m

This is Aalto. A Professional theme for
architects, construction and interior designers

Call us on +651 464 033 04

531 West Avenue, NY

Mon - Sat 8 AM - 8 PM

Top
Image Alt

Cos Petrogaz

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.

Practitioners with a beneficial constructivist epistemology tended to set so much more emphasis on the non-public bond regarding the healing matchmaking www.datingranking.net/our-teen-network-review/ than the practitioners having a great rationalist epistemology

The current data showed that specialist epistemology was a serious predictor with a minimum of specific areas of the functional alliance. The strongest shopping for was a student in reference to the introduction of a beneficial private bond amongst the buyer and you will therapist (Thread subscale). This supports the notion from the literature one constructivist therapists set a heightened increased exposure of strengthening a good healing matchmaking described as, “invited, wisdom, believe, and you will caring.

Hypothesis step three-the selection of Specific Healing Treatments

The third and you can latest research is designed to target new anticipate one to epistemology might possibly be good predictor regarding specialist accessibility certain cures processes. So much more especially, the rationalist epistemology tend to report playing with procedure for the intellectual behavioural procedures (age.g. information giving) over constructivist epistemologies, and you can practitioners that have constructivist epistemologies tend to statement using techniques for the constructivist procedures (elizabeth.g. psychological handling) over therapists which have rationalist epistemologies). A simultaneous linear regression analysis try used to choose if for example the predictor variable (therapist epistemology) often influence therapist studies of your expectations parameters (procedures 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.