The important standardized 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.

Therapists that have an effective constructivist epistemology had a tendency to place even more focus on the private bond on healing relationship versus practitioners with a beneficial rationalist epistemology

The modern study indicated that specialist epistemology is a life threatening predictor with a minimum of particular areas of the working alliance. The strongest trying to find was at regards to the introduction of an effective private thread amongst the client and you can therapist (Bond subscale). Which supports the notion in the literature you to constructivist therapists place an elevated emphasis on building a quality therapeutic dating described as, “allowed, wisdom, trust, and you will compassionate.

Theory step 3-your choice of Particular Healing Treatments

The 3rd and you may latest research is made to target the prediction one epistemology was a beneficial predictor regarding counselor usage of specific therapy procedure. Far more especially, the rationalist epistemology often declaration playing with techniques associated with the cognitive behavioural procedures (e.g. pointers providing) over constructivist epistemologies, and you can practitioners with constructivist epistemologies tend to declaration using procedure associated with constructivist treatment (elizabeth.g. psychological handling) over practitioners with rationalist epistemologies). A parallel linear regression data is presented to determine quiero reseña de la aplicación de citas para presos in the event your predictor adjustable (specialist epistemology) will influence therapist product reviews of one’s criterion variables (medication 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.

© COPYRIGHT | UNIVERZITET DŽON NEZBIT

logo-footer

OSTANIMO U KONTAKTU: