Who’s Multiculturally Competent? Everybody and Nobody: A Multimethod Examination

Abstract

This study was a social dominance theory-driven multimethod investigation of multicultural competence. Given the concerns with self-report, we examined the relationship between study variables and both self-report and performance-based multicultural competence. We also tested competing hypotheses regarding the relationship between the multicultural competence measures. We examined two samples: one of counselor trainees ( N = 93), and one of practicing therapists ( N = 107). The overwhelming performance floor effect in the context of self-report ceiling effects was striking and unexpected in its severity. Awareness of privilege was the most consistent predictor, and the only variable related to most multicultural competence measures. Results related to social dominance orientation, just-world beliefs, and empathy differed by sample. A key finding was the failure by a substantial proportion of participants in both samples to even minimally address clients’ sociocultural context. Thus, we focus our discussion on the implications of this result.

The role of moral reasoning and attitudes regarding bisexuality in the development of bisexual counseling competence.

“…The interrater agreement for the current study was .94 for etiology and .93 for treatment. A number of prior studies have used the MCCA and scoring procedures to assess performance based MCC (e.g., Constantine, 2001a; Constantine, 2001b; Constantine & Ladany, 2000; Spanierman, Poteat, Wang, & Oh, 2008; Wilcox et al, 2020). In support of construct validity, Wilcox and colleagues (2020) recently found positive correlations between the MCCA etiology and treatment scores with awareness of privilege and inverse correlations with a measure of just world beliefs.…”

“…MCC is commonly measured through counselor self-report, supervisor ratings, client ratings, observer ratings (Worthington, Soth-McNett, & Moreno, 2007), or case conceptualization as a type of performance-based assessment (e.g., Calfa, Van Horne Kerne, & McCarthy, 2013; Ladany, Inman, Constantine, & Hofheinz, 1997; Schomburg & Prieto, 2011); however, MCC has most often been operationalized through the use of self-report measures. Although scholars have noted that self-report MCC may be an important construct (particularly as conceptualized as a type of self-efficacy), it also has considerable limitations when used as the only method of assessing MCC (Lantz, Pieterse, & Taylor, 2020; Wilcox, Franks, Taylor, Monceaux, & Harris, 2020; Constantine & Ladany, 2000; Worthington & Dillon, 2011). Still, self-report remains most widely used, which is arguably due to the ease with which self-report measures can be administered as compared to other methods of assessing MCC.…”

The COVID-19 era: How therapists can diminish burnout symptoms through self-care

“…Another such bias is in the presence of clients from different cultural backgrounds than that of the therapist; research indicates that although therapists often feel efficacious while working with these clients, they often fail to attend to their sociopolitical context, and (inadvertently) cause them harm (Johnson et al, 2012 ; Wilcox, Franks, Taylor, Monceaux, & Harris, 2020 ). Thus, speaking to a wide range of multicultural therapists would increase the finer intricacies of navigating discussions when the counselor and counselee do not share the same cultural background.…”

Development and initial validation of the Multicultural Training and Education Questionnaire.

“…As well, it is possible that colorblind racial attitudes do not serve as a useful criterion variable from multicultural training, or at least multicultural training as measured in the present study. As for the MCKAS, scholars have questioned whether self-report multicultural competence measures are measuring competence per se, or rather, self-efficacy (e.g., Constantine, 2000; Constantine et al, 2002; Lantz et al, 2020; Wilcox et al, 2020), and have noted that participants tend to rate themselves highly on self-report measures, even despite limited integration of cultural variables into case conceptualization (Lantz et al, 2020; Monceaux et al, 2020; Wilcox et al, 2020). Thus, self-report measures may not adequately capture participants’ multicultural knowledge, awareness, and skills as originally intended.…”