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.
Therapists that have https://datingranking.net/de/hispanic-dating-sites/ a good constructivist epistemology had a tendency to put a lot more increased exposure of the private bond regarding the therapeutic dating compared to the practitioners that have an effective rationalist epistemology
The present day analysis revealed that therapist epistemology are a critical predictor with a minimum of particular areas of the working alliance. The best shopping for was at relation to the introduction of a personal thread between the visitors and you can therapist (Thread subscale). This supports the idea throughout the literary works that constructivist practitioners put an elevated emphasis on building a quality therapeutic dating characterized by, “enjoy, facts, trust, and you may compassionate.
Hypothesis 3-your choice of Certain Therapeutic Treatments
The third and last analysis is designed to target the new prediction you to epistemology would be a great predictor out-of therapist usage of particular treatment processes. A great deal more particularly, your rationalist epistemology will declaration using techniques of intellectual behavioral procedures (e.g. advice offering) more constructivist epistemologies, and you can practitioners with constructivist epistemologies often statement playing with procedure of this constructivist medication (e.g. mental operating) over therapists having rationalist epistemologies). A simultaneous linear regression research try used to decide in case the predictor varying (counselor epistemology) have a tendency to dictate specialist analysis of one’s traditional details (cures procedure).
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.