Cited by 35Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsCounseling Practices and SupervisionPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research

Unpacking the therapist effect: Impact of treatment length differs for high- and low-performing therapists

Goldberg, Simon B., Hoyt, William T., Nissen-Lie, Helene A., Nielsen, Stevan Lars, Wampold, Bruce E.·2018·Psychotherapy Research

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Differences between therapists in their average outcomes (i.e., therapist effects) have become a topic of increasing interest in psychotherapy research in the past decade. Relatively little work, however, has moved beyond identifying the presence of significant between-therapist variability in patient outcomes. The current study sought to examine the ways in which therapist effects emerge over the course of time in psychotherapy. METHOD: We used a large psychotherapy data set (n = 5828 patients seen by n = 158 therapists for 50,048 sessions of psychotherapy) and examined whether outcomes diverge for high-performing (HP) and low-performing (LP) therapists as treatment duration increases. RESULTS: Therapists accounted for a small but significant proportion of variance in patient outcomes that was not explained by differences between therapists' caseload characteristics. The discrepancy in outcomes between HP and LP therapists increased as treatment duration increased (interaction coefficient = 0.071, p < .001). In addition, patients' trajectories of change were a function of their therapist's average outcome as well as the patient's duration of treatment (interaction coefficient = 0.060, p = .040). CONCLUSIONS: Indeed, patterns of change previously described ignoring between-therapist differences (e.g., dose-effect, good-enough level model) may vary systematically when disaggregated by therapist effect.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10503307.2016.1216625

Cites

45 of 45 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
Goldberg, S. B., Hoyt, W. T., Nissen-Lie, H. A., Nielsen, S. L., & Wampold, B. E.
Affiliations
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • Department of Psychology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
  • Brigham Young University (US)
Corresponding author
Goldberg, Simon B.
Venue
Psychotherapy Research
Published
2016-09-12
Volume
28
Issue
4
Pages
532-544
ISSN
  • 1050-3307 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-4381
OpenAlex
W2520727566
Cited by
35
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5
FWCI
6.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychotherapy Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Society for Psychotherapy Research
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Counseling Practices and Supervision
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Keywords
therapist effects, treatment duration, patient outcomes, dosage effect, change trajectories, psychotherapy outcome
MeSH terms
Work Performance, Adult, Mental Disorders, Health Personnel, Humans, Psychotherapy, Time Factors, Models, Statistical, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Multilevel 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