@misc{HeinzeWeckKuehne2022, author = {Heinze, Peter Eric and Weck, Florian and K{\"u}hne, Franziska}, title = {Assessing Patient Preferences}, series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe}, issn = {1866-8364}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-54414}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-544140}, pages = {12}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Despite the positive effects of including patients' preferences into therapy on psychotherapy outcomes, there are still few thoroughly validated assessment tools at hand. We translated the 18-item Cooper-Norcross Inventory of Preferences (C-NIP) into German and aimed at replicating its factor structure. Further, we investigated the reliability of the questionnaire and its convergence with trait measures. A heterogeneous sample of N = 969 participants took part in our online survey. Performing ESEM models, we found acceptable model fit for a four-factor structure similar to the original factor structure. Furthermore, we propose an alternative model following the adjustment of single items. The German C-NIP showed acceptable to good reliability, as well as small correlations with Big-Five personality traits, trait and attachment anxiety, locus of control, and temporal focus. However, we recommend further replication of the factor structure and further validation of the C-NIP.}, language = {en} } @article{HeinzeWeckKuehne2022, author = {Heinze, Peter Eric and Weck, Florian and K{\"u}hne, Franziska}, title = {Assessing patient preferences}, series = {Frontiers in psychology}, volume = {12}, journal = {Frontiers in psychology}, publisher = {Frontiers Media}, address = {Lausanne}, issn = {1664-1078}, doi = {10.3389/fpsyg.2021.795776}, pages = {10}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Despite the positive effects of including patients' preferences into therapy on psychotherapy outcomes, there are still few thoroughly validated assessment tools at hand. We translated the 18-item Cooper-Norcross Inventory of Preferences (C-NIP) into German and aimed at replicating its factor structure. Further, we investigated the reliability of the questionnaire and its convergence with trait measures. A heterogeneous sample of N = 969 participants took part in our online survey. Performing ESEM models, we found acceptable model fit for a four-factor structure similar to the original factor structure. Furthermore, we propose an alternative model following the adjustment of single items. The German C-NIP showed acceptable to good reliability, as well as small correlations with Big-Five personality traits, trait and attachment anxiety, locus of control, and temporal focus. However, we recommend further replication of the factor structure and further validation of the C-NIP.}, language = {en} } @article{HeinzeWeckKuehne2022, author = {Heinze, Peter Eric and Weck, Florian and K{\"u}hne, Franziska}, title = {Assessing Patient Preferences}, series = {Frontiers in Psychology}, volume = {12}, journal = {Frontiers in Psychology}, publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation}, address = {Lausanne}, issn = {1664-1078}, doi = {10.3389/fpsyg.2021.795776}, pages = {10}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Despite the positive effects of including patients' preferences into therapy on psychotherapy outcomes, there are still few thoroughly validated assessment tools at hand. We translated the 18-item Cooper-Norcross Inventory of Preferences (C-NIP) into German and aimed at replicating its factor structure. Further, we investigated the reliability of the questionnaire and its convergence with trait measures. A heterogeneous sample of N = 969 participants took part in our online survey. Performing ESEM models, we found acceptable model fit for a four-factor structure similar to the original factor structure. Furthermore, we propose an alternative model following the adjustment of single items. The German C-NIP showed acceptable to good reliability, as well as small correlations with Big-Five personality traits, trait and attachment anxiety, locus of control, and temporal focus. However, we recommend further replication of the factor structure and further validation of the C-NIP.}, language = {en} } @article{HahnWeckWitthoeftetal.2021, author = {Hahn, Daniela and Weck, Florian and Witth{\"o}ft, Michael and K{\"u}hne, Franziska}, title = {Assessment of counseling self-efficacy}, series = {Frontiers in psychology / Frontiers Research Foundation}, volume = {12}, journal = {Frontiers in psychology / Frontiers Research Foundation}, publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation}, address = {Lausanne}, issn = {1664-1078}, doi = {10.3389/fpsyg.2021.780088}, pages = {10}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Background: Many authors regard counseling self-efficacy (CSE) as important in therapist development and training. The purpose of this study was to examine the factor structure, reliability, and validity of the German version of the Counselor Activity Self-Efficacy Scales-Revised (CASES-R). Method: The sample consisted of 670 German psychotherapy trainees, who completed an online survey. We examined the factor structure by applying exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis to the instrument as a whole. Results: A bifactor-exploratory structural equation modeling model with one general and five specific factors provided the best fit to the data. Omega hierarchical coefficients indicated optimal reliability for the general factor, acceptable reliability for the Action Skills-Revised (AS-R) factor, and insufficient estimates for the remaining factors. The CASES-R scales yielded significant correlations with related measures, but also with therapeutic orientations. Conclusion: We found support for the reliability and validity of the German CASES-R. However, the subdomains (except AS-R) should be interpreted with caution, and we do not recommend the CASES-R for comparisons between psychotherapeutic orientations.