<%BANNER%>

Record for a UF thesis. Title & abstract won't display until thesis is accessible after 2015-05-31.

DARK ITEM
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0045605/00001

Material Information

Title: Record for a UF thesis. Title & abstract won't display until thesis is accessible after 2015-05-31.
Physical Description: Book
Language: english
Creator: Barthle, Megan A
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2013

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: Psychology -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Psychology thesis, M.S.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Statement of Responsibility: by Megan A Barthle.
Thesis: Thesis (M.S.)--University of Florida, 2013.
Local: Adviser: Neimeyer, Gregory J.
Electronic Access: INACCESSIBLE UNTIL 2015-05-31

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2013
System ID: UFE0045605:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0045605/00001

Material Information

Title: Record for a UF thesis. Title & abstract won't display until thesis is accessible after 2015-05-31.
Physical Description: Book
Language: english
Creator: Barthle, Megan A
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2013

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: Psychology -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Psychology thesis, M.S.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Statement of Responsibility: by Megan A Barthle.
Thesis: Thesis (M.S.)--University of Florida, 2013.
Local: Adviser: Neimeyer, Gregory J.
Electronic Access: INACCESSIBLE UNTIL 2015-05-31

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2013
System ID: UFE0045605:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

1 Non t By MEGAN A. BARTHLE A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTE R OF SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 201 3

PAGE 2

2 201 3 M egan A. B arthle

PAGE 3

3 This paper is dedicated t o all those who supported me through this process and encouraged me to never give up.

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I could never have done this with out my amazing support system. I thank God for endowing me with the gifts to be successful in my endeavors. I thank my parents, my sisters and Joey for their overwhelming love, care, faith, and encouragement. I thank Dr. Greg Neimeyer for guiding me while allowing me freedom to explore. I thank my student colleagues for helping me navigate the intricacies of this process and the emotional turmoil it engenders especially to Brandon Velez for his help in my conceptualization of data and statistical analyses I also thank Dr. Joe McNamara for being a huge moral support and mentor when the pro cess became difficult. I thank everyone who supported me because I could not have endured this process without you.

PAGE 5

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 4 LIST OF TABLES ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 7 ABSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 8 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 9 Conceptual Definitions and Empirical Findings ................................ ............................. 11 Personality Characteristics ................................ ................................ ......................... 11 Theoretical Orientation ................................ ................................ ............................... 13 Self selected ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 13 Trait based selection ................................ ................................ .............................. 14 Epistemic Commitments ................................ ................................ ............................ 17 Therapist Style ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 19 Purpose of Present Study, Hypotheses, and Research Questions ............................... 22 Purpose ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 22 Hypotheses ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 22 Research Questions ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 24 2 INSTRUMENTS AND METHOD ................................ ................................ ................ 27 Participants ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 27 Procedure ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 27 Instruments ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 28 Demographics ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 29 Personality Characteristics ................................ ................................ ...................... 29 Theoretical Orientation ................................ ................................ ............................ 29 Epistemic Commitments ................................ ................................ ......................... 30 Therapist Style ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 32 3 RESULTS ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 34 Demographics ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 34 Measurement Reliability ................................ ................................ ................................ 34 Correlational Analyses ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 35 Regression Analyses ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 36 Hypothesis 1 ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 36

PAGE 6

6 Hypothesis 2 ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 37 Hypothesis 3 ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 37 Hypothesis 4 ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 38 Hypothesis 5 ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 38 Hypothesis 6 ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 38 Hypothesis 7 ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 39 Research Q uestion 1 ................................ ................................ ................................ 39 Psychodynamic ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 40 Cognitive Behavioral ................................ ................................ ............................... 40 Family ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 41 Humanistic ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 41 Ecosystems ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 42 Pragmatic ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 42 Biological ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 43 Research Q uestion 2 ................................ ................................ ................................ 43 Rationalist ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 43 Constructivist ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 43 Research Q uestion 3 ................................ ................................ ................................ 44 Instructional ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 44 Expressive ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 45 Engagement ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 45 Attentional ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 46 Operative ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 46 4 DISCUSSION LIMITATIONS, AND FUTURE RESEARCH ................................ ....... 51 5 CONCLUSION ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 55 APPENDIX A BIG FIVE INVENTORY (BFI 44) ................................ ................................ ................ 57 B THEORETICAL EVALUATION SELF TEST (TEST) ................................ .................. 60 C THERAPIST ATTITUDE QUESTIONNAIRE SHORT FORM (TAQ SF) .................... 62 D PERSON AL STYLE OF THE THERAPIST QUESTIONNAIRE (PST Q) ................... 64 E DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION ................................ ................................ .............. 66 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ............................... 68 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................ ................................ ............................ 73

PAGE 7

7 LIST OF TABLES Table page 4 1 Matrix for e stimating a dequacy of i nterna l consistency coefficients with r esearch m easures ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 47 4 2 Internal c onsistency c oefficients ................................ ................................ .......... 48 4 3 Pearson p roduct m oment c orrelations of p erso nality c haracteristics to t heoretical o rienatation ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 49 4 4 Pearson p roduct m oment c orrelations for p ersonality c haracteristics to e pi stemic c ommitments and t h erapist s tyles ................................ ................................ ....... 50

PAGE 8

8 Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science NON FOR THERAPY CLIMATE: THE ROLE OF PERSONALITY By Megan A. Barthle May 2013 Chair: Greg Neimeyer Major: Psychology This study explored the relationship between personality characteristics in non therapists and their preferences for theoretical orientation, e pistemic commitment, and therapist style in therapy. A total of 76 student participants completed the online survey. Preference for theoretical orientation was measured using the The oretical Orientation Self Test ( T E S T ) Preference for epist emic commitment was measured by the Therapist Attitudes Questionnaire Short Form ( T A Q S F ) Preferences for therapist styles w ere measured using the Personal Style of the Therapist Questionnaire ( P S T Q ) Personality characteristics were measure d by the Big Five Inventory 44 ( B F I 4 4 ) Personality was found to predict the preference for Psychodynamic, Cognitive Behavioral, Humanistic, and Ecosystems t heoretical orientation s Constructivist epistemology, and Instructive and Engagement therapy style s The implications and limitations of these findings were discussed in relation to counseling and psychotherapy.

PAGE 9

9 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION This study aims to explore the preference of students for theoretical orientation, epistemological commitments, and therapeutic style using personality characteristics as a predictor. Johnson, Germer, Efran, and Overton (1988) found that personality characteristics reflect individ ual s worldviews, and Fernndez lvarez, Garca, Lo Bi anco, a n d Corbella (2003 client counselor relationship and treatment outcomes. T he preferences of students for different kinds of therapeutic experiences will be explored This may help us better understand what clients want in therapy This could lead to a pres screening of clients before treatment to see what intervention strategy could best f it f or that individual. P ersonality characteristics included in this st udy are Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Openness to Experience. Theoretical o rientation is organized into Psychodynamic, Cognitive Behavioral, Family, Humanist/Experiential/E xistential, Ecosystems/Cultural, Pragmatic Case M anagement, and Biological E pistemic commitments which are underlying world, views, are divided into Rationalism and Constructivism Lastly, t herapeutic style is measured as Instructional, Expressive, Engagement, Attentional and Operative subscales The goal of the study is to explore the ways in which the personality characteristics may predict preferences for various therapeutic orientations, therapeutic styles, or underlying epistemic commitments. Personality characteristics were selected as predictors for theoretical orientation based on past research linking the two factors (Arthur 2000, 2001; Ogunfowora & Drapeau, 2008; Scragg, Bor, & Watts, 1999 ; Scandell, Wlaze lek, & Scandell, 1997,

PAGE 10

10 Tremblay, Herron, & Schultz 1986 ). A notable difference between t he current study and these previous studies is that the current study uses a trait based selection of theoretical orientation instead of a self selection measure to obtain orientation commitments. Epistemic commitments are the beliefs about how knowledge is acquired, organized, and developed (Bruccatto & Neimeyer, 2007; Neimeyer, Prichard, Lyddon, & Sherrard, 1993 ). This variable was selected because it can be viewed as what comes before a theoretical orienation selection, or as a higher order grouping of orientations into Rastionalism and Constructivism beliefs. It has been found that even within a specified theoretical orientation, individual therapists will vary on their commitment to the orientation or how they enact their orientation in the therapeuti c setting (Poznanski & McLennan, 1995; Buckley, Karasu, Charles, & Stein, 1979; Fischer, Paveza, Kickertz, Hubbard, & Graystone, 1975; Rosso & Frey, 1973 ). Therapist style gets at these individualized nuances in how therapists apply their therapeutic orien tation in therapy. This can be viewed as what comes after the selec tion of theoretical orientation, or as the specifics for each individual therapist. The three aspects of theoretical orientation: theoretical orientation, epistemic commitment, and therapis t style, all combine to give the most full view of theoretical orientation and how it is specifically enacted in the real world. An exploration of personality characteristics and theoretical orienation would not be complete without the inclusion of all the se variables.

PAGE 11

11 Conceptual Definitions and Empirical Findings Personality Characteristics individual of those psychophysical systems that determine his unique adjustment to the en then, seeing a substantial increase since the 1980s (John, Naumann, & Soto, 2008). John et al. (2008) also report that while the names of personality traits would often be the same between researchers, they would be measuring different constructs. Because of this misunderstanding of trait names and their meanings, the five factors of personality used in this study were defined in John et al. (2008), combined from the work o f Costa & McCrae (1992), John (1990), and Tekllegen (1985), are as follows: Extraversion implies an energetic approach toward the social and material world and includes traits such as sociability, activity, assertiveness, and positive emotionality. Agr eeableness contrasts a prosocial and communal orientation toward others with antagonism and includes traits such as altruism, tender mi ndedness, trust, and modesty Conscientiousness describes socially prescribed impulse control that facilitates task an d goal directed behavior, such as thinking before action, delaying gratification, following norms and rules, and planning, organizing, and prioritizing tasks. Neuroticism contrasts emotional stability and even temperedness with negative emotionality suc h as feeling anxious, nervous, sad, and tense. Openness to Experience (vs. close mindedness) describes the breadth, depth, originality, and complexity of an individual's mental and experiential life ( p. 138, italics in original, bold not in original) Thalmayer, Saucier, and Eigenhuis (2011) agree that Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism and Openness are widely accepted as the personality factors, while Wiggins (1968) names Extraversion and Neuroticism as personality The Big Five Inventory 44 (BFI 44; John, Donahue, & Kentle 199 1 ) used in this study drew its items from the largest collection of pre existing personality data (Thalmayer et al., 2011). Another advantage of the BFI over

