4.2 Article

Rupture Resolution Rating System (3RS): Development and validation

期刊

PSYCHOTHERAPY RESEARCH
卷 29, 期 3, 页码 306-319

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/10503307.2018.1552034

关键词

ruptures; therapeutic alliance; process research; psychotherapy outcome

资金

  1. National Institute of Mental Health [MH07178]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Our aim was to examine the reliability and validity of the Rupture Resolution Rating System (3RS), an observer-based measure of alliance ruptures and resolution processes. Method: We used the 3RS to rate early sessions from 42 cases of cognitive behavior therapy. We compared the 3RS to a simplified version of the Structural Analysis of Social Behavior (SASB), as well as patient and therapist self-reports of ruptures and the alliance. Results: Coders achieved high rates of interrater reliability on the frequency of confrontation and withdrawal ruptures and resolution strategies (ICCs = .85 to .98), as well as ratings of the therapist's contribution to ruptures and the extent to which ruptures were resolved (ICC = .92). Predictive validity analyses found that confrontation markers (d = .74), successful resolution (d = .67), and ratings of the therapist's contribution to ruptures (d = .61) predicted dropout from therapy. Analyses of convergent validity with the SASB failed to meet predictions; however, we observed theoretically coherent relations between 3RS and SASB variables. Confrontation rupture markers were significantly associated with patient self-report of rupture (d = 1.54) and therapist self-reported alliance (r = -.50, p = .002). Conclusions: This study provides evidence that the 3RS is a reliable and useful tool for examining psychotherapy process and predicting dropout.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据