CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 112Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsCounseling Practices and SupervisionPsychometric Methodologies and Testing

Factorial validation of a French short‐form of the Working Alliance Inventory

Open access
Corbière, Marc, Bisson, Jocelyn, Lauzon, Sylvie, Ricard, Nicole·2006·International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research
DOI 10.1002/mpr.27PMC PMC6878398
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Evaluation of the therapeutic alliance is crucial for understanding the therapeutic process and its results. However, few instruments are available in French. This article aims to validate a French short form of the Working Alliance Inventory (WAI). Unlike other questionnaires, the WAI is the most widely used in psychotherapy research as well as in social psychiatry. Confirmatory factor analyses were carried out on a sample of 150 client‐case manager dyads in order to determine the validity of this short‐form instrument. The results of these confirmatory factor analyses allowed us to answer different authors' questions (Horvath and Greenberg, 1989; Tracey and Kokotovic, 1989) regarding the factorial structure of the WAI. The results also indicated a unidimensional solution as being the most valid for the two samples. We suggest that, in future studies, only one score be considered for the evaluation of the WAI. We also suggest modifying two statements in the English and French versions in order to render a faithful comparison between the therapist and client versions. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/mpr.27

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Therapeutic alliance will be assessed in both participants and therapists after the last preparation session with the Working Alliance Inventory-Short Revised.

    “we will assess therapeutic alliance in both participants and therapists after the last preparation session with the Working Alliance Inventory-Short Revised (WAI-SR; [115]).”

    From Psilocybin-assisted therapy for severe alcohol use disorder: protocol for a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, 7-month parallel-group phase II superiority trial (2024) · cites this paper as [115]

    The Introduction and Definition describe a short-form Working Alliance Inventory with separate client and therapist versions, supporting its use to assess therapeutic alliance from both perspectives. But the paper identifies its instrument as a French short-form WAI, not the specifically named Working Alliance Inventory–Short Revised (WAI-SR). The timing after the last preparation session is the citing authors’ plan, not a finding attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Bacher F. Les modèles structuraux en psychologie. Présenta- tion d'un modèle: LISREL. Le Travail Humain 1987; 50: 347-68.
  2. Bordin ES. The generalisability of the psychoanalytic concept of the working alliance. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice 1979; 6(3): 252-60.
  3. Horvath AO, Greenberg LS. Development and validation of the working alliance inventory. J Couns Psych 1989; 36(2): 223-33.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Corbière, M., Bisson, J., Lauzon, S., & Ricard, N.
Affiliations
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
  • Institut universitaire en santé mentale de Montréal (CA)
  • University of Ottawa (CA)
Corresponding author
Corbière, Marc
ORCID
Venue
International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2006-03
Volume
15
Issue
1
Pages
36-45
ISSN
  • 1049-8931 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-0657
DOI
10.1002/mpr.27
PMC
PMC6878398
OpenAlex
W2161914723
Cited by
112
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 5
FWCI
3.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 19 d)
Locations
  • International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Counseling Practices and Supervision
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Keywords
Working Alliance Inventory, therapeutic relationship, short-form questionnaire, French translation, factor structure, psychotherapy outcome assessment, unidimensional scale, instrument validation
MeSH terms
Mental Disorders, Factor Analysis, Statistical, France, Humans, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychotherapy, Schizophrenic Psychology, Psychotherapeutic Processes, Treatment Outcome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review