Therapeutic alliance in vocational rehabilitation counseling: Assessing client factors and functioning

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

The therapeutic relationship is often acknowledged as one of the most significant factors in clinical process that influences client outcomes.

OBJECTIVE:

While considerable research has been conducted on the therapeutic relationship in psychotherapy, there is a paucity of research on the impact of the therapeutic relationship in vocational rehabilitation counseling settings.

METHODS:

This study explored the relationship between areas of client functioning (individual, interpersonal, social, and overall) and the therapeutic alliance among clients who receive services from the State vocational rehabilitation agency.

RESULTS:

In this study, younger clients (ages between 16 to 29) reported stronger therapeutic alliance.

CONCLUSION:

The findings of this study suggested that clients’ perceived individual, interpersonal and overall functioning have a significant positive relationship with the task and bond components of therapeutic relationship.

Keywords

Vocational rehabilitation counseling therapeutic relationship working alliance

1 Introduction

Maximizing the effectiveness of clinical therapy has been a longstanding endeavor for the helping professions. Empirically supported treatments (EST) and evidence-based practices (EBP) serve as the benchmarks for demonstrably effective and quality counseling (Hubble et al., 2010; Wampold and Imel, 2015). These trends emerged in parallel to historical and ongoing efforts to deconstruct the variables of psychotherapy and determine the “active ingredients” of clinical process. In the pursuit of developing best practices for psychotherapy, researchers and practitioners also explored unifying theories of this process (Norcross & Lambert, 2019). Common factors research, an explanatory model for the pantheoretical variables present in all clinical encounters and process, facilitates an informed perspective of how clinicians develop EST and EBP.

The therapeutic alliance is often acknowledged as one of the most significant factors in clinical process that influences outcomes. Though accounting for a relatively modest 15%of the variance in outcomes, the therapeutic alliance represents a keystone aspect of therapy (Norcross & Lambert, 2019). Furthermore, because the relationship involves participation of both the client and clinician to exist, it has the capacity to activate the client factors (30%variance in outcomes) which may positively influence the course of treatment (Gelso et al., 2019). However, it is relatively unknown how client factors may present in the therapeutic alliance, nor what aspects of the relationship may influence or elicit the activation of client factors.

To better understand the significance and potency of the therapeutic alliance, it is useful to conceptualize it from a theoretical perspective. The construct of the therapeutic alliance has been described as a fundamentally human interaction, incorporating interpersonal dispositions, empathy, positive affect, and genuineness. These and other qualities described must be directed toward some relationship goal. Bordin’s (1976) conceptualization of the working alliance addresses the productive nature of the therapeutic relationship. Productive therapeutic alliances can be assessed through the elements of mutually agreed upon goals, tasks of therapy that move the client closer to those goals, and the relational, affective bond between the two individuals. Studies on the therapeutic alliance support this conceptualization; meta-analyses examining the relationship between the alliance and therapy outcomes have been consistent with Bordin’s tripartite model (Bordin, 1976; Flückiger et al., 2019). These meta analyses replicated previous findings about the relationship of the therapeutic alliance and patient outcome (r = 0.28; Flückiger et al., 2019).

1.1 Client functioning and therapeutic alliance

One means of promoting a productive and growth oriented therapeutic alliance is through the use of client feedback on therapeutic process (Brattland et al., 2019). Significant research has been produced which supports the use of client feedback in promoting positive therapeutic outcomes (Miller et al., 2015). Feedback in therapy primarily serves to maintain the integrity of the therapeutic alliance; it encourages clients to take shared ownership of the therapy and facilitates an egalitarian engagement from the clinician. It also serves a secondary purpose of providing insight into the client’s experiences outside of therapy, thus providing a window into those client factors which may be influencing treatment.

Miller and Duncan (2000) created a self-report tool, The Outcome Rating Scale (ORS) to collect information about client functioning and feedback that are useful for the therapeutic process. Three areas of client functioning included in the ORS: 1) individual functioning, 2) interpersonal relationships, and 3) social role performance. These three areas of client functioning were adapted from the widely accepted Outcome Questionnaire 45 (OQ-45; Lambert et al. 1996). Individual functioning refers to individual’s degree of subjective comfort/discomfort; interpersonal functioning refers to functioning in intimate relationships, loneliness, conflict with others; and the social functioning refers to functioning at workplace, school and in other social roles (Lambert & Shimokawa, 2011).

1.2 Vocational rehabilitation counseling and therapeutic alliance

Vocational rehabilitation (VR) counseling is comprised of a comprehensive sequence of services, mutually planned by the client and rehabilitation counselor, to maximize employability, independence, integration, and participation of people with disabilities in the workplace and the community (Strauser, 2013). Rehabilitation counselors who work in VR settings play a critical role in helping clients assess and identify their strengths and limitations, explore, and develop work interests, assess aptitudes to develop realistic goals for obtaining and maintaining work, and aid future career development (Ballou et al., 2015). The state-federal VR program is the oldest and most successful public program supporting the employment and independence of individuals with disabilities (Chan et al., 2018). Nationwide, the United States’ state-federal VR agency serves more than 1 million individuals with disabilities who have significant physical or mental disabilities that seriously limit one or more functional capacities in mobility, communication, self-care, self-direction, interpersonal skills, work tolerance, and work skill (Rehabilitation Services Administration [RSA], 2016).

