Abstract
Patients’ outcome expectancies and the working alliance are two psychotherapy process variables that researchers have found to be associated with treatment outcome, irrespective of treatment approach and problem area. Despite this, little is known about the mechanisms accounting for this association, and whether contextual factors (e.g., psychotherapy type) impact the strength of these relationships. The primary aim of this study was to examine whether patient-rated working alliance quality mediates the relationship between outcome expectancies and pre- to post-treatment change in anxiety symptoms using data from a recent randomized clinical trial comparing a transdiagnostic treatment (the Unified Protocol [UP]; Barlow et al., Unified protocol for transdiagnostic treatment of emotional disorders: Client workbook, Oxford University Press, New York, 2011a; Barlow et al., Unified protocol for transdiagnostic treatment of emotional disorders: Patient workbook. New York: Oxford University Press, 2017b) to single diagnosis protocols (SDPs) for patients with a principal heterogeneous anxiety disorder (n = 179). The second aim was to explore whether cognitive-behavioral treatment condition (UP vs. SDP) moderated this indirect relationship. Results from mediation and moderated mediation models indicated that, when collapsing across the two treatment conditions, the relationship between expectancies and outcome was partially mediated by the working alliance [B = 0.037, SE = 0.05, 95% CI (.005, 0.096)]. Interestingly, within-condition analyses showed that this conditional indirect effect was only present for SDP patients, whereas in the UP condition, working alliance did not account for the association between expectancies and outcome. These findings suggest that outcome expectancies and working alliance quality may interact to influence treatment outcomes, and that the nature and strength of the relationships among these constructs may differ as a function of the specific cognitive-behavioral treatment approach utilized.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 135-145 |
| Number of pages | 11 |
| Journal | Cognitive Therapy and Research |
| Volume | 42 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Apr 1 2018 |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2017, Springer Science+Business Media New York.
Funding
Funding This study was funded by grant R01 MH090053 from the National Institutes of Health. Conflict of Interest Dr. Barlow receives royalties from Oxford University Press (which includes royalties for all five treatment manuals included in this study), Guilford Publications Inc., Cengage Learning, and Pearson Publishing. Grant monies for various projects come from the National Institute of Mental Health, the National Institute of Alcohol and Alcohol Abuse, and Colciencias (Government of Columbia Initiative for Science, Technology, and Health Innovation). Consulting and honoraria during the past several years have come from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, the Foundation for Informed Medical Decision Making, the Department of Defense, the Renfrew Center, the Chinese University of Hong Kong, Universidad Católica de SantaMaria (Arequipa, Peru), New Zealand Psychological Association, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Mayo Clinic, and various American Universities. Shannon Sauer-Zavala, James F. Boswell, Kate H. Bentley, Johanna Thompson-Hollands, Todd J. Farchione declare that they have no conflict of interest. We would like to thank Dr. Michael Constantino for his helpful comments regarding this study and manuscript. This study was funded by grant R01 MH090053 from the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Barlow receives royalties from Oxford University Press (which includes royalties for all five treatment manuals included in this study), Guilford Publications Inc., Cengage Learning, and Pearson Publishing. Grant monies for various projects come from the National Institute of Mental Health, the National Institute of Alcohol and Alcohol Abuse, and Colciencias (Government of Columbia Initiative for Science, Technology, and Health Innovation). Consulting and honoraria during the past several years have come from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, the Foundation for Informed Medical Decision Making, the Department of Defense, the Renfrew Center, the Chinese University of Hong Kong, Universidad Cat?lica de SantaMaria (Arequipa, Peru), New Zealand Psychological Association, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Mayo Clinic, and various American Universities. Shannon Sauer-Zavala, James F. Boswell, Kate H. Bentley, Johanna Thompson-Hollands, Todd J. Farchione declare that they have no conflict of interest.
| Funders | Funder number |
|---|---|
| Guilford Publications Inc. | |
| National Institute of Alcohol and Alcohol Abuse, and Colciencias | |
| National Institutes of Health (NIH) | |
| U.S. Department of Defense | |
| National Institute of Mental Health | |
| National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism | |
| Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality | |
| Mayo Clinic Rochester | |
| Informed Medical Decisions Foundation | |
| Association of American Colleges and Universities | |
| Hebrew University of Jerusalem | |
| Chinese University of Hong Kong |
Keywords
- Cognitive-behavioral therapy
- Mediation
- Outcome expectancies
- Transdiagnostic
- Working alliance
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
- Clinical Psychology