Cited by 79Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsPsychological Treatments and Assessments

Skills of Cognitive Therapy (SoCT): a new measure of patients' comprehension and use

Open access
Jarrett, Robin B., Vittengl, Jeffrey R., Clark, Lee Anna, Thase, Michael E.·2011·Psychological Assessment

Abstract

The authors describe the development and psychometric properties of a new measure called the Skills of Cognitive Therapy (SoCT) in depressed adults and their cognitive therapists. The 8-item SoCT assesses patients' understanding and use of basic cognitive therapy (CT) skills rated from the perspectives of both observers (SoCT-O; therapists in this report) and patients (SoCT-P). Ratings of patients' skill usage are made on 5-point Likert-type scales ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (always or when needed). Higher scores reflect greater patient skill in applying cognitive therapy principles and coping strategies. To develop this scale, a 33-item pool was used, rated by both patients and their therapists at the middle and end of CT (Ns = 359-416), and evaluated the reliability and concurrent and predictive validity of both versions of the scale. The SoCT has excellent internal consistency reliability and moderate correlations between the observer and patient versions. It is important to note that the SoCT showed good predictive validity for response when collected at the midpoint of acute phase CT. Considering both patients' self-ratings and clinicians' SoCT ratings, the odds ratio for responding to CT was 2.6. The practical utility of the SoCT is discussed, as well as its theoretical importance in research of patient CT skills (e.g., acquisition, comprehension, and generalization) as putative moderators or mechanisms of symptom change in the therapy.

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 · 10.1037/a0022485

Cites

33 of 33 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

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

2 of the 35 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Beck AT Rush AJ Shaw BF Emery G Cognitive Therapy of Depression 1979 New York Guilford Press
  2. First MB Spitzer RL Gibbon M Williams JB Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders-Patient Edition (SCID-I/P, Version 2.0) 1996 New York New York State Psychiatric Institute, Biometrics Research Department
  3. Weissman AN The Dysfunctional Attitudes Scale: A validation study (Doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 1979) Dissertation Abstracts International 1979 40 1389B 1390B

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jarrett, R. B., Vittengl, J. R., Clark, L. A., & Thase, M. E.
Affiliations
  • The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (US)
  • Truman State University (US)
  • University of Iowa (US)
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
Venue
Psychological Assessment
Published
2011
Volume
23
Issue
3
Pages
578-586
ISSN
  • 1040-3590 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-134X
OpenAlex
W2016485027
Cited by
79
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 3
FWCI
5.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychological Assessment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (K24 MH001571; R01 MH58397; R01 MH69619, R01 MH58356; R01 MH69618)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychological Treatments and Assessments
Keywords
cognitive therapy, coping strategies, depression, scale development, psychometric properties, predictive validity, concurrent validity, internal consistency, patient self-report, therapist ratings
MeSH terms
Adult, Attitude to Health, Major Depressive Disorder, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Humans, Predictive Value of Tests, Professional Competence, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychological Tests, Surveys and Questionnaires, Reproducibility of Results, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome, Comprehension

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