Assessing and predicting supervisors' evaluations of psychotherapists – an empirical study

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to analyze the dimensions used by supervisors to evaluate trainee therapists and to detect how supervisors' assessments are influenced by features of the case and of the therapist.

Method: Data from 226 patients with diverse mental and social disorders who had been treated by 22 trainee therapists under the supervision of 12 supervisors were analyzed by factor- and regression analyses. Supervision was implemented as part of a psychotherapy training program. After treatment, each supervisor was asked to evaluate the trainee by using a list of 38 items proposed by Kanfer, Reinecker and Schmelzer (1996). Case characteristics and therapists' features were assessed by questionnaires and checklists and related to the supervisors' evaluations.

Results: The statistical analyses indicated that supervisors could not easily integrate the multitude of relevant aspects into a differentiated schema of evaluation. A two-factor model best fitted the data. The two factors focus on specific aspects of therapeutic behavior. The evaluations were mainly related to the experience of the trainee therapist and to therapy outcome. For trainee therapists with more experience, the standards of comparison were set higher resulting in less positive evaluations.

Discussion: The results are discussed with reference to a process-oriented view of supervision and therapist evaluation. It was concluded that supervisors of behavior therapy seem to weight therapist-related and case-related information differently. However, the way supervisors integrate these types of information into evaluations of trainee therapists still remains rather vague.

Keywords:

• Supervisor
• trainee therapist
• evaluation
• behavior therapy
• Psychotherapy training program