Reports the retraction of "The triadic effect: Associations among the supervisory working alliance, therapeutic working alliance, and therapy session evaluation" by Judith A. Gerstenblith, Kathryn V. Kline, Clara E. Hill and Dennis M. Kivlighan Jr. (Journal of Counseling Psychology, 2022[Mar], Vol 69[2], 199-210). The following article is being retracted (https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000567). This retraction is at the request of coauthors Kivlighan and Hill 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Maryland Psychotherapy Clinic and Research Laboratory (MPCRL) who either had not been asked to provide consent or had withdrawn consent for their data to be included in the research. Gerstenblith and Kline 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 2021-88607-001.) Several theorists (Bandura, 1969; Hackney & Goodyear, 1984; Searles, 1955) suggest parallels between the relationship in supervision and the relationship in therapy. We examined supervisor and therapist trainee ratings of supervisory working alliance (SWA) in 1 week predicting client-rated therapeutic working alliance (TWA) and client-rated therapy session evaluation (TSE) in the following week as well as TWA and TSE ratings in 1 week predicting SWA ratings in the following week. Our data included 663 weeks of therapy nested within 28 trainees nested within 15 supervisors, disaggregated into differences between supervisors, differences within supervisors, and differences within trainees. At the between-supervisor level, when supervisors' trainees rated the SWA higher on average compared with other supervisors' trainees' average SWA ratings, their clients' average TWA rating was higher. In contrast, when supervisors rated the SWA higher on average compared with other supervisors' average SWA ratings, their trainees' clients' average TSE rating was higher but the average TWA rating was lower. At the within-supervisor level, when trainees rated a higher SWA on average compared with other trainees' average SWA ratings with the same supervisor, their clients' average TSE rating was higher. The theoretical prediction of parallel relationships in supervision and therapy was supported, but only for between-supervisor and within-supervisor differences in SWA. We found no evidence that week-to-week changes in SWA or client-rated TWA or TSE reflected parallel relationships. We provide suggestions for further research, including exploring the mechanisms through which supervision relates to the therapy process and outcome. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

Gerstenblith 等人撤回。 （2022）。


报告撤回了 Judith A. Gerstenblith、Kathryn V. Kline、Clara E. Hill 和 Dennis M. Kivlighan Jr. 撰写的“三元效应：监督工作联盟、治疗工作联盟和治疗会话评估之间的关联”（Journal of咨询心理学，2022年[三月]，第69卷[2]，199-210）。以下文章已被撤回（https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000567）。此次撤回是应合著者 Kivlighan 和 Hill 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。 Gerstenblith 和 Kline 不负责获取和验证参与者的同意，但同意撤回本文。 （以下原文章摘要出现在记录 2021-88607-001 中。）一些理论家（Bandura，1969；Hackney & Goodyear，1984；Searles，1955）提出监督关系与治疗关系之间的相似之处。我们检查了 1 周内督导工作联盟 (SWA) 的督导师和治疗师实习生评分，预测下周客户评价的治疗工作联盟 (TWA) 和客户评价的治疗会话评估 (TSE)，以及 1 周内的 TWA 和 TSE 评级。周预测 SWA 下周收视率。我们的数据包括 28 名受训者和 15 名督导员的 663 周治疗，分为督导员之间的差异、督导员内部的差异和受训者内部的差异。 在主管之间的层面上，当主管的学员对 SWA 的平均评分高于其他主管的学员的平均 SWA 评级时，其客户的平均 TWA 评级也较高。相反，当主管对 SWA 的平均评级高于其他主管的平均 SWA 评级时，其学员客户的平均 TSE 评级较高，但平均 TWA 评级较低。在主管内部层面，当受训者的平均 SWA 评级高于同一主管的其他受训者的平均 SWA 评级时，其客户的平均 TSE 评级也较高。支持监督和治疗中平行关系的理论预测，但仅限于 SWA 中监督者之间和监督者内部的差异。我们没有发现任何证据表明 SWA 或客户评价的 TWA 或 TSE 的每周变化反映了平行关系。我们为进一步研究提供建议，包括探索监督与治疗过程和结果相关的机制。 （PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2023 APA，保留所有权利）。