Search

The authors make the case for using a written instead of a spoken supervision agreement at supervision's outset in order to provide clarity and education about supervision, supply an accessible document that supervisees can readily reference, sidestep memory issues that negatively affect the supervision process, and enable dyadic collaboration that sets an immediate positive tone for supervision. The invitational, clarifying, educational, empowering, and transparent (ICEE-T) supervision agreement approach is described, with emphasis on the essential elements to put in place at the outset of supervision. A written agreement, which is valuable at any supervisee developmental stage, can be invaluable when working with novice supervisees (e.g., because of the anxieties and self-doubt of first-time supervisees) and is explored with that group foremost in mind., Competing Interests: The authors report no financial relationships with commercial interests.

How do psychotherapy supervisors most effectively integrate issues and concerns about multiculturalism and social justice (MSJ) into the supervisory experience? Concrete examples of how to best address this integration are needed, and this article provides one such example. The authors propose multicultural streaming as one approach to orient supervisees about, and prepare them for, incorporation of MSJ matters into group supervision and to foster their evolving sense of culturally humble practice. This article defines multicultural streaming, presents a plan for its implementation at the group's outset, and identifies implementation guideposts for consideration. A set of cultural humility guidelines adapted for group supervision is also proposed for group facilitation. This perspective is presented with the hope of generating further discussion about integrating MSJ issues into the group supervisory experience.

Objective: The objective of this review was to answer the question, What do supervisors actually do in promoting transformative change in the beginning therapist supervisee? New therapist trainees, lacking treatment skills and a sense of "therapist identity," are prone to experience self-doubt, feel anxious and demoralized, and think of themselves as impostors. Psychotherapy supervision can be helpful and encouraging to beginning therapists in their process of development., Methods: Using Mälkki and Green's concepts of liminality, edge emotions, and boundary confusion as framework, the author examines the pivotal role of the supervisor in striving to create a transformative supervision space., Results: The author identifies and elaborates on three transformative streams of supervisory action-to anchor and ground, to educate and facilitate, and to liberate and emancipate. The constituents of each action stream are also identified., Conclusions: Psychotherapy supervisors serve foremost as agents of transformation, their chief objective being to actuate and actualize a transformative process of therapist development. The crucial processes by which supervisors achieve that transformative objective reside in the three streams of supervisory action. Accordingly, psychotherapy supervision is best conceptualized as a transformative learning pedagogy.

Although recognized as highly crucial to supervision practice (e.g., Tummala-Narra, 2004), culture has been addressed minimally in the psychoanalytic supervision literature. Calls to remedy that limitation have been made and making culture matter has been identified as a most pressing need for psychoanalytic supervision. But how then do we as supervisors go about doing that? How might we better position culture in, and make culture central to, our psychoanalytic supervisory conceptualization and conduct? We subsequently take up those questions, expanding upon our earlier proposals about cultural humility and the Cultural Third (Watkins and Hook, 2016) by (a) proposing a tripartite multicultural perspective (i.e., cultural humility-cultural comfort-cultural opportunities) as supervision sine qua non; (b) using recognition theory as a way to better understand that very process of Third creation and elaboration; and (c) providing a rupture/repair case example that shows efforts to create and build the Cultural Third in supervision. The Cultural Third is conceptualized as a product of doers-doing with so as to culturally learn together through "not knowing".

As a complement to multicultural competence, the multicultural orientation (MCO) perspective has been proposed as a pragmatic way to enhance cultural understandings about psychotherapeutic dynamics, processes, and outcomes. Consisting of three core components-cultural humility, cultural comfort, and cultural opportunities-the MCO is considered relevant for both individual and group treatment. However, the MCO perspective has yet to be specifically applied to psychotherapy supervision. Because supervision often provides multicultural oversight for individual and group psychotherapy services, considering the ramifications of MCO for psychotherapy supervision (MCO-S) is important. In this article, the implications of MCO-S are reviewed, with attention given to the impacts of cultural humility, cultural comfort, and cultural opportunities on the supervisor-supervisee relationship. Case examples are provided to illustrate the ways in which MCO can affect the psychotherapy supervision process and outcome. Supervision research possibilities are also proposed.