The construct of therapeutic alliance is particularly important to facilitate client’s shared ownership of the therapeutic work in VR counseling (Chan et al., 1997). Previous researchers have found that the working alliance predicts likelihood of positive employment outcomes in VR counseling services (Schelat, 2000). Specifically, the working alliance impacts VR outcomes for clients with traumatic brain injury (Lustig et al., 2003) and for those living with other mental impairment (Donnell et al., 2004). It has also been supported as an important variable in the vocational outcomes for cancer survivors (Strauser et al., 2010). The evidence shows that VR counselors can improve counseling and psychotherapy outcomes for individuals with intellectual disabilities or other disabilities by facilitating a strong working alliance (Strauser et al., 2004). Research findings also indicate that increases in therapeutic alliance between client and counselor, positively impacts clients’ compliance in rehabilitation programs (Schonberger et al., 2006).

A strong therapeutic alliance is established mutually between the client and the counselor. It is assumed that the characteristics each participant brings into the relationship will affect the quality of the therapeutic alliance (Kokotovic & Tracey, 1990). The VR literature can greatly benefit from research to provide a better understanding of the influence of client factors (such as age, gender, employment status) on therapeutic alliance. To date, no research has investigated the impact of clients’ perceived functionality (individually, interpersonally, socially, and overall) at the time they enter counseling, on the therapeutic alliance with their counselors in a VR setting. The findings of this research can be used to equip counselors with interventions for specific clients groups (e.g., transition students) and clients with different functioning levels (e.g., low social functioning).

The present study explored the relationship between client functioning as reported by the Outcome Rating Scale (ORS; Miller & Duncan, 2000) and the Working Alliance Inventory (Tracey & Kokotovic, 1989). More specifically, the researchers assessed how VR clients’ ratings on the global and subscale measure ratings of the ORS trend with ratings on the WAI and its subscales. Researchers asked the following questions of the data:

What client factors (age, gender, ethnicity, type of disability, education level, employment status) influence the quality of therapeutic alliance?

What is the relationship between the areas of client functioning (individual, interpersonal, social, and overall) and the quality of therapeutic alliance?

2 Methods

2.1 Participants

The participants in this study were Florida Division of Vocational Rehabilitation clients. To receive public VR services, individuals must (a) have a physical and/or mental impairment (documented by appropriate medical, psychological, or psychiatric reports) that substantially impedes his or her ability to secure employment and (b) be able to benefit from the VR services to obtain or maintain employment in an integrated work setting. For this study 280 clients were identified as meeting the inclusion criteria. To be eligible for inclusion in this study, clients were required to meet the following criteria: (1) be a current client of VR (2) be in the early stage of therapeutic alliance (for fair comparison for all participants), (3) have the ability to read and understand the English language at a fourth-grade level, and (4) have the ability to self-report and to make an independent decision (to be his or her own guardian).

Demographic characteristics of participants are presented in Table 1. Fifty eight percent of the respondents (n = 163) were men. Participants ranged in age from 16 to 69 (M = 32.3, SD = 13.7). Most participants reported that they have multiple disabilities (71.4%; n = 200). Forty six percent (n = 129) of the respondents identified themselves as individuals of White/Caucasian origin, 26%(n = 73) Black/African American, and 23%(n = 64) Hispanic/Latino. Twenty five percent of the respondents had less than a high school degree (i.e., no formal schooling, special education, elementary education, secondary education) whereas 43%(n = 119) had high school diploma or GED. Most of the respondents were unemployed (n = 193).

Table 1
Client demographics

Variable Characteristic n %

Gender

Female 117 42

Male 163 58

Age

16–29 142 51

30–39 61 22

40+ 77 28

Ethnicity

White/Caucasian 129 46

Black/African American 73 26

Hispanic/Latino 64 23

Other 14 5

Primary disability

Mental 200 71

Physical 80 29

Education

No formal schooling 4 1

Special education 27 10

Elementary (1–5) 1 –

Secondary education (6–9) 38 14

High school/GED 119 43

Post-secondary 65 23

Bachelors 20 7

Masters/higher 6 2

Employment

Employed part-time/full-time 29 10

Unemployed 193 69

Student 58 21

Total 280 100

Variable	Characteristic	n	%
Gender
Female	117	42
	Male	163	58
Age
	16–29	142	51
	30–39	61	22
	40+	77	28
Ethnicity
	White/Caucasian	129	46
	Black/African American	73	26
	Hispanic/Latino	64	23
	Other	14	5
Primary disability
	Mental	200	71
	Physical	80	29
Education
	No formal schooling	4	1
	Special education	27	10
	Elementary (1–5)	1	–
	Secondary education (6–9)	38	14
	High school/GED	119	43
	Post-secondary	65	23
	Bachelors	20	7
	Masters/higher	6	2
Employment
	Employed part-time/full-time	29	10
	Unemployed	193	69
	Student	58	21
Total		280	100

