Cited by 30Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesCounseling Practices and Supervision

Do supervisors and independent judges agree on evaluations of therapist adherence and competence in the treatment of cocaine dependence?

Open access
Dennhag, Inga, Gibbons, Mary Beth Connolly, Barber, Jacques P., Gallop, Robert, Crits-Christoph, Paul·2012·Psychotherapy Research

Abstract

The current study examined the agreement between supervisors' and independent judges' evaluations of therapist adherence and competence in three treatments of cocaine dependence: supportive expressive therapy (SE), cognitive therapy CT), and individual drug counseling (IDC). We used data from The National Institute on Drug Abuse Collaborative Cocaine Treatment Study (n = 295). Trained and experienced supervisors and independent judges rated treatment fidelity. At the therapist level of analysis, the agreement between supervisors' and independent judges' ratings was weak for SE competence, CT adherence, and CT competence. Moderate relations were found for IDC adherence and competence. Supervisors consistently rated adherence and competence more positively than judges in CT and IDC. The potential bias in supervisors' ratings is discussed.

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 · 10.1080/10503307.2012.716528

Cites

51 of 51 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?

  • Supervisors overestimate clinicians' competence and adherence to treatment model, relative to independent judges.

    “supervisors overestimate clinicians ' competence and adherence to treatment model, relative to independent judges (Dennhag, Gibbons, Barber, Gallop, & Crits-Christoph, 2012).”

    From Clinicians' concerns about delivering cognitive-behavioural therapy for eating disorders (2014) · cites this paper as Dennhag, Gibbons, Barber, Gallop, & Crits-Christoph, 2012

    The Results (Mean Levels for Supervisors’ Ratings Compared to Judges’ Ratings; page unavailable) show higher supervisor ratings for adherence and competence in CT and IDC, but not for competence in SE. The Discussion says higher ratings could reflect upward bias or supervisors’ better contextual knowledge, so the study does not establish that supervisors overestimated clinicians’ performance. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Supervisors of therapists substantially over-estimate the ability of their supervisees.

    “For example, the objectivity of clinical supervision is questionable, given evidence that supervisors of therapists substantially over-estimate the ability of their supervisees (Dennhag et al ., 2012).”

    From Supervisor practice when guiding therapists working with depression: The impact of supervisor and patient characteristics (2018) · cites this paper as Dennhag et al., 2012

    The Results section reports substantially higher supervisor ratings of therapist competence than independent-judge ratings in cognitive therapy and individual drug counseling, but not in supportive-expressive therapy (page unavailable). The Discussion says the higher ratings might reflect bias or supervisors’ greater contextual knowledge; it does not establish that supervisors overestimated their supervisees’ actual ability. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Supervisors consistently overrate the abilities of their supervisees, relative to independent judges and even relative to the supervisees' own perceptions.

    “supervisors consistently overrate the abilities of their supervisees, relative to independent judges and even relative to the supervisees' own perceptions”

    From Therapist drift redux: Why well-meaning clinicians fail to deliver evidence-based therapy, and how to get back on track (2016) · cites this paper as Dennhag, Gibbons, Barber, Gallop & Crits-Christoph, 2012

  • Clinicians and supervisors tend to believe that they are far better than the average clinician.

    “Why should we be concerned about our abilities if we already believe that we (and our supervisees) are far better than the average clinician (e.g., Dennhag et al., 2012; Parker & Waller, 2015; Walfish et al, 2012)?”

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. Fiske DW Gurman AS Razin AM Methodological issues in research on the psychotherapist Effective psychotherapy 1977 New York Pergamon Press 23 43
  2. Goldstein H Models in Educational and Social Research 1987 New York, NY Oxford University Press
  3. Kazantzis N Therapist competence in review of the contemporary empirical evidence Behaviour Change 2003 20 1 12

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dennhag, I., Gibbons, M. B. C., Barber, J. P., Gallop, R., & Crits-Christoph, P.
Affiliations
  • Umeå University (SE)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • West Chester University (US)
Corresponding author
Dennhag, Inga
Venue
Psychotherapy Research
Published
2012-11
Volume
22
Issue
6
Pages
720-730
ISSN
  • 1050-3307 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-4381
OpenAlex
W1996381035
Cited by
30
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 2
FWCI
2.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychotherapy Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Drug Abuse (U18DA007090, R01DA012249)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Counseling Practices and Supervision
Keywords
cocaine dependence, intervention fidelity, therapist adherence, therapist competence, supervisor ratings, interobserver agreement, supportive-expressive therapy, cognitive therapy, rating bias
MeSH terms
Adult, Clinical Competence, Counseling, Female, Health Personnel, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychotherapy, Observer Variation, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Cocaine-Related Disorders, Guideline Adherence

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