Adapting the therapeutic pyramid to the supervision of psychotherapy, the author presents and describes the supervision pyramid-a simple meta-model of the broad conceptual organizers of the supervisor's contribution to the experience and outcomes of supervision. The supervision pyramid consists of three commonalities: supervisor skills and interventions, the supervisory relationship, and the supervisor's person and personhood. Those three commonalities converge to stimulate supervisee learning and relearning and client improvement and symptom reduction. The implications of this meta-model for supervision conceptualization and conduct and for supervisor training are briefly described.

Just as the analyst's self-perspective is critical to effective analytic process, the supervisor's self-perspective is accordingly critical to effective supervision process. But the supervisor's self-perspective has received virtually no attention as a listening/experiencing perspective in the psychoanalytic supervision literature. In this paper, the author defines the supervisor's self-perspective and considers five ways by which it contributes to an effective supervisory process: (1) sharing one's own impressions of/reactions to patients; (2) sharing personal disclosures about the supervisee-patient relationship; (3) sharing personal disclosures about the supervisee as a developing analytic therapist; (4) sharing personal disclosures about the supervisor-supervisee relationship; and (5) using one's own self-reflection as a check and balance for supervisory action. The supervisor's self-perspective provides the missing supervisory voice in the triadic complement of subject-other-self, has the potential to be eminently educative across the treatment/supervision dyads, and serves as a prototype for the supervisee's own development and use of analytic (or analyst) self-perspective.

As a core component of multicultural orientation, cultural humility can be considered an important attitude for clinical supervisees to adopt and practically implement. How can cultural humility be most meaningfully incorporated in supervision? In what ways can supervisors stimulate the development of a culturally humble attitude in our supervisees? We consider those questions in this paper and present a model for addressing cultural humility in clinical supervision. The primary focus is given to two areas: (a) modeling and teaching of cultural humility through interpersonal interactions in supervision, and (b) teaching cultural humility through outside activities and experiences. Two case studies illustrating the model are presented, and a research agenda for work in this area is outlined.

What are the critical components of reflective supervision? In this commentary, I offer a complementary perspective on A.M. Tomlin, D.J. Weatherston, and T. Pavkov's (2014) seminal study about that very question. I consider their findings within the context of what we now know about the supervisory alliance-a highly robust, heuristic, and eminently practical construct that appears to capture the spirit of reflection, collaboration, and regularity at its best. Matters of alliance theory, practice, and research are briefly addressed, and effort is made to consider the implications of the supervisory alliance as fundamental, foundational, and quintessentially organizational for reflective supervision practice., (© 2015 Michigan Association for Infant Mental Health.)

What is signature pedagogy in psychoanalytic education? This paper examines that question, considering why psychoanalytic supervision best deserves that designation. In focusing on supervision as signature pedagogy, I accentuate its role in building psychoanalytic habits of mind, habits of hand, and habits of heart, and transforming theory and self-knowledge into practical product. Other facets of supervision as signature pedagogy addressed in this paper include its features of engagement, uncertainty, formation, and pervasiveness, as well as levels of surface, deep, and implicit structure. Epistemological, ontological, and axiological in nature, psychoanalytic supervision engages trainees in learning to do, think, and value what psychoanalytic practitioners in the field do, think, and value: It is, most fundamentally, professional preparation for competent, "good work." In this paper, effort is made to shine a light on and celebrate the pivotal role of supervision in "making" or developing budding psychoanalysts and psychoanalytic psychotherapists. Now over a century old, psychoanalytic supervision remains unparalleled in (1) connecting and integrating conceptualization and practice, (2) transforming psychoanalytic theory and self-knowledge into an informed analyzing instrument, and (3) teaching, transmitting, and perpetuating the traditions, practice, and culture of psychoanalytic treatment.

