Pepperdine University Pepperdine University
Pepperdine Digital Commons Pepperdine Digital Commons
Theses and Dissertations
2019
Best practices in addressing diversity in clinical supervision: a Best practices in addressing diversity in clinical supervision: a
survey of experienced supervisors survey of experienced supervisors
Yeung Chan
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/etd
Recommended Citation Recommended Citation Chan, Yeung, "Best practices in addressing diversity in clinical supervision: a survey of experienced supervisors" (2019). Theses and Dissertations. 1102. https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/etd/1102
This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by Pepperdine Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Pepperdine Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected], [email protected].
Pepperdine University
Graduate School of Education and Psychology
BEST PRACTICES IN ADDRESSING DIVERSITY IN CLINICAL SUPERVISION: A
SURVEY OF EXPERIENCED SUPERVISORS
A clinical dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction
of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Psychology
by
Yeung Chan
September, 2019
Edward Shafranske, PhD - Dissertation Chairperson
This clinical dissertation, written by
Yeung Chan
under the guidance of a Faculty Committee and approved by its members, has been submitted to and accepted by the Graduate Faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PSYCHOLOGY Doctoral Committee: Edward Shafranske, PhD, Chairperson Carol Falender, PhD Shelly Harrell, PhD
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page
LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... vi
DEDICATION .............................................................................................................................. vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................................... viii
VITA .............................................................................................................................................. ix
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................... x
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1
BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................ 3
Clinical Supervision ............................................................................................................ 3 Diversity and Multiculturalism in Clinical Supervision ..................................................... 5 Multicultural Supervisory Framework and Processes ........................................................ 8 Multicultural Competence in Clinical Supervisors ........................................................... 11 Limitations and Gaps in Multicultural Supervision Literature ......................................... 13 Purpose of Study and Research Question ......................................................................... 15
METHOD ..................................................................................................................................... 17
Research Approach and Design ........................................................................................ 17 Participants ........................................................................................................................ 17
General characteristics of participants ........................................................................ 18 Supervision and supervision training experience characteristics of participants........ 19
Instrumentation ................................................................................................................. 20 Demographic questionnaire ........................................................................................ 20 Multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices form ............................................ 20
Procedures ......................................................................................................................... 22 Recruitment ................................................................................................................. 23 Protection of human subjects ...................................................................................... 23 Consent for participation............................................................................................. 24 Potential risks and benefits ......................................................................................... 24 Data collection ............................................................................................................ 25 Data analysis ............................................................................................................... 26
RESULTS ..................................................................................................................................... 27
DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................................... 29
Study Results and Multicultural Supervision Competency Framework ........................... 29 Clinical Supervision and Multicultural Supervision Training .......................................... 34 Limitations ........................................................................................................................ 35
v
Directions for Future Research ......................................................................................... 36 Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 37
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 38
TABLES ....................................................................................................................................... 50
Literature Review Tables .................................................................................... 58
Multicultural Supervisory Behaviors and Practices .......................................... 146
Demographic Questionnaire .............................................................................. 150
Recruitment Letter to ListServ Managers ......................................................... 155
Follow-up Letter to ListServ Managers ............................................................ 158
Recruitment Letter to Participants ..................................................................... 161
Follow-up Letter to Participants ........................................................................ 163
Introduction to Survey and Consent to Participate ............................................ 165
IRB Approval Notice ......................................................................................... 168
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Participant Demographics (N = 44) ............................................................................... 50
Table 2. Participant Supervision and Supervision Training Experience (N = 44) ....................... 52
Table 3. Frequencies of Multicultural Supervisory Behaviors Rated as Most Important............ 56
Table 4. Top Five Supervisory Behaviors Compared to Bottom Five Supervisory Behaviors ... 57
vii
DEDICATION
To my family, who inspired me to never stop learning and supported me unconditionally.
viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost, I would like to acknowledge my committee members. I am deeply
grateful for the wisdom and guidance of Dr. Edward Shafranske, Dr. Shelly Harrell, and Dr.
Carol Falender.
I am also grateful to the Pepperdine GSEP community who made my graduate school
journey an invaluable experience. A big thank you to Dr. Aaron Aviera, Dr. Daryl Rowe, Dr.
Susan Himelstein, Dr. Natasha Thapar-Olmos, and Dr. Harold Burke who served as incredible
teachers, supervisors, and mentors.
Finally, I want to thank my family members; none of this would have been possible
without their love and support. They have been my biggest believers and have provided the
encouragement and support I needed throughout my educational career as well as reminding me
that there is life outside of graduate school.
ix
VITA
EDUCATION _____________________________________________________________________________________ Pepperdine University, Graduate School of Education & Psychology, Los Angeles, CA Doctorate in Clinical Psychology June 2019 Pepperdine University, Graduate School of Education & Psychology, Los Angeles, CA Masters of Arts in Clinical Psychology w/ an emphasis in Marriage and Family Therapy June 2011
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA Bachelor of Arts, double major in Psychology, Sociology, minor in Business Administration May 2008 CLINICAL EXPERIENCE _____________________________________________________________________________________ Rutgers University Student Health Center, Camden, NJ July 2018 – June 2019 Student Health Services, ADHD & Learning Disabilities Diagnostic Assessment, Pre-Doctoral Intern Kaiser Permanente Los Angeles Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA July 2017 – June 2018 Department of Pediatrics, Pediatric Neuropsychology, Extern Southern California Neuropsychological Group, Woodland Hills, CA July 2016 – June 2018 Adult & Pediatric Neuropsychology & Therapy, Extern Center for Autism and Related Disorders, Woodland Hills, CA August 2016 – July 2017 Autism, ADHD, & Learning Disabilities Diagnostic Assessment, Extern Insight Collective, Pasadena, CA August 2015 – August 2016 Pediatric Neuropsychology & Evidence-Based Interventions, Extern Union Rescue Mission, Los Angeles, CA September 2014 – July 2016 Practicum, Conrad N. Hilton Foundation Fellow Asian Pacific Counseling and Treatment Center, Los Angeles, CA September 2011 – June 2014 Marriage and Family Therapist Intern Exodus Recovery Inc., Culver City, CA September 2010 – September 2011 Practicum, MFT Trainee
RESEARCH EXPERIENCE _____________________________________________________________________________________ Southern California Neuropsychological Group, Woodland Hills, CA August 2016 – June 2018 Research Assistant
Insight Collective, Pasadena, CA March 2016 – December 2017 Research Assistant Pepperdine University, Los Angeles, CA April 2016 – June 2019 Doctoral Dissertation
x
ABSTRACT
The focus in this exploratory study was to investigate the opinions of licensed psychologists,
who were experienced in clinical supervision, to obtain a list of specific supervisor behaviors and
practices considered to be most important to address diversity in clinical supervision. Forty-four
licensed psychologists completed the web-based questionnaire assessing opinions regarding the
most important multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices. Results of the chi-square
goodness-of-fit test indicated the frequencies of ratings were not equally distributed within this
sample, indicating a level of consensus among survey participants. The results showed that when
addressing multicultural and diversity issues in supervision, supervisors tend to take a more
passive stance, which is contrary to recommended best practices in the multicultural supervision
literature. Furthermore, results showed that supervisors’ participation in continuing education
regarding supervision and multicultural supervision was very limited. Implications for
multicultural supervision practice and directions for future research are explored.
Introduction
Clinical supervision is the foundational method used in mental health education and
training programs to prepare students to provide effective psychological and counseling services.
It encapsulates the essential and contractual relationship between a supervisor and a supervisee,
as well as aids in students’ own professional development and competent delivery of treatments
to their clients (Falender & Shafranske, 2007). Clinical supervision is a continuous process that
provides less skilled clinicians with ways to navigate new and challenging experiences based on
others’ knowledge, guidance, and expertise (Atkinson & Woods, 2007). Successful clinical
supervision can facilitate supervisory alliance, enhance supervisee growth and independence,
safeguard client welfare, and enhance both client and supervisee therapeutic outcomes (Falender,
Shafranske, & Ofek 2014; Ladany, Mori, & Mehr, 2013).
The importance of incorporating diversity variables in clinical training and practice has
led more recently to the development of culture-specific guidelines and standards (Dressel,
Consoli, Kim, & Atkinson, 2007). Multiple studies have shown that when multicultural and
diversity variables are addressed and attended to during supervision, supervisees report feeling
considerably more satisfied with supervision, view supervisors as more sincere, experience a
deeper working alliance with supervisors, and report their supervisors as more competent (Ancis
& Marshall, 2010; Falender & Shafranske, 2014; Inman, 2006; Mori, Inman, & Caskie, 2009).
According to Inman (2006), supervisors are ultimately responsible for promoting supervisees’
multicultural competence by initiating and facilitating multicultural discussions in supervision.
When supervisors fail to address and integrate cultural and diversity variables in the supervision
process, supervisees may experience frustration and resistance and view their supervisors as
culturally insensitive and incompetent (Hird, Cavalieri, Dulko, Felice, & Ho, 2001).
2
Over the last 30 years, authors and researchers have proposed many models of
multicultural supervision that contributed to the conceptualization and understanding of this
important field. However, very few existing models offer clear instructions for the application of
the concepts through specific multicultural supervisory behaviors in supervision beyond simply
introducing multiculturalism as a topic in supervision (Ober, Granello, & Henfield, 2009).
The purpose of this study was to obtain the opinions of licensed psychologists, who were
experienced in clinical supervision, and to identify supervisor behaviors and practices considered
to be most important to address diversity in clinical supervision. This list of behaviors could then
be used to assess current multicultural supervisory practices, in multicultural supervision
guidelines for supervisors, and in future studies to explore supervisory multicultural competence.
The following presents a review of the major areas under investigation in this study.
3
Background
This section provides an overview of the literature for the following topics: clinical
supervision, diversity and multiculturalism in clinical supervision, multicultural competency in
supervisors, multicultural clinical supervisory processes and framework, and limitations in the
current multicultural supervision literature base.
Clinical Supervision
Clinical supervision provides the foundation of training in health service psychology. It
offers pre-degree students as well as postdegree/pre-licensed supervisees a learning experience to
effectively integrate and apply knowledge, skills, and values in clinical practice (Bernard &
Goodyear, 2014; Falender & Shafranske, 2004). Supervisors also are charged with the
responsibility of monitoring the quality of professional service supervisees provide to clients. In
other words, supervisors have an overall responsibility for the type and quality of treatment their
supervisees are providing (Bernard & Goodyear, 2014; Watkins, 2012). In addition, supervisors
serve as gatekeepers and ensure that only qualified trainees progress to licensing (Falender &
Shafranske, 2004, 2017).
Clinical supervision is considered to be a crucial requirement for clinical training and
program accreditation and has been recognized as a distinct professional specialty and practice
(American Psychological Association [APA], 2010). Falender and Shafranske (2004) described
clinical supervision as an exclusive interpersonal process that developed from science-informed
practices. In addition, they noted that clinical supervision entails the facilitation of supervisees in
their pursuit of knowledge and skills through instruction, demonstration, and mutual problem-
solving.
4
Over the years, a considerable number of studies have been published regarding clinical
supervision and its approaches, stages, components, and ethics (Barnett & Molzon, 2014;
Goodyear, Lichtenberg, Bang, & Gragg, 2014); its value and merits (Falender & Shafranske,
2014); the nature of the supervisory relationship (Inman, 2006); the unavoidable conflicts and
dilemmas (Safran, Muran, Stevens, & Rothman, 2007); its effectiveness in enhancing clinical
work (Falender & Shafranske, 2014); and fostering attention to difference and diversity (Ancis &
Ladany, 2010; Tsui, O’Donoghue, & Ng, 2014; Watkins, 2014).
Supervision is a continuous process that provides less skilled clinicians with ways to
navigate new and challenging experiences based on others’ knowledge, guidance, and expertise
(Atkinson & Woods, 2007). Successful clinical supervision can facilitate the supervisory
alliance, enhance supervisee growth and independence, safeguard client welfare, and enhance
both client and supervisee therapeutic outcomes (Falender, Shafranske, & Ofek, 2014; Ladany et
al., 2013).
The importance of the supervisory relationship is well-established in the empirical
literature (Borders, 2014). According to Quek and Storm (2012), the supervisory relationship can
facilitate the passing of knowledge, wisdom, insight, and experience from one professional
generation to the next. Martínez and Holloway (1997) also noted that a positive supervisory
relationship will provide the necessary environment to foster multicultural competence and help
translate the supervisee’s acquired theoretical knowledge into clinical practice.
In addition, the supervisory relationship can be viewed as a reciprocal educational
process in which supervisors and supervisees learn about themselves and from each other
(Ladany, Friedlander, & Nelson, 2005). Supervision can affect supervisees as well as clients.
