EFFECTIVE PSYCHOTHERAPY SUPERVISION AS PERCEIVED BY PSYCHOLOGY INTERNS

This study investigated the existence of developmental levels in the training of psychotherapists, and attempted to identify relevant variables in effective supervision at the internship stage. The subjects of this investigation were volunteer interns and intern supervisors solicited, with the permission of each director of training, from thirteen internship sites in the Baltimore, Md.-Washington, D.C. area, over two internship years. The study was conducted anonymously and no participants' names were known to the investigator, nor to the training sites. This study was based on research by Worthington and Roehlke (1979), carried out on 31 practicum students and 16 practicum supervisors, concerning supervisor behaviors correlated with positive evaluation of supervision. In the present investigation their data were compared to a sample of 48 psychology interns and 77 intern supervisors. The same list of 42 behaviors, in the same form, was used in both studies. Trainees were asked to rate the behaviors according to use by their supervisors. These ratings were correlated with their ratings of supervision, using "satisfaction," "supervisor competence," and "amount of improvement" as the criteria, in order to obtain a ranked order of the behaviors as they related to supervisor effectiveness. Supervisors rated the same behaviors on the basis of how essential they felt each was to good supervision. Rankings of each group (interns, intern supervisors, practicum students, and practicum supervisors) were compared to determine the significance of differences between them. The second part of the research used only the interns and intern supervisors. An additional set of questions was developed for this study concerned with supervisor characteristics: experience, time talking in supervision, and specific foci of supervisory sessions. These were correlated with each other and with intern evaluation of supervision, using the three criteria just described. Intern evaluation of supervision was also correlated with felt increase in specific skills. There were eleven hypotheses tested, of which four pertained to the question of developmental level. The existence of different supervisory needs according to the stage of training was not directly substantiated by the method used, though results were not wholly negative. The intern and practicum supervisors had clearly differentiated ideas about essential supervisory behaviors for their particular trainee groups, and both were more congruent with the interns' needs than with the practicum students. From the exploration of variables related to effective intern supervision, there were no findings that supervisor experience or talk time were related to each other or to evaluation of supervision. Placement site was also not relevant. A high ranking by the supervisor for "discussing personal issues" was significantly related to intern positive evaluation of supervision. The other significant variables were "felt increase" in specific skills, particularly inner growth rather than increased cognitive grasp. The sample of intern supervisors was found to be relatively homogeneous across disciplines, setting and theoretical differences, focusing on informational, case-specific content, and support. Though there was agreement of content area among intern supervisors these areas did not correlate significantly with intern evaluation of supervisory effectiveness. The findings were presented for evaluation, and discussion of the relevance of prior research was included. Suggestions for further investigations were made, and implications for supervisory practice were considered.