What are some of the most recent, cutting-edge developments and innovations in psychotherapy supervision? And what is their particular significance for supervision now and into its future? In this special supervision issue of the American Journal of Psychotherapy, those questions are considered, and some compelling answers are provided. In what follows, I introduce this special journal issue: (a) define supervision and indicate its purposes; (b) summarize the contents of each innovative paper; and (c) accentuate the significance of each presented development/innovation. The papers contained in this issue boldly speak to supervision's future and provide exciting--and highly profitable--directions to pursue in forever making psychotherapy supervision a far more anchored, accountable, and educational experience.

What are some of the most pressing needs currently confronting clinical supervision? In this paper, I give attention to that question. Drawing on two 1990 reviews for comparative purposes, I examine where supervision is now relative to four areas: (a) supervision training and practice; (b) measurement; (c) difference and diversity; and (d) research. Lines of advance, pressing needs, and potential remedies are considered across each area. Effort is made to accentuate the "robustly international" nature of clinical supervision and its increasing globalization.

Over the course of psychotherapy supervision history, the supervisor-supervisee alliance has increasingly emerged as a variable of preeminent importance in the conceptualization and conduct of the supervision experience: It has come to be embraced as the very heart and soul of supervision. But after a half century, what evidence do we actually have to justify that highly favorable outlook afforded to the alliance? What do we really know about the supervisory alliance? What do we need to know about it? As we mark the first 50 years of supervisory alliance and look toward its future, I thought it might be useful to examine those questions and provide a current status report about the construct itself In what follows, I (a) describe the two supervisory alliance visions that have been (and remain) dominant in the supervision literature and (b) provide a review of 20 plus years of supervision alliance research. While the supervisory alliance has accumulated solid clinical support, its empirical support appears to be more tentative and less robust. I consider why that is so, identify some missing elements in the alliance research conducted thus far and propose possible remedies to move inquiry in this area forward.

Psychoanalytic supervision is moving well into its 2nd century of theory, practice, and (to a limited extent) research. In this paper, I take a look at the pioneering first efforts to define psychoanalytic supervision and its importance to the psychoanalytic education process. Max Eitingon, the "almost forgotten man" of psychoanalysis, looms large in any such consideration. His writings or organizational reports were seemingly the first psychoanalytic published material to address the following supervision issues: rationale, screening, notes, responsibility, supervisee learning/personality issues, and the extent and length of supervision itself. Although Eitingon never wrote formally on supervision, his pioneering work in the area has continued to echo across the decades and can still be seen reflected in contemporary supervision practice. I also recognize the role of Karen Horney-one of the founders of the Berlin Institute and Poliklinik, friend of Eitingon, and active, vital participant in Eitingon's efforts-in contributing to and shaping the beginnings of psychoanalytic education.

More than 40 years ago eminent psychiatrist Richard Chessick penned a classic, highly prescient psychotherapy supervision paper (that appeared in this journal) in which he identified for supervisors the crucial triad of learning difficulties that tend to confront beginning therapists in their training. These are (a) dealing with the anxiety attendant to the development of psychological mindedness; (b) developing a psychotherapist identity; and (c) developing conviction about the meaningfulness of psychodynamics and psychotherapy. In this paper, I would like to revisit Chessick's seminal contribution about the teaching and learning of psychotherapy and extrapolate his triad of learning difficulties to the process of teaching and learning supervision. The process of being and becoming a psychotherapist has been likened to a developmental journey, and similarly being and becoming a supervisor is increasingly recognized as a developmental journey that is best stimulated by means of didactic and practical experiences (i.e., supervision coursework, seminars, or workshops and the supervision of supervision). In what follows, I would like to explore how Chessick's crucial triad of learning difficulties can be meaningfully extrapolated to and used to inform the supervision training situation. In extrapolating Chessick's triad, beginning supervisors or supervisor trainees can be conceptualized as confronting three critical issues: (a) dealing with the anxiety and demoralization attendant to the development of supervisory mindedness; (b) developing a supervisory identity; and (c) developing conviction about the meaningfulness of psychotherapy supervision. This triadic conceptualization appears to capture nicely core concerns that extend across the arc of the supervisor development process and provides a useful and usable way of thinking about supervisor training and informing it. Each component of the triadic conceptualization is described, and some supervisor education intervention possibilities are considered.