Bhat and Davis (2007) stated that supervision is a parallel process, as interactions from the
5
supervisory relationship can be repeated in the supervisee–client therapeutic relationship. Many
researchers have suggested that when the supervisory relationship is based on safety, trust,
understanding, support, and collaboration, the relationship will also be positively replicated in
the supervisee–client relationship (Atkinson & Woods, 2007; Murphy & Wright, 2005). When
attending to the supervisory relationship, experts and researchers have also recognized the need
to address cultural variables in the supervisory process. Lassiter, Napolitano, Culbreth, and Ng
(2008) recommended that existing supervision models be adapted to include a multicultural
focus in supervision. Given the importance of clinical supervision, it is essential for supervisors
to initiate discussions and practices that address multicultural variables in supervision (Soheilian,
Inman, Klinger, Isenberg, & Kulp, 2014). Inman and DeBoer Kreider (2013) opined that one of
the initial supervisory responsibilities is to help supervisees identify, understand, and clarify their
own and their clients’ values and beliefs as well as how these beliefs are reflected across multiple
social identities. Ancis and Marshall (2010) also noted that when supervisors encourage
discussions of cultural issues in supervision, they enhance the supervisory relationship. In a
related study, Toporek, Ortega-Villalobos, and Pope-Davis (2004) found that supervisees
perceived an enhanced multicultural awareness after experiencing positive multicultural
interactions with their supervisors.
Diversity and Multiculturalism in Clinical Supervision
In the last 2 decades, the multicultural supervision literature not only has grown
considerably, but also has contributed to an enhanced understanding about its practices (Ancis &
Marshall, 2010; Falender, Shafranske, & Falicov, 2014; Soheilian et al., 2014; Watkins, 2014).
However, multicultural supervision is still “one of the newest kids on the multicultural block and
many of the emerging models and research findings are not yet clearly programmatic and
6
interrelated” (Inman & Ladany, 2014, p. 654). For some supervisors, there may be confusion
about the meaning of multiculturalism or multicultural competence.
Multiculturalism is defined by the American Psychological Association as aspects of
identity stemming from race, ethnicity, language, education, gender, religion and spiritual
orientation, sexual orientation, disability, socioeconomic status, age, and any other cultural
dimensions (APA, 2010). Integrating multicultural and attention to diversity is not optional in
professional practice; rather, being able to address various diversity factors and provide feedback
and training are considered to be important legal and ethical supervisor responsibilities (APA,
2014).
Multicultural supervision is defined as supervisory incidents where supervisors and
supervisees consider and discuss a variety of cultural issues in their clinical understanding and
practice with diverse clients (Ancis & Marshall, 2010). The ability to understand and address the
influences of cultural as well as other aspects of identity in supervision have been regarded as
essential components for supervisees to conduct ethical and effective practice with their clients
(Ancis & Ladany, 2010). Diversity and multicultural practice in supervision includes paying
attention to values and attitudes as well as an appreciation of many strands of identities of
trainees and clients, involving race and ethnicity, gender and sex, social class and socioeconomic
status, ability, religion and spirituality, immigration status, as well as age and generational
experiences (Falender, Shafranske, & Falicov, 2014).
Many researchers have identified the following three widely accepted viewpoints as
having high practical importance (Ancis & Ladany, 2010; Bernard & Goodyear, 2014). Effective
multicultural supervision includes (a) establishing and maintaining a safe supervisory
environment and a strong working alliance that functions as the foundational core of the
7
supervisor–supervisee relationship; (b) acknowledging that multiculturalism and diversity in
supervision is an ongoing commitment to continually working toward awareness and knowledge
enhancement; and (c) introducing and addressing multicultural issues throughout the entire
supervisory process, making them consistent elements of the ongoing supervisory dialogue
(Atkinson & Woods, 2007; Falender, Burnes, & Ellis, 2013; Wong, Wong, & Ishiyama, 2013).
According to Inman (2006), supervisors are ultimately responsible for promoting
supervisees’ multicultural competence by initiating and facilitating multicultural discussions in
supervision. Many researchers believe it is impossible to conduct multicultural supervision if the
supervisor does not have the ability to attend to issues of diversity and cultural identities in both
the supervisory relationship as well as the supervisee’s relationship with clients (Bernard &
Goodyear, 2014; Falender et al., 2013). This means supervisors have to be willing to be
proactive, to be willing to do some self-exploration, and to have courage to talk openly with
supervisees about potentially uncomfortable issues (Garrett et al., 2001). “Supervisors should not
wait for racial and cultural issues to come up during supervision, but rather supervisors should
take initiative and raise these issues” (Gatmon et al., 2001, p. 109).
Numerous studies have been published on the components of successful versus
unsuccessful, supportive versus unsupportive, and competent versus incompetent multicultural
supervision (Falender et al., 2013; Falender, Shafranske, & Falicov, 2014; Inman et al., 2014).
These studies all showed that culturally responsive supervisors demonstrate and appreciate the
multicultural aspects of clients during case presentations and continually encourage supervisees’
recognition and interest regarding the diversity variables of their clients. This appreciation, in
turn, can create a stronger therapeutic alliance between the supervisee and the client (Burkard et
al., 2006).
8
Multicultural Supervisory Framework and Processes
The competency-based approach to clinical supervision provides a framework with which
to understand complex issues of diversity variables and their interactions among supervisor,
supervisee, and clients (Falender, Shafranske, & Falicov, 2014). Addressing diversity issues and
challenges should always be acknowledged and be part of the ongoing conversations in clinical
supervision.
A supervisor using a multicultural framework models openness, self-awareness, and the
integration of values, beliefs, and biases in relation to culturally diverse clients and their social
contexts (Falender, Shafranske, & Falicov, 2014). It can be said that all supervision is
multicultural because culture incorporates the influences of issues such as gender, race, ethnicity,
sexual orientation, religion and spirituality, and socioeconomic status on our assumptions,
thoughts, and behaviors (Killian, 2001).
Ancis and Ladany (2001) proposed a framework for multicultural supervision
competencies influenced by the APA guidelines for clinical training and codes of ethics. Ancis
and Ladany’s multicultural supervision guidelines were divided into five areas: (a) personal
development, (b) conceptualization, (c) interventions, (d) process, and (e) evaluation. In the
supervision literature, these domains have all been recognized as important for the personal and
professional development of supervisors and supervisees as well as clinical techniques and
interventions (Ancis & Marshall, 2010). The personal development domain consists of
supervisor-focused personal development and supervisee-focused personal development.
Supervisor-focused personal development refers to the process of self-awareness and knowledge
of multicultural beliefs, biases, strengths, and limitations. This domain also involves supervisors’
participation in related training, educational, and consultative multicultural experiences.
9
Supervisee-focused personal development refers to facilitating discussions and encouraging
supervisee self-exploration, awareness, and understanding of one’s cultural knowledge (Ancis &
Ladany, 2001).
The conceptualization domain encourages consideration of the impact of personal and
contextual factors on clients’ lives and the examination of the impact of stereotyping and
oppression on clients’ perspectives and concerns. The interventions domain refers to supervisors
encouraging consideration and flexibility regarding the use of interventions and alternative
approaches that are culturally appropriate and relevant with diverse clients. The process domain
encourages a supervisory alliance that conveys acceptance, respect, and support. This domain
also refers to discussions of power dynamics in supervision and facilitating a climate in which
diversity variables can be openly and safely discussed. Finally, the evaluation domain refers to
the ethical responsibility of supervisors to identify and provide feedback regarding supervisees’
multicultural strengths and weaknesses. Considering the various and interrelated demands of the
supervisor’s responsibilities, Ancis and Ladany (2001) mentioned the possibility of some overlap
among the competencies identified across these five dimensions.
To summarize, a multicultural framework in supervision provides guidelines for
supervisors to consciously integrate diversity variables and global perspectives in the supervisory
process (Falender, Shafranske, & Falicov, 2014). The goal is to enhance the success of the
working relationship between the supervisor and the supervisee as well as the therapeutic
alliance between the supervisee and the client.
One of the most fundamental notions of effective clinical supervision is creating a
collaborative supervisory interaction grounded in honest and constructive conversations. The
responsibility of creating an environment where trainees can discover and share their values and
10
beliefs lies with the supervisor (Falender & Shafranske, 2014; Yabusaki, 2010). In this
collaborative and supportive environment, trainees can feel safe to be vulnerable, reveal
uncertainties, and to accept suggestions and feedback (Ancis & Marshall, 2010). It is worth
noting that this type of relational safety does not refer to blind validation and emotional support,
but to the development of critical thinking in a caring relational environment (Hernández &
McDowell, 2010).
The current supervision literature shows that when supervisors attended to diversity and
power issues in supervision, supervisees reported increased satisfaction with supervision
(Gatmon et al., 2001; Inman, 2006; Murphy & Wright, 2005). Furthermore, supervisees reported
a higher level of satisfaction with the supervision experiences when they viewed their
supervisors to be competent in addressing and discussing diversity variables (Inman, 2006).
In a qualitative study of the experiences of supervisees in multicultural supervision, Hird
et al. (2001) stated that supervisees reported that having discussions of cultural interactions in
supervision had a great positive impact on supervisory alliance. Most importantly, racial identity
interactions between the supervisors and supervisees not only influenced the supervisory
alliance, but also the development of the supervisees’ multicultural competence. The authors also
stated that “multicultural supervision consists of the process of modeling, supporting, teaching,
coaching and evaluating a supervisee’s development” (p. 118). A multiculturally competent
supervisor attempts to recognize the supervisee’s understanding of “self in the world” and how
the self can be validated, sustained, and used to conceptualize the supervisee’s growth.
When supervisors fail to integrate cultural and diversity variables in the supervision
process, supervisees may experience frustration and resistance and view their supervisors as
culturally insensitive and incompetent (Burkard, Knox, Clarke, Phelps, & Inman, 2014; Hird et
11
al., 2001). In addition, not addressing multicultural issues in supervision can lead supervisees to
feel misunderstood, miscommunicated, disconnected, dismissed, and ignored by their
supervisors, which, in turn, makes the supervision process unsatisfying and negative (Burkard et
al., 2006).
Multicultural Competence in Clinical Supervisors
The APA’s recent Clinical Supervision Guidelines (APA, 2015) and Multicultural
Guidelines (APA, 2017) as well as current leading models of supervision all identified the
importance of attending to diversity issues in the supervision process (Falender, 2018; Falender,
Shafranske, & Falicov, 2014; Falender, Shafranske, & Ofek, 2014; Inman & Ladany, 2014;
Tohidian & Quek, 2017; Westefeld, 2009). Domain B, Diversity, of the Clinical Supervision
Guidelines (APA, 2015) highlighted many supervisory behaviors that are associated with
multicultural competence in supervision. Supervisors should explore multicultural issues during
supervision with supervisees, such as by placing focus on the diverse identities in the supervisory
dyad in order to benefit supervisees and clients.
In recent years, there has been an increased number of articles and studies focused on
conducting culturally competent and effective supervision (Borders, 2014; Falender et al., 2013;
Falender, Shafranske, & Falicov, 2014; Falender, Shafranske, & Ofek, 2014; Hernández &
McDowell, 2010; Tohidian & Quek, 2017; Watkins, 2014). Over the past few decades,
multicultural competence in therapy also received heightened attention in the mental health
literature (Ancis & Marshall, 2010; Clauss-Ehlers, Chiriboga, Hunter, Roysurcar, & Tummala-
Narra, 2019; Inman & DeBoer Kreider, 2013; Watkins, 2014).
Ancis and Marshall (2010) defined cultural competence as having an awareness of one’s
own cultural beliefs and biases, understanding the personal and cultural worldviews of diverse
12
clients, and being committed to developing ways to appropriately work with client of diverse
cultural background. Researchers have also suggested that supervisor self-disclosure, self-
awareness, genuine attention, and support and non-defensive feedback can contribute to a
culturally responsive supervisory relationship (Bernard & Goodyear, 2014; Christiansen et al.,
2011; Falender & Shafranske, 2017; Inman & Ladany, 2014; Tohidian & Quek, 2017).
Through the examination of the literature available on various dimensions of providing
multiculturally competent supervision, common themes can be identified. Overall, the literature
supports the supervisor as the key to inviting multiculturalism into the supervisory discussion
and instigating active dialogues regarding diversity and differences (Falender, 2018; Falender,
Shafranske, & Ofek, 2014; Fouad & Chavez-Korell, 2014; Furr & Brown-Rice, 2016; Phillips,
Parent, Dozier & Jackson, 2017; Trimble & King, 2014). In order to accomplish this, the
supervisor need to embody a certain degree of openness, self-disclosure, and self-awareness
regarding his or her own identity development related to multicultural factors as well as foster an
environment of safety and self-exploration within the supervisory relationship (Bernard &
Goodyear, 2014; Clauss-Ehlers et al., 2019; Falender & Shafranske, 2017; Tohidian & Quek,
2017). This can be done via the creation of clear goals and expectations of supervision (Falender,
Shafranske, & Falicov, 2014).
