This study was conducted to explore patterns of disclosure of psychotherapy trainees to their supervisors. Specifically, trainees' conscious concealment and distortion of events and feelings that occurred in therapy sessions was investigated. Subjects (N = 93), most of whom were in doctoral programs in clinical psychology, completed a 66item Supervision Questionnaire (SQ) in reference to a supervisor with whom they were working at that time. Results indicated that most supervisees, while usually presenting an honest picture of the interaction with patients, also, at least some of the time, consciously distort and/or conceal some material; as many as 30-40% of supervisees withhold information (e.g., perceived clinical errors) at moderate to high levels of frequency. The findings suggest that nondisclosure, distortion, and concealment may be an inevitable aspect of supervision. Supervision is a critical element of virtually all psychotherapist training in psychology and related fields. As there are many different models for psychotherapy, so too are there different mod-This article is based on a paper presented at the Society for Psychotherapy Research:

Research indicates that psychotherapy trainees often withhold information from supervisors even though they are expected to be self-disclosing in the supervisory process. A contributing factor to this nondisclosure is trainee shame. By its very nature, psychotherapy supervision is an endeavor in which trainees are likely to experience feelings of self-doubt and shame. Because shame is an affect that often provokes a desire to hide oneself, it follows that supervisees experiencing more shame will be less likely to be forthcoming, especially about material that might be viewed negatively by their supervisors. The material most often withheld by trainees pertains to problems within the supervisory relationship. It appears that trainee shame and nondisclosure have the greatest impact upon the quality of the psychotherapy supervision itself, as opposed to the treatment being supervised. Four examples of supervisory dyads affected by trainee shame and nondisclosure are presented. Each case is examined in terms of what could have triggered the supervisee's shame, the consequences of the disrupted communications, and ways in which the situation might have been improved.

When there are politically polarizing events taking place in the world, can it be useful for a therapist to disclose his or her political views within the context of a psychotherapeutic dyad? This paper examines this question through the example of a Marxist therapist working with a politically conservative patient in the polarized political atmosphere following Donald Trump's election to the Presidency of the United States. Also explored are the patient's dynamics that might have made it particularly salient for the therapist to eschew a more neutral stance. The theoretical and technical bases for this disclosure are examined via the Affect Theory of Silvan S. Tomkins as well as the Person-Centered Therapy of Carl Rogers. The family history of the patient is examined to further understand the context in which the political/therapeutic interactions take place.