What role does the real relationship play in psychoanalytic supervision? While the real relationship's role has long been and continues to be considered with regard to psychoanalysis, it has received virtually no attention in the supervision literature. In this paper, using Horney's construct of the real self as conceptual anchor, I attempt to: (1) situate the real relationship squarely within the borders of the psychoanalytic supervision relationship; (2) examine the relevance of real relationship phenomena for the supervision experience; (3) provide some simple, ordinary yet meaningful examples of case dialogue that illustrate moments of real relationship in supervision; and (4) introduce the concept of real relationship rupture and consider its potential ramifications for and impact upon the supervisor-supervisee relationship. Just as ruptures can occur in the supervisory alliance, I propose that ruptures can also transpire in the supervisory real relationship, have the potential to reverberate throughout the entirety of the supervision experience, and depending upon how they are handled, can prove either constructive and relationally energizing and enlivening or enervating and eviscerating to supervision process and outcome.

In a way not done before, Tracey, Bludworth, and Glidden-Tracey ("Are there parallel processes in psychotherapy supervision: An empirical examination," Psychotherapy, 2011, advance online publication, doi.10.1037/a0026246) have shown us that parallel process in psychotherapy supervision can indeed be rigorously and meaningfully researched, and their groundbreaking investigation provides a nice prototype for future supervision studies to emulate. In what follows, I offer a brief complementary comment to Tracey et al., addressing one matter that seems to be a potentially important conceptual and empirical parallel process consideration: When is a parallel just a parallel?, (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved.)

What do we know clinically and empirically about the education of psychotherapy supervisors? In this paper, I attempt to address that question by: (1) reviewing briefly current thinking about psychotherapy supervisor training; and (2) examining the available research where supervisor training and supervision have been studied. The importance of such matters as training format and methods, supervision topics for study, supervisor development, and supervisor competencies are considered, and some prototypical, competency-based supervisor training programs that hold educational promise are identified and described. Twenty supervisor training studies are critiqued, and their implications for practice and research are examined. Based on this review of training programs and research, the following conclusions are drawn: (1) the clinical validity of supervisor education appears to be strong, solid, and sound, (2) although research suggests that supervisor training can have value in stimulating the development of supervisor trainees and better preparing them for the supervisory role, any such base of empirical support or validity should be regarded as tentative at best; and (3) the most formidable challenge for psychotherapy supervisor education may well be correcting the imbalance that currently exists between clinical and empirical validity and "raising the bar" on the rigor, relevance, and replicability of future supervisor training research.

The psychotherapy supervisor's development (i.e., the unfolding process of growth in being and becoming a supervisor) has long been considered a substantive issue in clinical supervision. Theory and clinical wisdom suggest that supervisors' level of development can have a significant and far-reaching impact on the supervision experience, potentially affecting supervisory alliance formation, in-session conceptualization and strategy utilization, and even the outcomes experienced by both supervisees and patients. Consensus seems to be that there is a critical need for empirical study of psychotherapy supervisor development. But with a generation of theory and research on psychotherapy supervisor development behind us, what do we know (or not know); where does this area of inquiry stand today, and what do we need to know about supervisor development going forward? In this paper, I attempt to address those questions. I examine the last 30-year period (approximately) of supervisor development theory, measurement, and quantitative and qualitative study; provide a contemporary status report of sorts on this subject; and identify some important matters for research and practical consideration. Despite a generation of inquiry, the psychotherapy supervisor still remains the largely unknown party in the supervision experience. But that long-standing reality can be changed, some possibilities for doing so are presented, and the promise of supervisor development study is seen to be an ever-inviting hope that awaits realization.

