Utilizing a collaborative therapeutic assessment (TA) model proposed by Finn and Tonsager (1997), we examined the interaction between therapeutic alliance and in-session process during the assessment phase of treatment. This study compares the utility of the TA model (n = 38) versus a traditional information gathering model (n = 90) of assessment. The results of this study indicate that the use of a TA model may decrease the number of patients who terminate treatment against medical advice. The Session Evaluation Questionnaire (Stiles & Snow, 1984), Combined Alliance Short Form (Hatcher & Barends, 1996), and Penn Helping Alliance Questionnaire-Revised (Barber & Crits-Christoph, 1996) can reliably measure the patient's experience of the assessment. The psychological assessment process may impact the patient's experience of assessment feedback and aid in the development of a therapeutic alliance. The therapeutic alliance developed during the assessment was found to be related to alliance early in psychotherapy. We discuss the theoretical, clinical, and research implications of these findings.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 March 2015.
All research outputs
#6,950,322
of 22,790,780 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Personality Assessment
#208
of 760 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,669
of 37,764 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Personality Assessment
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,790,780 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 760 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 37,764 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them
