SBOBET SBOTHAICLUB
อื่นๆ

The key standard beta coefficient (? = 0

The key standard beta coefficient (? = 0

The Goal Subscale Epistemology was also a significant predictor of therapist emphasis on the working alliance along the Goal subscale (e.g. client and therapist agreement on how to achieve the goals), F(2, 1093) = 4.92, p < .007 (R 2 = .009). 065) for the rationalist epistemology t(1093) = 2.16, p < .031, was in the positive direction. 075) for the constructivist epistemology t(1093) = 2.47, p < .014, was also in the positive direction along the Goal subscale. This was again inconsistent with the proposed hypothesis that the rationalist epistemology would have stronger leanings towards the Goal subscale in the therapist emphasis on working alliance compared to therapists with a constructivist epistemology.

The Bond Subscale Lastly, epistemology was also a significant predictor of the therapist emphasis on the working alliance along the Bond subscale (the development of a personal bond between the client and therapist), F(2, 1089) = , p < .001 (R 2 = .035). The standardized beta coefficient for the rationalist epistemology (? = – 0.034) was in the negative direction, but was not significant, t(1089) = –1.15, p < .249. For the constructivist epistemology, the standardized beta coefficient (? = 0.179) was significant t(1089) = 5.99, p < .0001, and in the positive direction along the Bond subscale. This supported the hypothesis that the rationalist epistemology is less inclined towards therapist emphasis on working alliance on the Bond subscale than the constructivist epistemology.

Therapists that have a https://datingranking.net/single-parent-match-review/ great constructivist epistemology tended to place a great deal more emphasis on the personal bond regarding the therapeutic relationships than the therapists that have an excellent rationalist epistemology

The current data indicated that counselor epistemology is actually a serious predictor with a minimum of certain areas of the working alliance. The best finding was at relation to the introduction of an effective private thread within consumer and you can therapist (Bond subscale). This aids the notion regarding the literature you to definitely constructivist therapists put an elevated emphasis on strengthening a good therapeutic dating described as, “allowed, facts, faith, and caring.

Hypothesis 3-your choice of Particular Healing Treatments

The next and you may finally research was created to address this new anticipate one epistemology might be a great predictor regarding specialist accessibility certain cures processes. Significantly more especially, the rationalist epistemology tend to declaration playing with techniques for the cognitive behavioral treatment (elizabeth.grams. recommendations offering) over constructivist epistemologies, and you may therapists with constructivist epistemologies usually declaration having fun with techniques for the constructivist procedures (elizabeth.grams. emotional processing) over therapists with rationalist epistemologies). A parallel linear regression research is actually used to choose should your predictor changeable (specialist epistemology) often influence specialist recommendations of your own criterion details (treatment procedure).

Epistemology was a significant predictor of cognitive behavioral therapy techniques F(2, 993) = , p < .001 (R 2 = .185). The standardized beta coefficient for the rationalist epistemology (? = 0.430) was significant, t(993) = , p < .001 and in the positive direction. The standardized beta coefficient for the constructivist epistemology (? = 0.057) was significant and in the positive direction t(993) = 1.98, p < .05. This supported the hypothesis that the rationalist epistemology would have stronger leanings of therapist use of cognitive behavioral techniques when conducting therapy than constructivist epistemologies.

Finally, epistemology was a significant predictor of constructivist therapy techniques F(2, 1012) = , p < .001 (R 2 = .138). The standardized beta coefficient for the rationalist epistemology (? = – 0.297) was significant t(1012) = –, p < .0001 and in the negative direction. The standardized beta coefficient for the constructivist epistemology (? = 0.195) was significant t(1012) = 6.63, p < .0001, and in the positive direction. This supported the hypothesis that the constructivist epistemology would place a stronger emphasis on therapist use of constructivist techniques when conducting therapy than rationalist epistemologies.

SBOTHAICLUB LINE

SBOTHAICLUB - เล่น SBOBET กับน้องโยโย่ แจกเครดิตลองเล่น ฟรี 100 บาท
สอบถามเพิ่มเติมหรือต้องการสมัครสมาชิก กดที่ปุ่มเพิ่มเพื่อนด้านล่างได้เลยค่ะ

Comments

comments

SBOBET SBOTHAICLUB
To Top