Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to examine the reliability and validity of the Rupture Resolution Rating System (3RS), an observer-based measure of alliance ruptures and resolution processes. METHOD: We used the 3RS to rate early sessions from 42 cases of cognitive behavior therapy. We compared the 3RS to a simplified version of the Structural Analysis of Social Behavior (SASB), as well as patient and therapist self-reports of ruptures and the alliance. RESULTS: Coders achieved high rates of interrater reliability on the frequency of confrontation and withdrawal ruptures and resolution strategies (ICCs = .85 to .98), as well as ratings of the therapist's contribution to ruptures and the extent to which ruptures were resolved (ICC = .92). Predictive validity analyses found that confrontation markers (d = .74), successful resolution (d = .67), and ratings of the therapist's contribution to ruptures (d = .61) predicted dropout from therapy. Analyses of convergent validity with the SASB failed to meet predictions; however, we observed theoretically coherent relations between 3RS and SASB variables. Confrontation rupture markers were significantly associated with patient self-report of rupture (d = 1.54) and therapist self-reported alliance (r = -.50, p = .002). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that the 3RS is a reliable and useful tool for examining psychotherapy process and predicting dropout. Clinical or methodological significance of this article: This study provides evidence of the reliability and validity of the 3RS, an observer-based measure of alliance ruptures and resolution processes. The 3RS can be used to identify problems in the therapeutic relationship that are associated with premature dropout from therapy.
Eubanks et al. (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: