Development a Instrument

7/25/2019 Development a Instrument

1/8

DEVELOPMENT OF AN INSTRUMENT

FOR MEASURING RAPPORT

ROBERT P

ANDERSON and GORDON V ANDERSON

T

HERE does not appear to be any striking

disagreement in the professional litera-

ture concerning the meaning of rapport.

The term as generally used, however, is de-

fined in such broad terms as to be of limited

usefulness as a concept in training or as a

variable in research. Fiedler, in his classic

studies

14,

5], investigated the concept of the

ideal relationsh ip. He found that thera-

pists with different therapeutic orientation s,

and non-therapists, tend to have similar

concepts of the ideal rela tion . Fiedler's

sample of therapists was small, and the

items described as indicative of good and

poor relationships were no t scaled for

quantita tive interview ratings. In an un-

published study, Bown

[1 ]

utilized Q-sort

methodology. He also concluded that

clients and counselors tend to have similar

concepts of the ideal relationsh ip. T h e

present study is an attempt to provide an

explicit, operational definition of the coun-

seling relationship characterized by ideal

rap po rt. Directly related to this, we were in-

terested in the extent of agreement among a

group of clients and counselors concerning

the meaning of rappo rt. T h e operational

definition was made in terms of attitudes

and behaviors of clieiits and counselors. As-

sumptions regarding the study were that

rapport is of importance early in counseling;

it is relevant to communication; it is ob-

servable behavior perceived by both partici-

pants in the relationship; and it can be as-

sessed by an observer.

METHOD

A series of 163 items concerned with coun-

RoiiERT P. ANI)EU.SON is Associate Professor of Psy-

chology at Texas Technological College, Ltibbock,

selor and client attitudes and behaviors was

collected. Items were derived from tran-

scribed case material, clients, counselors,

and the Q-U niverses of Fiedler and Bown.

Preliminary screening in terms of the three

categoriesgood-poor rapport, ambiguous

or unrelated to rapport, and those defying

classificationwas carried out by seven

psychologists and one psychiatrist. Judges

were allowed to put as many items in a

category as they wished. Th ose items on

which there appeared to be agreement con-

cerning their relevance as descriptive of rap-

port were singled out for further study.

N ext, a 99-item form of the Rap po rt Rat-

ing S cale was developed. One h undred

counseling psychologists were asked to rate

each item on a nine-point scale. T he ex-

tremes of the scale were good rap po rt and

poor rapp ort; the items were rated in

terms of the ratees' own conceptions of ideal

rap po rt. T he psychologists surveyed were

all members of Division 12 and/or 17 of the

Am erican Psychological Association. A ran-

dom sample of judges was not obtained;

rather, psychologists known to the authors

as being actively engaged in counseling ac-

tivity were contacted.

In add ition to the psychologists, 62 clients

from the U niversity of Texas Testing and

Guidance Bureau were asked to rate the

items.

T h e client pop ulation was com-

posed of 15 males and 15 females witli more

than five interviews in counseling; and 16

males and 16 females with less than five

interviews. T he majority of persons in the

short-term group had finished their counsel-

ing experience prior to the request for their

particip ation . Clients in the long-term

group had had from 6 to 50 interviews.

The majoi'ity of these clients were still in


2/8

RESULTS

S ixty-nine psychologists (69 per cent) a nd

thirty-four clients (55 per cent) returned

the 99-item version of the scale; 55 of the

psychologists were actively engaged in some

form of counseling work; 26 had less than

10 years experience ; 26 had from 10 to 15

years of experience; and 17 had over 15

years of expe rience. T h e 34 clients retu rn-

ing scales were about equally divided be-

tween males and females and between those

With less than five interviews and those with

Wore than five interviews.

Each item checked by at least 10 per cent

of the counselors as unclassifiable was

eliminated from further analysis; using this

criterion, 77 items were retained. M edians

^nd quartile deviations were computed for

each item. Tw enty-eight items indicative of

poor rapp ort h ad m edians rangin g from 0.00

to 1.49; 26 items indicative of good rapport

had medians ranging from 6.50 to 7.99.

^

items with a Q-value of 1.00 or less,

''epresenting the extremes of good and poor

rapport and showing the least amount of

disagreement among judges, were selected

*or inclusion in the Interview Rating Scale.

Medians for each item ra ted by the clients

re computed . Fifty-four differences in

Medians between the counselors and clients

less tha n 0.80 score po ints . S ince we

interested in obtaining those items

both groups agreed represented good

poor rapport, the medians of the 50

selected from the counselors' ratings

Were correlated with these same item me-

^lans^from the clients' ratings. T he Pear-

son r's between the two arrays of medians

0.98. In short, we ha d a series of items

which both clients and counselors agreed

representing the extremes of rapport.

^ Th e final 50-item IR S is evenly divided

etween items representing good and poor

=ippot 18 items refer to client behaviors

attitudes; the remaining refer to coun-

behavior.

Examples of each type are as follows:

. Positive clien t: T he client has confidence

Positive counselor: T he counselor's tone

of voice conveys the ability to share the

client's feelings.

N egative counselor: T h e counselor

pushed the client into saying things that

aren't really true.

In order to make the scale adaptable for

interview ratings by client and counselors,

raters are asked in the directions to indicate

the degree to which an item describes a be-

havior or attitude present in a counseling

experience. T he range is from always

through occasionally to neve r, w ith five

points provided for checking on the con-

tinu um . T h e scale is scored in the follow-

ing m ann er: (1) weights from

1

to 5 are as-

signed to the poin ts in the contin uu m ; (2)

items indicating good rapport receive a

ma xim um score of 5 for always and a

m inim um of 1 for never ; (3) items indi-

cating poor rapport are scored in reverse

fashion. S cores may rang e from a maxi-

mum of 250 for ideal rapp ort to a minim um

of 50.

DISCUSSION

The results support the findings of Fiedler

and Bown; that is, when described in terms

of specific behaviors and attitudes, there is

a core of agreement among clients and coun-

selors concerning the nature of ideal rapport

or the ideal relationship.

It is hypothesized that each of these char-

acteristics may be rated separately for an

interview so as to give a score quantifying

the level of rap po rt. S tudies by Correll [3

and Brams [2] support the hypothesis that

the scale can be used to provide a measure

of the relati onship in initial interviews.

Correll investigated the factors influencing

the quality of the communication process

in initial counseling interviews. T h e Inter-

view Rating Scale was used as a criterion

measure. Th ree judges rated 52 interviews

with the scale. Tw o conclusions were: (1)

Expert judges are able to rate typescripts of

initial counseling interviews on the basis of

what constitutes good and poor communica-


3/8

tion within the initia l counseling inter-

view. Correll underto ok an item analysis

of thescale. Hefound 8 of the 50items

were of little value in difEerentiatingbe-

tween good and poor interviews. As

a

further stepin increasing thesensitivityof

the scale, Correll determined weights for

each response category for the 50 items.

Brams used the scale

as a

criterion meas-

urein astudyof thepersonality character-

istics of counseling trainees and the effective-

nessof their ability to communicate with

clients. T h e weights developed by Co rrellin

his item analysis were usedinBrams's mod i-

fication

of the

scale, which

he

labeled

the

Communication Rating Scale.

His

results

suggest that effective communication as

measured by the scale is related positively

to

a counseling trainee's tolerance for am-

biguity, although other relationships meas-

ured were inconclusive. Theautho r felt,

however, that the CRS appeared

to be an

adequate measure of efEective communica-

tioninthe counseling relationship .

