Developing Dyadic Evaluation for Supervision: An Exploratory Factor Analysis

This study addresses the need for empirically validated tools to support the training, supervision, and the discovery of best practices in Marital and Family Therapy (MFT). This project represents a first step in developing the Dyadic Supervision Evaluation (DSE), an assessment tool that is grounded in developmental and systemic theory and is psychometrically strong. An Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) approach was applied to data from 88 trainee-supervisor dyads across four time periods during the first year of clinical training, resulting in 20 factors, including 9 factors for trainees and 11 factors for supervisors with internal reliabilities ranging from α’s = .82–.98. Discussion addresses the utility of the DSE in documenting the developmental and dyadic progression of supervision during the first year of MFT training.     

The Role of Attributions and Fairness in Understanding Job Applicant Reactions to Selection Procedures and Decisions

Purpose

Drawing mainly upon Applicant Attribution-Reaction Theory (AART), we clarify and underscore the role of attribution dimensions (personal control, external control, and stability) in forming applicant fairness perceptions, attitudes, and behavioral reactions.

Design/Methodology/Approach

Students seeking (or about to seek) jobs (N = 264) participated in an experimental study in which procedural justice rules and outcome favorability (selected or rejected) were manipulated. Participants reported their attributions, fairness perceptions, and behavioral intentions. Hypotheses were tested through SEM and bootstrapping.

Findings

Applicant attributions were predicted by outcome favorability and the extent to which the interview process satisfied/violated procedural justice rules. In line with AART, process fairness perceptions mediated relationships between applicant attribution dimensions and both organizational perceptions and behavioral intentions.

Implications

Organizations should satisfy justice rules in employee selection processes because such rules affect applicant attributions, which in turn predict perceptions and behavioral intentions. In addition to identifying antecedents and consequences of fairness perceptions, antecedents and consequences of applicant attributions should be investigated, as both relate to important organizational outcomes.

Originality/Value

This study is one of a very few to test propositions from AART. Through an experimental design of high internal validity, we show that outcome favorability and the satisfaction/violation of justice rules predict job applicant attributions (personal control, external control, and stability). We further show that applicants’ attributions explain unique variance in their perceptions of the employing organization and in their behavioral intentions (e.g., recommend organization to others; litigate) beyond that explained by selection outcome and fairness perceptions.     

Towards a Non‐Essentialist Pedagogy of “Islam”

Abstract. Traversing a rock‐strewn terrain of essentialist methodologies historically employed for teaching Islam, the author espouses a non‐Essentialist pedagogy that combines critical reflection, analysis of historical methods, and development of an appreciation for alternative notions about Islam and global interdependence. In this essay the author contends that teaching Islam ought to avoid our and their language and instead aim at helping students think in critically reflective, creative, and relational ways so that they might learn to “think of civilizations as transformative, reflexive, and fluid entities.”     

Moving from “I” to “We”: A Grounded Theory Analysis of Couple Therapy with Liver Patients and Their Partners

Prior research indicates that couples who cope with chronic illness from a relational “we” orientation experience more positive outcomes than couples that cope individually; however, little prior research identifies clinical processes that promote reciprocity or how societal gender processes are involved. This grounded theory analysis of 25 videotaped therapy sessions with six heterosexual couples coping with chronic liver disease (LD) used a feminist-informed relational lens to focus on the clinical processes involved in shifting from an individual to a relational orientation. Findings identified three contextual barriers to attaining a “we orientation”: (a) autonomy discourse, (b) illness-related power, and (c) gendered power. Analysis detailed therapist actions that decreased the impact of barriers to reciprocity and fostered relational coping. Clinical implications attend to complex intersections among gender, caregiving, and contextual barriers to reciprocity.