Pepperdine University Pepperdine University

Pepperdine Digital Commons Pepperdine Digital Commons

Theses and Dissertations

2019

Best practices in addressing diversity in clinical supervision: a Best practices in addressing diversity in clinical supervision: a

survey of experienced supervisors survey of experienced supervisors

Yeung Chan

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/etd

Recommended Citation Recommended Citation Chan, Yeung, "Best practices in addressing diversity in clinical supervision: a survey of experienced supervisors" (2019). Theses and Dissertations. 1102. https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/etd/1102

This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by Pepperdine Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Pepperdine Digital Commons. For more information, please contact Katrina.Gallardo@pepperdine.edu, anna.speth@pepperdine.edu, linhgavin.do@pepperdine.edu.

Pepperdine University

Graduate School of Education and Psychology

BEST PRACTICES IN ADDRESSING DIVERSITY IN CLINICAL SUPERVISION: A

SURVEY OF EXPERIENCED SUPERVISORS

A clinical dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction

of the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Psychology

by

Yeung Chan

September, 2019

Edward Shafranske, PhD - Dissertation Chairperson

This clinical dissertation, written by

Yeung Chan

under the guidance of a Faculty Committee and approved by its members, has been submitted to and accepted by the Graduate Faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PSYCHOLOGY Doctoral Committee: Edward Shafranske, PhD, Chairperson Carol Falender, PhD Shelly Harrell, PhD

© Copyright by Yeung Chan (2019)

All Rights Reserved

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... vi

DEDICATION .............................................................................................................................. vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................................... viii

VITA .............................................................................................................................................. ix

ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................... x

INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1

BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................ 3

Clinical Supervision ............................................................................................................ 3 Diversity and Multiculturalism in Clinical Supervision ..................................................... 5 Multicultural Supervisory Framework and Processes ........................................................ 8 Multicultural Competence in Clinical Supervisors ........................................................... 11 Limitations and Gaps in Multicultural Supervision Literature ......................................... 13 Purpose of Study and Research Question ......................................................................... 15

METHOD ..................................................................................................................................... 17

Research Approach and Design ........................................................................................ 17 Participants ........................................................................................................................ 17

General characteristics of participants ........................................................................ 18 Supervision and supervision training experience characteristics of participants........ 19

Instrumentation ................................................................................................................. 20 Demographic questionnaire ........................................................................................ 20 Multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices form ............................................ 20

Procedures ......................................................................................................................... 22 Recruitment ................................................................................................................. 23 Protection of human subjects ...................................................................................... 23 Consent for participation............................................................................................. 24 Potential risks and benefits ......................................................................................... 24 Data collection ............................................................................................................ 25 Data analysis ............................................................................................................... 26

RESULTS ..................................................................................................................................... 27

DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................................... 29

Study Results and Multicultural Supervision Competency Framework ........................... 29 Clinical Supervision and Multicultural Supervision Training .......................................... 34 Limitations ........................................................................................................................ 35

v

Directions for Future Research ......................................................................................... 36 Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 37

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 38

TABLES ....................................................................................................................................... 50

Literature Review Tables .................................................................................... 58

Multicultural Supervisory Behaviors and Practices .......................................... 146

Demographic Questionnaire .............................................................................. 150

Recruitment Letter to ListServ Managers ......................................................... 155

Follow-up Letter to ListServ Managers ............................................................ 158

Recruitment Letter to Participants ..................................................................... 161

Follow-up Letter to Participants ........................................................................ 163

Introduction to Survey and Consent to Participate ............................................ 165

IRB Approval Notice ......................................................................................... 168

vi

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Participant Demographics (N = 44) ............................................................................... 50

Table 2. Participant Supervision and Supervision Training Experience (N = 44) ....................... 52

Table 3. Frequencies of Multicultural Supervisory Behaviors Rated as Most Important............ 56

Table 4. Top Five Supervisory Behaviors Compared to Bottom Five Supervisory Behaviors ... 57

vii

DEDICATION

To my family, who inspired me to never stop learning and supported me unconditionally.

viii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First and foremost, I would like to acknowledge my committee members. I am deeply

grateful for the wisdom and guidance of Dr. Edward Shafranske, Dr. Shelly Harrell, and Dr.

Carol Falender.

I am also grateful to the Pepperdine GSEP community who made my graduate school

journey an invaluable experience. A big thank you to Dr. Aaron Aviera, Dr. Daryl Rowe, Dr.

Susan Himelstein, Dr. Natasha Thapar-Olmos, and Dr. Harold Burke who served as incredible

teachers, supervisors, and mentors.

Finally, I want to thank my family members; none of this would have been possible

without their love and support. They have been my biggest believers and have provided the

encouragement and support I needed throughout my educational career as well as reminding me

that there is life outside of graduate school.

ix

VITA

EDUCATION _____________________________________________________________________________________ Pepperdine University, Graduate School of Education & Psychology, Los Angeles, CA Doctorate in Clinical Psychology June 2019 Pepperdine University, Graduate School of Education & Psychology, Los Angeles, CA Masters of Arts in Clinical Psychology w/ an emphasis in Marriage and Family Therapy June 2011

University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA Bachelor of Arts, double major in Psychology, Sociology, minor in Business Administration May 2008 CLINICAL EXPERIENCE _____________________________________________________________________________________ Rutgers University Student Health Center, Camden, NJ July 2018 – June 2019 Student Health Services, ADHD & Learning Disabilities Diagnostic Assessment, Pre-Doctoral Intern Kaiser Permanente Los Angeles Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA July 2017 – June 2018 Department of Pediatrics, Pediatric Neuropsychology, Extern Southern California Neuropsychological Group, Woodland Hills, CA July 2016 – June 2018 Adult & Pediatric Neuropsychology & Therapy, Extern Center for Autism and Related Disorders, Woodland Hills, CA August 2016 – July 2017 Autism, ADHD, & Learning Disabilities Diagnostic Assessment, Extern Insight Collective, Pasadena, CA August 2015 – August 2016 Pediatric Neuropsychology & Evidence-Based Interventions, Extern Union Rescue Mission, Los Angeles, CA September 2014 – July 2016 Practicum, Conrad N. Hilton Foundation Fellow Asian Pacific Counseling and Treatment Center, Los Angeles, CA September 2011 – June 2014 Marriage and Family Therapist Intern Exodus Recovery Inc., Culver City, CA September 2010 – September 2011 Practicum, MFT Trainee

RESEARCH EXPERIENCE _____________________________________________________________________________________ Southern California Neuropsychological Group, Woodland Hills, CA August 2016 – June 2018 Research Assistant

Insight Collective, Pasadena, CA March 2016 – December 2017 Research Assistant Pepperdine University, Los Angeles, CA April 2016 – June 2019 Doctoral Dissertation

x

ABSTRACT

The focus in this exploratory study was to investigate the opinions of licensed psychologists,

who were experienced in clinical supervision, to obtain a list of specific supervisor behaviors and

practices considered to be most important to address diversity in clinical supervision. Forty-four

licensed psychologists completed the web-based questionnaire assessing opinions regarding the

most important multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices. Results of the chi-square

goodness-of-fit test indicated the frequencies of ratings were not equally distributed within this

sample, indicating a level of consensus among survey participants. The results showed that when

addressing multicultural and diversity issues in supervision, supervisors tend to take a more

passive stance, which is contrary to recommended best practices in the multicultural supervision

literature. Furthermore, results showed that supervisors’ participation in continuing education

regarding supervision and multicultural supervision was very limited. Implications for

multicultural supervision practice and directions for future research are explored.

Introduction

Clinical supervision is the foundational method used in mental health education and

training programs to prepare students to provide effective psychological and counseling services.

It encapsulates the essential and contractual relationship between a supervisor and a supervisee,

as well as aids in students’ own professional development and competent delivery of treatments

to their clients (Falender & Shafranske, 2007). Clinical supervision is a continuous process that

provides less skilled clinicians with ways to navigate new and challenging experiences based on

others’ knowledge, guidance, and expertise (Atkinson & Woods, 2007). Successful clinical

supervision can facilitate supervisory alliance, enhance supervisee growth and independence,

safeguard client welfare, and enhance both client and supervisee therapeutic outcomes (Falender,

Shafranske, & Ofek 2014; Ladany, Mori, & Mehr, 2013).

The importance of incorporating diversity variables in clinical training and practice has

led more recently to the development of culture-specific guidelines and standards (Dressel,

Consoli, Kim, & Atkinson, 2007). Multiple studies have shown that when multicultural and

diversity variables are addressed and attended to during supervision, supervisees report feeling

considerably more satisfied with supervision, view supervisors as more sincere, experience a

deeper working alliance with supervisors, and report their supervisors as more competent (Ancis

& Marshall, 2010; Falender & Shafranske, 2014; Inman, 2006; Mori, Inman, & Caskie, 2009).

According to Inman (2006), supervisors are ultimately responsible for promoting supervisees’

multicultural competence by initiating and facilitating multicultural discussions in supervision.

When supervisors fail to address and integrate cultural and diversity variables in the supervision

process, supervisees may experience frustration and resistance and view their supervisors as

culturally insensitive and incompetent (Hird, Cavalieri, Dulko, Felice, & Ho, 2001).

2

Over the last 30 years, authors and researchers have proposed many models of

multicultural supervision that contributed to the conceptualization and understanding of this

important field. However, very few existing models offer clear instructions for the application of

the concepts through specific multicultural supervisory behaviors in supervision beyond simply

introducing multiculturalism as a topic in supervision (Ober, Granello, & Henfield, 2009).

The purpose of this study was to obtain the opinions of licensed psychologists, who were

experienced in clinical supervision, and to identify supervisor behaviors and practices considered

to be most important to address diversity in clinical supervision. This list of behaviors could then

be used to assess current multicultural supervisory practices, in multicultural supervision

guidelines for supervisors, and in future studies to explore supervisory multicultural competence.

The following presents a review of the major areas under investigation in this study.

3

Background

This section provides an overview of the literature for the following topics: clinical

supervision, diversity and multiculturalism in clinical supervision, multicultural competency in

supervisors, multicultural clinical supervisory processes and framework, and limitations in the

current multicultural supervision literature base.

Clinical Supervision

Clinical supervision provides the foundation of training in health service psychology. It

offers pre-degree students as well as postdegree/pre-licensed supervisees a learning experience to

effectively integrate and apply knowledge, skills, and values in clinical practice (Bernard &

Goodyear, 2014; Falender & Shafranske, 2004). Supervisors also are charged with the

responsibility of monitoring the quality of professional service supervisees provide to clients. In

other words, supervisors have an overall responsibility for the type and quality of treatment their

supervisees are providing (Bernard & Goodyear, 2014; Watkins, 2012). In addition, supervisors

serve as gatekeepers and ensure that only qualified trainees progress to licensing (Falender &

Shafranske, 2004, 2017).

Clinical supervision is considered to be a crucial requirement for clinical training and

program accreditation and has been recognized as a distinct professional specialty and practice

(American Psychological Association [APA], 2010). Falender and Shafranske (2004) described

clinical supervision as an exclusive interpersonal process that developed from science-informed

practices. In addition, they noted that clinical supervision entails the facilitation of supervisees in

their pursuit of knowledge and skills through instruction, demonstration, and mutual problem-

solving.

4

Over the years, a considerable number of studies have been published regarding clinical

supervision and its approaches, stages, components, and ethics (Barnett & Molzon, 2014;

Goodyear, Lichtenberg, Bang, & Gragg, 2014); its value and merits (Falender & Shafranske,

2014); the nature of the supervisory relationship (Inman, 2006); the unavoidable conflicts and

dilemmas (Safran, Muran, Stevens, & Rothman, 2007); its effectiveness in enhancing clinical

work (Falender & Shafranske, 2014); and fostering attention to difference and diversity (Ancis &

Ladany, 2010; Tsui, O’Donoghue, & Ng, 2014; Watkins, 2014).

Supervision is a continuous process that provides less skilled clinicians with ways to

navigate new and challenging experiences based on others’ knowledge, guidance, and expertise

(Atkinson & Woods, 2007). Successful clinical supervision can facilitate the supervisory

alliance, enhance supervisee growth and independence, safeguard client welfare, and enhance

both client and supervisee therapeutic outcomes (Falender, Shafranske, & Ofek, 2014; Ladany et

al., 2013).

The importance of the supervisory relationship is well-established in the empirical

literature (Borders, 2014). According to Quek and Storm (2012), the supervisory relationship can

facilitate the passing of knowledge, wisdom, insight, and experience from one professional

generation to the next. Martínez and Holloway (1997) also noted that a positive supervisory

relationship will provide the necessary environment to foster multicultural competence and help

translate the supervisee’s acquired theoretical knowledge into clinical practice.

In addition, the supervisory relationship can be viewed as a reciprocal educational

process in which supervisors and supervisees learn about themselves and from each other

(Ladany, Friedlander, & Nelson, 2005). Supervision can affect supervisees as well as clients.

Bhat and Davis (2007) stated that supervision is a parallel process, as interactions from the

5

supervisory relationship can be repeated in the supervisee–client therapeutic relationship. Many

researchers have suggested that when the supervisory relationship is based on safety, trust,

understanding, support, and collaboration, the relationship will also be positively replicated in

the supervisee–client relationship (Atkinson & Woods, 2007; Murphy & Wright, 2005). When

attending to the supervisory relationship, experts and researchers have also recognized the need

to address cultural variables in the supervisory process. Lassiter, Napolitano, Culbreth, and Ng

(2008) recommended that existing supervision models be adapted to include a multicultural

focus in supervision. Given the importance of clinical supervision, it is essential for supervisors

to initiate discussions and practices that address multicultural variables in supervision (Soheilian,

Inman, Klinger, Isenberg, & Kulp, 2014). Inman and DeBoer Kreider (2013) opined that one of

the initial supervisory responsibilities is to help supervisees identify, understand, and clarify their

own and their clients’ values and beliefs as well as how these beliefs are reflected across multiple

social identities. Ancis and Marshall (2010) also noted that when supervisors encourage

discussions of cultural issues in supervision, they enhance the supervisory relationship. In a

related study, Toporek, Ortega-Villalobos, and Pope-Davis (2004) found that supervisees

perceived an enhanced multicultural awareness after experiencing positive multicultural

interactions with their supervisors.

Diversity and Multiculturalism in Clinical Supervision

In the last 2 decades, the multicultural supervision literature not only has grown

considerably, but also has contributed to an enhanced understanding about its practices (Ancis &

Marshall, 2010; Falender, Shafranske, & Falicov, 2014; Soheilian et al., 2014; Watkins, 2014).

However, multicultural supervision is still “one of the newest kids on the multicultural block and

many of the emerging models and research findings are not yet clearly programmatic and

6

interrelated” (Inman & Ladany, 2014, p. 654). For some supervisors, there may be confusion

about the meaning of multiculturalism or multicultural competence.

Multiculturalism is defined by the American Psychological Association as aspects of

identity stemming from race, ethnicity, language, education, gender, religion and spiritual

orientation, sexual orientation, disability, socioeconomic status, age, and any other cultural

dimensions (APA, 2010). Integrating multicultural and attention to diversity is not optional in

professional practice; rather, being able to address various diversity factors and provide feedback

and training are considered to be important legal and ethical supervisor responsibilities (APA,

2014).

Multicultural supervision is defined as supervisory incidents where supervisors and

supervisees consider and discuss a variety of cultural issues in their clinical understanding and

practice with diverse clients (Ancis & Marshall, 2010). The ability to understand and address the

influences of cultural as well as other aspects of identity in supervision have been regarded as

essential components for supervisees to conduct ethical and effective practice with their clients

(Ancis & Ladany, 2010). Diversity and multicultural practice in supervision includes paying

attention to values and attitudes as well as an appreciation of many strands of identities of

trainees and clients, involving race and ethnicity, gender and sex, social class and socioeconomic

status, ability, religion and spirituality, immigration status, as well as age and generational

experiences (Falender, Shafranske, & Falicov, 2014).

Many researchers have identified the following three widely accepted viewpoints as

having high practical importance (Ancis & Ladany, 2010; Bernard & Goodyear, 2014). Effective

multicultural supervision includes (a) establishing and maintaining a safe supervisory

environment and a strong working alliance that functions as the foundational core of the

7

supervisor–supervisee relationship; (b) acknowledging that multiculturalism and diversity in

supervision is an ongoing commitment to continually working toward awareness and knowledge

enhancement; and (c) introducing and addressing multicultural issues throughout the entire

supervisory process, making them consistent elements of the ongoing supervisory dialogue

(Atkinson & Woods, 2007; Falender, Burnes, & Ellis, 2013; Wong, Wong, & Ishiyama, 2013).

According to Inman (2006), supervisors are ultimately responsible for promoting

supervisees’ multicultural competence by initiating and facilitating multicultural discussions in

supervision. Many researchers believe it is impossible to conduct multicultural supervision if the

supervisor does not have the ability to attend to issues of diversity and cultural identities in both

the supervisory relationship as well as the supervisee’s relationship with clients (Bernard &

Goodyear, 2014; Falender et al., 2013). This means supervisors have to be willing to be

proactive, to be willing to do some self-exploration, and to have courage to talk openly with

supervisees about potentially uncomfortable issues (Garrett et al., 2001). “Supervisors should not

wait for racial and cultural issues to come up during supervision, but rather supervisors should

take initiative and raise these issues” (Gatmon et al., 2001, p. 109).

Numerous studies have been published on the components of successful versus

unsuccessful, supportive versus unsupportive, and competent versus incompetent multicultural

supervision (Falender et al., 2013; Falender, Shafranske, & Falicov, 2014; Inman et al., 2014).

These studies all showed that culturally responsive supervisors demonstrate and appreciate the

multicultural aspects of clients during case presentations and continually encourage supervisees’

recognition and interest regarding the diversity variables of their clients. This appreciation, in

turn, can create a stronger therapeutic alliance between the supervisee and the client (Burkard et

al., 2006).

8

Multicultural Supervisory Framework and Processes

The competency-based approach to clinical supervision provides a framework with which

to understand complex issues of diversity variables and their interactions among supervisor,

supervisee, and clients (Falender, Shafranske, & Falicov, 2014). Addressing diversity issues and

challenges should always be acknowledged and be part of the ongoing conversations in clinical

supervision.

A supervisor using a multicultural framework models openness, self-awareness, and the

integration of values, beliefs, and biases in relation to culturally diverse clients and their social

contexts (Falender, Shafranske, & Falicov, 2014). It can be said that all supervision is

multicultural because culture incorporates the influences of issues such as gender, race, ethnicity,

sexual orientation, religion and spirituality, and socioeconomic status on our assumptions,

thoughts, and behaviors (Killian, 2001).

Ancis and Ladany (2001) proposed a framework for multicultural supervision

competencies influenced by the APA guidelines for clinical training and codes of ethics. Ancis

and Ladany’s multicultural supervision guidelines were divided into five areas: (a) personal

development, (b) conceptualization, (c) interventions, (d) process, and (e) evaluation. In the

supervision literature, these domains have all been recognized as important for the personal and

professional development of supervisors and supervisees as well as clinical techniques and

interventions (Ancis & Marshall, 2010). The personal development domain consists of

supervisor-focused personal development and supervisee-focused personal development.

Supervisor-focused personal development refers to the process of self-awareness and knowledge

of multicultural beliefs, biases, strengths, and limitations. This domain also involves supervisors’

participation in related training, educational, and consultative multicultural experiences.

9

Supervisee-focused personal development refers to facilitating discussions and encouraging

supervisee self-exploration, awareness, and understanding of one’s cultural knowledge (Ancis &

Ladany, 2001).

The conceptualization domain encourages consideration of the impact of personal and

contextual factors on clients’ lives and the examination of the impact of stereotyping and

oppression on clients’ perspectives and concerns. The interventions domain refers to supervisors

encouraging consideration and flexibility regarding the use of interventions and alternative

approaches that are culturally appropriate and relevant with diverse clients. The process domain

encourages a supervisory alliance that conveys acceptance, respect, and support. This domain

also refers to discussions of power dynamics in supervision and facilitating a climate in which

diversity variables can be openly and safely discussed. Finally, the evaluation domain refers to

the ethical responsibility of supervisors to identify and provide feedback regarding supervisees’

multicultural strengths and weaknesses. Considering the various and interrelated demands of the

supervisor’s responsibilities, Ancis and Ladany (2001) mentioned the possibility of some overlap

among the competencies identified across these five dimensions.

To summarize, a multicultural framework in supervision provides guidelines for

supervisors to consciously integrate diversity variables and global perspectives in the supervisory

process (Falender, Shafranske, & Falicov, 2014). The goal is to enhance the success of the

working relationship between the supervisor and the supervisee as well as the therapeutic

alliance between the supervisee and the client.

One of the most fundamental notions of effective clinical supervision is creating a

collaborative supervisory interaction grounded in honest and constructive conversations. The

responsibility of creating an environment where trainees can discover and share their values and

10

beliefs lies with the supervisor (Falender & Shafranske, 2014; Yabusaki, 2010). In this

collaborative and supportive environment, trainees can feel safe to be vulnerable, reveal

uncertainties, and to accept suggestions and feedback (Ancis & Marshall, 2010). It is worth

noting that this type of relational safety does not refer to blind validation and emotional support,

but to the development of critical thinking in a caring relational environment (Hernández &

McDowell, 2010).

The current supervision literature shows that when supervisors attended to diversity and

power issues in supervision, supervisees reported increased satisfaction with supervision

(Gatmon et al., 2001; Inman, 2006; Murphy & Wright, 2005). Furthermore, supervisees reported

a higher level of satisfaction with the supervision experiences when they viewed their

supervisors to be competent in addressing and discussing diversity variables (Inman, 2006).

In a qualitative study of the experiences of supervisees in multicultural supervision, Hird

et al. (2001) stated that supervisees reported that having discussions of cultural interactions in

supervision had a great positive impact on supervisory alliance. Most importantly, racial identity

interactions between the supervisors and supervisees not only influenced the supervisory

alliance, but also the development of the supervisees’ multicultural competence. The authors also

stated that “multicultural supervision consists of the process of modeling, supporting, teaching,

coaching and evaluating a supervisee’s development” (p. 118). A multiculturally competent

supervisor attempts to recognize the supervisee’s understanding of “self in the world” and how

the self can be validated, sustained, and used to conceptualize the supervisee’s growth.

When supervisors fail to integrate cultural and diversity variables in the supervision

process, supervisees may experience frustration and resistance and view their supervisors as

culturally insensitive and incompetent (Burkard, Knox, Clarke, Phelps, & Inman, 2014; Hird et

11

al., 2001). In addition, not addressing multicultural issues in supervision can lead supervisees to

feel misunderstood, miscommunicated, disconnected, dismissed, and ignored by their

supervisors, which, in turn, makes the supervision process unsatisfying and negative (Burkard et

al., 2006).

Multicultural Competence in Clinical Supervisors

The APA’s recent Clinical Supervision Guidelines (APA, 2015) and Multicultural

Guidelines (APA, 2017) as well as current leading models of supervision all identified the

importance of attending to diversity issues in the supervision process (Falender, 2018; Falender,

Shafranske, & Falicov, 2014; Falender, Shafranske, & Ofek, 2014; Inman & Ladany, 2014;

Tohidian & Quek, 2017; Westefeld, 2009). Domain B, Diversity, of the Clinical Supervision

Guidelines (APA, 2015) highlighted many supervisory behaviors that are associated with

multicultural competence in supervision. Supervisors should explore multicultural issues during

supervision with supervisees, such as by placing focus on the diverse identities in the supervisory

dyad in order to benefit supervisees and clients.

In recent years, there has been an increased number of articles and studies focused on

conducting culturally competent and effective supervision (Borders, 2014; Falender et al., 2013;

Falender, Shafranske, & Falicov, 2014; Falender, Shafranske, & Ofek, 2014; Hernández &

McDowell, 2010; Tohidian & Quek, 2017; Watkins, 2014). Over the past few decades,

multicultural competence in therapy also received heightened attention in the mental health

literature (Ancis & Marshall, 2010; Clauss-Ehlers, Chiriboga, Hunter, Roysurcar, & Tummala-

Narra, 2019; Inman & DeBoer Kreider, 2013; Watkins, 2014).

Ancis and Marshall (2010) defined cultural competence as having an awareness of one’s

own cultural beliefs and biases, understanding the personal and cultural worldviews of diverse

12

clients, and being committed to developing ways to appropriately work with client of diverse

cultural background. Researchers have also suggested that supervisor self-disclosure, self-

awareness, genuine attention, and support and non-defensive feedback can contribute to a

culturally responsive supervisory relationship (Bernard & Goodyear, 2014; Christiansen et al.,

2011; Falender & Shafranske, 2017; Inman & Ladany, 2014; Tohidian & Quek, 2017).

Through the examination of the literature available on various dimensions of providing

multiculturally competent supervision, common themes can be identified. Overall, the literature

supports the supervisor as the key to inviting multiculturalism into the supervisory discussion

and instigating active dialogues regarding diversity and differences (Falender, 2018; Falender,

Shafranske, & Ofek, 2014; Fouad & Chavez-Korell, 2014; Furr & Brown-Rice, 2016; Phillips,

Parent, Dozier & Jackson, 2017; Trimble & King, 2014). In order to accomplish this, the

supervisor need to embody a certain degree of openness, self-disclosure, and self-awareness

regarding his or her own identity development related to multicultural factors as well as foster an

environment of safety and self-exploration within the supervisory relationship (Bernard &

Goodyear, 2014; Clauss-Ehlers et al., 2019; Falender & Shafranske, 2017; Tohidian & Quek,

2017). This can be done via the creation of clear goals and expectations of supervision (Falender,

Shafranske, & Falicov, 2014).

Furthermore, the creation of clear boundaries and expectations of supervision may also

counteract the fear of repudiation can prevent supervisees from bringing issues of

multiculturalism into the supervision (Sue, Rivera, Capodilupo, Lin, & Torino, 2010). The client

will be better served and all aspects of the client’s identity will be considered when supervisory

issues related to diversity and culture are further addressed. Increased self-awareness and self-

13

exploration will not only be beneficial to the treatment of clients, but also to supervisors and

supervisees both personally and professionally.

Limitations and Gaps in Multicultural Supervision Literature

Through the process of examining the current literature regarding multicultural

competence in clinical supervision, it is evident that the existing knowledge and literature must

be further expanded to fully address all aspects of multiculturalism within clinical practice and

supervision. Although there is readily available literature on conceptual theories and models of

multicultural supervision, there is a relative lack of literature that addressed the various aspects

of the actual implementation of multicultural supervision through the use of specific practices

and techniques.

Literature on multicultural psychotherapy and competence has flourished since the 1990s

but is still in its early stages (Ladany, 2014). The literature on multicultural supervision has also

flourished but few authors reviewed and discussed best practices in teaching about the

supervision process (Bernard & Luke, 2015; Ladany, 2014). In fact, a content analysis of the last

10 years of published supervision articles in counseling revealed that even articles that were

identified as training articles only contained descriptions of supervision processes and not the

teaching and actual practice of these processes (Bernard & Luke, 2015). This is an indication that

currently there is an imbalance in the focus of literature where scholarly opinions regarding

multicultural supervision are outpacing studies that focus on the actual implementation and

practices of clinical multicultural supervision (Falender & Shafranske, 2017). Leaders in the field

of multicultural supervision continue to call for the studies of supervision techniques of initiating

and maintaining discussion of multicultural issues in supervision (Falender et al., 2013; Falender,

Shafranske, & Ofek, 2014; Gatmon et al., 2001; Inman & Ladany, 2014).

14

Supervisors continue to face the challenges of addressing, facilitating, and integrating

multicultural issues in supervision. These challenges encountered by supervisors can be the

result of multiculturally incorrect perceptions of supervision and psychotherapy by minimizing

or ignoring multicultural issues (Ancis & Ladany, 2010; Inman, 2006; Ladany, 2014).

Furthermore, researchers and theorists speculate that difficulties in supervision related to

multicultural issues often occur because many experienced supervisors may have entered the

mental health field before the emergence of the multicultural movement in psychology and

therefore do not know how to address issues of race and culture in the therapy or supervision

process (Jernigan, Green, Helms, Perez-Gualdron, & Henze, 2010). As a result, there is a

significant need for multicultural supervision training among supervisors in order to promote

effective supervision and help ensure supervisees’ competency in providing services to clients.

Over the last 30 years, authors and researchers have proposed many models of

multicultural supervision that contributed to the conceptualization and understanding of this

important field. However, very few existing models offer clear instructions for the application of

the concepts through specific multicultural supervisory behaviors in supervision beyond simply

introducing multiculturalism as a topic in supervision (Bernard & Luke, 2015; Ober et al., 2009).

In addition, the current existing research is limited in terms of the qualities and sources through

which supervisors gain multicultural competencies and researchers have noted the importance

for supervisors to obtain training and education on multicultural supervision as studies have

shown there is a low frequency of discussions related to cultural variables during supervision that

are initiated by supervisors (Falender, 2018; Falender & Shafranske, 2017; Fukuyama, 1994;

Gatmon et al., 2001; Phillips et al., 2017; Priest, 1994).

15

As such, there is a need to explore and identify whether there are any specific

multicultural supervisory practices and behaviors in clinical supervision that are commonly

considered to be most important by experienced supervisors. Furthermore, multicultural

supervisory behaviors that are identified by experienced supervisors can be compared to those

recommended as best practices based on the current literature to examine the differences

between the current recommended standards in multicultural supervision and the actual

implementation of these standards in actual practice at active training sites.

Purpose of Study and Research Question

The purpose of this exploratory study was to invite experienced supervisors at active

training sites to rate and categorize a list of specific supervisor behaviors that best demonstrate

multicultural supervision competence and address diversity in clinical supervision as well as to

determine whether there was consensus among the participants. This categorized list of

behaviors can then be used to assess current multicultural supervisory practices at training sites

compared to the recommendations of current literature, as possible multicultural supervision

guidelines for supervisors, and in future studies to explore supervisory multicultural competence

and actual implementations of multicultural supervisory practices at active training sites.

Using quantitative data and descriptive and frequency analyses, this study was designed

to investigate the most important multicultural supervisory practices as recommended by

experienced supervisors in multicultural psychology through the use of a survey. The research

questions for this study were:

1. What are the best practices in addressing diversity in clinical supervision as

recommended by experienced supervisors?

16

2. Are there any discrepancies between the best practices recommended by experienced

supervisors and suggested by current literature publications?

17

Method

Research Approach and Design

This study involved the use of a survey approach to assess participants’ opinions

regarding effective multicultural supervision practices. Specifically, the use of an Internet-based

instrument provided for relatively expedited, straightforward, and cost-effective recruitment and

survey administration (Hoonakker & Carayon, 2009). In addition, the study procedures reflected

several recommendations for enhancing recruitment and participation in web-based survey

studies (Hoonakker & Carayon, 2009). Descriptive and frequency distribution approaches to data

analysis were used to investigate the best practices to address diversity issues in clinical

supervision as recommended by survey participants.

Participants

Participants recruited for this study were licensed psychologists who were currently

supervising trainees or interns or had provided supervision previously. They were required to

have at least 5 years of supervision experience and to have supervised at least 10 supervisees.

Participants were recruited from several sources: (a) members of the APA Division 45, (b)

members of the Association of Black Psychologists, (c) members of the Asian APA, (d)

members of the National Latina/o Psychological Association, and (e) university and college

counseling center directors. Participants were also asked to forward recruitment announcement

email to other licensed psychologists who would be interested in participating in the study.

For the purpose of this study, “experienced supervisors” were defined as licensed

psychologists who were highly experienced in multicultural psychology and supervision based

on years of experience working in settings that served a diverse population (at least 5 years of

post-doctoral supervision experience) and the number of supervisees supervised (at least 10

18

supervisees). Those who met the selection criteria were selected based on the information

included in the demographic questionnaire given at the beginning of the survey.

A total of 122 licensed psychologists responded to the recruitment announcement and

email by completing the consent for this study; however, 60 individuals consented but did not

complete the survey and were therefore excluded from data analysis. Overall, 62 licensed

psychologists participated and completed the survey study. Of the 62 participants, 18 participants

were excluded as a result of not meeting the selection criteria of having at least 5 years of

postdoctoral supervision experience and having supervised at least 10 supervisees, resulting in a

final sample of 44.

General characteristics of participants. Detailed demographic characteristics of the 44

participants are displayed in Table 1. Participants ranged in age from 34 to 66 years (M = 49.2,

SD = 8.11). The range of years of licensure was from 5 to 36 years (M = 15.16, SD = 7.26). Of

the 44 participants, 30 (68.18%) were female and 14 (31.82%) were male. With regard to

racial/ethnic identification, 68.18% of the participants identified as Caucasian/White, 9.09% as

African American/Black, 9.09% as Latinx, 6.82% as bi-racial or multiracial, 4.54% as Asian, and

2.27% as Iranian. With regard to sexual orientation, 84.09% identified as heterosexual, 4.54% as

lesbian, 4.54% as pansexual, 2.27% as gay, 2.27% as gay or queer, and 2.27% did not report

their sexual orientation. In terms of primary theoretical orientation, 25% described their

orientation as integrative or eclectic, 20.45% as cognitive, 15.91% as psychodynamic or

relational, 9.09% as humanistic, 4.54% as cognitive-behavioral, 4.54% as feminist, 4.54% as

multicultural, 2.27% as behavioral, 2.27% as existential, 2.27% as interpersonal (IPT), 2.27% as

neuropsychotherapy, 2.27% as postmodern constructive, 2.27% as relational or cultural, and

2.27% as systems or family systems. With regard to most recent work, training, or teaching site,

19

52.27% were in a university counseling center, 18.18% were in a veteran affairs medical center,

9.09% were in multiple sites, 6.82% were in private practice, 4.54% were in medical school,

2.27% were in an armed forces medical center, 2.27% were in child or adolescent psychiatric or

pediatrics, 2.27% were in community mental health, and 2.27% were in a state funded non-profit

agency or regional center. Finally, 86.36% of the participants reported not being an APA

Division 45 member, 11.36% reported being a member of APA Division 45, and 2.27% did not

respond.

Supervision and supervision training experience characteristics of participants.

Detailed supervision and supervision training experience characteristics of the 44 participants are

displayed in Table 2. A total of 90.91% of the participants were currently providing supervision

and 9.09% were not currently supervising. Years of supervision experience ranged from 5 to 36

years (M = 14.11, SD = 6.43). The number of supervisees they supervised in the last 10 years

ranged from 10 to 200 (M = 36.5, SD = 31.96). The current weekly number of supervisees they

supervised was reported to be from 0 to 13 (M = 3.98, SD = 3.25). The number of weekly hours

that participants spent on direct supervision ranged from 0 to 10 hours (M = 3.77, SD = 2.01).

The number of weekly hours spent on indirect supervision ranged from 0 to 20 hours (M = 4, SD

= 4.39). With regard to number of supervision workshops or trainings attended during the last 2

licensure cycles, the range was from 0 to 10 (M = 3.09, SD = 2.48). The number of multicultural

supervision workshops or trainings attended during the last two licensure cycles ranged from 0 to

5 (M = 1.32, SD = 1.33). In terms of the number of supervision books or articles read during the

last two licensure cycles, participants’ reports ranged from 0 to 50 (M = 5.75, SD = 8.6) and the

number of multicultural supervision books or articles read during the last two licensure cycles

ranged from 0 to 15 (M = 3.43, SD = 4.14). A total of 54.55% of the participants did not take a

20

graduate course in clinical supervision and 45.45% did. Of the participants, 88.65% took a

graduate course in culture or diversity and 11.36% did not. Finally, 72.73% of the participants

received supervision of supervision and 27.27% did not.

Instrumentation

The web-based survey instrument included a Demographic Questionnaire and the

Multicultural Supervisory Behaviors and Practices form (see Appendices B-C).

Demographic questionnaire. The Demographic Questionnaire was developed for the

purpose of collecting information regarding demographics of study participants (e.g., age,

gender, ethnicity, supervision setting, supervision experience, theoretical orientation) by

participant self-report. This measure consisted of free response and force-choice items. The

Demographic Questionnaire can be found in Appendix C.

Multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices form. The Multicultural

Supervisory Behaviors and Practices (MSBP) form was developed for the purpose of this

investigation to assess the best supervisory behaviors and practices in addressing diversity issues

in clinical supervision. The MSBP consists of 20 specific supervisory behaviors and practices

that facilitate discussions of diversity issues and cultivate multicultural competence in clinical

supervision (e.g., “articulating a commitment to develop multicultural competence by discussing

expectations within the first two supervision sessions” and “addressing feelings of discomfort

experienced by trainees concerning multicultural issue”). During the first part of the survey,

participants were asked to rate each behavior into one of two categories based on its importance

on addressing diversity issues in clinical supervision (1 was more important and 2 was less

important). The participants were also instructed to only include 10 specific behaviors in each

category. During the second part of the survey, participants were asked again to rate the 10

21

behaviors they rated as more important in the first part into one of two categories based on their

importance on addressing diversity issues in clinical supervision (1 was most important and 2

was moderately important). The participants were also instructed to only include five specific

behaviors in each category. Items on the MSBP form were specifically selected and developed

based on successful multicultural supervisory behaviors identified in current literature. Each

behavior or practice was carefully worded to be action-focused as well as to be

observable/measurable. The MSBP can be found in Appendix B.

Respondents were provided the following instructions in Part I:

On the following page, there are 20 specific multicultural supervisory behaviors. As you read through the behaviors, please rate the behaviors into one of two categories (1 more important and 2 less important) based on its importance on addressing diversity issues in clinical supervision. Please ONLY include 10 behaviors in EACH category.

Respondents were provided the following instructions in Part II:

On the following page, there are 10 specific multicultural supervisory behaviors that you have just rated as more important. As you read through the behaviors again, please rate the behaviors into one of two categories (1 most important and 2 moderately important) based on its importance on addressing diversity issues in clinical supervision. Please ONLY include 5 behaviors in EACH category. The MSBP form was developed based on an extensive review of the literature on

competency-based supervision practices, effective and ineffective supervisory behaviors,

supervision processes and outcomes, cross-cultural and multicultural supervision, power and

diversity in supervision, and cultural responsiveness in clinical supervision. Based on the

literature review (see Ancis & Marshall, 2010; Burkard et al., 2006; Dressel et al., 2007; Duan &

Roehlke, 2001; Estrada, Frame, & Williams, 2004; Foo & Rodolfa, 2013; Fukuyama, 1994;

Garrett et al., 2001; Gatmon et al., 2001; Green & Dekkers, 2010; Hernández, Taylor, &

McDowell, 2009; Hird, Tao, & Gloria, 2005; Jernigan et al., 2010; Kaduvettoor et al., 2009;

22

Ladany et al., 2013; Magnuson, Wilcoxon, & Norem, 2000; Murphy-Shigematsu, 2010; Ryde,

2000; Taylor, Hernandez, Deri, Rankin, & Siegel, 2007; Toporek et al., 2004; Wong et al.,

2013), the researcher initially compiled an inventory of 82 behaviors or practices but later

narrowed the list down for redundancies and identified 20 supervisor-specific behaviors or

practices that have the most importance in addressing diversity issues in clinical supervision.

Each behavior or practice was carefully worded to be action-focused as well as observable or

measurable for the purpose of this study.

A majority of the items in the MSBP form are similar to the top 20 elements of successful

multicultural supervision developed based on a 2007 study published by Dressel et al.. In their

study, university counseling center supervisors with significant experience in multicultural

supervision generated and ranked elements of successful and unsuccessful multicultural

supervision using the Delphi method. The Delphi method is widely used in the counseling field

as a relevant process to achieve consensus among knowledgeable respondents (e.g., Dimmitt,

Carey, & McGannon, 2005; Doerries & Foster, 2005; Norcross, Hedges, & Prochaska, 2002). In

the Delphi method, researchers gather a panel of knowledgeable participants, typically through a

nomination process that identifies individuals considered experienced in the area being surveyed.

The panel is surveyed repeatedly (in several rounds) to arrive at a consensus opinion on a topic

of interest (Dalkey, Rourke, Lewis, & Snyder, 1972).

Procedures

Data collection occurred through the use of a web-based survey instrument designed

specifically for this study that contained two primary components of (a) participant

demographics and (b) multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices.

23

Recruitment. Recruitment of study participants occurred following study approval by

Pepperdine University’s Institutional Review Board (IRB). Following final IRB approval,

recruitment opened for a period of 2 months. Initial invitations were sent via email with one

follow-up reminder after approximately 3 weeks. In order to make the study available to as many

potential participants identified above, recruitment occurred via three main approaches. First, the

managers of the listservs of the specific psychological associations identified were contacted via

email and asked to post a recruitment announcement containing invitation for study participation

on the listserv websites. Second, invitations for study participation were sent via emails acquired

through an online search of individuals who self-identified as members of the specific

psychological associations. Third, these announcements invited recipients to forward the survey

to any individuals who were eligible for study participation. This type of snowball sampling

method allowed participants who may not have received the invitation from the first two

recruitment methods to access the survey and participate in the study. One drawback of using

this recruitment method is that participants may receive an invitation to participate more than

once and will have the opportunity to participate more than once. However, the web-based

program housing the survey only allowed each computer IP address to access the survey once,

although the IP addresses were not recorded or stored to protect participant anonymity.

Recruitment materials are included in Appendices D through G.

Protection of human subjects. The study proposal was submitted to Pepperdine

University’s Graduate and Professional Schools IRB to ensure the protection of participants. The

investigator sought expedited IRB review and approval as the study posed no greater than

minimal risk to participants. Risk was reduced by not collecting identifying information from

participants and through the use of hypothetical supervision experiences as opposed to asking

24

about participants’ personal experiences. In addition, the hypothetical supervision experiences

comprised multicultural supervisory behaviors of which the participants were aware because

these behaviors are required competencies in multicultural supervision (Borders, 2104; Soheilian

et al., 2014; Watkins, 2014). Potential participants were informed of the purpose of the study,

study procedures, estimated participation time, protection of confidentiality, and potential risks

and benefits associated with participation. They were advised that participation was strictly

voluntary and that they may refuse to answer questions or discontinue the study at any time.

