Reports the retraction of "Do therapists improve in their ability to assess clients' satisfaction? A truth and bias model" by Brian TaeHyuk Keum, Katherine Morales Dixon, Dennis M. Kivlighan Jr., Clara E. Hill and Charles J. Gelso (Journal of Counseling Psychology, 2021[Oct], Vol 68[5], 608-620). The following article (https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000525) is being retracted. This retraction is at the request of coauthors Kivlighan, Hill, and Gelso after the results of an investigation by the University of Maryland Institutional Review Board (IRB). The IRB found that the study included data from between one and four therapy clients of the Maryland Psychotherapy Clinic and Research Laboratory (MPCRL) who either had not been asked to provide consent or had withdrawn consent for their data to be included in the research. Keum and Dixon were not responsible for obtaining and verifying participant consent but agreed to the retraction of this article. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2020-51285-001.) We used the truth and bias model to examine changes in tracking accuracy and under/overestimation (directional bias) on therapists' judgments about clients' satisfaction. We examined 3 factors of clinical experience that could moderate accuracy: (a) overall level of acquaintanceship with a client, operationalized as treatment length (i.e., less or more time seeing a client), (b) time point in therapy with a specific client, operationalized as session number (i.e., earlier or later in treatment with a client), and (c) order (1st client seen, 2nd client seen . . . last client seen across two years of training in a psychology clinic) in which clients were seen. We conducted a three-level hierarchical linear modeling using data on 6054 sessions, nested in 284 adult clients, nested in 41 doctoral student therapists providing open-ended psychodynamic individual psychotherapy. We found that therapists were able to accurately track client-rated session evaluations with less underestimation (i.e., lower tendency to estimate that clients were less satisfied than they actually were) as they gained experience (both treatment length and client order). Furthermore, therapists exhibited greater tracking accuracy gains over the span of shorter treatments and when working with clients earlier in their clinical training. In longer treatments and with clients seen later in training, tracking accuracy was stable and consistent. Implications for research and practice are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

Keum 等人的撤回。 （2021）。


报告撤回了 Brian TaeHyuk Keum、Katherine Morales Dixon、Dennis M. Kivlighan Jr.、Clara E. Hill 和 Charles J. Gelso 撰写的“治疗师是否提高了评估客户满意度的能力？真理与偏见模型”（杂志）咨询心理学，2021年[10月]，第68卷[5]，608-620）。以下文章（https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000525）已被撤回。此次撤回是应合著者 Kivlighan、Hill 和 Gelso 在马里兰大学机构审查委员会 (IRB) 调查结果出来后的要求。 IRB 发现，该研究包含来自马里兰州心理治疗诊所和研究实验室 (MPCRL) 的一到四名治疗客户的数据，这些客户要么没有被要求提供同意，要么已经撤回了将其数据纳入研究的同意。 Keum 和 Dixon 不负责获取和验证参与者的同意，但同意撤回本文。 （原始文章的以下摘要出现在记录 2020-51285-001 中。）我们使用真相和偏差模型来检查治疗师对客户满意度判断的跟踪准确性和低估/高估（方向偏差）的变化。我们检查了可能调节准确性的临床经验的 3 个因素：(a) 与客户的总体熟悉程度，可操作为治疗长度（即见客户的时间更少或更长），(b) 与特定客户进行治疗的时间点，可操作为会话编号（即，与客户治疗的较早或较晚），以及（c）顺序（第一个客户看到的，第二个客户看到的......在心理诊所的两年培训中看到的最后一个客户），其中客户被看见了。 我们使用 6054 个疗程的数据进行了三级分层线性建模，其中包含 284 名成年客户和 41 名提供开放式心理动力学个体心理治疗的博士生治疗师。我们发现，随着经验的积累（治疗时长和客户订单），治疗师能够准确跟踪客户评价的会话评估，并且低估程度较低（即，估计客户比实际情况不太满意的倾向较低）。此外，治疗师在较短的治疗期间以及在临床培训的早期与客户合作时表现出更大的跟踪准确性。在较长的治疗过程中以及在培训后期见到客户时，跟踪准确性是稳定且一致的。讨论了对研究和实践的影响。 （PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2023 APA，保留所有权利）。