This study examined whether clients' ratings of the working alliance as well as their perception of cognitive-behavioral (CB) and psychodynamic-interpersonal (PI) techniques (delivered by therapists who used both) were associated with clients' intersession processes (i.e., their thoughts about therapy and therapeutic activity between sessions). Seventy-five clients who were currently in therapy at a large university counseling center participated in the current study. Multilevel regression analyses demonstrated that alliance and clients' perceptions of their therapists' use of PI techniques were positively associated with clients' general thoughts about therapy between sessions. Also, stronger alliances were associated with more therapeutic activities between sessions and more positive (and less negative) thoughts about therapy between sessions. In addition, clients at later sessions who described their therapists as using more PI techniques also reported engaging in more therapeutic activities between sessions (after controlling for the variance in the other variables, such as use of CB techniques). Clients' perceptions of their therapists' use of CB techniques in the most recent session were not related to thinking about therapy or therapeutic activities after controlling for the variance in the other variables.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 11 January 2012.
All research outputs
#16,722,190
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Counseling Psychology
#636
of 1,602 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,824
of 250,100 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Counseling Psychology
#17
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,602 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 250,100 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
