The Measurement of Empathy and Its Efficacy in Psychotherapy (EMPATHY)

February 11, 2008 updated by: University of Illinois at Chicago
The purpose of the research is to: 1) to test whether psychotherapy including immediate feedback of empathy data is more efficacious than therapy without such an exchange of data, 2) to measure the degree of accuracy of therapist's empathy and its relationship to the patient's estimate of the therapist's empathy.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Intervention / Treatment

Detailed Description

Objective: To develop and evaluate a feedback method for measuring and increasing therapists' empathic accuracy and reducing empathic errors in psychotherapy. Method: Sixteen (16) patient-therapist pairs were randomly assigned to intervention and control groups. All patients rated their own functioning using the GAF (Global Assessment of Functioning) and predicted the accuracy with which their therapists would estimate their ratings. Therapists rated the patient's GAF, predicted the patients' ratings of their own GAFs, and rated their confidence in their own predictions. In the intervention condition, therapist and patients discussed the previous session's ratings for a few minutes of the therapy session. Results: Intervention therapists showed greater empathic accuracy relative to controls on our empathy measure (t(14) = 2.69, p < .01) and increased empathy over time on the Barrett-Lenard Empathy subscale (t(32) = 3.21, p < .01). We also found significant effects on errors related to perceived accuracy of therapist empathy. Patients in the control group were found to perceive their therapists to be either more or less accurate than was actually the case (over/under-idealization), but such biases were not as strong in the intervention group. Similarly, therapists in the control group were likely to over-estimate their own accuracy (over-confidence) to a greater extent than intervention therapists. Affective responses to the instrument were positive overall and did not differ by condition. Conclusion: Empathy feedback and feedback concerning degrees of patient idealization and therapist confidence may be effective in improving functioning as well as in increasing empathic accuracy in psychotherapy.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

16

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • United States
    • Illinois
      • Chicago, Illinois, United States, 60608
        • University of Illinois at Chicago

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years to 65 years (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Outpatient psychotherapy at University of Illinois at Chicago
  • Age 18-65

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Psychosis
  • Suicidality
  • Organic Brain Disorder

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
No Intervention: Control
Therapists and patients record their estimates of the patient's Global Assessment of Functioning, but do not discuss these estimates in therapy sessions.
Experimental: Empathy Feedback
Therapists and patients record their ratings of the patient's Global Assessment of Functioning and discuss these ratings.
Behavioral: Empathy Feedback
Discussion of empathy ratings between patients and therapists during psychotherapy sessions.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
Patient Global Assessment of Functioning
Time Frame: 20 psychotherapy sessions
20 psychotherapy sessions

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
Barrett-Lenard Relationship Inventory
Time Frame: Every 5th session, 20 sessions of psychotherapy
Every 5th session, 20 sessions of psychotherapy

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

University of Illinois at Chicago

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Bhaskar N. Sripada, M.D., University of Illinois at Chicago

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

June 1, 2002

Primary Completion (Actual)

June 1, 2007

Study Completion (Actual)

June 1, 2007

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

February 11, 2008

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

February 11, 2008

First Posted (Estimate)

February 21, 2008

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

February 21, 2008

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

February 11, 2008

Last Verified

February 1, 2008

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Other Study ID Numbers

  • 2002-0381

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Subscribe