Therapist’s interpersonal style and therapy benefit as the determinants of personality self-reports in clients

Nina Hadžiahmetović; Sabina Alispahić; Đenita Tuce; Enedina Hasanbegović-Anić

doi:10.2298/6580

Nina Hadžiahmetović Department of Psychology, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Sabina Alispahić Department of Psychology, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Đenita Tuce Department of Psychology, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Enedina Hasanbegović-Anić Department of Psychology, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2298/6580

Keywords: psychotherapy, physician-patient relations, personality, personality assessment, questionnaires, control, autonomy, therapist's interpersonal style, personality traits, therapist-client relationship,

Abstract

Background/Aim. In (counter)transference relationship therapist’s interpersonal style, implying the perceived relation of therapist to a client (patient) in terms of control, autonomy, care and positive feedback, has been shown to be important. The aim of our study was to assess the relationship between therapist’s interpersonal style and clients’ personality self-reports. Within therapist’s interpersonal style, preliminary validation of the Therapist’s Interpersonal Style Scale has been conducted, which included double translation method, exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, as well as the reliability tests of the derived components. Methods. This research was conducted on a group of 206 clients, attending one of the four psychotherapy modalities: psychoanalysis, gestalt therapy, cognitive-behavioral and systemic family therapy. Beside Therapist’s Interpersonal Style Scale, Big Five Questionnaire and Therapy Benefit Scale were administered, showing good internal consistency. Results. Principal component analysis of therapist’s interpersonal style singled out two components Supportive Autonomy and Ignoring Control, explaining 42% of variance. Two-factor model of the therapist’s styles was better fitted in confirmatory factor analysis than the original 4-factor model. Structural model showing indirect and direct effects of therapist’s interpersonal styles on self-reports in clients indicates good fitness (χ²₍₁₂₎ = 8.932, p = 0.709; goodness-of-fit index = 0.989), with Ignoring Control having direct effect on Stability, Supportive Autonomy on Therapy Benefit, and Therapy Benefit on Plasticity. Conclusion. The results of this study indicate the importance of further research on therapist’s interpersonal style, as well as further validation of the instrument that measures this construct. Besides, a client’s perception that the therapy is being helpful could instigate more explorative and approach-oriented behavior, what indirectly might contribute to a client’s stability.

Author Biographies

Nina Hadžiahmetović, Department of Psychology, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina

MA

Department of Psychology,

Senior Teaching Assistant

Sabina Alispahić, Department of Psychology, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina

PhD

Department of Psychology

Assistant Professor

Đenita Tuce, Department of Psychology, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina

MSc

Department of Psychology

Senior Teaching Assistant

Enedina Hasanbegović-Anić, Department of Psychology, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina

PhD

Department of Psychology

Assistant Professor

References

Ryan RM, Deci EL. Self-determination theory and the facilita-tion of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am Psychol 2000; 55(1): 68−78.

Vansteenkiste M, Wiliams GC, Resnicow K. Toward systematic inte-gration between Self-Determination Theory and Motivational Interviewing as examples of top-down and bottom-up intervention development: Autonomy or volition as a fundamental theoretical principle. Int J Behav Nutr Phy 2012; 23(9): 1−11.

Pelletier LG, Tuson KM, Haddad NK. Client Motivation for Therapy Scale: a measure of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, and amotivation for therapy. J Pers Assess 1997; 68(2): 414−35.

Dinger U, Strack M, Leichsenring F, Wilmers F, Schauenburg H. Therapist effects on outcome and alliance in inpatient psychotherapy. J Clin Psychol 2008; 64(3): 344−54.

Okiishi JC, Lambert MJ, Eggett D, Nielsen L, Dayton DD, Ver-meersch DA. An Analysis of Therapist Treatment Effects: Toward Providing Feedback to Individual Therapists on Their Clients‘Psychotherapy Outcome. J Clin Psychol 2006; 62(9): 1157−72.

Oliveira VC, Refsdhauge KM, Ferreira ML, Pinto RZ, Beckenkamp PR, Filho RF, et al. Communication that values patient autonomy is associated with satisfaction with care: a systematic review. J Physiother 2012; 58(4): 215−29.

Theodoridou A, Schlatter F, Ajdačić V, Rössler W, Jäger M. Therapeutic relationship in the context of perceived coercion in a psychiatric population. Psychiatry Res 2012; 200(2−3): 939−44.

