Cited by 37Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsSchizophrenia research and treatmentPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research

Negative Symptoms and Poor Insight as Predictors of the Similarity Between Client and Therapist Ratings of Therapeutic Alliance in Cognitive Behavior Therapy for Patients With Schizophrenia

Lysaker, Paul H., Davis, Louanne W., Buck, Kelly D., Outcalt, Samantha, Ringer, Jamie M.·2011·Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease

Abstract

Recent studies have found that clients with schizophrenia rate therapeutic alliance more highly than therapists. Unclear is whether there are clinical characteristics which predict the degree of difference in client and therapist ratings. To explore this, we correlated client and therapist ratings of therapeutic alliance with baseline assessments of positive negative, and disorganized symptoms and awareness of need for treatment. Participants were 40 adults with schizophrenia enrolled in a 6-month program of cognitive behavior therapy. Results indicated that clients produced higher ratings of therapeutic alliance than therapists and that therapist and client general ratings were more disparate when clients had fewer negative symptoms and better insight. Higher overall client ratings of therapeutic alliance were linked to lower levels of positive, negative, and disorganized symptoms and better awareness of need for treatment. Higher overall therapist ratings were linked only to lower levels of disorganized symptoms among clients.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/nmd.0b013e31820c73eb

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

2 of the 37 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lysaker, P. H., Davis, L. W., Buck, K. D., Outcalt, S., & Ringer, J. M.
Affiliations
Richard L. Roudebush VA Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
  • Lysaker, Paul H.
  • Davis, Louanne W.
  • Buck, Kelly D.
  • Outcalt, Samantha
  • Ringer, Jamie M.
Venue
Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease
Published
2011-03
Volume
199
Issue
3
Pages
191-195
ISSN
0022-3018 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1990458121
Cited by
37
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
FWCI
4.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Keywords
therapeutic relationship, schizophrenia, cognitive behavioral therapy, client-therapist agreement, negative symptoms, insight, positive symptoms, disorganized symptoms, treatment outcome prediction
MeSH terms
Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Professional-Patient Relations, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychological Tests, Psychotic Disorders, Schizophrenia, Schizophrenic Psychology, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy

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