Objective The technical hypothesis of motivational interviewing (MI) posits that therapist implemented MI skills will be related to client speech regarding behavior change and that client speech will predict client outcome. The current meta-analysis is the first aggregate test of this proposed causal model. Method A systematic literature review, using stringent inclusion criteria, identified k = 16 reports describing 12 primary studies. Review methods calculated the inverse-variance-weighted pooled correlation coefficient for the therapist to client and the client to outcome paths across multiple targeted behaviors (i.e., alcohol or illicit drug use, other addictive behaviors). Results Therapist MI-consistent skills were correlated with more client language in favor of behavior change (i.e., change talk; r = .26, p < .0001), but not less client language against behavior change (i.e., sustain talk; r = .10, p = .09). MI-inconsistent skills were associated with less change talk (r = −.17, p = .001) as well as more sustain talk (r = .07, p = .009). Among these studies, client change talk was not associated with follow-up outcome (r = .06, p = .41), but sustain talk was associated with worse outcome (r = −.24, p = .001). In addition, studies that examined composite client language (e.g., an average of negative and positive statements) showed an overall positive relationship with client behavior change (r = .12, p = .006; k = 6). Conclusions This meta-analysis provides an initial test and partial support for a key causal model of MI efficacy. Recommendations for MI practitioners, clinical supervisors, and process researchers are provided.

Objective In the present meta-analysis, we test the technical and relational hypotheses of Motivational Interviewing (MI) efficacy. We also propose an a priori conditional process model where heterogeneity of technical path effect sizes should be explained by interpersonal/relational (i.e., empathy, MI Spirit) and intrapersonal (i.e., client treatment seeking status) moderators. Method A systematic review identified k = 58 reports, describing 36 primary studies and 40 effect sizes (N = 3025 participants). Statistical methods calculated the inverse variance-weighted pooled correlation coefficient for the therapist to client and the client to outcome paths across multiple target behaviors (i.e., alcohol use, other drug use, other behavior change). Results Therapist MI-consistent skills were correlated with more client change talk (r = .55, p < .001) as well as more sustain talk (r = .40, p < .001). MI-inconsistent skills were correlated with more sustain talk (r = .16, p < .001), but not change talk. When these indicators were combined into proportions, as recommended in the Motivational Interviewing Skill Code, the overall technical hypothesis was supported. Specifically, proportion MI consistency was related to higher proportion change talk (r = .11, p = .004) and higher proportion change talk was related to reductions in risk behavior at follow up (r = −.16, p < .001). When tested as two independent effects, client change talk was not significant, but sustain talk was positively associated with worse outcome (r = .19, p < .001). Finally, the relational hypothesis was not supported, but heterogeneity in technical hypothesis path effect sizes was partially explained by inter- and intra-personal moderators. Conclusions This meta-analysis provides additional support for the technical hypothesis of MI efficacy; future research on the relational hypothesis should occur in the field rather than in the context of clinical trials.

This study provides the evidence that a 10-15-minute BAI does not decrease alcohol use and health resource utilization in hazardous drinkers treated in the ED, and demonstrates that commonly found decreases in hazardous alcohol use in control groups cannot be attributed to the baseline alcohol assessment.

Efforts to convert refusers are effective in reducing non-response bias. However, converted late respondents cannot be seen as proxies of non-respondents, and are at best only indicative of existing response bias due to persistent non-respondents.