Bothof these studies support the original

purposeof thescale, i.e.,to rate interviews

in termsof theeffectiveness ofcomm unica-

tion or, as we termed it, rapport; moreover,

further judicious exploration

of

the scale

as

a research instrument and asatool in coun-

S U M M A R Y

The Interview Rating Scale wasdevel

oped to provide an operational definition of

ideal rapport

or, as

termed

by

Correll,

ef-

fective communication in counseling inter-

views. Item s selected for inclusion in the

scale represent a consensus among aselec

group

of

counselors

and

clients concerning

the meaningofrapp ort. Research and sub

sequent modification

by

independent

in-

vestigators have supported the effectiveness

of thescale as a measure of rapport in

counseling.

REFEREN CES

1. Bown, O. H. An investigation of therapeutic

relationships in client-centered psychotherapy

U npublished doctoral dissertation, U niv.of Ch

cago, 1953.

2.

Brams,J. H. Counselor characteristicsandeffec

tive communication in counseling. /. counsel

Psychol., 1961, 8,25-30.

3. Correll,P. Factors influencing communicationin

counseling. U npublished doctoral dissertation

U n iv .ofMissouri, 1955.

4.

Fiedler, F. E. T he concept

of

the ideal therapeu

tic relationship.

/. consult. Psychol., 1950, 1

239-245.

5. Fiedler,

F. E.

Quantitative studies

on the

role

o

therapists' feelings toward their patients. In

O.H.Mow rer, (Ed.),

Psychotherapy, theory, and

research.

N ew York: Ro nald Press, 1953, 296.

316.

elor train ing is justified by these results.

Interview Rating Scale

Form

INSTRUCTIONS

It is essential that all ratings bemade by you ashonestly as possible.

Your taskis to rat e your counseling experienceat thepresen t time. Ra te your experience in termsof

what

is

now,

not

what ought

to

be.

Look

at the

following exam ple w hich

has

been filled o ut

to

show you how

to use the

scale.

Always Occasionally N ever

1. The counseloris anice person |-, |

The person who marked this thinks thathiscounselorisoccasionallyanice person . Youare toanswe

allthe questionsbyplacingacheckin the bo x

which best expresses whatyou feel about your interviews

the present time.

U se

any one of the five boxes

forratin g each stateme nt acco rdingto the extent it hol

truein your own experience.

Here are some hints to help you:

1. Work rapidly. Th ere is no time limit,but do notspend much timeon any one item.

2.

Mark all items according to you r feelings today.

N ow proceed to answer thequestionson the following pages.


4/8

NT RV W R TING SC LE

Name Date.

Items

Scale

Always

Occasionally Never

A

O N

1. The counselor gives the impression of being intellec- D D D D Q

tually aloof from the client. (1) 1 2 3 4 5

(2) 0 - 2 - 1 0 -+-3

2.

The counselor creates a feeling of warmth in the A O N

relationship. D D D D D

5 4 3 2 1

f

4-3 - 3 - 3 - 2

^'

The counselor has a condescending attitude. A O N

D

D D D

1 2 3 4 5

0 - 3 - 1 0 -f3

' . The counselor insists on being always right. A O N

n D D D n

1 2 3 4 5

- 1 0 0 0 + 3

^' The elient feels seeure in his relationship with the A O N

counselor. D D D D D

5 4 3 2 1

0 +3 - 3 - 3 0

6- The client has confidence in the counselor. A O N

D D D D D

5 4 3 2 1

0 +3 - 3 - 2 0

' . The counselor is uncertain ofhimself. A O N

D

D D D D

1 2 3 4 5

- 2 - 3 - 1 +2 +3

The counselor is artifieial in his behavior. A O N

n

D D D D

1 2 3 4 5

0 - 3 - 1 +3 +3

^

The client feels like a misguided delinquent around A O N

the eounselor. D D D D D

1 2 3 4 5

0 0 - 2 0 + 3

' *The elient feels the eounselor will jump on him if he A O N

says the wrong thing. D D D D D

1 2 3 4 5

0 0 0 0 + 3

The eounselor's tone of voiee conveys the ability to A O N

share the client's feelings. D

5 4 3 2 1


5/8


6/8

. The eounselor's teehniques are obvious and clumsy. A O N

D D D n

1 2 3 4 5

3 - 1 0 -f-3 -f3

The eounselor is restless while talking to the elient. A O N

D D D D

1 2 3 4 5

- 1 0 - 3 -f3 + 3

.

