The important standard beta coefficient (? = 0

The important standard beta coefficient (? = 0

The Goal Subscale Epistemology was also a significant predictor of therapist emphasis on the working alliance along the Goal subscale (e.g. client and therapist agreement on how to achieve the goals), F(2, 1093) = 4.92, p < .007 (R 2 = .009). 065) for the rationalist epistemology t(1093) = 2.16, p < .031, was in the positive direction. 075) for the constructivist epistemology t(1093) = 2.47, p < .014, was also in the positive direction along the Goal subscale. This was again inconsistent with the proposed hypothesis that the rationalist epistemology would have stronger leanings towards the Goal subscale in the therapist emphasis on working alliance compared to therapists with a constructivist epistemology.

The Bond Subscale Lastly, epistemology was also a significant predictor of the therapist emphasis on the working alliance along the Bond subscale (the development of a personal bond between the client and therapist), F(2, 1089) = , p < .001 (R 2 = .035). The standardized beta coefficient for the rationalist epistemology (? = – 0.034) was in the negative direction, but was not significant, t(1089) = –1.15, p < .249. For the constructivist epistemology, the standardized beta coefficient (? = 0.179) was significant t(1089) = 5.99, p < .0001, and in the positive direction along the Bond subscale. This supported the hypothesis that the rationalist epistemology is less inclined towards therapist emphasis on working alliance on the Bond subscale than the constructivist epistemology.

Practitioners that have a constructivist epistemology had a tendency to lay a lot more emphasis on the non-public bond regarding healing matchmaking than the therapists that have a rationalist epistemology

The current data indicated that specialist epistemology is actually a critical predictor with a minimum of some areas of the functional alliance. The strongest wanting was in reference to the introduction of a beneficial private thread between the client and specialist (Thread subscale). This helps the idea in the books one constructivist therapists set an increased increased exposure of strengthening a good healing relationship described as, “greeting, insights, faith, and caring.

Hypothesis step 3-your choice of Certain Healing Treatments

The third and latest research willow was designed to target the fresh new anticipate that epistemology would-be good predictor of therapist access to specific cures processes. Far more specifically, that rationalist epistemology tend to declaration playing with processes of this intellectual behavioural treatment (age.grams. guidance offering) more constructivist epistemologies, and you may therapists that have constructivist epistemologies often statement using processes of constructivist procedures (elizabeth.grams. mental control) over practitioners that have rationalist epistemologies). A simultaneous linear regression study is presented to determine if for example the predictor adjustable (counselor epistemology) will influence therapist product reviews of the expectations variables (procedures techniques).

Epistemology was a significant predictor of cognitive behavioral therapy techniques F(2, 993) = , p < .001 (R 2 = .185). The standardized beta coefficient for the rationalist epistemology (? = 0.430) was significant, t(993) = , p < .001 and in the positive direction. The standardized beta coefficient for the constructivist epistemology (? = 0.057) was significant and in the positive direction t(993) = 1.98, p < .05. This supported the hypothesis that the rationalist epistemology would have stronger leanings of therapist use of cognitive behavioral techniques when conducting therapy than constructivist epistemologies.

Finally, epistemology was a significant predictor of constructivist therapy techniques F(2, 1012) = , p < .001 (R 2 = .138). The standardized beta coefficient for the rationalist epistemology (? = – 0.297) was significant t(1012) = –, p < .0001 and in the negative direction. The standardized beta coefficient for the constructivist epistemology (? = 0.195) was significant t(1012) = 6.63, p < .0001, and in the positive direction. This supported the hypothesis that the constructivist epistemology would place a stronger emphasis on therapist use of constructivist techniques when conducting therapy than rationalist epistemologies.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *