Enhancing Therapeutic Processes in Videoconferencing Psychotherapy: Interview Study of Psychologists’ Technological Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic caused a surge in the use of telehealth platforms. Psychologists have shifted from face-to-face sessions to videoconference sessions. Therefore, essential information that is easily obtainable via in-person sessions may be missing. Consequently, therapeutic work could be compromised. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the videoconference psychotherapy (VCP) experiences of psychologists around the world. Furthermore, we aimed to identify technological features that may enhance psychologists' therapeutic work through augmented VCP. METHODS: In total, 17 psychologists across the world (n=7, 41% from Australia; n=1, 6% from England; n=5, 29% from Italy; n=1, 6% from Mexico; n=1, 6% from Spain; and n=2, 12% from the United States) were interviewed. We used thematic analysis to examine the data collected from a sample of 17 psychologists. We applied the Chaos Theory to interpret the system dynamics and collected details about the challenges posed by VCP. For collecting further information about the technology and processes involved, we relied on the Input-Process-Output (IPO) model. RESULTS: The analysis resulted in the generation of 9 themes (input themes: psychologists' attitude, trust-reinforcing features, reducing cognitive load, enhancing emotional communication, and engaging features between psychologists and patients; process themes: building and reinforcing trust, decreasing cognitive load, enhancing emotional communication, and increasing psychologist-patient engagement) and 19 subthemes. Psychologists found new strategies to deal with VCP limitations but also reported the need for more technical control to facilitate therapeutic processes. The suggested technologies (eye contact functionality, emergency call functionality, screen control functionality, interactive interface with other apps and software, and zooming in and out functionality) could enhance the presence and dynamic nature of the therapeutic relationship. CONCLUSIONS: Psychologists expressed a desire for enhanced control of VCP sessions. Psychologists reported a decreased sense of control within the therapeutic relationship owing to the influence of the VCP system. Great control of the VCP system could better approximate the critical elements of in-person psychotherapy (eg, observation of body language). To facilitate improved control, psychologists would like technology to implement features such as improved eye contact, better screen control, emergency call functionality, ability to zoom in and out, and an interactive interface to communicate with other apps. These results contribute to the general perception of the computer as an actual part of the VCP process. Thus, the computer plays a key role in the communication, rather than remaining as a technical medium. By adopting the IPO model in the VCP environment (VCP-IPO model), the relationship experience may help psychologists have more control in their VCP sessions.
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 | 0.011 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".