Xiaochen Luo, Katie Aafjes-van Doorn, Vera Békés, Tracy A. Prout, Leon Hoffman
The usefulness of therapists' self-disclosure (TSD) in psychotherapy remains controversial, and little is known regarding the potential risks and benefits of TSD in times of global crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic and in teletherapy. We examined two independent samples of therapists (N = 1705; Study 1) and patients (N = 772; Study 2) on their perceptions of increases in TSD during the transition to teletherapy early in the COVID-19 pandemic (spring 2020). Approximately 20% of therapists and 14% of patients reported perceptions of definite increases in TSD. Therapists' top reasons for increased TSD were therapists' heightened distress and an effort to connect with patients in teletherapy. Importantly, therapist perceptions of their increased TSD were positively related to subjective vicarious trauma, real relationship, psychodynamic theoretical orientation and negatively with humanistic orientation, but not with age, race/ethnicity, length of clinical experience, working alliance, or professional self-doubt. Patients' perceptions of increased TSD were positively related with patient pandemic-related traumatic distress and their own self-disclosure, but not with patient-reported therapeutic relationship variables. Longitudinally, patients' perceptions of TSD increases predicted higher pandemic-related traumatic distress at 3-month follow-up, after controlling for their baseline traumatic distress and other variables. These results highlighted that increased TSD in teletherapy may be a potential marker for heightened distress in both patients and therapists during a global crisis and a transition to teletherapy. The findings also contrasted the literature and emphasized that therapists, but perhaps not patients, may have considered increased TSD as a reflection of genuine therapeutic connection.
{"title":"Therapist self-disclosure in teletherapy early in the COVID-19 pandemic: Associations with real relationship and traumatic distress","authors":"Xiaochen Luo, Katie Aafjes-van Doorn, Vera Békés, Tracy A. Prout, Leon Hoffman","doi":"10.1002/cpp.2915","DOIUrl":"10.1002/cpp.2915","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The usefulness of therapists' self-disclosure (TSD) in psychotherapy remains controversial, and little is known regarding the potential risks and benefits of TSD in times of global crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic and in teletherapy. We examined two independent samples of therapists (<i>N</i> = 1705; Study 1) and patients (<i>N</i> = 772; Study 2) on their perceptions of increases in TSD during the transition to teletherapy early in the COVID-19 pandemic (spring 2020). Approximately 20% of therapists and 14% of patients reported perceptions of definite increases in TSD. Therapists' top reasons for increased TSD were therapists' heightened distress and an effort to connect with patients in teletherapy. Importantly, therapist perceptions of their increased TSD were positively related to subjective vicarious trauma, real relationship, psychodynamic theoretical orientation and negatively with humanistic orientation, but not with age, race/ethnicity, length of clinical experience, working alliance, or professional self-doubt. Patients' perceptions of increased TSD were positively related with patient pandemic-related traumatic distress and their own self-disclosure, but not with patient-reported therapeutic relationship variables. Longitudinally, patients' perceptions of TSD increases predicted higher pandemic-related traumatic distress at 3-month follow-up, after controlling for their baseline traumatic distress and other variables. These results highlighted that increased TSD in teletherapy may be a potential marker for heightened distress in both patients and therapists during a global crisis and a transition to teletherapy. The findings also contrasted the literature and emphasized that therapists, but perhaps not patients, may have considered increased TSD as a reflection of genuine therapeutic connection.</p>","PeriodicalId":10460,"journal":{"name":"Clinical psychology & psychotherapy","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2023-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cpp.2915","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41101668","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Philip Hyland, Enya Redican, Thanos Karatzias, Mark Shevlin
The International Anxiety Questionnaire (IAQ) and International Depression Questionnaire (IDQ) are self-report measures of ICD-11 Generalized Anxiety Disorder (ICD-11 GAD) and ICD-11 Single Episode Depressive Disorder (ICD-11 DD). This study tested the psychometric properties of these scales in two samples of bereaved adults from the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to test the combined dimensionality and measurement invariance of the IAQ and IDQ across the United Kingdom (n = 1012) and Irish (n = 1011) samples. Differential item functioning (DIF) was tested using multiple indicator multiple cause (MIMIC) modelling while convergent validity was also assessed. CFA results supported a correlated two-factor model in both samples. The MIMIC model showed that the IDQ item “Had recurrent thoughts of death or suicide” showed DIF and the effect was small. Internal reliability of the scales were high and convergent validity was supported. The prevalence of ICD-11 GAD was 18.6% and 16.1% and ICD-11 DD was 13.8% and 10.5% in the United Kingdom and Irish samples, respectively. Findings of the study provide support for the validity, measurement invariance, and reliability of the IAQ and IDQ among two bereaved national samples.
{"title":"Assessing the validity and reliability of the International Anxiety Questionnaire and the International Depression Questionnaire in two bereaved national samples","authors":"Philip Hyland, Enya Redican, Thanos Karatzias, Mark Shevlin","doi":"10.1002/cpp.2917","DOIUrl":"10.1002/cpp.2917","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The International Anxiety Questionnaire (IAQ) and International Depression Questionnaire (IDQ) are self-report measures of ICD-11 Generalized Anxiety Disorder (ICD-11 GAD) and ICD-11 Single Episode Depressive Disorder (ICD-11 DD). This study tested the psychometric properties of these scales in two samples of bereaved adults from the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to test the combined dimensionality and measurement invariance of the IAQ and IDQ across the United Kingdom (<i>n</i> = 1012) and Irish (<i>n</i> = 1011) samples. Differential item functioning (DIF) was tested using multiple indicator multiple cause (MIMIC) modelling while convergent validity was also assessed. CFA results supported a correlated two-factor model in both samples. The MIMIC model showed that the IDQ item “Had recurrent thoughts of death or suicide” showed DIF and the effect was small. Internal reliability of the scales were high and convergent validity was supported. The prevalence of ICD-11 GAD was 18.6% and 16.1% and ICD-11 DD was 13.8% and 10.5% in the United Kingdom and Irish samples, respectively. Findings of the study provide support for the validity, measurement invariance, and reliability of the IAQ and IDQ among two bereaved national samples.</p>","PeriodicalId":10460,"journal":{"name":"Clinical psychology & psychotherapy","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2023-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cpp.2917","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41107611","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}