While a growing body of empirical data attests increasingly to the efficacy of psychoanalytic treatment, what data do we have that attests to the effectiveness of psychoanalytic education? In this comment on Damsa et al. (2010), I briefly address that question and suggest that-if we are to truly generate passionate interest in psychoanalysis among psychiatric residents and other mental health professionals in training-perhaps we need to begin by researching the largely unresearched process of psychoanalytic education and supervision.

The psychoanalytic supervision relationship is examined as a tripartite phenomenon, comprised of the supervisory alliance, transference-countertransference configuration, and real relationship. While most supervisory analysts would readily acknowledge that a real (or personal) relationship element exists in analytic supervision, that facet of the supervision relationship has not routinely been incorporated into considerations of psychoanalytic supervision. In this vision of supervision, real relationship, supervisory alliance, and transference-countertransference configuration are presented as integral and complementary constructs that define psychoanalytic supervision. Each of those three components is examined briefly with regard to its beginnings, evolution, and contemporary status; each component is also considered from an empirical perspective. While we have a growing quantitative and qualitative research foundation that supports psychoanalytic practice, psychoanalytic supervision has largely been ignored as a subject and object of scientific study. Supervisory alliance, transference-countertransference configuration, and real relationship are explored as research ready variables. Some clinical hypotheses--eminently testable and worthy of investigation--are proposed with regard to each component of the model, and some ideas--albeit tentative and preliminary--about how to initiate such inquiries are offered., (© 2011 N.P.A.P.)

While the real relationship has long been addressed in psychoanalysis and psychotherapy, the matter of the real relationship in psychotherapy supervision has yet to receive any attention. Ample supervisory focus has indeed been given to the working alliance and transference-countertransference configuration (including parallel processes), but after a century of psychotherapy supervision, any mention whatsoever of real relationship phenomena is absent. In this paper, the following hypotheses are proposed: The real relationship (1) is a crucial component of the supervision relationship that has transtheoretical implications; (2) exists from the moment supervision begins until its end; (3) is the forever silent yet forever substantive contributor to supervisory process and outcome; (4) exerts a significant impact on (a) the development and establishment of the supervisory working alliance and (b) the unfolding and eventual utilization of the transference-countertransference experience in the supervisory situation; (5) consists of at least two dimensions in supervision--realism and genuineness--that vary along valence and magnitude continua (building on the works of Greenson and Gelso), and (6) deserves a place of eminence equal to the working alliance and transference-countertransference configuration if supervision theory, practice, and research are to be most fully informed. The possibility of using recent real relationship research in psychotherapy as a prototype to inform future research in supervision is presented, and two case examples are provided to illustrate the seeming power of real relationship phenomena in psychotherapy supervision.

The characterological resistance of the psychotherapy supervisor to engage in authentic relatedness with psychotherapy supervisees is examined. Three types of supervisor resistances are considered: Autonomy based, shame based, and narcissism based. These resistances are placed within a developmental context and are viewed as particularly problematic for supervisors new to the role of supervising. While these resistances can subside over time, they still have a decidedly negative impact on the supervision experience and can restrain supervisee learning and growth as a therapist. Self-analysis, psychotherapy, psychotherapy supervision coursework, and the supervision of supervision are presented as methods by which supervisor characterological resistances can be attacked.

