Therapist affiliation and hostility in cognitive–behavioral therapy with and without motivational interviewing for severe generalized anxiety disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective Although therapist supportive, rather than directive, strategies have been particularly indicated during client resistance, little systematic research has examined how therapists responsively navigate resistance in different therapy approaches and how this responsiveness is related to outcome.Method In the context of disagreement episodes in cognitive–behavioral therapy (CBT) for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD; Westra, H. A., Constantino, M. J., & Antony, M. M. Integrating motivational interviewing with cognitive–behavioral therapy for severe generalized anxiety disorder: An allegiance-controlled randomized clinical trial. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 84(9), 768–782. https://doi.org/10.1037/ccp0000098, 2016), the present study examined (1) the degree to which therapist management of resistance differed between therapists trained in CBT integrated with motivational interviewing (MI-CBT; i.e., training centered on the responsive management of resistance) and therapists trained in CBT-alone, and (2) the impact of specific therapist behaviors during disagreement on client worry outcomes immediately posttreatment and 1-year posttreatment. Episodes of disagreement were rated used the Structural Analysis of Social Behavior (Benjamin, L. S. Structural analysis of social behavior. Psychological Review, 81(5), 392–425. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0037024, 1974).Results Therapists trained in MI-CBT were found to exhibit significantly more affiliative and fewer hostile behaviors during disagreement compared to those trained in CBT-alone; both of these, in turn, were found to mediate client 1-year posttreatment outcomes, such that increased affiliation during disagreement was associated with improved outcomes.Conclusion This study highlights the value of training therapists in the responsive detection and management of resistance, as well as the systematic integration of MI into CBT.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".