Application of scaling techniques to the evaluation of counseling outcomes.

Abstract

A reasonably comprehensive review of the literature has revealed largely inadequate attempts to evaluate counseling, due chiefly to improper criterion development. A consolidation of various criterion issues reveals that multiple criteria and some combination of the other types of criteria discussed are most promising for application in research. A consolidation of scaling issues emphasizes multiple ratings, the closing gap between physical and psychological continua, and the improper use of theoretical definitions for criterion development. A review of rating scales covering the last 20 years reveals a general implementation of relevant criterion issues, but little attention to relevant scaling issues. It is concluded that each phase of rating scale development demands proper scaling techniques. Those suggested are (a) factor analysis and (b) multidimensional scaling analysis. Other scaling methods are discussed, and item construction and analysis are developed briefly.

An open system model for psychotherapy evaluation

“…333-372), the sources of measures have generally been restricted to the patient and his therapist, and perhaps judges of therapy improvement. There has been a neglect of measures of the patient's relationship to his social environment, or measures by persons in his social environment, despite occasional suggestions along this line (Farnsworth, 1966;Zax & Klein, 1960). Furthermore, the closed system assumption ignores the evidence from an increasing amount of research which indicates that for accurate prediction of behavior there must be information about the environment as well as the individual (Endler & Hunt, 1966;Moos, 1968;Pervin, 1968;Raush, Dittman, & Taylor, 1959;Raush, Farbman, & Llewellyn, 1960).…”

Intra family variables and psychotherapy outcome research.

“…The content of these measures has been directed primarily at variables of the patient; the sources for the measures have been restricted generally to the patient and therapist, and perhaps judges of therapeutic improvement. This focus in measurement has continued despite occasional suggestions that significant others also be included as measurement sources (Farnsworth, 1966;Zax & Klein, 1960). There is an increasing amount of research which indicates that for accurate prediction of behavior there must be information about the environment as well as the individual (Endler & Hunt, 1966;Moos, 1968;Pervin, 1968;Rausch, Dittman & Taylor, 1959).…”