Furthermore, the creation of clear boundaries and expectations of supervision may also
counteract the fear of repudiation can prevent supervisees from bringing issues of
multiculturalism into the supervision (Sue, Rivera, Capodilupo, Lin, & Torino, 2010). The client
will be better served and all aspects of the client’s identity will be considered when supervisory
issues related to diversity and culture are further addressed. Increased self-awareness and self-
13
exploration will not only be beneficial to the treatment of clients, but also to supervisors and
supervisees both personally and professionally.
Limitations and Gaps in Multicultural Supervision Literature
Through the process of examining the current literature regarding multicultural
competence in clinical supervision, it is evident that the existing knowledge and literature must
be further expanded to fully address all aspects of multiculturalism within clinical practice and
supervision. Although there is readily available literature on conceptual theories and models of
multicultural supervision, there is a relative lack of literature that addressed the various aspects
of the actual implementation of multicultural supervision through the use of specific practices
and techniques.
Literature on multicultural psychotherapy and competence has flourished since the 1990s
but is still in its early stages (Ladany, 2014). The literature on multicultural supervision has also
flourished but few authors reviewed and discussed best practices in teaching about the
supervision process (Bernard & Luke, 2015; Ladany, 2014). In fact, a content analysis of the last
10 years of published supervision articles in counseling revealed that even articles that were
identified as training articles only contained descriptions of supervision processes and not the
teaching and actual practice of these processes (Bernard & Luke, 2015). This is an indication that
currently there is an imbalance in the focus of literature where scholarly opinions regarding
multicultural supervision are outpacing studies that focus on the actual implementation and
practices of clinical multicultural supervision (Falender & Shafranske, 2017). Leaders in the field
of multicultural supervision continue to call for the studies of supervision techniques of initiating
and maintaining discussion of multicultural issues in supervision (Falender et al., 2013; Falender,
Shafranske, & Ofek, 2014; Gatmon et al., 2001; Inman & Ladany, 2014).
14
Supervisors continue to face the challenges of addressing, facilitating, and integrating
multicultural issues in supervision. These challenges encountered by supervisors can be the
result of multiculturally incorrect perceptions of supervision and psychotherapy by minimizing
or ignoring multicultural issues (Ancis & Ladany, 2010; Inman, 2006; Ladany, 2014).
Furthermore, researchers and theorists speculate that difficulties in supervision related to
multicultural issues often occur because many experienced supervisors may have entered the
mental health field before the emergence of the multicultural movement in psychology and
therefore do not know how to address issues of race and culture in the therapy or supervision
process (Jernigan, Green, Helms, Perez-Gualdron, & Henze, 2010). As a result, there is a
significant need for multicultural supervision training among supervisors in order to promote
effective supervision and help ensure supervisees’ competency in providing services to clients.
Over the last 30 years, authors and researchers have proposed many models of
multicultural supervision that contributed to the conceptualization and understanding of this
important field. However, very few existing models offer clear instructions for the application of
the concepts through specific multicultural supervisory behaviors in supervision beyond simply
introducing multiculturalism as a topic in supervision (Bernard & Luke, 2015; Ober et al., 2009).
In addition, the current existing research is limited in terms of the qualities and sources through
which supervisors gain multicultural competencies and researchers have noted the importance
for supervisors to obtain training and education on multicultural supervision as studies have
shown there is a low frequency of discussions related to cultural variables during supervision that
are initiated by supervisors (Falender, 2018; Falender & Shafranske, 2017; Fukuyama, 1994;
Gatmon et al., 2001; Phillips et al., 2017; Priest, 1994).
15
As such, there is a need to explore and identify whether there are any specific
multicultural supervisory practices and behaviors in clinical supervision that are commonly
considered to be most important by experienced supervisors. Furthermore, multicultural
supervisory behaviors that are identified by experienced supervisors can be compared to those
recommended as best practices based on the current literature to examine the differences
between the current recommended standards in multicultural supervision and the actual
implementation of these standards in actual practice at active training sites.
Purpose of Study and Research Question
The purpose of this exploratory study was to invite experienced supervisors at active
training sites to rate and categorize a list of specific supervisor behaviors that best demonstrate
multicultural supervision competence and address diversity in clinical supervision as well as to
determine whether there was consensus among the participants. This categorized list of
behaviors can then be used to assess current multicultural supervisory practices at training sites
compared to the recommendations of current literature, as possible multicultural supervision
guidelines for supervisors, and in future studies to explore supervisory multicultural competence
and actual implementations of multicultural supervisory practices at active training sites.
Using quantitative data and descriptive and frequency analyses, this study was designed
to investigate the most important multicultural supervisory practices as recommended by
experienced supervisors in multicultural psychology through the use of a survey. The research
questions for this study were:
1. What are the best practices in addressing diversity in clinical supervision as
recommended by experienced supervisors?
16
2. Are there any discrepancies between the best practices recommended by experienced
supervisors and suggested by current literature publications?
17
Method
Research Approach and Design
This study involved the use of a survey approach to assess participants’ opinions
regarding effective multicultural supervision practices. Specifically, the use of an Internet-based
instrument provided for relatively expedited, straightforward, and cost-effective recruitment and
survey administration (Hoonakker & Carayon, 2009). In addition, the study procedures reflected
several recommendations for enhancing recruitment and participation in web-based survey
studies (Hoonakker & Carayon, 2009). Descriptive and frequency distribution approaches to data
analysis were used to investigate the best practices to address diversity issues in clinical
supervision as recommended by survey participants.
Participants
Participants recruited for this study were licensed psychologists who were currently
supervising trainees or interns or had provided supervision previously. They were required to
have at least 5 years of supervision experience and to have supervised at least 10 supervisees.
Participants were recruited from several sources: (a) members of the APA Division 45, (b)
members of the Association of Black Psychologists, (c) members of the Asian APA, (d)
members of the National Latina/o Psychological Association, and (e) university and college
counseling center directors. Participants were also asked to forward recruitment announcement
email to other licensed psychologists who would be interested in participating in the study.
For the purpose of this study, “experienced supervisors” were defined as licensed
psychologists who were highly experienced in multicultural psychology and supervision based
on years of experience working in settings that served a diverse population (at least 5 years of
post-doctoral supervision experience) and the number of supervisees supervised (at least 10
18
supervisees). Those who met the selection criteria were selected based on the information
included in the demographic questionnaire given at the beginning of the survey.
A total of 122 licensed psychologists responded to the recruitment announcement and
email by completing the consent for this study; however, 60 individuals consented but did not
complete the survey and were therefore excluded from data analysis. Overall, 62 licensed
psychologists participated and completed the survey study. Of the 62 participants, 18 participants
were excluded as a result of not meeting the selection criteria of having at least 5 years of
postdoctoral supervision experience and having supervised at least 10 supervisees, resulting in a
final sample of 44.
General characteristics of participants. Detailed demographic characteristics of the 44
participants are displayed in Table 1. Participants ranged in age from 34 to 66 years (M = 49.2,
SD = 8.11). The range of years of licensure was from 5 to 36 years (M = 15.16, SD = 7.26). Of
the 44 participants, 30 (68.18%) were female and 14 (31.82%) were male. With regard to
racial/ethnic identification, 68.18% of the participants identified as Caucasian/White, 9.09% as
African American/Black, 9.09% as Latinx, 6.82% as bi-racial or multiracial, 4.54% as Asian, and
2.27% as Iranian. With regard to sexual orientation, 84.09% identified as heterosexual, 4.54% as
lesbian, 4.54% as pansexual, 2.27% as gay, 2.27% as gay or queer, and 2.27% did not report
their sexual orientation. In terms of primary theoretical orientation, 25% described their
orientation as integrative or eclectic, 20.45% as cognitive, 15.91% as psychodynamic or
relational, 9.09% as humanistic, 4.54% as cognitive-behavioral, 4.54% as feminist, 4.54% as
multicultural, 2.27% as behavioral, 2.27% as existential, 2.27% as interpersonal (IPT), 2.27% as
neuropsychotherapy, 2.27% as postmodern constructive, 2.27% as relational or cultural, and
2.27% as systems or family systems. With regard to most recent work, training, or teaching site,
19
52.27% were in a university counseling center, 18.18% were in a veteran affairs medical center,
9.09% were in multiple sites, 6.82% were in private practice, 4.54% were in medical school,
2.27% were in an armed forces medical center, 2.27% were in child or adolescent psychiatric or
pediatrics, 2.27% were in community mental health, and 2.27% were in a state funded non-profit
agency or regional center. Finally, 86.36% of the participants reported not being an APA
Division 45 member, 11.36% reported being a member of APA Division 45, and 2.27% did not
respond.
Supervision and supervision training experience characteristics of participants.
Detailed supervision and supervision training experience characteristics of the 44 participants are
displayed in Table 2. A total of 90.91% of the participants were currently providing supervision
and 9.09% were not currently supervising. Years of supervision experience ranged from 5 to 36
years (M = 14.11, SD = 6.43). The number of supervisees they supervised in the last 10 years
ranged from 10 to 200 (M = 36.5, SD = 31.96). The current weekly number of supervisees they
supervised was reported to be from 0 to 13 (M = 3.98, SD = 3.25). The number of weekly hours
that participants spent on direct supervision ranged from 0 to 10 hours (M = 3.77, SD = 2.01).
The number of weekly hours spent on indirect supervision ranged from 0 to 20 hours (M = 4, SD
= 4.39). With regard to number of supervision workshops or trainings attended during the last 2
licensure cycles, the range was from 0 to 10 (M = 3.09, SD = 2.48). The number of multicultural
supervision workshops or trainings attended during the last two licensure cycles ranged from 0 to
5 (M = 1.32, SD = 1.33). In terms of the number of supervision books or articles read during the
last two licensure cycles, participants’ reports ranged from 0 to 50 (M = 5.75, SD = 8.6) and the
number of multicultural supervision books or articles read during the last two licensure cycles
ranged from 0 to 15 (M = 3.43, SD = 4.14). A total of 54.55% of the participants did not take a
20
graduate course in clinical supervision and 45.45% did. Of the participants, 88.65% took a
graduate course in culture or diversity and 11.36% did not. Finally, 72.73% of the participants
received supervision of supervision and 27.27% did not.
Instrumentation
The web-based survey instrument included a Demographic Questionnaire and the
Multicultural Supervisory Behaviors and Practices form (see Appendices B-C).
Demographic questionnaire. The Demographic Questionnaire was developed for the
purpose of collecting information regarding demographics of study participants (e.g., age,
gender, ethnicity, supervision setting, supervision experience, theoretical orientation) by
participant self-report. This measure consisted of free response and force-choice items. The
Demographic Questionnaire can be found in Appendix C.
Multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices form. The Multicultural
Supervisory Behaviors and Practices (MSBP) form was developed for the purpose of this
investigation to assess the best supervisory behaviors and practices in addressing diversity issues
in clinical supervision. The MSBP consists of 20 specific supervisory behaviors and practices
that facilitate discussions of diversity issues and cultivate multicultural competence in clinical
supervision (e.g., “articulating a commitment to develop multicultural competence by discussing
expectations within the first two supervision sessions” and “addressing feelings of discomfort
experienced by trainees concerning multicultural issue”). During the first part of the survey,
participants were asked to rate each behavior into one of two categories based on its importance
on addressing diversity issues in clinical supervision (1 was more important and 2 was less
important). The participants were also instructed to only include 10 specific behaviors in each
category. During the second part of the survey, participants were asked again to rate the 10
21
behaviors they rated as more important in the first part into one of two categories based on their
importance on addressing diversity issues in clinical supervision (1 was most important and 2
was moderately important). The participants were also instructed to only include five specific
behaviors in each category. Items on the MSBP form were specifically selected and developed
based on successful multicultural supervisory behaviors identified in current literature. Each
behavior or practice was carefully worded to be action-focused as well as to be
observable/measurable. The MSBP can be found in Appendix B.
Respondents were provided the following instructions in Part I:
On the following page, there are 20 specific multicultural supervisory behaviors. As you read through the behaviors, please rate the behaviors into one of two categories (1 more important and 2 less important) based on its importance on addressing diversity issues in clinical supervision. Please ONLY include 10 behaviors in EACH category.
Respondents were provided the following instructions in Part II:
On the following page, there are 10 specific multicultural supervisory behaviors that you have just rated as more important. As you read through the behaviors again, please rate the behaviors into one of two categories (1 most important and 2 moderately important) based on its importance on addressing diversity issues in clinical supervision. Please ONLY include 5 behaviors in EACH category. The MSBP form was developed based on an extensive review of the literature on
competency-based supervision practices, effective and ineffective supervisory behaviors,
supervision processes and outcomes, cross-cultural and multicultural supervision, power and
diversity in supervision, and cultural responsiveness in clinical supervision. Based on the
literature review (see Ancis & Marshall, 2010; Burkard et al., 2006; Dressel et al., 2007; Duan &
Roehlke, 2001; Estrada, Frame, & Williams, 2004; Foo & Rodolfa, 2013; Fukuyama, 1994;
Garrett et al., 2001; Gatmon et al., 2001; Green & Dekkers, 2010; Hernández, Taylor, &
McDowell, 2009; Hird, Tao, & Gloria, 2005; Jernigan et al., 2010; Kaduvettoor et al., 2009;
22
Ladany et al., 2013; Magnuson, Wilcoxon, & Norem, 2000; Murphy-Shigematsu, 2010; Ryde,
2000; Taylor, Hernandez, Deri, Rankin, & Siegel, 2007; Toporek et al., 2004; Wong et al.,
2013), the researcher initially compiled an inventory of 82 behaviors or practices but later
narrowed the list down for redundancies and identified 20 supervisor-specific behaviors or
practices that have the most importance in addressing diversity issues in clinical supervision.