2.2 Instruments

2.2.1 Working alliance inventory short form (WAI-S)

The WAI is one of the most widely used alliance measurement scales (Hatcher & Gillaspy, 2006). This instrument is developed based on the three constituent components identified in Bordin’s (1979) theoretical model: tasks, bonds, and goals of the alliance (Horvath, 1994). The WAI has been updated twice: The Working Alliance Inventory Short Form, WAI-S, (Tracey & Kokotovic, 1989) and the Working Alliance Inventory Short Revised, WAI-SR (Hatcher & Gillaspy, 2006). The instrument has two parallel forms: the client and the counselor. For the purpose of this study the WAI-S version client form was used.

The WAI-S is a 12-item self-report questionnaire designed to measure the therapeutic alliance. The WAI-S was selected from the four highest loading items for each of the three WAI factors: Bond, goal, and task. Bond represents the development of personal bonds between client and counselor. Goal represents the agreement between client and counselor on treatment goals. Task represents the agreement between client and counselor on the tasks necessary to achieve these goals (Tracey & Kokotovic, 1989). The WAI-S is rated on a 7-point Likert scale. For each statement, respondents are asked to respond never (1), rarely (2), occasionally (3), sometimes (4), often (5), very often (6), or always (7). A higher endorsement of the statement reflects a stronger therapeutic alliance. Total scores are derived by summing all the items with total scores ranging from 12 to 84. An example of a question on the client form is: “My counselor and I agree about the things I will need to do in therapy to help improve my situation.” The WAI-S has good internal consistency for both full scales (client version α= 0.98 and counselor version α= 0.95) and the three subscales, with alpha values ranging from α= 0.90 to 0.92 (Tracey & Kokotovic, 1989). The measure was correlated with the California Psychotherapy Alliance Scales and has demonstrated strong convergent validity (Goal = 0.84, Task = 0.79, Bond = 0.72; (Horvath, 1994; Safran & Wallner, 1991).

The WAI-S was selected for this study because (a) it is an appropriate measure for most types of research investigating the therapeutic alliance; (b) it is applicable to all types of therapy and is based on the underlying theoretical concepts that transcend helping relationships (Martin et al., 2000); (c) it has received the most empirical attention as a measure of therapeutic alliance (Busseri & Tyler, 2003; Carmel & Friedlander, 2009; Martin et al., 2000; Tracey & Kokotovic, 1989;); and (d) it is a useful tool to measure the quality of the therapeutic alliance in the rehabilitation counseling settings (Chan et al., 1997; Forchuk, 1995; Goldberg et al., 2004; Schönberger et al., 2006b; Schönberger et al., 2006c; Schönberger et al., 2007; Solomon et al., 1995).

2.2.2 Outcome rating scale (ORS)

The ORS is a four-item self-report instrument developed by Miller and colleagues (2003). It is designed to assess the functioning of a client under four subscales: individual (personal well-being), interpersonal (family, close relationships), social (work, friendships), and overall (general sense of well-being). The ORS has a visual analog scale that allows respondents to mark on the continuous line to the point that they feel represents their perception of current state of functioning. The total score range is from 0 to 40 based on each subscale with a possible score ranging from 0 to 10 (Anker et al., 2009). Lower scores reflect more severe distress (Miller et al., 2003). The ORS internal consistency reliability coefficients range from 0.79 to 0.97, with an average of 0.85 and 0.95 (Gillaspy & Murphy, 2012). Test-retest reliability coefficients range from 0.51 to 0.72. Concurrent validity coefficients range from 0.53 to 0.74 (Gillaspy & Murphy, 2012). The ORS was used in this study because of its brevity, ease of administration, strong psychometric properties and the effective use of the visual analog scale.

2.3 Procedure

Upon the approval of the Florida Atlantic University Institutional Review Board (Approval number 995899-1), permission was obtained from VR headquarters to recruit clients. All clients invited to participate in the study were at their first or second meeting with their counselors. The unit supervisors were provided the purpose of the study, time requirements, and measures to protect confidentiality. Counselors identified potential clients in their caseload that match the inclusion criteria and inform support staff before their scheduled session. Initial contact with these clients was made by the support staff, one-on-one, when the clients arrive at the VR office. Consent information was provided verbally. Clients were informed that participation would not impact their current VR services. Clients who accepted to participate the study were given a) the ORS instrument before their meeting, b) the WAI-S instrument after the meeting. There was no risk for loss of confidentiality as all data were collected anonymously. To identify the two forms of instruments from the same participant, a coding system was utilized. In each unit, support staff helped providing consent information and collecting instruments.

