Date of Award

12-2005

Degree Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy

Major

Psychology

Major Professor

Jacob Levy

Committee Members

Mark Hector, Suzanne Molnar, John Lounsbury, Victor Barr

Abstract

This study assessed the effects of general and specific supervisory feedback on counselors’-in-training ratings of counseling self-efficacy (CSE). Fifty-four students in counseling-related graduate programs from two universities in the southeast and one in the mid-west volunteered as participants. Thirty-seven participants were female (68.5%), 14 were male (25.9%), and three did not indicate their sex (5.6%). Forty out of 54 participants (74.1%) indicated they were Caucasian-American, five were African-American (9.3%), one was Hispanic-American (1.9%), one was Asian-American (1.9%), and three indicated that they were best described as “other” (5.6%). The median number of months of previous clinical supervision for the participants was one month. This study made use of a two-group pretest-posttest design. The independent variable was performance feedback, with two levels (specific and general). The dependent variables included post-test scores on the Counselor Activity Self-Efficacy Scales (CASES; Lent, Hill, & Hoffman, 2003). State anxiety was also assessed with the state scale of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-S; Spielberger, 1982). After completing pretest measures, participants performed a ten-minute mock counseling session with a confederate. After the mock counseling session, the confederate provided either specific feedback or general feedback statements to the participants. Participants then filled out post-test measures. After the measures were collected, participants received an extensive debriefing. The three hypotheses for counseling self efficacy were: (a) there would be a significant difference between the two groups’ counseling self-efficacy scores with participants receiving specific feedback obtaining higher counseling self-efficacy scores; (b) there would be a significant difference between pre- and post-test scores of counseling self-efficacy with the post-test scores being significantly higher than pre-test scores; and (c) while both groups were expected to score similarly in the pre-test measure of counseling self-efficacy, it is predicted that the participants receiving specific feedback reporting higher counseling self-efficacy scores in the post-test measures. There was no difference between counseling self-efficacy scores of participants who received general or specific supervisory feedback. Post-measure counseling self-efficacy scores were significantly higher than the pre-measure scores. There was no group x time interaction. The three hypotheses for anxiety were: (a) there will be a significant difference between the two groups’ anxiety scores with the participants receiving specific supervisory feedback will report significantly less anxiety than those receiving global supervisory feedback; (b) there will be a significant difference between pre- and post-test scores of state anxiety with the post-test scores being significantly lower than pre-test scores; and (c) while both groups are expected to score similarly in the pre-test measure of state anxiety, it is predicted that the participants receiving specific feedback reporting lower state anxiety scores in the post-test measures. There was no difference between anxiety scores of participants who received general or specific supervisory feedback. Post-measure anxiety scores were significantly higher than the pre-measure scores. There was no group x time interaction. Implications and issues to be considered in future research were discussed.

Files over 3MB may be slow to open. For best results, right-click and select "save as..."

Included in

Psychology Commons

Share

COinS