Consent for participation. Because risk to participants was minimized in this study by

not collecting identifying information, the investigator applied for a Waiver of Documentation of

Informed Consent from the IRB. Instead, the invitation for research participation and survey

included a statement of informed consent and stated that the participants were confirming their

consent by completing the survey and were asked to check the confirmation box prior to

beginning the survey. The informed consent statement included the aforementioned information

related to the study, including the purpose, procedures, the rights of human research subjects, and

the potential risks and benefits associated with study participation.

Potential risks and benefits. This study was thought to pose no more than minimal risk

to participants. Risks included inconvenience as a result of time spent participating in the study

(approximately 15 minutes), fatigue, and the potential for distressing reactions in response to

survey items. The risk of distressing emotional reactions was minimized in this study through the

use of hypothetical supervision experiences. Risk for this study was also minimized by

attempting to make the administration as convenient as possible, through not collecting any

identifying information regarding participants, and through suggesting that participants seek

assistance to deal with any distress related to participation. Participants were provided the name

25

and contact information of the researcher and the project advisor, and advised to seek help in the

event the study procedure results in distress. No participants contacted the researcher reporting

adverse events over the course of this study.

Participants might not have directly benefited from study participation. However, it was

believed that this study would provide information related to effective multicultural supervision

that may help future psychology trainees and supervisors. Potential benefits included the

opportunity to reflect on their multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices with their

supervisees.

Data collection. Data were collected via a web-based survey to recruit participants

nationwide, eliminating geographic restrictions and reducing costs. The data collection window

for the current study was January 16, 2019 through March 21, 2019. Surveys administered

through email and the Internet generally have a shorter response time and better response quality

compared to postal mail surveys and also show similar response rates (52% versus 51%) to

postal mail surveys (Hoonakker & Carayon, 2009). The use of the Internet to recruit and

administer the study survey presented advantages for potential participants, as it was relatively

quicker to participate, convenient to access the survey at anytime and from any location for the

duration of data collection, and protected the confidentiality of participants. These factors

potentially contributed to higher response rate and presumably honest reporting by participants

(Hoonakker & Carayon, 2009).

In addition, collecting raw data online reduced the time and cost associated with manual

data entry as well as prevented human error associated with manual data entry. An online

service, Qualtrics, was used for housing the study questionnaires and protecting participant

anonymity by not obtaining information about IP addresses accessing the website. The use of an

26

online survey service also enabled the data to be converted to a digital database that facilitated

data analyses. The data will be stored on a password-protected external computer drive for 5

years and will then be destroyed by the investigator.

Data analysis. Prior to analyzing the data collected, the raw data were examined for

missing information and errors and a determination was made regarding final data inclusion in

the analysis. The final dataset was converted from the web-based survey to data analysis

software and analyzed through a combination of descriptive statistics and frequency analyses.

Descriptive statistics were used to report the categorical and continuous variables of participant

demographics as well as supervision and supervision training experience (See Tables 1 & 2).

Chi-Square goodness of fit test was used to compare and report the observed sample distribution

with the expected probability distribution of the multicultural supervisory behaviors that were

rated by study participants as most important (See Table 3).

27

Results

The purpose of this exploratory study was to invite licensed psychologists who were

experienced in the field of multicultural psychology and supervision to rate and categorize a list

of specific supervisor behaviors and practices that are most important in demonstrating

multicultural supervision competence and addressing diversity in clinical supervision. A total of

44 completed surveys were used in data analyses. A chi-square goodness-of-fit test was used to

compare the observed sample frequency distribution with the expected probability distribution of

the multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices that were rated by study participants as

most important. Results of the goodness-of-fit test indicated the frequencies of multicultural

supervisory behaviors and practices that were rated as most important were not equally

distributed within this sample; these frequencies were statistically different from what would be

expected by chance (See Table 3).

It appears the following multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices were regarded

as having the highest level of importance (See Table 3):

• Creating a safe (nonjudgmental, supportive) environment for the discussion of

multicultural issues, values, and ideas through the use of verbal and nonverbal

communication

• Addressing feelings of discomfort experienced by trainees concerning multicultural

issues

• Inviting supervisee to explore and discuss the possible existence of personal cultural

biases and prejudices in the conceptualization and practice with clients

• Acknowledging and discussing realities of racism and oppression during supervision

28

• Providing supervisees with a multiculturally diverse caseload to ensure breadth of

clinical experience

• Acknowledging and discussing power issues in supervision that may be related to

racial or ethnic multicultural differences

• Modeling for supervisees by initiating, attending to, and demonstrating interest and

respect for clients’ intersecting identities and culture during case conceptualization

and discussion

It appears the following multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices were regarded

as having the lowest level of importance (See Table 4):

• Encouraging supervisees to share, within supervision, their personal and professional

cultural backgrounds and experiences

• Consulting colleagues willingly about one’s own reactions to racial or ethnic

concerns as a result of any supervision experience

• Acknowledging, discussing, and providing affirming statements that demonstrate

respect for racial or ethnic multicultural similarities and differences between the self

and supervisee, and discussing feelings concerning these similarities or differences

• Self-disclosing own development of self-awareness about cultural and ethnic identity,

biases, and limitations

• Providing recommended multicultural readings and related training experiences to

supervisee

29

Discussion

The focus in this study was to explore whether certain multicultural supervisor behaviors

and practices in demonstrating multicultural supervision competence and addressing diversity in

clinical supervision are commonly considered to be the most important by licensed psychologists

who are experienced in the field of multicultural psychology and supervision. Results showed a

number of multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices were commonly regarded as having

the highest level of importance by study participants. The major finding of this study indicated

that participants rated practices that focused on the supervisee and on process importance more

highly and practices that focused on the supervisor less highly. This is further discussed in detail

in the following section.

Study Results and Multicultural Supervision Competency Framework

Multicultural supervision has been defined as a “supervisor’s ability to address and

facilitate cultural discussions in supervision; incorporate culturally sensitive interventions,

assessments, client conceptualizations; and evaluate the multicultural competence of her or his

supervisee” (Soheilian et al., 2014, p. 380). Multicultural supervision considers and integrates

“multiple cultural interactions as they occur within the triadic process of the supervisor,

supervisee, and client;” it also represents the multiple cultural interactions and contexts that

occur within counseling and supervision dyads (Hird et al., 2001, p. 118).

As suggested by the Competency Benchmarks published by Falender et al. in 2013,

supervisors are responsible for attending to and initiating discussions of multicultural issues and

identities and for preparing psychology trainees to address these issues in their own respective

advocacy, practice, and research settings. Much of the existing literature also supports that

supervisors bear the responsibility to initiate discussions of multicultural issues with supervisees,

30

especially during the initial phase of supervision. Supervision that consciously encourages

explorations of multicultural issues has been shown to promote growth in supervisees’ cultural

competencies (Killian, 2001; Ladany, Inman, Constantine, & Hofheinz, 1997). This means

supervisors have to be willing to be proactive, to be willing to do some self-exploration, and to

have courage to talk openly with supervisees about potentially uncomfortable issues (Garrett et

al., 2001). According to Gatmon et al. (2001), “Supervisors should not wait for racial and

cultural issues to come up during supervision, but rather supervisors should take initiative and

raise these issues” (p. 109).

Ancis and Marshall (2010) delineated six domains under which multicultural supervision

practices fall: (a) supervisor-focused personal development, (b) supervisee-focused personal

development, (c) conceptualization, (d) interventions, (e) process, and (f) evaluation. Based on

the current survey results, multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices that are more

frequently regarded as having the highest level of importance can be categorized into one of the

six domains listed above (See Table 4):

• Process – Creating a safe (nonjudgmental, supportive) environment for the discussion

of multicultural issues, values, and ideas through the use of verbal and nonverbal

communication

• Supervisee-focused personal development – Addressing feelings of discomfort

experienced by trainees concerning multicultural issues

• Supervisee-focused personal development – Inviting supervisees to explore and

discuss the possible existence of personal cultural biases and prejudices in the

conceptualization and practice with clients

31

• Supervisee-focused personal development – Acknowledging and discussing realities

of racism and oppression during supervision

• Process – Providing supervisees with a multiculturally diverse caseload to ensure

breadth of clinical experience

• Process – Acknowledging and discussing power issues in supervision that may be

related to racial or ethnic multicultural differences

• Conceptualization – Modeling for supervisees by initiating, attending to, and

demonstrating interest and respect for clients’ intersecting identities and culture

during case conceptualization and discussion

In addition, the multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices that are regarded as

having less degree of importance can also be categorized into one of the six domains as specified

above (See Table 4):

• Supervisee-focused personal development – Encouraging supervisees to share, within

supervision, their personal and professional cultural backgrounds and experiences

• Supervisor-focused personal development – Consulting colleagues willingly about

one’s own reactions to racial or ethnic concerns as a result of any supervision

experience

• Supervisor-focused personal development – Acknowledging, discussing, and

providing affirming statements that demonstrate respect for racial or ethnic

multicultural similarities and differences between the self and supervisee, and

discussing feelings concerning these similarities or differences

• Supervisor-focused personal development – Self-disclosing own development of self-

awareness about cultural or ethnic identity, biases, and limitations

32

• Supervisee-focused personal development – Providing recommended multicultural

readings and related training experiences to supervisees

A closer examination of the seven multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices

regarded as the most important by the participants of this study revealed that three behaviors and

practices belong to the process domain: creating a safe (nonjudgmental, supportive) environment

for discussion of multicultural issues, values, and ideas through the use of verbal and nonverbal

communication; providing supervisee with a multiculturally diverse caseload to ensure breadth

of clinical experience; acknowledging and discussing power issues in supervision that may be

related to racial/ethnic multicultural differences. Three behaviors and practices belong to the

supervisee-focused personal development domain: addressing feelings of discomfort experienced

by trainees concerning multicultural issue; inviting supervisee to explore and discuss possible

existence of personal cultural biases and prejudices on the conceptualization and practice with

clients; and acknowledging and discussing realities of racism/oppression during supervision. One

behavior belongs to the conceptualization domain: modeling for supervisee by initiating,

attending to, and demonstrating interest and respect for client’s intersecting identities and culture

during case conceptualization and discussion. It is worth noting that the most important

supervisory behavior identified in this study was “Creating a safe (nonjudgmental, supportive)

environment for discussion of multicultural issues, values, and ideas through the use of verbal

and nonverbal communication,” which is consistent with the supervisory behavior identified by

Dressel and colleagues in a 2007 study (Dressel et al., 2007) as the most important behavioral

element involved in successful multicultural supervision.

A closer examination of the five multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices that

participants regarded as having less degree of importance revealed that three behaviors and

33

practices belong to the supervisor-focused personal development domain: consulting colleagues

willingly about my own reactions to racial/ethnic concerns as a result of any supervision

experience; acknowledging, discussing, and providing affirming statements that demonstrate

respect for racial/ethnic multicultural similarities and differences between myself and supervisee,

and discussing feelings concerning these similarities and/or differences; and self-disclosing own

development of self-awareness about cultural/ethnic identity, biases, and limitations. Two

behaviors and practices belong to the supervisee-focused personal development domain:

encouraging supervisee to share, within supervision, their personal and professional cultural

background and experiences; and providing recommended multicultural readings and related

training experiences to supervisee.

Based on the results of this exploratory study, this author hypothesizes that the extent to

which a supervisory behavior is believed to be important by supervisors will affect the frequency

of their performance of that behavior when they are conducting supervision. In other words, this

study results support that the current multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices viewed as

most important and perhaps practiced more frequently by supervisors have a greater emphasis on

the domains of process and supervisee-focused self development and less emphasis on the

domain of supervisor-focused self development. Though supervisors may put more of their focus

on creating a safe space and tending to supervisees’ thoughts and feelings regarding culture and

diversity issues, supervisors are less likely to actively bring up these issues in supervision. In

addition, there seemed to be a greater emphasis on managing multicultural issues through the

supervisee–client dyad and less focus on self-reflection and self-disclosure at the supervisee–

supervisor dyad level.

34

The study finding that supervisor-focused supervisory behaviors were rated as having

lower importance also supported findings in other research studies that showed supervisors are

taking a more passive stance toward initiating diversity conversation during supervision

(Fukuyama, 1994; Gatmon et al., 2001; Phillips et al., 2017; Priest, 1994). This passive approach

is contrary to the recommendations given in the existing multicultural supervision literature and

indicates that supervisors are more reliant on implicit communication and wait for supervisees to

initiate discussions of multicultural and diversity issues in supervision. This approach can

potentially lead to many missed opportunities for multicultural and diversity discussions by

placing the responsibility on supervisees to bring these issues into supervision––ultimately,

supervisees do not know what they do not know.

In order to foster and instill multicultural competency in supervisees, supervisors should

focus on communicating culture and diversity issues explicitly during supervision and pay

attention by proactively raising culture and diversity issues, exploring any discomfort that arises

from culture and diversity discussions, and modeling self-reflection as well as encouraging

supervisee self-reflection during supervision instead of passively waiting for these issues to be

brought up by supervisees.

Clinical Supervision and Multicultural Supervision Training

A closer look at survey participants’ responses on questions regarding continuing

education on clinical supervision and multicultural supervision revealed relatively low numbers

of workshops or trainings attended and books or articles read during the last two licensure cycles,

especially with regard to multicultural supervision. With regard to the number of supervision

workshops or trainings attended, the range was from 0 to 10 (M = 3.09, SD = 2.48) and five out

of the 44 participants (11.36%) stated they did not attend any supervision workshops or trainings.

35

The number of multicultural supervision workshops or trainings attended ranged from 0 to 5 (M

= 1.32, SD = 1.33) and 14 out of the 44 participants (31.82%) indicated they did not attend any

multicultural supervision workshops or trainings. In terms of the number of supervision books or

articles read during the last two licensure cycles, participants’ reports ranged from 0 to 50 (M =

5.75, SD = 8.6) and seven out of the 44 participants (15.91%) stated they did not read any

supervision books or articles. Finally, in terms of the number of multicultural supervision books

or articles read during the last two licensure cycles, the range was from 0 to 15 (M = 3.43, SD =

4.14) and nine out of the 44 participants (20.45%) indicated they did not read any multicultural

supervision books or articles. This indicates supervisors do not engage in adequate continuing

education regarding the topic of supervision and multicultural supervision. In addition, there is a

need for clinical supervisors to be exposed to and trained more in multicultural supervision

theories as well as learn strategies to effectively facilitate skills to initiate discussions about

culture and diversity issues in supervision.

Limitations

Several methodological limitations were identified in the study. First, this study relied

exclusively on self-report, which may result in self-report bias as it assumes participants are

being honest about their experiences, are not engaging in social desirability, and are able to

accurately recall their experiences. Another possible limitation is self-selection bias, with those

who were more interested in supervision and multicultural supervision being more likely to

participate in this study. Along these lines, there was a relatively low response rate given how

many venues for recruitment were used to reach out to elicit participation. This study also

included the assumptions that the results can be generalized to different clinical settings and the

sample surveyed in this study had expert knowledge in multicultural supervision based on work

36

settings and years of supervision experience. Furthermore, it was assumed that the 20

multicultural supervisory behaviors identified based on literature review were representative of

the best multicultural supervision practices. Finally, based on the small sample size, the results

may not be representative of the entire population of experienced clinical supervisors. Despite

these limitations, the present study did demonstrate the frequencies of multicultural supervisory

behaviors and practices viewed as most important were not equally distributed within this

sample, indicating some level of consensus on the most important behaviors among survey

participants. This study also offered some insight into the current practices of multicultural

supervision at training sites as well as the levels of multicultural supervision training received by

licensed psychologists who are providing supervision.

Directions for Future Research

Because this was an exploratory study with a relatively small sample size that was

designed to examine whether there was consensus among more experienced supervisors

regarding the most important multicultural supervisory behaviors, future research should be

conducted to explore whether there is a similar consensus with a larger sample size. Future

studies should also be conducted to explore whether there are any differences between the

opinions of experienced supervisors and the opinions of early career supervisors. It would also

be helpful to explore whether differences in opinion exist among supervisors who have

participated in more extensive continuing education regarding multicultural supervision

compared to those who have less extensive continuing education regarding multicultural

supervision. In addition, investigations should be conducted examining opinions and attitudes

regarding supervisory behaviors and the actual performance of these supervisory behaviors.

37

Conclusions

The purpose of this exploratory study was to invite licensed psychologists who were

experienced in the field of multicultural psychology and supervision to rate and categorize a list

of specific supervisor behaviors and practices that they considered to be most important in

demonstrating multicultural supervision competence and addressing diversity in clinical

supervision. A total of 44 completed surveys were used in data analyses. Results of the chi-

square goodness-of-fit test indicated the frequencies of multicultural supervisory behaviors and

practices rated as most important were not equally distributed within this sample and these

frequencies were statistically different from what would be expected by chance, indicating a

level of consensus among survey participants. This study provided a snapshot of what type of

multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices were viewed as most important by survey

participants and perhaps also currently practiced more frequently by supervisors at training sites.

Results support that when it comes to multicultural and diversity issues, supervisors tend to use a

more passive approach, which is contrary to what the present multicultural supervision literature

and research recommend as best practices. Furthermore, supervisors’ engagement in continuing

education regarding supervision and multicultural supervision is very limited. This indicates

there is a need for clinical supervisors to be exposed to and trained more in multicultural

supervision theories as well as to learn effective facilitative skills to initiate discussions about

culture and diversity issues in supervision.

38

REFERENCES

American Psychological Association. (2010). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of

conduct. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/principles.pdf

American Psychological Association. (2014). Guidelines for clinical supervision in health

service psychology. Retrieved from http://apa.org/about/policy/guidelines-supervision.pdf

American Psychological Association. (2015). Guidelines for clinical supervision in health

service psychology. American Psychologist, 70, 33–46. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038112

American Psychological Association. (2017). Multicultural guidelines: An ecological approach

to context, identity, and intersectionality, 2017. Retrieved from

http://www.apa.org/about/policy/multicultural-guidelines.aspx

Ancis, J. R., & Ladany, N. (2001). A multicultural framework for counselor supervision. In L. J.

Bradley & N. Ladany (Eds.), Counselor supervision: Principles, process, and practice

(3rd ed., pp. 63–90). New York, NY: Brunner-Routledge.

Ancis, J. R., & Ladany, N. (2010). A multicultural framework for counselor supervision. In N.

Ladany & L. J. Bradley (Eds.), Counselor supervision (4th ed., pp. 53–94). New York,

NY: Routledge.

Ancis, J. R., & Marshall, D. S. (2010). Using a multicultural framework to assess supervisees’

perceptions of culturally competent supervision. Journal of Counseling & Development,

88(3), 277–284. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6678.2010.tb00023.x

Atkinson, C., & Woods, K. (2007). A model of effective fieldwork supervision for trainee

educational psychologists. Educational Psychology in Practice, 23(4), 299–316.

https://doi.org/10.1080/02667360701660902

39

Barnett, J. E., & Molzon, C. H. (2014). Clinical supervision of psychotherapy: Essential ethics

issues for supervisors and supervisees. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 70(11), 1051–

1061. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22126

Bernard, J. M., & Goodyear, R. K. (2014). Fundamentals of clinical supervision (5th ed.). Upper

Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Bernard, J. M., & Luke, M. (2015). A content analysis of 10 years of clinical supervision articles

in counseling. Counselor Education and Supervision, 54(4), 242–257.

https://doi.org/10.1002/ceas.12024

Bhat, C. S., & Davis, T. E. (2007). Counseling supervisors’ assessment of race, racial identity,

and working alliance in supervisory dyads. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and

Development, 35(2), 80–91. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2007.tb00051.x

Borders, D. L. (2014). Best practices in clinical supervision: Another step in delineating effective

supervision practice. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 68(2), 151–162.

https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.2014.68.2.151

Burkard, A. W., Johnson, A. J., Madson, M. B., Pruitt, N. T., Contreras-Tadych, D. A.,

Kozlowski, J. E. M., . . . Knox, S. (2006). Supervisor cultural responsiveness and

unresponsiveness in cross-cultural supervision. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53(3),

288–301. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.53.3.288

Burkard, A. W., Knox, S., Clarke, R. D., Phelps, D. L., & Inman, A. G. (2014). Supervisors’

experiences of providing difficult feedback in cross-ethnic/racial supervision. The

Counseling Psychologist, 42(3), 314–344. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000012461157

Christiansen, A. T., Thomas, V., Kafescioglu, N., Karakurt, G., Lowe, W., Smith, W., &

Wittenborn, A. (2011). Multicultural supervision: Lessons learned about an ongoing

40

struggle. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 37(1), 109–119.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-0606.2009.00138.x

Clauss-Ehlers, C. S., Chiriboga, D. A., Hunter, S. J., Roysurcar, G., & Tummala-Narra, P.

(2019). APA multicultural guidelines executive summary: Ecological approach to

context, identity, and intersectionality. American Psychologist, 74(2), 232–244.

https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000382

Dalkey, N. G., Rourke, D. L., Lewis, R., & Snyder, D. (1972). Studies in the quality of life:

Delphi and decision-making. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

Dimmitt, G., Carey, J. G., & McGannon, W. (2005). Identifying a school counseling research

agenda: A Delphi study. Counselor Education and Supervision, 44, 214–228.

https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6978.2005.tb01748.x

Doerries, D. B., & Foster, V. A. (2005). Essential skills for novice structural family therapists: A

Delphi study of experienced practitioners’ perspectives. Family Journal: Counseling and

Therapy for Couples and Families, 13, 259–265.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1066480704273639

Dressel, J. L., Consoli, A. J., Kim, B. S. K., & Atkinson, D. R. (2007). Successful and

unsuccessful multicultural supervisory behaviors: A Delphi poll. Journal of Multicultural

Counseling and Development, 35(1), 51–64. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-

1912.2007.tb00049.x

Duan, C., & Roehlke, H. (2001). A descriptive “snapshot” of cross-racial supervision in

university counseling center internships. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and

Development, 29(2), 131–146. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2001.tb00510.x

41

Estrada, D., Frame, M. W., & Williams, C. B. (2004). Cross-cultural supervision: Guiding the

conversation toward race and ethnicity. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and

Development, 32, 307–319.

Falender, C. A. (2018). Clinical supervision—The missing ingredient. American

Psychologist, 73(9), 1240–1250. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000385

Falender, C. A., Burnes, T. R., & Ellis, M. V. (2013). Multicultural clinical supervision and

benchmarks: Empirical support informing practice and supervisor training. Counseling

Psychologist, 41(1), 8–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000012438417

Falender, C. A., & Shafranske, E. P. (2004). The practice of clinical supervision. In C. A.

Falender & E. P. Shafranske (Eds.), Clinical supervision: A competency-based approach

(pp. 3–35). Washington, DC: American Psychological

Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10806-001

Falender, C. A., & Shafranske, E. P. (2007). Competence in competency-based supervision

practice: Construct and application. Professional Psychology: Research & Practice,

38(3), 232–240. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.38.3.232

Falender, C. A., & Shafranske, E. P. (2014). Clinical supervision: The state of the art. Journal of

Clinical Psychology, 70(11), 1030–1041. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22124

Falender, C. A., & Shafranske, E. P. (2017). Competency-based clinical supervision: Status,

opportunities, tensions, and the future. Australian Psychologist, 52(2), 86–93.

https://doi.org/10.1111/ap.12265

Falender, C. A., Shafranske, E. P., & Falicov, C. J. (2014). Multiculturalism and diversity in

clinical supervision: A competency-based approach. Washington, DC: American

Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14370-000

42

Falender, C. A., Shafranske, E. P., & Ofek, A. (2014). Competent clinical supervision: Emerging

effective practices. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 27(4), 393–408.

https://doi.org/10.1080/09515070.2014.934785

Foo, K. N. M. R., & Rodolfa, E. R. (2013). Putting the benchmarks into practice: Multiculturally

competent supervisors-effective supervision. Counseling Psychologist, 41(1), 121–130.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000012453944

Fouad, N. A., & Chavez-Korell, S. (2014). Considering social class and socioeconomic status in

the context of multiple identities: An integrative clinical supervision approach. In C. A.

Falender, E. P. Shafranske, & C. J. Falicov (Eds.), Multiculturalism and diversity in

clinical supervision: A competency-based approach (pp. 145–161). Washington, DC:

American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14370-006

Fukuyama, M. A. (1994). Critical incidents in multicultural counseling supervision: A

phenomenological approach to supervision research. Counselor Education and

Supervision, 34(2), 142–151. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6978.1994.tb00321.x

Furr, S., & Brown-Rice, K. (2016). Doctoral students’ knowledge of educators’ problems of

professional competency. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 10(4),

223–230. https://doi.org/10.1037/tep0000131

Garrett, M. T., Borders, L. D. A., Crutchfield, L. B., Torres-Rivera, E., Brotherton, D., & Curtis,

R. (2001). Multicultural SuperVISION: A paradigm of cultural responsiveness for

supervisors. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 29(2), 147–158.

https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2001.tb00511.x

Gatmon, D., Jackson, D., Koshkarian, L., Martos-Perry, N., Molina, A., Patel, N., & Rodolfa, E.

(2001). Exploring ethnic, gender, and sexual orientation variables in supervision: Do they

43

really matter? Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 29(2), 102–113.

https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2001.tb00508.x

Goodyear, R., Lichtenberg, J. W., Bang, K., & Gragg, J. B. (2014). Ten changes

psychotherapists typically make as they mature into the role of supervisor. Journal of

Clinical Psychology, 70(11), 1042–1050. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22125

Green, M., & Dekkers, T. (2010). Attending to power and diversity in supervision: An

exploration of supervisee learning outcomes and satisfaction with supervision. Journal of

Feminist Family Therapy, 22(4), 293–312.

https://doi.org/10.1080/08952833.2010.528703

Hernández, P., & McDowell, T. (2010). Intersectionality, power, and relational safety in context:

Key concepts in clinical supervision. Training and Education in Professional

Psychology, 4(1), 29–35. https://doi-org/10.1037/a0017064

Hernández, P., Taylor, B. A., & McDowell, T. (2009). Listening to ethnic minority AAMFT

approved supervisors: Reflections on their experiences as supervisees. Journal of

Systemic Therapies, 28(1), 88-100. https://doi.org/10.1521/jsyt.2009.28.1.88

Hird, J. S., Cavalieri, C. E., Dulko, J. P., Felice, A. A. D., & Ho, T. A. (2001). Visions and

realities: Supervisee perspectives of multicultural supervision. Journal of Multicultural

Counseling & Development, 29(2), 114–130. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-

1912.2001.tb00509.x

Hird, J., Tao, K., & Gloria, A. (2005). Examining supervisors’ multicultural competence in

racially similar and different supervision dyads. The Clinical Supervisor, 23(2), 107–

122. https://doi.org/10.1300/j001v23n02_07

44

Hoonakker, P., & Carayon, P. (2009). Questionnaire survey nonresponse: A comparison of

postal mail and Internet surveys. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction,

25(5), 348–373. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447310902864951

Inman, A. G. (2006). Supervisor multicultural competence and its relation to supervisory process

and outcome. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 32(1), 73–85.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-0606.2006.tb01589.x

Inman, A. G., & DeBoer Kreider, E. (2013). Multicultural competence: Psychotherapy practice

and supervision. Psychotherapy, 50(3), 346–350. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032029

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. J. Watkins

& D. L. Milne (Eds.), The Wiley international handbook of clinical supervision (pp. 61–

102). New York, NY: Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118846360.ch4

Inman, A. G., & Ladany, N. (2014). Multicultural competencies in psychotherapy supervision. In

F. T. L. Leong, L. Comas-Díaz, G. C. Nagayama Hall, V. C. McLoyd, & J. E. Trimble

(Eds.), APA handbook of multicultural psychology, Vol. 2: Applications and training (pp.

643–658). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

https://doi.org/10.1037/14187-036

Jernigan, M. M., Green, C. E., Helms, J. E., Perez-Gualdron, L., & Henze, K. (2010). An

examination of people of color supervision dyads: Racial identity matters as much as

race. Training And Education in Professional Psychology, 4(1), 62–73.

https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018110

Kaduvettoor, A., O’Shaughnessy, T., Mori, Y., Beverly, C. I. I. I., Weatherford, R. D., &

Ladany, N. (2009). Helpful and hindering multicultural events in group supervision:

45

Climate and multicultural competence. Counseling Psychologist, 37(6), 786–820.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000009333984

Killian, K. D. P. D. (2001). Differences making a difference. Journal of Feminist Family

Therapy, 12(2), 61–103. https://doi.org/10.1300/j086v12n02_03

Ladany, N. (2014). The ingredients of supervisor failure. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 70(11),

1094–103. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22130

Ladany, N., Friedlander, M. L., & Nelson, M. L. (2005). Heightening multicultural awareness:

It’s never been about political correctness. In N. Ladany, M. L. Friedlander, & M. L.,

Nelson (Eds.), Critical events in psychotherapy supervision: An interpersonal approach

(pp. 53–77). Washington, DC: American Psychological

Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10958-003

Ladany, N., Inman, A. G., Constantine, M. G., & Hofheinz, E. W. (1997). Supervisee

multicultural case conceptualization ability and self-reported multicultural competence as

functions of supervisee racial identity and supervisor focus. Journal of Counseling

Psychology, 44(3), 284–293. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-0167.44.3.284

Ladany, N., Mori, Y., & Mehr, K. E. (2013). Effective and ineffective supervision. Counseling

Psychologist, 41(1), 28–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000012442648

Lassiter, P. S., Napolitano, L., Culbreth, J. R., & Ng, K. (2008). Developing multicultural

competence using the structured peer group supervision model. Counselor Education and

Supervision, 47(3), 164–178. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6978.2008.tb00047.x

Magnuson, S., Wilcoxon, S. A., & Norem, K. (2000). A profile of lousy supervision:

Experienced counselors’ perspectives. Counselor Education and Supervision, 39(3), 189–

202. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6978.2000.tb01231.x

46

Martínez, R. P., & Holloway, E. L. (1997). The supervision relationship in multicultural training.

In D. B. Pope-Davis & H. K. Coleman (Eds.), Multicultural counseling competencies:

Assessment, education and training, and supervision (pp. 325–349). Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452232072.n15

Mori, Y., Inman, A. G., & Caskie, G. I. L. (2009). Supervising international students:

Relationship between acculturation, supervisor multicultural competence, cultural

discussions, and supervision satisfaction. Training and Education in Psychology, 3(1),

10–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013072

Murphy, M. J., & Wright, D. W. (2005). Supervisees’ perspectives of power use in supervision.

Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 31(3), 283–295. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-

0606.2005.tb01569.x

Murphy-Shigematsu, S. (2010). Microaggressions by supervisors of color. Training and

Education in Professional Psychology, 4(1), 16–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017472

Norcross, J. G., Hedges, M., & Prochaska, J. (2002). The face of 2010: A Delphi poll on the

future of psychotherapy. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 33(3), 316–

322. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.33.3.316

Ober, A. M., Granello, D. H., & Henfield, M. S. (2009). A synergistic model to enhance

multicultural competence in supervision. Counselor Education and Supervision, 48(3),

204–221. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6978.2009.tb00075.x

Phillips, J. C., Parent, M. C., Dozier, V. C., & Jackson, P. L. (2017). Depth of discussion of

multicultural identities in supervision and supervisory outcomes. Counselling Psychology

Quarterly, 30(2), 188–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515070.2016.1169995

47

Priest, R. (1994). Minority supervisor and majority supervisee: Another perspective of clinical

reality. Counselor Education and Supervision, 34(2), 152–158.

https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6978.1994.tb00322.x

Quek, K., & Storm, C. (2012). Chinese values in supervisory discourse: Implications for

culturally sensitive practices. Contemporary Family Therapy: An International Journal,

34(1), 44–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10591-011-9172-4

Ryde, J. (2000). Supervising across difference. International Journal of Psychotherapy, 5(1),

37–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/13569080050020254

Safran, J. D., Muran, J. C., Stevens, C., & Rothman, M. (2007). A relational approach to

supervision. In C. A. Falender & E. P. Shafranske (Eds.), Casebook for clinical

supervision: A competency-based approach (pp. 137–157). Washington, DC: American

Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/11792-007

Soheilian, S. S., Inman, A. G., Klinger, R. S., Isenberg, D. S., & Kulp, L. E. (2014).

Multicultural supervision: Supervisees’ reflections on culturally competent supervision.

Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 27(4), 379–392.

https://doi.org/10.1080/09515070.2014.961408

Sue, D. W., Rivera, D. P., Capodilupo, C. M., Lin, A. I., & Torino, G. C. (2010). Racial

dialogues and White trainee fears: Implications for education and training. Cultural

Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 16(2), 206–214.

https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016112

Taylor, B. A., Hernandez, P., Deri, A., Rankin, P. R., & Siegel, A. (2007). Integrating diversity

dimensions in supervision. The Clinical Supervisor, 25(1), 3–21.

https://doi.org/10.1300/j001v25n01_02

48

Tohidian, N. B., & Quek, K. M. (2017). Processes that inform multicultural supervision: A

qualitative meta-analysis. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 43(4), 573–590.

https://doi.org/10.1111/jmft.12219

Toporek, R. L., Ortega-Villalobos, L., & Pope-Davis, D. B. (2004). Critical incidents in

multicultural supervision: Exploring supervisees’ and supervisors’ experiences. Journal

of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 32(2), 66–83.

https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2004.tb00362.x

Trimble, J. E., & King, J. (2014). Considerations in supervision working with American Indian

and Alaska Native clients: Understanding the context of deep culture. In C. A. Falender,

E. P. Shafranske, & C. J. Falicov (Eds.), Multiculturalism and diversity in clinical

supervision: A competency-based approach (pp. 231–254). Washington, DC: American

Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14370-010

Tsui, M., O’Donoghue, K., & Ng, A. K. T. (2014). Culturally competent and diversity-sensitive

clinical supervision. In C. E. Watkins & D. L. Milne (Eds.), The Wiley international

handbook of clinical supervision (pp. 238–254). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118846360.ch10

Watkins, C. E., Jr. (2012). Development of the psychotherapy supervisor: Review of and

reelections on 30 years of theory and research. American Journal of Psychotherapy,

66(1), 45–83. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.2012.66.1.45

Watkins, C. E., Jr. (2014). Clinical supervision in the 21st century: revisiting pressing needs and

impressing possibilities. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 68(2), 251–

272. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.2014.68.2.251

49

Westefeld, J. S. (2009). Supervision of psychotherapy: Models, issues, and recommendations.

Counseling Psychologist, 37(2), 296–316. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000008316657

Wong, L. J., Wong, P. P., & Ishiyama, F. I. (2013). What helps and what hinders in cross-

cultural clinical supervision: A critical incident study. The Counseling Psychologist,

41(1), 66–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000012442652

Yabusaki, A. S. (2010). Clinical supervision: Dialogues on diversity. Training and Education in

Professional Psychology, 4(1), 55–61. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017378

50

TABLES

Table 1 Participant Demographics (N = 44)

Characteristic Range M SD Age 34 – 66 49.20 8.11 Years Licensed 5 – 36 15.16 7.26 n % Gender

Female 30 68.18 Male 14 31.82

Race/Ethnicity African American/Black 4 9.09 Asian 2 4.54

Vietnamese American 1 Japanese American 1

Bi-racial/Multiracial 3 6.82 Caucasian/Middle Eastern 1 White/German/English/French/Cherokee 1 White/Latino 1

Caucasian/White 30 68.18 Irish/Scottish 1 Italian American 1 Romanian 1 Did not specify 27

Iranian 1 2.27 Latinx 4 9.09

Cuban American 1 Puerto Rican 1 Salvadoran American 1 Did not specify 1

Sexual Orientation

Gay 1 2.27 Gay/Queer 1 2.27 Heterosexual 37 84.09 Lesbian 2 4.54 Pansexual 2 4.54 Not reported 1 2.27

Primary Theoretical Orientation Behavioral 1 2.27

(continued)

51

Table 1 (continued)

Participant Demographics (N = 44)

Characteristics n % Cognitive 9 20.45 Cognitive-Behavioral 2 4.54 Existential 1 2.27 Feminist 2 4.54 Humanistic 4 9.09 Integrative/Eclectic 11 25.00 Interpersonal (IPT) 1 2.27 Multicultural 2 4.54 Neuropsychotherapy 1 2.27 Postmodern Constructive 1 2.27 Psychodynamic/Relational 7 15.91 Relational/Cultural 1 2.27 Systems/Family Systems 1 2.27

Most Recent Work/Training/Teaching Site(s) Armed Forces Medical Center 1 2.27 Child/Adolescent Psychiatric/Pediatrics 1 2.27 Community Mental Health 1 2.27 Medical School 2 4.54 Multiple Sites 4 9.09

Consortium & Private Practice 1 Community Mental Health & School District 1 Private Practice & University Counseling Center 1 Private Practice & School District & University

Counseling Center 1

Private Practice 3 6.82 State Funded Non-Profit Agency/Regional Center 1 2.27 University Counseling Center 23 52.27 Veteran Affairs Medical Center 8 18.18

APA Division 45 Member Yes 5 11.36 No 38 86.36 Not reported 1 2.27

52

Table 2

Participant Supervision and Supervision Training Experience (N = 44)

Characteristic Range M SD Years provided/providing supervision 5 - 36 14.11 6.43 Number of supervisees in the last 10 years 10 - 200 36.5 31.96 Number of supervisees in the last 3 years 1 - 60 13.16 10.72 Current weekly number of supervisees 0 - 13 3.98 3.25 Current weekly direct supervision hours 0 - 10 3.77 2.01 Current weekly indirect supervision hours 0 - 20 4 4.39 Number of supervision workshops/trainings attended during

last 2 licensure cycles 0 - 10 3.09 2.48

Number of multicultural supervision workshops/trainings attended during last 2 licensure cycles

0 - 5 1.32 1.33

Number of supervision books/articles read during last 2 licensure cycles

0 – 50 5.75 8.6

Number of multicultural supervision books/articles read during last 2 licensure cycles

0 - 15 3.43 4.14

n % Currently Supervising Trainees/Interns

Yes 40 90.91 No 4 9.09

Current supervisees bring up culture/diversity issues during supervision Always 1 2.27 Very Often 9 20.45 Often 17 38.64 Sometimes 13 29.54 Rarely 3 6.82 Very Rarely 0 0.00 Never 1 2.27

Supervisor brings up culture/diversity issues during supervision

Always 3 6.82 Very Often 12 27.27 Often 18 40.91 Sometimes 11 25.00 Rarely 0 0.00 Very Rarely 0 0.00 Never

Supervisor taken graduate course in clinical supervision

Yes 20 45.45 No 24 54.55

(continued)

53

Table 2 (continued)

Participant Supervision and Supervision Training Experience (N = 44)

Characteristics n % Supervisor taken graduate course in culture/diversity

Yes 39 88.64 No 5 11.36

Supervisor received supervision of supervision Yes 32 72.73 No 12 27.27

Supervisor brought up culture/diversity issues during supervision as a trainee Always 1 2.27 Very Often 8 18.18 Often 10 22.73 Sometimes 22 50 Rarely 3 6.82 Very Rarely 0 0.00 Never 0 0.00

When supervisor was a trainee, their supervisors brought up culture/diversity issues during supervision

Always 0 0.00 Very Often 6 13.64 Often 5 11.36 Sometimes 26 59.09 Rarely 6 13.64 Very Rarely 0 0.00 Never 1 2.27

Years provided/providing supervision 5-9 years 13 29.55 10-14 years 11 25.00 15-19 years 11 25.00 > 20 years 9 20.45

Number of supervisees in the last 10 years 10-19 11 25.00 20-29 11 25.00 30-39 8 18.18 40-49 4 9.09 50-99 8 18.18 > 100 2 4.55

(continued)

54

Table 2 (continued)

Participant Supervision and Supervision Training Experience (N = 44)

Characteristics n % Number of supervisees in the last 3 years

1-4 4 9.09 5-9 14 31.82 10-14 13 29.55 15-19 5 11.36 20-24 3 6.82 >25 5 11.36

Current weekly number of supervisees

0 3 6.82 1-4 25 56.82 5-9 10 22.73 >10 6 13.64

Current weekly direct supervision hours 0 1 2.27 1-4 28 63.64 5-9 14 31.82 > 10 1 2.27

Current weekly indirect supervision hours 0 4 9.09 1-4 27 61.36 5-9 8 18.18 10-20 3 6.82 > 20 2 4.55

Number of supervision workshops/trainings attended during last 2 licensure cycles

0 5 11.36 1-2 18 40.91 3-4 11 25.00 5-6 5 11.36 > 7 5 11.36

Number of multicultural supervision workshops/trainings attended during last 2 licensure cycles

0 14 31.82 1-2 22 50.00 3-4 7 15.91 > 5 1 2.27

(continued)

55

Table 2 (continued)

Participant Supervision and Supervision Training Experience (N = 44)

Characteristics n % Number of supervision books/articles read during last 2 licensure cycles

0 7 15.91 1-3 16 36.36 4-6 11 25.00 7-9 1 2.27 10-14 3 6.82 15-19 3 6.82 > 20 3 6.82

Number of multicultural supervision books/articles read during last 2 licensure cycles

0 9 20.45 1-3 21 47.73 4-6 6 13.64 7-9 2 4.55 10-14 4 9.09 > 15 2 4.55

56

Table 3

Frequencies of Multicultural Supervisory Behaviors Rated as Most Important

Behavioral statement Observed frequency

Expected frequency

(proportion) Creating a safe (nonjudgmental, supportive) environment for discussion of multicultural issues, values, and ideas through the use of verbal and nonverbal communication

31 11 (0.05)

Addressing feelings of discomfort experienced by trainees concerning multicultural issue

23 11 (0.05)

Inviting supervisee to explore and discuss possible existence of personal cultural biases and prejudices on the conceptualization and practice with clients

20 11 (0.05)

Acknowledging and discussing realities of racism/oppression during supervision 17 11 (0.05) Providing supervisee with a multiculturally diverse caseload to ensure breadth of clinical experience

14 11 (0.05)

Acknowledging and discussing power issues in supervision that may be related to racial/ethnic multicultural differences

14 11 (0.05)

Modeling for supervisee by initiating, attending to, and demonstrating interest and respect for client’s intersecting identities and culture during case conceptualization and discussion

14 11 (0.05)

Communicating acceptance of and respect for supervisee’s own culture and perspectives through verbal phrases

11 11 (0.05)

Initiating respectful and explicit discussions about the importance of culture/multicultural issues during supervision

11 11 (0.05)

Articulating a commitment to develop multicultural competence by discussing expectations within the first two supervision sessions

10 11 (0.05)

Listening [to] and providing affirming statements to demonstrate genuine respect [for] supervisee’s ideas about how culture influences the clinical interaction

10 11 (0.05)

Engaging supervisee actively in discussions to explore clients’ cultural perspectives 9 11 (0.05) Initiating dialogue during supervision about supervisees’ own racial/ethnic identity development

8 11 (0.05)

Encouraging discussion regarding multicultural issues by presenting myself non-defensively such as maintaining an open posture and calming tone of voice when supervisee shows feelings of anger, rage, and/or fear when these issues are raised during supervision

7 11 (0.05)

Identifying and discussing racial/ethnic cultural differences reflected in parallel process issues (supervisor/supervisee and supervisee/client)

6 11 (0.05)

Encouraging supervisee to share, within supervision, their personal and professional cultural background and experiences

5 11 (0.05)

Consulting colleagues willingly about my own reactions to racial/ethnic concerns as a result of any supervision experience

4 11 (0.05)

Acknowledging, discussing, and providing affirming statements that demonstrate respect for racial/ethnic multicultural similarities and differences between myself and supervisee, and discussing feelings concerning these similarities and/or differences

4 11 (0.05)

Self-disclosing own development of self-awareness about cultural/ethnic identity, biases, and limitations

2 11 (0.05)

Providing recommended multicultural readings and related training experiences to supervisee

0 11 (0.05)

Note. χ2 = 98.15*, df = 19. Numbers in parentheses, (), are expected proportions.