PAGE 12

12 other personality measures is tha t it is easier to understand (Benet Martinez & John, 1998; Soto, John, Gosling, & Potter, 2008). Past studies have found that personality Og u nfowora & Drapeau, 2008; S candell et al., 1997; Scragg et al. 1999). Ogunfowora and Drapeau (2008) explored the connection between personality factors and theoretical orientation with practicing clinicians and psychotherapy students. They used the six factor HEXACO measure of per sonality characteristics (honesty humility, H; emotionality, E; extraversion, X; Agreeableness, A; conscientiousness, C; and openness to experience, O; Lee & Ashton, 2004) and a variation of the Theoretical Orientation Profile Scale Revised (TOPS R; Worth ington & Dillon, 2003). Ogunfowora and Drapea u (2008), Scragg et al. (1999), Scandell et al. (1997), and Tremblay et al. (1986) found that Openness to Experience predicted Humanistic/Existential theoretical orientation. Ogunfowora and Drapeau (2008) fou nd that Conscientiousness predicted Cognitive Behavioral theoretical orientation, which is supported by the findings of Arthur (2000, 2001) and Scragg et al. (1999). C onscientiousness was also found to negatively predict Humanistic/Existential theoretical orientations and positively predict a Biological theoretical orientation (Ogunfowora & Drapeau, 2008) For only the practicing clinician sample, Openness to Experience was found to predict Psychodynamic, Feminist, and Multicultural theoretical orientations and Agreeableness predicted Feminist, Multicultural, and Family theoretical orientations (Ogunfowora & Drapeau, 2008). Arthur (2000), and Scragg (1999) also found a connection between Openness to Experience and Psychodynamic theoretical orientation. For only the psychotherapy student sample, Openness predicted

PAGE 13

13 Feminist theoretical orientation, Extraversion predicted Family theoretical orientation, and Conscientiousness predicted Neuropsychological (Biological) theoretical orientation (Ogunfowora & Drapeau 2008) Personality is found to have a greater affect on (Ogunfowora & Drapeau, 2008) Theoretical Orientation Poznanski & McLennan (1995) simply define theoretical orientation as a conceptual framework used by mental health clinicians to understand the therapeutic needs of the clien t. Self selected Most studies on theoretical orientation rely on a self selection by mental health clinicians (Coleman, 2007; Poznanski & McLennan, 1995). The problem with this is that what counselors actually do in a session may not be a true reflection of the theory they self select (Poznanski & McLennan, 1995). Some studies (e.g., Bu ckley et al., 1979; Fischer et al. 1975; Rosso & Fre y, 1973), have shown that therapists of a particular theoretical orientation may have varying degrees of conformity to the tenants of that orientation in practice leading to question the value of self ascribed theoretical orientations (Poznanski & McLen nan, 1995). Johnson and Brems (1991) affirmed that dy (1985) concluded that overall, therapists do not identify with one therapeutic orientation specifically, endorsing an eclectic label in lieu of selecting one orientation over others used. practitioner changes theo retical orientations 2 or 3 times dur

PAGE 14

14 59). Jensen, Bergin, and Greaves (1990) and Hollanders and McLeod (1999) found that mental health professionals are increasingly using multiple theories in practice and only a small portion of clinicians endorsed using only one theory in practice. Despite this, differences in theoretical orientation continue, though the trend for eclecticism or integrationist becomes more pronounced (Coleman, 2004; 2007; Larson, 1980; Poznanski & McLennan, 1995 ; 1999 ; Toska, 2008 ). Theoretical orientation categorization persists because it is helpful for organizing training, clinical, and supervision experiences (Coleman, 2007). Trait based s election Over the course of more than 40 years, several scales have be en developed to measure therapist theoretical orientation (Poznanski & McLennan, 1995). Poznanski and McLennan (1995) continue by stating, T he term theoretical orientation refers to an organized set of assumptions, which provides a counselor with a theo ry based framework for (a) generating for specific treatment interventions, and (c) evaluating the ongoing therapeutic process (p. 412, italics in original, bold not in origi nal) Coleman (2004) described us ing theoretical orientation to guide how the clinician understands psychopathology and the process of helping, and each theory and The most common theoretical orientations identified by questionnaires are psychodynamic, cognitive behavioral, family therapy, and humanistic experiential/existential (Coleman, 2004; Jensen et al. 1990 ; Norcross, Hedges, & Castle, 2002; Norcross, Prochaska, & Farber, 1993 ; Poznanski & McLennan, 1999 ). In addition to these traditional theoretical orientations, Coleman (2004) identified Ecosystems Cultural, Pragmatic Case Management, and Biological orientations.

PAGE 15

15 ientations, derived from information from Ablon and Jones (1998), Orlinsky and Howard (1995), Sundland (1977), and Cocozzelli (1987 ) for established theoretical orientations, Meyer (1983) and LaFromboise, Coleman, and Hernandez (1991 ) for E cosystems and C u ltural approaches a case management model from The National Alliance for the Mentally Ill (2003) for Pragmatic Case Management approach, and Torrey (1997) for the Biological approach. P sychodynamic theory uses the emphasis of the unconsc ious, conceptualizing it in terms of motivation and conflict. Dreams and fantasies are means by which the unconscious is interpreted. The therapeutic relationship uses the projective process of transference and countertransference, recreating past relation ships as a tool to change. Clients resolve internal conflict by the use of insight, therefore allowing a full, self aware personal experience o f life (Ablon & Jones, 1998; Orlinsky & Howard, 1995; Sundland, 1977). Cognitive Behavioral theory emphasizes con ditioning and reinforcement, while taking into account cognition. The therapist takes an active role by helping the client become aware of and analyze irrational beliefs, flawed reasoning, and maladaptive behavior, then enacting behavioral interventions to decrease or end the maladaptive behaviors and reactions. Interventions in this theory are directive and include (Ablon & Jones, 1998; Coleman, 2004; Orlinsky & Howar d, 1995; Sundland, 1977). Applications of Family therapy include structural, strategic, and systems focused approaches (Coleman, 2004). Family therapists value the importance of meeting with

PAGE 16

16 the whole family, the observance that change in one member of a f amily affects the reciprocal relationships, and an active, indirect approach (Orlinsky & Howard, 1995). Humanist ic Experiential, or Existential therapies focus on the here and now, The therapist aids the client in becoming more aware and facilitates the expression. The client therapist relationship is benefitted by the therapist being empathic and nonjudgmental, with the therapy being heavily client centered (Orlinsky & Howard, 1995). Ecosystems/Cultural ( Ecocultural ) therapies focus on loca lizing the problem in experience, namely the experience of a psychosocial pro blem, beliefs about its causes, and how to get help (LaFromboise et al., 1991). Pragmatic Case Management therapy emphasized an active and directive approach in which the therapist provides advice and guidance to the client (Coleman, 2004). Coleman (2005) gives a n example of a case management model called (ACT), promoted by The National Alliance for the Mentally Ill (2003). Biological orientation to therapy focuses on the biological basis of mental disorders. Psychoeducation on biological features in treatment as well as treatment with medications are emphasized (Torrey, 1997).

PAGE 17

17 Epistemic C ommitments prevailing set of assumptions about the way in which kno wledge is acquired, organized, rstanding epistemic commitment a s the underlying philosophical assumptions guiding how people construct reality and test their beliefs (Neimeyer et al. 1993). Ro yce (1964) suggested three ways of knowing: rational, metaphorical, and empirical. Royce describes that a person using rational style relates to the world using conceptual cognitive abilities paired with rational and analytic thinking skills a person usin g metaphorical style understands the world using symbolic cognitive abilities in reference to symbolic representations, and a person using an empirical style conceptualizes the world using perceptual cognitive abilities through the use of the senses and ob servations. Individuals tend to have one dominant epistemic style, but are likely to use all of the styles depending on the situation (Royce, 1964). Schacht and Black (1985) found that behavioral therapists endorsed empiricist epistemology while analytical therapists endorsed metaphorism as their empiricist epistemology. taxonomy of epistemic styles Clients prefer a counseling ap proach that matches their epistemic commitments (Lyddon, 1989). Metaphorical epistemic style predicted constructivist therapies, empirical style predicted behavioral therapies, and rationalistic style predicted rationalist therapies ( Lyddon, 1989; Neimeyer et al., 1993; Neimeyer & Morton, 1997). Psychoanalysts prefer metaphorical style and Cognitive Behaviorists prefer empirical style (Arthur, 2000; Schacht & Black, 1985).

PAGE 18

18 Neimeyer and Morton ( 1997) argued that there are two main epistemic styles, rationali sm and constructivism. Rationalism is the separation of thinking and feeling, with greater emphasis on thinking, and that there is a single knowable reality. The method of rational epistemologies is to correct dysfunction through directive interventions (N eimeyer & Morton, 1997). Constructivism does not separate thinking and feeling, arguing that this separation is artificial; referring to feeling as a primitive knowing system, and that reality is different for each individual depending on their experiences (Neimeyer & Morton, 1997). Toska (2008) found that experienced therapists endorsed greater commitment to a constructivist epistemology than they did when they were novice counselors. She investigated the effect of cohort on the transition from rationalist to constructivist epistemology and found no cohort effects, stating that experience is the factor engendering the transition. Toska (2008) also found a relationship between the transition along the rationalist constructivist epistemic belief continuum to theoretical orientation and therapist style. Clinicians who perceived increased constructivist commitments and a decrease in rationalist commitments increased their commitment to integrational or eclectic theoretical orientation and increased levels of em otional closeness (Expressive), became less active in information gathering (Attentional) and increased spontaneous interventions (Operational). (1962) Analytic (1979) Objective Subjective epistemic dimensions. Poznanski and McLennan (1995) created two dimensions for describing

PAGE 19

19 epistemologies: Rational Intuitive and Objective Subjective. The Rational Intuitive subscale emphasizes preferred ways of knowing in ter ms of rational judgment through logical and analytical thinking, or intuition (Poznanski & McLennan, 1995). The Objective Subjective dimension emphasizes preferred ways of knowing by taking a view of reality by rationalism and empiricism (logical and obser vable) or by subjective experience (metaphorism and symbolism; Poznanski & McLennan, 1995). Cognitiv e Behavioral therapists are likely to hold rational and objective beliefs, Psychodynamic therapists are to hold beliefs based on intuition, Experiential /P henomenological (Humanistic/Existential) therapists are likely to hold subject ive and intuition based beliefs, but less so than Psychodynamic, and Family/ Systemic therapists tend to hold beliefs of pragmatic realism, along with moderate subjective and rat ional beliefs (Poznanski & McLennan, 1999). Consequently, Cognitive Behaviorists scored the highest on the Rational Intuitive and Objective Subjective s ubscales, Experiential/Phenomeno logical therapists scored lower on both scales, Psychodynamic scoring lo wer only on the Rational Intuitive scale, Family/Systemic therapists had intermediate scores on both scales (Poznanski & McLennan, 1999). Therapist S tyle Variables in therapist style account for a signific ant portion of therapy outcomes. Fernndez lvarez et al. (2003 ) define personal style of the therapist (PST) the set of characteristics that each therapist applies in every psychotherapeutic situation, thus shaping the main attributes of the therapeutic act Therapist style includes five b ipolar dimensions.

