@article{MaassKuehnePoltzetal.2022, author = {Maaß, Ulrike and K{\"u}hne, Franziska and Poltz, Nadine and Lorenz, Anna and Ay-Bryson, Destina Sevde and Weck, Florian}, title = {Live supervision in psychotherapy training}, series = {Training and education in professional psychology}, volume = {16}, journal = {Training and education in professional psychology}, number = {2}, publisher = {American Psychological Association}, address = {Washington}, issn = {1931-3918}, doi = {10.1037/tep0000390}, pages = {130 -- 142}, year = {2022}, abstract = {There is increasing interest in improving psychotherapy training using evidence-based supervision. One approach is live supervision (LS), in which the supervisor offers immediate feedback to the trainee (e.g., via microphone, text messages) during the session. This review summarizes the research on LS and its main results. The databases Web of Science Core Collection, PsycArticles, PsycBooks, PsycInfo, PSYNDEX, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, and PubMed were searched from inception to January 23, 2020 (including a backward search) and updated November 15, 2020. The inclusion criteria (i.e., main focus on LS, immediate feedback from a present supervisor, psychological setting) were met by k = 138 publications, including k = 8 randomized controlled trials (RCTs; N = 339). Two reviewers independently evaluated the RCTs' risk of bias using the revised Cochrane Risk-of-Bias Tool. Most publications had a family therapy background (59\%), were categorized as nonempirical (55\%), aimed primarily at describing or comparing specific LS methods (35\%), and displayed positive views on LS (87\%). Based on the RCTs, LS was superior to no-supervision in 78\% of all comparisons, but only in 13\% of the cases compared to a delayed supervision (DS) condition (i.e., regarding trainee skills, patient outcomes, or other variables). These results somewhat contradict the overall favorable views in the literature. However, the generalizability is limited due to a lack of high-quality studies and substantial heterogeneity in terms of LS methods, concepts, outcomes, and measurements. Ideas for more systematic research on LS regarding objectives and methods are proposed.
Public Significance Statement This review summarizes research on live supervision (LS). LS is a form of supervision in psychotherapy training in which the supervisor observes the trainee's therapy session and provides immediate feedback. The review concludes that LS is probably as effective as delayed supervision (DS), although more high-quality research is needed.}, language = {en} } @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} }