The reporting of therapist sample data in the Journal of Counseling Psychology.

Abstract

Adequate reporting of sample characteristics is necessary in conducting, reviewing, and replicating research studies. In this study, the author reviewed Journal of Counseling Psychology studies from 1988 to 1997 that used therapists in their research samples and examined the type and consistency of therapist sample reporting. Researchers report as many as 9 different therapist variables, and overall there is a lack of consistency in how often each variable is reported and how it is measured. The implications for the lack of uniformity in reporting are discussed. I thank Ernie Ness for his feedback on an earlier version of this article.

Sample Reporting in Qualitative Studies of Women with HIV Infection

“…A key means by which readers judge the validity of both qualitative and quantitative research findings is to consider how well these findings are supported by the sample from which they were drawn. In the case of quantitative studies, researchers do not always describe the relevant features of the people participating in their studies and sometimes present inconsistent information (Betan, Roberts, and McCluskey-Fawcett 1995;Guinee 2000). These deficiencies in reporting seriously undermine the ability to produce formal knowledge or nomothetic generalizations from samples to populations.…”

Rehabilitation Counselling Theory and Quality Practice Reported inThe Australian Journal of Rehabilitation Counselling

“…Second, the research papers cited above suggest that the identity of RCs in Australia is problematic. T h e qualifications, training and experience of RCparticipants were often not clearly identified, a problem that has been evident in counselling research elsewhere (Guinee, 2000). Confusion about role identity can be attributed to the various titles that are used to denote RCs, such as case manager, rehabilitation consultant or co-ordinator (Walker, 1999).…”

“…Few authors discussed theoretical or methodological plurality in the development of the clinical or knowledge base of RCs (Crisp, 2000). Yet, practising counsellors may adhere to components of several theories rather than just one, and authors tend not to discuss or rate the degree of adherence to multiple theories (Guinee, 2000). Further, not all RCs embrace psychological perspectives (Kenny, 1998a,b).…”