Effects of counseling supervision method and preference on empathic understanding.

Abstract

A supervision analogue was used to determine whether counselor trainees' preference for supervision method affects the outcome of supervision. Subjects were enrolled a counselor education master's program. Two treatment . groups of 8 subjects received supervision according to their preference; two groups of 8 did not. A control group of 8 subjects received no supervision. Supervisory sessions focused on increasing levels of empathic understanding. An analysis of empathy ratings indicated that learning empathy was not contingent upon receiving the preferred mode of supervision. Type of supervision received was a significant factor. Subjects receiving didactic supervision were rated higher levels of empathy than subjects other groups. Interaction effect between supervisor and supervision method was also significant. Little research has been done on the relative effectiveness of different supervisory strategies. The research tnat do,-bs exist has centered around the types, didactic and experiential, which Truax, Carkhuff and Douds (1964) refer to as the primary positions of theorists. The emphasis on cognitive learning is implicit within the didactic model. The strong position ti-2ken by Mazer and Engle (1968) not only supports the value of cognitive emphases, but clearly asserts that the cognitive approach is actually the preferred training method. Clark (1965) likewise stated preference for a pedagogical emphasis supervision by describing counseling supervision as essentially a teaching situation an academic setting. Krasner (1962) and Krumboltz (1967) recommended structuring trainee responses accord with the supervisor's orientation. The proponents of the experiential orientation (e.g. Altucher, 1967; Lister, 1966a; Sanderson, 1954) consider t:le intellectual aspect of supervision secondary to the emotional experience. Significant supervision learning, according to Altucher (1967), occurs in situations where one's feelings are engaged. Sysbers placed import on feeling when he emphasized trust within the supervisory relationship (1963) and encouraged exploration of trainees' need system (1964). Past investigations indicate superv.sor differences exist perceived roles during supervision. A survey by Johnston and Gysbers (1966) revealed that supervisors prefer the sti-ategy of minimally structured discussion a democratic atmosphere. These findings were inconsistent with those of Walz and Poeber (1962), and sharp contrast to the findings of studies reporting supervisees expectations of didactic supervision (Delaney and Moore, 1966; Gysbers and Johnston, 1965). Discrepancir.:s are also apparent when contrasting the findings of Miller and Oettinj (1966), that trainees resist