PAGE 20

20 The Instructional subscale includes the rules that regulate the therapeutic interaction such as fees, location, and client therapist negotiation procedures It is measured on a scale from flexibility to rigidity. The Expressive subscale involves the emotional communication distance between the therapist and client. The therapist can range from being emotionally distant from the client to being emotionally close to the client. The third subscale, Engagement is the degree to which a thera pist is committed to clients This ranges from a lesser degree to a greater degree. The Attentional subscale pertains to how active or passive the therapist is while gathering c lient information in session. Therapist attention can be broadly focused or narrowly focused. Finally, the Operative subscale is how the therapist enacts interventions with clients. Therapist interventions can fall along a continuum from spontaneous to pla nned. Fernndez lvarez et al. (2003) measured these constructs by creating the Pe r sonal Style of the Therapist Questionnair e (PST Q) and later put it to use comparing PST, theoretical orientation, years of experience, and length of treatments (Castaeiras Garca, Lo Bianco & Fernndez lvarez, 2006). In this 2006 study, Castaeiras et al. found PST differences for therapists of different experiential levels, bolstering the statements of Fernndez lvarez et al. (2003) that PST is conceptualized as a stabl e variable, but can be flexible relating to changes therapists experience over time. Castaeiras et al. (2006) found differences in PST in therapists according to theoretical orientation, and that experience was a moderating factor. Expressiveness and Enga gement were found to be the same across theoretical orientations of novice therapists; they tended to be committed to and emotionally close to their clients.

PAGE 21

21 Beginner therapists were separated along theoretical orientation lines for the Instructional subsc ale with C ognitive therapists were more rigid with their regulation while integrative therapists were more flexible with rules relating to therapy. For both begi nner and experienced therapists, C ognitive and I ntegrative therapists tended to have the same v iews relating to A ttentional and O perative subscales, tending to be more active in getting information from clients and enacting a planned intervention. This separated them from psychoanalytic therapists of both experience levels who tended to be more pass ive in information gathering and used a more spontaneous intervention strategy. For experts only, cognitive and integrative therapists scored higher on the Expressive and Engagement subscales, reporting more emotional closeness and higher levels of commitm ent to their clients than their psychoanalytic counterparts (Castaeiras et al., 2006) Castaeiras et al. (2006) found that experience level affects the relationship of PST and theoretical orientation in different ways. Beginners and experts also varied within their theoretical orientation. Instructional and Expressive subscales differed in cognitive therapists with beginners being more rigid with rules and more emotionally distant toward clients, respectively. Among integrational therapists, beginners t ended to be less committed to their clients, more active in eliciting information from clients, and tended to have more planned interventions, showing a difference from their more experienced counterparts in Engagement, Attenti onal and Operative subs c ales respectively. Psychoanalytic therapists differed on the Attentional scale with beginners being more narrowly focused on information gathering than the experts.

PAGE 22

22 Toska (2008) extended the work of Castaeiras et al. (2006), finding that clinicians perceived their style as affected by experience, endorsing being more emotionally expressive (Expressive), having a broader attention when gathering client information (Attentional), and more spontaneous in implementing interventions (Operational) over time P urpo se of P resent Study, Hypothese s and Research Questions Purpose The present study aims to explore the relationship between personality chara cteristics of students to their preference for theoretical orientations, epistemic commitments, and therapist style. Hypotheses will follow findings in past research, and research questions will extend this research to other related constructs. Past research has mostly been conducted with mental health clinicians or students in training to become mental health clinician s. The results from former studies may not entirely fit the student sample in this study, but connections between personality characteristics and theoretical orientation will still be explored. Hypotheses 1. Openness to Experience will predict preference for the Humanistic theoretical orientation. 2. Openness to Experience will predict preference for the Psychod ynamic theoretical orientation. 3. Conscientiousness will negatively predict Huma nistic theoretical orientation. 4. Conscientiousness will predict Biological theoretical orientation. 5. Conscientiousness will predict preference for the Cognitive Behavioral orientation. 6. Agreeableness and Openness to Experience will predict Ecosystems theoretical orientation.

PAGE 23

23 7. Extraversion and Agreeableness will predict Family th eoretical orientation. Hypotheses # 1 is the most consistently replicated finding with Ogunfowora and Drapea (2008), Scandell et al. (1997), Scragg et al. (1999), and Trembla y et al. (1986) finding that Openness to Experience predicted a preference for Hum anistic theoretical orientation. Humanistic therapists have long been known for their open mindedness in challenging traditional beliefs (O gunfowora & Drapeau, 2008). Hypothesis #2 hopes to replicate the findings of Arthur (2000), Ogunfowora and Drapeau (2 008) and Scragg et al. (1999), who found Openness to Experience predicted a preference for Psychodynamic orientation. This may be due to the tendency for Psychodynamic therapists to engage in more abstract thinking which allows them a unique view of their clients free from cognitive structure (Arthur, 2000; Ogunfowora & Drapeau, 2008). In their 2008 study, Ogunfowora and Drapeau also found that high scores on Conscientiousness for clinicians and psychotherapy students negatively predicted the Humanistic or ientation (Hypothesis #3) Lee and Ashton (2004) reported that conscientious individuals prefer setting goals, having structure, and working in a disciplined manner to achieve perfection in their tasks, while Young (2000) finds that existential therapists do not usually work towards specific therapy goals, valuing exploration over determination. Out Hypothesis #4 originated from Ogunfowora and Drapeau (2008) who found that Conscientiousness predicted a Biological orientation The same traits that deter Cons cientious individuals from embracing Humanistic orientation may also be in play here to help guide them towards Biological theoretical orientation.

PAGE 24

24 Conscientiousness was found by Ogunfowora and Drapeau (2008) to predict Cognitive Behavioral theoretical ori entation for Hypothesis #5. The ordely aspects of Conscientiousness would fit well with the beliefs of Cognitive Behaviorists. Arthur (2000, 2001) and Scragg et al. (1999) report that Cognitive Behaviorists are concientiousness, orderly, and goal directed. Hypothesis # 6 concerned Agreeableness and Openness to Experience topredict Ecosystems therapeutic orientation. Ogunfowora and Drapeau found this in their 2008 study, citing the definition of Lee and Ashton (2004) which states highly agreeable individuals are cooperative and forgiving, having great patience and allowing much leniency, which are characteristics associated with the beliefs of Ecosystems therapists. Finally, Hypothesis #7 is taken from Ogunfowora and Drapeau (2008), who found that Extraversion and Agreeableness predicted the Family theoretical orientation. The energy from Extraversion and the prosocial and communal aspects of Agreeableness would fit well with the Family orientation when dealing with a family system. Research Question s 1. What othe r relationships exist between personality characteristics and theoretical orientation? 2. How are personality characteristics of students related to the preference for Epistemic Commitments ? 3. How are personality characteristics of students related to the prefe rence for Therapist Style? Research Question #1 strives to explore what other connections are made between personality characteristics and theoretical orientation, as well as specifying this

PAGE 25

25 Research Que commitment depending on their personality characteristics. If the preference for epistemic commitments follow the preferences for theoretical orientations, we expect to see students with high er levels of Conscie ntiousness to prefer Rationalist epistemology while higher levels of Agreeableness and Openness to Experience should predict a preference for a more Constructivist epistemology. These expectations come from the findings of Neimeyer and Mortion (1997) who found individuals who held Rationalist epistemological beliefs preferred Rational Emotive Behavi oral Therapy and Behavioral approaches and individuals holding Constructivist beliefs preferred a more metaphorical, individualized approac h. Poznanski and McLennan (1999) also found that Cognitive Behavioral therapists hold Rationalist beliefs, and Humanistic therapists held more Constructivist beliefs. Lastly, Research Question #3 explores personality characteristics and preference for ther apist style. Combining the first two research questions, Saferstein (2007) found individuals holding more Rationalist beliefs scored lower on Expressive and Engagement styles, and scored higher on Attentional and Operative therapy styles. The opposite is t rue for Constructivist beliefs scoring higher on Expressive and Engagement therapy styles and lower on Attentional and Operative styles (Saferstein, 2007) C astaeiras et al. (2006) found that Cognitive Behavioral therapists had a more rigid Instructional style, were more emotionally connected with and committed to their clients (Expressive and Engagement styles, respectively), were more active when gathering information (Attentional style) and more planned when enacting interventions (Operational style). This is in contrast to Castaeiras et al.

PAGE 26

26 Psychoanalytic therapists had a more passive Attentional style and enacted more spontaneous interventions for Operative style. Following through Saferstein (2007), individuals high on Conscie ntiousness should follow scoring lower on Expressive and Engagement styles, and higher on Attentional and Operative therapy styles, whereas individuals high in Agreeableness and Openness to Experience should score higher on Expressive and Engagement therap y styles and lower on Attentional and Operative styles. Following Castaeiras et al. (2006) High scores of Conscientiousness should score higher on all therapist style subscales, and individuals high in Agreeableness and Openness to Experience should scor e lower on Attentional and Operative styles. Castaeiras et al. (2006) and Saferstein (2007) agree on the Attentional and Operative styles, but the other styles have mixed results. This may be due to the use of experience in the Castaeiras et al. (2006) study.

PAGE 27

27 CHAPTER 2 INSTRUMENTS AND METHOD Participants Student Participants were recruited online through an introductory undergraduate research credit requirement was prov ided. 81 surveys were given to students and 76 responded to at least the first measure resulting in a partial response rate of 93.8%. Due to the nature of the credit system used by the undergraduates, students could not see the study information before cli cking the study link. All studies in the system are given a numbered code so students can select a study to participate in at random. The large response rate reflects this unique system, and indicates that out of the 81 students who selected the randomized study number 76 agreed to the informed consent and completed at least the first measure in the study. Procedure Participants were tested by means of a computer based survey that required approximately 30 minutes to complete. Each participant was asked to read and complete the informed consent form which was placed before the survey. The Informed Consent notified the participants that the purpose of the study is to explore how personality characteristics and counseling theoretica l orientation are related Participants were also informed that there are no known risks associated with participation in this study and that they may decline to answer any question that they did not want to answer. Participants were reminded that their participation in the project is voluntary, and that students in introductory psychology classes at the University of Florida would receive 1 credit towards their research credit requirement while all other

PAGE 28

28 participants would not receive any compensation. The survey was anonymous and c onfidentiality of participants was insured through the use of a randomly generated code number to record surveys. Instructions to complete the survey were then presented. A questionnaire that included demographic info rmation, The Big Five Inventory 44 (Jo hn et al. 1991; reprinted in John et al. 2008), Theoretical Evaluation Self Test (Coleman, 2004), Therapist Attitude Questionnaire Short Form (Neimeyer & Morton, 1997), and Personal Style of the Therapist Questionnaire ( Fernndez lvarez et al. 2003 ) w a s administered via an online survey collection program. Items included in each questionnaire were randomized Since the measures were worded for use with mental health providers, students were encouraged to view the questions as items concerning how they w ould like themselves and their issues to be viewed in therapy. The following is text from the survey: Some items in this questionnaire concern different views of mental health services. If you are a non mental health worker, please answer these questions in the way you view the mental health process or how you would like to be viewed as a client/patient. At the conclusion of the survey, participants were thanked for their participation. Instruments Demographics were collected at the beginning of the sur vey. Questionnaires included in the survey are broken up into four subcategories: Personality Characteristics, Theoretical Orientation, Epistemic Commitments, and Therapist Style.

PAGE 29

29 Demographics Participants were asked to answer some basic demographic infor mation including age, gender, race, sexual orientation, and relationship status. Participants were also asked to provide their current class year and major of study. Personality Characteristics Student personality characteristics were measured with the Big Five Inventory (BFI 44) The Big Five Inventory (John et al., 1991 ; reprinted in John et al. 2008) contains 44 items on a five point scale from 1 (disagree strongly) to 5 (agree strongly). dhere to specific personality characteristics. John et al. (1991) developed the Big Five Inventory (BFI 44) to measure the big five dimensions; extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, and openness; in a small number of items in the sho rtest amount of time possible (about 5 minutes). Sample items for the BFI Theoretical Orientation Student s preference for o rientation used when receiving counseling, was measured with the Theoretical Evaluation Self Test (Coleman, 2004) Theoretical orientation not by self selection was measured by the Theoretical Evaluation Self Test (TEST) Developed by Coleman (2004), the Theoretical Evaluation Self Test was created to measure theoretical orientation in an updated manner and to include subscales that reflect the nature of actual clinical work. The items for the TEST questionnaire were collected by surveying mental health pr oviders currently in the field

PAGE 30

30 and having these providers select appropriate items from a group of 56 pooled items. The items were taken from previously used theoretical orientation scales ( Coleman 2004; see Ablon & Jones 1998 ; Orlinsky & Howard 1995 ; Su ndland, 1977 ; Cocozzelli 1987; Meyer, 1983; LaFromboise, et al., 1991; The National Alliance for the Mentally Ill, 2003; Torrey, 1997). The testable pool of items numbered 36. Out of the hypothesized subscales: psychodynamic, cognitive, humanistic, family pragmatic, biological, casework, and cultural competence; the former half were taken from previous research and the latter half were created for TEST. The final TEST questionnaire has a total of 30 items. The seven subscales are as follows: Psychodynamic (5 items), Biological (4 items), Family(4 items), Ecosystems Cultural(4 items), Cognitive Behavioral(5 items), Pragmatic Case Management (5 items), and Humanistic(3 items). The items are rated on a seven point likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 f their own not covered in previous theoretical orientation questionnaires (ecosystems, biological, and pragmatic), which may reflect a better view or real world practice while also replicating finding for the dominant theoretical orientations in the field, suggesting they still have a strong influence over practicing clinicians (Coleman, 2004). Epistemic C ommitments The Therapist Attitude Questionnaire Short Form (Neimey er & Morton 1997) w as used in this study to measure preference for how they would like to be conceptualized in therapy.

PAGE 31

31 Questionnaire Short Form (TAQ SF). This scale me asures the degree to which one adheres to rationalist or constructivist epistemologies. DiGiuseppe and Linscott (1993) and constructivist beliefs. Participants rated i tems on the TAQ on a five point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Neimeyer and Morton (1997) developed the TAQ SF as a short version of the TAQ to measure the same constructs of rationalism and constructivism. The TAQ SF is a 16 item measure as opposed to the 38 item TAQ. These 16 items were selected by choosing only items that met a .39 salience level from a factor analysis, and were rated on the same five point scale as the TAQ from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Sampl e items from the TAQ SF are, relationship which entails the service and delivery of technical, instructional information hip with clients can best be conceptualized as a unique social exchange which provides the clients a safe The TAQ SF was found to reproduce the same basic factor struct ure of the TAQ with higher rationalism and constructivism scores relating to higher rationalist and constructivist beliefs, respectively. The TAQ SF also showed promise in predicting and identifying theoretical orientation of practicing psychologists by me asuring their rationalist and constructivist epistemologies (Neimeyer & Morton, 1997).

PAGE 32

32 Therap ist S tyle the Personal Style of the Therapist Questionnaire (PST Q). This questionnaire measures the way psychother apy is conducted by therapists. Fernndez lvarez et al. (2003 ) developed this which characteristics shape their therapeutic work. The PST Q was reduced from a pool of 61 i tems to a 36 item measure through factor analysis. Participants rated items based on a seven point scale from 1 (total disagreement) to 7 (total agreement). The items are broken down into five subscales: Instructional, Expressive, Engagement, Attentional, and Operative. The number of items in the Instructional scale is 8, the Expressive scale is 9, the Engagement scale is 6, the Attentional scale is 6, and the Operative scale is 7. The Instructional factor is related to the flexibility or rigidity of the th erapist on the setting of therapy. This includes fees, location, scheduling, etc. An example of sample items the patient in exploring than to point out the steps to and Operative subscales are related in that the degree of attentiveness can influence the plan of or spontaneous implementation of therapeutic interventions. All of these subscales are bipolar. Instructional scale deals wi th flexibility and rigidity, Expressive scale measures distance and closeness, Engagement scale measures lesser and greater degree of commitment Attentional scale determines whether attention is more broadly or narrowly focused, and Operative scale focuse s on spontaneous or planned methods of implementation. Fernandez Alvarez et al. (2003) set up the PST Q to avoid

PAGE 33

33 characteristic is helpful in different settings. This means fit into a style, but look for situations where their personal styles are advantageous. Good fit between clients and mental health workers may be in part the personal style of both.

PAGE 34

34 CHAPTER 3 RESULTS Demographics The sa mple consisted of 76 participants 52.6% wo men (N=40), and 47.4% men (N= 36) aged 18 24 (M=18.75, SD=1.19) The majority of participants were Caucasian, 51.3% (N=39), followed by Other/Multicultural, 23.7% (N=18), African American, 11.8% (N=9), Asian America n, 6.6% (N=5), Hispanic, 5.3% (N=4), and Pacific Islander, 1.3% (N=1). Out of the sample, f reshmen mad e up 52.6% (N=40), followed by s ophomores 21.1% (N=16), j uniors 13.2% (N=10), s eniors 5.3% (N=4), and a 2 nd year Graduate Student not in a mental health training program 1.3% (N=1). Measurement Reliability Cr determine reliability. All measures in this study were interpreted using the cutoff limits from Ponterotto and Ruckdeschel (2 007). These cutoffs can be found in Table 4 1 Table 4 2 For Personality Characteristics, the Extraversion subscale consisted of 8 items =.80 ), the Agreeableness subscale =. 83 ), the Conscientious =.72 ), the Neuroticism subscale consisted of 8 items =.82 =.77 ). For Theoretical Orientation the Psychodynamic subscale c onsisted of 5 items =.6 0 ), the Cognitive Behavioral subscale consisted of 5 5 ), the Family 6 ), the Humanistic subscale consisted of 3 items

PAGE 35

35 =.64 ) ragmatic subscale Rationalis m and 8 Constructivis m 7 For Therapist S 0 5 ), the .62 ), the Engagement subscale consisted 6 9 ), the 03 ), and the Operative subscale con 0.18). The data was checked to ensure there was no incorrect reverse coding. Due to the unsatisfactory alphas of 4 out of the 5 scales in this measure, this construct may not be applicable to students and items may have poor covarianc e. Correlational Analyses Pearson Product Moment correlations were computed u sing a criterion level of =.05 ( 2 tailed) between the 5 personality subscales (Extraversion, Agreeableness, Neuroticism, Conscientiousness, and Openness to Experience ) and the other subscales. The correlations between personality characteristics and the theoretical orientation subscales can be found in Table 4 3 The correlations between personality characteristics and the epistemology and therapist style subscales can be found in Table 4 4 The Pearson Product Moment correlations yielded significant correlations for Agreeableness and Openness to Experience Agreeableness correlated positively with Cognitive Behavioral, N= 73, r= .297 p= .011 Humanistic N=73, r= .275 p= .018 Eco systems N=73, r=.354, p=.002, Pragmatic N=73, r=.237, p=.044, and Biological

PAGE 36

36 N=73, r=.294, p=.012, theoretical orientations. Agreeableness was also correlated with Constructivist Epistemology, N=72, r=.311, p=.008 and Engagement Style, N=72, r=.280, p=.01 7. Openness to Experience positively correlated to Cognitive Behavioral, N=73, r=.321, p=.006, and E cosystems N=73, r=. 343, p=.003, theoretical orientations. Openness to Experience negatively correlated with Instructional style, N=72, r= .286, p=.015 Regr ession Analyses Separate regression analyses were conducted for each hypothesis. ( 1 ) Openness to Experience will predict preference for the Humanistic theoretical orientation. (2 ) Openness to Experience will predict preference for the Psychodynamic theoret ical orientation. ( 3 ) Conscientiousness will negatively predict Humanistic theoretical orientation. ( 4 ) Conscientiousness will predict Biological theoretical orientation. ( 5 ) Conscientiousness will predict preference for the Cognitive Behavioral orientati on. ( 6 ) Agreeableness and Openness to Experience will predict Ecosys tems theoretical orientation. (7 ) Extraversion and Agreeableness will predict Fami ly theoretical orientation. Separate regression analyses were also conducted for each research question: ( 1) What other relationships exist between personality characteristics and theoretical orientation? (2) How are personality characteristics of students related to the preference for Epistemic Commitments? (3) How are personality characteristics of students related to the preference for Therapist Style? Hypothesis 1 The first hypothesis concerned the personality characteristic of Openness to Experience as a predictor for the Humanistic theoretical orientation. In other words, an

PAGE 37

37 individual with a higher rati ng on Openness to Experience will also have a therapeutic orientation preference for Humanistic therapy. The results of the regression analysis indicated that Openness to Experience did not significantly predict a Humanistic theoretical orientation prefere nce in this sample, F(1,71)=1.107, p=.296, ( R 2 =.015 ). The standardized Beta coefficient for Openness to Experience was in the positive direction, Hypothesis 2 The second hypothesis concerned the personality charact eristic of Openness to Experience as a predictor for the Psychodynamic theoretical orientation. In other words, an individual with a higher rating on Openness to Experience will also have a therapeutic orientation preference for Psychodynamic therapy. The results of the regression analysis indicated that Openness to Experience did not significantly predict a Psychodynamic theoretical orientation preference in this sample, F(1,71)=1.657, p=.202, ( R 2 =.023 ). The standardized Beta coefficient for Openness to Ex perience was Hypothesis 3 The third hypothesis concerned the personality characteristic of Conscientiousness as a negative predictor for the Humanistic theoretical orientation. In other words, an individual with a higher rating on Conscientiousness will have a lower therapeutic orientation preference for Humanistic therapy. The results of the regression analysis indicated that Conscientiousness did not significantly negatively predict a H umanistic theoretical orientation preference in this sample, F(1,71)= .561 p=. 456

PAGE 38

38 ( R 2 =.0 08 ). The standardized Beta coefficient for Openness to Experience was in the positive direction, and was not significant ( 089 p=. 456 ). Hypothesis 4 The fourth hypothesis concerned the personality characteristic of Conscientiousness a predictor for the Biological theoretical orientation. In other words, an individual with a higher rating on Conscientiousness will also hav e a Biological therapeutic orientation preference. The results of the regression analysis indicated that Conscientiousness did not significantly predict a Biological theoretical orientation preference in this sample, F(1,71)=.202, p=.655, ( R 2 =.003 ). The st andardized Beta coefficient for Conscientiousness was in the positive direction, but was not significant Hypothesis 5 The fif th hypothesis concerned the personality characteristic Conscientiousness as a predictor for the Cognitive Behavio ral theoretical orientation. In other words, an individual with a higher rating on Conscientiousness will also have a therapeutic orientation preference for Cognitive Behavioral therapy. The results of the regression analysis indicated that Conscientiousne ss did not significantly predict a Cognitive Behavioral theoretical orientation preference in this sample, F( 1 ,7 1 )= 1 039 p=. 312 ( R 2 =. 014 ). The standardized Beta coefficient for Conscientiousness was in the positive direction, and was not si 20 p=. 312 ). Hypothesis 6 The six th hypothesis concerned the personality characteristics of Agreeableness and Openness to Experience as predictors for the Ecosystems theoretical orientation. In

PAGE 39

39 other words, an individual with a higher ratin g on Agreeableness and Openness to Experience will also have a higher preference for an Ecosystems therapeutic orientation preference. The results of the regression analysis indicated that Agreeableness and Openness to Experience significantly predicted an Ecosystems theoretical orientation preference in this sample, F(2,70)= 8.923 p=. 000 ( R 2 =. 2 0 3 ). The standardized Beta 299 p=. 008 ). The standardized Beta coefficient for Openness to Experience was in the positive .284, p=.011 ). Hy pothesis 7 The seventh hypothesis concerned the personality characteristics of Agreeableness and Extraversion as predictors for the Family theoretical orientation. In other words, an individual with a higher rating on Agreeableness and Extraversion will a lso have a higher preference for a Family therapeutic orientation preference. The results of the regression analysis indicated that Agreeableness and Extraversion did not significantly predict a Family theoretical orientation preference in this sample, F(2 ,70)=1.401 p=. 253 ( R 2 =.0 38 ). The standardized Beta coefficient for Agreeableness was in the positive direction, but was not 174, p=.147 ). The standardized Beta coefficient for Openness to Experience was in the positive direction, but was not 068 p=. 5 6 7 ). Research Q uestion 1 The first research question concerned other non hypothesized relationships between personality characteristics and theoretical orientations in a student sample. Separate regression analyses were run f or each theoretical orientation.

PAGE 40

40 Psychodynamic A regression was run on all five personality characteristics (Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Openness to Experience) in relation to a Psychodynamic theoretical orientation pr eference. In other words, we were looking at which personality characteristics in this sample predicted a preference for Psychodynamic theoretical orientation in our sample. The results of the regression analysis indicated that personality characteristics did predict Psychodynamic theoretical orientation in this sample, F(5,67)=3.643, p=.006, ( R 2 =.214 ). Agreeableness and Neuroticism were significant predictors for Psychodynamic theoretical orientation. The standardized Beta coefficient for Agreeableness was in the positive direction, and was Cognitive b ehavioral A regression was run on all five personality cha racteristics (Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Openness to Experience) in relation to a Cognitive Behavioral theoretical orientation preference. In other words, we were looking at which personality characteristics in this sa mple predicted a preference for a Cognitive Behavioral theoretical orientation in our sample. The results of the regression analysis indicated that personality characteristics did predict a Cog n itive Behav i oral theoretical orientation in this sample, F(5,6 7)=3. 107 p=.0 14 ( R 2 =. 188 ). Agreeableness and Openness to Experience were significant predictors for Psychodynamic theoretical orientation. The standardized Beta coefficient for .387 p= 013 ). The

PAGE 41

41 standardized Beta coefficient for Openness to Experience was in the positive direction, .280 p= .0 1 7 ). Family A regression was run on all five personality characteristics (Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, N euroticism, and Openness to Experience) in relation to a Family theoretical orientation preference. In other words, we were looking at which personality characteristics in this sample predicted a preference for a Family theoretical orientation in our sampl e. The results of the regression analysis indicated that personality characteristics did not predict a Family theoretical orientation in this sample, F(5,67)=1.773, p=.13, ( R 2 =.117 ). Humanistic A regression was run on all five personality characteristics (Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Openness to Experience) in relation to a Humanistic theoretical orientation preference. In other words, we were looking at which personality characteristics in this sample predicted a prefe rence for a Humanistic theoretical orientation in our sample. The results of the regression analysis indicated that personality characteristics did predict a Humanistic theoretical orientation in this sample, F(5,67)=3.783, p=.004, ( R 2 =.188 ). Agreeableness and Neuroticism were significant predictors for a Humanistic theoretical orientation preference. The standardized Beta coefficient for Agreeableness was in the positive direction, and was Neuroticism was in

PAGE 42

42 Ecosystems A regression was run on all five personality characteristics (Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Openness to Experience) in relatio n to an Ecosystems theoretical orientation preference. In other words, we were looking at which personality characteristics in this sample predicted a preference for an Ecosystems theoretical orientation in our sample. The results of the regression analysi s indicated that personality characteristics did predict an Ecosystems theoretical orientation in this sample, F(5,67)=3.818, p=.004, ( R 2 =.222 ). Agreeableness and Openness to Experience were significant predictors for Psychodynamic theoretical orientation. The standardized Beta coefficient for Agreeableness was in the positive p=.011). Pragm atic A regression was run on all five personality characteristics (Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Openness to Experience) in relation to a Pragmatic theoretical orientation preference. In other words, we were looking at w hich personality characteristics in this sample predicted a preference for a Pragmatic theoretical orientation in our sample. The results of the regression analysis indicated that personality characteristics did not predict a Pragmatic theoretical orientat ion in this sample, F(5,67)= 1.089 p=. 375 ( R 2 =. 075 ).

PAGE 43

43 Biological A regression was run on all five personality characteristics (Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Openness to Experience) in relation to a Biological theoretica l orientation preference. In other words, we were looking at which personality characteristics in this sample predicted a preference for a Biological theoretical orientation in our sample. The results of the regression analysis indicated that personality c haracteristics did not predict a Biological theoretical orientation in this sample, F(5,67)=2.16, p=.069, ( R 2 =.139 ). Research Q uestion 2 The second research question concerned relationships between personality characteristics and the preference for epist emic commitments in a student sample. Separate regression analyses were run for each epistemology. Rationalist A regression was run on all five personality characteristics (Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Openness to Exper ience) in relation to a Rationalist epistemic commitment preference. In other words, we were looking at which personality characteristics in this sample predicted a preference for a Rationalist epistemic commitment in our sample. The results of the regress ion analysis indicated that personality characteristics did not predict a Rationalist epistemic commitment in this sample, F(5,66)=.701, p=.625, ( R 2 =.05 ). Constructivist A regression was run on all five personality characteristics (Extraversion, Agreeabl eness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Openness to Experience) in

PAGE 44

44 relation to a Constructivist epistemic commitment preference. In other words, we were looking at which personality characteristics in this sample predicted a preference for a Constructiv ist epistemic commitment in our sample. The results of the regression analysis indicated that personality characteristics did significantly predict a Constructivist epistemic commitment in this sample, F(5,66)=3.448, p=.008, ( R 2 =.207 ). Agreeableness and Ne uroticism were significant predictors for a Constructivist epistemic commitment preference. The standardized Beta coefficient for Agreeableness Beta coefficient for Neuro ticism was in the positive direction, and was significant Research Q uestion 3 The third research question concerned relationships between personality characteristics and the preference for therapist style in a student sample. Separate r egression analyses were run for each style subscale. Instructional A regression was run on all five personality characteristics (Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Openness to Experience) in relation to an Instructional thera pist style preference. In other words, we were looking at which personality characteristics in this sample predicted a preference for an Instructional therapist style in our sample. The results of the regression analysis indicated that personality characte ristics did significantly predict an Instructional therapist style in this sample, F(5,66)=2.427, p=.044, ( R 2 =.155 ) Agreeableness and Openness to Experience were significant predictors for an Instructional therapist style

PAGE 45

45 preference. The standardized Beta coefficient for Agreeableness was in the negative direction, and wa .312, p=.05). The standardized Beta coefficient for .267, p=.025). Expressive A regression was run on all five personality characteristics (Extraversion, Agre eableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Openness to Experience) in relation to an Expressive therapist style preference. In other words, we were looking at which personality characteristics in this sample predicted a preference for an Expressive the rapist style in our sample. The results of the regression analysis indicated that personality characteristics did not significantly predict an Expressive therapist style in this sample, F(5,66)=2.427, p=.044, ( R 2 =.155 ) Engagement A regression was run on all five personality characteristics (Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Openness to Experience) in relation to an Engagement therapist style preference. In other words, we were looking at which personality characteristics in this sample predicted a preference for an Engagement therapist style in our sample. The results of the regression analysis indicated that personality characteristics did significantly predict an Engagement therapist style in this sample, F(5,66)=4.601, p= .001, ( R 2 =.258 ) Agreeableness and Neuroticism were significant predictors for an Engagement therapist style preference. The standardized Beta coefficient for Agreeableness was in the positive direction, and

PAGE 46

46 673, p<.001 ). The standardiz ed Beta coefficient for Neuroticism was in the positive direction, ). Attentional A regression was run on all five personality characteristics (Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Openness t o Experience) in relation to an Attentional therapist style preference. In other words, we were looking at which personality characteristics in this sample predicted a preference for an Attentional therapist style in our sample. The results of the regressi on analysis indicated that personality characteristics did not significantly predict an Attentional therapist style in this sample, F(5,66)= .729 p=. 605 ( R 2 =. 052 ) Operative A regression was run on all five personality characteristics (Extraversion, Agr eeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Openness to Experience) in relation to an Operative therapist style preference. In other words, we were looking at which personality characteristics in this sample predicted a preference for an Operative ther apist style in our sample. The results of the regression analysis indicated that personality characteristics did not significantly predict an Operative therapist style in this sample, F(5,66)=.545, p=.741, ( R 2 =.04 )

PAGE 47

47 Table 4 1. Matrix for e stimating adeq uacy of i nterna l consistency coefficients with research m easures Items per Subscale Rating N<100 < 6 Excellent 0.75 Good 0.70 Moderate 0.65 Fair 0.60 7 to 12 Excellent 0.80 Good 0.75 Moderate 0.70 Fair 0.65 > 12 Ex cellent 0.85 Good 0.80 Moderate 0.75 Fair 0.70 Note: An internal consistency falling below the "Fair" rating for its particular cell would be deemed "Unsatisfactory." Table taken from Ponterotto and Ruckdeschel (2007).

PAGE 48

48 Table 4 2. I nternal c ons istency c oefficients Scale Cronbach's Alpha Number of Items Extraversion 0.80 8 Agreeableness 0.8 3 9 Conscientiousness 0.72 9 Neuroticism 0.82 8 Openness to Experience 0.77 10 Psychodynamic 0.60 5 Biological 0.71 4 Family 0.66 4 Ecosystems 0.44 4 Cognitive 0.65 5 Pragmatic 0.41 5 Humanistic 0.64 3 Rationalist 0.67 8 Constructivist 0.79 8 Instructional 0.05 8 Expressive 0.62 9 Engagement 0.69 6 Attentional 0.03 6 Operative 0.18 7

PAGE 49

49 Table 4 3. P earson p roduct m oment c orrelations of p ersonality c haracteristics to t heoretical o rienatation Personality Characteristic Psychodynami c Cognitive Behaviora l Family Humanisti c Ecosystem s Pragmatic Biological Extraversion Pearson Correlation 0.026 0.094 0.095 0.049 0.098 0.048 0.178 Sig (2 tailed) 0.83 0.43 0.425 0.68 0.407 0.684 0.131 N 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 Agreeableness Pearson Correlation 0.219 .297* 0.184 .275* .354** .237* .294* Sig. (2 tailed) 0.063 0.011 0.119 0.018 0.002 0.044 0.012 N 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 Conscientiou sness Pearson Correlation 0.203 0.12 0.06 0.089 0.137 0.142 0.053 Sig. (2 tailed) 0.085 0.312 0.612 0.456 0.247 0.23 0.655 N 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 Neuroticism Pearson Correlation 0.13 0.079 0.071 0.102 0.141 0.061 0.154 Sig. (2 tailed) 0.274 0.506 0.551 0.389 0.233 0.606 0.194 N 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 Openness Pearson Correlation 0.151 .321** 0.128 0.124 .343** 0.091 0.023 Sig. (2 tailed) 0.202 0.006 0.279 0.296 0.003 0.446 0.847 N 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 Note: *. Co rrelation is signifi cant at the 0.05 level (2 tailed) and **. Correlation is significa nt at the 0.01 level (2 tailed)

PAGE 50

50 Table 4 4 Pearson p roduct m oment c orrelations for p ersonality c haracteristics to e pistemic commitments and t herapist s tyles Personality Characteristic Rationali st Constructivis t Instruction al Expressiv e Engagement Attentional Operative Extraversion Pearson Correlation 0.039 0.008 0.07 0.093 0.04 0.009 0.028 Sig. (2 tailed) 0.742 0.944 0.57 0.439 0.741 0.938 0.817 N 7 2 72 72 72 72 72 72 Agreeableness Pearson Correlation 0.187 .311** 0.17 0.171 .280* 0.146 0.124 Sig. (2 tailed) 0.116 0.008 0.151 0.15 0.017 0.22 0.298 N 72 72 72 72 72 72 72 Conscientiousness Pearson Correlation 0.169 0.199 0.093 0.057 0.0 58 0.142 0.011 Sig. (2 tailed) 0.155 0.093 0.437 0.637 0.629 0.236 0.928 N 72 72 72 72 72 72 72 Neuroticism Pearson Correlation 0.12 0.002 0.02 0.116 0.117 0.165 0.004 Sig. (2 tailed) 0.315 0.99 0.868 0.33 0.326 0.167 0.976 N 72 72 72 72 72 72 72 Openness Pearson Correlation 0.036 0.221 .286* 0.046 0.066 0.137 0.071 Sig. (2 tailed) 0.761 0.062 0.015 0.704 0.581 0.252 0.556 N 72 72 72 72 72 72 72 Note: *. Co rrelation is significant at the 0.05 level (2 tailed) and **. Correlation is significa nt at the 0.01 level (2 tailed)

PAGE 51

51 CHAPTER 4 DISCUSSION, LIMITATIONS, AND FUTURE RESEARCH The present study explored the relationship between student personality characteristics and their preference for theoretical orientation, epistemic com mitments, and therapist style. In general, the results do not fit for student s in the same way they fit for practicing clinicians and students in training to become mental health clinicians. Despite the difference in these groups, this study found that per sonality characteristics for student s did predict preferences for theoretical orientation, epistemic commitment, and therapist style. Personality characteristics predicted student preferences for Psychodynamic, Cognitive Behavioral, Humanistic, and Ecosys tems theoretical orientations, Constructivism epistemology, and Instructional and Engagement therapy styles. Participants that were high on Agreeableness and Neuroticism preferred Psychodynamic and Humanistic theoretical orientations. The affiliation betw een Agreeableness and Neuroticism with Psychodynamic and Humanistic theoretical orientations was not predicted. Agreeableness seems to fit theoretically with these two orientations in that an agreeable individuals are considered warm trusting, nonjudgment al, altruistic, and tender minded (John et al., 2008). Since these theoretical orientations focus on the individual traits and experiences of the client, it makes sense that warm, caring students would want to have that reciprocated by their therapist. The characteristic of Neuroticism does not seem to fit with these orientations from what is found in past research. However, a student with high levels of neuroticism may benefit from experiencing the non directive, self exploration focused on in Humanistic a nd Psychoanalytic therapies.

PAGE 52

52 Participants that were high on Agreeableand Neurotic personality characteristics also were more likely to prefer a Constructivist epistemology and a greater degr ee of Engagement therapy style. Both of these variables seem to fit with Agreeableness, but not as much with Neuroticism. The grouping of Constructivist epistemology and Humanistic and Psychoanalytic theoretical orientations mirrors past research with Neimeyer and Morton (1997) finding a link between Constructivist epi stemology and metaphoric therapy approaches. High levels of Engagement have been shown to match up with high levels of Constructivism (Saferstein, 2007). This adds more evidence in support of grouping Agreeableness, Constructivism, and a greater degree of Engagement. Overall the findings fit with more agreeable individuals want ing their therapist to be committed to them and preferring a client centered, individualized, self exploration approach to therapy. The significance of Neuroticism to these factors should be further explored. Participants who were high on Agreeableness and Openness to Experience preferred Cognitive Behavioral and Ecosystems theoretical orientations. The affiliation between the two personality factors and the Ecosystems approach fits well with past research. Ogufowora and Drapeau (2008) found a relationship between both of these personality characteristics and a multicultural approach which encompasses the Ecosystems approach to therapy. Agreeableness could fit with Cognitive Behaviora l orientation in a warmth aspect, but the judgment of thoughts and behaviors as irrational and maladaptive does not fit with the characteristic of Agreeableness in that they are not nonjudgmental, trusting, and lenient.

PAGE 53

53 Participants that were high on thes e personality characteristics also preferred a more flexible Instructional style. This style does not fit with the Cognitive Behavioral therapeutic orientation, but does fit well with Agreeableness, Openness to Experience, and Ecosystems. While Cognitive B ehavioral therapists tendancy for goal oriented, directive, and structured therapy, a more rigid instructional style would be expected as found in Castaeiras et al. (2006) The flexible instructional style fits with these personality characteristics and an Ecosystems approach because is allows for some freedom and movement. An example of this flexibility would be the setting of therapy, the fees, and any client therapist negotiations being changeable. Agreeable and Open students might prefer a Cognitive B ehavioral approach along with an Ecosystems approach because they are open to more experiences and may like a balance between structure and flexibility. The se students want their therapist to be flexible with rules about the therapy session, and focus on t houghts and behaviors specifically tailored to their individual life situation. The most pervasive personality characteristic that predicted the other factors was Agreeableness. This may suggest that more agreeable students are more open to therapy in gen eral, regardless of other factors. First off, it is important to acknowledge that the associations presented in this study do not imply causal relationships. Personality cannot be said to cause a preference for any specific theoretical orientation, epistem ic commitment, or therapist style. Because of the cross sectional nature of this study we can only conclude that the significant connections between variables indicate that they occur together.

PAGE 54

54 Limitations to this study include sample size and sample chara cteristics. A sample size of 76 is small, and more robust results can be found with a larger sample size. Even with the Ponter otto and Ruckdeschel (2007) cutoff corrections, low style. A larger sample size may improve these statistics and the alphas may be more meaningful. Also, the sample was taken from a pool of undergraduates at a large university and t he survey was administered via the internet. These two factors limit the g eneralizability of this study to the whole population who may not be college educated or may not have access to the internet. These results can only safely be generalized to populations that match the demographics of this sample. Another limitation is tha t the survey relied on self report measures. Although no researchers were present during the administration of the questionnaire, participants could have answered questions in a socially desirable way, or in a way that does not reflect their actual prefere nces. Lastly, the wording of the measures is largely in psychological jargon and may not have been fully understood by participants taking an introduction to psychology class. Students may not be fully informed on psychology or psychotherapy and may not have completely known the meanings of some of the items they were answering. A positive point is that a myriad of ethnic backgrounds were represented, though the largest group was Caucasians multicultural and minority groups were represented Another pos itive point is the separation by gender. The sample consisted of 76 participants 52.6% women (N=40), and 47.4% men (N=36), which is a close split.

PAGE 55

55 Further research should aim to replicate and extend the results of this study to look at what students woul d prefer in a therapeutic relationship. Additionally, the preferences for students should be paired with therapists in a real world setting, and therapeutic alliance, client satisfaction, and therapy outcomes should be explored The wording of the measures should be created so that students are able to understand what each item is asking Some previous studies have found a difference in these variables over time ( Castaeiras et al., 2006 ; Toska, 2008 ). If these variables are implemented in a real should be included to see if time has a significant effect on different commitments and preferences. Ogunfowora and Dr apeau (2008) found some effects of gender for the prediction of theoretical orientation which also may be important to look at as well in future studies.

PAGE 56

56 CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION The current study succeeded in extending the current literature on personality characteristics and therapeutic climate. An important factor is looking at these constructs with students to be able to explore what clients are looking for when they begin therapy. Furthermore, additional research needs to be done on the preferences of s tudents and the outcome variables in a real world therapeutic setting. While some of the hypothesized relationships were not found in this data, it can be understood that students will have a different view of the therapeutic climate than practicing clinic ians or students in training to become mental health clinicians. Further work should be done on the measures themselves, making them understandable to individuals who are not currently working in the mental health professions.

PAGE 57

57 APPENDIX A BIG FIVE INVENTO RY (BFI 44) Here are a number of characteristics that may or may not apply to you. For example, do you agree that you are someone who likes to spend time with others ? Please write a number next to each statement to indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with that statement. 1 2 3 4 5 Disagree Disagree Neither agree Agree Agree strongly a little nor disagree a little strongly 1. Is talkative 1 2 3 4 5 2. Tend s to find fault with others 1 2 3 4 5 3. Does a thorough job 1 2 3 4 5 4. Is depressed, blue 1 2 3 4 5 5. Is original, comes up with new ideas 1 2 3 4 5 6. Is reserved 1 2 3 4 5 7. Is helpful and unselfish with others 1 2 3 4 5 8. Can be somewhat careless 1 2 3 4 5 9. Is relaxed, handles stress well 1 2 3 4 5 10. Is curious about many different things 1 2 3 4 5 11. Is full of energy 1 2 3 4 5 12. Starts quarrels with others 1 2 3 4 5 13. Is a rel iable worker 1 2 3 4 5

PAGE 58

58 14. Can be tense 1 2 3 4 5 15. Is ingenious, a deep thinker 1 2 3 4 5 16. Generates a lot of enthusiasm 1 2 3 4 5 17. Has a forgiving nature 1 2 3 4 5 18. Tends to be disorganized 1 2 3 4 5 19. Worries a lot 1 2 3 4 5 20. Has an active imagination 1 2 3 4 5 21. Tends to be quiet 1 2 3 4 5 22. Is generally trusting 1 2 3 4 5 23. Tends to be lazy 1 2 3 4 5 24. Is emotionally stable, not easily upset 1 2 3 4 5 25. Is inventive 1 2 3 4 5 26. Has an assertive personality 1 2 3 4 5 27. Can be cold and aloof 1 2 3 4 5 28. Perseveres until the task is finished 1 2 3 4 5 29. Can be moody 1 2 3 4 5 30. Values artistic, aesthetic experiences 1 2 3 4 5 31. Is sometimes shy, inhibited 1 2 3 4 5 32. Is considerate and kind to almost everyone 1 2 3 4 5 33. Does things efficiently 1 2 3 4 5

PAGE 59

59 34. Remains calm in tense situations 1 2 3 4 5 35. Prefers work that is routine 1 2 3 4 5 36. Is out going, sociable 1 2 3 4 5 37. Is sometimes rude to others 1 2 3 4 5 38. Makes plans and follows through with them 1 2 3 4 5 39. Gets nervous easily 1 2 3 4 5 40. Likes to reflect, play with ideas 1 2 3 4 5 41. Has few artistic inte rests 1 2 3 4 5 42. Likes to cooperate with others 1 2 3 4 5 43. Is easily distracted 1 2 3 4 5 44. Is sophisticated in art, music, or literature 1 2 3 4 5

PAGE 60

60 APPENDIX B THEORETICAL EVALUATION SELF TEST (TEST) Select the number whic h best reflects your agreement or disagreement with each item. 1. One central therapeutic factor is the symbolic recreation of a nurturing caretaker relat ionship with the therapist. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 2. The therapist should educate the client about the relationship of patterns of cognition and many mental health problems. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 3. a crucial therapeutic factor. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 4. It is important for therapists to see clients together with their families 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 5. The therapeutic alliance is important primarily to provide a foundation for collaborative case management. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6. Human behavior is shaped by patterns of reinforcements and punishments in the environment. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 7. Change occurs in therapy because of the therapist's empathic, non judgmental, positive attitude towards the client. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8. Psychoeducation about the benefits and side effects of medications is an important part of treatment. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9. Dreams discussed in therapy can uncover significant unconscious wishes, conflicts and feelings. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10. Mo st psychotherapy theories are distractions from the central task of solving the client's problems. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 11. Advocacy with other providers on behalf of clients is a central role of the therapist. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 12. It is important for the ther apist to respond to clients with spontaneous, genuine affect. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 Strongly Disagree 2 Disagree 3 Somewhat Disagree 4 Neutral 5 Somewhat Agree 6 Agree 7 Strongly Agree

PAGE 61

61 13. Primary emphasis should be placed on the client's interactions with his or her family. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 14. The role of the therapist is to advise and guide the client. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 15. Client's problems are often caused by negative patterns of thinking. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 16. Psychological problems vary with the culture of the client. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 17. Many mental health problems are effectively treated with medication. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 18. The therapist should be active, directive and goal oriented. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 19. and gaps in the social service system. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 20. It is important to attend to w hat the client is projecting onto the therapist. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 21. The therapist should teach clients techniques to address problem areas. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 22. When one person in a family is experiencing problems, it is usually the expression of family communication and relationship problems. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 23. Many clients can benefit from psychiatric medication. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 24. It is important to assess not only the person seeking services, but his or her environment as well. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 25. Change occurs in therapy through restoring healthy family structures 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 26. It is essential for therapists to be aware of the values and worldview of their own culture and how they might affect clients. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 27. Change occurs in therapy because of the client's insight into characteristic ways of relating with others set in early childhood. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 28. It is helpful to ask questions to lead the client to realize their mistakes or misperceptions. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 29. There is evidence that most mental health problems have biological causes. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 30. Denial, repression, intellectualization and other defense mechanisms are important to understanding psychology. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

PAGE 62

62 APPENDIX C THERAPIST ATTITUDE QU ESTIONNAIRE SHORT FORM (TAQ SF) Please rate the following items along the following 5 point scale. 1 2 3 4 5 Disagree Disagree Neither agree Agree Agree strongly a little nor disagree a littl e strongly 1. Reality is singular, stable and external to human experience. 1 2 3 4 5 2. Knowledge is determined to be valid by logic and reason. 1 2 3 4 5 3. Learning involves the contiguous or contingent chaining of discrete events. 1 2 3 4 5 4. Mental representations of reality involve accurate, explicit and extensive copies of the external world, which are encoded in memory. 1 2 3 4 5 5. current problems and the e limination or control of these problems. 1 2 3 4 5 6. Disturbed affect comes from irrational, invalid, distorted or/and unrealistic thinking. 1 2 3 4 5 7. ambivalence or motivated a voidance and such resistance to change is an impediment to therapy, which the psychotherapist works to overcome. 1 2 3 4 5 8. Reality is relative. Realities reflect individual or collective 1 2 3 4 5 9. Learning involves the refinement and transformation (assimilation and accommodation) of mental representation. 1 2 3 4 5 10. Cognition, behavior and affect are interdependent expressions of holistic systemic processes. The three are functionall y and structurally inseparable. 1 2 3 4 5 11. Intense emotions have a disorganizing effect on behavior. This disorganization may be functional in that it initiates a reorganization so that more viable adaptive constructions can be formed to meet the environmental demands. 1 2 3 4 5 12. Psychotherapists should encourage emotional experience, expression, and exploration. 1 2 3 4 5

PAGE 63

63 13. Clinical problems are current or recurrent discrepancies between our external environmental challenges and i nternal adaptive capacities. Problems can become powerful opportunities for learning. 1 2 3 4 5 14. Awareness or insight is one of many strategies for improvement, however, emotional and/or behavioral enactments are also very important. 1 2 3 4 5 15. professional helping relationship, which entails the service and delivery of technical, instructional information or guidance. 1 2 3 4 5 16. clients can best be conceptualized as a unique social exchange, which provides the clients a safe supportive context to explore and develop relationships with themselves and the world. 1 2 3 4 5

PAGE 64

64 APPENDIX D PERSONAL STYLE OF THE THERAPIST QUESTI ONNAIRE (PST Q) Directions : Please rate the following items along the following 7 point scale. 1. I tend to be open minded and receptive in listening rather than narrow minded and restrictive. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 2. I try to get patients to adjust to the regular format of my work. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 3. As a therapist I prefer to indicate to patients what they should do in each session. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 4. I keep a low profile of involvement with patients in order to be more objective. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 5. I find changes in the setting quite exciting. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6. The emotions the patient arouses in me are key to the course of the treatment. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 7. point out the steps to follow. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8. I avoid communicating through gestures or deeply emotional expressions. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9. I tend to demand strict compliance with schedules. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10. I place little value on planned treatments. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 11. Expressing emotions is a powerful tool leading to changes. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 12. Many important changes that occu r during treatment require the therapist to respond without expressing much emotion. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 13. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 14. Changing offices has a negative impact on treatment. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 15. Real cha nges take place during highly emotional sessions. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 16. I believe I am a therapist with a flexible setting. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 Total Disagreement 2 Moderately Disagree 3 Somewhat Disagree 4 Neither Agree nor Disagree 5 Somewhat Agree 6 Moderately Agree 7 Total Agreement

PAGE 65

65 17. I find it useful to reveal something personal about myself during sessions. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 18. I like to feel surprised by what each patient brings to the session without having preconceived notions. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 19. I often attend patients outside the office. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 20. The best intervention in a treatment occurs spontaneously. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 21. Whatever happens to my patients has little influence on my own life. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 22. My intervention is mostly directive. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 23. I think quite a lot about my job even in my spare time. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 24. I avoid revealing my emotions t o my patients. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 25. I can plan an entire treatment from the very outset. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 26. Keeping emotional distance from patients favors change. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 27. I never change how long a session lasts, unless absolutely necessary. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 28. If something bothers me during a session I can express it. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 29. Emotional closeness with patients is essential to bring about therapeutic change. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 30. I prefer to know in advance what things I should pa y attention to in sessions. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 31. I prefer treatments where everything is programmed. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 32. I like working with patients who have clearly focused problems. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 33. I can give my entire attention to everything that takes place during sessions. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 34. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 35. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 36. Right from the beginning of the session I allow my attention to float. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

PAGE 66

66 APPENDIX E DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION Please answer each of the following questions truthfully and to the best of your ability. What is your age in years? Dropdown menu of age groups What is your gender? Male Female Other What is your curr ent sexual orientation? Heterosexual Homosexual Other What is your current marital status? Single, Never Married Married/Life Partner Separated/Divorced Widowed How would you describe yourself? (Choose all that apply) White/Caucasian African American Hispa nic Asian Native American Pacific Islander Other/Multicultural What is your current occupation? Counselor/Therapist/Social Worker/Mental Health Clinician Student/Intern In Training To Be Counselor/Therapist/Social Worker/Mental Health Clinician Student N ot In Training To Be Counselor/Therapist/Social Worker/Mental Health Clinician Other

PAGE 67

67 If you selected Student, please answer the following questions What is your current class year? Freshman Sophomore Junior Senior Graduate 1st year Graduate 2nd year Gradua te 3rd year Graduate 4th year Graduate 5th year+ What is your major of study? _________________________