*p < 0.001.

57

Table 4

Top Five Supervisory Behaviors Compared to Bottom Five Supervisory Behaviors

Behavioral statement Type of focus Frequency rank

Creating a safe (nonjudgmental, supportive) environment for discussion of multicultural issues, values, and ideas through the use of verbal and nonverbal communication

Process 1

Addressing feelings of discomfort experienced by trainees concerning multicultural issue

Supervisee Focused Personal Development

2

Inviting supervisee to explore and discuss possible existence of personal cultural biases and prejudices on the conceptualization and practice with clients

Supervisee Focused Personal Development

3

Acknowledging and discussing realities of racism/oppression during supervision

Supervisee Focused Personal Development

4

Providing supervisee with a multiculturally diverse caseload to ensure breadth of clinical experience

Process 5

Acknowledging and discussing power issues in supervision that may be related to racial/ethnic multicultural differences

Process 5

Modeling for supervisee by initiating, attending to, and demonstrating interest and respect for client’s intersecting identities and culture during case conceptualization and discussion

Conceptualization 5

Encouraging supervisee to share, within supervision, their personal and professional cultural background and experiences

Supervisee Focused Personal Development

16

Consulting colleagues willingly about my own reactions to racial/ethnic concerns as a result of any supervision experience

Supervisor Focused Personal Development

17

Acknowledging, discussing, and providing affirming statements that demonstrate respect for racial/ethnic multicultural similarities and differences between myself and supervisee, and discussing feelings concerning these similarities and/or differences

Supervisor Focused Personal Development

17

Self-disclosing own development of self-awareness about cultural/ethnic identity, biases, and limitations

Supervisor Focused Personal Development

19

Providing recommended multicultural readings and related training experiences to supervisee

Supervisee Focused Personal Development

20

58

APPENDIX A

Literature Review Tables

59

Lite

ratu

re R

evie

w T

able

: Clin

ical

Sup

ervi

sion

Clin

ical

Sup

ervi

sion

– T

heor

etic

al P

ublic

atio

ns

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r R

esea

rch

Que

stio

ns/

Obj

ectiv

es

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

Bar

nett

and

Mol

zon

(201

4)

• To

des

crib

e an

d ex

plai

n th

e el

emen

ts o

f the

et

hica

l, le

gal,

and

com

pete

nt p

ract

ice

of c

linic

al

supe

rvis

ion

Con

cept

ual/

theo

retic

al

fram

ewor

k

N/A

N

/A

• Ta

ilorin

g th

e su

perv

isio

n pr

ovid

ed to

eac

h in

divi

dual

supe

rvis

ee’s

trai

ning

nee

ds is

es

sent

ial

• It

is e

ssen

tial t

hat a

thor

ough

info

rmed

con

sent

pr

oces

s be

enga

ged

in a

t the

out

set o

f the

su

perv

isor

y re

latio

nshi

p •

The

clin

ical

supe

rvis

or w

ill li

kely

take

a ra

ther

ac

tive

role

in th

e be

ginn

ing

of th

e su

perv

isor

y re

latio

nshi

p, a

nd th

en g

radu

ally

redu

ce h

is o

r he

r inv

olve

men

t to

allo

w th

e su

perv

isee

to ta

ke

on g

reat

er a

uton

omy

and

resp

onsi

bilit

y •

The

supe

rvis

ee m

ust p

erce

ive

the

supe

rvis

ory

rela

tions

hip

to b

e su

ffici

ently

safe

to b

e ab

le to

op

enly

shar

e th

ough

ts, i

deas

, exp

erie

nces

, and

fe

elin

gs w

ith th

e su

perv

isor

•

In a

dditi

on to

all

the

teac

hing

that

clin

ical

su

perv

isor

s pro

vide

, the

y al

so se

rve

the

impo

rtant

func

tion

of p

rofe

ssio

nal r

ole

mod

el

• Is

sues

of d

iver

sity

in a

ll its

form

s sho

uld

be

give

n ac

tive

atte

ntio

n in

all

aspe

cts o

f the

su

perv

isio

n pr

oces

s as w

ell a

s with

in th

e su

perv

isor

y re

latio

nshi

p •

It is

impo

rtant

for s

uper

viso

rs to

add

ress

issu

es

of d

iver

sity

bet

wee

n th

e su

perv

isor

and

su

perv

isee

with

in su

perv

isio

n as

wel

l as t

o fo

ster

the

deve

lopm

ent o

f cul

tura

l com

pete

nce

for s

uper

vise

es in

thei

r wor

k w

ith c

lient

s

60

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r R

esea

rch

Que

stio

ns/

Obj

ectiv

es

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

Bor

ders

(2

014)

•

To h

ighl

ight

the

diff

eren

ces b

etw

een

com

pete

ncie

s and

be

st p

ract

ices

•

To d

escr

ibe

the

deve

lopm

ent a

nd

cont

ent o

f one

co

mpr

ehen

sive

st

atem

ent,

the

Bes

t Pr

actic

es in

Clin

ical

Su

perv

isio

n cr

eate

d fo

r the

fiel

d of

co

unse

ling

and

coun

selo

r edu

catio

n •

To il

lust

rate

the

appl

icab

ility

of t

he

Bes

t Pra

ctic

es

acro

ss d

isci

plin

es

and

coun

tries

th

roug

h a

com

paris

on a

nd

cont

rast

with

se

vera

l oth

er

exis

ting

docu

men

ts •

To b

riefly

exa

min

e th

e de

velo

pmen

t of

supe

rvis

or

expe

rtise

, whi

ch

requ

ires n

ot o

nly

decl

arat

ive

know

ledg

e (c

ompe

tenc

ies)

and

pr

oced

ural

Lite

ratu

re

revi

ew;

conc

eptu

al/

theo

retic

al

fram

ewor

k

N/A

N

/A

• Th

e de

velo

pmen

t of s

uper

viso

r exp

ertis

e,

requ

ires r

efle

ctiv

e kn

owle

dge

and

the

insi

ghts

on

e ga

ins o

ver t

ime

abou

t how

and

whe

n to

ad

apt (

even

impr

ovis

e)

• O

ne’s

supe

rvis

ion

appr

oach

is b

ased

on

the

cont

ext,

supe

rvis

ee, a

nd c

lient

thro

ugh

reco

gniz

ing

the

com

plex

ity, a

mbi

guity

, and

ill-

defin

ed p

robl

ems e

ndem

ic to

supe

rvis

ion

• M

eta-

com

pete

nce

is d

efin

ed a

s “th

e ab

ility

to

asse

ss w

hat o

ne k

now

s and

wha

t one

doe

sn’t

know

” or

“th

e ne

ed to

mak

e ap

prop

riate

ad

apta

tions

in o

rder

to m

axim

ize

the

supe

rvis

ee’s

abi

lity

to le

arn”

and

the

abili

ty to

“a

pply

pro

fess

iona

l jud

gmen

t to

com

plex

iss

ues”

•

Ref

lect

ive

know

ledg

e is

bui

lt du

ring

year

s of

prac

tice

and

is d

epen

dent

on

cont

inua

l sel

f-aw

aren

ess,

self-

ass

essm

ent,

self-

mon

itorin

g,

and

self-

refle

ctio

n, w

hich

are

pre

dom

inan

t ch

arac

teris

tics o

f exp

ert s

uper

viso

rs a

s rep

orte

d in

a re

cent

stud

y

• “P

rofe

ssio

nal a

rtistr

y,”

base

d in

supe

rvis

or’s

re

flect

ive

know

ledg

e, re

quire

s bot

h re

flect

ion-

in-a

ctio

n, su

perv

isor

s’ th

inki

ng a

bout

wha

t th

ey a

re d

oing

whi

le th

ey a

re d

oing

it, a

s wel

l as

refle

ctio

n on

refle

ctio

n-in

-act

ion

61

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r R

esea

rch

Que

stio

ns/

Obj

ectiv

es

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

know

ledg

e (s

tate

men

ts o

f bes

t pr

actic

es),

but a

lso

refle

ctiv

e kn

owle

dge

Cas

hwel

l, Lo

oby,

and

H

ousl

ey

(200

8)

• To

pro

vide

spec

ific

supe

rvis

ion

tech

niqu

es a

nd

task

s to

help

serv

ice

prov

ider

s exa

min

e is

sues

of c

ultu

ral

dive

rsity

in th

eir

wor

k •

To fa

cilit

ate

mor

e ef

fect

ive

mul

ticul

tura

l se

rvic

es th

roug

h th

e su

perv

isio

n pr

oces

s

Con

cept

ual/

theo

retic

al

fram

ewor

k

N/A

N

/A

• It

is im

porta

nt to

rais

e th

e is

sue

of c

ultu

ral

dive

rsity

in g

roup

or i

ndiv

idua

l sup

ervi

sion

w

hen

cultu

ral i

ssue

s may

be

affe

ctin

g th

e th

erap

eutic

pro

cess

•

Less

exp

erie

nced

clin

icia

ns m

ay n

ot c

onsi

der

the

influ

ence

of c

ultu

re o

n th

e th

erap

eutic

re

latio

nshi

p •

Rai

sing

mul

ticul

tura

l iss

ues i

n in

divi

dual

and

gr

oup

supe

rvis

ion

enco

urag

es se

lf-ex

plor

atio

n •

To in

crea

se th

eir e

ffec

tiven

ess w

hen

wor

king

w

ith m

ultic

ultu

ral p

opul

atio

ns, s

uper

viso

rs

need

to c

onsu

lt w

ith m

inor

ity c

olle

ague

s and

re

mai

n op

en to

incr

easi

ng th

eir o

wn

know

ledg

e, sk

ills,

and

self-

awar

enes

s with

m

ultic

ultu

ral p

opul

atio

ns to

incr

ease

thei

r ef

fect

iven

ess a

s sup

ervi

sors

•

Cul

tura

l het

erog

enei

ty w

ithin

supe

rvis

ion

grou

ps, w

hen

poss

ible

, als

o is

enc

oura

ged

• Se

lf-re

ports

from

the

coun

selo

r may

be

unre

liabl

e or

eve

n bi

ased

acc

ount

s of

coun

selin

g se

ssio

ns; d

irect

met

hods

such

as

revi

ew o

f aud

iota

pes o

r liv

e su

perv

isio

n ar

e ne

eded

to h

elp

clin

icia

ns id

entif

y is

sues

of

cultu

ral b

lindn

ess o

r cul

tura

l enc

apsu

latio

n

62

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r R

esea

rch

Que

stio

ns/

Obj

ectiv

es

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

Fale

nder

an

d Sh

afra

nske

(2

007)

• To

revi

ew

pers

pect

ives

on

com

pete

nce

as a

co

nstru

ct

• To

def

ine

com

pete

ncy-

base

d cl

inic

al su

perv

isio

n,

with

par

ticul

ar

atte

ntio

n to

the

natu

re o

f eth

ical

, le

gal,

cont

extu

al,

and

prac

tice

issu

es

that

aris

e •

To d

iscu

ss

chal

leng

es fa

ced

in

clin

ical

supe

rvis

ion

• To

mak

e re

com

men

datio

ns

for b

est p

ract

ices

Theo

retic

al

fram

ewor

k

N/A

N

/A

• C

ompe

tenc

e, a

n et

hica

l prin

cipl

e th

at in

form

s th

e pr

actic

e of

psy

chol

ogy,

refe

rs to

requ

isite

kn

owle

dge,

skill

s, an

d va

lues

for e

ffec

tive

perf

orm

ance

•

A p

resu

mpt

ion

of c

linic

al c

ompe

tenc

e is

im

plic

it in

supe

rvis

ion

• Th

e su

perv

isor

is p

resu

med

to b

e m

ore

com

pete

nt th

an th

e su

perv

isee

in m

ost a

reas

, in

clud

ing

the

prac

tice

of su

perv

isio

n an

d th

e co

nten

t are

as su

perv

ised

•

A c

ompe

tenc

y-ba

sed

appr

oach

can

be

used

to

enha

nce

supe

rvis

or a

nd p

ract

ition

er

com

pete

nce

sim

ilar t

o its

app

licat

ion

in c

linic

al

train

ing

• C

linic

al su

perv

isio

n id

eally

requ

ires a

fo

unda

tion

of e

duca

tion

and

train

ing,

co

ntin

uous

self-

asse

ssm

ent (

lead

ing

to se

lf-di

rect

ed le

arni

ng),

and

parti

cipa

tion

in

prof

essi

onal

dev

elop

men

t •

Am

ong

the

ethi

cal s

tand

ards

, mul

ticul

tura

l co

mpe

tenc

e is

an

area

that

requ

ires p

artic

ular

at

tent

ion

in o

ur se

lf-as

sess

men

t pra

ctic

e an

d co

mm

itmen

ts to

dev

elop

men

t and

trai

ning

in

light

of t

he e

xist

ing

liter

atur

e

For s

uper

viso

rs, r

esea

rch

has r

epor

ted:

• In

atte

ntio

n to

cul

ture

and

div

ersi

ty in

cro

ss-

cultu

ral s

uper

viso

ry d

yads

(Bur

kard

et a

l.,

2006

) •

Supe

rvis

ors n

ot a

s cul

tura

lly c

ompe

tent

as t

heir

supe

rvis

ees (

Con

stan

tine,

200

1)

63

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r R

esea

rch

Que

stio

ns/

Obj

ectiv

es

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

• Fa

ilure

to a

ckno

wle

dge

lack

of c

ross

-rac

ial

supe

rvis

ion

expe

rienc

e (D

uan

& R

oehl

ke,

2001

) •

Failu

re to

initi

ate

disc

ussi

on o

f cul

tura

l di

ffer

ence

s bet

wee

n su

perv

isor

and

supe

rvis

ee

(Gat

mon

et a

l., 2

001)

•

Failu

re to

initi

ate

dive

rsity

dis

cuss

ions

in

gene

ral e

ven

thou

gh th

is h

as b

een

dem

onst

rate

d to

enh

ance

alli

ance

(Gat

mon

et

al.,

2001

)

Fale

nder

an

d Sh

afra

nske

(2

014)

• To

hig

hlig

ht re

cent

de

velo

pmen

ts a

nd

the

stat

e of

the

art

in su

perv

isio

n, w

ith

parti

cula

r em

phas

is

on th

e co

mpe

tenc

y-ba

sed

appr

oach

•

To p

rese

nts

effe

ctiv

e cl

inic

al

supe

rvis

ion

stra

tegi

es,

prov

idin

g an

in

tegr

ated

snap

shot

of

the

curr

ent s

tatu

s •

To e

xam

ine

curr

ent

train

ing

prac

tices

in

supe

rvis

ion

and

chal

leng

es

Theo

retic

al

fram

ewor

k

N/A

N

/A

• G

reat

er a

ttent

ion

has b

een

plac

ed o

n di

vers

ity

fact

ors,

emph

asiz

ing

mul

ticul

tura

l sup

ervi

sion

pr

actic

e

• Ef

fect

ive

supe

rvis

ion

is d

efin

ed a

s pra

ctic

e th

at

enco

urag

es su

perv

isee

dev

elop

men

t and

au

tono

my,

faci

litat

es th

e su

perv

isor

y re

latio

nshi

p, p

rote

cts t

he c

lient

, and

enh

ance

s bo

th c

lient

and

supe

rvis

ee o

utco

mes

. •

An

ethi

cal i

mpe

rativ

e un

derly

ing

all c

linic

al

prac

tice

and

supe

rvis

ion

is d

iver

sity

co

mpe

tenc

e •

Alth

ough

gre

ater

atte

ntio

n is

bei

ng d

irect

ed to

di

vers

ity, s

till d

ata

are

emer

ging

that

su

perv

isor

s ofte

n ar

e no

t ini

tiatin

g co

nsid

erat

ion

of m

ultip

le d

iver

sity

fact

ors i

n su

perv

isio

n, n

or a

re fa

ctor

s of p

rivile

ge,

hist

oric

al tr

aum

a, a

nd o

ppre

ssio

n be

ing

addr

esse

d (F

alen

der,

Shaf

rans

ke, &

Fal

icov

, 20

14; H

erná

ndez

& M

cDow

ell,

2010

) •

Spec

ific

com

pete

nce

is n

eede

d to

add

ress

the

mul

tiple

iden

titie

s (e.

g., r

ace,

soci

oeco

nom

ic

stat

us, s

exua

l orie

ntat

ion,

gen

der i

dent

ity,

64

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r R

esea

rch

Que

stio

ns/

Obj

ectiv

es

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

ethn

icity

, rel

igio

n, d

isab

ility

, age

) am

ong

clie

nt, s

uper

vise

e/ps

ycho

ther

apis

t, an

d su

perv

isor

to c

onsi

der t

he m

ultip

le w

orld

view

s an

d th

e ef

fect

s of t

hese

upo

n th

e as

sess

men

t an

d tre

atm

ent o

f the

clie

nt

• A

ddre

ssin

g th

ese

dive

rsity

com

pete

nce

fact

ors

and

prov

idin

g fe

edba

ck a

nd tr

aini

ng w

hen

supe

rvis

ees d

o no

t dem

onst

rate

ade

quat

e co

mpe

tenc

e ar

e im

porta

nt su

perv

isor

re

spon

sibi

litie

s •

In th

e co

llabo

rativ

e su

perv

isor

y re

latio

nshi

p,

the

supe

rvis

ee is

em

pow

ered

to a

ddre

ss

dive

rsity

issu

es su

ch a

s gen

erat

ion

(age

) and

cu

lture

to re

flect

on

diff

eren

t per

spec

tives

•

Oth

er fa

ctor

s aff

ectin

g ef

fect

ive

clin

ical

su

perv

isio

n in

clud

e su

perv

isor

y al

lianc

e,

addr

essi

ng p

erso

nal f

acto

rs a

nd

coun

tertr

ansf

eren

ce in

supe

rvis

ion,

co

mpe

tenc

es, s

elf-

asse

ssm

ent,

feed

back

, ev

alua

tion,

and

eth

ical

and

lega

l com

pete

ncie

s

Fale

nder

, Sh

afra

nske

, an

d O

fek

(201

4)

• To

exp

lore

the

stre

ngth

s and

em

ergi

ng

com

pete

ncie

s of t

he

supe

rvis

ee a

nd th

e cl

inic

al a

nd

supe

rvis

ion

com

pete

ncie

s of t

he

supe

rvis

or.

• To

add

ress

es th

e st

ate

of th

e lit

erat

ure

on

Met

a-th

eore

tical

fr

amew

ork

with

cas

e ex

ampl

e

N/A

N

/A

• In

dev

elop

ing

a st

rong

supe

rvis

ory

allia

nce,

the

pers

onal

cha

ract

eris

tics a

nd b

ehav

iors

of t

he

supe

rvis

or su

ch a

s war

mth

, em

path

y,

genu

inen

ess,

resp

ect,

flexi

bilit

y, a

no

njud

gmen

tal s

tanc

e, a

nd tr

ansp

aren

cy a

re

impo

rtant

fact

ors

• Su

perv

isor

s are

mor

e lik

ely

to b

uild

and

m

aint

ain

effe

ctiv

e su

perv

isor

y re

latio

nshi

ps

and

to p

rom

ote

train

ee se

lf-ef

ficac

y by

usi

ng

supe

rvis

ory

skill

s suc

h as

enc

oura

ging

de

velo

pmen

tally

app

ropr

iate

aut

onom

y,

expr

essi

ng c

onfid

ence

and

trus

t in

train

ees’

65

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r R

esea

rch

Que

stio

ns/

Obj

ectiv

es

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

effe

ctiv

e cl

inic

al

supe

rvis

ion

and

the

spec

ific

know

ledg

e,

skill

s, an

d at

titud

es

that

com

pris

e co

mpe

tent

su

perv

isio

n

• To

pro

vide

a b

rief

sum

mar

y of

re

sear

ch o

n se

vera

l pa

rticu

lar p

ivot

al

area

s, i.e

. alli

ance

, m

ultic

ultu

ral

com

pete

nce,

lega

l an

d et

hica

l iss

ues

• To

pro

vide

a se

lf-

asse

ssm

ent d

evic

e fo

r bot

h cu

rren

t su

perv

isor

s and

su

perv

isor

s-in

- pr

epar

atio

n to

as

sess

read

ines

s, co

mpe

tenc

e, a

nd

area

s in

whi

ch

addi

tiona

l tra

inin

g an

d ex

perie

nce

are

desi

rabl

e

• To

pro

vide

a

vign

ette

illu

stra

ting

the

impl

emen

tatio

n of

eff

ectiv

e

abili

ties,

prov

idin

g po

sitiv

e as

wel

l as

cons

truct

ive

feed

back

, dem

onst

ratin

g th

eir o

wn

clin

ical

exp

ertis

e in

the

serv

ice

of tr

aine

e gr

owth

, and

bei

ng re

spon

sive

to su

perv

isee

’s

indi

vidu

al le

arni

ng st

yles

• B

est p

ract

ices

aro

und

mul

ticul

tura

l com

pete

nce

incl

ude

self-

awar

enes

s of o

ne’s

ow

n m

ultip

le

cultu

ral i

dent

ities

and

the

impa

ct o

f sup

ervi

sor

wor

ldvi

ew o

n su

perv

isio

n an

d th

e cl

inic

al

wor

k, a

dopt

ing

a po

sitio

n of

cul

tura

l hum

ility

, ex

erci

sing

met

a-co

mpe

tenc

e, a

nd n

ot

erro

neou

sly

assu

min

g on

e is

com

pete

nt in

fa

cilit

atin

g cu

ltura

lly re

spon

sive

supe

rvis

ion

• En

gagi

ng in

refle

ctiv

e pr

actic

e an

d id

entif

ying

ar

eas f

or fu

rther

gro

wth

in m

ultic

ultu

ral

com

pete

nce

is p

art o

f a c

omm

itmen

t to

a lif

etim

e of

lear

ning

– a

cor

e va

lue

in

prof

essi

onal

psy

chol

ogy

– an

d pe

rtine

nt

espe

cial

ly to

issu

es o

f mul

ticul

tura

l co

mpe

tenc

e

• A

supe

rvis

or’s

tran

spar

ency

in a

ckno

wle

dgin

g ga

ps o

r lim

itatio

ns in

kno

wle

dge

or th

e ch

alle

nges

in im

plem

entin

g cu

lture

-sen

sitiv

e ap

proa

ches

to tr

eatm

ent p

rovi

des a

n op

enin

g fo

r mut

ual d

iscu

ssio

n an

d m

odel

s met

a-co

mpe

tenc

e an

d co

mm

itmen

t to

enha

ncin

g m

ultic

ultu

ral c

ompe

tenc

e

• Tr

aine

e di

sclo

sure

is a

nec

essa

ry c

ompo

nent

fo

r eff

ectiv

e su

perv

isio

n. W

ithou

t suc

h di

sclo

sure

, a su

perv

isor

can

not c

onfid

ently

ca

rry

out t

he su

perv

isor

y ta

sks o

f pro

tect

ing

the

66

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r R

esea

rch

Que

stio

ns/

Obj

ectiv

es

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

supe

rvis

ion

prac

tices

tra

inee

’s c

lient

s and

hel

ping

to p

rom

ote

to

train

ee’s

com

pete

nce

Her

bert

and

Cal

dwel

l (2

015)

• To

def

ine

clin

ical

su

perv

isio

n an

d ba

rrie

rs to

su

perv

isio

n

• To

exa

min

e th

e de

velo

pmen

tal

proc

ess i

n pr

ogre

ssin

g fr

om

coun

selo

r to

supe

rvis

or ro

les

• To

revi

ew e

ffec

tive

prac

tices

in g

roup

su

perv

isio

n

• To

dis

cuss

m

ultic

ultu

ral

pers

pect

ives

on

supe

rvis

ion

• To

iden

tify

clin

ical

su

perv

isio

n st

rate

gies

con

sist

ent

with

goo

d et

hica

l pr

actic

e

Con

cept

ual/

theo

retic

al

fram

ewor

k

N/A

N

/A

• Is

sues

of d

iver

sity

in a

ge, d

isab

ility

, eth

nici

ty,

gend

er, r

elig

ious

aff

iliat

ion

and

spiri

tual

ity,

sexu

al o

rient

atio

n, a

nd/o

r soc

ioec

onom

ic st

atus

ar

e em

bedd

ed in

eve

ry p

rofe

ssio

nal a

nd so

cial

re

latio

nshi

p an

d, a

s a re

sult,

how

we

perc

eive

on

e an

othe

r will

be

man

ifest

ed w

ithin

the

supe

rvis

ory

rela

tions

hips

• It

is a

lway

s the

supe

rvis

or’s

resp

onsi

bilit

y to

in

itiat

e an

d ad

dres

s mul

ticul

tura

l asp

ects

• Su

perv

isor

s, w

ho a

re sk

illed

in se

lf-di

sclo

sing

th

eir c

ultu

ral h

erita

ge, b

iase

s, va

lues

, and

w

orld

view

s con

sist

ent w

ith th

eir s

uper

viso

ry

styl

e, c

an o

ffer

a sa

fe e

nviro

nmen

t for

the

coun

selo

r with

a m

ore

regr

esse

d ra

cial

iden

tity,

so

that

gre

ater

self-

awar

enes

s occ

urs t

o pr

omot

e ch

ange

Lada

ny

(201

4)

• To

pre

sent

a

conc

eptu

aliz

atio

n of

the

theo

retic

al,

empi

rical

, and

pr

actic

al e

lem

ents

Con

cept

ual/

theo

retic

al

fram

ewor

k

N/A

N

/A

• Su

perv

isor

s con

tinue

to p

ose

chal

leng

es d

ue to

m

ultic

ultu

rally

mis

guid

ed n

otio

ns a

bout

su

perv

isio

n an

d ps

ycho

ther

apy,

or b

y m

inim

izin

g or

alto

geth

er ig

norin

g m

ultic

ultu

ral

issu

es, p

artic

ular

ly in

rela

tion

to g

ende

r, ra

ce,

67

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r R

esea

rch

Que

stio

ns/

Obj

ectiv

es

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

of su

perv

isor

fa

ilure

s

• To

pro

vide

re

com

men

datio

ns

for i

ncre

asin

g su

perv

isor

succ

ess

and

limiti

ng

supe

rvis

or fa

ilure

sexu

al o

rient

atio

n, a

nd o

ther

var

iabl

es su

ch a

s di

sabi

lity,

soci

al c

lass

, and

relig

ion

• R

acia

l mic

roag

gres

sion

s hav

e be

en h

ighl

ight

ed

as p

robl

emat

ic in

supe

rvis

ory

dyad

s (D

ress

el,

Con

soli,

Kim

, & A

tkin

son,

200

7), a

nd tr

aine

es

of c

olor

hav

e be

en fo

und

to e

xper

ienc

e su

perv

isor

s as c

ultu

rally

unr

espo

nsiv

e in

co

mpa

rison

to W

hite

trai

nees

(Bur

kard

et a

l.,

2006

)

• W

ith a

dvan

ces i

n m

ultic

ultu

ral t

rain

ing

at th

e gr

adua

te le

vel,

supe

rvis

ors a

re n

ow o

ften

the

leas

t mul

ticul

tura

lly a

dept

mem

ber o

f the

su

perv

isor

y dy

ad, f

orm

ing

wha

t has

bee

n re

ferr

ed to

as r

egre

ssiv

e re

latio

nshi

ps

(Con

stan

tine,

200

1)

• W

ithou

t the

des

ire fo

r, or

eng

agem

ent i

n,

supe

rvis

or tr

aini

ng, s

uper

viso

rs w

ill li

kely

co

ntin

ue to

dem

onst

rate

mul

ticul

tura

l in

com

pete

nce

and

not p

rovi

de e

ffec

tive

supe

rvis

ion

• W

ithou

t suc

h tra

inin

g, su

perv

isor

s are

not

lik

ely

to fa

cilit

ate

mul

ticul

tura

l gro

wth

in

train

ees,

such

as e

nhan

cing

thei

r gen

der o

r ra

cial

iden

tity

or in

crea

sing

thei

r mul

ticul

tura

l kn

owle

dge

or sk

ills i

n ps

ycho

ther

apy

3 ov

erar

chin

g re

com

men

datio

ns fo

r sup

ervi

sors

w

ho a

spire

to b

ecom

e ex

celle

nt in

the

field

: •

Trai

ning

68

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r R

esea

rch

Que

stio

ns/

Obj

ectiv

es

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

• A

sses

smen

t

• A

ccou

ntab

ility

Wat

kins

(2

012)

•

To e

xam

ine

the

last

30

-yea

r per

iod

of

supe

rvis

or

deve

lopm

ent

theo

ry,

mea

sure

men

t, an

d qu

antit

ativ

e an

d qu

alita

tive

stud

y •

To p

rovi

de a

co

ntem

pora

ry st

atus

re

port

on th

is

subj

ect

• To

iden

tify

som

e im

porta

nt m

atte

rs

for r

esea

rch

and

prac

tical

co

nsid

erat

ion

Lite

ratu

re

revi

ew;

theo

retic

al

fram

ewor

k

N/A

N

/A

• A

s of t

he m

id-1

990s

, psy

chot

hera

py su

perv

isor

de

velo

pmen

t had

bee

n de

clar

ed "t

he ri

ches

t yet

m

ost u

ntap

ped

face

t of t

he c

linic

al su

perv

isio

n en

deav

or"

• Fi

ve su

perv

isor

dev

elop

men

t mod

els h

ad b

een

prop

osed

• A

ll th

e m

odel

s wer

e ju

dged

to b

e qu

ite si

mila

r in

stru

ctur

e, se

emed

clin

ical

ly v

alid

, yet

re

mai

ned

inco

mpl

ete

in so

me

resp

ects

(e.g

., la

ckin

g a

trans

ition

theo

ry) b

ecau

se o

f the

ir ne

wne

ss

• A

ttent

ion

to a

nd in

tere

st in

psy

chot

hera

py

supe

rvis

or d

evel

opm

ent a

ppea

red

to b

e hi

gh,

and

all i

ndic

atio

ns su

gges

ted

that

this

are

a w

as

pois

ed a

nd p

rimed

to b

e ta

ken

to it

s nex

t lev

el

of c

once

ptua

l, ex

perim

enta

l, an

d pr

actic

al

scru

tiny

and

soph

istic

atio

n

• Fo

ur p

artic

ular

mec

hani

sms t

hat e

mer

ged

as

criti

cal a

nd p

ivot

al fo

r cha

nge

and

grow

th

acro

ss m

odel

s: (1

) suf

ficie

nt in

tere

st in

bei

ng

and

desi

re to

impr

ove

as a

supe

rvis

or; (

2)

open

ness

to o

ne’s

supe

rviso

ry se

lf-ex

perie

ncin

g; (3

) cap

acity

for a

nd w

illin

g em

brac

e of

supe

rvis

ory

self-

exam

inat

ion

and

self-

refle

ctio

n; a

nd (4

) act

ion,

pra

ctic

e, a

nd

expe

rimen

tatio

n (e

.g.,

with

rega

rd to

69

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r R

esea

rch

Que

stio

ns/

Obj

ectiv

es

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

supe

rvis

ion

skill

s, st

rate

gy d

eplo

ymen

t, an

d al

lianc

e fo

rmat

ion)

• Tr

aini

ng in

supe

rvis

ion

mat

ters

• Th

e re

ach

of th

e ps

ycho

ther

apy

supe

rvis

or is

br

oad,

far,

and

affe

ctin

g

• In

the

supe

rvis

ion

train

ing

expe

rienc

e,

supe

rvis

ors s

trive

to e

nhan

ce th

e le

arni

ng a

nd

deve

lopm

ent o

f the

ir su

perv

isee

s and

, ac

cord

ingl

y, th

eir s

uper

vise

es’ p

atie

nts

• U

nfor

tuna

tely

, the

dev

elop

men

tal p

roce

ss,

traje

ctor

y, a

nd e

xper

ienc

es o

f the

supe

rvis

or

have

rem

aine

d m

ore

mys

tery

than

man

ifest

for

far t

oo lo

ng

Wat

kins

(2

014)

•

To d

iscu

sses

the

mos

t pre

ssin

g ne

eds

curr

ently

co

nfro

ntin

g cl

inic

al

supe

rvis

ion

• To

exa

min

e w

here

su

perv

isio

n is

now

re

lativ

e to

four

ar

eas:

(a)

supe

rvis

ion

train

ing

and

prac

tice;

(b)

mea

sure

men

t; (c

) di

ffer

ence

and

di

vers

ity; a

nd (d

) re

sear

ch

Com

para

tive

liter

atur

e re

view

N/A

N

/A

Diff

eren

ce a

nd D

iver

sity

:

• D

iffer

ence

and

div

ersi

ty a

re n

ow p

rom

inen

tly

feat

ured

in c

urre

nt su

perv

ision

com

pete

ncy

fram

ewor

ks

• W

hate

ver t

he c

ount

ry o

f orig

in, a

cqui

ring

mul

ticul

tura

l com

pete

nce

appe

ars t

o no

w b

e in

tern

atio

nally

con

side

red

to b

e a

supr

emel

y si

gnifi

cant

, int

egra

l asp

ect o

f sup

ervi

sion

pr

actic

e •

The

liter

atur

e on

supe

rvis

ion

mul

ticul

tura

l is

sues

has

gro

wn

cons

ider

ably

ove

r the

last

20

year

s and

con

tribu

ted

to a

bet

ter u

nder

stan

ding

ab

out i

ts p

ract

ice

and

limita

tions

•

Parti

cula

r eff

orts

to c

reat

e m

odel

s or t

heor

etic

al

visi

ons a

bout

mul

ticul

tura

l fac

tors

and

thei

r im

port

and

impa

ct o

n su

perv

isio

n ha

ve a

lso

been

evi

dent

acr

oss t

he la

st tw

o de

cade

s

70

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r R

esea

rch

Que

stio

ns/

Obj

ectiv

es

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

• Th

e re

ality

rem

ains

that

mul

ticul

tura

l su

perv

ision

is st

ill “

one

of th

e ne

wes

t kid

s on

the

mul

ticul

tura

l blo

ck, a

nd a

s suc

h, m

any

of

the

emer

ging

mod

els a

nd re

sear

ch a

re y

et to

be

clea

rly p

rogr

amm

atic

and

inte

rrela

ted”

Res

earc

h:

• Th

e nu

mbe

r of s

uper

visi

on st

udie

s pro

duce

d ea

ch y

ear s

till t

ends

to b

e so

mew

hat l

imite

d •

Estim

ates

hav

e in

dica

ted

that

app

roxi

mat

ely

10

supe

rvis

ion

inve

stig

atio

ns a

ppea

r ann

ually

•

That

lim

ited

outp

ut c

an b

e se

en a

s pot

entia

lly

cons

train

ing

rese

arch

adv

ance

men

t

Wes

tefe

ld

(200

9)

• To

exa

min

e cu

rren

t m

odel

s and

issu

es

rela

ted

to

psyc

hoth

erap

y su

perv

isio

n

Lite

ratu

re

revi

ew

N/A

N

/A

3 su

perv

isio

n m

odel

s are

impo

rtant

mod

els t

hat

have

mad

e m

ajor

a m

ajor

con

tribu

tion

to th

e fie

ld

of c

ouns

elin

g ps

ycho

logy

:

• D

evel

opm

enta

l app

roac

h •

Syst

ems a

ppro

ach

• In

terp

erso

nal a

ppro

ache

s •

Div

ersi

ty is

one

of t

he m

ost n

egle

cted

are

as in

su

perv

ision

trai

ning

and

rese

arch

(“Fa

lend

er &

Sh

afra

nske

, 200

4, p

.115

) •

Div

ersi

ty e

xper

ienc

es in

trai

ning

com

bine

d w

ith p

erso

nal e

xper

ienc

es in

volv

ing

dive

rsity

re

sulte

d in

hig

her s

core

s rel

ated

to

mul

ticul

tura

l com

pete

nce

• H

ighe

r am

ount

s of c

ours

ewor

k in

m

ultic

ultu

ralis

m, a

ttend

ing

wor

ksho

ps o

n m

ultic

ultu

ralis

m, a

nd h

avin

g ha

d su

perv

isio

n in

a

mul

ticul

tura

l situ

atio

n al

l con

tribu

ted

to a

71

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r R

esea

rch

Que

stio

ns/

Obj

ectiv

es

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

high

er sk

ill le

vel i

n te

rms o

f mul

ticul

tura

l co

mpe

tenc

e

72

Clin

ical

Sup

ervi

sion

– E

mpi

rica

l Stu

dies

and

Pub

licat

ions

A

utho

r(s)

/ Y

ear

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n

Inst

rum

enta

tion

Sam

ple

Maj

or F

indi

ngs

Atk

inso

n an

d W

oods

(2

007)

• To

pro

vide

cu

rren

t sur

vey

data

from

qu

alifi

ed

psyc

holo

gist

s ab

out e

ffec

tive

supe

rvis

ion

Qua

litat

ive

stud

y us

ing

focu

s gro

ups

• Pr

oprie

tary

qu

estio

nnai

re

• N

=93

educ

atio

nal

psyc

holo

gist

s •

71 o

f the

re

spon

dent

s had

ex

perie

nce

of

supe

rvis

ing

a tra

inee

ps

ycho

logi

st •

22 d

id n

ot h

ave

supe

rvis

ing

expe

rienc

e

• 49

resp

onde

nts

iden

tifie

d th

at th

ey

had

been

su

perv

ised

as a

tra

inee

with

in th

e la

st fi

ve y

ears

•

43 re

spon

dent

s ha

d no

t

• EP

s rat

ed th

e sta

tem

ent “

supe

rvisi

on

offe

rs g

uida

nce,

pro

blem

-sol

ving

and

su

ppor

t app

ropr

iate

to th

e ne

eds o

f the

tra

inee

,” a

s the

mos

t im

porta

nt in

fa

cilit

atin

g a

succ

essf

ul tr

aine

e pl

acem

ent

• Th

e se

cond

hig

hest

mea

n ra

ting

give

n to

“ef

fect

ive

com

mun

icat

ion

betw

een

the

supe

rviso

r and

trai

nee”

em

phas

izes

the

impo

rtanc

e of

co

mm

unic

atio

n as

a c

ore

conc

ept o

f su

perv

isio

n in

est

ablis

hing

a tr

ustin

g re

latio

nshi

p an

d an

eff

ectiv

e pa

rtner

ship

bet

wee

n su

perv

isor

and

tra

inee

•

Diff

icul

ties w

ith th

e su

perv

isor

y re

latio

nshi

p an

d w

ith e

ffec

tive

com

mun

icat

ion

wer

e pe

rcei

ved

to b

e th

e m

ost s

igni

fican

t bar

riers

to

effe

ctiv

e tra

inee

supe

rvis

ion

Col

eman

(2

006)

•

Are

ther

e id

entif

iabl

e pr

oces

s co

mpo

nent

s of

mul

ticul

tura

l co

unse

lor

train

ing

that

in

fluen

ce

train

ees’

Qua

litat

ive

anal

yses

of

criti

cal

inci

dent

s

• D

emog

raph

ic

ques

tionn

aire

•

Mul

ticul

tura

l En

viro

nmen

t In

vent

ory-

Rev

ised

(MEI

-R)

• C

ritic

al In

cide

nt

Prot

ocol

• N

=59

grad

uate

st

uden

ts •

15%

mas

ter’

s lev

el

• 80

% d

octo

ral-l

evel

•

20%

men

/75%

w

omen

•

Ave

rage

age

: 28

• 24

% A

fric

an

Am

eric

an/B

lack

, 5%

Asi

an

Thre

e ty

pes o

f inf

luen

tial p

roce

ss

com

pone

nts i

n m

ultic

ultu

ral c

ouns

elor

tra

inin

g:

• Ex

perie

nces

with

col

leag

ues f

rom

di

vers

e cu

ltura

l bac

kgro

unds

in th

eir

mul

ticul

tura

l tra

inin

g •

Did

actic

and

exp

erie

ntia

l cou

rse

com

pone

nts

73

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r R

esea

rch

Que

stio

ns/

Obj

ectiv

es

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n

Inst

rum

enta

tion

Sam

ple

Maj

or F

indi

ngs

deve

lopm

ent

of th

e M

CC

? •

Doe

s the

m

ultic

ultu

ral

envi

ronm

ent

of th

e tra

inin

g pr

ogra

m a

ffec

t th

e di

ffer

ent

proc

esse

s?

• D

o tra

inee

s of

colo

r and

W

hite

trai

nees

ha

ve d

iffer

ent

expe

rienc

es in

th

eir

deve

lopm

ent

of th

e M

CC

?

