Cited by 8Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychological Treatments and Assessments

Working alliance does not mediate the relation between outcome expectancy and symptom improvement following cognitive behavioural therapy for social anxiety disorder

Draheim, Amanda A., Anderson, Page L.·2019·The Cognitive Behaviour Therapist

Abstract

A small body of research shows that the working alliance mediates the relation between outcome expectancy and treatment response, but this model has not been applied to the treatment of social anxiety disorder. The present study tests the hypothesis that the working alliance mediates the relation between outcome expectancy and symptom improvement within a randomized controlled trial testing the efficacy of virtual reality exposure therapy for social anxiety disorder. A sample of 54 individuals diagnosed with social anxiety disorder completed eight sessions of virtual reality exposure therapy or exposure group therapy. Participants completed standardized self-report measures of outcome expectancy at the first session, of the working alliance at each session, and three measures of social anxiety symptoms at pre- and post-treatment. The working alliance did not mediate the relation between outcome expectancy and symptom improvement across time points, dependent measures, and treatment type. Bayes factors were calculated for the relation between the working alliance and symptom reduction, while controlling for outcome expectancy and therapist effects. Results were inconclusive. These null findings are intriguing and urge further study of the mechanisms through which common factors relate to treatment response. Utilization of Bayesian analyses may help to clarify the nature of these relations. Key learning aims (1) Readers will consider the role of common factors in treatment for…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1754470x19000266

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Parker, 2018, International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 18, 111
  2. Muran, 2002, Comprehensive Handbook of Psychotherapy: Psychodynamic/Object Relations, 253
  3. First, 1994, Disorders – Research

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Draheim, A. A., & Anderson, P. L.
Affiliations
Georgia State University (US)
Corresponding author
Anderson, Page L.
Venue
The Cognitive Behaviour Therapist
Published
2019
Volume
12
ISSN
1754-470X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2972536834
Cited by
8
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 1
FWCI
0.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
The Cognitive Behaviour Therapist (publishedVersion)
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 › Clinical Psychology › Psychological Treatments and Assessments
Keywords
therapeutic relationship, outcome expectations, social anxiety disorder, cognitive behavioral therapy, virtual reality exposure therapy, symptom improvement, mediation, common factors, Bayesian analysis

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