Countertransference and Psychological Assessment

Abstract

Countertransference (CT) is usually conceptualized as emerging in the course of psychotherapy. This study explores whether CT manifests itself in the context of assessment and if the modality of exposure to participants (interviewer and observer) affects the intensity and nature of CT. Evaluators either led (direct exposure) or observed (indirect exposure) a 6-hour interview with a subject focusing on attachment and personality. Interviewers and evaluators then completed a measure of CT, the Therapist Response Questionnaire for a total of 43 subjects. Results show significant CT reactions for both interviewers and observers that were globally as intense in both conditions, although lower positive/satisfying and helpless/inadequate CTs were reported by observers. Moreover, intraclass correlations suggest that interviewers' and observers' CT reactions toward the same interviewee show an important degree of similarity. These results highlight the presence of CT in assessment contexts and support the existence of an objective part to CT reactions.

Clinicians’ Emotional Reactions toward Patients with Depressive Symptoms in Mood Disorders: A Narrative Scoping Review of Empirical Research

“…Therapist subjective reactions (often conceptualized as CT) are a ubiquitous and potentially useful phenomenon for mental health clinicians in various diagnostic and treatment situations and settings [54,63,[111][112][113]. It is the result of a complex combination of the intrapsychic interactions of the clinician and the interpersonal dynamics between the clinician and the patient, the latter being intrinsically linked to the characteristics of the patient.…”

The relationship between self-observed and other-observed countertransference and session outcome.

“…In this study, we sought to empirically deepen the complex and elusive construct of CT, trying to shed some light on the relationship between CT and a session’s outcome. The complexity of the CT phenomenon—in particular its nature, both conscious and nonconscious, and the complex relationship between awareness and management of it—led us to adopt a multiperspective methodology, following the suggestions in the literature (Fauth, 2006; Hayes et al, 1997; Laverdière et al, 2018). We then explored what CT dimensions were prevalent in a sample of in-training psychotherapists conducting counseling sessions by measuring them from an internal (clinicians) and external (observers) point of view.…”

“…For example, CT could be evaluated and reported by a clinician (Rosenberger & Hayes, 2002; Tanzilli et al, 2016) or identified by an external observer (Friedman & Gelso, 2000; Van Wagoner et al, 1991); an external observer could evaluate the presence of CT starting from the therapist’s report, as happens during a typical supervision activity (Gelso et al, 2002), or detect it while observing or listening to the session in vivo (Fuertes et al, 2015; Mohr et al, 2005). Certainly, the most reliable methodological solution is to explore simultaneously the points of view of the therapist and the observer (Hayes et al, 1997; Laverdière et al, 2018) to analyze their convergence or divergence.…”

Between a rock and a hard place: Associations between Mentzos' “dilemma”, self‐reported interpersonal problems, and psychosocial functioning in individuals with non‐affective psychoses

“…Although researchers conducting the interviews were particularly trained for this part of the diagnostic process and prepared to attend to their personal feelings, memories, and attitudes, as well as to reflect specific interaction sequences between patients and themselves on a metalevel (Ogden, ), subjective assessments nonetheless have to be considered with extreme caution. However, research related to counter‐transference in clinical assessment contexts have shown acceptable intraclass correlation coefficients (Laverdière, Beaulieu‐Tremblay, Descôteaux, & Simard, ), substantiating that counter‐transference reactions might consist of both subjective and objective parts (Kiesler, ). Interrater reliability, though, might differ for various counter‐transference reactions (Hafkenscheid, ), and the therapists' experience of counter‐transference can occur at very different levels of reflectivity and mentalizing (Barreto & Matos, ).…”