Am

eric

an, 5

9%

Euro

pean

A

mer

ican

/Whi

te

• 7%

Lat

ina/

o •

3% B

i/Mul

tirac

ial

• Ex

perie

nces

with

cul

tura

lly d

iver

se

othe

rs in

thei

r per

sona

l liv

es a

s bei

ng

Coo

k an

d H

elm

s (1

988)

• To

stud

y th

e qu

ality

of

cros

s-cu

ltura

l in

divi

dual

th

erap

ist

supe

rvis

ion

Fact

or

anal

ysis

•

Bar

rett-

Lenn

ard

Rel

atio

nshi

p In

vent

ory

(BLR

I) •

Wor

thin

gton

and

R

oehl

ke’s

m

easu

res o

f sa

tisfa

ctio

n •

Pers

onal

dat

a sh

eet

• N

=225

non

-C

auca

sian

stud

ents

w

ho w

ere

enro

lled

in c

linic

al a

nd

coun

selin

g ps

ycho

logy

pr

ogra

ms

• 57

% w

omen

•

57%

Bla

cks

• A

ge ra

nge

betw

een

26-3

1

5 no

north

ogon

al d

imen

sion

s wer

e id

entif

ied:

• Su

perv

isor

’s li

king

•

Emot

iona

l dis

com

fort

• C

ondi

tiona

l int

eres

t •

Con

ditio

nal l

ikin

g •

Unc

ondi

tiona

l lik

ing

Find

ings

:

• Th

e co

mbi

natio

n of

supe

rvis

or’s

lik

ing

and

cond

ition

al in

tere

st

cons

iste

ntly

con

tribu

ted

to g

reat

er

satis

fact

ion

74

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r R

esea

rch

Que

stio

ns/

Obj

ectiv

es

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n

Inst

rum

enta

tion

Sam

ple

Maj

or F

indi

ngs

Lada

ny,

Mor

i, an

d M

ehr

(201

3)

• To

iden

tify

supe

rvis

or

skill

s, te

chni

ques

, an

d be

havi

ors

that

wer

e de

emed

ef

fect

ive

in

faci

litat

ing

supe

rvis

ee

grow

th v

s. th

ose

skill

s, te

chni

ques

, an

d be

havi

ors

that

wer

e in

effe

ctiv

e, o

r lim

ited

or

hind

ered

su

perv

isee

gr

owth

•

To e

xam

ine

the

rela

tions

hip

betw

een

effe

ctiv

e an

d in

effe

ctiv

e su

perv

isor

be

havi

or a

nd

supe

rvis

ion

proc

ess a

nd

outc

ome,

sp

ecifi

cally

th

e

Mix

ed-

met

hod

desi

gn,

qual

itativ

e an

d qu

antit

ativ

e in

quiry

• Su

perv

isee

ev

alua

tion

of

supe

rvis

or fo

rm

• W

orki

ng A

llian

ce

Inve

ntor

y/Su

perv

isi

on-S

hort

Form

(W

AI/S

-Sho

rt)

• Su

perv

isor

y St

yles

Inve

ntor

y (S

SI)

• Su

perv

isor

Sel

f-D

iscl

osur

e In

dex

(SSD

I)

• Tr

aine

e D

iscl

osur

e Sc

ale

(TD

S)

• Ev

alua

tion

Proc

ess W

ithin

Su

perv

isio

n In

vent

ory

(EPS

I)

Trai

nees

:

• N

=128

•

100

fem

ale,

27

mal

e, 1

unk

now

n •

Ave

rage

age

: 35.

4 •

85%

Eur

opea

n A

mer

ican

/Whi

te;

6%

His

pani

c/La

tino(

a), 4

% A

fric

an

Am

eric

an/B

lack

; 2%

Asi

an

Am

eric

an o

r Pa

cific

Isla

nd; 2

%

Oth

er

Bes

t Sup

ervi

sors

:

• N

=128

•

85%

Whi

te; 4

%

His

pani

c/La

tino;

4%

Afr

ican

A

mer

ican

; 3%

A

sian

Am

eric

an;

2% O

ther

•

56%

fem

ale,

41%

m

ale

• 87

% h

ad d

octo

ral

degr

ee

Wor

st S

uper

viso

rs:

• N

=128

The

mos

t eff

ectiv

e su

perv

isor

skill

s, te

chni

ques

, and

beh

avio

rs:

• En

cour

aged

aut

onom

y •

Stre

ngth

ened

the

supe

rvis

ory

rela

tions

hip

• Fa

cilit

ated

ope

n di

scus

sion

The

mos

t ine

ffec

tive

supe

rvis

or sk

ills,

tech

niqu

es, a

nd b

ehav

iors

:

• D

epre

ciat

ed su

perv

isio

n •

Perf

orm

ed in

effe

ctiv

e cl

ient

co

ncep

tual

izat

ion

and

treat

men

t •

Wea

kene

d th

e su

perv

isor

y re

latio

nshi

p

• Em

pow

erin

g th

e su

perv

isee

via

en

cour

agin

g au

tono

my

and

faci

litat

ing

open

ness

to th

e su

perv

isee

’s id

eas i

s va

lued

by

supe

rvis

ees

•

Supe

rvis

ors w

ho w

ere

able

to

dem

onst

rate

thei

r clin

ical

kno

wle

dge,

th

at is

, to

self-

disc

lose

clin

ical

in

form

atio

n th

at w

as re

leva

nt to

the

supe

rvis

ees p

rese

ntin

g co

ncer

ns a

nd

was

in th

e se

rvic

e of

the

supe

rvis

ee,

seem

ed p

artic

ular

ly h

elpf

ul

•

Feed

back

that

was

pos

itive

and

ch

alle

ngin

g se

emed

to b

e un

ique

ly

bene

ficia

l to

supe

rvis

ees

75

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r R

esea

rch

Que

stio

ns/

Obj

ectiv

es

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n

Inst

rum

enta

tion

Sam

ple

Maj

or F

indi

ngs

supe

rvis

ory

wor

king

al

lianc

e,

supe

rvis

or

styl

e,

supe

rvis

or

self-

disc

losu

re,

supe

rvis

ee

nond

iscl

osur

e,

and

supe

rvis

ee

eval

uatio

n •

To d

eter

min

e th

e di

ffer

ence

s be

twee

n th

e be

st a

nd w

orst

su

perv

isor

s in

rela

tion

to th

e su

perv

isor

y w

orki

ng

allia

nce,

su

perv

isor

st

yle,

su

perv

isor

se

lf-di

sclo

sure

, su

perv

isee

no

ndis

clos

ure,

an

d su

perv

isee

ev

alua

tion

• 87

% W

hite

; 5%

H

ispa

nic/

Latin

o;

2% A

fric

an

Am

eric

an; 2

%

Asi

an;

• A

ppro

x. 5

0/50

fe

mal

e/m

ale

• 82

% h

ad d

octo

ral

degr

ee

76

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r R

esea

rch

Que

stio

ns/

Obj

ectiv

es

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n

Inst

rum

enta

tion

Sam

ple

Maj

or F

indi

ngs

Mag

nuso

n,

Wilc

oxon

, an

d N

orem

(2

000)

• To

exa

min

e in

effe

ctiv

e su

perv

isio

n pr

actic

es

• To

iden

tify

coun

terp

rodu

ctiv

e su

perv

isor

y be

havi

ors a

nd

to d

evel

op a

sc

hem

a fo

r ca

tego

rizin

g th

ese

beha

vior

s

Res

earc

h qu

estio

ns:

• W

hat

beha

vior

s lea

d to

the

perc

eptio

n of

in

effe

ctiv

e su

perv

isio

n?

• W

hat,

if an

y,

patte

rns

emer

ge fr

om

thes

e be

havi

ors?

Qua

litat

ive

met

hod

• Se

mi-s

truct

ured

in

terv

iew

s •

N=1

1 •

Cou

nsel

ors w

ho

repr

esen

ted

vario

us

prof

essi

onal

ex

perie

nces

•

8 m

en/3

wom

en

• 4

stat

es

• 3

ethn

ic g

roup

s re

pres

ente

d:

Afr

ican

Am

eric

an,

His

pani

c, a

nd

Euro

pean

A

mer

ican

•

Taug

ht in

co

unse

lor

educ

atio

n pr

ogra

ms o

r pr

actic

ed in

pr

ivat

e se

tting

s, sc

hool

s, U

CC

s, an

d ju

veni

le

corr

ectio

n fa

cilit

ies

• 10

wer

e cl

inic

al

supe

rvis

ors

Ana

lyse

s of t

he in

terv

iew

dat

a yi

elde

d tw

o br

oad

cate

gorie

s of f

indi

ngs:

(a)

over

arch

ing

prin

cipl

es o

f lou

sy

supe

rvis

ion

and

(b) g

ener

al sp

here

s of

lous

y su

perv

isio

n

Lous

y Su

perv

isio

n: O

vera

rchi

ng

Prin

cipl

es (O

P)

• O

P 1:

Unb

alan

ced

• O

P 2:

Dev

elop

men

tally

inap

prop

riate

•

OP

3: In

tole

rant

of d

iffer

ence

s. •

OP

4: P

oor m

odel

of

prof

essi

onal

/per

sona

l attr

ibut

es

• O

P 5:

Unt

rain

ed

• O

P 6:

Pro

fess

iona

lly a

path

etic

Lous

y Su

perv

isio

n: G

ener

al S

pher

es

(GS)

• G

S 1:

Org

aniz

atio

nal/a

dmin

istra

tive

• G

S 2:

Tec

hnic

al/c

ogni

tive

• G

S 3:

Rel

atio

nal/a

ffec

tive

Mur

phy

and

Wrig

ht

(200

5)

• To

exa

min

e th

e us

e of

po

wer

in th

e su

perv

isor

y

Qua

litat

ive

•

Sem

i-stru

ctur

ed

inte

rvie

ws

• N

=11

supe

rvis

ees

in a

n ac

adem

ic

clin

ical

trai

ning

pr

ogra

m

Them

es fo

r sup

ervi

sors

’ pow

er u

ses

incl

uded

:

• D

iscu

ssio

ns o

f pow

er

• Em

pow

erin

g su

perv

isee

s

77

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r R

esea

rch

Que

stio

ns/

Obj

ectiv

es

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n

Inst

rum

enta

tion

Sam

ple

Maj

or F

indi

ngs

rela

tions

hip

from

su

perv

isee

s’

pers

pect

ives

• 8

fem

ales

/3 m

ales

•

100%

Cau

casi

an

• A

ge ra

nge:

23-

38

• 6

in m

aste

r’s-

leve

l pr

ogra

m; 5

in

doct

oral

-leve

l pr

ogra

m

• M

ix o

f rel

igio

us

pref

eren

ces (

a va

riety

of

Chr

istia

n id

entit

ies,

i.e.

Cat

holic

and

Lu

ther

an)

• Pr

omot

ing

an a

tmos

pher

e of

safe

ty

• C

olla

bora

ting

with

supe

rvise

es

• Im

posi

tion

of st

yle/

orie

ntat

ion

• M

isus

es o

f pow

er, i

.e. v

iola

tion

of

conf

iden

tialit

y

Them

es fo

r sup

ervi

sees

’ pow

er u

ses

incl

uded

:

• Su

perv

isee

-pee

r pow

er

• Su

perv

isee

s as c

onsu

mer

s •

With

hold

ing

info

rmat

ion

Rec

omm

enda

tions

:

• B

ecau

se sa

fety

is c

lear

ly id

entif

ied

as

bein

g ve

ry im

porta

nt in

supe

rvis

ion,

su

perv

isor

s sho

uld

thin

k ab

out w

hat

they

can

do

to fa

cilit

ate

a sa

fe

envi

ronm

ent i

n su

perv

isio

n •

Supe

rvis

ors c

an a

ctiv

ely

colla

bora

te

with

and

em

pow

er th

eir s

uper

vise

es

• Su

perv

isor

s can

be

clea

r abo

ut th

eir

expe

ctat

ions

, in

part

by p

rovi

ding

ex

plic

it ex

pect

atio

ns th

at a

re li

nked

to

sum

mat

ive

and

form

ativ

e ev

alua

tions

of

supe

rvis

ees

Rus

sell

and

Yar

hous

e (2

006)

• To

ass

ess h

ow

syst

emat

ical

ly

relig

ion

/ sp

iritu

ality

is

inco

rpor

ated

in

to

Surv

ey

• W

eb-b

ased

su

rvey

(18-

item

s)

• N

=139

APA

-ac

cred

ited

pre-

doct

oral

inte

rnsh

ip

site

s

• Rel

igio

n/sp

iritu

ality

is m

ost o

ften

addr

esse

d in

inte

rnsh

ip tr

aini

ng w

hen

clie

nts b

ring

it up

• R

elig

ion/

spiri

tual

ity is

pro

cess

ed

furth

er in

the

cont

ext o

f sup

ervi

sion

78

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r R

esea

rch

Que

stio

ns/

Obj

ectiv

es

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n

Inst

rum

enta

tion

Sam

ple

Maj

or F

indi

ngs

psyc

holo

gy

prog

ram

s • R

elat

ivel

y fe

w in

tern

ship

site

s pro

vide

m

ore

form

al tr

aini

ng in

re

ligio

n/sp

iritu

ality

79

Lite

ratu

re R

evie

w T

able

: Mul

ticul

tura

l Sup

ervi

sion

M

ultic

ultu

ral S

uper

visio

n –

The

oret

ical

Pub

licat

ions

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

Cha

ng,

Hay

s, an

d Sh

offn

er

(200

3)

• To

exa

min

e th

e be

nefit

s and

ch

alle

nges

rela

ted

to c

ross

-raci

al

supe

rvis

ion

• To

dis

cuss

the

sign

ifica

nce

of

inte

grat

ing

raci

al

iden

tity

deve

lopm

ent i

n th

e su

perv

isio

n pr

oces

s

Lite

ratu

re

Rev

iew

Con

cept

ual/

Theo

retic

al

N/A

N

/A

• C

ross

-rac

ial s

uper

visi

on se

rves

as a

rich

lear

ning

op

portu

nity

and

a so

urce

for p

erso

nal a

nd

prof

essi

onal

gro

wth

. It a

lso

prov

ides

an

oppo

rtuni

ty to

incr

ease

supe

rvis

or a

nd

supe

rvis

ee’s

leve

ls o

f mul

ticul

tura

l aw

aren

ess,

know

ledg

e, a

nd sk

ills a

s the

y ex

amin

e ho

w

cultu

ral v

aria

bles

impa

ct c

ouns

elin

g an

d su

perv

isio

n •

A re

view

of t

he li

tera

ture

sugg

ests

that

it is

the

supe

rvis

ors’

resp

onsi

bilit

y to

add

ress

raci

al a

nd

cultu

ral i

ssue

s with

thei

r sup

ervi

sees

, yet

su

perv

isor

s ofte

n ig

nore

or a

void

cul

tura

l iss

ues

• A

lack

of a

war

enes

s of r

acia

l and

cul

tura

l si

mila

ritie

s and

diff

eren

ces b

etw

een

the

supe

rvis

or a

nd su

perv

isee

, or a

lack

of a

ttent

ion

to c

ultu

rally

rele

vant

issu

es, w

ill n

egat

ivel

y im

pact

the

rela

tions

hip

and

may

hin

der t

he

supe

rvis

ee’s

futu

re su

cces

s in

mul

ticul

tura

l co

unse

ling

•

Cro

ss-r

acia

l com

pete

nce

can

be e

nhan

ced

by

fost

erin

g m

ultic

ultu

ral t

rain

ing

in g

ener

al. W

hen

addr

essi

ng ra

cial

iden

tity

issu

es in

supe

rvis

ion,

it

is e

ffec

tive

to fo

cus i

nitia

lly o

n se

lf-aw

aren

ess

• St

rate

gies

that

enc

oura

ge b

oth

the

supe

rvis

or a

nd

the

supe

rvis

ee to

add

ress

raci

al id

entit

y is

sues

in

clud

e jo

urna

ling

and

the

use

of c

ritic

al

inci

dent

s

80

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

• A

noth

er st

rate

gy in

volv

es th

e us

e of

dya

ds a

nd

shar

ing

of st

orie

s in

grou

p su

perv

isio

n to

ac

know

ledg

e di

ffer

ence

s and

sim

ilarit

ies o

f rac

ial

grou

ps a

nd d

iscu

ss th

eir s

ourc

es

• A

dditi

onal

stra

tegi

es in

clud

e re

adin

g an

d w

ritin

g as

sign

men

ts a

ddre

ssin

g is

sues

rela

ted

to ra

cial

id

entit

y, st

ruct

ured

imm

ersi

on a

nd e

xper

ient

ial

expe

rienc

es (e

.g.,

visi

ting

cultu

ral c

ente

rs a

nd

atte

ndin

g cu

ltura

l act

iviti

es),

and

the

use

of ro

le

play

s in

indi

vidu

al su

perv

isio

n

Chr

istia

nsen

et

al.

(201

1)

• To

exa

min

e th

e ex

perie

nces

of 7

di

vers

e th

erap

ists

in

a su

perv

isio

n co

urse

as t

hey

wre

stle

d w

ith th

e re

al-w

orld

ap

plic

atio

n of

m

ultic

ultu

ral

supe

rvis

ion

Cas

e ex

ampl

es

N/A

N

/A

• R

ace

very

muc

h st

ill m

atte

rs, n

ot o

nly

in th

e liv

es

of c

lient

s, bu

t als

o be

twee

n su

perv

isor

s and

su

perv

isee

s •

Opp

ortu

nitie

s for

incr

easi

ng th

e m

ultic

ultu

ral

sens

itivi

ty o

f bot

h th

erap

ists

and

supe

rvis

ors

occu

r dur

ing

the

supe

rvis

ion

proc

ess

Des

pite

diff

erin

g ba

ckgr

ound

s, se

vera

l sim

ilarit

ies

emer

ged

acro

ss c

ase

exam

ples

:

• In

all

case

exa

mpl

es, n

egat

ive

emot

iona

l re

actio

ns w

ere

pres

ent (

i.e.,

disc

omfo

rt, a

nxie

ty,

and

ange

r) •

All

of th

ese

inst

ance

s of m

ultic

ultu

ral s

uper

visi

on

wer

e un

plan

ned;

they

occ

urre

d sp

onta

neou

sly

out

of th

e co

nten

t of t

hera

py o

r sup

ervi

sion

•

All

of th

e th

erap

ists

invo

lved

dis

cuss

the

need

for

thei

r sup

ervi

sor’s

supp

ort a

nd v

alid

atio

n of

thei

r ex

perie

nces

, inc

ludi

ng th

eir n

egat

ive

emot

iona

l re

actio

ns

• Th

ere

is a

cle

ar n

eed

in a

ll of

thes

e ex

ampl

es fo

r a

safe

spac

e w

ithin

whi

ch to

com

mun

icat

e an

d

81

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

proc

ess t

hese

exp

erie

nces

at t

he su

perv

isor

y le

vel,

rath

er th

an o

n th

e th

erap

eutic

leve

l

Col

lins a

nd

Piet

erse

(2

008)

• To

dis

cuss

2

pers

pect

ives

on

the

Mul

ticul

tura

l C

ouns

elin

g C

ompe

tenc

ies:

fix

ed g

oal a

nd

proc

ess

• To

ope

ratio

naliz

e ac

tive

raci

al/c

ultu

ral

awar

enes

s •

To c

ritiq

ue

curr

ent t

rain

ing

appr

oach

es fr

om

a pr

oces

s pe

rspe

ctiv

e •

To d

iscu

ss th

e cr

itica

l inc

iden

t an

alys

is a

s a to

ol

for i

ncre

asin

g ra

cial

/cul

tura

l aw

aren

ess

Lite

ratu

re

revi

ew w

ith

criti

que

and

criti

cal

inci

dent

an

alys

is

N/A

N

/A

• Th

e an

alys

is o

f a c

ritic

al in

cide

nt sh

ould

in

corp

orat

e fo

ur c

ore

elem

ents

: ack

now

ledg

men

t, co

nfro

ntat

ion,

refle

ctio

n, a

nd c

omm

itmen

t •

Aut

hors

reco

mm

end

that

edu

cato

rs re

view

and

im

plem

ent C

IAB

T an

d ot

her t

rain

ing

mod

els t

hat

affe

ct th

e pr

oces

s asp

ect o

f mul

ticul

tura

l co

mpe

tenc

e an

d pr

omot

e ac

tive

raci

al/c

ultu

ral

awar

enes

s •

Cou

nsel

or e

duca

tors

and

rese

arch

ers n

eed

grea

ter

empi

rical

und

erst

andi

ng o

f the

und

erly

ing

proc

esse

s of m

ultic

ultu

ral c

ompe

tenc

e an

d in

com

pete

nce

to b

ette

r inf

orm

mul

ticul

tura

l tra

inin

g st

rate

gies

•

Bec

ause

this

invo

lves

con

stru

cts a

nd p

heno

men

a th

at a

re u

ncon

scio

us a

nd d

iffic

ult t

o m

easu

re, t

he

auth

ors r

ecom

men

d th

at re

sear

cher

s use

a v

arie

ty

of re

sear

ch m

etho

ds

Eklu

nd,

Aro

s-O

’Mal

ley,

an

d M

urrie

ta

(201

4)

• To

exp

lore

cu

ltura

l fac

tors

im

pact

ing

supe

rvis

ion

• To

out

line

raci

al

iden

tity

deve

lopm

ent

mod

els a

nd th

eir

Lite

ratu

re

revi

ew w

ith

case

ex

ampl

es

N/A

N

/A

Lite

ratu

re re

view

was

con

duct

ed in

the

follo

win

g ar

eas:

• C

ultu

ral M

atch

•

Whi

te P

rivile

ge

• C

omm

unic

atio

n St

yles

•

Trai

ning

and

Sup

ervi

sion

•

Rac

ial I

dent

ity D

evel

opm

ent M

odel

s

82

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

appl

icat

ion

with

in

the

cont

ext o

f cu

ltura

lly

com

pete

nt

supe

rvis

ion

• To

hig

hlig

ht b

est

prac

tice

cons

ider

atio

ns fo

r en

gagi

ng in

ef

fect

ive

mul

ticul

tura

l su

perv

isio

n

• W

hite

Rac

ial I

dent

ity D

evel

opm

ent M

odel

•

Fram

ewor

k fo

r Mul

ticul

tura

l Sup

ervi

sion

•

Bes

t Pra

ctic

e C

onsi

dera

tions

in M

ultic

ultu

ral

Supe

rvis

ion

The

follo

win

g B

est P

ract

ice

Con

side

ratio

ns in

MC

Su

perv

isio

n w

ere

mad

e:

• D

iscu

ss c

ultu

ral s

imila

ritie

s and

diff

eren

ces

• Sh

ow g

enui

ne in

tere

st in

and

resp

ect f

or th

e su

perv

isee

’s u

niqu

e cu

lture

•

Cre

ate

a sa

fe a

nd in

clus

ive

setti

ng

• M

odel

and

impa

rt m

ultic

ultu

ral c

ompe

tenc

ies

• V

alue

ong

oing

pro

fess

iona

l dev

elop

men

t op

portu

nitie

s •

App

ly a

mul

ticul

tura

l fra

mew

ork

for s

uper

visi

on

Estra

da,

Fram

e, a

nd

Will

iam

s (2

004)

• To

exa

min

e th

e im

porta

nce

of

mea

ning

ful

disc

ussi

on o

f rac

e an

d et

hnic

ity in

cr

oss-

cultu

ral

supe

rvis

ion

• To

iden

tify/

sh

owca

se

com

mon

err

ors i

n cr

oss-

cultu

ral

supe

rvis

ion

• To

pre

sent

st

rate

gies

for

effe

ctiv

e cr

oss-

Lite

ratu

re

revi

ew; c

ase

exam

ple

N/A

N

/A

It is

the

supe

rvis

or’s

resp

onsi

bilit

y to

faci

litat

e th

e fo

llow

ing

exam

inat

ions

in a

clim

ate

of sa

fety

, tru

st,

and

com

fort…

Mak

ing

Supe

rvis

ion

Safe

:

• A

ckno

wle

dgin

g th

eir p

erso

nal a

nd p

rofe

ssio

nal

pow

er is

a fi

rst s

tep

in b

uild

ing

a sa

fe c

limat

e fo

r th

e su

perv

isee

•

Avo

id u

sing

pow

er in

arb

itrar

y an

d de

stru

ctiv

e w

ays a

nd m

ust b

e in

tent

iona

l abo

ut a

ddre

ssin

g th

e po

wer

inhe

rent

in th

e su

perv

isor

y re

latio

nshi

p •

Cre

ate

a cl

imat

e of

hon

esty

and

trus

t whe

rein

su

perv

isee

s hav

e th

e op

portu

nity

for h

onin

g th

eir

coun

selin

g sk

ills a

s wel

l as a

ddre

ssin

g th

e pe

rson

al a

nd c

onte

xtua

l iss

ues t

hat a

rise

83

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

cultu

ral

supe

rvis

ion

• R

aise

the

issu

es o

f rac

ial a

nd e

thni

c di

ffer

ence

, of

expe

ctat

ions

, and

fear

s

Con

duct

ing

Supe

rvis

or a

nd S

uper

vise

e Se

lf-A

sses

smen

t:

• It

is c

ritic

al fo

r bot

h su

perv

isor

s and

supe

rvis

ees

to c

onsi

der t

heir

own

raci

al a

nd e

thni

c ba

ckgr

ound

s and

bel

ief s

yste

ms a

nd h

ow th

ese

may

impa

ct th

e su

perv

isor

y re

latio

nshi

p •

One

stra

tegy

to in

crea

se a

war

enes

s of r

acia

l and

et

hnic

iden

tity

is fo

r bot

h th

e su

perv

isor

and

su

perv

isee

to p

repa

re c

ultu

ral g

enog

ram

s •

Oth

er a

venu

es fo

r exp

lorin

g ra

cial

and

eth

nic

iden

tity

issu

es in

clud

e th

e us

e of

raci

al id

entit

y in

vent

orie

s •

Supe

rvis

ors a

nd su

perv

isee

s wor

king

with

ra

cial

ly d

iffer

ent c

lient

s are

enc

oura

ged

to se

lf-ad

min

iste

r the

raci

al id

entit

y in

vent

orie

s and

di

scus

s the

resu

lts in

supe

rvis

ion

Embr

acin

g Le

arni

ng O

ppor

tuni

ties

• Ta

king

resp

onsi

bilit

y fo

r lea

rnin

g ab

out t

he ra

cial

pa

ttern

s and

pra

ctic

es o

f the

ir et

hnic

ally

div

erse

cl

ient

s

Supe

rvis

ors a

nd su

perv

isee

s mut

ually

und

erta

ke th

e ta

sk o

f lea

rnin

g ab

out c

lient

s’ ra

cial

and

eth

nic

cont

ext

Fale

nder

, B

urne

s, an

d El

lis (2

013)

• To

pro

vide

ba

ckgr

ound

kn

owle

dge

and

cont

ext f

or

com

pete

ncy-

Lite

ratu

re

revi

ew w

ith

theo

retic

al

and

N/A

N

/A

• Th

ere

exis

ts a

crit

ical

nee

d w

ithin

app

lied

psyc

holo

gy to

und

erst

and

and

prom

ote

supe

rvis

ion

usin

g a

com

pete

ncy-

base

d m

ultic

ultu

ral f

ram

ewor

k

84

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

base

d cl

inic

al

supe

rvis

ion

• To

show

case

a

dive

rsity

of

met

hodo

logi

cally

so

und

empi

rical

ap

proa

ches

to

stud

y ef

fect

ive

supe

rvis

ion,

in

clud

ing

mul

ticul

tura

lly

com

pete

nt

supe

rvis

ion,

and

co

mpa

rativ

e pe

rspe

ctiv

es o

n su

perv

isio

n cr

oss-

cultu

rally

conc

eptu

al

impl

icat

ions

A

utho

rs p

rovi

de v

alua

ble

guid

ance

for s

uper

viso

rs

abou

t eff

ectiv

e su

perv

isio

n an

d th

e co

mpl

exiti

es o

f in

tern

atio

nal,

cros

s-cu

ltura

l, an

d m

ultic

ultu

ral g

roup

su

perv

isio

n; th

ey o

ffer

6 im

plic

atio

ns:

1. F

acili

tatin

g an

d en

gagi

ng in

the

trans

form

atio

n to

co

mpe

tenc

y-ba

sed

supe

rvis

ion

rem

aini

ng

min

dful

of p

ower

, per

spec

tive,

and

the

cultu

ral

and

dive

rsity

rela

tivity

and

con

text

of

com

pete

ncie

s 2.

Enc

oura

ging

met

hodo

logi

cal a

dvan

ces a

nd n

ew

cons

truct

s in

supe

rvis

ion

rese

arch

3.

Atte

ndin

g to

mul

tiple

iden

titie

s of c

lient

(s),

supe

rvis

ees,

and

supe

rvis

ors

4. T

rans

latin

g ro

bust

resu

lts in

to fr

amew

orks

for

train

ing

of su

perv

isor

s. 5.

Con

duct

ing

rese

arch

on

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

supe

rvis

ion

train

ing

for s

uper

vise

es in

de

velo

pmen

t and

for m

ore

expe

rienc

ed

supe

rvis

ors

6. I

ncre

asin

g at

tent

ion

to c

ross

-nat

iona

l stu

dies

of

supe

rvis

ion

prac

tice,

inte

rnat

iona

l com

pete

ncy

stan

dard

s, an

d ev

olvi

ng p

ract

ices

and

gui

delin

es

in th

e in

tern

atio

nal a

rena

Foo

and

Rod

olfa

(2

013)

• To

exp

lore

how

th

e TC

P M

ajor

C

ontri

butio

n,

“Mul

ticul

tura

l C

linic

al

Supe

rvis

ion

and

Ben

chm

arks

: Em

piric

al

Supp

ort

Com

men

tary

N

/A

N/A

Th

e ar

ticle

ope

ratio

naliz

ed n

umer

ous b

ench

mar

ks

and

prov

ided

a sp

ecifi

c pa

thw

ay to

hel

p su

perv

isor

s be

com

e in

crea

sing

ly m

ultic

ultu

rally

com

pete

nt

Wor

king

Alli

ance

in su

perv

isio

n is

key

to fo

ster

ing

train

ee le

arni

ng

• Th

e be

st su

perv

isor

s bui

ld st

rong

supe

rvis

ory

rela

tions

hips

•

Use

of e

mpa

thy

and

enco

urag

emen

t

85

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

Info

rmin

g Pr

actic

e an

d Su

perv

isor

Tr

aini

ng,”

can

be

appl

ied

to th

e re

finin

g of

co

mpe

tenc

ies f

or

the

prof

essi

on o

f ps

ycho

logy

• Pr

ovid

e po

sitiv

e an

d ch

alle

ngin

g fe

edba

ck

Supe

rvis

or U

se o

f Sel

f/Sel

f-D

iscl

osur

e: ju

dici

ous

use

of se

lf-di

sclo

sure

by

supe

rvis

ors w

as v

ery

help

ful t

o su

perv

isee

s

Empo

wer

ing

Supe

rvis

ees:

• En

cour

agin

g au

tono

my

and

open

ness

to tr

aine

es’

idea

s •

Abi

lity

to re

flect

on

own

role

s and

pow

er w

as

parti

cula

rly h

elpf

ul to

supe

rvis

ees

Cro

ss-C

ultu

ral C

ompe

tenc

ies

• La

ck o

f aw

aren

ess →

har

mfu

l to

supe

rvis

ees o

f co

lor

Ethi

cal B

ehav

iors

: the

re is

a n

eed

for s

uper

viso

rs to

fr

ame

and

mod

el e

thic

al b

ehav

ior f

or su

perv

isee

s

Men

tors

hip:

par

ticul

arly

effe

ctiv

e ap

proa

ch fo

r tra

inee

s of c

olor

Foua

d et

al.

(200

9)

• To

out

line

core

fo

unda

tiona

l and

fu

nctio

nal

com

pete

ncie

s in

prof

essi

onal

ps

ycho

logy

ac

ross

thre

e le

vels

of

prof

essi

onal

de

velo

pmen

t: re

adin

ess f

or

prac

ticum

, re

adin

ess f

or

Con

cept

ual

fram

ewor

k N

/A

N/A

C

ompe

tenc

y fo

r Sup

ervi

sion

and

Tra

inin

g, A

rea

D:

Aw

aren

ess o

f Fac

tors

Aff

ectin

g Q

ualit

y:

Rea

dine

ss fo

r Int

erns

hip:

• K

now

ledg

e ab

out t

he im

pact

of d

iver

sity

on

all

prof

essi

onal

setti

ngs a

nd su

perv

isio

n pa

rtici

pant

s in

clud

ing

self

as d

efin

ed b

y A

PA p

olic

y •

Dem

onst

rate

s aw

aren

ess o

f rol

e of

opp

ress

ion

and

priv

ilege

on

supe

rvis

ion

proc

ess

Rea

dine

ss fo

r Ent

ry to

Pra

ctic

e:

• U

nder

stan

ding

of o

ther

indi

vidu

als a

nd g

roup

s an

d in

ters

ectio

n di

men

sion

s of d

iver

sity

in th

e

86

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

inte

rnsh

ip, a

nd

read

ines

s for

en

try to

pra

ctic

e •

To se

rve

as a

re

sour

ce fo

r tho

se

char

ged

with

tra

inin

g an

d as

sess

ing

for

com

pete

nce

cont

ext o

f sup

ervi

sion

pra

ctic

e, a

ble

to e

ngag

e in

re

flect

ion

on th

e ro

le o

f one

’s se

lf on

ther

apy

and

in su

perv

isio

n •

Dem

onst

rate

s int

egra

tion

of d

iver

sity

and

m

ultip

le id

entit

y as

pect

s in

conc

eptu

aliz

atio

n of

su

perv

isio

n pr

oces

s with

all

parti

cipa

nts (

clie

nts,

supe

rvis

ee, s

uper

viso

r)

• D

emon

stra

tes a

dapt

atio

n of

ow

n pr

ofes

sion

al

beha

vior

in a

cul

tura

lly se

nsiti

ve m

anne

r as

appr

opria

te to

the

need

s of t

he su

perv

isio

n co

ntex

t and

all

parti

es in

it

• A

rticu

late

s and

use

s div

ersi

ty a

ppro

pria

te

repe

rtoire

of s

kills

and

tech

niqu

es in

supe

rvis

ory

proc

ess

• Id

entif

ies i

mpa

ct o

f asp

ect o

f sel

f in

ther

apy

and

supe

rvis

ion

Gar

rett

et a

l. (2

001)

•

To a

ddre

ss th

e ne

ed fo

r cul

tura

l re

spon

sive

ness

in

supe

rvis

ion

and

prov

ide

supe

rvis

ors w

ith a

pa

radi

gm to

hel

p th

em w

ork

mor

e ef

fect

ivel

y w

ith

supe

rvis

ees,

give

n di

ffer

ence

s in

val

ues a

nd

belie

f sys

tem

s, in

terp

reta

tion

of

expe

rienc

es,

stru

ctur

e

Theo

retic

al

fram

ewor

k N

/A

N/A

V

ISIO

N is

use

ful f

or re

latin

g th

e on

goin

g in

tera

ctio

nal p

roce

ss o

f cul

ture

in th

e w

ay th

at

supe

rvis

or a

nd su

perv

isee

:

V (V

alue

s and

Bel

ief S

yste

ms)

: stru

ctur

e th

eir

phen

omen

al w

orld

in te

rms o

f Val

ues a

nd b

elie

f sy

stem

s

I (In

terp

reta

tion

of E

xper

ienc

es):

resp

ond

to th

e in

tern

al a

nd e

xter

nal s

timul

i of t

heir

phen

omen

al

wor

ld b

y In

terp

retin

g th

eir e

xper

ienc

es a

nd

ascr

ibin

g m

eani

ngs

S (S

truct

urin

g): S

truc

ture

thei

r phe

nom

enal

wor

ld

acco

rdin

g to

per

sona

l/cul

tura

l mea

ning

s and

pr

efer

ence

s tha

t pro

vide

app

ropr

iate

ave

nues

for

goal

-dire

cted

beh

avio

rs a

nd e

xpec

tatio

ns

87

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

pref

eren

ces,

inte

ract

iona

l st

yle,

ope

ratio

nal

stra

tegi

es, a

nd

perc

eive

d ne

eds

of su

perv

isee

s •

To d

escr

ibe

the

VIS

ION

mod

el o

f cu

ltura

l re

spon

sive

ness

as

a pr

actic

al m

eans

of

supe

rvis

ors

expl

orin

g m

ultic

ultu

ral

issu

es in

the

supe

rvis

ory

rela

tions

hip

I (In

tera

ctio

nal S

tyle

): en

gage

in in

tera

ctiv

e le

arni

ng

and

self-

expr

essi

on th

roug

h an

Inte

ract

iona

l sty

le o

f ve

rbal

and

non

verb

al c

omm

unic

atio

n in

soci

al

grou

ps a

nd th

e su

rrou

ndin

g en

viro

nmen

t tha

t re

quire

s a c

ontin

uous

pro

cess

of a

dapt

atio

n

O (O

pera

tiona

l Stra

tegi

es):

deve

lop

Ope

ratio

nal

stra

tegi

es a

nd p

roce

dure

s for

acc

ompl

ishi

ng th

eir

expe

ctat

ions

and

goa

ls

N (N

eeds

, Per

ceiv

ed):

deve

lop

a pa

rticu

lar

pers

pect

ive

in se

ekin

g to

fulfi

ll pe

rcei

ved

phys

ical

, m

enta

l, sp

iritu

al (e

mot

iona

l) an

d en

viro

nmen

tal

Nee

ds

Gra

y an

d Sm

ith

(200

9)

• To

intro

duce

an

appr

oach

to

supe

rvis

ion

that

en

hanc

es th

e su

perv

isor

’s

cultu

ral

resp

onsi

vene

ss

and

atte

ntio

n to

th

e in

fluen

ce o

f di

vers

ity

• To

des

crib

e st

rate

gies

to

iden

tify

the

supe

rvis

ee’s

pe

rson

al q

ualit

ies

Theo

retic

al

fram

ewor

k (p

ostm

oder

n an

d co

nstru

ctiv

ist

pers

pect

ives

); ca

se e

xam

ple

N/A

N

/A

The

auth

ors p

ropo

se in

corp

orat

ing

the

conc

eptu

al

inte

rsec

tion

of th

ese

two

ther

apy

appr

oach

es to

set

the

stag

e fo

r a fr

amew

ork

for s

uper

visi

on:

• A

ttent

ive

to th

e as

pect

s of d

iffer

ence

foun

d in

the

rela

tions

hip

betw

een

supe

rvis

or a

nd su

perv

isee

an

d •

Dis

tingu

ishe

d by

refle

ctiv

e co

mm

unic

atio

n an

d qu

estio

ns (o

r RC

Q) a

s a c

ompr

ehen

sive

dia

logi

c an

d re

curs

ive

proc

ess

Solu

tion-

Focu

sed:

• So

cial

ize

the

supe

rvis

ee to

a so

lutio

n-fo

cuse

d su

perv

isor

y fo

rmat

•

Focu

s on

“exc

eptio

ns”

(or a

tim

e w

hen

the

supe

rvis

ee h

as e

xper

ienc

ed so

me

degr

ee o

f

88

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

and

skill

s tha

t co

uld

be a

cces

sed

in o

rder

to fo

ster

co

mpe

tent

pr

actic

e

succ

ess;

hel

p su

perv

isee

repe

at w

hat h

as w

orke

d in

the

past

and

to g

ain

conf

iden

ce in

his

/her

ab

ility

to m

ake

impr

ovem

ents

for t

he fu

ture

•

Expl

ore

copi

ng: a

sk c

opin

g qu

estio

ns

• Em

phas

ize

help

ing

the

supe

rvis

ee c

onst

ruct

a

posi

tive

visi

on o

f his

/her

futu

re w

ork

with

a

clie

nt

• U

se “

scal

ing

ques

tions

” to

iden

tify

usef

ul

“diff

eren

ces”

for t

he su

perv

isee

• C

ompl

imen

t the

supe

rvis

ee fo

r hav

ing

tried

to

solv

e a

prob

lem

•

Pay

atte

ntio

n to

wha

t was

atte

nded

to o

r ign

ored

in

supe

rvis

ion

sess

ions

Nar

rativ

e:

• Li

sten

to th

e su

perv

isee

’s “

story

” •

Dism

antle

stuc

k “s

torie

s”

• D

econ

stru

ct li

miti

ng n

arra

tives

•

Enga

ge a

pre

ferr

ed re

ality

•

Enga

ge o

utsi

der w

itnes

ses

• U

tiliz

e m

etap

hors

Hird

, C

aval

ieri,

D

ulko

, Fe

lice,

and

H

o (2

001)

• To

pro

vide

an

over

view

of t

he

expe

rienc

es o

f 4

psyc

holo

gist

s-in

-tra

inin

g as

su

perv

isee

s in

mul

ticul

tura

l su

perv

isio

n re

latio

nshi

ps

• To

und

erst

and

supe

rvis

ees’

Lite

ratu

re

revi

ew; c

ase

exam

ples

N/A

N

/A

Con

cept

ualiz

atio

n an

d Ex

perie

nce

of M

ultic

ultu

ral

Supe

rvis

ion:

• M

ultic

ultu

ral s

uper

visi

on c

onsi

ders

and

in

tegr

ates

mul

tiple

cul

tura

l int

erac

tions

as t

hey

occu

r with

in th

e tri

adic

pro

cess

of t

he su

perv

isor

, su

perv

isee

, and

clie

nt

• A

lthou

gh v

aria

tions

in th

e de

finiti

on a

nd

oper

atio

naliz

atio

n of

mul

ticul

tura

l sup

ervi

sion

ex

ist,

all s

uper

visi

on e

xper

ienc

es n

eed

to

inte

grat

e cu

lture

into

the

proc

ess

89

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

need

s and

pe

rspe

ctiv

es fo

r cu

ltura

lly

inte

grat

ed

supe

rvis

ion

• To

dis

cuss

m

ultic

ultu

ral

issu

es d

urin

g su

perv

isio

n •

To p

rovi

de

reco

mm

enda

tions

fo

r fac

ilita

ting

the

deve

lopm

ent o

f ef

fect

ive

mul

ticul

tura

l su

perv

isio

n

Effe

cts o

n th

e D

ynam

ics o

f Sup

ervi

sion

R

elat

ions

hip

due

to C

ultu

ral D

iffer

ence

s:

• C

ultu

ral i

nter

actio

ns g

reat

ly a

ffec

t the

dyn

amic

s of

supe

rvis

ion

rela

tions

hip

• Po

wer

diff

eren

ces b

y ra

ce, e

thni

city

, gen

der,

or

othe

r cul

tura

l fac

tor a

lso

cont

ribut

e to

the

qual

ity

of th

e su

perv

isor

y ex

perie

nce

• Th

e gr

eate

st c

ost o

f not

disc

ussi

ng

mul

ticul

tura

lism

ins s

uper

visi

on ty

pica

lly o

ccur

s fo

r tho

se w

ho h

ave

the

leas

t soc

iopo

litic

al a

nd

cont

extu

al p

ower

(i.e

. the

supe

rvis

ee a

nd th

e cl

ient

)

How

to In

trodu

ce C

ultu

ral I

ssue

s int

o th

e Su

perv

isor

y R

elat

ions

hip:

• C

onve

rsat

ions

abo

ut m

ultic

ultu

ralis

m sh

ould

oc

cur e

arly

in su

perv

isio

n, in

par

ticul

ar to

dis

pel

any

prec

once

ptio

ns a

nd a

ssum

ptio

ns th

at m

ight

un

derm

ine

the

supe

rvis

ion

proc

ess

• Se

lf-di

sclo

sure

s of v

ulne

rabi

lity

and

stru

ggle

by

an e

xper

ienc

ed m

ento

r can

be

com

forti

ng to

su

perv

isee

s, pr

ovid

ing

a m

odel

by

whi

ch

supe

rvis

ees c

an a

ddre

ss th

eir o

wn

bias

es a

nd

assu

mpt

ions

as t

hey

unde

rsta

nd a

nd in

tegr

ate

mul

ticul

tura

lism

•

Con

side

r the

use

of s

emi-s

truct

ured

que

stio

ns to

pr

ompt

the

disc

ussi

on o

f cul

tura

l iss

ues i

n th

e su

perv

isio

n pr

oces

s

Ass

essm

ents

of M

ultic

ultu

ral C

ompe

tenc

ies:

• M

ultic

ultu

ral A

war

enes

s-K

now

ledg

e-Sk

ills

Surv

ey (M

AK

SS)

90

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

• C

ross

Cul

tura

l Cou

nsel

ing

Inve

ntor

y-R

evis

ed

(CC

CI-R

) •

Mul

ticul

tura

l Cou

nsel

ing

Inve

ntor

y (M

CI)

Hol

low

ay

and

Wol

leat

(1

994)

• To

exa

min

e cl

inic

al

supe

rvis

ion

in

prof

essi

onal

ps

ycho

logy

from

th

e pe

rspe

ctiv

e of

ge

nder

(to

desc

ribe

supe

rvis

ion

with

in th

e co

ntex

t of

gen

der a

nd

pow

er)

Theo

retic

al

fram

ewor

k w

ith c

ase

exam

ples

N/A

N

/A

• Th

is a

rticl

e co

nfirm

s the

legi

timat

e po

wer

in

here

nt in

the

role

of s

uper

viso

r reg

ardl

ess o

f w

heth

er a

mal

e or

fem

ale

is in

the

role

•

Gen

der r

ole

char

acte

ristic

s com

e to

pla

y,

how

ever

, with

in th

e tra

inee

role

•

A su

bord

inat

e po

sitio

n of

freq

uent

acq

uies

cenc

e is

rein

forc

ed in

tera

ctio

nally

for f

emal

e tra

inee

s •

Cen

tral t

o su

perv

isio

n is

the

role

of p

ower

and

in

volv

emen

t in

the

supe

rvis

ory

rela

tions

hip

and

the

inte

ntio

ns o

f the

supe

rvis

or a

s she

or h

e de

sign

s way

of t

each

ing

and

lear

ning

that

are

ne

cess

arily

in a

con

text

of a

pro

fess

iona

l and

hi

erar

chic

al re

latio

nal s

truct

ure

Inm

an a

nd

DeB

oer

Kre

ider

(2

013)

• To

off

er tw

o su

perv

isor

y in

terv

entio

ns, t

he

Crit

ical

Eve

nts

Mod

el a

nd th

e H

euris

tic M

odel

of

Non

-op

pres

sive

In

terp

erso

nal

Dev

elop

men

t to

high

light

the

use

of a

m

ultic

ultu

rally

co

mpe

tent

fr

amew

ork

in

Con

cept

ual/

Theo

retic

al

N/A

N

/A

• A

s a k

ey c

ompo

nent

to e

ffec

tive

psyc

hoth

erap

y tra

inin

g, c

linic

al su

perv

isio

n an

d m

ultic

ultu

ral

com

pete

ncie

s hav

e be

en c

onsi

dere

d co

re

com

pete

ncie

s in

the

prov

isio

n of

eth

ical

pra

ctic

e •

Res

pons

ibili

ty fa

lls o

n tra

inin

g pr

ogra

ms a

nd

supe

rvis

ors t

o pr

epar

e tra

inee

s and

supe

rvis

ees

for t

he o

ngoi

ng p

ursu

it of

mul

ticul

tura

l co

mpe

tenc

e •

Theo

ry su

gges

ts th

at su

perv

isor

mod

elin

g of

cu

ltura

lly a

ppro

pria

te d

iscu

ssio

ns a

nd

inte

rven

tions

, as w

ell a

s ack

now

ledg

men

t of t

heir

own

limits

rega

rdin

g m

ultic

ultu

ral k

now

ledg

e,

faci

litat

es su

perv

isee

dev

elop

men

t and

co

mpe

tenc

e in

the

mul

ticul

tura

l are

na

91

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

psyc

hoth

erap

y an

d su

perv

isio

n •

Res

earc

h in

dica

tes t

hat t

he p

rovi

sion

of

mul

ticul

tura

lly c

ompe

tent

supe

rvis

ion

posi

tivel

y in

fluen

ces m

ultic

ultu

ral c

ouns

elin

g kn

owle

dge,

cu

ltura

l em

path

y, m

ultic

ultu

ral c

ouns

elin

g se

lf-ef

ficac

y, su

perv

isor

y w

orki

ng a

llian

ce a

nd

satis

fact

ion

with

supe

rvis

ion,

and

lear

ning

ou

tcom

es

• Th

e C

ritic

al E

vent

s Mod

el is

an

inte

rper

sona

l ap

proa

ch th

at e

mph

asiz

es m

ultic

ultu

rally

co

mpe

tent

cou

nsel

ing

and

supe

rvis

ion

with

in a

n ev

ents

-bas

ed m

odel

•

Ther

e ar

e, c

urre

ntly

, tw

o st

udie

s tha

t hav

e ai

med

to

pro

vide

em

piric

al su

ppor

t for

the

Crit

ical

Ev

ents

Mod

el

• Th

e m

odel

em

phas

izes

supe

rvis

ee le

arni

ng a

nd

grow

th, a

nd c

onsi

ders

the

supe

rvis

ory

wor

king

al

lianc

e to

be

the

“fou

ndat

ion

for e

ffec

tive

supe

rvisi

on”

• B

ased

on

the

ther

apeu

tic w

orki

ng a

llian

ce, t

he

supe

rvis

ory

mul

ticul

tura

l wor

king

alli

ance

is

com

pose

d of

thre

e fa

ctor

s: th

e em

otio

nal b

ond,

an

agr

eem

ent o

n su

perv

isor

y go

als,

and

an

agre

emen

t on

the

task

s of s

uper

visi

on.

Mul

ticul

tura

l em

path

y ai

ds in

est

ablis

hing

a

stro

ng b

ond

• Th

e su

perv

isor

y al

lianc

e ca

n be

the

focu

s of w

ork

(fig

ure)

in su

perv

isio

n an

d ca

n al

so se

rve

as th

e ba

ckdr

op (g

roun

d), o

n w

hich

oth

er su

perv

isor

y w

ork

is a

ddre

ssed

•

Thre

e th

eore

tical

stru

ctur

es c

ombi

ne to

mak

e up

m

ultic

ultu

ral s

uper

visi

on: s

uper

vise

es’

mul

ticul

tura

l com

pete

nce

as th

erap

ists

,

92

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

supe

rvis

ors’

mul

ticul

tura

l com

pete

nce,

and

cl

ient

–sup

ervi

see–

supe

rvis

or c

ultu

ral i

dent

ity

inte

ract

ions

•

The

Heu

ristic

Mod

el o

f Non

-opp

ress

ive

Inte

rper

sona

l Dev

elop

men

t (H

MN

ID) i

s hel

pful

in

det

erm

inin

g th

e w

ays i

n w

hich

mul

ticul

tura

l id

entit

ies (

i.e.,

gend

er, r

ace,

eth

nici

ty, s

exua

l or

ient

atio

n, d

isab

ility

, soc

ioec

onom

ic st

atus

, age

, re

ligio

n, e

tc.)

of e

ach

mem

ber o

f the

supe

rvis

ory

triad

inte

ract

and

impa

ct th

e th

erap

eutic

and

su

perv

isor

y re

latio

nshi

ps

• Th

eory

sugg

ests

that

mos

t su

perv

isor

y/th

erap

eutic

succ

esse

s evo

lve

from

pa

ralle

l-adv

ance

d in

tera

ctio

ns; p

rogr

essi

ve

inte

ract

ions

lead

to h

ighe

st g

ains

in m

ultic

ultu

ral

com

pete

nce

in su

perv

isee

s/cl

ient

s; a

nd

supe

rvis

ory/

ther

apeu

tic fa

ilure

s are

mor

e lik

ely

to o

ccur

with

in re

gres

sive

inte

ract

ions

Lada

ny,

Frie

dlan

der

and

Nel

son

(200

5)

• To

dis

cuss

m

ultic

ultu

ral

chal

leng

es in

su

perv

isio

n

• To

con

cept

ualiz

e m

ultic

ultu

ral

supe

rvis

ion

as

inco

rpor

atin

g th

ree

theo

retic

al

stru

ctur

es:

supe

rvis

ees’

m

ultic

ultu

ral

com

pete

nce

as

ther

apis

ts, c

lient

-

Con

cept

ual/

Theo

retic

al

N/A

N

/A

• To

ass

ess a

nd e

nhan

ce m

ultic

ultu

ral a

bilit

ies i

n th

eir s

uper

vise

es, s

uper

viso

rs m

ust p

osse

ss th

ese

abili

ties t

hem

selv

es

• Th

e le

ss m

ultic

ultu

rally

ade

pt th

e su

perv

isor

, the

m

ore

likel

y th

ere

is c

onfli

ct in

the

supe

rvis

ory

rela

tions

hip,

with

neg

ativ

e co

nseq

uenc

es fo

r the

th

erap

eutic

serv

ices

off

ered

to c

lient

s •

The

task

for t

he su

perv

isor

is to

iden

tify

the

type

of

inte

ract

ion

occu

rrin

g in

the

ther

apy

rela

tions

hip

to fa

cilit

ate

the

mos

t pos

itive

su

perv

isio

n ex

perie

nce

poss

ible

•

In su

perv

isio

n, p

roce

sses

and

out

com

es c

an b

e pr

edic

ted

base

d on

inte

rper

sona

l rel

atio

nshi

p in

tera

ctio

ns

93

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

supe

rvis

ee-

supe

rvis

or

cultu

ral i

dent

ity

inte

ract

ions

, and

su

perv

isor

s’

mul

ticul

tura

l co

mpe

tenc

e

• It

mig

ht b

e ex

pect

ed th

at p

rogr

essi

ve a

nd

para

llel-a

dvan

ced

rela

tions

hips

cha

ract

eriz

e th

e m

ost p

rodu

ctiv

e su

perv

isio

n pr

oces

ses a

nd

outc

omes

, whe

reas

par

alle

l-del

ayed

and

re

gres

sive

inte

ract

ions

pro

duce

the

leas

t eff

ectiv

e on

es

• M

ore

adva

nced

rela

tions

hips

enj

oy a

stro

ng

supe

rvis

ory

allia

nce

and

obse

rvab

le g

ains

in

supe

rvis

ee’s

mul

ticul

tura

l com

pete

nce,

whe

reas

th

e la

tter m

ight

hav

e a

wea

k al

lianc

e an

d no

gr

owth

in c

ultu

ral c

ompe

tenc

e

• Su

perv

isor

s mus

t und

erta

ke th

eir o

wn

jour

ney

tow

ard

mul

ticul

tura

l dev

elop

men

t suc

h as

re

adin

g re

leva

nt li

tera

ture

and

atte

ndin

g co

ntin

uing

edu

catio

n se

min

ars t

hat a

ddre

ss

vario

us m

ultic

ultu

ral i

ssue

s

Mur

phy-

Shig

emat

su

(201

0)

• To

pre

sent

pe

rson

al

expe

rienc

es

thro

ugh

narr

ativ

e as

a w

ay o

f co

ntrib

utin

g kn

owle

dge

of th

e ra

cial

and

cul

tura

l dy

nam

ics i

n su

perv

isio

n •

To u

se

mic

roag

gres

sion

s to

exa

min

e ra

cial

ex

perie

nces

in

supe

rvis

ion

Pers

pect

ive

N/A

N

/A

• Su

perv

isor

s of c

olor

are

not

onl

y ta

rget

s of

disc

rimin

atio

n bu

t als

o pe

rpet

rato

rs

• Th

e de

nial

of s

uper

vise

es’ i

dent

ities

reve

als a

la

ck o

f res

pect

and

em

path

y, c

reat

ing

sign

ifica

nt

barr

iers

to a

goo

d su

perv

isor

y re

latio

nshi

p •

An

area

of p

rofe

ssio

nal d

evel

opm

ent f

or

supe

rvis

ors o

f col

or is

und

erst

andi

ng th

e di

vers

e id

entit

ies o

f our

supe

rvis

ees,

who

are

in

crea

sing

ly m

ultie

thni

c an

d tra

nsna

tiona

l •

Supe

rvis

ors o

f col

or a

lso

need

to re

flect

on

thei

r ow

n id

entit

ies a

nd h

ow th

ey im

pede

or e

nhan

ce

the

qual

ity o

f sup

ervi

sion

•

The

prof

essi

onal

dev

elop

men

t of s

uper

viso

rs o

f co

lor c

an b

e en

hanc

ed b

y ris

king

vul

nera

bilit

y,

94

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

owni

ng e

ntitl

emen

ts, a

nd a

ssum

ing

an a

ttitu

de o

f “n

ot k

now

ing”

Obe

r, G

rane

llo,

and

Hen

field

(2

009)

• To

pro

pose

a

mod

el o

f su

perv

isio

n th

at

enha

nces

m

ultic

ultu

ral

coun

selo

r co

mpe

tenc

e in

de

velo

pmen

tally

ap

prop

riate

way

s:

Syne

rgis

tic

Mod

el o

f M

ultic

ultu

ral

Supe

rvis

ion,

(S

MM

S)

Con

cept

ual/

Theo

retic

al

N/A

N

/A

• Th

e Sy

nerg

istic

Mod

el o

f Mul

ticul

tura

l Su

perv

isio

n is

an

inte

grat

ion

of 3

exi

stin

g m

odel

s to

pro

vide

con

cret

e an

d pr

actic

al g

uida

nce

for

supe

rvis

ors w

ishi

ng to

enh

ance

supe

rvis

ee

mul

ticul

tura

l com

pete

nce

in p

erso

nally

m

eani

ngfu

l and

dev

elop

men

tally

app

ropr

iate

w

ays

• Th

e m

odel

atte

nds t

o bo

th c

onte

nt a

nd p

roce

ss

with

in th

e su

perv

isor

y se

ssio

n an

d pr

omot

es

mul

ticul

tura

l cou

nsel

or c

ompe

tenc

e th

roug

h in

crea

sing

cog

nitiv

e co

mpl

exity

, sel

f-re

flect

ion,

an

d st

ruct

ured

inte

rven

tions

•

Des

pite

a p

revi

ous c

all t

o in

tegr

ate

deve

lopm

enta

l and

mul

ticul

tura

l sup

ervi

sion

m

odel

s, a

com

preh

ensi

ve m

odel

has

yet

to

emer

ge

• A

trul

y co

mpr

ehen

sive

mod

el m

ust (

a)

inco

rpor

ate

deve

lopm

enta

l asp

ects

of s

uper

visi

on

by d

efin

ing

the

stag

es o

f dev

elop

men

t and

pr

ovid

ing

spec

ific

inte

rven

tions

to h

elp

supe

rvis

ees m

ove

to h

ighe

r lev

els o

f cog

nitiv

e de

velo

pmen

t; (b

) pro

vide

an

oppo

rtuni

ty to

di

scus

s the

supe

rvis

ees’

mul

ticul

tura

l co

mpe

tenc

e an

d he

ight

en a

war

enes

s of

mul

ticul

tura

l iss

ues w

ithin

the

supe

rvis

ory

rela

tions

hip;

and

(c) b

e ba

sed

on th

e pr

ofes

sion

’s

firm

ly h

eld

stan

ce a

bout

the

appr

opria

te c

onte

nt

for m

ultic

ultu

ral c

ouns

elin

g an

d su

perv

isio

n, th

e M

CC

s

95

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

• Th

e SM

MS

emer

ges f

rom

two

exis

ting

mod

els o

f su

perv

isio

n (o

ne d

evel

opm

enta

l and

the

othe

r m

ultic

ultu

ral),

whi

ch, w

hen

com

bine

d w

ith th

e M

CC

s, fo

rm a

n in

tegr

ated

and

syne

rgis

tic m

odel

th

at c

an b

e us

ed to

hel

p de

velo

p su

perv

isee

s’

mul

ticul

tura

l com

pete

nce

Prie

st

(199

4)

• To

pre

sent

an

over

view

of

supe

rvis

ion

issu

es

that

may

occ

ur

whe

n su

perv

isor

s ar

e et

hnic

m

inor

ity

mem

bers

and

su

perv

isee

s are

et

hnic

maj

ority

m

embe

rs

Con

cept

ual/

Theo

retic

al

N/A

N

/A

• B

efor

e di

scus

sing

cul

tura

l diff

eren

ces a

nd

sim

ilarit

ies w

ith su

perv

isee

s, su

perv

isor

s sho

uld

assi

st th

e st

uden

t in

iden

tifyi

ng a

ny p

reex

istin

g pr

ejud

ices

or f

aulty

cog

nitio

ns re

late

d to

wor

king

w

ith d

iver

se c

ultu

res

• Th

e su

perv

isor

has

an

inhe

rent

resp

onsi

bilit

y to

en

hanc

e th

e su

perv

isee

’s c

ultu

ral k

now

ledg

e ba

se

with

out a

llow

ing

the

stud

ent t

o en

gage

in

ster

eoty

ping

•

Supe

rvis

ors c

an m

inim

ize

the

likel

ihoo

d of

su

perv

isee

s ste

reot

ypin

g cl

ient

s if i

t is

cons

iste

ntly

exp

lain

ed th

roug

hout

supe

rvis

ion

that

ther

e is

no "g

ener

ic c

ultu

ral c

lient

” •

The

sing

ular

Asi

an A

mer

ican

, Afr

ican

Am

eric

an,

Nat

ive

Am

eric

an, o

r His

pani

c A

mer

ican

sim

ply

does

not

exi

st

Prie

st (1

994)

pos

ited

that

eff

ectiv

e su

perv

isor

s:

Stag

e 1:

firs

t go

thro

ugh

the

proc

ess o

f den

ying

th

at th

ere

are

appr

ecia

ble

cultu

ral d

iffer

ence

s tha

t in

fluen

ce su

perv

isio

n •

Stag

e 2:

invo

lves

a re

cogn

ition

of c

ultu

ral

diff

eren

ces w

ithou

t act

ually

kno

win

g w

hat t

o do

w

ith th

e in

form

atio

n •

Stag

e 3:

is re

pres

ente

d by

an

atte

mpt

to id

entif

y di

ffer

ence

s and

sim

ilarit

ies b

etw

een

and

amon

g

96

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

the

resp

ectiv

e cu

lture

s tha

t mak

e an

impa

ct o

n th

e su

perv

isor

y re

latio

nshi

p •

Stag

e 4:

repr

esen

ts th

e su

perv

isor

’s a

ttem

pt to

se

lf-id

entif

y by

dis

cern

ing

whe

re h

e or

she

fits i

n th

e ov

eral

l cul

tura

l sch

ema

• St

age

5: th

e su

perv

isor

beg

ins t

o ap

prec

iate

cu

ltura

l dis

tinct

iven

ess a

nd id

entif

ies t

houg

ht,

proc

ess,

and

com

mun

icat

ion

patte

rns t

hat

faci

litat

e su

perv

isio

n an

d as

sist

the

supe

rvis

ee in

le

arni

ng c

ouns

elin

g sk

ills

• St

age

6: is

cha

ract

eriz

ed b

y th

e su

perv

isor

bei

ng

able

to fo

rmul

ate

mul

tiple

supe

rvis

ory

met

hodo

logi

es th

at a

re re

spec

tful o

f the

su

perv

isee

’s c

ultu

re a

nd in

tera

ctiv

e st

yle,

whi

le

rem

aini

ng p

rofe

ssio

nal i

n na

ture

and

scop

e

Ryd

e (2

000)

•

To e

xplo

re b

est

prac

tice

in

rela

tion

to

cultu

rally

se

nsiti

ve

supe

rvis

ion

Theo

retic

al

fram

ewor

k N

/A

N/A

•

It is

impo

rtant

to b

ecom

e co

nsci

ous o

f the

su

perv

isor

’s o

wn

cultu

re

• H

abitu

al w

ays o

f thi

nkin

g m

ay a

rise

out o

f cu

ltura

l ass

umpt

ions

and

not

out

of p

erso

nal

path

olog

y •

Supe

rvis

ors a

lso

exis

t in

a cu

lture

whi

ch is

no

mor

e or

less

val

id th

an th

e cl

ient

’s b

ut m

ay le

ad

to u

s hol

ding

diff

eren

t val

ues a

nd a

ssum

ptio

ns

• D

ialo

gue

will

thro

w u

p cu

ltura

l cla

shes

and

thes

e m

ay b

e a

frui

tful w

ay o

f und

erst

andi

ng a

nd

nego

tiatin

g cu

ltura

l diff

eren

ces

• Su

perv

isor

s will

wor

k m

ore

sens

itive

ly if

they

fa

mili

ariz

e th

emse

lves

with

the

type

s and

rang

e of

diff

eren

ces t

hat m

ay e

xist

in o

rder

that

they

ca

n re

cogn

ize

them

whe

n th

ey a

rise

97

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

• It

is g

ood

to b

e se

nsiti

ve to

the

diff

eren

ces t

hat

mig

ht e

mer

ge b

oth

in th

e su

perv

isor

y an

d th

e th

erap

y re

latio

nshi

p •

To fa

cilit

ate

this

sens

itivi

ty, s

uper

viso

rs n

eed

not

only

to ta

ke a

n ac

tive

inte

rest

in o

ther

cul

ture

s an

d ar

eas o

f diff

eren

ce b

ut n

ever

to a

ssum

e th

at

they

und

erst

and

the

clie

nt’s

cul

tura

l wor

k •

Star

t with

an

inte

rest

in fi

ndin

g ou

t fro

m th

e ot

her w

hils

t als

o ac

cept

ing

one’

s ow

n no

t kn

owin

g

Mod

e 1:

Foc

us o

n th

e cu

lture

of t

he c

lient

and

thei

r co

ntex

t

Mod

e 2:

Fin

d w

ays o

f res

pond

ing

to th

e cu

ltura

l di

ffer

ence

s and

the

hidd

en c

ultu

ral a

ssum

ptio

ns

impl

icit

in th

e su

perv

isee

’s in

terv

entio

ns

Mod

e 3:

Atte

nd to

the

cultu

re in

here

nt in

the

rela

tions

hip

betw

een

the

clie

nt a

nd th

e su

perv

isee

Mod

e 4:

Foc

us o

n th

e cu

ltura

l ass

umpt

ions

of t

he

supe

rvis

ee

Mod

e 5:

Atte

nd to

the

cultu

ral d

iffer

ence

s ex

perie

nced

in th

e he

re-a

nd-n

ow c

ultu

ral d

ynam

ics

betw

een

clie

nt a

nd su

perv

isee

and

how

they

are

m

irror

ed in

the

supe

rvis

ion

rela

tions

hip

Mod

e 6:

Atte

nd to

ow

n cu

ltura

l ass

umpt

ions

Mod

e 7:

Atte

nd to

the

wid

er c

onte

xt in

whi

ch th

e w

ork

is d

one,

par

ticul

arly

org

aniz

atio

nal,

soci

al, a

nd

polit

ical

98

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

Suth

akar

an

(201

1)

• To

pre

sent

the

use

of a

nalo

gies

as

ano

ther

m

etho

d to

pr

omot

e m

ultic

ultu

ral

com

pete

nce

durin

g su

perv

isio

n.

Con

cept

ual/

Theo

retic

al

N/A

N

/A

• M

ultic

ultu

ral c

ompe

tenc

e tra

inin

g ha

s see

med

to

affe

ct k

now

ledg

e an

d sk

ills a

cqui

sitio

n m

ore

than

th

e fa

cilit

atio

n of

self-

awar

enes

s •

Cha

nges

in se

lf-aw

aren

ess m

ay h

ave

the

mos

t im

pact

in c

ultiv

atin

g m

ultic

ultu

ral c

ouns

elin

g co

mpe

tenc

e •

Self-

awar

enes

s is p

erce

ived

to fa

cilit

ate

cultu

ral

empa

thy,

whi

ch c

ontri

bute

s to

mor

e cu

ltura

lly

sens

itive

cou

nsel

ing

•

A n

umbe

r of m

ultic

ultu

ral s

chol

ars h

ave

sugg

este

d pl

acin

g m

ore

emph

asis

on

incl

udin

g ex

perie

ntia

lly b

ased

aff

ectiv

e le

arni

ng a

s a

com

pone

nt o

f mul

ticul

tura

l tra

inin

g to

impr

ove

the

self-

awar

enes

s and

cul

tura

l em

path

y of

co

unse

lors

-in-tr

aini

ng

• Ex

perie

ntia

l lea

rnin

g, c

ompa

red

with

trad

ition

al

dida

ctic

lear

ning

, has

mor

e ca

paci

ty to

pro

mot

e a

trans

form

atio

n in

one

’s a

ttitu

des a

nd b

elie

fs

• U

sing

ana

logi

es a

s an

expe

rient

ial l

earn

ing

tool

in

supe

rvis

ion

to e

nhan

ce se

lf-aw

aren

ess a

nd

cultu

ral e

mpa

thy

has t

he p

oten

tial t

o be

hel

pful

in

a nu

mbe

r of w

ays

• A

nalo

gies

pro

vide

an

effe

ctiv

e m

eans

of

proc

essi

ng m

ultic

ultu

ral i

ssue

s with

supe

rvis

ees

who

hav

e ha

d lim

ited

expo

sure

to m

embe

rs o

f di

vers

e cu

lture

s by

allo

win

g th

em to

take

on

the

pers

pect

ive

of th

e "o

ther

” •

The

use

of a

nalo

gies

can

pro

vide

a sa

fe st

rate

gy

to p

roce

ss to

pics

that

can

be

conf

usin

g or

an

xiet

y- p

rovo

king

99

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

• Su

perv

isor

s nee

d to

cre

ate

a sa

fe e

nviro

nmen

t th

at is

con

duci

ve fo

r sup

ervi

sees

to st

retc

h an

d gr

ow

Yab

usak

i (2

010)

•

To d

escr

ibe

barr

iers

to th

e in

tegr

atio

n of

di

vers

ity is

sues

in

to su

perv

isio

n tra

inin

g •

To im

plem

ent

peda

gogy

de

velo

ped

for

dive

rse

and

unde

rser

ved

popu

latio

ns

Theo

retic

al

fram

ewor

k N

/A

N/A

A

t lea

st fi

ve b

arrie

rs im

pede

d di

vers

ity tr

aini

ng in

su

perv

isio

n:

• Su

perv

isee

s wer

e af

raid

to d

iscu

ss c

olor

and

race

in

a “

Whi

te”

envi

ronm

ent.

They

fear

ed th

at th

ey

may

be

perc

eive

d as

mak

ing

excu

ses f

or th

eir

poor

per

form

ance

or u

sing

thei

r eth

nici

ty a

s a

defe

nse,

or “

seen

as p

atho

logi

cally

pre

occu

pied

w

ith c

olor

and

disc

rimin

atio

n”

• M

any

supe

rvis

ors f

elt i

nade

quat

ely

train

ed o

n di

vers

ity is

sues

. In

som

e ca

ses,

train

ees k

new

m

ore

than

thei

r sup

ervi

sor

• Th

ere

was

a la

ck o

f em

piric

al e

vide

nce

to su

ppor

t th

e m

odel

s of e

thni

c an

d cr

oss-

cultu

ral t

rain

ing

and

thei

r rel

atio

nshi

p to

trea

tmen

t •

Psyc

holo

gica

l tra

inin

g ra

rely

focu

sed

on se

lf-kn

owle

dge

and

expl

orat

ion

• Th

e pr

oces

s of d

iver

sity

edu

catio

n its

elf—

the

expl

orat

ion

of p

erso

nal c

ultu

ral b

iase

s and

pr

ejud

ices

—in

duce

d re

sist

ance

, def

ensi

vene

ss

and

inhi

bitio

n in

stud

ents

This

arti

cle

prop

oses

that

supe

rvis

ors:

• W

ork

with

in th

e su

perv

isee

s’ Z

one

of P

roxi

mal

D

evel

opm

ent (

ZPD

) •

Use

med

iate

d le

arni

ng e

xper

ienc

es th

at

inte

ntio

nally

cre

ate

colla

bora

tive

lear

ning

en

viro

nmen

ts a

nd m

ento

ring

rela

tions

hips

(i.e

. Ta

o m

ento

ring

rela

tions

hip)

100

Mul

ticul

tura

l Sup

ervi

sion –

Em

piri

cal S

tudi

es a

nd P

ublic

atio

ns

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

Anc

is a

nd

Mar

shal

l (2

010)

• To

inve

stig

ate

the

proc

ess,

clim

ate,

an

d ac

tiviti

es o

f su

perv

isio

n th

at,

from

the

train

ee’s

pe

rspe

ctiv

e,

atte

nded

co

mpe

tent

ly to

m

ultic

ultu

ral

issu

es

Qua

litat

ive:

in

-dep

th,

sem

i-st

ruct

ured

in

terv

iew

s (4

5-60

m

inut

es)

• In

terv

iew

qu

estio

ns w

ere

deve

lope

d us

ing

Anc

is

and

Lada

ny’s

(2

001)

m

ultic

ultu

ral

fram

ewor

k fo

r co

unse

lor

supe

rvis

ion

• N

=4 g

radu

ate

stud

ents

from

2

doct

oral

pr

ogra

ms i

n ps

ycho

logy

at 2

so

uthe

aste

rn

univ

ersi

ties

• 1

Euro

pean

A

mer

ican

he

tero

sexu

al m

an

in c

ouns

elin

g ps

ycho

logy

pr

ogra

m

• 1

Asi

an A

mer

ican

he

tero

sexu

al

wom

an in

co

unse

ling

psyc

holo

gy

• 1

Euro

pean

A

mer

ican

lesb

ian

in c

linic

al

psyc

holo

gy

• 1

Euro

pean

A

mer

ican

he

tero

sexu

al m

an

in c

linic

al

psyc

holo

gy

• A

ge ra

nge

= 27

-41

Dom

ain

A1:

Sup

ervi

sor-

Focu

sed

Pers

onal

Dev

elop

men

t

• D

emon

stra

tes s

treng

ths a

nd

limita

tions

of m

ultic

ultu

ral k

now

ledg

e •

Proa

ctiv

ely

intro

duce

s mul

ticul

tura

l is

sues

in su

perv

isio

n •

Self-

disc

lose

s cul

tura

l bia

ses,

cultu

ral

back

grou

nd, v

alue

s, an

d/or

ex

perie

nces

•

Dem

onst

rate

s aw

aren

ess o

f the

cl

inic

al si

gnifi

canc

e of

raci

sm a

nd

oppr

essi

on

Dom

ain

A2:

Sup

ervi

see-

Focu

sed

Pers

onal

Dev

elop

men

t

• Fa

cilit

ates

dis

cuss

ions

of t

he im

pact

of

supe

rvis

ees’

cul

tura

l bac

kgro

und

on c

lient

s •

Enco

urag

es in

crea

sed

mul

ticul

tura

l aw

aren

ess v

ia d

iscu

ssio

ns a

nd

activ

ities

Dom

ain

B: C

once

ptua

lizat

ion

• En

cour

ages

con

side

ratio

n of

cul

tura

l as

sum

ptio

ns a

nd c

ouns

elor

st

ereo

typi

ng

• A

ctiv

ely

enga

ges s

uper

vise

e in

an

expl

orat

ion

of th

e cl

ient

’s p

ersp

ectiv

e

Dom

ain

C: I

nter

vent

ions

101

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

• M

inim

um o

f 2

supe

rvis

ed

clin

ical

ex

perie

nces

•

Hig

h de

gree

of

inte

rest

in M

C

issu

es

• B

elie

ved

that

su

perv

isor

de

scrib

ed

dem

onst

rate

d co

mpe

tenc

e in

w

orki

ng w

ith

dive

rse

clie

nts

• V

ery

satis

fied

with

the

degr

ee to

w

hich

div

ersi

ty

issu

es w

ere

addr

esse

d in

su

perv

isio

n

• En

cour

ages

con

side

ratio

n of

the

clie

nt’s

role

in g

oal s

ettin

g •

Enco

urag

es su

perv

isee

to fa

cilit

ate

the

clie

nt’s

aw

aren

ess r

egar

ding

soci

al

issu

es

Dom

ain

D: P

roce

ss

• C

onve

ys a

n ac

cept

ance

of c

ultu

ral

diff

eren

ces i

n su

perv

isor

y re

latio

nshi

ps

• Fa

cilit

ates

a sa

fe a

nd o

pen

supe

rvis

ory

clim

ate

in w

hich

the

supe

rvis

ee c

an b

e vu

lner

able

and

take

risk

s •

Initi

ates

and

eng

ages

in d

iscu

ssio

ns

abou

t pow

er d

ynam

ics

Dom

ain

E: E

valu

atio

n

• Id

entif

ies t

he su

perv

isee

’s

mul

ticul

tura

l stre

ngth

s and

w

eakn

esse

s •

Mul

ticul

tura

l dis

cuss

ions

pos

itive

ly

affe

cted

clie

nt o

utco

mes

Ban

ks-

John

son

(200

2)

• To

exp

lore

the

supe

rvis

ors’

th

ough

ts,

feel

ings

, and

vi

ews o

n su

ch

topi

cs a

s: ra

ce o

r et

hnic

ity e

ffec

ts

on th

e dy

ad; t

he

proc

ess o

f ad

dres

sing

Qua

litat

ive

cros

s-ca

se

anal

ysis

Sem

i-stru

ctur

ed

inte

rvie

ws

• N

=4 su

perv

isor

s of

col

or fr

om

diff

eren

t rac

ial o

r et

hnic

gro

ups

• A

ll w

ere

non-

Whi

te

• A

ll w

ere

over

21

•

All

had

expe

rienc

e

• R

ace

does

impa

ct th

e su

perv

isor

y re

latio

nshi

p w

hen

both

the

supe

rvis

or

and

supe

rvis

ee a

re p

eopl

e of

col

or

• Th

e pa

rtici

pant

s ind

icat

ed th

e im

porta

nce

of a

ddre

ssin

g be

twee

n an

d w

ithin

gro

up d

iffer

ence

s in

supe

rvis

ion

Ana

lyse

s of t

he in

terv

iew

s in

rela

tion

to

the

liter

atur

e re

veal

ed 3

maj

or th

emes

:

102

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

cultu

ral f

acto

rs

with

in th

e dy

ad;

inte

ract

ions

w

ithin

the

dyad

; an

d ot

her t

opic

s as

they

aro

se in

th

e in

terv

iew

•

To c

ontri

bute

to

the

wor

k on

the

phen

omen

on o

f cu

ltura

l and

sp

ecifi

cally

raci

al

fact

ors i

n m

ultic

ultu

ral

supe

rvis

ion

whe

n bo

th th

e su

perv

isor

and

th

e su

perv

isee

are

pe

rson

s of c

olor

supe

rvis

ing

pers

ons o

f col

or

• Th

e im

porta

nce

of in

trodu

cing

cu

ltura

l fac

tors

• Th

e im

pact

of c

ultu

ral v

aria

bles

on

the

rela

tions

hip

• Th

e po

wer

dyn

amic

s and

how

pow

er

is in

here

nt in

the

role

of s

uper

viso

r

2 m

ajor

them

es th

at e

mer

ged

that

wer

e no

t dis

cuss

ed in

the

liter

atur

e re

view

: •

How

with

in-g

roup

sim

ilarit

ies

influ

ence

the

rela

tions

hip

• S

uper

visi

on o

f per

sons

with

di

sabi

litie

s and

the

effe

ct o

n th

e re

latio

nshi

p

2 im

plic

atio

ns fo

r gra

duat

e pr

ogra

ms:

• A

ddre

ssin

g cu

ltura

l var

iabl

es a

t the

be

ginn

ing

of th

e su

perv

isor

y re

latio

nshi

p an

d in

fusi

ng c

ultu

ral

awar

enes

s thr

ough

out t

rain

ing

and

thro

ugho

ut a

ll le

vels

of t

he

prof

essi

on

• Th

ese

impl

icat

ions

app

ly to

co

unse

lor e

duca

tors

, men

tal h

ealth

pr

actit

ione

rs, a

nd c

ouns

elin

g pr

ofes

sion

al o

rgan

izat

ions

103

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

Ber

tsch

et

al. (

2014

) •

Wha

t typ

es o

f ge

nder

rela

ted

even

ts (G

REs

) do

train

ees

expe

rienc

e in

ps

ycho

ther

apy

supe

rvis

ion?

•

How

do

supe

rvis

ors a

ttend

to

thes

e G

REs

? •

Wha

t is t

he

rela

tions

hip

betw

een

the

inte

rven

tions

that

su

perv

isor

s use

an

d th

e re

solu

tion

of th

e cr

itica

l ev

ent?

•

Wha

t is t

he

rela

tions

hip

betw

een

GR

Es,

the

supe

rvis

ory

wor

king

alli

ance

, an

d su

perv

isee

s’

perc

eptio

ns o

f th

eir s

uper

viso

rs’

mul

ticul

tura

l co

mpe

tenc

e as

it

rela

tes t

o G

REs

?

Con

sens

ual

Qua

litat

ive

Res

earc

h-M

odifi

ed

(CQ

R-M

)

• D

emog

raph

ic

form

•

Gen

der-

Rel

ated

Eve

nts

Que

stio

nnai

re

(GEQ

) •

The

Wor

king

A

llian

ce

Inve

ntor

y/Su

per

visi

on-S

hort

(WA

I/S-S

hort)

•

Cro

ss-C

ultu

ral

Cou

nsel

ing

Com

pete

ncy

Inve

ntor

y-R

evis

ed

(CC

CI-R

)

• N

=81

• 78

% w

omen

, 16

% m

en

• A

ge ra

nge:

23-

53

• 80

% W

hite

, 6%

B

lack

, 4%

B

iraci

al, 3

%

His

pani

c/La

tinas

/La

tinos

, 1%

M

ultir

acia

l •

56%

in P

h.D

. pr

ogra

ms,

20%

in

PsyD

pro

gram

s, 16

% m

aste

rs

leve

l •

31%

com

plet

ing

inte

rnsh

ip, 5

2%

in a

dvan

ced

prac

ticum

tra

inin

g, 1

0% in

fir

st y

ear o

f tra

inin

g •

37%

in U

CC

, 21

% in

CM

H,

14%

in h

ospi

tals

, 22

% in

oth

er

setti

ngs

• G

ende

r bia

s and

dis

crim

inat

ion

cont

inue

to e

xist

in th

e su

perv

isor

y re

latio

nshi

p •

4 ty

pes o

f GR

Es re

porte

d by

co

unse

ling

train

ees:

o

Gen

der D

iscr

imin

atio

n o

Gen

der I

dent

ity In

tera

ctio

ns

o A

ttrac

tion

o Po

wer

Dyn

amic

s •

Whi

le su

perv

isor

s atte

nded

to G

REs

us

ing

vario

us in

terv

entio

ns, t

he m

ost

freq

uent

ly u

sed

inte

rven

tion

(ther

apeu

tic p

roce

ss, e

xplo

ratio

n of

fe

elin

gs, f

ocus

on

skill

s, an

d fo

cus o

n se

lf-ef

ficac

y) w

ere

sign

ifica

ntly

re

late

d to

the

reso

lutio

n st

age

• G

REs

rela

ted

to G

ende

r D

iscr

imin

atio

n w

ere

sign

ifica

ntly

and

ne

gativ

ely

rela

ted

to th

e su

perv

isor

y w

orki

ng a

llian

ce a

nd su

perv

isee

s’

perc

eptio

ns o

f sup

ervi

sors

’ gen

der-

rela

ted

mul

ticul

tura

l com

pete

nce

• In

add

ress

ing

the

GR

E, tr

aine

es

repo

rted

11 p

rimar

y su

perv

isor

in

terv

entio

ns th

at fo

cuse

d on

: th

erap

eutic

pro

cess

, exp

lora

tion

of

feel

ings

, ski

lls, s

elf-

effic

acy,

m

ultic

ultu

ral a

war

enes

s, no

rmal

izin

g ex

perie

nce,

cou

nter

trans

fere

nce,

kn

owle

dge,

supe

rvis

ory

allia

nce,

ev

alua

tion,

and

par

alle

l pro

cess

104

Bha

t and

D

avis

(2

007)

• To

inve

stig

ate

the

role

of r

ace,

raci

al

iden

tity

attit

udes

an

d w

orki

ng

allia

nce

in

coun

selin

g su

perv

isio

n us

ing

data

obt

aine

d fr

om su

perv

isor

s in

supe

rvis

ory

dyad

s

Res

earc

h qu

estio

ns:

• D

o su

perv

isor

y dy

ads w

ith

para

llel h

igh

raci

al id

entit

y in

tera

ctio

ns h

ave

the

stro

nges

t w

orki

ng a

llian

ce

from

the

pers

pect

ive

of

supe

rvis

ors?