3 Results

Two research questions guided this study. For question one, a correlation analysis was performed to determine if the client factors (age, gender, ethnicity, type of disability, education level, employment status) correlate to the quality of therapeutic alliance. Out of all factors, only two revealed a significant correlation with the quality of therapeutic alliance: Clients’ age and employment status (r = –0.11, N = 280, p < 0.001; r = –0.20, N = 280, p < 0.001 respectively). Younger clients and clients who are employed reported better therapeutic alliances. For Pearson correlation, Cohen (1988) characterizes r = 0.10 as a small, r = 0.30 as a medium, and r = 0.50 as a large effect. Based on this, effect sizes for both age and employment indicated a small effect in this study.

Research question two investigated the relationship between WAI-S and ORS total scores and subscales. Table 2 summaries the results. Pearson product–moment correlations demonstrated a positive correlation between the WAI-S and the ORS total score, which was statistically significant with a small effect size (r = 0.18, p < 0.001; Cohen, 1988). Positively significant correlations can be seen between all the ORS and WAI-S subscales with one exception; the goal subscale of WAI-S was not significantly correlated with ORS total score, personal, interpersonal, and overall items. The goal subscale only correlated with the ORS social items. Additionally, a multiple regression analysis was computed to examine the contribution of client-perceived personal, interpersonal, social, and overall functioning to the quality of therapeutic alliance. A significant model emerged: F (4,275) = 3.16, p = 0.014, R² = 0.44. As seen in Table 3, client perceived social functioning was a significant predictor with a positive relationship to quality of therapeutic alliance.

Table 2
Correlations of WAI-S and ORS

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1. ORS total score –

2. Personal 0.90^ –

3. Interpersonal 0.92^ 0.77^ –

4. Social 0.93^ 0.82^ 0.80^ –

5. Overall 0.92^ 0.74^ 0.82^ 0.81^ –

6. WAI-S total score 0.18^** 0.15^* 0.14^* 0.20^ 0.17^ –

7. Task 0.17^** 0.15^* 0.13^* 0.18^ 0.17^ 0.94^ –

8. Bond 0.20^ 0.16^ 0.16^ 0.21^ 0.19^ 0.96^ 0.90^ –

9. Goal 0.11 0.08 0.09 0.15^* 0.10 0.83^ 0.64^ 0.69^** –

	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9
1. ORS total score	–
2. Personal	0.90^**	–
3. Interpersonal	0.92^**	0.77^**	–
4. Social	0.93^**	0.82^**	0.80^**	–
5. Overall	0.92^**	0.74^**	0.82^**	0.81^**	–
6. WAI-S total score	0.18^**	0.15^*	0.14^*	0.20^**	0.17^**	–
7. Task	0.17^**	0.15^*	0.13^*	0.18^**	0.17^**	0.94^**	–
8. Bond	0.20^**	0.16^**	0.16^**	0.21^**	0.19^**	0.96^**	0.90^**	–
9. Goal	0.11	0.08	0.09	0.15^*	0.10	0.83^**	0.64^**	0.69^**	–

Note. ORS = Outcome rating scale. WAI-S = Working Alliance Inventory Short Form. *p < 0.05, two-tailed. **p < 0.01, two-tailed.

Table 3

The unstandardized and standardized regression coefficients

	B	SE B	β	p
Variable
Personal	–0.32	0.62	–0.06	0.60
Interpersonal	–0.38	0.64	–0.07	0.55
Social	1.51	0.72	0.26	0.04
Overall	0.28	0.59	0.05	0.63

4 Discussion

The purpose of this study was to explore the impact of client factors and clients’ perceived functioning on the quality of therapeutic alliance in a public VR setting. Studies on the relationship between the alliance and functional outcome measures have been limited in this setting (Deane et al., 2010). Regardless of the type of counseling setting, it is important for counselors to understand the therapeutic alliance and the factors that affect it. Therapeutic alliance is one of the most important common factors all counseling approaches share and contributes significantly to positive client outcomes (Horvath et al., 2011; Wampold, 2001). The findings of this study add an important dimension to the therapeutic alliance research.

4.1 Client age and therapeutic alliance

In this study, younger clients reported better therapeutic alliance. The results revealed a small effect size for age, but it is important to further investigate this client factor because the transition-age youth with disabilities (ages between 16–21) has become the priority of state-federal VR agencies. Currently, limited research exists addressing the relationship between the client age and therapeutic alliance in the VR counseling. Past studies in mental health settings demonstrated mix results. For example, clients with severe mental illness showed that age has no significant association with therapeutic alliance (Robiner & Storandt, 1983) or, in contrast to our findings, being older was significantly correlated with a higher positive alliance (Draine & Solomon, 1996; Cichocki, 2015). This could be related to the differences between the therapeutic alliance in a VR counseling and other counseling and psychotherapy fields. In VR counseling, the alliance is related to the client’s perception of future employment prospect and satisfaction (Lustig, 2002). It is possible younger adults, being in an earlier stage of career development, perceive higher potential for future employment opportunities, positively influencing their therapeutic alliance with their counselors.

