Cited by 46Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsCounseling Practices and SupervisionAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Structural characteristics and external correlates of the Working Alliance Inventory-Short Form.

Smits, Dave, Luyckx, Koen, Smits, Dirk, Stinckens, Nele, Claes, Laurence·2015·Psychological Assessment

Abstract

Controversy remains on the psychometric properties of the Working Alliance Inventory-Short Form (WAI-S). In the present study we first examined the factor structure and reliability of WAI-S scores in a sample of 557 Flemish mental health consumers. Subsequently, we investigated the relationship between early alliance quality and client's psychological dysfunctioning (symptomatic distress, interpersonal functioning and personality pathology). Participants completed the Outcome Questionnaire and the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology-Short Form at start of treatment. The WAI-S was completed after the third treatment session. The structure of the WAI-S was examined using confirmatory factor analysis. Four different factor models were compared. Internal consistencies of the scales were ascertained using the Cronbach's alpha coefficient. Pearson correlations were calculated to determine the relationships between alliance ratings and the independent variables. CFA resulted in a two-factor model, with a Bond component (Contact) and a Task-Goal (Contract) component. Reliability of the WAI-S subscale scores proved to be very good. Symptomatic distress, interpersonal dysfunctioning and personality traits were associated to the Contract component of the alliance, but not to the Contact component. Clinical implications, limitations and suggestions for further research are formulated.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/pas0000066

Cites

42 of 42 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Smits, D., Luyckx, K., Smits, D., Stinckens, N., & Claes, L.
Venue
Psychological Assessment
Published
2015-06
Volume
27
Issue
2
Pages
545-551
ISSN
  • 1040-3590 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-134X
OpenAlex
W2118029875
Cited by
46
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2
FWCI
3.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Assessment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Counseling Practices and Supervision
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
therapeutic relationship, factor structure, psychometric properties, reliability statistics, interpersonal functioning, personality pathology, mental health service users, psychotherapy
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Mental Disorders, Cooperative Behavior, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Professional-Patient Relations, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Psychotherapeutic Processes, Reproducibility of Results, Young Adult

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