The

eounselor

has a

easual relaxed manner

of

open-

A O N

ing the interview. D D D D D

5 4 3 2 1

4-3 4-3 - 1 - 3 - 3

The client is tricked into relating confidences he did A O N

not wish to diselose. D D D D D

1 2 3 4 5

0 0 0 0 0

The eounselor communieates little understanding of A O N

the elient. D D D D D

1 2 3 4 5

- 3 - 3 - 2 4-3 4-3

The elient ean talk freely about his innermost feelings. A O N

D D D D D

5 4 3 2 1

4-3 4-3 0 - 3 - 3

The counselor's remarks make things clearer for the A O N

client. D D n n D

5 4 3 2 1

4-3 4-3 0 - 3 - 3

The client feels frustrated with the counselor. A O N

D n D D D

1 2 3 4 5

- 2

-1

- 3 4-2 4-2

^' The client distrusts the counselor. A O N

D D D D D

1 2 3 4 5

0 0 - 3 0 4-3

The eounselor is awkward in starting the interview. A O N

D D D D D

1 2 3 4 5

0 - 3 - 3

-t-2 - -2

The counselor is (to the elient) a very human per- A O N

n D n D D D

5 4 3 2 1

4-2 4-3 - 3 - 3 0

The eounselor makes far-fetehed remarks. A O N

D D D D D

1 2 3 4 5

0 - 1 0 0 0

i he eounselor has a good sense of humor. A O N

D

D n D n

5 4 3 2 1

0 4 - 3 - 1 0 0

40 Ti


7/8

41. Th e client feeJs grateful for the counselor's hel p. A

D D

5 4

4-1 -1-3

42. Th e counselor understan ds completely the client's A

feelings. D

5 4

0 4-3

43 .

T he counselor's lang uag e is confused. A

D D

1 2

0 0

44 . T he c l i en t is open , hones t , and genu ine wi th the A

couns elor . O [H

5 4

0 4-3

4 5 . *

T h e counse lo r is a c loc k-w atch er . A

D D

1 2

0 0

46. T he coutiselor gives the impression of feeling at A

case. D D

5 4

4-3 4-3

47. Th e client feels mo re like a case than an individ ual. A

D n

1 2

- 2 - 3

48 . Th e client is comfortable in the counseling situation. A

D D

5 4

0 4-3

49. Th e counselor is a co-worker with the client on a A

common problem. . D D

5 4

4-3 4-3

50.

Th e client respects the counselor's ability. A

D D

5 4

-1-2 4-3

* Items found by Correll not to differentiate between go od and po or interviews.

(1) Weights assigned for scoring by the autho rs.

(2) Weights determ ined thro ugh Phi coefficient analysis by Correll.

FREE DIRECTORY O F HOM E STUDY SC HOOLS AVA ILABLE

T he N ational Hom e S tudy Council announces publication of the Blue

Book and Directory of Home Study Schools, available free of charge from

2000 K S treet, N . W., Washington 6, D. C.

D

3

3

D

3

0

D

3

3

D

3

3

D

3

0

D

3

3

D

3

0

D

3

3

D

3

3

D

3

3

O

O

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

D

2

_ ^

D

2

D

4

4 3

D

2

0

D

4

0

D

2

2

n

4

0

D

2

3

D

2

D

2

1

N

D

1

0

N

D

1

3

N

D

5

0

N

D

1

0

N

D

5

4 1

N

D

1

3

N

D

5

4 3

N

D

1

0

N

D

1

0

N

D

1

0


8/8

Development a Instrument

Documents

Transcript of Development a Instrument