The deviation of this result from previous studies could also be related to generational differences which impact perceptions of the therapeutic alliance. Previous research has shown that older adults disproportionately underutilize professional mental health services relative to younger adults (Bogner et al., 2009; Crabb & Hunsley, 2006; Wang et al., 2005). In addition, some evidence exists that older individuals are less open to acknowledging psychological problems (James & Buttle, 2008), which may provide some context for the inverse relationship between older age and a stronger therapeutic alliance that was found in this study. In addition, for the past couple of decades, the access to mental health and rehabilitation services for youth with physical and mental disabilities has been improved. Particularly, the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) signed in 2014 allocated large funds to attract youth, of ages 16–21 and with physical and mental disabilities, to start receiving VR counseling while still in high school. This early exposure may help youth perceive counselors as a part of the team of professionals helping them explore, determine, and achieve future vocational goals, leading to better alliances. This novel finding, whether related to differences in the field-specific nature of the alliance or generational differences, provides counselors with insights into age as a factor that can impact their therapeutic alliances with their clients.

4.2 Employment status and therapeutic alliance

In this study, people who were already employed or became employed during the first few sessions reported stronger therapeutic alliance. This result supports the previous evidence that indicates that employed clients have a stronger therapeutic alliance with their counselors than unemployed clients (Lustig et al., 2003). Unemployment status impacts the therapeutic alliance by creating diminishing expectations in vocational outcomes (i.e. outcome expectancy; Iwanaga et al., 2019). It seems that there is a symbiotic relationship between the alliance and employment status. Not only does employment status contribute to a stronger alliance, but a positive therapeutic alliance also correlates with attainment of employment (Catty et al., 2011; Lustig et al., 2002; Schelat, 2000; Schönberger et al., 2006a). This evidence provides further insight into the utility of VR counseling.

4.3 Client perceived functioning and components of therapeutic alliance

The therapeutic alliance has three components: bond, task, and goal. The results of this study showed that clients’ perceived individual, interpersonal and overall functioning have a significant positive relationship with the task and bond components of therapeutic alliance. Based on this, if individuals believe that they are doing well individually, interpersonally, and overall, in their lives, they would be more likely to connect well with someone (bond) and align with their counselors on the tasks to be accomplished. However, the goal component of a therapeutic alliance only correlated with the clients’ perceived social functioning, not with individual, interpersonal, and overall functioning. It is necessary to look at this result closer, considering the fact that the VR is a goal-oriented counseling approach. First, if someone perceives their work-life to be going poorly (which is part of social functioning), it could logically deflate the perception of the relationship with the person who is helping with their employment goals (i.e. VR counselor). Second, it is possible that clients perceive their work-life (not personal, interpersonal, and overall functioning) to be aligned with the goal portion of the VR counseling relationship. This fits well with the ultimate goal of VR counseling.

4.4 Clients’ perceived functioning and therapeutic alliance

The results of this study indicated that clients’ perception of their social functioning is a significant predictor of the quality of the therapeutic alliance. People who reported higher social functioning also reported higher therapeutic alliances with their counselors. This result is consistent with the current literature. For example, patients with a high level of psychosocial functioning establish better therapeutic alliance while patients with personality disorders tended to report a weaker alliance (Johansson & Eklund, 2004). Likewise, client interpersonal factors were found to be significant predictors of the therapist-rated alliance in the treatment of clients with schizophrenia (Couture et al., 2006).

This result also appears theoretically consistent with Self Efficacy Theory (Bandura, 1997) which postulates that people who have high levels of confidence in their ability to perform well in a domain are more likely to persist in their efforts to increase skills in that particular area. The perceived self-efficacy also determines how people think and motivate themselves, thus impacting the way individuals feel and behave (Bandura, 1994). Individuals with a strong sense of efficacy are more likely to feel confident in their abilities to accomplish a difficult task and see this as a challenge to be conquered, rather than a task that should be avoided (Bandura, 1994). On the other hand, individuals with a low sense of efficacy tend to focus on their personal deficits and view difficult tasks as threats; they are more likely to avoid these tasks because of their fear of failure (Bandura, 1994). Based on the results of this study, a higher sense of self-efficacy in social functioning leads to a more impactful therapeutic alliance.

4.5 Implications into practice

The results of the current study lend support to much of the existing literature on the therapeutic alliance in counseling. A stronger alliance leads to better outcomes in many types of counseling and case management-oriented endeavors (De Leeuw et al. 2012; Johnson et al., 2005; Norcross, 2010). This conclusion is supported by the findings of this study. Being employed and age have an impact on the therapeutic alliance. When providing therapy to older clients, replacing the “top-down” or “expert” approach with a more relational approach between perceived equals may lead to the establishment of better alliances. It is possible that a more collaborative relational stance may help older clients to openly acknowledge their limitations, and eliminate the obstacles related to viewing a (potentially younger) VR counselors as “experts.”

