This study investigates the facets of the alliance and their relationship with estimated effectiveness of psychotherapy using a measure called the Combined Alliance Short Form (CASF; Hatcher, 1999; Hatcher & Barends, 1996; Hatcher, Barends, Hansell, & Gutfreund, 1995). Because the CASF has both patient and therapist versions, it was possible to compare ratings of various facets of the alliance from each perspective. Data were collected from 125 patient-therapist dyads, and all participants completed the CASF as well as measures of perceived progress during therapy. Convergence was examined for each alliance subscale for the patient-therapist dyads. Both the patient and therapist Confident Collaboration factors were found to be primary predictors of perceived improvement in psychotherapy. Number of psychotherapy sessions was related to patient estimates of improvement and therapist ratings of the amount of help received by their patients as well. Confident Collaboration, a factor that reflects the level of confidence and commitment a patient experiences regarding the therapy as well as the degree to which the therapy is experienced as worthwhile, is discussed in relation to previous research. Implications regarding the presence of this factor during psychotherapy are considered in detail.

This study investigates the effects of structured clinician training in a Therapeutic Model of Assessment (TMA) and Short-Term Psychodynamic Psychotherapy (STPP) on therapeutic alliance variables measured early in treatment. Thirty-four outpatients received psychotherapy from clinicians who had undergone structured training in a TMA and STPP. A 2nd group of 34 outpatients were assessed using a

The Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale (SCORS), developed by Western, Lohr, Silk, Kerber, and Goodrich (1985), is a diagnostic instrument used to assess an array of psychological functioning by using clinical narratives such as the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT; Murray, 1943) stories. This study investigated the utility of the SCORS to differentiate between Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed. [DSM-IV]; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) antisocial personality disorder (ANPD), borderline personality disorder (BPD), narcissistic personality disorder (NPD), and Cluster C personality disorder (CPD). A sample of 58 patients was separated into four groups: ANPD (n = 9), BPD (n = 21; 18 with a primary BPD diagnosis and 3 with prominent borderline traits who met 4 of the 5 DSM-IV criteria necessary for a BPD diagnosis), NPD (n = 16; 8 with a primary NPD diagnosis and 8 with prominent narcissistic traits who met 4 of the 5 DSM-IV criteria necessary for a NPD diagnosis), and CPD (n = 12). These groups were then compared on the 8 SCORS variables by using 5 TAT cards (1, 2, 3BM, 4, and 13MF). Spearman-Brown correction for 2-way mixed effects model of reliability for the 8 SCORS variables ranged from .70 to .95. The results of categorical and dimensional analyses indicate that (a) SCORS variables can be used to differentiate ANPD, BPD, and NPD; (b) the BPD group scored significantly lower (greater maladjustment) than did the CPD group on certain variables; (c) the BPD group scored significantly lower (greater maladjustment) than did the NPD group on all 8 SCORS variables; (d) the ANPD group scored significantly lower than did the NPD group on certain variables; (e) certain variables were found to be empirically related to the total number of DSM-IV ANPD, BPD, and NPD criteria; and (f) certain variables were found to be empirically related to Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2; Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989) Personality disorder scales. The results of this study are discussed in terms of clinical utility, conceptual, and theoretical implications.

We used a survey of internship training directors to examine the nature of assessment use and assessment skills training at 382 internship settings in professional psychology across the United States and Canada. For the purposes of this study, we created a questionnaire that inquired about the types of assessment instruments used at each internship setting, the amount and type of training offered at internship sites, and the type of assessment experience desired of interns before beginning their rotations. The results revealed several differences across type of internship facility surveyed as well as several trends in the current use of assessment in applied settings. The findings further demonstrate the important role of projective assessment in the training of graduate students and lead to the conclusion that major discrepancies may exist between what is being taught in graduate school and what students are expected to know on entering their internship positions.