Each behavior or practice was carefully worded to be action-focused as well as observable or
measurable for the purpose of this study.
A majority of the items in the MSBP form are similar to the top 20 elements of successful
multicultural supervision developed based on a 2007 study published by Dressel et al.. In their
study, university counseling center supervisors with significant experience in multicultural
supervision generated and ranked elements of successful and unsuccessful multicultural
supervision using the Delphi method. The Delphi method is widely used in the counseling field
as a relevant process to achieve consensus among knowledgeable respondents (e.g., Dimmitt,
Carey, & McGannon, 2005; Doerries & Foster, 2005; Norcross, Hedges, & Prochaska, 2002). In
the Delphi method, researchers gather a panel of knowledgeable participants, typically through a
nomination process that identifies individuals considered experienced in the area being surveyed.
The panel is surveyed repeatedly (in several rounds) to arrive at a consensus opinion on a topic
of interest (Dalkey, Rourke, Lewis, & Snyder, 1972).
Procedures
Data collection occurred through the use of a web-based survey instrument designed
specifically for this study that contained two primary components of (a) participant
demographics and (b) multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices.
23
Recruitment. Recruitment of study participants occurred following study approval by
Pepperdine University’s Institutional Review Board (IRB). Following final IRB approval,
recruitment opened for a period of 2 months. Initial invitations were sent via email with one
follow-up reminder after approximately 3 weeks. In order to make the study available to as many
potential participants identified above, recruitment occurred via three main approaches. First, the
managers of the listservs of the specific psychological associations identified were contacted via
email and asked to post a recruitment announcement containing invitation for study participation
on the listserv websites. Second, invitations for study participation were sent via emails acquired
through an online search of individuals who self-identified as members of the specific
psychological associations. Third, these announcements invited recipients to forward the survey
to any individuals who were eligible for study participation. This type of snowball sampling
method allowed participants who may not have received the invitation from the first two
recruitment methods to access the survey and participate in the study. One drawback of using
this recruitment method is that participants may receive an invitation to participate more than
once and will have the opportunity to participate more than once. However, the web-based
program housing the survey only allowed each computer IP address to access the survey once,
although the IP addresses were not recorded or stored to protect participant anonymity.
Recruitment materials are included in Appendices D through G.
Protection of human subjects. The study proposal was submitted to Pepperdine
University’s Graduate and Professional Schools IRB to ensure the protection of participants. The
investigator sought expedited IRB review and approval as the study posed no greater than
minimal risk to participants. Risk was reduced by not collecting identifying information from
participants and through the use of hypothetical supervision experiences as opposed to asking
24
about participants’ personal experiences. In addition, the hypothetical supervision experiences
comprised multicultural supervisory behaviors of which the participants were aware because
these behaviors are required competencies in multicultural supervision (Borders, 2104; Soheilian
et al., 2014; Watkins, 2014). Potential participants were informed of the purpose of the study,
study procedures, estimated participation time, protection of confidentiality, and potential risks
and benefits associated with participation. They were advised that participation was strictly
voluntary and that they may refuse to answer questions or discontinue the study at any time.
Consent for participation. Because risk to participants was minimized in this study by
not collecting identifying information, the investigator applied for a Waiver of Documentation of
Informed Consent from the IRB. Instead, the invitation for research participation and survey
included a statement of informed consent and stated that the participants were confirming their
consent by completing the survey and were asked to check the confirmation box prior to
beginning the survey. The informed consent statement included the aforementioned information
related to the study, including the purpose, procedures, the rights of human research subjects, and
the potential risks and benefits associated with study participation.
Potential risks and benefits. This study was thought to pose no more than minimal risk
to participants. Risks included inconvenience as a result of time spent participating in the study
(approximately 15 minutes), fatigue, and the potential for distressing reactions in response to
survey items. The risk of distressing emotional reactions was minimized in this study through the
use of hypothetical supervision experiences. Risk for this study was also minimized by
attempting to make the administration as convenient as possible, through not collecting any
identifying information regarding participants, and through suggesting that participants seek
assistance to deal with any distress related to participation. Participants were provided the name
25
and contact information of the researcher and the project advisor, and advised to seek help in the
event the study procedure results in distress. No participants contacted the researcher reporting
adverse events over the course of this study.
Participants might not have directly benefited from study participation. However, it was
believed that this study would provide information related to effective multicultural supervision
that may help future psychology trainees and supervisors. Potential benefits included the
opportunity to reflect on their multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices with their
supervisees.
Data collection. Data were collected via a web-based survey to recruit participants
nationwide, eliminating geographic restrictions and reducing costs. The data collection window
for the current study was January 16, 2019 through March 21, 2019. Surveys administered
through email and the Internet generally have a shorter response time and better response quality
compared to postal mail surveys and also show similar response rates (52% versus 51%) to
postal mail surveys (Hoonakker & Carayon, 2009). The use of the Internet to recruit and
administer the study survey presented advantages for potential participants, as it was relatively
quicker to participate, convenient to access the survey at anytime and from any location for the
duration of data collection, and protected the confidentiality of participants. These factors
potentially contributed to higher response rate and presumably honest reporting by participants
(Hoonakker & Carayon, 2009).
In addition, collecting raw data online reduced the time and cost associated with manual
data entry as well as prevented human error associated with manual data entry. An online
service, Qualtrics, was used for housing the study questionnaires and protecting participant
anonymity by not obtaining information about IP addresses accessing the website. The use of an
26
online survey service also enabled the data to be converted to a digital database that facilitated
data analyses. The data will be stored on a password-protected external computer drive for 5
years and will then be destroyed by the investigator.
Data analysis. Prior to analyzing the data collected, the raw data were examined for
missing information and errors and a determination was made regarding final data inclusion in
the analysis. The final dataset was converted from the web-based survey to data analysis
software and analyzed through a combination of descriptive statistics and frequency analyses.
Descriptive statistics were used to report the categorical and continuous variables of participant
demographics as well as supervision and supervision training experience (See Tables 1 & 2).
Chi-Square goodness of fit test was used to compare and report the observed sample distribution
with the expected probability distribution of the multicultural supervisory behaviors that were
rated by study participants as most important (See Table 3).
27
Results
The purpose of this exploratory study was to invite licensed psychologists who were
experienced in the field of multicultural psychology and supervision to rate and categorize a list
of specific supervisor behaviors and practices that are most important in demonstrating
multicultural supervision competence and addressing diversity in clinical supervision. A total of
44 completed surveys were used in data analyses. A chi-square goodness-of-fit test was used to
compare the observed sample frequency distribution with the expected probability distribution of
the multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices that were rated by study participants as
most important. Results of the goodness-of-fit test indicated the frequencies of multicultural
supervisory behaviors and practices that were rated as most important were not equally
distributed within this sample; these frequencies were statistically different from what would be
expected by chance (See Table 3).
It appears the following multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices were regarded
as having the highest level of importance (See Table 3):
• Creating a safe (nonjudgmental, supportive) environment for the discussion of
multicultural issues, values, and ideas through the use of verbal and nonverbal
communication
• Addressing feelings of discomfort experienced by trainees concerning multicultural
issues
• Inviting supervisee to explore and discuss the possible existence of personal cultural
biases and prejudices in the conceptualization and practice with clients
• Acknowledging and discussing realities of racism and oppression during supervision
28
• Providing supervisees with a multiculturally diverse caseload to ensure breadth of
clinical experience
• Acknowledging and discussing power issues in supervision that may be related to
racial or ethnic multicultural differences
• Modeling for supervisees by initiating, attending to, and demonstrating interest and
respect for clients’ intersecting identities and culture during case conceptualization
and discussion
It appears the following multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices were regarded
as having the lowest level of importance (See Table 4):
• Encouraging supervisees to share, within supervision, their personal and professional
cultural backgrounds and experiences
• Consulting colleagues willingly about one’s own reactions to racial or ethnic
concerns as a result of any supervision experience
• Acknowledging, discussing, and providing affirming statements that demonstrate
respect for racial or ethnic multicultural similarities and differences between the self
and supervisee, and discussing feelings concerning these similarities or differences
• Self-disclosing own development of self-awareness about cultural and ethnic identity,
biases, and limitations
• Providing recommended multicultural readings and related training experiences to
supervisee
29
Discussion
The focus in this study was to explore whether certain multicultural supervisor behaviors
and practices in demonstrating multicultural supervision competence and addressing diversity in
clinical supervision are commonly considered to be the most important by licensed psychologists
who are experienced in the field of multicultural psychology and supervision. Results showed a
number of multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices were commonly regarded as having
the highest level of importance by study participants. The major finding of this study indicated
that participants rated practices that focused on the supervisee and on process importance more
highly and practices that focused on the supervisor less highly. This is further discussed in detail
in the following section.
Study Results and Multicultural Supervision Competency Framework
Multicultural supervision has been defined as a “supervisor’s ability to address and
facilitate cultural discussions in supervision; incorporate culturally sensitive interventions,
assessments, client conceptualizations; and evaluate the multicultural competence of her or his
supervisee” (Soheilian et al., 2014, p. 380). Multicultural supervision considers and integrates
“multiple cultural interactions as they occur within the triadic process of the supervisor,
supervisee, and client;” it also represents the multiple cultural interactions and contexts that
occur within counseling and supervision dyads (Hird et al., 2001, p. 118).
As suggested by the Competency Benchmarks published by Falender et al. in 2013,
supervisors are responsible for attending to and initiating discussions of multicultural issues and
identities and for preparing psychology trainees to address these issues in their own respective
advocacy, practice, and research settings. Much of the existing literature also supports that
supervisors bear the responsibility to initiate discussions of multicultural issues with supervisees,
30
especially during the initial phase of supervision. Supervision that consciously encourages
explorations of multicultural issues has been shown to promote growth in supervisees’ cultural
competencies (Killian, 2001; Ladany, Inman, Constantine, & Hofheinz, 1997). This means
supervisors have to be willing to be proactive, to be willing to do some self-exploration, and to
have courage to talk openly with supervisees about potentially uncomfortable issues (Garrett et
al., 2001). According to Gatmon et al. (2001), “Supervisors should not wait for racial and
cultural issues to come up during supervision, but rather supervisors should take initiative and
raise these issues” (p. 109).
Ancis and Marshall (2010) delineated six domains under which multicultural supervision
practices fall: (a) supervisor-focused personal development, (b) supervisee-focused personal
development, (c) conceptualization, (d) interventions, (e) process, and (f) evaluation. Based on
the current survey results, multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices that are more
frequently regarded as having the highest level of importance can be categorized into one of the
six domains listed above (See Table 4):
• Process – Creating a safe (nonjudgmental, supportive) environment for the discussion
of multicultural issues, values, and ideas through the use of verbal and nonverbal
communication
• Supervisee-focused personal development – Addressing feelings of discomfort
experienced by trainees concerning multicultural issues
• Supervisee-focused personal development – Inviting supervisees to explore and
discuss the possible existence of personal cultural biases and prejudices in the
conceptualization and practice with clients
31
• Supervisee-focused personal development – Acknowledging and discussing realities
of racism and oppression during supervision
• Process – Providing supervisees with a multiculturally diverse caseload to ensure
breadth of clinical experience
• Process – Acknowledging and discussing power issues in supervision that may be
related to racial or ethnic multicultural differences
• Conceptualization – Modeling for supervisees by initiating, attending to, and
demonstrating interest and respect for clients’ intersecting identities and culture
during case conceptualization and discussion
In addition, the multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices that are regarded as
having less degree of importance can also be categorized into one of the six domains as specified
above (See Table 4):
• Supervisee-focused personal development – Encouraging supervisees to share, within
supervision, their personal and professional cultural backgrounds and experiences
• Supervisor-focused personal development – Consulting colleagues willingly about
one’s own reactions to racial or ethnic concerns as a result of any supervision
experience
• Supervisor-focused personal development – Acknowledging, discussing, and
providing affirming statements that demonstrate respect for racial or ethnic
multicultural similarities and differences between the self and supervisee, and
discussing feelings concerning these similarities or differences
• Supervisor-focused personal development – Self-disclosing own development of self-
awareness about cultural or ethnic identity, biases, and limitations
32
• Supervisee-focused personal development – Providing recommended multicultural
readings and related training experiences to supervisees
A closer examination of the seven multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices
regarded as the most important by the participants of this study revealed that three behaviors and
practices belong to the process domain: creating a safe (nonjudgmental, supportive) environment
for discussion of multicultural issues, values, and ideas through the use of verbal and nonverbal
communication; providing supervisee with a multiculturally diverse caseload to ensure breadth
of clinical experience; acknowledging and discussing power issues in supervision that may be
related to racial/ethnic multicultural differences. Three behaviors and practices belong to the
supervisee-focused personal development domain: addressing feelings of discomfort experienced
by trainees concerning multicultural issue; inviting supervisee to explore and discuss possible
existence of personal cultural biases and prejudices on the conceptualization and practice with
clients; and acknowledging and discussing realities of racism/oppression during supervision. One
behavior belongs to the conceptualization domain: modeling for supervisee by initiating,
attending to, and demonstrating interest and respect for client’s intersecting identities and culture
during case conceptualization and discussion. It is worth noting that the most important
supervisory behavior identified in this study was “Creating a safe (nonjudgmental, supportive)
environment for discussion of multicultural issues, values, and ideas through the use of verbal
and nonverbal communication,” which is consistent with the supervisory behavior identified by
Dressel and colleagues in a 2007 study (Dressel et al., 2007) as the most important behavioral
element involved in successful multicultural supervision.