In this study, those who had a job and those who were younger tended to rate their therapeutic alliance as stronger. Counselors would be wise to attend more closely to the relationship with those who are unemployed. The findings of this study suggested that VR counselors should be more attentive to the task and bond components of the therapeutic relationship with the age group forty and older, those who are unemployed, and those who perceive their social functioning as lower or have lower self-efficacy.

4.6 Limitations and future research

While the design of the present study had many strengths (such as a large sample size, diverse populations reflecting ethnicity, age, education level, sex, and disability type), some limitations emerged. A primary limitation of the present study was the use of a convenience sample of participants whose treatment goal was focused primarily on employment. While employment-focused goals are very common in VR settings, employment is not always a focus of the client. For example, Koch (2001) used open-ended qualitative surveys completed by 65 adults referred to state VR services and found that only 56.9%of 65 participants stated that employment was one of their goals. Others identified goals such as vocational training (46.2%), increasing independence (9.2%), enhancing personal growth (7.7%). As a result of restricting the sample to clients whose focus is employment, it may not be possible to generalize the current result to all VR clients. For this reason, it is recommended that future research on the relationship between the alliance and functional outcomes include measures of disability severity or include goals unrelated to obtaining employment.

Furthermore, the sample included only clients who were able to speak English, indicating higher levels of acculturation in this sample than may be typical in VR settings. The present sample may be more homogenous in cultural attitudes towards work which pertain to wellbeing and self-efficacy, than is typical in VR settings. These results may not be reflected in less acculturated populations. Finally, the majority of the clients that participated in this study were in the age group of thirty nine and younger. In order to address this limitation, it is recommended that this research be replicated in broader samples in terms of age groups and multilingual samples with varying degrees of acculturation to the mainstream Western culture.

Footnotes

Acknowledgment

None to report.

Conflict of interest

None to report.

Ethical declaration

Ethical approval for this study was obtained from Florida Atlantic University Institutional Review Board (Approval Number 995899-1).

Funding

None to report.

References

Anker,

M. G.

, Duncan,

B. L.

, & Sparks,

J. A.

(2009). Using client feedback to improve couple therapy outcomes: A randomized clinical trial in a naturalistic setting. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 77(4), 693–704.

Ballou,

, Balogun,

, Gittens,

, Matsumoto,

, & Sanchez,

(2015). Trauma and returning to work: Women’s lived experiences and its implications for vocational rehabilitation counseling. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 46(1), 25–33.

Bandura,

(1994). Self-efficacy. In V. S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human Behavior (4th ed., pp. 71–81). Academic Press. http://www.uky.edu/eushe2/Bandura/BanEncy.html.

Bandura,

(1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman.

Bogner,

H.R.

, de Vries,

H.F.

, Maulik,

P.K.

, & Unutzer,

(2009). Mental health services use: Baltimore epidemiologic catchment area follow-up. The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 17, 706–715. https://doi.org/10.1097/JGP.0b013e3181aad5c5.

Bordin,

E. S.

, (1976, June). The working alliance: Basis for a general theory of psychotherapy. Paper presented at the Society for Psychotherapy Research, Washington, DC.

Brattland,

, Morten Koksvik,

, Burkeland,

, Klöckner,

C. A.

, Loreto Lara-Cabrera,

, Miller,

S. D.

, Wampold,

, Ryum,

, & Cabral Iversen,

(2019). Does the working alliance mediate the effect of routine outcome monitoring (RCOM) and alliance feedback on psychotherapy outcomes? A secondary analysis from a randomized clinical trial. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 66(2), 234–246.

Busseri,

M. A.

, & Tyler,

J. D.

(2003). Interchangeability of the working alliance inventory and working alliance inventory, short form. Psychological Assessment, 15(2), 193–197.

Catty,

, White,

, Koletsi,

, Becker,

, Fioritti,

, Kalkan,

, Lauber,

, Lissouba,

, Rössler,

, Tomav,

, van Busschbach,

J.T.

, Wiersma,

, & Burns,

(2011). Therapeutic relationships in vocational rehabilitation: Predicting good relationships for people with psychosis. Psychiatry Research, 187(1–2), 68–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2010.10.018.

10.

Carmel,

M. J. S.

, & Friedlander,

M. L.

(2009). The relation of secondary traumatization to therapists’ perceptions of the working alliance with clients who commit sexual abuse. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 56(3), 461–467.

11.

Chan,

, Shaw,

L. R.

, McMahon,

B. T.

, Koch,

L. C.

, & Strauser,

(1997). A model for enhancing consumer-counselor working relationships in rehabilitation. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 41, 122–137.

12.

Chan,

, Bishop,

, Chronister,

, Lee,

E. J.

, & Chiu,

C. Y.

(2018). Certified Rehabilitation Counselor Examination Preparation. Springer Publishing Company.

13.

