Abstract
We contend that a particular form of self-efficacy beliefs — specifically referred to as relation-inferred self-efficacy beliefs — often gets activated in beginning supervisees, can potentially pose supervision problems from the outset and, consequently, is best addressed by supervisors early on. Relation-inferred self-efficacy beliefs refer to what supervisees think or infer that their supervisor is thinking about their therapeutic efficacy; because beginning supervisees often have doubts about their own therapeutic efficacy, they can make incorrect inferences about what their supervisor is thinking of them, and supervision can be accordingly affected. In this brief report, relation-inferred self-efficacy beliefs are elaborated upon, their significance for the trajectory of beginning supervisee development is considered, and some supervisor actions that can aid in alleviating the impact of those beliefs on beginning supervisees are identified. We view it as important that supervisors (a) hold supervisee problematic relation-inferred self-efficacy beliefs in mind as a likely supervision reality, (b) strive to proactively address their possible emergence through supervisee education at supervision’s onset and through including the topic in the body of the supervision agreement, (c) be sensitive to cues that may indicate the emergence of such problematic inferred beliefs during the course of supervision, (d) sensitively inquire about those cues and, if confirmed, be open to discussing their implications with beginning supervisees, (e) fully carry out discussion about those beliefs so as to allay supervisees’ inference concerns, and (f) because addressing those problematic beliefs is not a one-and-done affair, be ready to re-address them as need arises.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
Not applicable.
Code Availability
Not applicable.
References
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Freeman.
Beinart, H., & Clohessy, S. (2017). Effective supervisory relationships: Best evidence and practice. Wiley.
Beitman, B. D., & Soth, A. M. (2006). Activation of self-observation: A core process among the psychotherapies. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 16(4), 383–397. https://doi.org/10.1037/1053-0479.16.4.383
Bernard, J. M., & Goodyear, R. K. (2014). Fundamentals of clinical supervision (5th ed.). Pearson.
Bernard, J. M., & Goodyear, R. K. (2019). Fundamentals of clinical supervision (6th ed.). Pearson.
Eitingon, M. (1923). Report on the Berlin psycho-analytical poliklinik. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 4, 254–269.
Eitingon, M. (1926). An address to the international training commission. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 7, 130–134.
Ellis, M. V. (2010). Bridging the science and practice of clinical supervision: Some discoveries, some misconceptions. The Clinical Supervisor, 29(1), 95–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/07325221003741910
Ellis, M. V. (2017a). Clinical supervision contract and consent statement and supervisee rights and responsibilities. The Clinical Supervisor, 36(1), 145–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/07325223.2017.1321885
Ellis, M. V. (2017b). Narratives of harmful clinical supervision. The Clinical Supervisor, 36(1), 20–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/07325223.2017.1297752
Inman, A. G., Hutman, H., Pendse, A., Devdas, L., Luu, L., & Ellis, M. V. (2014). Current trends concerning supervisors, supervisees, and clients in clinical supervision. In C. E. Watkins Jr. & D. Milne (Eds.), Wiley international handbook of clinical supervision (pp. 61–102). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118846360.ch4
Ladany, N. (2004). Psychotherapy supervision: What lies beneath. Psychotherapy Research, 14(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptr/kph001
Larson, L. M. (1998). The social cognitive model of counselor training. The Counseling Psychologist, 26(2), 219–273. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000098262002
Lent, R. W. (2016). Self-efficacy in a relational world: Social cognitive mechanisms of adaptation and development. The Counseling Psychologist, 44(4), 573–594. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000016638742
Lent, R. W., & Lopez, F. G. (2002). Cognitive ties that bind: A tripartite view of efficacy beliefs in growth-promoting relationships. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 21(3), 256–286. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.21.3.256.22535
McNeill, B. W., & Stoltenberg, C. D. (2016). Supervision essentials for the integrative developmental model. American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14858-004
Morrison, M. A., & Lent, R. W. (2018). The working alliance, beliefs about the supervisor, and counseling self-efficacy: Applying the relational efficacy model to counselor supervision. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 65(4), 512–522. https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000267
Orlinsky, D. E., & Ronnestad, M. H. (2005). How psychotherapists develop: A study of therapeutic work and professional growth. American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/11157-000
Overholser, J. C. (2019). Graduate training in psychotherapy: The importance of ongoing clinical activity for the training faculty. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, 19(3), 264–273. https://doi.org/10.1002/capr.12224
Ronnestad, M. H., & Skovholt, T. M. (2013). The developing practitioner: Growth and stagnation of therapists and counselors. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203841402
Rønnestad, M. H., Orlinsky, D. E., Schröder, T. A., Skovholt, T. M., & Willutzki, U. (2019). The professional development of counsellors and psychotherapists: Implications of empirical studies for supervision, training and practice. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, 19, 214–230. https://doi.org/10.1002/capr.12198
Scaife, J. (2019). Supervision in clinical practice: A practitioner’s guide (3rd ed.). Routledge.
Skovholt, T. M., & Rønnestad, M. H. (2003). Struggles of the novice counselor and therapist. Journal of Career Development, 30(1), 45–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/089484530303000103
Stoltenberg, C. (1981). Approaching supervision from a developmental perspective: The counselor complexity model. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28(1), 59–65. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.28.1.59
Swaby, H. (2020). Learning to “live upside down”: Experiencing the true and false self in psychotherapy training. Psychotherapy and Politics International, 18(2), e1531. https://doi.org/10.1002/ppi.1531
Vîşcu, L.-I. (2018). Modelul integrativ strategic de supervizare [Integrative strategic model of supervision]. Universul Academic.
Vîşcu L.-I. & Watkins, C. E., Jr. (2021). A guide to clinical supervision: The supervision pyramid. Elsevier.
Vitoria, A. D. (2020). Experiential supervision: Healing imposter phenomenon from the inside out. The Clinical Supervisor. https://doi.org/10.1080/07325223.2020.1830215
Watkins, C. E., Jr. (2012). On demoralization, therapist identity development, and persuasion and healing in psychotherapy supervision. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 22(3), 187–205. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0028870
Watkins, C. E., Jr. (2019). On disruption and construction, reflection and reorganization in psychotherapist development: A taxonomy of transformative learning outcomes. Journal of Transformative Education. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344619864061
Watkins, C. E., Jr. (2020). Psychotherapy supervision: an ever-evolving signature pedagogy. World Psychiatry, 19(2), 244–245. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20747
Watkins, C. E., Jr. (2021). Rupture and rupture repair in clinical supervision: some thoughts and steps along the way. The Clinical Supervisor, 40(2), 321–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/07325223.2021.1890657
Žvelc, M. (2017). Razvoj modela spodbujajočih in ovirajočih dejavnikov v superviziji psihoterapije. Doktorska naloga. [Development of a model of facilitating and hindering factors in psychotherapy supervision. Doctoral Dissertation.] Ljubljani, Slovenia: University of Ljubljani. Faculty of Arts.
Žvelc, M. (2019, June 28th). Significant factors in psychotherapy supervision. Presentation delivered at the International Conference on Supervision in Psychotherapy II, Timisoara, Romania.
Funding
Not applicable.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Ethical Approval
Not applicable.
Consent to Participate
Not applicable.
Consent to Publication
Not applicable.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Edward Watkins, C., Vîşcu, LI., Cădariu, IE. et al. Problematic Self-Efficacy Inferences in Beginning Psychotherapy Supervisees: Identification and Management. J Contemp Psychother 52, 109–116 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10879-021-09525-4
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10879-021-09525-4