While the constructs of the working alliance, parallel process, and countertransference have long had transtheoretical appeal for many supervision practitioners, what empirical data--quantitative or qualitative--are there that support their use in psychotherapy supervision? In this paper, I attempt to address that question by: (1) identifying empirical, data-based efforts to research the supervisory working alliance (n = 17), parallel process (n = 7), and countertransference (n = 1); (2) reviewing and determining for each study sample characteristics, measures used, procedure, analyses used, findings, and limitations; (3) identifying the primary conclusions that can be drawn from that review and analysis; and (4) considering the implications and directions for future supervision research and practice. While the data appear strongest for the supervisory working alliance and tentatively support its place in psychotherapy supervision, research on alliance, parallel process, and countertransference is still very much in its infancy and sorely limited empirically. Some avenues for remedying previous study deficiencies are presented, and the hope and caution of future research on these constructs are considered.

This study explored whether a relationship exists between anger among Black adolescents that has been provoked by racial discrimination, and alcohol consumption. Participants consisted of 134 Black adolescents from 14 to 18 years of age, residing in northeast Texas. All participants were administered a questionnaire measuring whether and the extent to which they might be dependent upon alcohol, a background information questionnaire which included questions about their drinking pattern, and a measure designed to assess the extent to which they feel angry either because they had been discriminated against or observed other Blacks being discriminated against or observed other Blacks being discriminated against in various situations. Only gender was found to be predictive of scores on the dependency scale. However gender, age, and racial discrimination anger scores were found to be predictive of the amount of alcohol consumed by the participants. Some implications for theory, research, and intervention are suggested.

What does the future hold with regard to psychotherapy training? We posed that question to experts representing three important therapeutic approaches: Psychodynamic, Experiential, and Eclectic. In what follows we introduce this special section, provide our rationale for putting it together, and briefly highlight some interesting, substantive points made in the subsequent papers.

As a professional and educational service, psychotherapy supervision looms large in importance. Yet if psychotherapy supervision is to most viably advance in the century ahead, a number of pressing measurement, research, and training/practice needs cry out to be better addressed. Ten such needs are identified by drawing on recent major research reviews and other substantive supervision publications. The author concludes that better addressing these needs would expand and fortify the empirical base of psychotherapy supervision and also enhance its training and practice base.

This paper identifies and discusses 10 broad-based themes or conclusions that could be drawn about the field of psychotherapy supervision now. These conclusions focus on various facets of clinical supervision theory, research, and practice; in so doing, they bring to light current supervision issues, problems, advances, and needs that seemingly merit our attention and consideration.

Corresponding to the four stages of the SCM, supervision environments/behaviors--which could be used to guide thinking about the supervision of psychotherapy supervisor trainees--have been proposed and described. The supervision environments are designed to match the particular needs of psychotherapy supervisors at the four SCM stages. From this presented conceptualization, the reader can see that the supervision of psychotherapy supervisor trainees proceeds through (1) an initial period where a strong, secure "hold" and direct instruction, teaching, and structure are needed, to (2) a period where a continued but loosened "hold" and continued but lessened instruction, teaching, and structure are needed, to (3) a period where an even greater loosening occurs and a shift to more of a collegiate/collaborative stance evolves, to (4) a period where a collegiate/collaborative stance totally predominates.

The growth of the psychotherapy supervisor has been a much neglected topic in the clinical supervision literature. In an effort to better address this area, a four-stage model of development through which psychotherapy supervisors generally are thought to pass has been proposed. To further flesh out this model and render its substance more explicit, this paper complements the earlier explication by (a) providing basic foundation material that supports and underlies it and (b) providing additional material that extends it. The concepts, assumptions, and hypotheses of the Supervisor Complexity Model (SCM) have been identified and delineated. Some attention has also been given to how research on the SCM might best proceed. Specifying the model in this way seems important if it is to be subject to further professional scrutiny (so that refinements/revisions in it can be made), if it is to be rendered most researchable as a heuristic paradigm, if it is to be more solidly grounded within a developmental framework, and if it is to ultimately inform supervision practice.