•

Do

supe

rvis

ory

dyad

s with

pa

ralle

l low

raci

al

iden

tity

inte

ract

ions

hav

e th

e w

eake

st

wor

king

alli

ance

fr

om th

e pe

rspe

ctiv

e of

su

perv

isor

s?

• D

o m

atch

ed

supe

rvis

ory

dyad

s (i.

e., b

oth

Qua

ntita

tive

•

Dem

ogra

phic

qu

estio

nnai

re

• W

hite

Rac

ial

Iden

tity

Atti

tude

Sca

le

(WR

IAS)

•

Col

or R

acia

l Id

entit

y A

ttitu

de S

cale

(P

RIA

S)

• Pe

rcep

tions

of

Supe

rvis

ee

Rac

ial I

dent

ity

for W

hite

s (P

SeR

IW)

• Pe

rcep

tions

of

Supe

rvis

ee

Rac

ial I

dent

ity

for P

OC

(P

SeR

IP)

• W

orki

ng

Alli

ance

In

vent

ory-

Supe

rvis

or

vers

ion

(WA

I-S)

• N

=119

co

unse

ling

supe

rvis

ors i

n a

mid

-wes

tern

stat

e (8

0 fe

mal

e, 3

9 m

ale)

• A

ge ra

nge:

31-

74

• Su

perv

isio

n ex

perie

nce:

be

twee

n 6

mon

ths-

40 y

ears

• Ea

rned

mas

ter’s

de

gree

= 9

0,

doct

orat

e de

gree

=

21, “

othe

r”

qual

ifica

tions

= 8

• 87

repo

rted

a m

ean

of 1

6.59

ho

urs o

f spe

cific

tra

inin

g in

m

ultic

ultu

ral

issu

es

• W

hite

(90.

8%),

Afr

ican

Am

eric

an

(8.4

%),

Latin

o (n

=1)

• W

hite

su

perv

isee

s (7

8.2%

), A

fric

an

Am

eric

ans

(20.

2%),

Mid

dle

East

ern

(1.7

%).

• R

esul

ts re

veal

ed th

e st

rong

est

wor

king

alli

ance

for s

uper

viso

r-su

perv

isee

pai

rs w

ith h

igh

raci

al

iden

tity

deve

lopm

ent a

nd th

e w

eake

st

wor

king

alli

ance

for p

airs

with

low

ra

cial

iden

tity

deve

lopm

ent

• Th

e di

ffer

ence

in su

perv

isor

y w

orki

ng

allia

nce

betw

een

the

four

raci

al

iden

tity

grou

ps (p

aral

lel h

igh,

par

alle

l lo

w, p

rogr

essi

ve, a

nd re

gres

sive

) was

si

gnifi

cant

with

a sm

all t

o m

ediu

m

effe

ct si

ze

• Po

st h

oc te

sts r

evea

led

a sig

nific

ant

diff

eren

ce in

wor

king

alli

ance

mea

ns

betw

een

the

para

llel h

igh

grou

p an

d th

e pa

ralle

l low

gro

up, a

nd b

etw

een

the

regr

essi

ve g

roup

and

the

para

llel

low

gro

up

• N

o st

atis

tical

ly si

gnifi

cant

diff

eren

ce

was

foun

d in

wor

king

alli

ance

for t

he

four

raci

al m

atch

ing/

nonm

atch

ing

grou

ps o

f sup

ervi

sory

dya

ds

105

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

supe

rvis

or a

nd

supe

rvis

ee o

f the

sa

me

race

) rep

ort

a st

rong

er

supe

rvis

ory

wor

king

alli

ance

th

an u

nmat

ched

ra

cial

dya

ds?

Bur

kard

, K

nox,

C

lark

e,

Phel

ps, a

nd

Inm

an

(201

4)

• To

exa

min

e su

perv

isor

s’

expe

rienc

es o

f pr

ovid

ing

diff

icul

t fee

dbac

k w

hen

supe

rvis

ors

and

supe

rvis

ees

wer

e of

diff

eren

t cu

ltura

l ba

ckgr

ound

s

Qua

litat

ive

•

Dem

ogra

phic

fo

rm

• Se

mi-

stru

ctur

ed

inte

rvie

w

prot

ocol

• N

=17

supe

rvis

ors

(14

psyc

holo

gist

s; 3

po

st-

inte

rnsh

ip/a

ll-bu

t-di

sser

tatio

n gr

adua

te

stud

ents

) •

10 in

cou

nsel

ing

psyc

holo

gy, 7

in

clin

ical

ps

ycho

logy

•

12 fe

mal

e/5

mal

e

• A

ge ra

nge:

28-

53

• 9

Euro

pean

A

mer

ican

, 3

Afr

ican

A

mer

ican

, 2

Asi

an A

mer

ican

, 1

Bira

cial

, 1

Inte

rnat

iona

l, 1

Latin

a

• N

ot o

nly

do c

ultu

ral d

iffer

ence

s be

twee

n su

perv

isor

s and

supe

rvis

ees

influ

ence

the

feed

back

pro

cess

in

supe

rvis

ion,

the

type

of c

ultu

ral t

opic

(e

.g.,

diff

icul

ty c

onne

ctin

g w

ith c

lient

s, un

will

ingn

ess t

o in

tegr

ate

cultu

ral

issu

es in

to w

ork

with

clie

nts)

may

als

o in

fluen

ce th

e fe

edba

ck p

roce

ss in

su

perv

isio

n •

EASR

s (Eu

rope

an A

mer

ican

su

perv

isor

s) a

ddre

ssed

spec

ific

coun

selin

g sk

ills (

e.g.

, com

mun

icat

ion

patte

rns,

atte

ndin

g, a

ctiv

e lis

teni

ng, u

se

of re

stat

emen

ts, q

uest

ions

and

re

flect

ions

of f

eelin

gs),

whi

le S

RC

s (s

uper

viso

rs o

f col

or) a

ddre

ssed

su

perv

isee

s’ c

ultu

ral i

nsen

sitiv

ity

• Th

ere

may

be

stro

ng d

iffer

ence

s in

prov

idin

g su

perv

isio

n fe

edba

ck a

bout

sk

ills i

n co

ntra

st to

per

sona

lity-

base

d fe

edba

ck

• A

lign

the

focu

s of s

uper

visio

n w

ith

spec

ific

goal

s tha

t are

est

ablis

hed

at th

e on

set o

f sup

ervi

sion

106

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

• It

is re

com

men

ded

that

dur

ing

initi

al

supe

rvis

ion

sess

ions

, sup

ervi

sors

and

su

perv

isee

s set

spec

ific

goal

s, in

clud

ing

thos

e re

late

d to

cul

tura

l co

mpe

tenc

e •

Furth

erm

ore,

not

all

cultu

ral

com

pete

ncy

goal

s can

be

antic

ipat

ed a

t th

e be

ginn

ing

of su

perv

isio

n; th

us, i

t is

impo

rtant

that

supe

rvis

ors t

ake

the

lead

in

setti

ng e

xpec

tatio

ns w

ith su

perv

isee

s th

at su

ch is

sues

will

be

addr

esse

d in

su

perv

isio

n

Bur

kard

et

al. (

2006

) •

To e

xam

ine

supe

rvis

ees’

ex

perie

nces

of

cros

s-cu

ltura

l su

perv

isio

n w

hen

supe

rvis

ors w

ere

resp

onsi

ve o

r un

resp

onsi

ve to

cu

ltura

l iss

ues

Qua

litat

ive

stud

y •

Dem

ogra

phic

fo

rm

• Se

mi-

stru

ctur

ed

inte

rvie

w

prot

ocol

Supe

rvis

ees:

• 26

doc

tora

l st

uden

ts in

pr

ofes

sion

al

psyc

holo

gy

prog

ram

s •

100%

wom

en

• A

ge ra

nge:

24-

48

• 13

Eur

opea

n A

mer

ican

s •

13 S

uper

vise

es o

f C

olor

(SEC

s)

Inte

rvie

wer

s and

A

udito

rs:

• 2

rese

arch

team

s (T

eam

A

inte

rvie

wed

onl

y SE

Cs;

Tea

m B

• C

ultu

rally

resp

onsi

ve a

nd

unre

spon

sive

supe

rvis

ion

expe

rienc

es

wer

e qu

ite p

ower

ful e

vent

s. Fo

r the

se

parti

cipa

nts,

the

even

ts a

ffec

ted

not

only

the

supe

rvis

ees b

ut a

lso th

e su

perv

isio

n re

latio

nshi

p an

d cl

ient

tre

atm

ent

• M

ost a

spec

ts o

f EA

SEs’

and

SEC

s’

expe

rienc

es o

f cul

tura

lly re

spon

sive

ev

ents

wer

e qu

ite p

aral

lel,

but t

heir

expe

rienc

es o

f cul

tura

lly u

nres

pons

ive

even

ts w

ere

quite

div

erge

nt

Cul

tura

lly R

espo

nsiv

e Ev

ents

•

Impo

rtant

supe

rvis

ion

beha

vior

s tha

t m

ay b

e us

ed to

enh

ance

cul

tura

l re

spon

sive

ness

: ask

ing

ques

tions

ab

out c

ultu

ral i

ssue

s, en

cour

agin

g su

perv

isee

s to

elab

orat

e on

co

ncep

tual

izat

ions

that

incl

ude

cultu

ral i

ssue

s, or

cha

lleng

ing

107

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

inte

rvie

wed

onl

y EA

SE’s

) su

perv

isee

s to

cons

ider

how

the

clie

nt’s

cul

tura

l bac

kgro

und

may

be

influ

enci

ng h

er o

r his

cur

rent

situ

atio

n or

pro

blem

•

Onl

y SE

Cs r

epor

ted

expe

rienc

ing

disc

omfo

rt w

ith re

gard

to th

e cu

ltura

lly re

spon

sive

eve

nt →

Su

perv

isor

s nee

d to

be

awar

e of

how

po

wer

ful t

heir

resp

onsi

vene

ss, o

r lac

k th

ereo

f, to

cul

tura

l iss

ues m

ay b

e fo

r su

perv

isee

s and

that

for s

ome

SEC

s, re

spon

sive

ness

may

be

a ra

re

expe

rienc

e •

Cul

tura

lly re

spon

sive

eve

nt y

ield

ed

posi

tive

effe

cts o

n su

perv

isee

s’

clin

ical

cas

es

Cul

tura

lly U

nres

pons

ive

Even

ts

• SE

Cs p

erce

ived

thei

r sup

ervi

sors

as

activ

ely

wor

king

to d

iscr

edit

or

disc

ount

the

impo

rtanc

e of

cul

tura

l is

sues

in th

erap

y •

The

cultu

rally

unr

espo

nsiv

e ev

ent

(whe

ther

act

ivel

y or

pas

sive

ly, i

gnor

e or

dis

coun

t cul

tura

l iss

ues)

yie

lded

ne

gativ

e re

actio

ns fr

om b

oth

EASE

s an

d SE

Cs,

incl

udin

g an

ger,

frus

tratio

n, a

nd d

isap

poin

tmen

t •

SEC

s des

crib

ed m

ore

inte

nse

and

inw

ard-

focu

sed

nega

tive

cons

eque

nces

than

thei

r EA

SE

coun

terp

arts

(e.g

., di

stru

stin

g th

eir

Euro

pean

Am

eric

an su

perv

isor

,

108

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

feel

ing

mor

e gu

arde

d du

ring

supe

rvis

ion,

hid

ing

thei

r em

otio

nal

• SE

Cs e

xpre

ssed

mor

e co

ncer

n ab

out

the

effe

ct o

f the

cul

tura

lly

unre

spon

sive

eve

nt o

n cl

ient

trea

tmen

t th

an d

id E

ASE

s

Con

stan

tine

and

Sue

(200

7)

• To

inve

stig

ate

the

spec

ific

form

s of

raci

al

mic

roag

gres

sion

s th

at m

ight

occ

ur

in su

perv

isor

y re

latio

nshi

ps

betw

een

Bla

ck

supe

rvis

ees a

nd

Whi

te su

perv

isor

s an

d th

e is

sues

th

at m

ight

ch

arac

teriz

e th

ese

inci

dent

s

Qua

litat

ive

anal

ysis

•

Sem

i-st

ruct

ured

in

terv

iew

pr

otoc

ol

• 10

Bla

ck

supe

rvis

ees w

ho

wer

e en

rolle

d in

ei

ther

an

adva

nced

pr

actic

um o

r ex

tern

ship

cou

rse

in o

ne o

f thr

ee

doct

oral

pr

ogra

ms i

n ei

ther

cou

nsel

ing

or c

linic

al

psyc

holo

gy in

the

north

east

ern

U.S

. •

8 fe

mal

e/2

mal

e •

Age

rang

e: 2

5-38

•

6 su

perv

isee

s re

porte

d th

at th

eir

supe

rvis

or w

as a

W

hite

wom

an/4

in

dica

ted

that

th

eir s

uper

viso

r w

as a

Whi

te m

an

• Th

eme

1: In

valid

atin

g Ra

cial

–Cul

tura

l Is

sues

: Man

y of

the

Bla

ck su

perv

isee

s in

this

stud

y in

dica

ted

that

thei

r Whi

te

supe

rvis

ors a

t tim

es te

nded

to

min

imiz

e, d

ism

iss,

or a

void

di

scus

sing

raci

al–c

ultu

ral i

ssue

s in

supe

rvis

ion

• Th

eme

2: M

akin

g St

ereo

typi

c A

ssum

ptio

ns A

bout

Bla

ck C

lient

s

• Th

eme

3: M

akin

g St

ereo

typi

c A

ssum

ptio

ns A

bout

Bla

ck

Supe

rvis

ees

• Th

eme

4: R

eluc

tanc

e to

Giv

e Pe

rfor

man

ce F

eedb

ack

for F

ear o

f B

eing

Vie

wed

as R

acis

t

• Th

eme

5: F

ocus

ing

Prim

arily

on

Clin

ical

Wea

knes

ses:

Sev

eral

Bla

ck

supe

rvis

ees i

ndic

ated

that

thei

r Whi

te

supe

rvis

ors t

ende

d to

focu

s prim

arily

on

thei

r clin

ical

def

icits

(as o

ppos

ed

to a

lso

prov

idin

g fe

edba

ck a

bout

cl

inic

al st

reng

ths)

109

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

• Th

eme

6: B

lam

ing

Clie

nts o

f Col

or

for P

robl

ems S

tem

min

g Fr

om

Opp

ress

ion:

Sev

eral

Bla

ck

supe

rvis

ees n

oted

that

thei

r Whi

te

supe

rvis

ors t

ende

d to

bla

me

clie

nts o

f co

lor f

or th

e ci

rcum

stan

ces t

hat

brou

ght t

hem

to c

ouns

elin

g, e

ven

whe

n su

ch is

sues

seem

ed to

be

rela

ted

to p

reju

dice

, rac

ism

, dis

crim

inat

ion,

an

d ot

her f

orm

s of o

ppre

ssio

n

• Th

eme

7: O

ffer

ing

Cul

tura

lly

Inse

nsiti

ve T

reat

men

t R

ecom

men

datio

ns: S

ever

al B

lack

su

perv

isee

s in

this

stud

y re

porte

d th

at

thei

r sup

ervi

sors

mad

e tre

atm

ent

reco

mm

enda

tions

that

did

not

app

ear

to b

e cu

ltura

lly se

nsiti

ve, a

nd th

ese

train

ees s

eem

ed to

bel

ieve

that

the

reco

mm

enda

tions

wer

e tie

d to

raci

sm

or u

nexa

min

ed c

ultu

ral b

iase

s

Dre

ssel

et

al. (

2007

) •

To u

se th

e D

elph

i m

etho

d to

id

entif

y sp

ecifi

c be

havi

ors

char

acte

rizin

g bo

th su

cces

sful

an

d un

succ

essf

ul

mul

ticul

tura

l su

perv

isio

n, a

s id

entif

ied

by

know

ledg

eabl

e pr

actic

ing

Del

phi

met

hod

• R

espo

nse

form

co

ntai

ning

the

defin

ition

s of

succ

essf

ul a

nd

unsu

cces

sful

m

ultic

ultu

ral

supe

rvis

ory

beha

vior

s

• Tr

aini

ng d

irect

ors

from

34

UC

Cs

that

bel

onge

d to

th

e A

ssoc

iatio

n of

C

ouns

elin

g C

ente

r Tra

inin

g A

genc

ies

(AC

CTA

) •

Rou

nd 1

: 34

pote

ntia

l pan

elis

ts

• R

ound

2: 2

1 pa

nelis

ts w

ho

• Th

e m

ost i

mpo

rtant

beh

avio

ral

elem

ent t

hat i

s inv

olve

d in

succ

essf

ul

mul

ticul

tura

l sup

ervi

sion

is “c

reat

ing

a sa

fe e

nviro

nmen

t for

dis

cuss

ion

of

mul

ticul

tura

l iss

ues”

•

Alth

ough

the

core

supe

rviso

ry

beha

vior

s may

con

tribu

te to

su

cces

sful

mul

ticul

tura

l sup

ervi

sion

, sp

ecifi

c m

ultic

ultu

ral i

ssue

s mus

t als

o be

add

ress

ed if

mul

ticul

tura

l su

perv

isio

n is

to b

e su

cces

sful

110

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

prof

essi

onal

s in

volv

ed in

tra

inin

g an

d su

perv

isio

n at

U

CC

s

resp

onde

d to

R

ound

1

• R

ound

3: 1

8 pa

nelis

ts fr

om

Rou

nd 2

•

Res

pons

es w

ere

rece

ived

from

13

pane

lists

Succ

essf

ul m

ultic

ultu

ral s

uper

visi

on:

• 35

succ

essf

ul M

C su

perv

isio

n be

havi

ors c

an b

e or

dere

d in

to 3

di

men

sion

s: su

perv

isor

y ta

sks;

m

ultic

ultu

ral s

uper

viso

ry re

latio

nshi

p;

pers

onal

and

pro

fess

iona

l gro

wth

of

the

succ

essf

ul m

ultic

ultu

ral s

uper

viso

r •

Supe

rvis

ory

task

s: a

dmin

istra

tive

and

info

rmat

iona

l beh

avio

rs

• M

ultic

ultu

ral s

uper

viso

ry re

latio

nshi

p:

requ

ires t

he c

ore

cond

ition

s of

open

ness

, gen

uine

ness

, em

path

y, a

nd

war

mth

; it m

ust a

lso

prov

ide

the

need

ed sa

fety

asp

ects

that

invi

te a

di

scus

sion

of m

ultic

ultu

ral i

ssue

s, va

lues

, and

idea

s, an

d ho

w th

ey

influ

ence

the

clin

ical

inte

ract

ion

Uns

ucce

ssfu

l mul

ticul

tura

l sup

ervi

sion

:

• Su

perv

isor

s’ la

ck o

f aw

aren

ess o

f th

eir o

wn

raci

al, e

thni

c, a

nd c

ultu

ral

bias

es a

s bei

ng th

e m

ost d

etrim

enta

l to

mul

ticul

tura

l sup

ervi

sion

•

Lack

of s

ensi

tivity

to th

e im

pact

of

cultu

re

• In

flexi

bilit

y on

the

part

of th

e su

perv

isor

•

Mis

guid

ed in

tent

ions

•

Faili

ng to

est

ablis

h a

wor

king

alli

ance

•

Faili

ng to

reco

gniz

e th

e po

wer

of t

he

supe

rvis

ory

role

111

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

Dua

n an

d R

oehl

ke

(200

1)

• D

id su

perv

isor

s, as

a g

roup

, ex

pres

s pos

itive

at

titud

es to

war

ds

thei

r rac

ially

di

ffer

ent

supe

rvis

ee a

nd

mak

e ac

tive

effo

rts to

add

ress

cu

ltura

l and

raci

al

diff

eren

ces

betw

een

them

? •

How

did

su

perv

isee

s, as

a

grou

p, p

erce

ive

thei

r sup

ervi

sors

’ at

titud

es,

beha

vior

s, an

d pe

rson

al

char

acte

ristic

s?

• H

ow w

ould

su

perv

isor

s’ a

nd

supe

rvis

ees’

pe

rcep

tions

of

each

oth

er’s

ch

arac

teris

tics,

beha

vior

s, an

d at

titud

es p

redi

ct

thei

r sat

isfa

ctio

n w

ith th

e su

perv

isor

y re

latio

nshi

p?

Surv

ey

desi

gn

• C

ross

-Rac

ial

Supe

rvis

ion

Surv

ey (w

ith

scal

ed it

ems

and

open

-en

ded

ques

tions

)

• 60

pre

-doc

tora

l in

tern

s (40

men

an

d 20

wom

en)

• 58

supe

rvis

ors

(30

men

and

28

wom

en)

• Fr

om 4

9 U

CC

in

tern

ship

s tha

t w

ere

scat

tere

d ac

ross

the

U.S

. •

Supe

rvis

ees:

77%

fr

om c

ouns

elin

g ps

ycho

logy

, 16%

fr

om c

linic

al

psyc

holo

gy, 7

%

from

pro

fess

iona

l sc

hool

pro

gram

s

• Su

perv

isee

s wer

e m

ore

sens

itive

to

cultu

ral/r

acia

l iss

ues t

han

wer

e su

perv

isor

s •

Supe

rvis

ors r

epor

ted

mak

ing

mor

e ef

forts

to a

ddre

ss c

ultu

ral i

ssue

s tha

n su

perv

isee

s per

ceiv

ed

• Sa

tisfa

ctio

n w

ith su

perv

isio

n w

as

rela

ted

to su

perv

isee

s’ se

lf-di

sclo

sure

an

d dy

ad m

embe

rs’ p

erce

ived

pos

itive

at

titud

es to

war

d ea

ch o

ther

112

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

Fuku

yam

a (1

994)

•

To e

xplo

re th

e us

eful

ness

of

elic

iting

“cr

itica

l in

cide

nts”

in

supe

rvis

ion

and

its a

pplic

abili

ty to

m

ultic

ultu

ral

supe

rvis

ion

rese

arch

Phen

omen

olog

ical

ap

proa

ch

(Crit

ical

In

cide

nts)

• B

rief

ques

tionn

aire

to

solic

it “c

ritic

al

inci

dent

s”

• N

=18

raci

al-

ethn

ic m

inor

ity

stud

ents

who

co

mpl

eted

in

tern

ship

at a

n A

PA a

ppro

ved

pre-

doct

oral

in

tern

ship

site

(U

CC

s)

• 12

wom

en/6

men

•

Res

pond

ents

: 10

(6 w

omen

/4 m

en)

• Et

hnic

ities

re

pres

ente

d:

Afr

ican

A

mer

ican

, Asi

an

Am

eric

an, L

atin

an

d C

arib

bean

Is

land

s, an

d In

tern

atio

nal

3 ca

tego

ries o

f pos

itive

crit

ical

inci

dent

s re

late

d to

mul

ticul

tura

l iss

ues:

• O

penn

ess a

nd su

ppor

t •

Cul

tura

lly re

leva

nt su

perv

ision

•

Opp

ortu

nitie

s to

wor

k in

mul

ticul

tura

l ac

tiviti

es

2 ca

tego

ries o

f neg

ativ

e cr

itica

l inc

iden

ts

rela

ted

to m

ultic

ultu

ral i

ssue

s:

• La

ck o

f sup

ervi

sor c

ultu

ral a

war

enes

s •

Que

stio

ning

supe

rvis

ee a

bilit

ies

Gen

eral

find

ings

:

• Et

hnic

min

ority

inte

rns e

xpre

ssed

co

ncer

ns fo

r sup

port

and

reco

gniti

on

of c

ompe

tenc

y fr

om th

eir s

uper

viso

rs

• M

ultic

ultu

ral i

ssue

s in

supe

rvis

ion

wer

e sa

lient

for e

thni

c tra

inee

s and

ha

ve im

porta

nt im

plic

atio

ns fo

r tra

inin

g •

It is

reco

mm

ende

d th

at su

perv

isor

s re

ceiv

e tra

inin

g in

mul

ticul

tura

l iss

ues

and

that

supe

rvis

ors i

nitia

te d

iscu

ssio

n of

mul

ticul

tura

l iss

ues w

ith

supe

rvis

ees

• O

n an

org

aniz

atio

nal l

evel

, act

iviti

es

such

as e

thni

c w

alk-

in h

ours

, spe

cial

in

tere

st c

ouns

elin

g gr

oups

, bro

wn

bag

sem

inar

s on

mul

ticul

tura

l iss

ues,

and

inte

rn se

min

ars s

erve

to e

nhan

ce

mul

ticul

tura

l tra

inin

g

113

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

Gar

dner

(2

002)

•

To e

xplo

re w

hat

fact

ors i

n th

e su

perv

isor

y re

latio

nshi

p co

ntrib

ute

to a

gr

owth

-pr

omot

ing

clim

ate

vs. a

gr

owth

-lim

iting

cl

imat

e, a

s pe

rcei

ved

by

cros

s-cu

ltura

l su

perv

isee

s

Com

para

tive

met

hod

of

qual

itativ

e re

sear

ch

• C

ultu

ral

Pers

pect

ive

Inte

rvie

w

(CPI

)

• N

=8 su

perv

isee

s •

7 A

fric

an

Am

eric

ans,

1 W

hite

Am

eric

an

• 7

fem

ales

, 1 m

ale

• A

ges 2

4-50

•

Rec

eive

d su

perv

isio

n by

a

supe

rvis

or fr

om a

di

ffer

ent e

thni

city

•

All

from

gra

duat

e co

unse

lor

educ

atio

n pr

ogra

ms a

t un

iver

sitie

s in

the

Mid

wes

t and

so

uthe

rn re

gion

s of

the

U.S

.

Gro

wth

-pro

mot

ing

fact

ors:

• C

ompe

tenc

e of

the

supe

rvis

or a

s pe

rcei

ved

to b

e kn

owle

dgea

ble,

to

have

dem

onst

rate

d go

od fa

cilit

ativ

e sk

ills,

and

to h

ave

poss

esse

d at

tribu

tes

of c

ompa

ssio

n, c

once

rn, f

airn

ess,

and

hone

sty

• In

terp

erso

nal b

ond

betw

een

supe

rvis

or a

nd su

perv

isee

(rew

ardi

ng

supe

rvis

ory

expe

rienc

e if

supe

rvis

ors

wer

e de

scrib

ed a

s bei

ng re

cept

ive,

de

dica

ted,

gen

uine

, hum

ble,

em

path

ic,

resp

ectfu

l, an

d hu

mor

ous)

Gro

wth

-lim

iting

fact

ors:

• C

ultu

ral i

nsen

sitiv

ity

• C

omm

unic

atio

n st

yles

•

Crit

ical

feed

back

Gat

mon

et

al. (

2001

) •

Supe

rvis

ory

disc

ussi

ons a

bout

cu

lture

: are

si

mila

ritie

s and

di

ffer

ence

s in

term

s of

ethn

icity

, gen

der,

and

sexu

al

orie

ntat

ion

disc

usse

d in

su

perv

isio

n? If

so

, who

initi

ates

Qua

ntita

tive

expl

orat

ory

stud

y

• Th

e W

orki

ng

Alli

ance

In

vent

ory

(Hor

vath

&

Gre

enbe

rg,

1989

) •

The

Supe

rvis

ion

Que

stio

nnai

re-

Rev

ised

(W

orth

ingt

on

& R

oehl

ke,

1979

)

• N

=289

pre

-do

ctor

al

psyc

holo

gy

inte

rns

• Eu

rope

an

Am

eric

ans:

73

.4%

•

Afr

ican

A

mer

ican

s: 6

.6%

•

Asi

an A

mer

ican

s:

5.9%

•

Chi

cano

/Lat

ino:

5.

2%

Supe

rvis

ory

Dis

cuss

ions

of C

ultu

ral

Var

iabl

es

• Lo

w fr

eque

ncy

and

lack

of i

nitia

tion

of d

iscu

ssio

ns (o

f cul

tura

l var

iabl

es)

durin

g su

perv

isio

n w

ere

note

d in

all

area

s inv

estig

ated

, par

ticul

arly

re

gard

ing

sexu

al o

rient

atio

n in

whi

ch

55%

of s

uper

vise

es in

itiat

ed th

ese

disc

ussi

ons

Cul

tura

l Dis

cuss

ions

and

Sup

ervi

sory

A

llian

ce

114

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

thes

e di

scus

sion

s?

• C

ultu

ral

disc

ussi

ons a

nd

supe

rvis

ory

allia

nce

and

satis

fact

ion:

do

train

ees w

ho

disc

uss

supe

rvis

or-

supe

rvis

ee

sim

ilarit

ies a

nd

diff

eren

ces r

epor

t hi

gher

sa

tisfa

ctio

n ra

tes

with

supe

rvis

ion

and

enha

nced

w

orki

ng a

llian

ce

with

thei

r su

perv

isor

s tha

n tra

inee

s who

do

not d

iscu

ss

sim

ilarit

ies a

nd

diff

eren

ces?

• Q

ualit

y of

di

scus

sion

s: d

oes

the

qual

ity o

f the

su

perv

isor

y di

scus

sion

s rel

ate

to th

e su

perv

isor

y w

orki

ng a

llian

ce

and

inte

rn

• D

iscu

ssio

n of

cu

ltura

l va

riabl

es

ques

tions

•

Dem

ogra

phic

qu

estio

ns

• Je

wis

h/C

auca

sian

: 5.2

%

• M

ultir

acia

l: 3.

1%

• A

rab

Am

eric

ans:

0.

3%

• W

omen

/Men

: 70

%/3

0%

• W

hen

cultu

ral v

aria

bles

are

dis

cuss

ed

in th

e su

perv

isor

y re

latio

nshi

p,

supe

rvis

ees r

epor

t sig

nific

antly

hig

her

satis

fact

ion

with

supe

rvis

ion

and

an

enha

nced

wor

king

alli

ance

Qua

lity

of C

ultu

ral D

iscu

ssio

n an

d Su

perv

isio

n

• Pr

ovid

ing

an a

tmos

pher

e of

safe

ty,

dept

h of

dia

logu

e, a

nd fr

eque

nt

oppo

rtuni

ties t

o di

scus

s cul

tura

l va

riabl

es in

the

supe

rvis

ory

rela

tions

hip

sign

ifica

ntly

con

tribu

te to

bu

ildin

g al

lianc

es a

nd in

crea

sing

sa

tisfa

ctio

n

Cul

tura

l Mat

ch a

nd S

uper

viso

ry A

llian

ce

• It

is n

ot th

e cu

ltura

l mat

ch b

etw

een

supe

rvis

or a

nd su

perv

isee

itse

lf th

at is

im

porta

nt b

ut th

e pr

esen

ce a

nd q

ualit

y of

the

disc

ussi

on o

f diff

eren

ce a

nd

sim

ilarit

y •

Whe

n di

ffer

ence

s exi

st, d

iscu

ssio

ns

shou

ld o

ccur

and

supe

rvis

ors s

houl

d be

bet

ter e

quip

ped

to in

itiat

e th

em

115

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

satis

fact

ion

with

su

perv

isio

n?

• C

ultu

ral m

atch

an

d th

e in

fluen

ce

on w

orki

ng

allia

nce:

doe

s su

perv

isor

y m

atch

on

the

cultu

ral v

aria

bles

st

udie

d re

late

to

the

supe

rvis

ory

wor

king

alli

ance

an

d in

tern

sa

tisfa

ctio

n w

ith

supe

rvis

ion?

Gre

en a

nd

Dek

kers

(2

010)

• To

exp

lore

the

rela

tions

hip

betw

een

atte

ndin

g to

po

wer

and

di

vers

ity in

cl

inic

al

supe

rvis

ion

for

thei

r inf

luen

ces

on su

perv

isee

le

arni

ng

outc

omes

from

th

e pe

rspe

ctiv

e of

su

perv

isee

s and

su

perv

isor

s

Res

earc

h qu

estio

ns:

Surv

ey

• D

emog

raph

ic

info

rmat

ion

• Fe

min

ist

Supe

rvis

ion

Scal

e (F

SS)

• Su

perv

isio

n Fe

edba

ck

Form

(SFF

)

42 su

perv

isee

s fr

om C

OA

MFT

E-ac

cred

ited

prog

ram

s

• 81

% fe

mal

e •

95%

het

eros

exua

l •

76%

Whi

te, 7

%

Afr

ican

A

mer

ican

/Bla

ck,

2% A

sian

, 5%

La

tino/

His

pani

c,

5%

Bira

cial

/Mul

tirac

ial

, 5%

Oth

er

• A

vera

ge a

ge: 2

8

• Fr

om su

perv

isee

s’ p

ersp

ectiv

e,

atte

ndin

g to

pow

er a

nd d

iver

sity

in

supe

rvis

ion

influ

ence

d sa

tisfa

ctio

n w

ith su

perv

isio

n an

d le

arni

ng

outc

omes

•

From

supe

rvis

ors’

per

spec

tive,

ther

e w

ere

no si

gnifi

cant

eff

ects

of

atte

ndin

g to

pow

er a

nd d

iver

sity

in

clin

ical

supe

rvis

ion

on su

perv

isor

sa

tisfa

ctio

n w

ith su

perv

isio

n or

su

perv

isee

lear

ning

out

com

es

116

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

• A

re su

perv

isor

s in

trai

ning

in

stitu

tions

at

tend

ing

to

pow

er a

nd

dive

rsity

? •

Are

atte

ndin

g to

po

wer

and

at

tend

ing

to

dive

rsity

rela

ted

to sa

tisfa

ctio

n w

ith su

perv

isio

n?

• A

re a

ttend

ing

to

pow

er a

nd

atte

ndin

g to

di

vers

ity re

late

d to

supe

rvis

ee

lear

ning

ou

tcom

es?

• A

vera

ge y

ears

of

clin

ical

ex

perie

nce:

2.1

6

22 su

perv

isor

s fro

m

CO

AM

FTE-

accr

edite

d pr

ogra

ms

• 68

% fe

mal

e •

96%

het

eros

exua

l •

96%

Whi

te

• A

vera

ge a

ge: 4

2 •

Ave

rage

yea

rs o

f cl

inic

al

expe

rienc

e: 1

4.65

Her

nánd

ez,

Tayl

or, a

nd

McD

owel

l (2

009)

• To

exp

lore

the

expe

rienc

es o

f ra

cial

and

eth

nic

min

ority

AA

MFT

su

perv

isor

s du

ring

thei

r tra

inin

g ye

ars a

s su

perv

isee

s and

as

act

ive

clin

ical

su

perv

isor

s •

To u

nder

stan

d ho

w d

iver

sity

is

sues

impa

ct

Con

sens

ual

Qua

litat

ive

Res

earc

h

• Se

mi-

stru

ctur

ed

inte

rvie

w

• 10

AA

MFT

ap

prov

ed

supe

rvis

ors

betw

een

the

ages

of

36

and

62

• 9

fem

ales

/1 m

ale

• 9

iden

tifie

d as

he

tero

sexu

al; 1

as

bise

xual

•

Chi

cana

, Pue

rto

Ric

an, S

outh

A

sian

, Asi

an

Chi

nese

, Mix

ed,

3 th

emes

em

erge

d su

mm

ariz

ing

ethn

ic

min

ority

supe

rvis

ors’

exp

erie

nces

as

supe

rvis

ees-

in-tr

aini

ng:

• La

ck o

f pro

cess

ing

soci

al lo

catio

n an

d di

vers

ity d

imen

sion

s: M

ost

parti

cipa

nts i

n ou

r stu

dy fe

lt th

at th

eir

supe

rvis

ors c

ondu

cted

supe

rvis

ion

from

a E

uroc

entri

c pe

rspe

ctiv

e th

at

deni

ed th

eir i

dent

ities

and

soci

al

loca

tions

•

Mis

use

of p

ower

by

supe

rvis

ors:

Pa

rtici

pant

s in

this

stud

y ex

pose

d m

isus

es in

pow

er b

y su

perv

isor

s,

117

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

train

ing

and

supe

rvis

ion

Afr

ican

A

mer

ican

, and

C

hine

se

• C

lass

ba

ckgr

ound

: ra

nge

betw

een

Low

er C

lass

and

U

pper

Mid

dle

Cla

ss

• R

ange

of

expe

rienc

es a

s su

perv

isor

s:

betw

een

4-20

ye

ars

incl

udin

g ex

perie

ncin

g ov

ert r

acis

m in

su

perv

isio

n (e

.g. s

uper

viso

rs u

sing

ra

cial

slur

s, gi

ving

less

atte

ntio

n to

the

train

ing

of su

perv

isee

s of c

olor

) •

Lack

of m

ento

rshi

p in

the

prof

essi

on:

Parti

cipa

nts i

n ou

r stu

dy re

ferr

ed

freq

uent

ly to

men

torin

g an

d su

ppor

t th

at w

as e

ssen

tial t

o th

eir g

row

th a

s th

erap

ists

and

whi

ch c

ame

from

ou

tsid

e of

thei

r sup

ervi

sory

re

latio

nshi

ps

Hird

, Tao

, an

d G

loria

(2

005)

• To

exa

min

e th

e se

lf-re

porte

d m

ultic

ultu

ral

supe

rvis

ion

com

pete

nce

of

Whi

te a

nd

Rac

ial/E

thni

c M

inor

ity (R

EM)

supe

rvis

ors

with

in ra

cial

ly

sim

ilar a

nd

raci

ally

diff

eren

t su

perv

isio

n dy

ads

Qua

ntita

tive

• Tw

o-pa

ge

surv

ey

(res

earc

her-

deve

lope

d qu

estio

ns a

nd

a st

anda

rdiz

ed

mea

sure

) •

Cro

ss-C

ultu

ral

Cou

nsel

ing

Com

pete

nce

Inve

ntor

y-R

evis

ed

• N

=442

su

perv

isio

n dy

ads

• 31

6 ra

cial

ly-

sim

ilar d

yads

•

126

raci

ally

-di

ffer

ent d

yads

•

In ra

cial

ly-s

imila

r dy

ads,

Whi

te

supe

rvis

or/W

hite

su

perv

isee

(9

3.4%

), R

EM

supe

rvis

or/R

EM

supe

rvis

ee (6

.6&

) •

In ra

cial

ly-

diff

eren

t dya

ds,

75%

wer

e W

hite

su

perv

isor

s with

R

EM su

perv

isee

s,

• O

vera

ll, R

EM su

perv

isor

s rep

orte

d m

ore

MC

supe

rvis

ion

com

pete

nce

than

Whi

te su

perv

isor

s. •

In ra

cial

ly si

mila

r dya

ds, R

EM

supe

rvis

ors s

pent

sign

ifica

ntly

mor

e tim

e ad

dres

sing

cul

tura

l iss

ues i

n su

perv

isio

n th

an W

hite

supe

rvis

ors

• W

hite

supe

rvis

ors d

iscu

ssed

cul

tura

l is

sues

sign

ifica

ntly

mor

e w

ith ra

cial

ly

diff

eren

t sup

ervi

sees

than

raci

ally

si

mila

r sup

ervi

sees

•

Supe

rvis

ors d

iffer

ed in

whi

ch c

ultu

ral

issu

es th

ey d

iscu

ssed

and

con

side

red

appl

icab

le to

supe

rvis

ion

118

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

25%

wer

e R

EM

supe

rvis

ors w

ith

Whi

te

supe

rvis

ees

• Su

perv

isor

s:

near

ly 5

0/50

m

ale/

fem

ale

Inm

an

(200

6)

• To

inve

stig

ate

the

dire

ct a

nd in

dire

ct

effe

cts o

f m

arria

ge a

nd

fam

ily th

erap

y tra

inee

s’

perc

eptio

ns o

f th

eir s

uper

viso

rs’

mul

ticul

tura

l co

mpe

tenc

e in

su

perv

isio

n on

th

e su

perv

isor

y w

orki

ng a

llian

ce,

train

ees’

m

ultic

ultu

ral

com

pete

nce

(cas

e co

ncep

tual

izat

ion

abili

ties i

n et

iolo

gy a

nd

treat

men

t), a

nd

perc

eive

d su

perv

isio

n sa

tisfa

ctio

n

Qua

ntita

tive

• D

emog

raph

ic

Form

•

Supe

rvis

or

Mul

ticul

tura

l C

ompe

tenc

e In

vent

ory

(SM

CI)

• W

orki

ng

Alli

ance

-Tr

aine

e V

ersi

on

(WA

I-T)

• M

ultic

ultu

ral

Cas

e C

once

ptua

lizat

ion

Abi

lity

dete

rmin

ed b

y a

codi

ng

syst

em

• Su

perv

isio

n Sa

tisfa

ctio

n Q

uest

ionn

aire

(S

SQ)

• N

=147

•

26 m

ales

/121

fe

mal

es

• A

ge ra

nge:

21-

72

• C

auca

sian

: 103

; A

fric

an

Am

eric

an: 1

2;

Asi

an A

mer

ican

: 13

; His

pani

c A

mer

ican

: 13;

N

ativ

e A

mer

ican

: 1;

Bira

cial

: 3; D

id

not s

peci

fy: 2

•

Mas

ter’s

leve

l: 90

; pos

tgra

duat

e le

vel:

15; d

octo

ral

leve

l: 37

; did

not

sp

ecify

: 5

• A

lthou

gh su

perv

isor

mul

ticul

tura

l co

mpe

tenc

e w

as d

irect

ly a

nd

posi

tivel

y as

soci

ated

with

supe

rvis

ory

wor

king

alli

ance

and

supe

rvis

ion

satis

fact

ion,

supe

rvis

or m

ultic

ultu

ral

com

pete

nce

had

a di

rect

, but

neg

ativ

e,

rela

tions

hip

with

trai

nee

etio

logy

co

ncep

tual

izat

ion

abili

ties

(mul

ticul

tura

l cas

e co

ncep

tual

izat

ion

abili

ties m

ay b

e in

fluen

ced

by

varia

bles

bey

ond

thos

e as

sess

ed in

th

is st

udy

such

as s

elf-

awar

enes

s and

se

lf-co

nfid

ence

) •

Supe

rvis

ory

wor

king

alli

ance

serv

ed

as a

sign

ifica

nt p

ositi

ve m

edia

tor i

n th

e re

latio

nshi

p be

twee

n su

perv

isor

m

ultic

ultu

ral c

ompe

tenc

e an

d su

perv

isio

n sa

tisfa

ctio

n •

A su

perv

isor

y re

latio

nshi

p th

at

invo

lves

an

impl

emen

tatio

n of

cu

ltura

l com

pete

nce

thro

ugh

a m

utua

l ag

reem

ent o

n go

als a

nd ta

sks r

elat

ed

to a

focu

s on

mul

ticul

tura

l iss

ues m

ay

prov

ide

for g

reat

er su

perv

isio

n sa

tisfa

ctio

n

119

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

Jern

igan

, G

reen

, H

elm

s, Pe

rez-

Gua

ldro

n,

and

Hen

ze

(201

0)

• To

exp

lore

raci

al

dyna

mic

s fro

m

the

pers

pect

ive

of

supe

rvis

ees o

f C

olor

with

in

supe

rvis

ion

dyad

s w

ith su

perv

isor

s of

Col

or

Qua

litat

ive

expl

orat

ory

stud

y

• D

emog

raph

ic

data

•

Sem

i-st

ruct

ured

su

rvey

• 6

supe

rvis

ees o

f C

olor

(with

su

perv

isor

s of

Col

or)

• 3

mas

ters

/3

doct

oral

-leve

l st

uden

ts in

the

depa

rtmen

t of

coun

selin

g ps

ycho

logy

at a

un

iver

sity

on

the

east

coa

st

• Su

perv

isee

s rep

orte

d th

at th

eir

supe

rvis

ors e

vide

nced

a ra

nge

of

resp

onse

s to

race

bei

ng in

trodu

ced

into

the

supe

rvis

ory

rela

tions

hip

• A

lthou

gh so

me

resp

onde

nts

dem

onst

rate

d an

und

erst

andi

ng o

f the

ne

cess

ity to

initi

ate

conv

ersa

tions

ab

out r

ace

and

cultu

re in

supe

rvis

ion,

th

ey re

porte

d th

at th

eir s

uper

viso

rs

did

not;

cons

eque

ntly

, the

se

inte

ract

ions

pro

ved

to b

e pr

oble

mat

ic

• D

espi

te h

avin

g to

initi

ate

conv

ersa

tions

abo

ut ra

ce, t

heir

supe

rvis

ors w

ere

rece

ptiv

e to

the

disc

ussi

on a

nd c

halle

nged

supe

rvis

ees

to c

ontin

ue to

eng

age

in th

e di

alog

ue;

supe

rvis

ees i

n su

ch re

latio

nshi

ps

subs

eque

ntly

repo

rted

grow

th-

fost

erin

g ex

perie

nces

. •

Res

pond

ents

’ des

crip

tions

of d

yads

, co

mpr

ised

of t

wo

peop

le o

f Col

or,

wer

e no

t nec

essa

rily

posi

tive

whe

n di

scus

sion

s of r

ace

in su

perv

isio

n w

ere

the

focu

s •

Not

all

peop

le-o

f Col

or su

perv

isor

s ar

e in

here

ntly

bet

ter a

t und

erst

andi

ng

raci

al a

nd c

ultu

ral i

nfor

mat

ion,

sole

ly

beca

use

they

are

peo

ple

of C

olor

•

Supe

rvis

ees o

f Col

or fr

eque

ntly

re

porte

d an

inte

rnal

izat

ion

of se

lf-do

ubt a

nd in

com

pete

nce

whe

n th

ey

perc

eive

d th

at th

eir s

uper

viso

rs w

ere

120

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

not o

pen

to d

isco

urse

abo

ut ra

ce

with

in su

perv

isio

n •

Trai

nees

of C

olor

, who

end

orse

d th

e im

porta

nce

of u

sing

raci

al a

nd c

ultu

ral

conc

eptu

aliz

atio

ns in

cou

nsel

ing

prac

tice,

wer

e de

terr

ed fr

om d

oing

so

whe

n th

eir s

uper

viso

rs d

id n

ot p

rovi

de

supp

ort o

r enc

oura

gem

ent.