Cichocki,

(2015). The alliance in psychiatric rehabilitation: Client characteristics associated with the initial alliance in a supported employment program. Work, 52(4), 811–824.

14.

Couture,

S. M.

, Roberts,

D. L.

, Penn,

D.L.

, Cather,

, Otto,

M. W.

, & Goff,

D.L.

(2006). Do baseline client characteristics predict the therapeutic alliance in the treatment of schizophrenia?The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 194(1), 10–14.

15.

Cohen,

(1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Erlbaum.

16.

Crabb,

, & Hunsley,

(2006). Utilization of mental health care services among older adults with depression. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 62, 299–312. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.20231.

17.

Deane,

F. P.

, Crowe,

T. P.

, & Oades,

L. G.

(2010). Therapeutic alliance in vocational rehabilitation, In Lloyd, C. (Ed.), Vocational rehabilitation and mental health. (pp. 95–113). Wiley-Blackwell.

18.

De Leeuw,

, Van Meijel,

, Grypdonck,

, & Kroon,

(2012). The quality of the working alliance between chronic psychiatric patients and their case managers: Process and outcomes. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 19, 1–7.

19.

Donnell,

C. M.

, Lustig,

D. C.

, & Strauser,

D. R.

(2004). The working alliance: Rehabilitation outcomes for persons with severe mental illness. The Journal of Rehabilitation, 70, 12–18.

20.

Draine,

, & Solomon,

(1996). Case manager alliance with clients in an older cohort. Community Mental Health Journal, 32, 125–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02249750.

21.

Flückiger,

, DelRe,

A. C.

, Horvath,

A. O.

, Wampold,

B. E.

, & Horvath,

A. O.

(2019). Alliance in adult psychotherapy. In J. C. Norcross (Ed.), Psychotherapy relationships that work (3rd ed., pp. 24–78). Oxford University Press.

22.

Forchuk,

(1995). Uniqueness within the nurse-client relationship. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 9(1), 34–39.

23.

Gelso,

C. J.

, Kivlighan

D.M.

Jr , & Markin,

R. D.

(2019). The real relationship. In J. C. Norcross & M. J. Lambert (Eds.), Psychotherapy Relationships thatWork (3rd ed., pp. 351–378). Oxford University Press.

24.

Goldberg,

R. W.

, Rollins,

A. L.

, & McNary,

S. W.

(2004). The working alliance inventory: Modification and use with people with serious mental illnesses in a vocational rehabilitation program. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 27(3), 267–270.

25.

Hatcher,

R. L.

, & Gillaspy,

J. A.

(2006). Development and validation of a revised short version of the working alliance inventory. Psychotherapy Research, 16(1), 12–25.

26.

Horvath,

A. O.

(1994). Research on the alliance. In A. O. Horvath & L. S. Greenberg, (Eds.), TheWorking Alliance: Theory, research, and practice. (pp. 259–286). John Willey & Sons, Inc.

27.

Horvath,

A. O.

, Del Re,

A. C.

, Flückiger,

, & Symonds,

(2011). Alliance in individual psychotherapy. Psychotherapy, 48(1), 9–16.

28.

Hubble,

M. A.

, Duncan,

B. L.

, Miller,

S. D.

, & Wampold,

B. E.

(2010). Heart and soul of change: Delivering what works in therapy (2nd ed.). American Psychological Association.

29.

Iwanaga,

, Chan,

, Tansey,

T. N.

, Strauser,

, Ritter,

, Bishop,

, & Brooks,

(2019). Working alliance and stages of change for employment: The intermediary role of autonomous motivation, outcome expectancy, and vocational rehabilitation engagement. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 29, 315–324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-018-9787-5.

30.

James,

S. A.

, & Buttle,

(2008). Attitudinal differences towards mental health services between younger and older New Zealand adults. New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 37(3), 33–43.

31.

Johansson,

, & Eklund,

(2004). Helping alliance and ward atmosphere in psychiatric inpatient care. Psychology and Psychotherapy Theory Research and Practice, 77(4), 511–23.

32.

Johnson,

J. E.

, Burlingame,

G. M.

, Olsen,

J. A.

, Davies,

D. R.

, & Gleave,

R. L.

(2005). Group climate, cohesion, alliance, and empathy in group psychotherapy: Multilevel structural equation models. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 310–321.

33.

Koch,

L. C.

(2001). The preferences and anticipations of people referred for vocational rehabilitation. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 44, 76–86.

34.

Lambert,

M. J.

, Burlingame,

G. M.

, Umphress,

, Hansen,

N. B.

, Vermeersch,

D. A.

, Clouse,

G. C

, & Yanchar,

S. C.

(1996). The reliability and validity of the Outcome Questionnaire. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy: An International Journal of Theory and Practice, 3(4), 249–258.

35.

Lambert,

M. J

, & Shimokawa,

(2011). Collecting client feedback. Psychotherapy, 48, 72–79. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022238.

36.

