SUPERVISORY STYLES, SUPERVISION OUTCOME AND COUNSELOR SELF-EFFICACY OF ADDICTION TREATMENT PROFESSIONALS

Due to the paucity of research in the addictions treatment field regarding supervision, this research study sought to examine the style, type and outcome of supervision of addictions treatment professionals and how it relates to supervisee self-efficacy. Thus, the primary purpose of this study is to quantify the addictions treatment professional's supervision outcome in relation to other variables including supervisory style, supervisory type, and demographic variables. The research questions of the present study are as follows: 1. What do addictions treatment counselors perceive as the overall supervisory style of their clinical supervisors? 2. Does the supervisory style of clinical supervisors of addictions treatment counselors predict the outcome of supervision? 3. What type of delivery style of supervision do addictions treatment counselors receive? 4. Is there a significant relationship between supervision outcome and specific demographic characteristics of addictions treatment professionals (e.g., age, years of experience, recovery status, gender, formal education)? 5. What is the relationship between perceived addictions treatment counselor self-efficacy and perceptions of supervision outcome? 6. Can supervision outcome be predicted from addiction treatment counselor perceived supervisory style and perceived self-efficacy? This study discussed the definition of supervision, types and techniques of supervision, models, and mechanisms. The supervisory relationship, supervision outcome, and supervision effectiveness were discussed in relation to other areas of mental health counseling. When discussing these areas in terms of the addictions treatment field, the lack of empirically valid research was noted. The many different types of supervision (e.g., individual, group, peer, etc.) and different styles were also discussed. Though styles have been variously defined, this research study used the supervisory styles as defined by Friedlander & Ward (1984) which include the Attractive, Interpersonally Sensitive, and Task Oriented subscales. The methodology included a pilot study to refine the instruments that were ultimately used for this study. Several changes were made to the original instruments and these changes focused mainly on defining terms used in rating supervisors. The three instruments that were used include the Supervisory Styles Inventory (SSI; Friedlander & Ward, 1984), The Supervision Outcome Questionnaire (SOQ; Worthington and Roehlke (1979) and the Counselor Self-Efficacy Scale (COSES; Melchert, et. al., 1996). A demographic questionnaire was included to gather information regarding demographic variables and supervisory style. The results indicate that supervisees have a fairly positive overall perception of the supervisory style of their supervisors. Supervisory style was found to be predictive of supervision outcome with a positive linear relationship. The delivery style of supervision for this sample was noted. There were no demographic variables that predicted type of supervision. Counselor self-efficacy was found to be not statistically significant relative to supervision outcome. A linear relationship was found between supervision style, counselor self-efficacy, and supervision outcome such that when overall supervision style increases and self-efficacy decreases slightly, then supervision outcome can be predicted. Finally, the implications for training of supervisors in the addictions treatment field was discussed as well as the implications for future research. The study's limitations were also discusse