Ackerman SJ, Hilsenroth MJ. A review of therapist characteristics and techniques positively impacting the therapeutic alliance. Clin Psychol Rev 2003; 23(1): 1−33.

Heinonen E, Lindfors O, Laaksonen MA, Knekt P. Therapists' professional and personal characteristics as predictors of outcome in short- and long-term psychotherapy. J Affect Disord 2012; 138(3): 301−12.

Watson JC. Treatment failure in humanistic and experiential psychotherapy. J Clin Psychol 2011; 67(11): 1117−28.

Henry WP, Schacht TE, Strupp HH, Butler SF, Binder JL. Effects of training in time-limited dynamic psychotherapy: mediators of therapists' responses to training. J Consult Clin Psychol 1993; 61(3): 441−7.

Ng CT, James S. "Directive approach" for Chinese clients receiving psychotherapy: is that really a priority. Front Psychol 2013; 4(49): 1−13.

Patrick H, Williams GC. Self-determination theory: its applica-tion to health behavior and complementarity with motivational interviewing. Int J Behav Nutr Phy 2012; 9(18): 1−12.

Swift JK, Callahan JL. The impact of client treatment preferences on outcome: a meta-analysis. J Clin Psychol 2009; 65(4): 368−81.

Mcmurtry SL, Hudson WW. The Client Satisfaction Inventory. Results of an Initial Validation Study. Res Social Work Prac 2000; 10(5): 644−63.

Landa AJ, Martos MP, Lopez-Zafra E. Emotional intelligence and personality traits as predictors of psychological well-being in Spanish undergraduates. Soc Behav Personal 2010; 38(6): 783−94.

Romero E, Gomez-Fraguela JA, Villar P. Life aspirations, personality traits and subjective well-being in a Spanish sample. Eur J Personality 2012; 26(1): 45−55.

Steel P, Schmidt J, Shultz J. Refining the relationship between personality and subjective well-being. Psychol Bull 2008; 134(1): 138−61.

Lucas RE, Diener E. Personality and subjective well-being. In: John OP, Robins R, Pervin LA. , editors. Handbook of personality : theory and research. 3rd ed. New York: Guilford; 2008. p. 795−814.

Weiss A, Bates TC, Luciano M. Happiness is a personal(ity) thing: the genetics of personality and well-being in a representative sample. Psychol Sci 2008; 19(3): 205−10.

Gutiérrez JL, Jiménez BM, Hernández EG, Puente CP. Personality and subjective well-being: big five correlates and demographic variables. Pers Indiv Differ 2005; 38: 1561−9.

Gale CR, Booth T, Mõttus R, Kuh D, Deary IJ. Neuroticism and Extraversion in Youth Predict Mental Wellbeing and Life Satisfaction 40 Years Later. J Res Pers 2013; 47(6): 687−97.

DeYoung CG. Higher-order factors of the Big Five in a multi-informant sample. J Pers Soc Psychol 2006; 91(6): 1138−51.

Ashton MC, Lee K, Goldberg LR, de Vries RE. Higher order fac-tors of personality: do they exist. Pers Soc Psychol Rev 2009; 13(2): 79−91.

del Re AC, Flückiger C, Horvath AO, Symonds D, Wampold BE. Therapist effects in the therapeutic alliance-outcome relationship: a restricted-maximum likelihood meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Rev 2012; 32(7): 642−9.

Pelletier LG, Fortier MS, Vallerand RJ, Tuson KM, Brìere NM, Blais MR. Toward a New Measure of Intrinsic Motivation, Extrinsic Motivation, and Amotivation in Sports: The Sport Motivation Scale (SMS). J Sport Exerc Psychol 1995; 17: 35−53.

Kardum I, Smovjer I. Five Factor Model of Personality Structure: Item Selection descriptors in Croatian language. Godišnjak Zavoda za psihologiju 1993; 2(1): 91−100. (Croatian)

Field A. Discovering Statistics Using SPSS. 3rd. London: Sage Publications; 2009.

Hair FH, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate Data Analysis. 7th ed. New Jersey (US): Pearson Prentice Hall; 2010.

Jöreskog KG, Sörbom D. LISREL-VI user‘s guide. 3rd ed. Mooresville (IN): Scientific Software; 1984.

Byrne BM. Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS. 2nd ed. New York (US): Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group; 2010.

Browne MW, Cudeck R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: Bollen KA, Long JS, editors. Testing Structural Equation Models. Newbury Park: Sage 1993. p. 136−62.