J Couns Psychol. 2023 Oct;70(5):561. doi: 10.1037/cou0000700.
Reports the retraction of "The triadic effect: Associations among the supervisory working alliance, therapeutic working alliance, and therapy session evaluation" by Judith A. Gerstenblith, Kathryn V. Kline, Clara E. Hill and Dennis M. Kivlighan Jr. (, 2022[Mar], Vol 69[2], 199-210). The following article is being retracted (https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000567). This retraction is at the request of coauthors Kivlighan and Hill after the results of an investigation by the University of Maryland Institutional Review Board (IRB). The IRB found that the study included data from between one and four therapy clients of the Maryland Psychotherapy Clinic and Research Laboratory (MPCRL) who either had not been asked to provide consent or had withdrawn consent for their data to be included in the research. Gerstenblith and Kline were not responsible for obtaining and verifying participant consent but agreed to the retraction of this article. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2021-88607-001.) Several theorists (Bandura, 1969; Hackney & Goodyear, 1984; Searles, 1955) suggest parallels between the relationship in supervision and the relationship in therapy. We examined supervisor and therapist trainee ratings of supervisory working alliance (SWA) in 1 week predicting client-rated therapeutic working alliance (TWA) and client-rated therapy session evaluation (TSE) in the following week as well as TWA and TSE ratings in 1 week predicting SWA ratings in the following week. Our data included 663 weeks of therapy nested within 28 trainees nested within 15 supervisors, disaggregated into differences between supervisors, differences within supervisors, and differences within trainees. At the between-supervisor level, when supervisors' trainees rated the SWA higher on average compared with other supervisors' trainees' average SWA ratings, their clients' average TWA rating was higher. In contrast, when supervisors rated the SWA higher on average compared with other supervisors' average SWA ratings, their trainees' clients' average TSE rating was higher but the average TWA rating was lower. At the within-supervisor level, when trainees rated a higher SWA on average compared with other trainees' average SWA ratings with the same supervisor, their clients' average TSE rating was higher. The theoretical prediction of parallel relationships in supervision and therapy was supported, but only for between-supervisor and within-supervisor differences in SWA. We found no evidence that week-to-week changes in SWA or client-rated TWA or TSE reflected parallel relationships. We provide suggestions for further research, including exploring the mechanisms through which supervision relates to the therapy process and outcome. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
撤回 Judith A. Gerstenblith、Kathryn V. Kline、Clara E. Hill 和 Dennis M. Kivlighan Jr. 的文章“三重效应:监督工作联盟、治疗工作联盟和治疗会议评估之间的关联”(,2022[3 月],第 69[2]卷,199-210)。这篇文章正在被撤回(https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000567)。这是马里兰大学机构审查委员会(IRB)调查后,共同作者 Kivlighan 和 Hill 要求撤回的。IRB 发现,该研究包括马里兰心理治疗诊所和研究实验室(MPCRL)的一到四个治疗客户的数据,这些客户要么没有被要求提供同意,要么已经撤回了同意将其数据纳入研究的同意。Gerstenblith 和 Kline 没有负责获取和验证参与者的同意,但同意撤回这篇文章。(原文摘要出现在记录 2021-88607-001 中。)几位理论家(Bandura,1969;Hackney & Goodyear,1984;Searles,1955)认为监督中的关系与治疗中的关系相似。我们检查了监督工作联盟(SWA)的监督者和治疗师培训生的评级,这些评级在一周内预测了客户对治疗工作联盟(TWA)和客户对治疗会议评估(TSE)的评级,以及一周内的 TWA 和 TSE 评级预测了以下一周的 SWA 评级。我们的数据包括 663 周的治疗嵌套在 28 名培训生中,嵌套在 15 名监督者中,分为监督者之间的差异、监督者内部的差异和培训生内部的差异。在监督者之间的水平上,当监督者的培训生对 SWA 的评价平均高于其他监督者的培训生对 SWA 的平均评价时,他们的客户的平均 TWA 评价就更高。相比之下,当监督者对 SWA 的评价平均高于其他监督者的 SWA 平均评价时,他们的培训生的客户的平均 TSE 评价更高,但平均 TWA 评价更低。在监督者内部的水平上,当培训生对 SWA 的评价平均高于同一监督者的其他培训生的 SWA 平均评价时,他们的客户的平均 TSE 评价更高。监督和治疗中平行关系的理论预测得到了支持,但仅限于 SWA 的监督者之间和监督者内部的差异。我们没有发现 SWA 或客户对 TWA 或 TSE 的每周变化反映平行关系的证据。我们提供了进一步研究的建议,包括探索监督与治疗过程和结果相关的机制。(PsycInfo 数据库记录(c)2023 APA,保留所有权利)。