MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2075277266 · doi:10.1037/a0029694

The use of theoretical models in psychology supervisor development research from 1994 to 2010: A systematic review.

2012· article· en· W2075277266 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Keegan K. Barker, John Hunsley

Notice bibliographique

RevueCanadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne · 2012
Typearticle
Langueen
DomainePsychology
ThématiqueCounseling Practices and Supervision
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPsychologyApplied psychologyEpistemologyPsychotherapist

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Training in supervision is becoming an increasingly important component of professional psychology programs. To assist students in developing supervisory competencies, knowledge of relevant research and effective training methods is required and, ideally, such knowledge should be derived from an empirical literature comprising good quality, theory-based research. To evaluate the nature of the empirical literature on supervisor development, a systematic review was conducted to determine the extent to which theoretical models have been used in this literature. Psyclnfo, Medline, CINAHL, and ERIC were searched for articles published between 1994 and 2010. Initially 3,248 abstracts were reviewed, 25 of which met the criteria of being empirical, focused on supervisor development, and having participants with graduate training in counselling or professional psychology. Of these studies, only half drew upon models of supervisory development in the conceptualisation, design, or interpretation of the research study. The most often used model was Watkins' Supervisor Complexity Model (Watkins, 1990, 1993, 1994). Approximately one third of studies examined the influence of past training and experience in supervision on current supervision practices. For competency-based training in supervision to advance, the theoretically informed evidence base needs to be greatly expanded, and much more research is needed that explicitly applies and/or evaluates models of supervisory development.Keywords: practicum supervision, professional supervision, clinical psychology, counselling psychology, systematic reviewClinical supervision has two main purposes: to ensure the integrity of clinical services and to develop service provision competence in the supervisee (Falender & Shafranske, 2004). Although many definitions of clinical supervision have been proposed, Milne's (2007) refinement of Bernard and Goodyear's widely cited work (2004) is the most comprehensive and detailed presented thus far in the literature:The formal provision, (i.e., sanctioned by relevant organisation/s) by senior/qualified health practitioners (or similarly experienced staff), of an intensive education (general problem solving capacity; developing capability) and/or training (competence enhancement) that is casefocused and which supports, directs, and guides (including restorative and/or normative topics, addressed by means of professional methods, including objective monitoring, feedback and evaluation) the work of junior colleagues (supervisees).In Canada, competency in supervision is required for licensure by some provincial or territorial regulatory bodies (see http:// www.cpa.ca/documents/MRA.pdf). Similarly, the American Psychological Association (APA) has stated that clinical supervision should be regarded as a distinct professional competency (American Psychological Association, 2006). Clinical supervision is also recognised as a key component of prelicensure training in Canada, as accreditation of professional psychology graduate programs requires doctoral students to have instruction in clinical supervision, and internship accreditation requires that interns acquire knowledge and skills in supervision (Canadian Psychological Association, 2011). As the provision of supervision is likely to be a component of future practice for many professional psychologists, graduate programs should provide training in supervision that is, ideally, built on a solid evidence base, as is the case in other areas of professional training (Hunsley & Barker, 2011).Current perspectives on graduate training in professional psychology emphasise a competency-based approach, with competency being broadly defined as the knowledge, skills, and values required to practice effectively (Falender et al., 2004). The task for educators, then, is to identify the knowledge, skills, and values that constitute a required competency such as supervision and, further, to effectively train students and professionals to develop the competency. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,041
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,129
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: Méthodes · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Revue systématique · Signal consensuel: Revue systématique
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,959
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,219

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0410,129
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0020,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0060,007
Bibliométrie0,0410,028
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,003
Communication savante0,0050,007
Science ouverte0,0030,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,281
Tête enseignante GPT0,434
Écart entre enseignants0,153 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeRevue systématique
DomaineMéthodes
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations18
Publié2012
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCanadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienneMême sujetCounseling Practices and SupervisionTravaux en français237 207