Measuring client perceptions of motivational interviewing: factor analysis of the Client Evaluation of Motivational Interviewing scale

Selecting an optimal instrument to identify active ingredients of the motivational interviewing-process

“…Three instruments are coding responses to scenarios, vignettes or simulated patients [20,32,39,40], and did not meet criterion 2. Two instruments measure through client opinion [22,37], and not through observations (criterion 3), and three instruments collect information with a low level of detail [21,23,36] (criterion 4). Finally, one instrument incorporates an other instrument (the MITI) to measure the MI-elements [35].…”

Normative Feedback and Adolescent Readiness to Change

“…First, participants rated their level of agreement (1 = very dissatisfied , 5 = very satisfied ) with the item “Overall, how satisfied are you with this discussion you just had about your assessment results?” Additionally, we administered the CEMI, a reliable and valid measure of client perceived quality of MI (Madson et al, 2013). The CEMI contains 16 items rated on a Likert-type scale (1 = not at all , 4 = a great deal ).…”

Measuring Client Experiences of Motivational Interviewing During a Lifestyle Intervention

“…In the initial validation work, the factor structure for the CEMI was evaluated using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis in a randomly split sample of 500 predominantly White (59%) male (53%) clients receiving acute inpatient psychiatric treatment in urban and suburban hospitals in the Northeastern United States (Madson et al, 2013). The two factor solution found in this sample suggested that clients were able to distinguish relational and technical aspects of MI, which is consistent with published descriptions of MI (Miller & Rose, 2009).…”