The

impa

ct

of a

regr

essi

ve su

perv

isio

n re

latio

nshi

p w

as b

oth

psyc

holo

gica

lly

taxi

ng a

nd h

ad n

egat

ive

cons

eque

nces

fo

r the

trai

ning

exp

erie

nce

for

supe

rvis

ees o

f col

or

• Pr

ogre

ssiv

e dy

ads w

ere

desc

ribed

as

educ

ativ

e an

d gr

owth

-fos

terin

g in

bo

th p

erso

nal a

nd p

rofe

ssio

nal

dom

ains

Kad

uvet

toor

et

al.

(200

9)

• To

exa

min

e th

e re

latio

nshi

p be

twee

n m

ultic

ultu

ral

even

ts in

gro

up

supe

rvis

ion,

gr

oup

clim

ate,

an

d su

perv

isee

m

ultic

ultu

ral

com

pete

nce

Mix

ed

qual

itativ

e/q

uant

itativ

e de

sign

• M

ultic

ultu

ral

Even

ts in

G

roup

Su

perv

isio

n Q

uest

ionn

aire

(M

EGSQ

) •

Gro

up C

limat

e Q

uest

ionn

aire

-Sh

ort F

orm

(G

CQ

-S)

• C

ross

-Cul

tura

l C

ouns

elin

g In

vent

ory-

Rev

ised

(C

CC

I-R)

• 13

6 th

erap

ists

in

train

ing

• 94

wom

en/2

5 m

en/1

7 un

spec

ified

•

7 id

entif

ied

as

Afr

ican

A

mer

ican

, 5

Asi

an A

mer

ican

, 7

Latin

o/a,

1

Mid

dle

East

ern,

1

nativ

e A

mer

ican

, 95

Whi

te, 2

B

iraci

al, 2

Oth

er,

• Th

e di

scov

ery-

orie

nted

app

roac

h yi

elde

d 19

6 he

lpfu

l and

hin

derin

g m

ultic

ultu

ral e

vent

s am

ong

136

parti

cipa

nts

• Th

e m

ost c

omm

on e

vent

s inc

lude

d m

ultic

ultu

ral l

earn

ing

and

peer

vi

cario

us le

arni

ng

• Su

perv

isee

s sug

gest

ed im

prov

ing

thei

r gro

up su

perv

isio

n th

roug

h be

tter

inte

grat

ion

of m

ultic

ultu

ral i

ssue

s and

m

ore

supe

rvis

or in

volv

emen

t •

Reg

ardi

ng g

roup

clim

ate,

supe

rvis

ees

repo

rting

pee

r vic

ario

us le

arni

ng o

r m

ultic

ultu

ral l

earn

ing

expe

rienc

ed

high

er g

roup

eng

agem

ent,

whe

reas

121

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

• D

emog

raph

ic

Que

stio

nnai

re

and

16

Uns

peci

fied

• 4

iden

tifie

d as

ga

y, le

sbia

n, o

r qu

eer;

7 as

bi

sexu

al; 1

06 a

s he

tero

sexu

al; a

nd

19 d

eclin

ed to

sp

ecify

•

29 m

aste

r’s le

vel

stud

ents

; 88

doct

oral

leve

l; 19

un

spec

ified

•

42 c

ross

-rac

ial

supe

rvis

ory

dyad

s

mis

appl

icat

ions

of m

ultic

ultu

ral

theo

ry re

late

d to

hig

her r

epor

ts o

f gr

oup

conf

lict

• In

crea

sed

mul

ticul

tura

l lea

rnin

g an

d ex

tra-g

roup

mul

ticul

tura

l eve

nts

posi

tivel

y re

late

d to

supe

rvis

ees’

m

ultic

ultu

ral c

ompe

tenc

e w

here

as

mul

ticul

tura

l con

flict

s with

su

perv

isor

s, m

isap

plic

atio

n of

m

ultic

ultu

ral t

heor

y, a

nd th

e ab

senc

e of

mul

ticul

tura

l eve

nts n

egat

ivel

y re

late

d to

supe

rvis

ee m

ultic

ultu

ral

com

pete

nce

Kis

sil,

Dav

ey, &

D

avey

(2

015)

• To

exa

min

e th

e as

soci

atio

ns

betw

een

accu

ltura

tion,

su

perv

isor

s’

mul

ticul

tura

l co

mpe

tenc

e, a

nd

clin

icia

ns’ s

elf-

effic

acy

in a

sa

mpl

e of

153

im

mig

rant

th

erap

ists

cu

rren

tly

prac

ticin

g in

the

U.S

.

Qua

ntita

tive

• D

emog

raph

ic

Surv

ey

• Th

e A

mer

ican

-In

tern

atio

nal

Rel

atio

ns

Scal

e (A

IRS)

•

The

Cou

nsel

or

Act

ivity

Sel

f-Ef

ficac

y Sc

ales

(C

ASE

S)

• Th

e Su

perv

isor

M

ultic

ultu

ral

Com

pete

nce

• N

=153

•

137

fem

ale/

16

mal

e •

Age

rang

e: 2

3-69

•

Age

of a

rriv

al to

th

e U

S: 1

4-46

•

Num

ber o

f yea

rs

livin

g in

the

US:

0-

30

• W

hite

: 42;

Asi

an:

17;

His

pani

c/La

tino:

8;

Mid

dle

East

ern:

5;

Afr

ican

/Bla

ck/A

fric

an A

mer

ican

: 2;

Bira

cial

: 4;

• Pe

rcei

ved

prej

udic

e, n

ot le

vel o

f ac

cultu

ratio

n, w

as si

gnifi

cant

ly

asso

ciat

ed w

ith fo

reig

n-bo

rn th

erap

ists

’ cl

inic

al se

lf-ef

ficac

y •

Perc

eive

d su

perv

isor

s’ m

ultic

ultu

ral

com

pete

nce

was

sign

ifica

ntly

as

soci

ated

with

ther

apis

ts’ c

linic

al se

lf-ef

ficac

y •

Fore

ign-

born

ther

apis

ts fe

el m

ore

clin

ical

ly se

lf- e

ffic

acio

us w

hen

thei

r su

perv

isor

s are

mul

ticul

tura

lly

com

pete

nt

• It

is e

spec

ially

impo

rtant

for c

linic

al

supe

rvis

ors t

o op

enly

dis

cuss

and

ac

tivel

y ex

plor

e cr

oss-

cultu

ral

inte

ract

ions

with

fore

ign-

born

su

perv

isee

s, in

clud

ing

all p

arts

of t

he

122

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

Inve

ntor

y (S

MC

I) O

ther

: 22;

Rac

e no

t ind

icat

ed: 5

2 tra

inin

g tri

ad a

nd th

e so

ciop

oliti

cal

cont

ext (

supe

rvis

or/s

uper

vise

e,

ther

apis

t/clie

nt, t

hera

pist

/larg

er

com

mun

ity w

here

ther

apis

t wor

ks)

• Su

perv

isor

s can

enc

oura

ge fo

reig

n-bo

rn su

perv

isee

s to

mor

e de

eply

ex

amin

e th

eir e

xper

ienc

es o

f ac

cultu

ratio

n an

d an

y pe

rcei

ved

prej

udic

e in

the

Uni

ted

Stat

es to

id

entif

y ho

w th

ese

expe

rienc

es m

ight

em

erge

dur

ing

ther

apeu

tic e

ncou

nter

s w

ith U

.S. c

lient

s •

Kno

win

g th

at e

xper

ienc

es o

f pre

judi

ce

in th

e U

nite

d St

ates

hav

e th

e po

tent

ial

to re

duce

thei

r for

eign

-bor

n su

perv

isee

s’ se

nse

of c

linic

al se

lf-ef

ficac

y, su

perv

isor

s can

enc

oura

ge

fore

ign-

born

ther

apis

ts to

dis

cuss

pr

ejud

icia

l exp

erie

nces

and

how

to

man

age

them

•

Supe

rvis

ors w

ho v

alue

the

pers

pect

ive

that

fore

ign-

born

ther

apis

ts b

ring

to

ther

apeu

tic e

ncou

nter

s in

the

U.S

. can

he

lp th

eir s

uper

vise

es fe

el m

ore

valid

ated

and

wor

thy

and,

as a

resu

lt,

mor

e cl

inic

ally

self-

effic

acio

us

123

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

Lada

ny,

Inm

an,

Con

stan

tine,

an

d H

ofhe

inz

(199

7)

• To

test

the

hypo

thes

is th

at

supe

rvis

ees’

m

ultic

ultu

ral c

ase

conc

eptu

aliz

atio

n ab

ility

and

self-

repo

rted

mul

ticul

tura

l co

mpe

tenc

e ar

e fu

nctio

ns o

f the

ir ra

cial

iden

tity

and

thei

r sup

ervi

sors

’ in

stru

ctio

n to

fo

cus o

n m

ultic

ultu

ral

issu

es

Qua

ntita

tive

• D

emog

raph

ic

ques

tionn

aire

•

Cul

tura

l Id

entit

y A

ttitu

de S

cale

(C

IAS)

•

Whi

te R

acia

l Id

entit

y A

ttitu

de S

cale

(W

RIA

S)

• C

ross

-Cul

tura

l C

ouns

elin

g In

vent

ory—

Rev

ised

(C

CC

I-R)

• N

=116

ps

ycho

logy

tra

inee

s •

84 fe

mal

e/30

m

ale,

2 d

id n

ot

indi

cate

) •

52 d

octo

ral-l

evel

tra

inee

s; 6

4 m

aste

r’s-

leve

l co

unse

lor t

rain

ees

• A

ge ra

nge:

21-

58

• W

hite

: 75;

A

fric

an

Am

eric

an: 2

0;

Asi

an A

mer

ican

: 11

; Lat

ino:

8;

Nat

ive

Am

eric

an:

1; B

iraci

al: 1

•

72%

of

resp

onde

nts n

oted

ha

ving

take

n at

le

ast o

ne c

ours

e on

eth

nic

and

raci

al d

iver

sity

is

sues

• R

acia

l ide

ntity

was

sign

ifica

ntly

re

late

d to

self-

repo

rted

mul

ticul

tura

l co

mpe

tenc

e •

Rac

ial i

dent

ity fo

r bot

h PO

C a

nd

Whi

te g

roup

s was

not

sign

ifica

ntly

re

late

d to

mul

ticul

tura

l cas

e co

ncep

tual

izat

ion

abili

ty

• Se

lf-re

porte

d m

ultic

ultu

ral c

ompe

tenc

e w

as n

ot fo

und

to b

e si

gnifi

cant

ly

rela

ted

to m

ultic

ultu

ral c

ase

conc

eptu

aliz

atio

n ab

ility

•

Supe

rvis

ors’

inst

ruct

ion

to fo

cus o

n m

ultic

ultu

ral i

ssue

s was

sign

ifica

ntly

re

late

d to

con

cept

ualiz

atio

ns o

f a

mul

ticul

tura

l tre

atm

ent s

trate

gy

Mor

i, In

man

, and

C

aski

e (2

009)

• To

exp

lore

the

rela

tions

hip

betw

een

inte

rnat

iona

l tra

inee

s’

accu

ltura

tion

leve

l and

cul

tura

l di

scus

sion

on

Qua

ntita

tive

•

Dem

ogra

phic

qu

estio

nnai

re

• A

mer

ican

-In

tern

atio

nal

Rel

atio

ns

Scal

e (A

IRS)

• N

=104

in

tern

atio

nal

train

ees

• 84

fem

ale/

18

mal

e, (2

un

know

n)

• A

vera

ge a

ge: 3

0

• St

uden

ts w

ho h

ad lo

wer

acc

ultu

ratio

n le

vels

but

gre

ater

cul

tura

l dis

cuss

ion

show

ed m

ore

satis

fact

ion

with

su

perv

isio

n •

Supe

rvis

or m

ultic

ultu

ral c

ompe

tenc

e po

sitiv

ely

influ

ence

d in

tern

atio

nal

124

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

supe

rvis

ion

satis

fact

ion

• To

exa

min

e th

e m

edia

ting

effe

ct

of c

ultu

ral

disc

ussi

ons o

n th

e re

latio

nshi

p be

twee

n pe

rcei

ved

supe

rvis

or

mul

ticul

tura

l co

mpe

tenc

e an

d tra

inee

sa

tisfa

ctio

n w

ith

supe

rvis

ion

• In

tern

atio

nal

Stud

ent

Supe

rvis

ion

Scal

e-M

ultic

ultu

ral

Dis

cuss

ion

(ISS

S-M

D)

• Su

perv

isor

M

ultic

ultu

ral

Com

pete

ncy

Inve

ntor

y (S

MC

I) •

Supe

rvis

ion

Satis

fact

ory

Que

stio

nnai

re

(SSQ

)

• 32

in c

ouns

elin

g ps

ycho

logy

pr

ogra

m; 3

3 in

cl

inic

al

psyc

holo

gy

prog

ram

; 13

in

mar

riage

and

fa

mily

ther

apy

prog

ram

; 7 in

sc

hool

ps

ycho

logy

/cou

nsel

ing;

4 in

soci

al

wor

k; 7

in o

ther

ty

pes o

f pro

gram

(e

.g.,

I/O

Psyc

holo

gy);

8 in

un

know

n pr

ogra

m

• D

octo

ral-l

evel

: 72

; Mas

ter’s

le

vel:

22;

Unk

now

n pr

ogra

m: 1

0

train

ees’

exp

erie

nce

with

supe

rvis

ion

both

dire

ctly

and

indi

rect

ly

• A

lthou

gh in

tern

atio

nal t

rain

ees

expe

rienc

ed m

ore

satis

fact

ion

whe

n th

ey p

erce

ived

thei

r sup

ervi

sors

as

cultu

rally

com

pete

nt, t

he le

vel o

f cu

ltura

l dis

cuss

ion

parti

ally

exp

lain

s th

e re

latio

nshi

p be

twee

n su

perv

isor

m

ultic

ultu

ral c

ompe

tenc

e an

d in

tern

atio

nal t

rain

ees’

satis

fact

ion

with

su

perv

isio

n

Nils

son

and

And

erso

n (2

004)

• To

exp

lore

the

rela

tions

hips

am

ong

accu

ltura

tion

coun

selin

g se

lf-ef

ficac

y, ro

le

ambi

guity

, and

th

e su

perv

isor

y w

orki

ng a

llian

ce

Surv

ey

• C

ouns

elin

g Se

lf-Es

timat

e In

vent

ory

(CO

SE)

• R

ole

Con

flict

an

d R

ole

Am

bigu

ity

Inve

ntor

y (R

CR

AI)

• 42

inte

rnat

iona

l st

uden

ts e

nrol

led

in A

PA-

accr

edite

d pr

ofes

sion

al

psyc

holo

gy

prog

ram

s •

Parti

cipa

nts

repr

esen

ted

20

Inte

rnat

iona

l stu

dent

s who

repo

rted

bein

g le

ss a

ccul

tura

ted

also

repo

rted:

• Le

ss c

ouns

elin

g se

lf-ef

ficac

y •

Wea

ker s

uper

viso

ry w

orki

ng a

llian

ces

• M

ore

role

diff

icul

ties i

n su

perv

isio

n •

Mor

e di

scus

sion

of c

ultu

ral i

ssue

s in

supe

rvis

ion

125

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

in in

tern

atio

nal

stud

ents

• A

mer

ican

-In

tern

atio

nal

Rel

atio

ns

Scal

e (A

IRS)

•

Supe

rvis

ory

Wor

king

A

llian

ce

Inve

ntor

y-Tr

aine

e Fo

rm

(SW

AI-

Trai

nee

Form

) •

Inte

rnat

iona

l St

uden

t Su

perv

isio

n Sc

ale

(ISS

S)

coun

tries

and

6

cont

inen

ts

• 62

% w

omen

•

62%

in c

linic

al

psyc

holo

gy

prog

ram

s •

31%

in

coun

selin

g pr

ogra

ms

• 7%

in sc

hool

ps

ycho

logy

pr

ogra

ms

Nin

omiy

a (2

012)

• To

exp

lore

the

expe

rienc

e of

A

sian

fore

ign-

born

ther

apis

ts o

f su

perv

isio

n w

ith

Euro

pean

-A

mer

ican

su

perv

isor

s

Res

earc

h qu

estio

ns:

• W

hat w

as th

e ex

perie

nce

of

Asi

an fo

reig

n-bo

rn th

erap

ists

in

cros

s-cu

ltura

l su

perv

isio

n w

ith

Euro

pean

-

Qua

litat

ive

In-d

epth

in

terv

iew

s gu

ided

by

open

-en

ded

ques

tions

ab

out

supe

rvis

ory

expe

rienc

es

• N

=7 A

sian

fo

reig

n-bo

rn

ther

apis

ts

• 5

fem

ale/

2 m

ale

•

Ave

rage

age

: 27-

43

• 3

Japa

nese

, 1

Taiw

anes

e, 1

C

hine

se, 1

Sou

th

East

Asi

an, 1

In

dian

Incl

usio

n cr

iteria

:

• In

divi

dual

s who

w

ere

ethn

ical

ly

Asi

an

• A

sian

fore

ign-

born

ther

apist

s’

expe

rienc

es o

f cro

ss-c

ultu

ral

supe

rvis

ion

with

Eur

opea

n-A

mer

ican

su

perv

isor

s var

ied

from

a p

ositi

ve a

nd

supp

ortiv

e to

a c

halle

ngin

g an

d di

ffic

ult

• Fo

reig

n-bo

rn tr

aine

e le

vel o

f ac

cultu

ratio

n w

as li

kely

to a

ffec

t the

su

perv

isor

y w

orki

ng a

llian

ce b

ecau

se

cultu

ral a

nd la

ngua

ge b

arrie

rs in

su

perv

isor

y dy

ads m

ight

pre

vent

the

deve

lopm

ent o

f a p

ositi

ve su

perv

isor

y w

orki

ng a

llian

ce

• A

s the

fore

ign-

born

trai

nees

pr

ocee

ded

in th

eir c

linic

al tr

aini

ng,

they

bec

ame

mor

e ac

cultu

rate

d, th

eir

lang

uage

and

cul

tura

l bar

riers

de

crea

sed,

and

thei

r lev

el o

f clin

ical

126

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

Am

eric

an

supe

rvis

ors?

•

Wha

t cha

lleng

es

did

the

Asi

an

fore

ign-

born

su

perv

isee

s ex

perie

nce

in

supe

rvis

ion

with

th

e Eu

rope

an-

Am

eric

an

supe

rvis

or?

• H

ow d

id

diff

eren

ces i

n cu

lture

influ

ence

th

e su

perv

isor

y pr

oces

s and

re

latio

nshi

p be

twee

n th

e Eu

rope

an-

Am

eric

an

supe

rvis

or a

nd

the

Asi

an fo

reig

n-bo

rn su

perv

isee

?

• In

divi

dual

s who

w

ere

born

and

gr

ew u

p in

Asi

a •

Stud

ents

-in-

train

ing

and

grad

uate

s fro

m

accr

edite

d pr

ofes

sion

al

psyc

holo

gy

doct

oral

pr

ogra

ms i

n th

e U

.S.

• In

divi

dual

s who

w

orke

d w

ith a

t le

ast 1

Eur

opea

n-A

mer

ican

su

perv

isor

dur

ing

clin

ical

trai

ning

; ex

perie

nced

ch

alle

ngin

g su

perv

isor

y ev

ents

; and

had

aw

aren

ess o

f the

im

pact

of c

ultu

ral

diff

eren

ces o

n th

e su

perv

isor

y pr

oces

s and

re

latio

nshi

p in

cr

oss-

cul

tura

l su

perv

isio

n

com

pete

ncy

incr

ease

d; a

s a re

sult,

th

eir s

uper

viso

ry a

llian

ce te

nded

to b

e m

ore

posi

tive

and

colla

bora

tive

• B

oth

the

supe

rvis

or’s

gen

eral

co

mpe

tenc

y an

d m

ultic

ultu

ral

com

pete

ncy

affe

cted

the

Asi

an

fore

ign

train

ee’s

supe

rvis

ory

expe

rienc

es a

nd w

orki

ng a

llian

ce w

ith

Euro

pean

-Am

eric

an su

perv

isor

s •

Cul

tura

l diff

eren

ces m

ade

a si

gnifi

cant

impa

ct o

n th

e pr

oces

s and

th

e re

latio

nshi

p in

the

cros

s-cu

ltura

l su

perv

isio

n be

twee

n th

e A

sian

fo

reig

n-bo

rn tr

aine

es a

nd th

e Eu

rope

an-A

mer

ican

supe

rvis

ors

• Th

e re

sults

indi

cate

d th

at th

e sk

ill

diff

icul

ties a

nd d

efic

its o

f Asi

an

fore

ign

supe

rvis

ees m

ay b

e ca

used

by

thre

e co

ntex

tual

fact

ors:

wor

king

in a

no

vel t

reat

men

t mod

ality

, wor

king

w

ith a

new

pop

ulat

ion,

and

wor

king

in

a n

ovel

clin

ical

setti

ng, w

hen

supe

rvis

ees w

ere

in th

e ea

rly st

ages

of

thei

r clin

ical

trai

ning

as f

orei

gn-b

orn

train

ees

127

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

Pow

ers

(201

5)

• To

exa

min

e A

fric

an A

mer

ican

su

perv

isee

s’

perc

eptio

n of

th

eir E

uro

Am

eric

an

supe

rvis

ors’

aw

aren

ess o

f ra

cial

and

cul

tura

l di

ffer

ence

s, cu

ltura

lly-a

war

e re

spon

ses,

and

the

impa

ct o

f ra

cial

and

cul

tura

l di

ffer

ence

s on

the

supe

rvis

ory

rela

tions

hip

Qua

litat

ive

(mul

tiple

ca

se st

udy)

• Sc

reen

ing

Form

•

Dem

ogra

phic

qu

estio

nnai

re

• In

terv

iew

s •

Supe

rvis

ory

Wor

king

A

llian

ce

Inve

ntor

y (S

WA

I)

• N

=8 A

fric

an

Am

eric

an fe

mal

e as

soci

ate-

leve

l lic

ense

d co

unse

lors

who

re

side

d in

the

sout

heas

tern

re

gion

of t

he

Uni

ted

Stat

es.

• A

ge ra

nge:

26-

42

• M

inim

um o

f 1

year

and

a

max

imum

of 3

ye

ars o

f pos

t-lic

ensu

re

expe

rienc

e

In a

n ex

amin

atio

n of

the

perc

eptio

ns o

f ra

cial

and

cul

tura

l diff

eren

ces,

supe

rvis

or

awar

enes

s, an

d th

e pe

rcei

ved

impa

ct o

f ra

ce a

nd c

ultu

re o

n th

e su

perv

isor

y re

latio

nshi

p, 6

maj

or th

emes

em

erge

d:

• C

ultu

ral i

dios

yncr

asie

s •

Supe

rvis

ees’

am

biva

lenc

e •

Cul

tura

l con

tact

•

Mic

roag

gres

sion

s •

Pow

er d

iffer

entia

l •

Hea

lthy

skep

ticis

m

• Su

perv

isor

s lac

ked

unde

rsta

ndin

g an

d aw

aren

ess o

f how

supe

rvise

es

perc

eive

d th

e im

pact

of r

acia

l and

cu

ltura

l diff

eren

ces o

n th

e su

perv

isor

y re

latio

nshi

p •

Alth

ough

the

parti

cipa

nts n

oted

that

cu

ltura

l diff

eren

ces a

re a

poi

gnan

t to

pic,

they

adm

itted

ly d

o no

t dis

cuss

th

em in

supe

rvis

ion

as it

rela

tes t

o th

e su

perv

isor

- sup

ervi

see

rela

tions

hip

• Pa

rtici

pant

s all

note

d di

scus

sing

race

an

d cu

lture

rela

ted

to th

eir c

lient

s, bu

t di

d no

t dire

ctly

eng

age

in d

iscu

ssin

g th

e ra

cial

and

cul

tura

l diff

eren

ces

betw

een

them

and

thei

r sup

ervi

sor

• Th

e m

ajor

ity o

f the

par

ticip

ants

felt

that

add

ress

ing

raci

al a

nd c

ultu

ral w

as

a sh

ared

resp

onsi

bilit

y be

twee

n th

e su

perv

isor

and

supe

rvis

ee

• Se

ven

of th

e pa

rtici

pant

s des

crib

ed

thei

r sup

ervi

sor’s

lack

of

128

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

unde

rsta

ndin

g of

the

Afr

ican

A

mer

ican

cul

ture

•

Whi

le th

ey fe

lt th

at th

eir s

uper

viso

r ha

d a

cont

extu

al u

nder

stan

ding

of

mul

ticul

tura

lism

, thi

s und

erst

andi

ng

did

not t

rans

late

into

aw

aren

ess o

f the

cu

ltura

l diff

eren

ces a

nd th

eir i

mpa

cts

on m

ultic

ultu

ral r

elat

ions

hips

•

Parti

cipa

nts a

ttrib

uted

thei

r su

perv

isor

’s la

ck o

f und

erst

andi

ng o

f th

eir c

ultu

re to

a c

ultu

ral g

ap

• A

lthou

gh su

perv

isee

s did

not

dire

ctly

di

scus

s the

ir ow

n cu

ltura

l diff

eren

ces

with

thei

r sup

ervi

sors

, the

ir as

sess

men

ts o

f the

ir su

perv

isor

s’

mul

ticul

tura

l aw

aren

ess w

ere

base

d up

on d

iscu

ssio

ns a

bout

Afr

ican

A

mer

ican

clie

nts w

ith th

eir s

uper

viso

r •

Parti

cipa

nts’

per

cept

ions

of t

heir

supe

rvis

or’s

mul

ticul

tura

l com

pete

nce

and

awar

enes

s neg

ativ

ely

impa

cted

th

e su

perv

isor

y w

orki

ng a

llian

ce

• Fi

ve o

f the

par

ticip

ants

repo

rted

expe

rienc

ing

raci

al m

icro

aggr

essi

ons

and

bein

g st

ereo

type

d •

Thes

e ex

perie

nces

impa

cted

the

supe

rvis

ory

rela

tions

hip

as w

ell a

s the

su

perv

isor

y w

orki

ng a

llian

ce

Sohe

ilian

, In

man

, K

linge

r, Is

enbe

rg,

• To

exa

min

e w

hat

topi

cs o

r asp

ects

of

m

ultic

ultu

ralis

m

Dis

cove

ry-

orie

nted

qu

alita

tive

appr

oach

• O

nlin

e su

rvey

co

nduc

ted

thro

ugh

• N

=102

su

perv

isee

s •

78%

wom

en/2

2%

men

1. C

onte

nt o

f Cul

tura

l Top

ics D

iscu

ssed

•

Rev

eale

d 9

subc

ateg

orie

s •

Rac

e w

as h

ighl

ight

ed a

s one

of t

he

mos

t com

mon

ly e

xplo

red

topi

cs

129

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

and

Kul

p (2

014)

ar

e di

scus

sed

whe

n m

ultic

ultu

ral

even

ts w

ere

the

focu

s in

supe

rvis

ion

• To

und

erst

and

wha

t sup

ervi

sory

in

terv

entio

ns a

re

perc

eive

d as

sa

lient

and

cu

ltura

lly

sens

itive

by

supe

rvis

ees

• To

und

erst

and

how

the

supe

rvis

ee’s

pe

rcep

tions

of t

he

supe

rvis

ory

expe

rienc

e an

d th

e in

terv

entio

ns

used

mig

ht

influ

ence

su

perv

isee

’s w

ork

with

clie

nts

Surv

ey

Mon

key

• Pa

rtici

pant

de

mog

raph

ic

ques

tionn

aire

•

Supe

rvis

or

mul

ticul

tura

l co

mpe

tenc

e qu

estio

nnai

re

• Eu

rope

an

Am

eric

ans:

68%

•

Het

eros

exua

l: 88

%

• A

ge ra

nge:

22-

67

(mea

n ag

e of

29

.34)

•

Hig

hest

deg

ree:

M

aste

r’s

• Pr

actic

um

setti

ngs:

ac

adem

ic/c

olle

ge

coun

selin

g ce

nter

s (48

%);

com

mun

ity

men

tal h

ealth

ag

enci

es (2

6%);

hosp

ital s

ettin

gs

(13%

); pr

ivat

e pr

actic

e (4

%)

• C

linic

al

expe

rienc

e: 4

-24

mon

ths

• 92

%ta

ken

at le

ast

one

MC

cou

rse

• 69

% re

porte

d at

tend

ing

at le

ast

one

MC

w

orks

hop

durin

g a

MC

com

pete

nt m

omen

t in

supe

rvis

ion

(N=4

3)

• G

ende

r-re

late

d di

scus

sion

s was

the

seco

nd m

ost f

requ

ent t

opic

s add

ress

ed

in su

perv

isio

n (N

=25)

•

Ther

e se

emed

to b

e an

inte

rest

in

talk

ing

abou

t iss

ues r

elat

ed to

et

hnic

ity a

nd re

ligio

n/sp

iritu

ality

•

Oth

er d

emog

raph

ic d

omai

ns (i

.e. S

ES

and

sexu

al o

rient

atio

n) w

ere

min

imal

ly a

ddre

ssed

in su

perv

isio

n.

2. C

onte

nt o

f MC

-Com

pete

nt S

uper

viso

r In

terv

entio

ns

• Th

e m

ost c

omm

on su

perv

isio

n in

terv

entio

n w

as fa

cilit

atin

g ex

plor

atio

n or

edu

catio

n on

spec

ific

cultu

ral i

ssue

s (N

=27)

•

A se

cond

com

mon

inte

rven

tion

was

di

scus

sing

cul

tura

lly a

ppro

pria

te

ther

apeu

tic sk

ills a

nd in

terv

entio

n (N

=27)

•

Faci

litat

ing

self-

awar

enes

s (N

=25)

an

d ch

alle

ngin

g su

perv

isee

/enc

oura

ged

open

ness

(N

=16)

wer

e sa

lient

and

freq

uent

in

terv

entio

ns

3. C

onte

nt o

f How

the

MC

Exp

erie

nce

Aff

ecte

d Su

perv

isee

s’ W

ork

with

C

lient

s •

Supe

rvis

ees m

odify

ing

the

treat

men

t ap

proa

ch (N

=56)

130

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

• Su

perv

isee

s dev

elop

ing

a m

ore

cultu

rally

com

plex

clie

nt

conc

eptu

aliz

atio

n (N

=18)

•

Supe

rvis

ees r

ecog

nizi

ng p

erso

nal

limita

tions

and

gai

ning

gre

ater

self-

awar

enes

s as a

cou

nsel

or (N

=22)

•

Enga

ging

mor

e em

path

ical

ly w

ith

clie

nts (

N=2

2)

Tayl

or,

Her

nand

ez,

Der

i, R

anki

n, a

nd

Sieg

el

(200

7)

• To

exp

lore

how

et

hnic

min

ority

su

perv

isor

s in

tegr

ate

inte

rsec

tions

of

dive

rsity

in

clin

ical

su

perv

isor

y pr

actic

es

Con

sens

ual

Qua

litat

ive

Res

earc

h (C

QR

)

• Se

mi-

stru

ctur

ed

inte

rvie

w w

ith

an o

pen-

ende

d fo

rmat

• N

=10

AA

MFT

ap

prov

ed

supe

rvis

ors

• A

ges:

36-

62

• 9

fem

ales

/1 m

ale

• 9

iden

tifie

d as

he

tero

sexu

al/1

as

bise

xual

•

Supe

rvis

ory

expe

rienc

e:

betw

een

4-20

Thre

e ar

eas o

f im

porta

nce

emer

ged

from

pa

rtici

pant

s:

• Su

perv

isor

s’ in

itiat

ive

in in

tegr

atin

g di

vers

ity

• Th

e im

pact

of s

ocia

l loc

atio

n on

cu

rren

t sup

ervi

sion

pra

ctic

es

• Th

e ne

ed fo

r men

torin

g th

e ne

xt

gene

ratio

n of

ther

apis

ts

Topo

rek,

O

rtega

-V

illal

obos

, an

d Po

pe-

Dav

is

(200

4)

• To

und

erst

and

how

exp

erie

nces

in

mul

ticul

tura

l su

perv

isio

n in

fluen

ced

supe

rvis

ees’

de

velo

pmen

t •

To e

xplo

re h

ow

issu

es o

f cul

ture

ar

e ex

perie

nced

by

bot

h

Qua

litat

ive

anal

yses

of

criti

cal

inci

dent

s

• B

ackg

roun

d qu

estio

nnai

re

(dem

ogra

phic

in

form

atio

n;

desc

riptio

n of

su

perv

isee

s’

leve

l of

mul

ticul

tura

l tra

inin

g)

• M

ultic

ultu

ral

Supe

rvis

ion

Crit

ical

• To

tal o

f 17

supe

rvis

ees a

nd

11 su

perv

isor

s at

a la

rge

mid

-A

tlant

ic

univ

ersi

ty

• 5

supe

rvis

ee a

nd

5 su

perv

isor

s w

ere

mat

ched

dy

ads

• M

ultic

ultu

ral i

ncid

ents

in su

perv

isio

n in

fluen

ce th

e su

perv

isio

n pr

oces

s and

th

e m

ultic

ultu

ral c

ompe

tenc

e of

su

perv

isor

s and

supe

rvis

ees (

the

influ

ence

may

be

posit

ive

or n

egat

ive,

de

pend

ing

on th

e na

ture

of t

he

supe

rvis

ory

rela

tions

hip

and

the

man

ner i

n w

hich

the

cultu

ral i

ssue

s w

ere

addr

esse

d)

• Po

sitiv

e in

fluen

ces a

s a re

sult

of a

va

riety

of s

uper

viso

ry b

ehav

iors

may

re

sult

in a

n in

crea

se in

supe

rvis

ees’

131

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

supe

rvis

ors a

nd

supe

rvis

ees

• To

iden

tify

reco

mm

enda

tions

fo

r tra

inin

g ba

sed

on th

e ex

perie

nces

of

grad

uate

co

unse

ling

supe

rvis

ees a

nd

thei

r sup

ervi

sors

Inci

dent

s Q

uest

ionn

aire

•

Cou

nsel

ing

expe

rienc

e: 0

-8

year

s

mul

ticul

tura

l com

pete

nce,

par

ticul

arly

in

the

area

of a

war

enes

s.

Con

tent

/Situ

atio

n an

d C

ultu

ral V

aria

bles

• A

war

enes

s: T

he m

ost s

triki

ng

influ

ence

of p

ositi

ve e

xper

ienc

es o

f m

ultic

ultu

ral i

ncid

ents

was

incr

ease

d aw

aren

ess f

or b

oth

supe

rvis

ors a

nd

supe

rvis

ees.

Aw

aren

ess w

as re

flect

ed

in m

any

diff

eren

t for

ms,

incl

udin

g se

lf-di

sclo

sure

s, th

eore

tical

di

scus

sion

s, co

ntac

t with

cul

tura

l di

ffer

ence

s, co

mm

unic

atio

n, in

sigh

t-or

ient

ed in

terv

entio

ns, a

nd o

ther

su

perv

isor

y in

tera

ctio

ns

• Sk

ills D

evel

opm

ent:

Supe

rvis

ors’

ga

ins i

n cu

ltura

l sen

sitiv

ity a

s a re

sult

of th

e se

lf-di

sclo

sure

of s

uper

vise

es

and

othe

r ins

ight

-orie

nted

in

terv

entio

ns

• Ex

posu

re: A

lthou

gh su

perv

isee

s did

no

t ind

icat

e th

at e

xpos

ure

to c

ultu

ral

diff

eren

ces w

as in

fluen

tial i

n th

eir

deve

lopm

ent,

supe

rvis

ors d

id b

elie

ve

that

exp

osur

e w

as in

fluen

tial i

n th

eir

supe

rvis

ees’

dev

elop

men

t

Wie

ling

and

Mar

shal

l (1

999)

• To

gai

n an

un

ders

tand

ing

of

the

vario

us

cultu

ral f

acto

rs

that

influ

ence

the

supe

rvis

or-tr

aine

e

Qua

ntita

tive

•

36-it

em

surv

ey

• D

emog

raph

ic

ques

tionn

aire

• N

=50

• 24

AA

MFT

cl

inic

al

mem

bers

, 22

stud

ent

mem

bers

, 4

• Th

e ex

perie

nce

of h

avin

g a

cros

s-

cultu

ral s

uper

viso

ry re

latio

nshi

p in

an

d of

itse

lf di

d no

t gua

rant

ee th

at

stud

ents

will

hav

e "b

ette

r" c

ultu

ral

dive

rsity

trai

ning

132

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

rela

tions

hip

whe

n at

leas

t one

of

thes

e in

divi

dual

s is

a m

embe

r of a

n et

hnic

min

ority

gr

oup

asso

ciat

e m

embe

rs

• 33

fem

ale/

17

mal

e)

• A

ge ra

nge:

24-

63

• 43

Ang

lo; 2

H

ispa

nic;

2

Jew

ish;

1 O

ther

• 7

with

BA

de

gree

s; 3

2 M

A/M

S; 1

1 Ph

.D.