PAGE 68

68 LIST OF REFERENCES treatment correlate with outcome in psychody namic and cognitive behavioral therapy. Psychotherapy Research, 8 71 83. Allport, G. W. (1937). Personality: a psychological interpretation Oxford England: Holt. Arthur, A. R. (2000). The personality and cognitive epistemological traits of cognitive b ehavioral and psychoanalytic psychotherapists. British Journal of Medical Psychology, 73 (Pt2), 243 257. Arthur, A. R. (2001). Personality, epistemology and psychotherapists' choice of theoretical model: A review and analysis. European Journal Of Psych otherapy, Counselling And Health 4 45 64. Benet Martnez, V., & John, O. P. (1998). Los c inco g randes across cultures and ethnic groups: Multitrait multimethod analyses of the b ig five in Spanish and English. Journal Of Personality And Social Psycho logy 75 729 750. Brucato, B., & Neimeyer, G. (2009). Epistemology as a predictor of psychotherapists' self care and coping. Journal Of Constructivist Psychology 22 269 282. Buckley, P., Karasu, T. B., Charles, E., & Stein, S. P. (1979). Theory and pra ctice in psychotherapy: Some contradictions in expressed belief and reported practice. Journal Of Nervous And Mental Disease 167 218 223. Castaeiras, C., Garca, F., Bianco, J., & Fernndez Alvarez, H. (2006). Modulating effect of experience and th eoretical technical orientation on the personal style of the therapist. Psychotherapy Research 16 587 593. Coan, R. W. (1979). Psychologists: Personal and theoretical pathways New York: Irvington. Cocozzelli, C. (1987). Social workers' theoretical or ientations Lanham, MD England: University Press of America. Coleman, D. (2004). Theoretical Evaluation Self Test (TEST): A preliminary validation study. Social Work Research 28 117 127. Coleman, D. (2007). Further factorial validity of a scale of th erapist theoretical orientation. Research On Social Work Practice 17 474 481. Costa, P.T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). NEO PI R professional manual, Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. DeAngelis, T. (2006). Finding focus. Monitor on Psy chology, 37 59 61.

PAGE 69

69 DiGiuseppe, R., & Linscott, J. (1993). Philosophical differences among cognitive behavioral therapists: Rationalism, constructivism, or both?. Journal Of Cognitive Psychotherapy 7 117 130. Fernndez lvarez, H., Garca, F., Bianco, J. & Santom, S. (2003). Assessment questionnaire on the personal style of the therapist PST Q. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy 10 116 125. Fischer, J., Paveza, G. J., Kickertz, N. S., Hubbard, L. J., & Grayston, S. B. (1975). The relationship between theoretical orientation and therapists' empathy, warmth, and genuineness. Journal Of Counseling Psychology 22 399 403. Hill, C. E., & O'Grady, K. E. (1985). List of therapist intentions illustrated in a case study and with therapists of varying theoret ical orientations. Journal Of Counseling Psychology 32 3 22. Hollanders, H., & McLeod, J. (1999). Theoretical orientation and reported practice: A survey of eclecticism among counsellors in Britain. British Journal Of Guidance & Counselling 27 405 4 14. Jensen, J. P., Bergin, A. E., & Greaves, D. W. (1990). The meaning of eclecticism: New survey and analysis of components. Professional Psychology: Research And Practice 21 124 130. John, O. P. (1990). The 'Big Five' factor taxonomy: Dimensions of p ersonality in the natural language and in questionnaires. In L. A. Pervin (Ed.) Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 66 100). New York, NY US: Guilford Press. John, O. P., Donahue, E. M., & Kentle, R. L. (1991). The big five inventory -Versi ons 4a and 54 Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Personality and Social Research. John, O. P., Naumann, L. P., & Soto, C. J. (2008). Paradigm shift to the integrative b ig f ive trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and conceptual issues. In O. P. John, R. W. Robins, L. A. Pervin (Eds.) Handbook of personality: Theory and research (3rd ed.) (pp. 114 158). New York, NY US: Guilford Press. Johnson, M. E., & Brems, C. (1991). Comp aring theoretical orientations of counseling and clinical psychologists: An objective approach. Professional Psychology: Research And Practice 22 133 137. Johnson, J. A., Germer, C. K., Efran, J. S., & Overton, W. F. (1988). Personality as the basis for theoretical predilections. Journal Of Personality And Social Psychology 55 824 835. Larson, D. (1980). Therapeutic schools, styles, and schoolism: A national survey. Journal of Humanistic Psychology 20 3 20.

PAGE 70

70 LaFromboise, T. D., Coleman, H. L., & Hernan dez, A. (1991). Development and factor structure of the Cross Cultural Counseling Inventory Revised. Professional Psychology: Research And Practice 22 380 388. Lee, K., & Ashton, M. C. (2004). Psychometric properties of the HEXACO personality inventory. Multivariate Behavioral Research 39 329 358. Lyddon, W. J. (1989). Personal epistemology and preference for counseling. Journal Of Counseling Psychology 36 423 429. Mahoney, M. J., & Lyddon, W. J. (1988). Recent developments in cognitive approaches to counseling and psychotherapy. The Counseling Psychologist 16 190 234 Meyer, C. H. (Ed.). (1983). Clinical social work in the ecosystems perspective. New York: Columbia University Press. National Alliance for the Mentally Ill. (2003). PACT: Program of As sertive Community Treatmen. Retrieved August 15, 2012, from http://www.nami.org/content/content groups/programs/PACT1/What_is_the_program_of_Assertive_community_treat ment_%28PACT%29_.htm Neimeyer, G. J., & Morton, R. J. (1997). Personal epistemologies and preferences for rationalist versus constructivist psychotherapies. Journal Of Constructivist Psychology 10 109 123. Neimeyer, G. J., Prichard, S., Lyddon, W. J., & Sherrard, P. A. (1993). The role of epistemic style in counseling preference and orienta tion. Journal Of Counseling & Development 71 515 523. Norcross, J. C., Hedges, M., & Castle, P. H. (2002). Psychologists conducting psychotherapy in 2001: A study of the Division 29 membership. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training 39 97 102. Norcross, J. C., Prochaska, J. O., & Farber, J. A. (1993). Psychologists conducting psychotherapy: New findings and historical comparisons on the psychotherapy division membership. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training 30 692 697. Ogun fowora, B., & Drapeau, M. (2008). A study of the relationship between personality traits and theoretical orientation preferences. Counselling & Psychotherapy Research 8 151 159 Orlinsky, D. E., & Howard, K. I. (1995). Unity and diversity among psychothe rapies: A comparative perspective. In B. Bongar, L. E. Beutler (Eds.) Comprehensive textbook of psychotherapy: Theory and practice (pp. 3 23). New York, NY US: Oxford University Press. Ponterotto, J. G., & Ruckdeschel, D. E. (2007). An overview of coeffi cient alpha and a reliability matrix for estimating adequacy of internal consistency coefficient with psychological research measures. Perceptual And Motor Skills, 105 997 1014.

PAGE 71

71 Poznanski, J. J., & McLennan, J. (1995). Conceptualizing and measuring counse lors' theoretical orientation. Journal Of Counseling Psychology 42 411 422. Poznanski, J. J., & McLennan, J. (1999). Measuring counsellor theoretical orientation. Counselling Psychology Quarterly 12 327 334. Rosso, S. M., & Frey, D. H. (1973). An asses sment of the gap between counseling theory and practice. Journal Of Counseling Psychology 20 471 476. Royce, J. R. (1964). The e ncapsulated m an: An i nterdisciplinary e ssay on the s earch for m eaning Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand. Saferstein, J. A. (2007). The relationship between therapists' epistemology and their therapy style, working alliance, and use of specific interventions. Dissertation Abstracts International 68 Gainesville, Fla.: University of Florida. Scandell, D. J., Wlazelek, B. G., & Scandell, R. S. (1997). Personality of the therapist and theoretical orientation. The Irish Journal Of Psychology 18 413 418. Schacht, T. E., & Black, D. A. (1985). Epistemological commitments of behavioral and psychoanalytic therapists. Profes sional Psychology: Research And Practice 16 316 323 Scragg, P., Bor, R., & Watts, M. (1999). The influence of personality and theoretical models on applicants to a counselling psychology course: A preliminary study. Counselling Psychology Quarterly 12 263 270. Soto, C. J., John, O. P., Gosling, S. D., & Potter, J. (2008). The developmental psychometrics of big five self reports: Acquiescence, factor structure, coherence, and differentiation from ages 10 to 20. Journal Of Personality And Social Psycholo gy 94 718 737 Sundland, D. M. (1977). Theoretical orientations of psychotherapists. In A.S. Gurman & A. M. Razin (Eds.), Effective psychotherapy: An empirical assessment ( 189 219). London: Pergamon Press. Sundland, D. M., & Barker, E. N. (1962). The ori entations of psychotherapists. Journal Of Consulting Psychology 26 201 212. Tellegen, A. (1985). Structures of mood and personality and their relevance to assessing anxiety, with an emphasis on self report. In A. H. Tuma & J. D. Maser (Eds.), Anxiety a nd the anxiety disorders (pp. 681 706). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Thalmayer, A., Saucier, G., & Eigenhuis, A. (2011). Comparative validity of b rief to m edium l ength b ig f ive and b ig s ix p ersonality q uestionnaires. Psychological Assessment 23 995 1009. T orrey, E. F. (1997). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

PAGE 72

72 Toska, G. (2011). Me now, me then: Therapists and constructions of their epistemic journey. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A 71 Gainesville Fla.: University of Florida. Tremblay, J. M., Herron, W. G., & Schultz, C. L. (1986). Relation between therapeutic orientation and p ersonality in psychotherapists. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 17, 106 110. Wiggins, J. S. (1968). Per sonality structure. In P. R. Farnsworth (Ed.), Annual review of psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 320 322). Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews. Worthington, R. L., & Dillon, F. R. (2003). The t heoretical o rientation p rofile s cale r evised: A validation study. Measureme nt And Evaluation In Counseling And Development 36 95 105 Young, S. (2000). Existential couns elling and psychotherapy. In S. Palmer (Ed.), Introduction to counselling and psychotherapy: The essential guide (pp. 7082). London: Sage.

PAGE 73

73 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Megan Barthle was born in Tampa, Florida, and raised on a horse and cattle ranch in Dade City, Florida. She received her Associate o f A r t s d egree from Pasco Hernando Community College i n 2 0 0 7 Following this, she received her Bachelor o f S c i e n c e degree in p sychology fro m the University of Florida in 2010. After her undergraduate completion, she immediatel y began her graduate program in c ounseling p sychology at the University of Florida. S h e r e c e i v e d h e r M a s t e r o f S c i e n c e d e g r e e i n 2 0 1 3