Clinical supervision for clinical psychologists: existing provision and unmet needs

Career‐long supervision: Patterns and perspectives

“…We also found that the vast majority of the respondents were satisfied with their supervision, indicating that they were not just fulfilling mandatory requirements. This contrasts with a previous study of clinical psychologists (Gabbay et al, 1999) which found that the majority were dissatisfied with supervision. It may be that the strong culture of supervision within the counselling and psychotherapy field has led to more satisfying forms of supervision.…”

Career-long clinical supervision among counselors in Turkey: Current experiences, needs, and preferred practices

“…These results were consistent with the findings of previous studies (e.g., Akyıl et al, 2015;Bilican & Soygüt, 2015;Özkan et al, 2009) while providing detailed information on the scope of current supervision experiences. The low rate was also similar to some of the national survey studies conducted in the United States (Borders & Usher, 1992;Page et al, 2001;Silva et al, 2016), but contrasts to those in the UK, Republic of Ireland, and Australia with high supervision rates (from 69% to 90%) (Gabbay et al, 1999;Grant & Schofield, 2007;McMahon & Errity, 2014).…”

“…It was also found that supervision was carried out primarily through group supervision. This finding differs considerably from the literature since group supervision is one of the least used methods (Borders & Usher, 1992;Gabbay et al, 1999;Grant & Schofield, 2007;Page et al, 2001;Townend et al, 2002;Silva et al, 2016). Interestingly, in the literature, the most preferred method is individual supervision and then group supervision with colleagues from different institutions.…”

Supervision of a Sample of Clinical and Counselling Psychologists in the UK: A Descriptive Study of Their Practices, Processes and Perceived Benefits

“…That individual supervision is used heavily is a consistent finding across all studies of practitioner supervision (Gabbay et al, 1999;Grant & Schofield, 2007;McMahon & Errity, 2014;Townend et al, 2002), including this. An individual format may lend itself better to discussing individual clients in depth, in comparison to group supervision, where supervisees may take it in turn to present a case from their workload.…”