A closer examination of the five multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices that
participants regarded as having less degree of importance revealed that three behaviors and
33
practices belong to the supervisor-focused personal development domain: consulting colleagues
willingly about my own reactions to racial/ethnic concerns as a result of any supervision
experience; acknowledging, discussing, and providing affirming statements that demonstrate
respect for racial/ethnic multicultural similarities and differences between myself and supervisee,
and discussing feelings concerning these similarities and/or differences; and self-disclosing own
development of self-awareness about cultural/ethnic identity, biases, and limitations. Two
behaviors and practices belong to the supervisee-focused personal development domain:
encouraging supervisee to share, within supervision, their personal and professional cultural
background and experiences; and providing recommended multicultural readings and related
training experiences to supervisee.
Based on the results of this exploratory study, this author hypothesizes that the extent to
which a supervisory behavior is believed to be important by supervisors will affect the frequency
of their performance of that behavior when they are conducting supervision. In other words, this
study results support that the current multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices viewed as
most important and perhaps practiced more frequently by supervisors have a greater emphasis on
the domains of process and supervisee-focused self development and less emphasis on the
domain of supervisor-focused self development. Though supervisors may put more of their focus
on creating a safe space and tending to supervisees’ thoughts and feelings regarding culture and
diversity issues, supervisors are less likely to actively bring up these issues in supervision. In
addition, there seemed to be a greater emphasis on managing multicultural issues through the
supervisee–client dyad and less focus on self-reflection and self-disclosure at the supervisee–
supervisor dyad level.
34
The study finding that supervisor-focused supervisory behaviors were rated as having
lower importance also supported findings in other research studies that showed supervisors are
taking a more passive stance toward initiating diversity conversation during supervision
(Fukuyama, 1994; Gatmon et al., 2001; Phillips et al., 2017; Priest, 1994). This passive approach
is contrary to the recommendations given in the existing multicultural supervision literature and
indicates that supervisors are more reliant on implicit communication and wait for supervisees to
initiate discussions of multicultural and diversity issues in supervision. This approach can
potentially lead to many missed opportunities for multicultural and diversity discussions by
placing the responsibility on supervisees to bring these issues into supervision––ultimately,
supervisees do not know what they do not know.
In order to foster and instill multicultural competency in supervisees, supervisors should
focus on communicating culture and diversity issues explicitly during supervision and pay
attention by proactively raising culture and diversity issues, exploring any discomfort that arises
from culture and diversity discussions, and modeling self-reflection as well as encouraging
supervisee self-reflection during supervision instead of passively waiting for these issues to be
brought up by supervisees.
Clinical Supervision and Multicultural Supervision Training
A closer look at survey participants’ responses on questions regarding continuing
education on clinical supervision and multicultural supervision revealed relatively low numbers
of workshops or trainings attended and books or articles read during the last two licensure cycles,
especially with regard to multicultural supervision. With regard to the number of supervision
workshops or trainings attended, the range was from 0 to 10 (M = 3.09, SD = 2.48) and five out
of the 44 participants (11.36%) stated they did not attend any supervision workshops or trainings.
35
The number of multicultural supervision workshops or trainings attended ranged from 0 to 5 (M
= 1.32, SD = 1.33) and 14 out of the 44 participants (31.82%) indicated they did not attend any
multicultural supervision workshops or trainings. In terms of the number of supervision books or
articles read during the last two licensure cycles, participants’ reports ranged from 0 to 50 (M =
5.75, SD = 8.6) and seven out of the 44 participants (15.91%) stated they did not read any
supervision books or articles. Finally, in terms of the number of multicultural supervision books
or articles read during the last two licensure cycles, the range was from 0 to 15 (M = 3.43, SD =
4.14) and nine out of the 44 participants (20.45%) indicated they did not read any multicultural
supervision books or articles. This indicates supervisors do not engage in adequate continuing
education regarding the topic of supervision and multicultural supervision. In addition, there is a
need for clinical supervisors to be exposed to and trained more in multicultural supervision
theories as well as learn strategies to effectively facilitate skills to initiate discussions about
culture and diversity issues in supervision.
Limitations
Several methodological limitations were identified in the study. First, this study relied
exclusively on self-report, which may result in self-report bias as it assumes participants are
being honest about their experiences, are not engaging in social desirability, and are able to
accurately recall their experiences. Another possible limitation is self-selection bias, with those
who were more interested in supervision and multicultural supervision being more likely to
participate in this study. Along these lines, there was a relatively low response rate given how
many venues for recruitment were used to reach out to elicit participation. This study also
included the assumptions that the results can be generalized to different clinical settings and the
sample surveyed in this study had expert knowledge in multicultural supervision based on work
36
settings and years of supervision experience. Furthermore, it was assumed that the 20
multicultural supervisory behaviors identified based on literature review were representative of
the best multicultural supervision practices. Finally, based on the small sample size, the results
may not be representative of the entire population of experienced clinical supervisors. Despite
these limitations, the present study did demonstrate the frequencies of multicultural supervisory
behaviors and practices viewed as most important were not equally distributed within this
sample, indicating some level of consensus on the most important behaviors among survey
participants. This study also offered some insight into the current practices of multicultural
supervision at training sites as well as the levels of multicultural supervision training received by
licensed psychologists who are providing supervision.
Directions for Future Research
Because this was an exploratory study with a relatively small sample size that was
designed to examine whether there was consensus among more experienced supervisors
regarding the most important multicultural supervisory behaviors, future research should be
conducted to explore whether there is a similar consensus with a larger sample size. Future
studies should also be conducted to explore whether there are any differences between the
opinions of experienced supervisors and the opinions of early career supervisors. It would also
be helpful to explore whether differences in opinion exist among supervisors who have
participated in more extensive continuing education regarding multicultural supervision
compared to those who have less extensive continuing education regarding multicultural
supervision. In addition, investigations should be conducted examining opinions and attitudes
regarding supervisory behaviors and the actual performance of these supervisory behaviors.
37
Conclusions
The purpose of this exploratory study was to invite licensed psychologists who were
experienced in the field of multicultural psychology and supervision to rate and categorize a list
of specific supervisor behaviors and practices that they considered to be most important in
demonstrating multicultural supervision competence and addressing diversity in clinical
supervision. A total of 44 completed surveys were used in data analyses. Results of the chi-
square goodness-of-fit test indicated the frequencies of multicultural supervisory behaviors and
practices rated as most important were not equally distributed within this sample and these
frequencies were statistically different from what would be expected by chance, indicating a
level of consensus among survey participants. This study provided a snapshot of what type of
multicultural supervisory behaviors and practices were viewed as most important by survey
participants and perhaps also currently practiced more frequently by supervisors at training sites.
Results support that when it comes to multicultural and diversity issues, supervisors tend to use a
more passive approach, which is contrary to what the present multicultural supervision literature
and research recommend as best practices. Furthermore, supervisors’ engagement in continuing
education regarding supervision and multicultural supervision is very limited. This indicates
there is a need for clinical supervisors to be exposed to and trained more in multicultural
supervision theories as well as to learn effective facilitative skills to initiate discussions about
culture and diversity issues in supervision.
38
REFERENCES
American Psychological Association. (2010). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of
conduct. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/principles.pdf
American Psychological Association. (2014). Guidelines for clinical supervision in health
service psychology. Retrieved from http://apa.org/about/policy/guidelines-supervision.pdf
American Psychological Association. (2015). Guidelines for clinical supervision in health
service psychology. American Psychologist, 70, 33–46. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038112
American Psychological Association. (2017). Multicultural guidelines: An ecological approach
to context, identity, and intersectionality, 2017. Retrieved from
http://www.apa.org/about/policy/multicultural-guidelines.aspx
Ancis, J. R., & Ladany, N. (2001). A multicultural framework for counselor supervision. In L. J.
Bradley & N. Ladany (Eds.), Counselor supervision: Principles, process, and practice
(3rd ed., pp. 63–90). New York, NY: Brunner-Routledge.
Ancis, J. R., & Ladany, N. (2010). A multicultural framework for counselor supervision. In N.
Ladany & L. J. Bradley (Eds.), Counselor supervision (4th ed., pp. 53–94). New York,
NY: Routledge.
Ancis, J. R., & Marshall, D. S. (2010). Using a multicultural framework to assess supervisees’
perceptions of culturally competent supervision. Journal of Counseling & Development,
88(3), 277–284. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6678.2010.tb00023.x
Atkinson, C., & Woods, K. (2007). A model of effective fieldwork supervision for trainee
educational psychologists. Educational Psychology in Practice, 23(4), 299–316.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02667360701660902
39
Barnett, J. E., & Molzon, C. H. (2014). Clinical supervision of psychotherapy: Essential ethics
issues for supervisors and supervisees. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 70(11), 1051–
1061. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22126
Bernard, J. M., & Goodyear, R. K. (2014). Fundamentals of clinical supervision (5th ed.). Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Bernard, J. M., & Luke, M. (2015). A content analysis of 10 years of clinical supervision articles
in counseling. Counselor Education and Supervision, 54(4), 242–257.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ceas.12024
Bhat, C. S., & Davis, T. E. (2007). Counseling supervisors’ assessment of race, racial identity,
and working alliance in supervisory dyads. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and
Development, 35(2), 80–91. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2007.tb00051.x
Borders, D. L. (2014). Best practices in clinical supervision: Another step in delineating effective
supervision practice. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 68(2), 151–162.
https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.2014.68.2.151
Burkard, A. W., Johnson, A. J., Madson, M. B., Pruitt, N. T., Contreras-Tadych, D. A.,
Kozlowski, J. E. M., . . . Knox, S. (2006). Supervisor cultural responsiveness and
unresponsiveness in cross-cultural supervision. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53(3),
288–301. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.53.3.288
Burkard, A. W., Knox, S., Clarke, R. D., Phelps, D. L., & Inman, A. G. (2014). Supervisors’
experiences of providing difficult feedback in cross-ethnic/racial supervision. The
Counseling Psychologist, 42(3), 314–344. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000012461157
Christiansen, A. T., Thomas, V., Kafescioglu, N., Karakurt, G., Lowe, W., Smith, W., &
Wittenborn, A. (2011). Multicultural supervision: Lessons learned about an ongoing
40
struggle. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 37(1), 109–119.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-0606.2009.00138.x
Clauss-Ehlers, C. S., Chiriboga, D. A., Hunter, S. J., Roysurcar, G., & Tummala-Narra, P.
(2019). APA multicultural guidelines executive summary: Ecological approach to
context, identity, and intersectionality. American Psychologist, 74(2), 232–244.
https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000382
Dalkey, N. G., Rourke, D. L., Lewis, R., & Snyder, D. (1972). Studies in the quality of life:
Delphi and decision-making. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Dimmitt, G., Carey, J. G., & McGannon, W. (2005). Identifying a school counseling research
agenda: A Delphi study. Counselor Education and Supervision, 44, 214–228.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6978.2005.tb01748.x
Doerries, D. B., & Foster, V. A. (2005). Essential skills for novice structural family therapists: A
Delphi study of experienced practitioners’ perspectives. Family Journal: Counseling and
Therapy for Couples and Families, 13, 259–265.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1066480704273639
Dressel, J. L., Consoli, A. J., Kim, B. S. K., & Atkinson, D. R. (2007). Successful and
unsuccessful multicultural supervisory behaviors: A Delphi poll. Journal of Multicultural
Counseling and Development, 35(1), 51–64. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-
1912.2007.tb00049.x
Duan, C., & Roehlke, H. (2001). A descriptive “snapshot” of cross-racial supervision in
university counseling center internships. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and
Development, 29(2), 131–146. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2001.tb00510.x
41
Estrada, D., Frame, M. W., & Williams, C. B. (2004). Cross-cultural supervision: Guiding the
conversation toward race and ethnicity. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and
Development, 32, 307–319.
