An Overview of Four Measures Developed to Test the Hill Process Model: Therapist Intentions, Therapist Response Modes, Client Reactions, and Client Behaviors

Abstract

The author presents a brief history of process research leading to the development of a process model, which guided the development of four measures: therapist intentions, therapist response modes, client reactions, and client behaviors. A description and information about format for data collection, validity, reliability, and research findings is presented for each of the measures. Future directions in terms of methodological issues, measurement development, and research areas are also presented.

But Why Does What Works Work? A Response to Fifer, Henschen, Gould, and Ravizza, 2008

“…The teacher's thinking must be made visible to the students and the student's thinking must be made visible to the teacher (p. 1-3). At the risk of this level of metacognition appearing trivial or, worse still, considered to be naval gazing, it is also worth noting that an increasing body of literature related to the importance of considering professional judgment and decision making is apparent both in our field (e.g., Martindale & Collins, 2005;2007) and in parallel fields and professions such as counseling psychology (e.g., Hill, 1992), teaching (e.g., Curtner-Smith, 1999), medicine (e.g., Patel & Ramoni, 1997), coaching (e.g., Abraham, Collins, & Martindale, 2004), and refereeing (e.g., Mascarenhas, Collins, Mortimer, & Morris, 2005). This literature may provide a vehicle for stimulating reflection at a meta-cognitive level through the use of suggested terminology as currency for discussion (e.g., notions of theoretical orientation, intentions for impact, and issue conceptualization) to name a few such possibilities.…”

Teaching graduate trainees how to manage client anger: a comparison of three types of training

“…One response mode was coded for each complete thought written by the trainee. Extensive validity and reliability have been reported by various versions of this category system (Hill, 1986(Hill, , 1992. For this study, we used only the proportions of reflection of feelings and immediacy out of the total number of responses because these were the focus of the supervision.…”

Assessing Competencies in Couples and Family Therapy/Counseling: A Call to the Profession

“…The set of instruments includes observer ratings of therapist verbal responses (i.e., the Supervisor or Peer Rating System; SOPRS) and self‐report ratings by counselor trainees of those same verbal responses (i.e., the Counseling Activity Self‐Efficacy Scale; CASES) that will be discussed below. Other instruments clearly define the skills that are to be practiced and assessed by the supervisor and trainee (i.e., the Hill’s Helping Skills System sheet; HHSS sheet), intentions that guide counselor trainees’ choices of skills employed throughout the counseling process (i.e., the Helper Intentions List; HIL), client reactions to the counselor’s responses (i.e., the Client Reactions System; CRS), and client ratings of the therapist’s skills, the therapeutic relationship, and session evaluation (i.e., the Session Process and Outcome Measure; SPOM; Hill, 1992).…”