Improvements in psychologists' metacommunication self-efficacy, willingness, and skill following online training and a supervision exercise.

OBJECTIVE(S): Psychologists' experiences of an online training tool in metacommunication as well as an in-supervisory metacommunication exercise were examined. METHOD: A total of 101 participants completed a training tool in metacommunication and changes in self-efficacy (SE) to use metacommunication with clients, the proportion of metacommunication used in vignette-responses, and their willingness to use metacommunication in supervision were assessed pre- and posttraining and at 6-week follow-up. A total of 48 participants elected to undertake the in-supervision exercise. RESULTS: Participants reported significantly higher willingness and self-efficacy after completing the online training. They also showed a higher proportion of metacommunicative statements in their posttraining vignette responses compared with pretraining. The increase in willingness was retained at 6-week follow-up. There was an increase in self-efficacy from pre- to postonline-training, and this increased at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This opens the door to better developing metacommunication skills in supervisees through both online training and the metacommunication supervisory exercise. Areas for continued research are outlined.

Supervisee perceptions of the use of metacommunication in the supervisory relationship.

Objective: This study examined the use of metacommunication in supervision from supervisees' perspectives. Method: A total of 129 supervisees completed the Metacommunication in Supervision Questionnaire-MSQ, a measure devised for the purpose of this study to explore the frequency and willingness to use various forms of metacommunication in clinical supervision. Measures of the nature of the supervisory relationship (also from the supervisee's perspective) were taken to explore whether a relationship exists between the nature of supervision and supervisees' perspectives on the use of metacommunication. Results: There was general concordance between supervisee ratings of their own willingness and their perception of their supervisor's willingness to use various forms of metacommunication in supervision. There were significant differences in the reported frequency with which the different types of metacommunication are actually used. A factor analysis elicited a two-factor structure underlying the MSQ and significant correlations with measures of the nature of the supervision relationship were observed. It appears that metacommunication around difficult or uncomfortable feelings in the supervisory relationship occurs less often than other components of metacommunication. Conclusion: Future research needs to further validate the MSQ and assess whether the frequency of metacommunication in the supervisory relationship is related to metacommunication in supervisees' psychotherapy with clients.