Falender, C. A. (2018). Clinical supervision—The missing ingredient. American
Psychologist, 73(9), 1240–1250. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000385
Falender, C. A., Burnes, T. R., & Ellis, M. V. (2013). Multicultural clinical supervision and
benchmarks: Empirical support informing practice and supervisor training. Counseling
Psychologist, 41(1), 8–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000012438417
Falender, C. A., & Shafranske, E. P. (2004). The practice of clinical supervision. In C. A.
Falender & E. P. Shafranske (Eds.), Clinical supervision: A competency-based approach
(pp. 3–35). Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10806-001
Falender, C. A., & Shafranske, E. P. (2007). Competence in competency-based supervision
practice: Construct and application. Professional Psychology: Research & Practice,
38(3), 232–240. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.38.3.232
Falender, C. A., & Shafranske, E. P. (2014). Clinical supervision: The state of the art. Journal of
Clinical Psychology, 70(11), 1030–1041. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22124
Falender, C. A., & Shafranske, E. P. (2017). Competency-based clinical supervision: Status,
opportunities, tensions, and the future. Australian Psychologist, 52(2), 86–93.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ap.12265
Falender, C. A., Shafranske, E. P., & Falicov, C. J. (2014). Multiculturalism and diversity in
clinical supervision: A competency-based approach. Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14370-000
42
Falender, C. A., Shafranske, E. P., & Ofek, A. (2014). Competent clinical supervision: Emerging
effective practices. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 27(4), 393–408.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09515070.2014.934785
Foo, K. N. M. R., & Rodolfa, E. R. (2013). Putting the benchmarks into practice: Multiculturally
competent supervisors-effective supervision. Counseling Psychologist, 41(1), 121–130.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000012453944
Fouad, N. A., & Chavez-Korell, S. (2014). Considering social class and socioeconomic status in
the context of multiple identities: An integrative clinical supervision approach. In C. A.
Falender, E. P. Shafranske, & C. J. Falicov (Eds.), Multiculturalism and diversity in
clinical supervision: A competency-based approach (pp. 145–161). Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14370-006
Fukuyama, M. A. (1994). Critical incidents in multicultural counseling supervision: A
phenomenological approach to supervision research. Counselor Education and
Supervision, 34(2), 142–151. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6978.1994.tb00321.x
Furr, S., & Brown-Rice, K. (2016). Doctoral students’ knowledge of educators’ problems of
professional competency. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 10(4),
223–230. https://doi.org/10.1037/tep0000131
Garrett, M. T., Borders, L. D. A., Crutchfield, L. B., Torres-Rivera, E., Brotherton, D., & Curtis,
R. (2001). Multicultural SuperVISION: A paradigm of cultural responsiveness for
supervisors. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 29(2), 147–158.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2001.tb00511.x
Gatmon, D., Jackson, D., Koshkarian, L., Martos-Perry, N., Molina, A., Patel, N., & Rodolfa, E.
(2001). Exploring ethnic, gender, and sexual orientation variables in supervision: Do they
43
really matter? Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 29(2), 102–113.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2001.tb00508.x
Goodyear, R., Lichtenberg, J. W., Bang, K., & Gragg, J. B. (2014). Ten changes
psychotherapists typically make as they mature into the role of supervisor. Journal of
Clinical Psychology, 70(11), 1042–1050. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22125
Green, M., & Dekkers, T. (2010). Attending to power and diversity in supervision: An
exploration of supervisee learning outcomes and satisfaction with supervision. Journal of
Feminist Family Therapy, 22(4), 293–312.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08952833.2010.528703
Hernández, P., & McDowell, T. (2010). Intersectionality, power, and relational safety in context:
Key concepts in clinical supervision. Training and Education in Professional
Psychology, 4(1), 29–35. https://doi-org/10.1037/a0017064
Hernández, P., Taylor, B. A., & McDowell, T. (2009). Listening to ethnic minority AAMFT
approved supervisors: Reflections on their experiences as supervisees. Journal of
Systemic Therapies, 28(1), 88-100. https://doi.org/10.1521/jsyt.2009.28.1.88
Hird, J. S., Cavalieri, C. E., Dulko, J. P., Felice, A. A. D., & Ho, T. A. (2001). Visions and
realities: Supervisee perspectives of multicultural supervision. Journal of Multicultural
Counseling & Development, 29(2), 114–130. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-
1912.2001.tb00509.x
Hird, J., Tao, K., & Gloria, A. (2005). Examining supervisors’ multicultural competence in
racially similar and different supervision dyads. The Clinical Supervisor, 23(2), 107–
122. https://doi.org/10.1300/j001v23n02_07
44
Hoonakker, P., & Carayon, P. (2009). Questionnaire survey nonresponse: A comparison of
postal mail and Internet surveys. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction,
25(5), 348–373. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447310902864951
Inman, A. G. (2006). Supervisor multicultural competence and its relation to supervisory process
and outcome. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 32(1), 73–85.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-0606.2006.tb01589.x
Inman, A. G., & DeBoer Kreider, E. (2013). Multicultural competence: Psychotherapy practice
and supervision. Psychotherapy, 50(3), 346–350. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032029
Inman, A. G., Hutman, H., Pendse, A., Devdas, L., Luu, L., & Ellis, M. V. (2014). Current trends
concerning supervisors, supervisees, and clients in clinical supervision. In C. J. Watkins
& D. L. Milne (Eds.), The Wiley international handbook of clinical supervision (pp. 61–
102). New York, NY: Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118846360.ch4
Inman, A. G., & Ladany, N. (2014). Multicultural competencies in psychotherapy supervision. In
F. T. L. Leong, L. Comas-Díaz, G. C. Nagayama Hall, V. C. McLoyd, & J. E. Trimble
(Eds.), APA handbook of multicultural psychology, Vol. 2: Applications and training (pp.
643–658). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
https://doi.org/10.1037/14187-036
Jernigan, M. M., Green, C. E., Helms, J. E., Perez-Gualdron, L., & Henze, K. (2010). An
examination of people of color supervision dyads: Racial identity matters as much as
race. Training And Education in Professional Psychology, 4(1), 62–73.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018110
Kaduvettoor, A., O’Shaughnessy, T., Mori, Y., Beverly, C. I. I. I., Weatherford, R. D., &
Ladany, N. (2009). Helpful and hindering multicultural events in group supervision:
45
Climate and multicultural competence. Counseling Psychologist, 37(6), 786–820.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000009333984
Killian, K. D. P. D. (2001). Differences making a difference. Journal of Feminist Family
Therapy, 12(2), 61–103. https://doi.org/10.1300/j086v12n02_03
Ladany, N. (2014). The ingredients of supervisor failure. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 70(11),
1094–103. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22130
Ladany, N., Friedlander, M. L., & Nelson, M. L. (2005). Heightening multicultural awareness:
It’s never been about political correctness. In N. Ladany, M. L. Friedlander, & M. L.,
Nelson (Eds.), Critical events in psychotherapy supervision: An interpersonal approach
(pp. 53–77). Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10958-003
Ladany, N., Inman, A. G., Constantine, M. G., & Hofheinz, E. W. (1997). Supervisee
multicultural case conceptualization ability and self-reported multicultural competence as
functions of supervisee racial identity and supervisor focus. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 44(3), 284–293. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-0167.44.3.284
Ladany, N., Mori, Y., & Mehr, K. E. (2013). Effective and ineffective supervision. Counseling
Psychologist, 41(1), 28–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000012442648
Lassiter, P. S., Napolitano, L., Culbreth, J. R., & Ng, K. (2008). Developing multicultural
competence using the structured peer group supervision model. Counselor Education and
Supervision, 47(3), 164–178. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6978.2008.tb00047.x
Magnuson, S., Wilcoxon, S. A., & Norem, K. (2000). A profile of lousy supervision:
Experienced counselors’ perspectives. Counselor Education and Supervision, 39(3), 189–
202. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6978.2000.tb01231.x
46
Martínez, R. P., & Holloway, E. L. (1997). The supervision relationship in multicultural training.
In D. B. Pope-Davis & H. K. Coleman (Eds.), Multicultural counseling competencies:
Assessment, education and training, and supervision (pp. 325–349). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452232072.n15
Mori, Y., Inman, A. G., & Caskie, G. I. L. (2009). Supervising international students:
Relationship between acculturation, supervisor multicultural competence, cultural
discussions, and supervision satisfaction. Training and Education in Psychology, 3(1),
10–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013072
Murphy, M. J., & Wright, D. W. (2005). Supervisees’ perspectives of power use in supervision.
Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 31(3), 283–295. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-
0606.2005.tb01569.x
Murphy-Shigematsu, S. (2010). Microaggressions by supervisors of color. Training and
Education in Professional Psychology, 4(1), 16–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017472
Norcross, J. G., Hedges, M., & Prochaska, J. (2002). The face of 2010: A Delphi poll on the
future of psychotherapy. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 33(3), 316–
322. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.33.3.316
Ober, A. M., Granello, D. H., & Henfield, M. S. (2009). A synergistic model to enhance
multicultural competence in supervision. Counselor Education and Supervision, 48(3),
204–221. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6978.2009.tb00075.x
Phillips, J. C., Parent, M. C., Dozier, V. C., & Jackson, P. L. (2017). Depth of discussion of
multicultural identities in supervision and supervisory outcomes. Counselling Psychology
Quarterly, 30(2), 188–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515070.2016.1169995
47
Priest, R. (1994). Minority supervisor and majority supervisee: Another perspective of clinical
reality. Counselor Education and Supervision, 34(2), 152–158.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6978.1994.tb00322.x
Quek, K., & Storm, C. (2012). Chinese values in supervisory discourse: Implications for
culturally sensitive practices. Contemporary Family Therapy: An International Journal,
34(1), 44–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10591-011-9172-4
Ryde, J. (2000). Supervising across difference. International Journal of Psychotherapy, 5(1),
37–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/13569080050020254
Safran, J. D., Muran, J. C., Stevens, C., & Rothman, M. (2007). A relational approach to
supervision. In C. A. Falender & E. P. Shafranske (Eds.), Casebook for clinical
supervision: A competency-based approach (pp. 137–157). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/11792-007
Soheilian, S. S., Inman, A. G., Klinger, R. S., Isenberg, D. S., & Kulp, L. E. (2014).
Multicultural supervision: Supervisees’ reflections on culturally competent supervision.
Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 27(4), 379–392.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09515070.2014.961408
Sue, D. W., Rivera, D. P., Capodilupo, C. M., Lin, A. I., & Torino, G. C. (2010). Racial
dialogues and White trainee fears: Implications for education and training. Cultural
Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 16(2), 206–214.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016112
Taylor, B. A., Hernandez, P., Deri, A., Rankin, P. R., & Siegel, A. (2007). Integrating diversity
dimensions in supervision. The Clinical Supervisor, 25(1), 3–21.
https://doi.org/10.1300/j001v25n01_02
48
Tohidian, N. B., & Quek, K. M. (2017). Processes that inform multicultural supervision: A
qualitative meta-analysis. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 43(4), 573–590.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jmft.12219
Toporek, R. L., Ortega-Villalobos, L., & Pope-Davis, D. B. (2004). Critical incidents in
multicultural supervision: Exploring supervisees’ and supervisors’ experiences. Journal
of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 32(2), 66–83.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2004.tb00362.x
Trimble, J. E., & King, J. (2014). Considerations in supervision working with American Indian
and Alaska Native clients: Understanding the context of deep culture. In C. A. Falender,
E. P. Shafranske, & C. J. Falicov (Eds.), Multiculturalism and diversity in clinical
supervision: A competency-based approach (pp. 231–254). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14370-010
Tsui, M., O’Donoghue, K., & Ng, A. K. T. (2014). Culturally competent and diversity-sensitive
clinical supervision. In C. E. Watkins & D. L. Milne (Eds.), The Wiley international
handbook of clinical supervision (pp. 238–254). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118846360.ch10
Watkins, C. E., Jr. (2012). Development of the psychotherapy supervisor: Review of and
reelections on 30 years of theory and research. American Journal of Psychotherapy,
66(1), 45–83. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.2012.66.1.45
Watkins, C. E., Jr. (2014). Clinical supervision in the 21st century: revisiting pressing needs and
impressing possibilities. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 68(2), 251–
272. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.2014.68.2.251
49
Westefeld, J. S. (2009). Supervision of psychotherapy: Models, issues, and recommendations.