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Kuehne2021, author = {K{\"u}hne, Franziska}, title = {Beurteilung und Aufbau psychotherapeutischer Kompetenzen und die Ver{\"a}nderung von Patientenfertigkeiten}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, year = {2021}, language = {de} } @article{AyBrysonWeckHeinzeetal.2020, author = {Ay-Bryson, Destina Sevde and Weck, Florian and Heinze, Peter Eric and Lang, Thomas and K{\"u}hne, Franziska}, title = {Can psychotherapy trainees distinguish standardized patients from real patients?}, series = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Klinische Psychologie und Psychotherapie}, volume = {49}, journal = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Klinische Psychologie und Psychotherapie}, number = {3}, publisher = {Hogrefe}, address = {G{\"o}ttingen}, issn = {1616-3443}, doi = {10.1026/1616-3443/a000594}, pages = {182 -- 190}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Background: Under the new psychotherapy law in Germany, standardized patients (SPs) are to become a standard component inpsychotherapy training, even though little is known about their authenticity.Objective:The present pilot study explored whether, followingan exhaustive two-day SP training, psychotherapy trainees can distinguish SPs from real patients. Methods: Twenty-eight psychotherapytrainees (M= 28.54 years of age,SD= 3.19) participated as blind raters. They evaluated six video-recorded therapy segments of trained SPsand real patients using the Authenticity of Patient Demonstrations Scale. Results: The authenticity scores of real patients and SPs did notdiffer (p= .43). The descriptive results indicated that the highest score of authenticity was given to an SP. Further, the real patients did notdiffer significantly from the SPs concerning perceived impairment (p= .33) and the likelihood of being a real patient (p= .52). Conclusions: The current results suggest that psychotherapy trainees were unable to distinguish the SPs from real patients. We therefore stronglyrecommend incorporating training SPs before application. Limitations and future research directions are discussed.}, language = {en} } @article{AyBrysonWeckKuehne2022, author = {Ay-Bryson, Destina Sevde and Weck, Florian and K{\"u}hne, Franziska}, title = {Can simulated patient encounters appear authentic?}, series = {Training and education in professional psychology}, volume = {16}, journal = {Training and education in professional psychology}, number = {1}, publisher = {American Psychological Association}, address = {Washington}, issn = {1931-3918}, doi = {10.1037/tep0000349}, pages = {20 -- 27}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Public Significance Statement This study demonstrates that simulated patients (SPs) can authentically portray a depressive case. The results provide preliminary evidence of psychometrically sound properties of the rating scale that contributes to distinguishing between authentic and unauthentic SPs and may thus foster SPs' dissemination into evidence-based training.
For training purposes, simulated patients (SPs), that is, healthy people portraying a disorder, are disseminating more into clinical psychology and psychotherapy. In the current study, we developed an observer-based rating instrument for the evaluation of SP authenticity-namely, it not being possible to distinguish them from real patients-so as to foster their use in evidence-based training. We applied a multistep inductive approach to develop the Authenticity of Patient Demonstrations (APD) scale. Ninety-seven independent psychotherapy trainees, 77.32\% female, mean age of 31.49 (SD = 5.17) years, evaluated the authenticity of 2 independent SPs, each of whom portrayed a depressive patient. The APD demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = .83) and a strong correlation (r = .82) with an established tool for assessing SP performance in medical contexts. The APD scale distinguished significantly between an authentic and unauthentic SP (d = 2.35). Preliminary evidence for the psychometric properties of the APD indicates that the APD could be a viable tool for recruiting, training, and evaluating the authenticity of SPs. Strengths, limitations, and future directions are also discussed in detail.