The development of the Epistemic Trust Rating System (ETRS).

OBJECTIVE: The present study introduces and validates the Epistemic Trust Rating System (ETRS), an observer-based measure designed to assess epistemic trust (ET) within psychotherapy. ET in psychotherapy has gained much theoretical attention as a critical component in the therapeutic context, given its inherent link to social communication. However, its empirical validation remains pending, largely due to the absence of a refined instrument to gauge ET levels within the therapy environment. Therefore, this study aimed to translate ET's theoretical construct into tangible markers within the therapeutic context. METHOD: One hundred eighteen patients enrolled in a randomized controlled trial received psychodynamic psychotherapy for depression. Incorporating top-down theoretical considerations with bottom-up empirical observations yielded an overall ETRS score accompanied by three distinct sub-scales, each assessing a singular ET element: one gauges the patient's propensity to share; another measures the degree to which "we-mode" moments are achieved within the session; and the third evaluates the patient's receptiveness to learning. RESULTS: The findings demonstrate the psychometric robustness of the ETRS, with good internal consistency, interrater reliability (ICC(1,8) = .86-.90), and convergent (r = .23-.29) and discriminant validity (r = -.10). CONCLUSION: The current study highlights the ETRS as a promising tool bridging theory and empirical exploration, enhancing our understanding of epistemic trust in psychotherapy.

A multi-modality and multi-dyad approach to measuring flexibility in psychotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: Flexibility, the ability of an individual to adapt to environmental changes in ways that facilitate goal attainment, has been proposed as a potential mechanism underlying psychopathology and psychotherapy. In psychotherapy, most findings are based on self-report measures that have important limitations. We propose a multimodal, multi-dyad approach based on a nonlinear dynamical systems framework to capture the complexity of this concept. METHOD: A new research paradigm was designed to explore the validity of the proposed conceptual model. The paradigm includes a psychotherapy-like social interaction, during which body movement and facial expressiveness data were collected. We analyzed the data using Hankel Alternative View of Koopmann analysis to reconstruct attractors of the observed behaviors and compare them. RESULTS: The patterns of behavior in the two cases differ, and differences in the reconstructed attractors correspond with differences in self-report measures and behavior in the interactions. CONCLUSIONS: The case studies show that information provided by a single modality is not enough to provide the full picture, and multiple modalities are needed. These observations can serve as an initial support for our claims that a multi-modal and multi-dyad approach to flexibility can address some of the issues of measurement in the field.