Counseling Psychologist, 37(2), 296–316. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000008316657
Wong, L. J., Wong, P. P., & Ishiyama, F. I. (2013). What helps and what hinders in cross-
cultural clinical supervision: A critical incident study. The Counseling Psychologist,
41(1), 66–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000012442652
Yabusaki, A. S. (2010). Clinical supervision: Dialogues on diversity. Training and Education in
Professional Psychology, 4(1), 55–61. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017378
50
TABLES
Table 1 Participant Demographics (N = 44)
Characteristic Range M SD Age 34 – 66 49.20 8.11 Years Licensed 5 – 36 15.16 7.26 n % Gender
Female 30 68.18 Male 14 31.82
Race/Ethnicity African American/Black 4 9.09 Asian 2 4.54
Vietnamese American 1 Japanese American 1
Bi-racial/Multiracial 3 6.82 Caucasian/Middle Eastern 1 White/German/English/French/Cherokee 1 White/Latino 1
Caucasian/White 30 68.18 Irish/Scottish 1 Italian American 1 Romanian 1 Did not specify 27
Iranian 1 2.27 Latinx 4 9.09
Cuban American 1 Puerto Rican 1 Salvadoran American 1 Did not specify 1
Sexual Orientation
Gay 1 2.27 Gay/Queer 1 2.27 Heterosexual 37 84.09 Lesbian 2 4.54 Pansexual 2 4.54 Not reported 1 2.27
Primary Theoretical Orientation Behavioral 1 2.27
(continued)
51
Table 1 (continued)
Participant Demographics (N = 44)
Characteristics n % Cognitive 9 20.45 Cognitive-Behavioral 2 4.54 Existential 1 2.27 Feminist 2 4.54 Humanistic 4 9.09 Integrative/Eclectic 11 25.00 Interpersonal (IPT) 1 2.27 Multicultural 2 4.54 Neuropsychotherapy 1 2.27 Postmodern Constructive 1 2.27 Psychodynamic/Relational 7 15.91 Relational/Cultural 1 2.27 Systems/Family Systems 1 2.27
Most Recent Work/Training/Teaching Site(s) Armed Forces Medical Center 1 2.27 Child/Adolescent Psychiatric/Pediatrics 1 2.27 Community Mental Health 1 2.27 Medical School 2 4.54 Multiple Sites 4 9.09
Consortium & Private Practice 1 Community Mental Health & School District 1 Private Practice & University Counseling Center 1 Private Practice & School District & University
Counseling Center 1
Private Practice 3 6.82 State Funded Non-Profit Agency/Regional Center 1 2.27 University Counseling Center 23 52.27 Veteran Affairs Medical Center 8 18.18
APA Division 45 Member Yes 5 11.36 No 38 86.36 Not reported 1 2.27
52
Table 2
Participant Supervision and Supervision Training Experience (N = 44)
Characteristic Range M SD Years provided/providing supervision 5 - 36 14.11 6.43 Number of supervisees in the last 10 years 10 - 200 36.5 31.96 Number of supervisees in the last 3 years 1 - 60 13.16 10.72 Current weekly number of supervisees 0 - 13 3.98 3.25 Current weekly direct supervision hours 0 - 10 3.77 2.01 Current weekly indirect supervision hours 0 - 20 4 4.39 Number of supervision workshops/trainings attended during
last 2 licensure cycles 0 - 10 3.09 2.48
Number of multicultural supervision workshops/trainings attended during last 2 licensure cycles
0 - 5 1.32 1.33
Number of supervision books/articles read during last 2 licensure cycles
0 – 50 5.75 8.6
Number of multicultural supervision books/articles read during last 2 licensure cycles
0 - 15 3.43 4.14
n % Currently Supervising Trainees/Interns
Yes 40 90.91 No 4 9.09
Current supervisees bring up culture/diversity issues during supervision Always 1 2.27 Very Often 9 20.45 Often 17 38.64 Sometimes 13 29.54 Rarely 3 6.82 Very Rarely 0 0.00 Never 1 2.27
Supervisor brings up culture/diversity issues during supervision
Always 3 6.82 Very Often 12 27.27 Often 18 40.91 Sometimes 11 25.00 Rarely 0 0.00 Very Rarely 0 0.00 Never
Supervisor taken graduate course in clinical supervision
Yes 20 45.45 No 24 54.55
(continued)
53
Table 2 (continued)
Participant Supervision and Supervision Training Experience (N = 44)
Characteristics n % Supervisor taken graduate course in culture/diversity
Yes 39 88.64 No 5 11.36
Supervisor received supervision of supervision Yes 32 72.73 No 12 27.27
Supervisor brought up culture/diversity issues during supervision as a trainee Always 1 2.27 Very Often 8 18.18 Often 10 22.73 Sometimes 22 50 Rarely 3 6.82 Very Rarely 0 0.00 Never 0 0.00
When supervisor was a trainee, their supervisors brought up culture/diversity issues during supervision
Always 0 0.00 Very Often 6 13.64 Often 5 11.36 Sometimes 26 59.09 Rarely 6 13.64 Very Rarely 0 0.00 Never 1 2.27
Years provided/providing supervision 5-9 years 13 29.55 10-14 years 11 25.00 15-19 years 11 25.00 > 20 years 9 20.45
Number of supervisees in the last 10 years 10-19 11 25.00 20-29 11 25.00 30-39 8 18.18 40-49 4 9.09 50-99 8 18.18 > 100 2 4.55
(continued)
54
Table 2 (continued)
Participant Supervision and Supervision Training Experience (N = 44)
Characteristics n % Number of supervisees in the last 3 years
1-4 4 9.09 5-9 14 31.82 10-14 13 29.55 15-19 5 11.36 20-24 3 6.82 >25 5 11.36
Current weekly number of supervisees
0 3 6.82 1-4 25 56.82 5-9 10 22.73 >10 6 13.64
Current weekly direct supervision hours 0 1 2.27 1-4 28 63.64 5-9 14 31.82 > 10 1 2.27
Current weekly indirect supervision hours 0 4 9.09 1-4 27 61.36 5-9 8 18.18 10-20 3 6.82 > 20 2 4.55
Number of supervision workshops/trainings attended during last 2 licensure cycles
0 5 11.36 1-2 18 40.91 3-4 11 25.00 5-6 5 11.36 > 7 5 11.36
Number of multicultural supervision workshops/trainings attended during last 2 licensure cycles
0 14 31.82 1-2 22 50.00 3-4 7 15.91 > 5 1 2.27
(continued)
55
Table 2 (continued)
Participant Supervision and Supervision Training Experience (N = 44)
Characteristics n % Number of supervision books/articles read during last 2 licensure cycles
0 7 15.91 1-3 16 36.36 4-6 11 25.00 7-9 1 2.27 10-14 3 6.82 15-19 3 6.82 > 20 3 6.82
Number of multicultural supervision books/articles read during last 2 licensure cycles
0 9 20.45 1-3 21 47.73 4-6 6 13.64 7-9 2 4.55 10-14 4 9.09 > 15 2 4.55
56
Table 3
Frequencies of Multicultural Supervisory Behaviors Rated as Most Important
Behavioral statement Observed frequency
Expected frequency
(proportion) Creating a safe (nonjudgmental, supportive) environment for discussion of multicultural issues, values, and ideas through the use of verbal and nonverbal communication
31 11 (0.05)
Addressing feelings of discomfort experienced by trainees concerning multicultural issue
23 11 (0.05)
Inviting supervisee to explore and discuss possible existence of personal cultural biases and prejudices on the conceptualization and practice with clients
20 11 (0.05)
Acknowledging and discussing realities of racism/oppression during supervision 17 11 (0.05) Providing supervisee with a multiculturally diverse caseload to ensure breadth of clinical experience
14 11 (0.05)
Acknowledging and discussing power issues in supervision that may be related to racial/ethnic multicultural differences
14 11 (0.05)
Modeling for supervisee by initiating, attending to, and demonstrating interest and respect for client’s intersecting identities and culture during case conceptualization and discussion
14 11 (0.05)
Communicating acceptance of and respect for supervisee’s own culture and perspectives through verbal phrases
11 11 (0.05)
Initiating respectful and explicit discussions about the importance of culture/multicultural issues during supervision
11 11 (0.05)
Articulating a commitment to develop multicultural competence by discussing expectations within the first two supervision sessions
10 11 (0.05)
Listening [to] and providing affirming statements to demonstrate genuine respect [for] supervisee’s ideas about how culture influences the clinical interaction
10 11 (0.05)
Engaging supervisee actively in discussions to explore clients’ cultural perspectives 9 11 (0.05) Initiating dialogue during supervision about supervisees’ own racial/ethnic identity development
8 11 (0.05)
Encouraging discussion regarding multicultural issues by presenting myself non-defensively such as maintaining an open posture and calming tone of voice when supervisee shows feelings of anger, rage, and/or fear when these issues are raised during supervision
7 11 (0.05)
Identifying and discussing racial/ethnic cultural differences reflected in parallel process issues (supervisor/supervisee and supervisee/client)
6 11 (0.05)
Encouraging supervisee to share, within supervision, their personal and professional cultural background and experiences
5 11 (0.05)
Consulting colleagues willingly about my own reactions to racial/ethnic concerns as a result of any supervision experience
4 11 (0.05)
Acknowledging, discussing, and providing affirming statements that demonstrate respect for racial/ethnic multicultural similarities and differences between myself and supervisee, and discussing feelings concerning these similarities and/or differences
4 11 (0.05)
Self-disclosing own development of self-awareness about cultural/ethnic identity, biases, and limitations
2 11 (0.05)
Providing recommended multicultural readings and related training experiences to supervisee
0 11 (0.05)
Note. χ2 = 98.15*, df = 19. Numbers in parentheses, (), are expected proportions.
*p < 0.001.
