Cited by 568Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesCounseling Practices and Supervision

The revised cognitive therapy scale (CTS-R): psychometric properties.

Open access
Blackburn, Ivy-Marie, James, Ian A., Milne, Derek L., Baker, Chris, Standart, Sally, Garland, Anne, Reichelt, F. Katharina·2001·Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy

Abstract

The existing scale for assessing competence in cognitive therapy (CTS) dates from 1988 and only the previous version of 1980 has been validated to any extent. A revised version, the CTS-R, was devised to improve on the CTS by: eliminating overlap between items, improving on the scaling system, and defining items more clearly. Kolb's well-known educational model was used as a guideline. In the new 14-item scale, three new items measure general therapeutic flair, the facilitation of emotional expression, and therapist's non-verbal behaviours (optional). We hypothesized that the CTS-R would prove more user friendly and demonstrate satisfactory reliability and validity. Twenty-one mental health professionals undergoing training in cognitive therapy provided 102 video-tapes of therapy with 34 patients, reflecting three stages of therapy. The tapes were rated by four expert raters, in a balanced design. The CTS-R showed high internal consistency and adequate average inter-rater reliability. Reliability for individual items varied widely among pairs of raters. Validity was demonstrated by improved ratings of competence for trainees who saw patients early and later during the course of training. Although raters found the CTS-R a more useful tool than the CTS and satisfactory reliability and validity were demonstrated, more refinement is needed in item definition. The study has led to modifications in the CTS-R, which are in the process of evaluation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1352465801004040

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Blackburn, I.-M., James, I. A., Milne, D. L., Baker, C., Standart, S., Garland, A., & Reichelt, F. K.
Venue
Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy
Published
2001-10
Volume
29
Issue
4
Pages
431-446
ISSN
  • 1352-4658 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-1833
OpenAlex
W2125885438
Cited by
568
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 71 · 2020: 37 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 39 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 38 · 2014: 29 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 19
FWCI
3.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy (publishedVersion)
  • Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Counseling Practices and Supervision
Keywords
inter-rater reliability, scale validation, therapist training

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