• M

FTs b

elie

ved

that

ther

e w

as g

reat

er

pote

ntia

l for

gro

wth

and

self-

awar

enes

s pro

vide

d by

cro

ss-c

ultu

ral

supe

rvis

ory

rela

tions

hips

; and

on

the

rare

occ

asio

ns th

at th

ey d

id o

ccur

, th

ese

rela

tions

hips

wer

e hi

ghly

re

gard

ed a

nd v

alue

d

• Th

e re

spon

dent

s who

had

bee

n su

perv

ised

by

som

eone

from

a

diff

eren

t rac

ial a

nd/o

r eth

nic

back

grou

nd fr

om th

eir o

wn

rate

d th

e na

ture

of t

hose

supe

rvis

ory

expe

rienc

es a

s bei

ng b

ette

r tha

n su

perv

isor

y ex

perie

nces

with

per

sons

of

the

sam

e ba

ckgr

ound

•

Find

ings

em

phas

ized

the

need

for

grea

ter c

ultu

ral d

iver

sity

in M

FT

train

ing

prog

ram

s •

Alth

ough

MFT

s rea

lize

the

impo

rtanc

e of

mul

ticul

tura

lism

and

cr

oss-

cultu

ral s

uper

visi

on in

the

field

, th

ey a

re n

ot fr

eque

ntly

pro

vide

d th

e op

portu

nity

to d

iscu

ss m

ultic

ultu

ral

issu

es in

trai

ning

, or t

o be

supe

rvis

ed

by, o

r ass

ocia

te w

ith c

olle

ague

s tha

t co

me

from

a d

iffer

ent r

ace

and/

or

ethn

icity

than

thei

r ow

n

Find

ings

from

this

stud

y:

• D

ocum

ent t

he la

ck o

f cro

ss-c

ultu

ral

supe

rvis

ory

expe

rienc

es in

the

field

of

MFT

133

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

• En

cour

age

futu

re re

sear

ch o

n th

e ef

fect

iven

ess a

nd re

latio

nal p

roce

sses

of

cro

ss-c

ultu

ral s

uper

viso

ry

rela

tions

hips

•

Und

ersc

ore

the

need

for m

ore

ethn

ic

min

ority

stud

ents

to b

e re

crui

ted

into

M

FT tr

aini

ng p

rogr

ams

Won

g,

Won

g, a

nd

Ishi

yam

a (2

013)

• To

inve

stig

ate

wha

t hel

ped

and

wha

t hin

dere

d in

cr

oss-

cultu

ral

supe

rvis

ion

Inte

rvie

w

via

the

Crit

ical

In

cide

nts

Tech

niqu

e

• “T

hink

of a

tim

e w

hen

a su

perv

isor

has

do

ne o

r sai

d so

met

hing

that

yo

u fe

lt w

as

an e

xam

ple

of

effe

ctiv

e (o

r in

effe

ctiv

e)

supe

rvis

ion.

Pl

ease

exp

lain

w

hy y

ou ju

dge

that

to b

e a

help

ful (

or

unhe

lpfu

l) in

cide

nt”

• N

=25

visi

ble

min

ority

gra

duat

e st

uden

ts a

nd e

arly

co

unse

ling

prof

essi

onal

s •

Rec

ruite

d fr

om

the

coun

selin

g ps

ycho

logy

de

partm

ents

of 5

C

anad

ian

univ

ersi

ties a

nd 2

un

iver

sitie

s in

the

U.S

. •

19 w

omen

/6 m

en

• A

vera

ge a

ges f

or

wom

en a

nd m

en

wer

e 32

and

37,

re

spec

tivel

y •

13 C

hine

se-

Can

adia

ns; 4

In

do-C

anad

ians

; 3

Firs

t Nat

ions

; 2

Japa

nese

-C

anad

ians

; 1

Afr

o-C

anad

ian;

1

• A

tota

l of 1

50 p

ositi

ve in

cide

nts a

nd

191

nega

tive

inci

dent

s wer

e id

entif

ied

5 Po

sitiv

e Th

emes

• Pe

rson

al a

ttrib

utes

of t

he su

perv

isor

•

Supe

rvis

ion

com

pete

ncie

s •

Men

torin

g •

Rel

atio

nshi

p •

Mul

ticul

tura

l sup

ervi

sion

co

mpe

tenc

ies

5 N

egat

ive

Them

es

• Pe

rson

al d

iffic

ultie

s as a

vis

ible

m

inor

ity

• N

egat

ive

pers

onal

attr

ibut

es o

f the

su

perv

isor

(bad

or h

arm

ful

supe

rvis

ors)

•

Lack

of a

safe

and

trus

ting

rela

tions

hip

• La

ck o

f mul

ticul

tura

l/cro

ss-c

ultu

ral

com

pete

ncie

s •

Lack

of s

uper

visi

on c

ompe

tenc

ies

134

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

Kor

ean-

Can

adia

n; a

nd 1

La

tin-C

anad

ian

Yan

g (2

004)

•

To in

vest

igat

e th

e pe

rcep

tions

that

A

sian

Am

eric

an

supe

rvis

ees h

ave

abou

t the

cr

edib

ility

and

m

ultic

ultu

ral

com

pete

nce

of

supe

rvis

ors

Qua

ntita

tive

•

Dem

ogra

phic

qu

estio

nnai

re

• Su

inn-

Lew

A

sian

Sel

f-Id

entit

y A

ccul

tura

tion

Scal

e (S

L-A

SIA

) •

Asi

an V

alue

s Sc

ale

(AV

S)

• Su

perv

isor

C

ross

-Cul

tura

l C

ouns

elin

g In

vent

ory

(SC

CC

I, m

odifi

ed

CC

CI-

R)

• Su

perv

isor

Ef

fect

iven

ess

Rat

ing

Scal

e (S

ERS;

m

odifi

ed

CER

S)

• N

=25

3 A

sian

an

d A

sian

A

mer

ican

gr

adua

te

stud

ents

in

clin

ical

and

co

unse

ling

psyc

holo

gy

prog

ram

s acr

oss

the

U.S

.

• 20

8 fe

mal

e/44

m

ale

• A

vera

ge a

ge:2

2-54

• G

ener

atio

n of

im

mig

ratio

n=1s

t-6

th

• In

tern

atio

nal

stud

ent =

42

• D

octo

ral l

evel

: 20

4; M

aste

r’s

leve

l: 43

• #

of w

eeks

of

clin

ical

su

perv

isio

n

• Su

perv

isor

eth

nic

grou

p m

embe

rshi

p an

d re

spon

sive

ness

to c

ultu

ral i

ssue

s ha

ve si

gnifi

cant

impa

ct o

n A

sian

A

mer

ican

supe

rvis

ee’s

per

cept

ions

.

• Su

perv

isor

resp

onsi

vene

ss to

cul

ture

m

ay h

ave

grea

ter i

mpa

ct th

an

supe

rvis

or e

thni

c gr

oup

mem

bers

hip

• C

ouns

elor

s’ p

erce

ptio

ns o

f su

perv

isor

s may

be

impa

cted

by

the

will

ingn

ess o

f the

supe

rvis

ees t

o in

tegr

ate

cultu

ral i

ssue

s in

supe

rvis

ion

• Su

perv

isor

s, re

gard

less

of t

heir

ethn

ic

grou

p m

embe

rshi

p, w

ho d

o no

t in

itiat

e an

d ex

plic

itly

addr

ess c

ultu

ral

issu

es, w

ere

gene

rally

vie

wed

as l

ess

cred

ible

and

not

as m

ultic

ultu

rally

co

mpe

tent

as t

hose

who

did

initi

ate

and

addr

ess t

hese

issu

es

135

Aut

hor(

s)/

Yea

r

Res

earc

h Q

uest

ions

/ O

bjec

tives

Res

earc

h A

ppro

ach/

D

esig

n In

stru

men

tatio

n Sa

mpl

e M

ajor

Fin

ding

s

rece

ived

= 0

to

270

• Et

hnic

Gro

up: 4

di

d no

t spe

cify

, 40

Asi

an m

ulti-

ethn

ic; 1

03

Chi

nese

; 31

Japa

nese

; 30

Kor

ean;

18

Filip

ino;

12

Vie

tnam

ese;

11

Indi

an/S

outh

A

sian

; 2

Hm

ong;

1 T

hai;

1 un

spec

ified

A

sian

136

References

Ancis, J. R., & Ladany, N. (2001). A multicultural framework for counselor supervision. In L. J.

Bradley & N. Ladany (Eds.), Counselor supervision: Principles, process, and practice

(3rd ed., pp. 63–90). New York, NY: Brunner-Routledge.

Atkinson, C., & Woods, K. (2007). A model of effective fieldwork supervision for trainee

educational psychologists. Educational Psychology in Practice, 23(4), 299–316.

https://doi.org/10.1080/02667360701660902

Banks-Johnson, A. (2002). Perceptions of the supervisory relationship: Minority supervisors

working with minority supervisees. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A, 63,

94.

Barnett, J. E., & Molzon, C. H. (2014). Clinical supervision of psychotherapy: Essential ethics

issues for supervisors and supervisees. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 70(11), 1051–

1061. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22126

Bertsch, K. N., Bremer-Landau, J. D., Inman, A. G., DeBoer Kreider, E. R., Price, T. A., &

DeCarlo, A. L. (2014). Evaluation of the critical events in supervision model using

gender related events. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 8(3), 174–

181. https://doi.org/10.1037/tep0000039

Bhat, C. S., & Davis, T. E. (2007). Counseling supervisors’ assessment of race, racial identity,

and working alliance in supervisory dyads. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and

Development, 35(2), 80–91. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2007.tb00051.x

Borders, D. L. (2014). Best practices in clinical supervision: Another step in delineating effective

supervision practice. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 68(2), 151–162.

https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.2014.68.2.151

137

Burkard, A. W., Johnson, A. J., Madson, M. B., Pruitt, N. T., Contreras-Tadych, D. A.,

Kozlowski, J. E. M., . . . Knox, S. (2006). Supervisor cultural responsiveness and

unresponsiveness in cross-cultural supervision. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53(3),

288–301. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.53.3.288

Burkard, A. W., Knox, S., Clarke, R. D., Phelps, D. L., & Inman, A. G. (2014). Supervisors’

experiences of providing difficult feedback in cross-ethnic/racial supervision. The

Counseling Psychologist, 42(3), 314–344. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000012461157

Cashwell, C. S., Looby, E. J., & Housley, W. F. (2008). Appreciating cultural diversity through

clinical supervision. The Clinical Supervisor, 15(1), 75–85.

https://doi.org/10.1300/j001v15n01_06

Chang, C. Y., Hays, D. G., & Shoffner, M. F. (2003). Cross-racial supervision: A developmental

approach for White supervisors working with supervisees of color. The Clinical

Supervisor, 22(2), 121–138. https://doi.org/10.1300/j001v22n02_08

Christiansen, A. T., Thomas, V., Kafescioglu, N., Karakurt, G., Lowe, W., Smith, W., &

Wittenborn, A. (2011). Multicultural supervision: Lessons learned about an ongoing

struggle. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 37(1), 109–119.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-0606.2009.00138.x

Coleman, M. N. (2006). Critical incidents in multicultural training: An examination of student

experiences. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 34(3), 168–182.

https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2006.tb00036.x

Collins, N. M., & Pieterse, A. L. (2008). Critical incident analysis based training: An approach

for developing active racial/cultural awareness. Journal of Counseling & Development,

85(1), 14–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6678.2007.tb00439.x

138

Constantine, M. G., & Sue, D. W. (2007). Perceptions of racial microaggressions among Black

supervisees in cross-racial dyads. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54(2), 142–153.

https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.54.2.142

Cook, D. A., & Helms, J. E. (1988). Visible racial/ethnic group supervisees’ satisfaction with

cross-cultural supervision as predicted by relationship characteristics. Journal of

Counseling Psychology, 35(3), 268–274. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.35.3.268

Dressel, J. L., Consoli, A. J., Kim, B. S. K., & Atkinson, D. R. (2007). Successful and

unsuccessful multicultural supervisory behaviors: A Delphi poll. Journal of Multicultural

Counseling and Development, 35(1), 51–64. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-

1912.2007.tb00049.x

Duan, C., & Roehlke, H. (2001). A descriptive “snapshot” of cross-racial supervision in

university counseling center internships. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and

Development, 29(2), 131–146. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2001.tb00510.x

Eklund, K., Aros-O’Malley, M., & Murrieta, I. (2014). Multicultural supervision: What

difference does difference make? Contemporary School Psychology, 18(3), 195–204.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40688-014-0024-8

Estrada, D., Frame, M. W., & Williams, C. B. (2004). Cross-cultural supervision: Guiding the

conversation toward race and ethnicity. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and

Development, 32, 307–319.

Falender, C. A., Burnes, T. R., & Ellis, M. V. (2013). Multicultural clinical supervision and

benchmarks: Empirical support informing practice and supervisor training. Counseling

Psychologist, 41(1), 8–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000012438417

139

Falender, C. A., & Shafranske, E. P. (2004). The practice of clinical supervision. In C. A.

Falender & E. P. Shafranske (Eds.), Clinical supervision: A competency-based approach

(pp. 3–35). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

https://doi.org/10.1037/10806-001

Falender, C. A., & Shafranske, E. P. (2007). Competence in competency-based supervision

practice: Construct and application. Professional Psychology: Research & Practice,

38(3), 232–240. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.38.3.232

Falender, C. A., & Shafranske, E. P. (2014). Clinical supervision: The state of the art. Journal of

Clinical Psychology, 70(11), 1030–1041. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22124

Falender, C. A., Shafranske, E. P., & Ofek, A. (2014). Competent clinical supervision: Emerging

effective practices. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 27(4), 393–408.

https://doi.org/10.1080/09515070.2014.934785

Foo, K. N. M. R., & Rodolfa, E. R. (2013). Putting the benchmarks into practice: Multiculturally

competent supervisors-effective supervision. Counseling Psychologist, 41(1), 121–130.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000012453944

Fouad, N. A., & Chavez-Korell, S. (2014). Considering social class and socioeconomic status in

the context of multiple identities: An integrative clinical supervision approach. In C. A.

Falender, E. P. Shafranske, & C. J. Falicov (Eds.), Multiculturalism and diversity in

clinical supervision: A competency-based approach (pp. 145–162). Washington, DC:

American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14370-006

Fukuyama, M. A. (1994). Critical incidents in multicultural counseling supervision: A

phenomenological approach to supervision research. Counselor Education and

Supervision, 34(2), 142–151. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6978.1994.tb00321.x

140

Gardner, R. M. (2002). Cross cultural perspectives in supervision. Western Journal of Black

Studies, 26(2), 98–106.

Garrett, M. T., Borders, L. D. A., Crutchfield, L. B., Torres-Rivera, E., Brotherton, D., & Curtis,

R. (2001). Multicultural SuperVISION: A paradigm of cultural responsiveness for

supervisors. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 29(2), 147–158.

https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2001.tb00511.x

Gatmon, D., Jackson, D., Koshkarian, L., Martos-Perry, N., Molina, A., Patel, N., & Rodolfa, E.

(2001). Exploring ethnic, gender, and sexual orientation variables in supervision: Do they

really matter? Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 29(2), 102–113.

https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2001.tb00508.x

Gray, S. W., & Smith, M. S. (2009). The influence of diversity in clinical supervision: A

framework for reflective conversations and questioning. The Clinical Supervisor, 28(2),

155–179. https://doi.org/10.1080/07325220903324371

Green, M., & Dekkers, T. (2010). Attending to power and diversity in supervision: An

exploration of supervisee learning outcomes and satisfaction with supervision. Journal of

Feminist Family Therapy, 22(4), 293–312.

https://doi.org/10.1080/08952833.2010.528703

Herbert, J. T., & Caldwell, T. A. (2015). Clinical supervision. In F. Chan, N. L. Berven, & K. R.

Thomas (Eds.), Counseling theories and techniques for rehabilitation and mental health

professionals (pp. 443–462). New York, NY: Springer.

Hernández, P., & McDowell, T. (2010). Intersectionality, power, and relational safety in context:

Key concepts in clinical supervision. Training and Education in Professional

Psychology, 4(1), 29–35. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017064

141

Hernández, P., Taylor, B. A., & McDowell, T. (2009). Listening to ethnic minority AAMFT

approved supervisors: Reflections on their experiences as supervisees. Journal of

Systemic Therapies, 28(1), 88–100. https://doi.org/10.1521/jsyt.2009.28.1.88

Hird, J. S., Cavalieri, C. E., Dulko, J. P., Felice, A. A. D., & Ho, T. A. (2001). Visions and

realities: Supervisee perspectives of multicultural supervision. Journal of Multicultural

Counseling & Development, 29(2), 114–130. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-

1912.2001.tb00509.x

Hird, J., Tao, K., & Gloria, A. (2005). Examining supervisors’ multicultural competence in

racially similar and different supervision dyads. The Clinical Supervisor, 23(2), 107–

122. https://doi.org/10.1300/j001v23n02_07

Holloway, E. L., & Wolleat, P. L. (1994). Supervision: The pragmatics of empowerment.

Journal of Educational & Psychological Consultation, 5(1), 23–43.

https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532768xjepc0501_2

Inman, A. G. (2006). Supervisor multicultural competence and its relation to supervisory process

and outcome. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 32(1), 73–85.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-0606.2006.tb01589.x

Inman, A. G., & DeBoer Kreider, E. (2013). Multicultural competence: Psychotherapy practice

and supervision. Psychotherapy, 50(3), 346–350. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032029

Jernigan, M. M., Green, C. E., Helms, J. E., Perez-Gualdron, L., & Henze, K. (2010). An

examination of people of color supervision dyads: Racial identity matters as much as

race. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 4(1), 62–73.

https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018110

142

Kaduvettoor, A., O’Shaughnessy, T., Mori, Y., Beverly, C. I. I. I., Weatherford, R. D., &

Ladany, N. (2009). Helpful and hindering multicultural events in group supervision:

Climate and multicultural competence. Counseling Psychologist, 37(6), 786–820.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000009333984

Kissil, K., Davey, M., & Davey, A. (2015). Foreign-born therapists: How acculturation and

supervisors’ multicultural competence are associated with clinical self-efficacy. Journal

of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 43(1), 38–57.

https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2015.00063.x

Ladany, N. (2014). The ingredients of supervisor failure. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 70(11),

1094–1103. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22130

Ladany, N., Friedlander, M. L., & Nelson, M. L. (2005). Heightening multicultural awareness:

It’s never been about political correctness. In N. Ladany, M. L. Friedlander, & M. L.,

Nelson (Eds.), Critical events in psychotherapy supervision: An interpersonal approach

(pp. 53–77). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

https://doi.org/10.1037/10958-003

Ladany, N., Inman, A. G., Constantine, M. G., & Hofheinz, E. W. (1997). Supervisee

multicultural case conceptualization ability and self-reported multicultural competence as

functions of supervisee racial identity and supervisor focus. Journal of Counseling

Psychology, 44(3), 284–293. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-0167.44.3.284

Ladany, N., Mori, Y., & Mehr, K. E. (2013). Effective and ineffective supervision. Counseling

Psychologist, 41(1), 28–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000012442648

143

Magnuson, S., Wilcoxon, S. A., & Norem, K. (2000). A profile of lousy supervision:

Experienced counselors’ perspectives. Counselor Education and Supervision, 39(3), 189–

202. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6978.2000.tb01231.x

Mori, Y., Inman, A. G., & Caskie, G. I. L. (2009). Supervising international students:

Relationship between acculturation, supervisor multicultural competence, cultural

discussions, and supervision satisfaction. Training and Education in Psychology, 3(1),

10–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013072

Murphy, M. J., & Wright, D. W. (2005). Supervisees’ perspectives of power use in supervision.

Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 31(3), 283–295. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-

0606.2005.tb01569.x

Murphy-Shigematsu, S. (2010). Microaggressions by supervisors of color. Training and

Education in Professional Psychology, 4(1), 16–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017472

Nilsson, J. E., & Anderson, M. Z. (2004). Supervising international students: The role of

acculturation, role ambiguity, and multicultural discussions. Professional Psychology:

Research & Practice, 35(3), 306–312. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.35.3.306

Ninomiya, Y. (2012). Asian foreign-born therapist experience of cross-cultural supervision with

European-American supervisors (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest

Dissertations & Theses Global. (1017861409)

Ober, A. M., Granello, D. H., & Henfield, M. S. (2009). A synergistic model to enhance

multicultural competence in supervision. Counselor Education and Supervision, 48(3),

204–221. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6978.2009.tb00075.x

144

Powers, Y. O. (2015). A case study exploring African American supervisees’ experience of

supervision with Euro-American supervisors. Dissertation Abstracts International

Section A, 76.

Priest, R. (1994). Minority supervisor and majority supervisee: Another perspective of clinical

reality. Counselor Education and Supervision, 34(2), 152–158.

https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6978.1994.tb00322.x

Russell, S. R., & Yarhouse, M. A. (2006). Training in religion/spirituality within APA-accredited

psychology predoctoral internships. Professional Psychology: Research & Practice,

37(4), 430–436. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.37.4.430

Ryde, J. (2000). Supervising across difference. International Journal of Psychotherapy, 5(1),

37–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/13569080050020254

Soheilian, S. S., Inman, A. G., Klinger, R. S., Isenberg, D. S., & Kulp, L. E. (2014).

Multicultural supervision: Supervisees’ reflections on culturally competent supervision.

Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 27(4), 379–392.

https://doi.org/10.1080/09515070.2014.961408

Suthakaran, V. (2011). Using analogies to enhance self-awareness and cultural empathy:

Implications for supervision. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development,

39(4), 206–217. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2011.tb00635.x

Taylor, B. A., Hernandez, P., Deri, A., Rankin, P. R., & Siegel, A. (2007). Integrating diversity

dimensions in supervision. The Clinical Supervisor, 25(1), 3–21.

https://doi.org/10.1300/j001v25n01_02

Toporek, R. L., Ortega-Villalobos, L., & Pope-Davis, D. B. (2004). Critical incidents in

multicultural supervision: Exploring supervisees’ and supervisors’ experiences. Journal

145

of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 32(2), 66–83.

https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2004.tb00362.x

Watkins, C. E., Jr. (2012). Development of the psychotherapy supervisor: Review of and

reelections on 30 years of theory and research. American Journal of Psychotherapy,

66(1), 45–83. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.2012.66.1.45

Watkins, C. E., Jr. (2014). Clinical supervision in the 21st century: revisiting pressing needs and

impressing possibilities. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 68(2), 251–272.

https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.2014.68.2.251

Westefeld, J. S. (2009). Supervision of psychotherapy: Models, issues, and recommendations.

Counseling Psychologist, 37(2), 296–316. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000008316657

Wieling, E., & Marshall, J. P. (1999). Cross-cultural supervision in marriage and family therapy.

Contemporary Family Therapy, 21(3), 317–329.

Wong, L. J., Wong, P. P., & Ishiyama, F. I. (2013). What helps and what hinders in cross-

cultural clinical supervision: A critical incident study. The Counseling Psychologist,

41(1), 66–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000012442652

Yabusaki, A. S. (2010). Clinical supervision: Dialogues on diversity. Training and Education in

Professional Psychology, 4(1), 55–61. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017378

Yang, P. H. (2004). The effects of supervisor cultural responsiveness and ethnic group similarity

on Asian American supervisees’ perceptions of supervisor credibility and multicultural

competence. Dissertation Abstracts International, 65, 6681.

146

APPENDIX B

Multicultural Supervisory Behaviors and Practices

147

Multicultural Supervisory Behaviors and Practices Part I Instructions: On the following page, there are 20 specific multicultural supervisory behaviors. As you read through the behaviors, please rate the behaviors into one of two categories based on its importance on addressing diversity issues in clinical supervision. The two categories are:

Less

Important

More Important

Please ONLY include 10 behaviors in EACH category.

Category Rating

Multicultural Supervisory Behaviors

Less More Initiating dialogue during supervision about supervisees’ own racial/ethnic identity

development Acknowledging and discussing realities of racism/oppression during supervision Encouraging supervisee to share, within supervision, their personal and professional

cultural background and experiences Communicating acceptance of and respect for supervisee’s own culture and

perspectives through verbal phrases Articulating a commitment to develop multicultural competence by discussing

expectations within the first two supervision sessions Consulting colleagues willingly about my own reactions to racial/ethnic concerns as a

result of any supervision experience Providing supervisee with a multiculturally diverse caseload to ensure breadth of

clinical experience Listening [to] and providing affirming statements to demonstrate genuine respect [for]

supervisee’s ideas about how culture influences the clinical interaction Inviting supervisee to explore and discuss possible existence of personal cultural biases

and prejudices on the conceptualization and practice with clients Acknowledging and discussing power issues in supervision that may be related to

racial/ethnic multicultural differences Self-disclosing own development of self-awareness about cultural/ethnic identity,

biases, and limitations Addressing feelings of discomfort experienced by trainees concerning multicultural

issue Acknowledging, discussing, and providing affirming statements that demonstrate

respect for racial/ethnic multicultural similarities and differences between myself and supervisee, and discussing feelings concerning these similarities and/or differences

Encouraging discussion regarding multicultural issues by presenting myself non-defensively such as maintaining an open posture and calming tone of voice when supervisee shows feelings of anger, rage, and/or fear when these issues are raised during supervision

148

Creating a safe (nonjudgmental, supportive) environment for discussion of multicultural issues, values, and ideas through the use of verbal and nonverbal communication

Initiating respectful and explicit discussions about the importance of culture/multicultural issues during supervision

Engaging supervisee actively in discussions to explore clients’ cultural perspectives Identifying and discussing racial/ethnic cultural differences reflected in parallel process

issues (supervisor/supervisee and supervisee/client) Providing recommended multicultural readings and related training experiences to

supervisee Modeling for supervisee by initiating, attending to, and demonstrating interest and

respect for client’s intersecting identities and culture during case conceptualization and discussion

Additional important behavior(s) not listed above (please specify) -

Part II Instructions: On the following page, there are 10 specific multicultural supervisory behaviors that you have just rated as “more important”. As you read through the behaviors again, please rate the behaviors into one of two categories based on its importance on addressing diversity issues in clinical supervision. The two categories are:

1 2

Most Important Moderately Important

Please ONLY include 5 behaviors in EACH category.

Category Rating Multicultural Supervisory Behaviors Most Moderat

e 10 specific behaviors rated as “more important” from Part I will be carried over/populated in this table for participants to rate again.

149

Permission to use the results (supervisory behaviors) from Successful and Unsuccessful Multicultural Supervisory Behaviors: A Delphi Poll

from: Jeana Dressel <jldressel@gmail.com> to: yeung.chan@pepperdine.edu date: Sun, Aug 26, 2018 at 8:51 PM subject: Re: Request for Permission: Successful and Unsuccessful

Multicultural Supervisory Behaviors: A Delphi Poll I, Jeana L. Dressel, Ph.D., give Yeung Chan permission to use the results (supervisory behaviors) from my 2007 study, Successful and Unsuccessful Multicultural Supervisory Behaviors: A Delphi Poll” in your research survey. Supervision was a favorite area for me as a psychologist and diversity was of concern to me then as well as now in these tense times we are in. I’m pleased that my study can be of help to you and I wish you the best with your research and completing your graduate degree. Jeana L Dressel, PhD jldressel@gmail.com

150

APPENDIX C

Demographic Questionnaire

151

Demographic Questionnaire

Instructions: For each item, please type in your answer or select the answer choice that is most appropriate. If there is not an answer that is appropriate, select “other” and type your response in the box provided. If you prefer not to answer any item, you may leave it blank. What is your age? ________________________________ What gender do you identify with? _________________________________ Please describe your race/ethnicity. _____________________________________ What is your sexual orientation? _____________________________________ Which of the following best describes your primary theoretical orientation? Choose only one. A. Behavioral B. Cognitive C. Existential D. Experiential/Gestalt E. Feminist F. Humanistic G. Integrative/Eclectic H. Interpersonal (IPT) I. Multicultural J. Postmodern Constructive K. Psychoanalytic L. Psychodynamic/Relational M. Rogerian/Person-centered N. Systems/Family Systems O. Other ________________________________________________ Which of the following best describes the setting(s) of your most recent work/training/teaching site(s)? A. Armed Forces Medical Center B. Child/Adolescent Psychiatric/Pediatrics C. Community Mental Health Center D. Consortium E. Medical School

152

F. Prison/Other Correctional Facility G. Private General Hospital H. Private Outpatient Clinic I. Private Practice J. Private Psychiatric Hospital K. School District L. State/County/Other Public Hospital M. University Counseling Center N. Veterans Affairs Medical Center O. Other ________________________________________________ Are you an APA Division 45 Member? A. Yes B. No How many years have you been licensed? ____________________________________ Are you currently supervising any trainees/interns? A. Yes B. No (Please provide reason why) ________________________________________ How many years have you provided/been providing supervision as a licensed professional? ________________________________________ Approximately how many supervisees have you supervised in the last 10 years? ________________________________________ Approximately how many supervisees have you supervised in the last 3 years? _________________________________________ Based on your current work schedule (or on average), how many trainees/interns do you supervise each week? _________________________________________ Based on your current work schedule (or on average), how many hours per week do you spend on direct supervision (both individual and group)? ________________________________________ Based on your current work schedule (or on average), how many hours per week do you spend on indirect supervision (such as reviewing session notes and recordings)?

153

_________________________________________ How often do your trainees/interns bring up issues related to culture/diversity during supervision?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Never

Very Rarely

Rarely

Sometimes

Often

Very Often

Always

How often do you as a supervisor bring up issues related to culture/diversity during supervision?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Never

Very Rarely

Rarely

Sometimes

Often

Very Often

Always

During the last two licensure cycles, how many workshops/trainings related to supervision did you attend? ___________________________ During the last two licensure cycles, how many workshops/trainings related to multicultural supervision did you attend? ___________________________ During the last two licensure cycles, how many books/articles related to supervision did you read? ___________________________ During the last two licensure cycles, how many books/articles related to multicultural supervision did you read? ___________________________ Please elaborate on any relevant supervision/multicultural supervision training experience prior to the last two licensure cycles. ________________________________________________________________ Did you take a course in clinical supervision as part of your graduate education? A. Yes B. No

154

Did you take a course in culture/diversity as part of your graduate education? C. Yes D. No Have you ever received supervision of supervision? E. Yes F. No When you were a trainee/intern, how often did you bring up issues related to culture/diversity during supervision?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Never

Very Rarely

Rarely

Sometimes

Often

Very Often

Always

When you were a trainee/intern, how often did your supervisors bring up issues related to culture/diversity during supervision?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Never

Very Rarely

Rarely

Sometimes

Often

Very Often

Always

155

APPENDIX D

Recruitment Letter to ListServ Managers

156

Subject: Invitation for Research Participation Dear ListServ Manager, I am a doctoral student in clinical psychology at Pepperdine University. As part of my dissertation project, I am investigating the best supervisory practices to address diversity issues in clinical supervision. It would be much appreciated if you would kindly post the invitation for research participation announcement attached below on the ListServ website. Participation in this study entails completing an online survey to rate the importance of specific supervisory behaviors that address diversity issues in clinical supervision. Information regarding participant demographics and supervision experience will also be collected; however, no identifying information is collected as part of this study. Completion time for this study is approximately 15 minutes. Study participation poses no greater than minimal risk, as participants will be asked their opinions about the impact of hypothetical supervision practices and experiences. This study has been approved by the Institutional Review Board at Pepperdine University. If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me, at yeung.chan@pepperdine.edu. You may also contact Dr. Edward Shafranske, Dissertation Chairperson, at edward.shafranske@pepperdine.edu or Dr. Judy Ho, Chairperson of the Pepperdine University Graduate and Professional Schools Institutional Review Board, at judy.ho@pepperdine.edu. Thank you in advance for your assistance with the completion of this study. Sincerely, Yeung Chan, M.A. Clinical Psychology Doctoral Student Pepperdine University

157

ListServ Research Participation Invitation Announcement

Subject: Invitation to Participate in Research Study on Multicultural Supervisory Behaviors and Practices

Greetings! I am a doctoral student in clinical psychology at Pepperdine University. As part of my dissertation project, I am investigating the best supervisory practices to address diversity issues in clinical supervision. This study has been approved by the Graduate and Professional Schools Institutional Review Board of Pepperdine University; a copy of the approval letter is available by request. Participation in this study is expected to last no more than 15 minutes. A link to the web address of the surveys can be found below. Thank you in advance for your assistance with the completion of this study. http://pepperdine.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_aY1qOnRLX6S8qbj Sincerely, Yeung Chan, M.A. Clinical Psychology Doctoral Student Pepperdine University

158

APPENDIX E

Follow-up Letter to ListServ Managers

159

Subject: Invitation for Research Participation Dear ListServ Manager, A few weeks ago, I sent you an invitation for study participation to be posted on the ListServ website. If you have already posted this invitation, I truly appreciate you taking the time to do so and would be grateful if you would post the announcement once again. Information about the study sent in my previous correspondence can be found below. I am a doctoral student in clinical psychology at Pepperdine University. As part of my dissertation project, I am investigating the best supervisory practices to address diversity issues in clinical supervision. It would be much appreciated if you would kindly post the invitation for research participation announcement attached below on the ListServ website. Participation in this study entails completing an online survey to rate the importance of specific supervisory behaviors that address diversity issues in clinical supervision. Information regarding participant demographics and supervision experience will also be collected; however, no identifying information is collected as part of this study. Completion time for this study is approximately 15 minutes. Study participation poses no greater than minimal risk, as participants will be asked their opinions about the impact of hypothetical supervision practices and experiences. This study has been approved by the Graduate and Professional Schools Institutional Review Board of Pepperdine University; a copy of the approval letter is available by request. If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me, at yeung.chan@pepperdine.edu. You may also contact Dr. Edward Shafranske, Dissertation Chairperson, at edward.shafranske@pepperdine.edu or Dr. Judy Ho, Chairperson of the Pepperdine University Graduate and Professional Schools Institutional Review Board, at judy.ho@pepperdine.edu. Thank you in advance for your assistance with the completion of this study. Sincerely, Yeung Chan, M.A. Clinical Psychology Doctoral Student Pepperdine University

160

ListServ Research Participation Invitation Announcement Subject: Invitation to Participate in Research Study on Multicultural Supervisory Behaviors and Practices

Greetings! I am a doctoral student in clinical psychology at Pepperdine University. As part of my dissertation project, I am investigating the best supervisory practices to address diversity issues in clinical supervision. This study has been approved by the Graduate and Professional Schools Institutional Review Board of Pepperdine University; a copy of the approval letter is available by request. Participation in this study is expected to last no more than 15 minutes. A link to the web address of the surveys can be found below. Thank you in advance for your assistance with the completion of this study.

http://www.qualtrics.com/ Sincerely, Yeung Chan, M.A. Clinical Psychology Doctoral Student Pepperdine University

161

APPENDIX F

Recruitment Letter to Participants

162

Subject: Invitation for Research Participation Dear Participant, I am a doctoral student in clinical psychology at Pepperdine University. As part of my dissertation project, I am investigating the best supervisory practices to address diversity issues in clinical supervision. I believe that with your particular background and experience, you are in the unique position of offering invaluable opinions and insights that will be helpful to trainees and their supervisors. I would greatly appreciate your assistance with my study. Participation in this study is entirely voluntary and is expected to last no more than 15 minutes. Participation in this study entails completing an online survey to rate the importance of specific supervisory behaviors that address diversity issues in clinical supervision. Information regarding your demographics and supervision experience will also be collected; however, no identifying information is collected as part of this study. Study participation poses no greater than minimal risk, as you will be asked your opinions about the impact of hypothetical supervision practices and experiences. This study has been approved by the Graduate and Professional Schools Institutional Review Board of Pepperdine University; a copy of the approval letter is available by request. By completing the surveys, you are acknowledging that you have been informed of study procedures and are giving your consent to participate. The surveys are on the website Qualtrics. A link to the web address of the surveys can be found below this message. If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me, at yeung.chan@pepperdine.edu. You may also contact Dr. Edward Shafranske, Dissertation Chairperson, at edward.shafranske@pepperdine.edu or Dr. Judy Ho, Chairperson of the Pepperdine University Graduate and Professional Schools Institutional Review Board, at judy.ho@pepperdine.edu. Thank you in advance for your assistance with the completion of this study. Sincerely, Yeung Chan, M.A. Clinical Psychology Doctoral Student Pepperdine University

http://www.qualtrics.com/

163

APPENDIX G

Follow-up Letter to Participants

164

Dear Participant, A few weeks ago, I sent you an invitation for study participation. If you have not completed this brief survey, I hope that you will consider participating in this opportunity to inform supervision practices for future trainees and their supervisors. If you have already completed this survey, I truly appreciate you taking the time to do so. The link to access the survey and information about the study sent in my previous correspondence can be found below.

http://www.qualtrics.com/

I am investigating the best supervisory practices to address diversity issues in clinical supervision. I believe that with your particular background and experience, you are in the unique position of offering invaluable opinions and insights that will be helpful to trainees and their supervisors. I would greatly appreciate your assistance with my study. Participation in this study is entirely voluntary and is expected to last no more than 15 minutes. Participation in this study entails completing an online survey to rate the importance of specific supervisory behaviors that address diversity issues in clinical supervision. Information regarding your demographics and supervision experience will also be collected; however, no identifying information is collected as part of this study. Study participation poses no greater than minimal risk, as you will be asked your opinions about the impact of hypothetical supervision practices and experiences. This study has been approved by the Graduate and Professional Schools Institutional Review Board of Pepperdine University; a copy of the approval letter is available by request. By completing the surveys, you are acknowledging that you have been informed of study procedures and are giving your consent to participate. The surveys are on the website Qualtrics. A link to the web address of the surveys can be found below this message. If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me, at yeung.chan@pepperdine.edu. You may also contact Dr. Edward Shafranske, Dissertation Chairperson, at edward.shafranske@pepperdine.edu or Dr. Judy Ho, Chairperson of the Pepperdine University Graduate and Professional Schools Institutional Review Board, at judy.ho@pepperdine.edu. Thank you in advance for your assistance with the completion of this study. Sincerely, Yeung Chan, M.A. Clinical Psychology Doctoral Student Pepperdine University

165

APPENDIX H

Introduction to Survey and Consent to Participate

166

Dear Participant: My name is Yeung Chan and I am a doctoral student in clinical psychology at Pepperdine University, Graduate School of Education and Psychology, who is currently in the process of recruiting individuals for my study entitled, “Best Practices in Addressing Diversity in Clinical Supervision: A Survey of Experienced Supervisors.” The professor supervising this project is Dr. Edward Shafranske. The study is designed to investigate the best supervisory practices to address diversity issues in clinical supervision. Please understand that your participation in my study is strictly voluntary. The following is a description of what your study participation entails, the terms for participating in the study, and a discussion of your rights as a study participant. Please read this information carefully before deciding whether or not you wish to participate. If you should decide to participate in the study, you will be asked to complete a web-based survey containing specific supervisory behaviors and asked to rate the importance of each behavior on addressing diversity issues in clinical supervision. You will also be asked for demographic information about you and your supervision experience. It should take approximately 15 minutes to complete the survey you have been asked to complete. Although minimal, there are potential risks that you should consider before deciding to participate in this study. These risks include potential for discomfort resulting from responding to hypothetical supervision practices and experiences that may have been encountered before or will be encountered in the future, boredom and fatigue, and time spent responding to survey. In the event you do experience emotional discomfort as a result of viewing or responding to the survey, it is recommended that you speak with someone whom you trust. If you experience any other adverse events, please notify the investigator and/or discontinue participation. There may be no direct benefit to you as a result of participating in the study; however, your participation may further current understanding of multicultural clinical supervision and be of benefit to future trainees and supervisors. If you should decide to participate and find you are not interested in completing the survey in its entirety, you have the right to discontinue at any point without being questioned about your decision. You also do not have to answer any of the questions on the survey that you prefer not to answer--just leave such items blank. After approximately three weeks, a reminder note will be sent to you to complete the survey. Since this note will go out to everyone, I apologize ahead of time for sending you these reminders if you have complied with the deadline. If the findings of the study are presented to professional audiences or published, no information that identifies you personally will be released. The data will be kept in a secure manner for at least five years at which time the data will be destroyed. If you have any questions regarding the information that I have provided above, please do not hesitate to contact me. If you have further questions or do not feel I have adequately addressed your concerns, please contact Dr. Edward Shafranske at edward.shafranske@pepperdine.edu. If

167

you have questions about your rights as a research participant, contact Dr. Judy Ho, Chairperson of the Graduate and Professional Schools IRB, Pepperdine University, at judy.ho@pepperdine.edu. By completing the survey, you are acknowledging that you have read and understand what your study participation entails, and are consenting to participate in the study. Thank you for taking the time to read this information, and I hope you decide to complete the survey. You are welcome to a brief summary of the study findings in about 1 year. If you decide you are interested in receiving the summary, please email me. Sincerely, Yeung Chan, M.A. Clinical Psychology Doctoral Student yeung.chan@pepperdine.edu

168

APPENDIX I

IRB Approval Notice

169

NOTICE OF APPROVAL FOR HUMAN RESEARCH

Date: February 12, 2019 Protocol Investigator Name: Yeung Chan Protocol #: 18-10-889 Project Title: Best Practices in Addressing Diversity in Clinical Supervision: A Survey of Experts School: Graduate School of Education and Psychology Dear Chan: Thank you for submitting your amended exempt application to Pepperdine University’s Institutional Review Board (IRB). We appreciate the work you have done on your proposal. The IRB has reviewed your submitted IRB application and all ancillary materials. Upon review, the IRB has determined that the above entitled project meets the requirements for exemption under the federal regulations 45 CFR 46.101 that govern the protections of human subjects. Your research must be conducted according to the proposal that was submitted to the IRB. If changes to the approved protocol occur, a revised protocol must be reviewed and approved by the IRB before implementation. For any proposed changes in your research protocol, please submit an amendment to the IRB. Since your study falls under exemption, there is no requirement for continuing IRB review of your project. Please be aware that changes to your protocol may prevent the research from qualifying for exemption from 45 CFR 46.101 and require submission of a new IRB application or other materials to the IRB. A goal of the IRB is to prevent negative occurrences during any research study. However, despite the best intent, unforeseen circumstances or events may arise during the research. If an unexpected situation or adverse event happens during your investigation, please notify the IRB as soon as possible. We will ask for a complete written explanation of the event and your written response. Other actions also may be required depending on the nature of the event. Details regarding the timeframe in which adverse events must be reported to the IRB and documenting the adverse event can be found in the Pepperdine University Protection of Human Participants in Research: Policies and Procedures Manual at community.pepperdine.edu/irb. Please refer to the protocol number denoted above in all communication or correspondence related to your application and this approval. Should you have additional questions or require clarification of the contents of this letter, please contact the IRB Office. On behalf of the IRB, I wish you success in this scholarly pursuit. Sincerely, Judy Ho, IRB Chairperson cc: Dr. Lee Kats, Vice Provost for Research and Strategic Initiatives Mr. Brett Leach, Regulatory Affairs Specialist