Lustig,

D. C.

, Strauser,

D. R.

, Rice,

N. D.

, & Rucker,

T. F.

(2002). The relationship between working alliance and rehabilitation outcomes. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 46(1), 24–32.

37.

Lustig,

D. C.

, Strauser,

D. R.

, Weems,

G. H.

, Donnell,

C. M.

, & Smith,

L. D.

(2003). Traumatic brain injury and rehabilitation outcomes: Does the working alliance make a difference?Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 34(4), 30–37.

38.

Martin,

D. J.

, Garske,

J. P.

, & Davis,

M. K.

(2000). Relation of the therapeutic alliance with outcome and other variables: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68, 438–450. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1037//0022-006X.68.3.438.

39.

Miller,

S. D.

, & Duncan,

B. L.

(2000). The Outcome and Session Rating Scales. Chicago, IL: International Center for Clinical Excellence.

40.

Miller,

S. D.

, Hubble,

M. A.

, Chow,

, & Seidel,

(2015). Beyond measures and monitoring: Realizing the potential of feedback-informed treatment. Psychotherapy, 52(4), 449–457.

41.

Norcross,

J. C.

(2010). The therapeutic relationship. In B. L. Duncan, S. D. Miller, B.E. Wampold, & M. A. Hubble (Eds.), The heart and soul of change: Discovering what works in psychotherapy (2nd ed ed., pp. 113–139). American Psychological Association.

42.

Norcross,

J. C.

, & Lambert,

M. J.

(2019). Evidence-based psychotherapy relationship: The third task force. In J. C. Norcross & M.J. Lambert (Eds.), Psychotherapy relationships that work (3rd ed., pp. 1–23). Oxford University Press.

43.

Rehabilitation Services Administration. (2016). U.S. Department of Education Annual Report, Fiscal Year 2016, Report on Federal Activities. Retrieved from https://www2.ed.gov/about/reports/annual/rsa/2016/rsa-2016-annual-report.pdf.

44.

Robiner,

W. N.

, & Storandt,

(1983). Client perceptions of the therapeutic relationship as a function of client and counselor age. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 30, 96–99. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1037/0022-0167.30.1.96

45.

Safran,

J. D.

, & Wallner,

L. K.

(1991). The relative predictive validity of two therapeutic alliance measures in cognitive therapy. Psychological Assessment: A Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 3(2), 188–195.

46.

Schönberger,

, Humle,

, Zeeman,

& Teasdale,

T. W.

, (2006a). Working alliance and patient compliance in brain injury rehabilitation and their relation to psychosocial outcome. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 16, 298–314.

47.

Schönberger,

, Humle,

& Teasdale,

T. W.

, (2006b). The development of the therapeutic working alliance, patients’ awareness and their compliance during the process of brain injury rehabilitation. Brain Injury, 20(4) 445–454.

48.

Schönberger,

, Humle,

& Teasdale,

T. W.

, (2006c). Subjective outcome of brain injury rehabilitation in relation to the therapeutic working alliance, client compliance and awareness. Brain Injury, 20(12) 1271–1282.

49.

Schönberger,

, Humle,

, & Teasdale,

T. W.

(2007). The relationship between clients’ cognitive functioning and the therapeutic working alliance in post-acute brain injury rehabilitation. Brain Injury, 21(8), 825–836.

50.

Schelat,

R. K.

(2000). The predictive capacity of the working alliance in vocational rehabilitation outcomes (Order No. 9980422). [Doctoral dissertation/Ohio State University]Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses A&I ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (304611194).

51.

Solomon,

, Draine,

, & Delaney,

M. A.

(1995). The working alliance and consumer case management. The Journal of Mental Health Administration, 22(2), 126–134.

52.

Strauser,

D. R.

, Lustig,

D. C.

, & Donnell,

(2004). The relationship between working alliance and therapeutic outcomes for individuals with mild mental retardation. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 47(4), 215–223.

53.

Strauser,

D. R.

(2013). Career development, employment, and disability in rehabilitation: From theory to practice. Springer Publishing Company.

54.

Strauser,

D. R.

, Lustig,

D. C.

, Chan,

, & O’Sullivan,

(2010). Working alliance and vocational outcomes for cancer survivors: An initial analysis. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research, 33(3), 271–274.

55.

Tracey,

T. J.

, & Kokotovic,

A. M.

(1989). Factor structure of the working alliance inventory: Psychological assessment. A Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1(3), 207–210.

56.

Wampold,

B. E.

(2001). The great psychotherapy debate: Models, methods, and findings. Mahwah: Erlbaum.

57.

Wampold,

B. E.

, & Imel,

Z. E.

(2015). The great psychotherapy debate: The evidence for what makes psychotherapy work. Routledge.

58.

Wang,

P. S.

, Lane,

, Olfson,

, Pincus,

H. A.

, Wells,

K. B.

, & Kessler,

R.C.

(2005). Twelve-month use of mental health services in the united states: Results from the national comorbidity survey replication. Archives of General Psychiatry, 62, 629–640. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.62.6.629.