Supervising Couple and Family Therapy Practitioners

Rigazio‐DiGilio, Sandra A.

doi:10.1002/9781118846360.ch30

Cited by 6 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 74 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For the developmental and social role metaperspective models, some uniqueness of vision is also evident (Bernard & Goodyear, 2014; Watkins & Milne, 2014). For example, Stoltenberg et al’s (2014) developmental view gives emphasis to therapist developmental stages and their practice implications, whereas Rigazio-DiGilio’s (2014) systemic cognitive–developmental supervision is a nonstage model that instead accentuates cognitive learning orientations and their flexible therapeutic utilization. Bernard’s (1997; Bernard & Goodyear, 2014) discrimination model emphasizes three supervisor roles—counselor, consultant, and teacher—as primary, whereas Holloway’s (2014) systems approach to supervision emphasizes five supervisor functions and five tasks.…”

Section: Extrapolating the Wampold/budge Psychotherapy Relationship M...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Common and specific factors converging in psychotherapy supervision: A supervisory extrapolation of the Wampold/Budge psychotherapy relationship model.

Watkins¹,

Budge²,

Callahan³

2015

Journal of Psychotherapy Integration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, a common and specific factors model of how the psychotherapy supervision relationship contributes to supervisee learning is proposed. Reasoning by analogy (Milne, 2006), the Wampold/ Budge (2012;Budge & Wampold, 2015) psychotherapy relationship model is extrapolated to psychotherapy supervision. We propose a convergence of supervision common and specific factors that emphasizes: (a) the importance of initial supervisor-supervisee alliance bond formation and its maintenance (involving the supervisee's trust for and recognized expertise of the supervisor), and (b) 3 relationship pathways by which supervisee change occurs. Those 3 change pathways are: (a) the supervisor-supervisee real relationship (involving professional attachment, belongingness, and social connection), (b) the supervisor's creation of expectations about the supervision process and implementation of some form of supervision (providing a framework for supervision understanding and enactment of that framework), and (c) the supervisee's participation in facilitative educational actions (where experimenting and refinement beget further experimenting and refinement). When operating in "good enough" fashion, the 3 pathways and supervisory bond converge to produce 3 general supervision outcomes: (a) reduction of supervisee anxiety, shame, and self-doubt; (b) therapist identity development; and (c) therapist skill/competence development. At least 2 learning mechanisms are involved in making those supervisee outcomes possible: (a) exposure and (b) reorganization. This combination of common and specific factors captures potent factors of learning liberation that become actualized in the supervision situation.

show abstract