Creating a brief form of the Supervisory Working Alliance Inventory in the Chinese cultural context using multilevel factor analyses.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to examine the multilevel factor structure of the Supervisory Working Alliance Inventory (SWAI; Efstation et al., 1990) and shorten it for routine clinical use in the Chinese cultural context. Participants were 203 (Sample 1) and 97 (Sample 2) beginning counseling trainees from a master’s level training program in China. They were given the SWAI after every supervision session, and a subset of Sample 1 trainees also completed measures of their counseling self-efficacy before every client session. With Sample 1, multilevel exploratory factory analysis (M-EFA) showed that for the original 19-item version of SWAI, two factors emerged on the within-trainee level (Rapport and Client Focus) as proposed in Efstation et al. (1990), whereas only one General Alliance factor was identifiable on the between-trainee level. After removing poorly or double-loaded items, a six-item brief version of SWAI (SWAI-Brief) was obtained. Using Sample 2, multilevel confirmatory factor analysis and multilevel bifactor models supported the factor structure found in M-EFA with Sample 1. Empirical evidence also supported the reliability of the SWAI-Brief, as well as its criterion-related concurrent and predictive validity given its significant associations with trainee’s counseling self-efficacy at the same week and in the subsequent week. Results suggested that the six-item SWAI-Brief could be a reliable and valid measure for assessing supervisory working alliance in the Chinese cultural context and may be used to continuously track clinical supervision processes.

The development of a Brief Working Alliance Inventory for clients and therapists using multilevel factor analysis and item response theory in the United States and China.

“…Therefore, traditional single-level factor analysis may not appropriately disentangle the variances at within-and betweenperson levels in longitudinal repeated measures, and thus may be inadequate in rigorously establishing the structural validity of the measure at both levels (McAleavey et al, 2020). As pointed out, in Zhao et al, 2023), we speculate that the inconsistent factor structure results may be partly attributable to the confounding of the withinand between-person variances in earlier studies before the application of M-FA.…”

Therapist self-efficacy developmental profiles, supervisory working alliance, and client outcome: A growth mixture analysis.

“…The SWAI-Brief is anchored on a 7-point Likert scale, with higher score indicating stronger SWA. An example item is “I feel comfortable working with my supervisor.” Regarding factor structure of the SWAI-Brief, Zhao et al (2023) found that, at the within-trainee between-session level, the SWAI-Brief retained the two original factors of Client Focus and Rapport proposed in Efstation et al (1990), whereas at the between-trainee level, the SWAI-Brief showed a predominant general alliance factor rather than two different factors of Client Focus and Rapport. In terms of reliability and validity, Zhao et al (2023) demonstrated that the six-item SWAI-Brief had acceptable multilevel reliability (ranging from .68 to .98), multilevel structural validity in multilevel CFA tests (e.g., comparative fit index [CFI] = .96, Tucker–Lewis index [TLI] = .92, root-mean-square error of approximation [RMSEA] = .05, standardized root-mean-square residual [SRMR] within = .03, SRMR between = .06), and multilevel convergent validity (correlating significantly with original SWAI measure, multilevel r s ranging between .94 and .995), concurrent validity (correlating significantly with concurrent trainee self-efficacy, multilevel r s ranging between .21 and .40), and predictive validity (significantly predicting subsequent self-efficacy, regression β = .24).…”

“…The Supervisory Working Alliance Inventory-Brief: Chinese Trainee Version (Zhao et al, 2023) The six-item, Chinese trainee version of Supervisory Working Alliance Inventory-Brief: Chinese Trainee Version (SWAI-Brief; Zhao et al, 2023) was adapted from the 19-item original SWAI measure (Efstation et al, 1990) to assess the therapist trainees' perceived working alliance with their clinical supervisor. The SWAI-Brief is anchored on a 7-point Likert scale, with higher score indicating stronger SWA.…”

“…This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. 1 Notably, Zhao et al (2023) found that SWAI-Brief scale showed two highly correlated but unidentical factors (Client Focus and Rapport) at the within-trainee between-session level, whereas at the between-trainee level, the SWAI-Brief was better represented by only one general alliance factor of SWA. In this study, the analysis was at the between-trainee level rather than within-trainee between-timepoints level, because we were comparing one trainee to another in terms of how their overall average level of SWA related to their CSE growth pattern and average client symptom improvement.…”