}, language = {en} } @article{KuehneFauthDestinaSevdeetal.2021, author = {K{\"u}hne, Franziska and Fauth, Henriette and Destina Sevde, Ay-Bryson and Visser, Leonie N.C. and Weck, Florian}, title = {Communicating the diagnosis of cancer or depression: Results of a randomized controlled online study using video vignettes}, series = {Cancer Medicine}, volume = {10}, journal = {Cancer Medicine}, edition = {24}, publisher = {Wiley}, address = {Hoboken, New Jersey, USA}, issn = {2045-7634}, doi = {10.1002/cam4.4396}, pages = {9012 -- 9021}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Background Communicating a diagnosis is highly important, yet complex, especially in the context of cancer and mental disorders. The aim was to explore the communication style of an oncologist vs. psychotherapist in an online study. Methods Patients (N = 136: 65 cancer, 71 depression) were randomly assigned to watch a standardized video vignette with one of two communication styles (empathic vs. unempathic). Outcome measures of affectivity, information recall, communication skills, empathy and trust were applied. Results Regardless of diagnosis, empathic communication was associated with the perception of a significantly more empathic (p < 0.001, η2partial = 0.08) and trustworthy practitioner (p = 0.014, η2partial = 0.04) with better communication skills (p = 0.013, η2partial = 0.05). Cancer patients reported a larger decrease in positive affect (p < 0.001, η2partial = 0.15) and a larger increase in negative affect (p < 0.001, η2partial = 0.14) from pre- to post-video than depressive patients. Highly relevant information was recalled better in both groups (p < 0.001, d = 0.61-1.06). Conclusions The results highlight the importance of empathy while communicating both a diagnosis of cancer and a mental disorder. Further research should focus on the communication of a mental disorder in association with cancer.}, language = {en} } @misc{KuehneFauthDestinaSevdeetal.2021, author = {K{\"u}hne, Franziska and Fauth, Henriette and Destina Sevde, Ay-Bryson and Visser, Leonie N.C. and Weck, Florian}, title = {Communicating the diagnosis of cancer or depression: Results of a randomized controlled online study using video vignettes}, series = {Zweitver{\"o}ffentlichungen der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Zweitver{\"o}ffentlichungen der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {817}, issn = {1866-8364}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-58228}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-582286}, pages = {9012 -- 9021}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Background Communicating a diagnosis is highly important, yet complex, especially in the context of cancer and mental disorders. The aim was to explore the communication style of an oncologist vs. psychotherapist in an online study. Methods Patients (N = 136: 65 cancer, 71 depression) were randomly assigned to watch a standardized video vignette with one of two communication styles (empathic vs. unempathic). Outcome measures of affectivity, information recall, communication skills, empathy and trust were applied. Results Regardless of diagnosis, empathic communication was associated with the perception of a significantly more empathic (p < 0.001, η2partial = 0.08) and trustworthy practitioner (p = 0.014, η2partial = 0.04) with better communication skills (p = 0.013, η2partial = 0.05). Cancer patients reported a larger decrease in positive affect (p < 0.001, η2partial = 0.15) and a larger increase in negative affect (p < 0.001, η2partial = 0.14) from pre- to post-video than depressive patients. Highly relevant information was recalled better in both groups (p < 0.001, d = 0.61-1.06). Conclusions The results highlight the importance of empathy while communicating both a diagnosis of cancer and a mental disorder. Further research should focus on the communication of a mental disorder in association with cancer.}, language = {en} } @article{PhilippKristonKuehneetal.2020, author = {Philipp, Rebecca and Kriston, Levente and K{\"u}hne, Franziska and Harter, Martin and Meister, Ramona}, title = {Concepts of metacognition in the treatment of patients with mental disorders}, series = {Journal of rational emotive and cognitive behavior therapy}, volume = {38}, journal = {Journal of rational emotive and cognitive behavior therapy}, number = {2}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {New York, NY}, issn = {0894-9085}, doi = {10.1007/s10942-019-00333-3}, pages = {173 -- 183}, year = {2020}, abstract = {While metacognitive interventions are gaining attention in the treatment of various mental disorders, a review of the literature showed that the term is often defined poorly and used for a variety of psychotherapeutic approaches that do not necessarily pursue the same goal. We give a summary of three metacognitive interventions which were developed within a sound theoretical framework-metacognitive therapy, metacognitive training, and metacognitively-oriented integrative psychotherapies-and discuss their similarities and distinctive features. We then offer an integrative operational definition of metacognitive interventions as goal-oriented treatments that target metacognitive content, which is characterized by the awareness and understanding of one's own thoughts and feelings as well as the thoughts and feelings of others. They aim to alleviate disorder-specific and individual symptoms by gaining more flexibility in cognitive processing.}, language = {en} }