Of the different approaches to interpreting early memories (EMs), Adlerian-oriented EM research comparatively has shown a most substantial increase in the past 10 years. I examine all Adlerian-oriented EM research appearing from 1981 through 1990. The majority of the research provides a tentative base of support for Adler's (1931) views about EMs. However, several deficiencies in these investigations are identified (e.g., a lack of pilot studies), and some recommendations are made for future EM studies.

Fifty mentally retarded adults were administered the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised (WAIS-R) on two separate occasions, with the mean amount of time between testings being 2 years, 8 months. The data were examined in an effort to study the test-retest reliability and stability of the WAIS-R with the mentally retarded. Based on correlational, t-value and percentage of scale score change information, the authors concluded that the WAIS-R IQs appeared to possess good test-retest reliability and stability over an approximate 2.5 year period for the present sample of mentally retarded adults.

This study compared two different interpretation styles (tentative and absolute), two levels of subjects' reactance (high and low), and gender on the counselor's social influence, willingness to see the counselor, willingness to help, ability to help, and subjects' anger. No significant main effects or interaction were found for the counselor's social influence, but men in contrast to women perceived the counselor as more willing to help and indicated that they were more willing to see the portrayed counselor. Highly reactant subjects were more willing to see the counselor when absolute interpretations were used; they also thought the counselor was more willing to help when absolute interpretations were used, whereas low reactant subjects thought the counselor was more willing to help when tentative interpretations were used. Mixed results were found for subjects' anger.

The preparation of psychotherapy supervisors to provide supervision services is examined briefly in this paper. The persistent paradox of psychotherapy supervision training--that the supervisor role is considered highly important in graduate and internship programs, but graduate and post-graduate training in how to be a supervisor is very limited--is discussed. The need to resolve this paradox in psychology training is considered.

In efforts to gather information about training in and the practice of psychological assessment, numerous surveys of practicing psychologists, training program directors, and internship training directors have been conducted. In this article, I briefly review all survey studies about psychological assessment that have appeared in the last 30 years (1960 through early 1990). The major findings of all the surveys are summarized in 14 points, and discussion of several of the points is provided. Of most significance, the surveys collectively attest to (a) the remarkable stability of psychologists' assessment practices over the past 3 decades; (b) the ever-consistent, ever-continuing significance of the assessment role in psychological training and practice; and (c) the resilient, enduring nature of projective techniques in psychodiagnostic assessment.

One hundred and sixty mentally retarded adults were administered the WAIS-R, and the scatter variability of their test profiles was examined. Compared to the WAIS data of Coolidge et al. (1986), the WAIS-R was less variable in its intratest and intertest scatter. The data support Wechsler's original statements about the characteristics of intelligence test profiles among mentally retarded adults.

Consumers, therapists, and researchers share an interest in the topic of service fees. The issue of fees can affect clients' evaluation of the provider as well as the likelihood of using the service being offered. In a between-subjects design, adult males (n = 84) and females (n = 78) read a brief description of a psychologist who provided individual or group therapy for a fee of $50, $80, or $110. While fees had no effect, treatment mode and participant sex did relate to perceptions of therapist credibility. A triple interaction emerged with respect to participants' willingness to consult the psychologist. Implications for service providers are discussed.

Although data about personality assessment training in clinical psychology programs have often been gathered, little comparable data have been collected about assessment training in counseling psychology programs. To collect such information, we conducted a survey of all programs identified as part of the Council of Counseling Psychology Training Programs. A two-page questionnaire was sent out to the 64 program directors, with 56 (88%) of the questionnaires being returned. Information about availability of required personality assessment courses, availability of elective assessment courses, and types of personality tests covered in the counseling curriculum is presented and discussed.

This article examines the place of personality assessment in counseling psychology. Three areas are considered: (a) the types of tests counseling psychologists use, (b) the perspective counseling psychologists apply to the use of tests, and (c) projective techniques and counseling psychology. Each area is examined, and the issues it raises for counseling psychology are presented. Some conclusions about personality assessment practices in counseling psychology are made, and several directions for future training are identified.