The authors conducted a 26-study meta-analysis of 5,759 therapists and their integration of religlon and spirituality in counseling. Most therapists consider spirituality relevant to their lives but rarely engage in spiritual practices or participate in organized religion. Marriage and family therapists consider spirituality more relevant and participate In organized religion to a greater degree than therapists from other professions. Across professions, most therapists surveyed (over 80%) rarely discuss Spiritual or religious issues in training. In mixed samples of religious and secular therapists, therapists' religious faith was associated with using religious and spiritual techniques in counseling frequently, willingness to discuss religion in therapy, and theoretical orientation.erapists' integration of religion and spirituality in counseling has been evaluated in 26 studies of 5,759 psychotherapists from the fields toral counseling. We suggest that it is now appropriate to perform a metaanalysis of the existing research. We discuss the relevance of religion and spirituality to counseling, review methods of integrating religion and spirituality in counseling, and conduct a meta-analysis of studies concerning therapists' integration of religion and spirituality into counseling.

has provided a historical perspective on religion and clinical psychology in America, pointing out an interest in religion and clinical practice that was evident many years ago. She also noted that a magazine called The Common Boundary (between spirituality and psychotherapy), which came out of a seminar on "Integrating Spirituality and Psychotherapy" organized in 1981, had 5,000 subscribers by 1992 (Simpkinson, 1992). Demetrios, Simpkinson, and Bennet ( 1991) recently published The Common Boundary Graduate Education Guide which has information on programs ranging from more traditional ones in Judeo-Christian clinical psychology and pastoral counseling, to those on shamanic counseling, holistic healing, intuition training, psychosynthesis, spiritual direction and formation, and transpersonal therapies (see also Journal of Transpersonal Psychology). These observations point to the renewed attention that religious issues have received within the psychological community.Although religion still seems to play a somewhat minimal role in the lives of most psychologists (Jones, 1994), there has been some change in the past decade or so. Surveys conducted by Bergin and Jensen (1990), as well as by Shafranske and Malony (1990), have indicated that professional therapists, including clinical psychologists, appear to be personally more religious or spiritually oriented today, but religion is still not as significant to them as it is to the general population. Shafranske and Malony found that 71% of the clinical psychologists they surveyed were affiliated with an organized religion, with 4 1 % attending religious services regularly. However, about 85% of them indicated that they had little or no training in the area of psychology and religion. It is not surprising, therefore, that 68% of them felt it was inappropriate for a psychologist to pray with a client, and 55% said it was inappropriate to use religious scripture or texts in therapy.Bergin and Jensen (1990) concluded that a majority of the general population would probably prefer an approach to psychotherapy and counseling that is at least sensitive, if not sympathetic, to a spiritual perspective.The importance of religion for many clients was noted, and they emphasized the need for "a careful reeducation of therapists whose conceptual/ clinical frameworks have room only for secular and naturalistic constructs" Worthington ( 1991) has pointed out that psychotherapists will have to deal with religious issues in psychotherapy much more in the next 30 years, partly because religious people have become more vocal about their religious beliefs and practices in recent years, and many have demanded explicitly religious therapists or counselors from their own distinctive re-(P. 7).

General psychopathology rating scales have multiple uses and have been used extensively. These rating scales may be found in several forms including an interview procedure and self-report. The advantages of self-report measures, as well as their possible deficits, were discussed. Because there are so many varying kinds of rating scales, criteria were set forth as to how to evaluate scales. An interview with a rating scale, the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), and a self-report measure, the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI), were compared in this study. The BPRS has been widely used and has been evaluated as one of the very best rating scales. However, experienced raters and more time are needed to administer the BPRS. The BSI is highly evaluated as one of the best brief self-report measures and requires much less professional time. Both instruments have high reliability and validity. Correlations of the BPRS total score with the total scores on the BSI were significant, as were correlations of the depression, anxiety, and hostility subscales on each instrument. Therefore, either scale could be used for a brief assessment of overall symptomatology, depression, anxiety, and hostility. However, it is suggested that the subscales should be compared to other criteria to measure their convergent validity.

The present study evaluated the efficacy of the Sepulveda Epilepsy Education program (SEE), using a controlled outcome design. SEE is a 2-day psychoeducational treatment program designed to provide medical education and psychosocial therapy. Thirty-eight outpatients, matched according to seizure type and frequency, were randomly assigned to treatment (n = 20) or waiting-list control (n = 18) groups. The major outcome measures used were a 50-item true-false test specifically designed to evaluate the SEE program, the Washington Psychosocial Seizure Inventory, the Beck Depression Inventory, Lubin's Depression Adjective Checklist, the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, the Acceptance of Disability Scale, and Sherer's Self-Efficacy Scale. Significant differences between the two groups were found on the three major subscales of the 50-item true-false test. The treatment group demonstrated a significant increase in overall understanding of epilepsy, a significant decrease in fear of seizures, and a significant decrease in hazardous medical self-management practices. In addition, an objective measure of blood levels of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) showed the treatment group to have a significant increase in medication compliance.