This study intends to analyze some skills trained during supervision. In it we describe sets of interactions (based on the American Psychological Association [APA], 2006 ; competency domains) happened between the supervisor and the supervisee during the supervision process. Interactions from twelve supervisor-supervisee dyads during asynchronous and direct, and individual and group supervision sessions were video recorded for this purpose. The recordings helped to determine, classify, and define behavioral response classes in each dyad’s interactions. Percentages of time spent in each behavior class were computed. A reliability of 95% CI [0.91, 0.95] among observers was obtained. The behavior classes in which more time was spent were assessment, intervention, and conceptualization skills. Behavior classes in which less time was spent were related to emotional and interpersonal processes. These findings are discussed by linking the evidence-based theory on supervision with the time spent in each behavior class.
This paper seeks to reinterpret current tenets of functional analytic psychotherapy (FAP) using some assumptions of molar behaviorism. In it, a conceptual alternative to the molecular approach is proposed to explain the mechanisms of change of FAP. To achieve this goal, the utility and limitations of using discrete responses and stimuli as units of analysis are discussed. As an alternative, this paper suggests, as proposed by molar behaviorism, using activities as the unit of analysis. The use of activities as the unit of analysis would allow analyses of clinical behavior as choices in different time scales and measurements of clinical behavior using time allocation. Using choice behavior to analyze data allows analyses of behavior in terms of its short-term and long-term value. It is argued that time allocation as a unit of measure is more appropriate than the rate of behavior because it allows the continuous measurement of behavior and comparisons of disparate behaviors as they occur during therapy sessions. Finally, a multi-scale analysis would allow the articulation of long-term and short-term contingencies that are related to therapy and behavioral change.
Research has demonstrated a negative association between social support and symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). This has been interpreted as a protective influence of social support against the development of posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS). Research on the opposite association is more limited, but findings suggest that PTSS have a negative impact on social support. There is conflicting evidence that these effects are moderated by gender. Few studies have assessed both associations and gender moderation in a postdisaster context. We examined the longitudinal and bidirectional effects of emotional support and PTSS and whether gender moderates these effects among U.S. survivors of the 2017–2018 season. Participants (N = 1,347) were assessed at four time points over 1 year. Bidirectional effects were assessed using cross‐lagged, autoregressive analyses with the combined sample (Model 1) and grouped by gender (Model 2) to assess gender moderation. The results supported small bidirectional negative effects of social support and PTSS on one another from one assessment point (e.g. Wave 1) to the subsequent point (e.g., Wave 2) for all waves, βs = −.07—.15, p < .001–p = .040. Multigroup analyses suggested the effects were not significantly different by gender. Overall, the results suggest that social support and PTSS may mutually diminish one another. Such effects may result in a positive or negative cascade wherein high PTSS may lead to lower social support and, therefore, even higher PTSS and vice versa. These findings support the importance of including social support in interventions to promote PTSS prevention and recovery.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.