57
Table 4
Top Five Supervisory Behaviors Compared to Bottom Five Supervisory Behaviors
Behavioral statement Type of focus Frequency rank
Creating a safe (nonjudgmental, supportive) environment for discussion of multicultural issues, values, and ideas through the use of verbal and nonverbal communication
Process 1
Addressing feelings of discomfort experienced by trainees concerning multicultural issue
Supervisee Focused Personal Development
2
Inviting supervisee to explore and discuss possible existence of personal cultural biases and prejudices on the conceptualization and practice with clients
Supervisee Focused Personal Development
3
Acknowledging and discussing realities of racism/oppression during supervision
Supervisee Focused Personal Development
4
Providing supervisee with a multiculturally diverse caseload to ensure breadth of clinical experience
Process 5
Acknowledging and discussing power issues in supervision that may be related to racial/ethnic multicultural differences
Process 5
Modeling for supervisee by initiating, attending to, and demonstrating interest and respect for client’s intersecting identities and culture during case conceptualization and discussion
Conceptualization 5
Encouraging supervisee to share, within supervision, their personal and professional cultural background and experiences
Supervisee Focused Personal Development
16
Consulting colleagues willingly about my own reactions to racial/ethnic concerns as a result of any supervision experience
Supervisor Focused Personal Development
17
Acknowledging, discussing, and providing affirming statements that demonstrate respect for racial/ethnic multicultural similarities and differences between myself and supervisee, and discussing feelings concerning these similarities and/or differences
Supervisor Focused Personal Development
17
Self-disclosing own development of self-awareness about cultural/ethnic identity, biases, and limitations
Supervisor Focused Personal Development
19
Providing recommended multicultural readings and related training experiences to supervisee
Supervisee Focused Personal Development
20
59
Lite
ratu
re R
evie
w T
able
: Clin
ical
Sup
ervi
sion
Clin
ical
Sup
ervi
sion
– T
heor
etic
al P
ublic
atio
ns
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r R
esea
rch
Que
stio
ns/
Obj
ectiv
es
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
Bar
nett
and
Mol
zon
(201
4)
• To
des
crib
e an
d ex
plai
n th
e el
emen
ts o
f the
et
hica
l, le
gal,
and
com
pete
nt p
ract
ice
of c
linic
al
supe
rvis
ion
Con
cept
ual/
theo
retic
al
fram
ewor
k
N/A
N
/A
• Ta
ilorin
g th
e su
perv
isio
n pr
ovid
ed to
eac
h in
divi
dual
supe
rvis
ee’s
trai
ning
nee
ds is
es
sent
ial
• It
is e
ssen
tial t
hat a
thor
ough
info
rmed
con
sent
pr
oces
s be
enga
ged
in a
t the
out
set o
f the
su
perv
isor
y re
latio
nshi
p •
The
clin
ical
supe
rvis
or w
ill li
kely
take
a ra
ther
ac
tive
role
in th
e be
ginn
ing
of th
e su
perv
isor
y re
latio
nshi
p, a
nd th
en g
radu
ally
redu
ce h
is o
r he
r inv
olve
men
t to
allo
w th
e su
perv
isee
to ta
ke
on g
reat
er a
uton
omy
and
resp
onsi
bilit
y •
The
supe
rvis
ee m
ust p
erce
ive
the
supe
rvis
ory
rela
tions
hip
to b
e su
ffici
ently
safe
to b
e ab
le to
op
enly
shar
e th
ough
ts, i
deas
, exp
erie
nces
, and
fe
elin
gs w
ith th
e su
perv
isor
•
In a
dditi
on to
all
the
teac
hing
that
clin
ical
su
perv
isor
s pro
vide
, the
y al
so se
rve
the
impo
rtant
func
tion
of p
rofe
ssio
nal r
ole
mod
el
• Is
sues
of d
iver
sity
in a
ll its
form
s sho
uld
be
give
n ac
tive
atte
ntio
n in
all
aspe
cts o
f the
su
perv
isio
n pr
oces
s as w
ell a
s with
in th
e su
perv
isor
y re
latio
nshi
p •
It is
impo
rtant
for s
uper
viso
rs to
add
ress
issu
es
of d
iver
sity
bet
wee
n th
e su
perv
isor
and
su
perv
isee
with
in su
perv
isio
n as
wel
l as t
o fo
ster
the
deve
lopm
ent o
f cul
tura
l com
pete
nce
for s
uper
vise
es in
thei
r wor
k w
ith c
lient
s
60
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r R
esea
rch
Que
stio
ns/
Obj
ectiv
es
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
Bor
ders
(2
014)
•
To h
ighl
ight
the
diff
eren
ces b
etw
een
com
pete
ncie
s and
be
st p
ract
ices
•
To d
escr
ibe
the
deve
lopm
ent a
nd
cont
ent o
f one
co
mpr
ehen
sive
st
atem
ent,
the
Bes
t Pr
actic
es in
Clin
ical
Su
perv
isio
n cr
eate
d fo
r the
fiel
d of
co
unse
ling
and
coun
selo
r edu
catio
n •
To il
lust
rate
the
appl
icab
ility
of t
he
Bes
t Pra
ctic
es
acro
ss d
isci
plin
es
and
coun
tries
th
roug
h a
com
paris
on a
nd
cont
rast
with
se
vera
l oth
er
exis
ting
docu
men
ts •
To b
riefly
exa
min
e th
e de
velo
pmen
t of
supe
rvis
or
expe
rtise
, whi
ch
requ
ires n
ot o
nly
decl
arat
ive
know
ledg
e (c
ompe
tenc
ies)
and
pr
oced
ural
Lite
ratu
re
revi
ew;
conc
eptu
al/
theo
retic
al
fram
ewor
k
N/A
N
/A
• Th
e de
velo
pmen
t of s
uper
viso
r exp
ertis
e,
requ
ires r
efle
ctiv
e kn
owle
dge
and
the
insi
ghts
on
e ga
ins o
ver t
ime
abou
t how
and
whe
n to
ad
apt (
even
impr
ovis
e)
• O
ne’s
supe
rvis
ion
appr
oach
is b
ased
on
the
cont
ext,
supe
rvis
ee, a
nd c
lient
thro
ugh
reco
gniz
ing
the
com
plex
ity, a
mbi
guity
, and
ill-
defin
ed p
robl
ems e
ndem
ic to
supe
rvis
ion
• M
eta-
com
pete
nce
is d
efin
ed a
s “th
e ab
ility
to
asse
ss w
hat o
ne k
now
s and
wha
t one
doe
sn’t
know
” or
“th
e ne
ed to
mak
e ap
prop
riate
ad
apta
tions
in o
rder
to m
axim
ize
the
supe
rvis
ee’s
abi
lity
to le
arn”
and
the
abili
ty to
“a
pply
pro
fess
iona
l jud
gmen
t to
com
plex
iss
ues”
•
Ref
lect
ive
know
ledg
e is
bui
lt du
ring
year
s of
prac
tice
and
is d
epen
dent
on
cont
inua
l sel
f-aw
aren
ess,
self-
ass
essm
ent,
self-
mon
itorin
g,
and
self-
refle
ctio
n, w
hich
are
pre
dom
inan
t ch
arac
teris
tics o
f exp
ert s
uper
viso
rs a
s rep
orte
d in
a re
cent
stud
y
• “P
rofe
ssio
nal a
rtistr
y,”
base
d in
supe
rvis
or’s
re
flect
ive
know
ledg
e, re
quire
s bot
h re
flect
ion-
in-a
ctio
n, su
perv
isor
s’ th
inki
ng a
bout
wha
t th
ey a
re d
oing
whi
le th
ey a
re d
oing
it, a
s wel
l as
refle
ctio
n on
refle
ctio
n-in
-act
ion
61
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r R
esea
rch
Que
stio
ns/
Obj
ectiv
es
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
know
ledg
e (s
tate
men
ts o
f bes
t pr
actic
es),
but a
lso
refle
ctiv
e kn
owle
dge
Cas
hwel
l, Lo
oby,
and
H
ousl
ey
(200
8)
• To
pro
vide
spec
ific
supe
rvis
ion
tech
niqu
es a
nd
task
s to
help
serv
ice
prov
ider
s exa
min
e is
sues
of c
ultu
ral
dive
rsity
in th
eir
wor
k •
To fa
cilit
ate
mor
e ef
fect
ive
mul
ticul
tura
l se
rvic
es th
roug
h th
e su
perv
isio
n pr
oces
s
Con
cept
ual/
theo
retic
al
fram
ewor
k
N/A
N
/A
• It
is im
porta
nt to
rais
e th
e is
sue
of c
ultu
ral
dive
rsity
in g
roup
or i
ndiv
idua
l sup
ervi
sion
w
hen
cultu
ral i
ssue
s may
be
affe
ctin
g th
e th
erap
eutic
pro
cess
•
Less
exp
erie
nced
clin
icia
ns m
ay n
ot c
onsi
der
the
influ
ence
of c
ultu
re o
n th
e th
erap
eutic
re
latio
nshi
p •
Rai
sing
mul
ticul
tura
l iss
ues i
n in
divi
dual
and
gr
oup
supe
rvis
ion
enco
urag
es se
lf-ex
plor
atio
n •
To in
crea
se th
eir e
ffec
tiven
ess w
hen
wor
king
w
ith m
ultic
ultu
ral p
opul
atio
ns, s
uper
viso
rs
need
to c
onsu
lt w
ith m
inor
ity c
olle
ague
s and
re
mai
n op
en to
incr
easi
ng th
eir o
wn
know
ledg
e, sk
ills,
and
self-
awar
enes
s with
m
ultic
ultu
ral p
opul
atio
ns to
incr
ease
thei
r ef
fect
iven
ess a
s sup
ervi
sors
•
Cul
tura
l het
erog
enei
ty w
ithin
supe
rvis
ion
grou
ps, w
hen
poss
ible
, als
o is
enc
oura
ged
• Se
lf-re
ports
from
the
coun
selo
r may
be
unre
liabl
e or
eve
n bi
ased
acc
ount
s of
coun
selin
g se
ssio
ns; d
irect
met
hods
such
as
revi
ew o
f aud
iota
pes o
r liv
e su
perv
isio
n ar
e ne
eded
to h
elp
clin
icia
ns id
entif
y is
sues
of
cultu
ral b
lindn
ess o
r cul
tura
l enc
apsu
latio
n
62
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r R
esea
rch
Que
stio
ns/
Obj
ectiv
es
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
Fale
nder
an
d Sh
afra
nske
(2
007)
• To
revi
ew
pers
pect
ives
on
com
pete
nce
as a
co
nstru
ct
• To
def
ine
com
pete
ncy-
base
d cl
inic
al su
perv
isio
n,
with
par
ticul
ar
atte
ntio
n to
the
natu
re o
f eth
ical
, le
gal,
cont
extu
al,
and
prac
tice
issu
es
that
aris
e •
To d
iscu
ss
chal
leng
es fa
ced
in
clin
ical
supe
rvis
ion
• To
mak
e re
com
men
datio
ns
for b
est p
ract
ices
Theo
retic
al
fram
ewor
k
N/A
N
/A
• C
ompe
tenc
e, a
n et
hica
l prin
cipl
e th
at in
form
s th
e pr
actic
e of
psy
chol
ogy,
refe
rs to
requ
isite
kn
owle
dge,
skill
s, an
d va
lues
for e
ffec
tive
perf
orm
ance
•
A p
resu
mpt
ion
of c
linic
al c
ompe
tenc
e is
im
plic
it in
supe
rvis
ion
• Th
e su
perv
isor
is p
resu
med
to b
e m
ore
com
pete
nt th
an th
e su
perv
isee
in m
ost a
reas
, in
clud
ing
the
prac
tice
of su
perv
isio
n an
d th
e co
nten
t are
as su
perv
ised
•
A c
ompe
tenc
y-ba
sed
appr
oach
can
be
used
to
enha
nce
supe
rvis
or a
nd p
ract
ition
er
com
pete
nce
sim
ilar t
o its
app
licat
ion
in c
linic
al
train
ing
• C
linic
al su
perv
isio
n id
eally
requ
ires a
fo
unda
tion
of e
duca
tion
and
train
ing,
co
ntin
uous
self-
asse
ssm
ent (
lead
ing
to se
lf-di
rect
ed le
arni
ng),
and
parti
cipa
tion
in
prof
essi
onal
dev
elop
men
t •
Am
ong
the
ethi
cal s
tand
ards
, mul
ticul
tura
l co
mpe
tenc
e is
an
area
that
requ
ires p
artic
ular
at
tent
ion
in o
ur se
lf-as
sess
men
t pra
ctic
e an
d co
mm
itmen
ts to
dev
elop
men
t and
trai
ning
in
light
of t
he e
xist
ing
liter
atur
e
For s
uper
viso
rs, r
esea
rch
has r
epor
ted:
• In
atte
ntio
n to
cul
ture
and
div
ersi
ty in
cro
ss-
cultu
ral s
uper
viso
ry d
yads
(Bur
kard
et a
l.,
2006
) •
Supe
rvis
ors n
ot a
s cul
tura
lly c
ompe
tent
as t
heir
supe
rvis
ees (
Con
stan
tine,
200
1)
63
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r R
esea
rch
Que
stio
ns/
Obj
ectiv
es
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
• Fa
ilure
to a
ckno
wle
dge
lack
of c
ross
-rac
ial
supe
rvis
ion
expe
rienc
e (D
uan
& R
oehl
ke,
2001
) •
Failu
re to
initi
ate
disc
ussi
on o
f cul
tura
l di
ffer
ence
s bet
wee
n su
perv
isor
and
supe
rvis
ee
(Gat
mon
et a
l., 2
001)
•
Failu
re to
initi
ate
dive
rsity
dis
cuss
ions
in
gene
ral e
ven
thou
gh th
is h
as b
een
dem
onst
rate
d to
enh
ance
alli
ance
(Gat
mon
et
al.,
2001
)
Fale
nder
an
d Sh
afra
nske
(2
014)
• To
hig
hlig
ht re
cent
de
velo
pmen
ts a
nd
the
stat
e of
the
art
in su
perv
isio
n, w
ith
parti
cula
r em
phas
is
on th
e co
mpe
tenc
y-ba
sed
appr
oach
•
To p
rese
nts
effe
ctiv
e cl
inic
al
supe
rvis
ion
stra
tegi
es,
prov
idin
g an
in
tegr
ated
snap
shot
of
the
curr
ent s
tatu
s •
To e
xam
ine
curr
ent
train
ing
prac
tices
in
supe
rvis
ion
and
chal
leng
es
Theo
retic
al
fram
ewor
k
N/A
N
/A
• G
reat
er a
ttent
ion
has b
een
plac
ed o
n di
vers
ity
fact
ors,
emph
asiz
ing
mul
ticul
tura
l sup
ervi
sion
pr
actic
e
• Ef
fect
ive
supe
rvis
ion
is d
efin
ed a
s pra
ctic
e th
at
enco
urag
es su
perv
isee
dev
elop
men
t and
au
tono
my,
faci
litat
es th
e su
perv
isor
y re
latio
nshi
p, p
rote
cts t
he c
lient
, and
enh
ance
s bo
th c
lient
and
supe
rvis
ee o
utco
mes
. •
An
ethi
cal i
mpe
rativ
e un
derly
ing
all c
linic
al
prac
tice
and
supe
rvis
ion
is d
iver
sity
co
mpe
tenc
e •
Alth
ough
gre
ater
atte
ntio
n is
bei
ng d
irect
ed to
di
vers
ity, s
till d
ata
are
emer
ging
that
su
perv
isor
s ofte
n ar
e no
t ini
tiatin
g co
nsid
erat
ion
of m
ultip
le d
iver
sity
fact
ors i
n su
perv
isio
n, n
or a
re fa
ctor
s of p
rivile
ge,
hist
oric
al tr
aum
a, a
nd o
ppre
ssio
n be
ing
addr
esse
d (F
alen
der,
Shaf
rans
ke, &
Fal
icov
, 20
14; H
erná
ndez
& M
cDow
ell,
2010
) •
Spec
ific
com
pete
nce
is n
eede
d to
add
ress
the
mul
tiple
iden
titie
s (e.
g., r
ace,
soci
oeco
nom
ic
stat
us, s
exua
l orie
ntat
ion,
gen
der i
dent
ity,
64
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r R
esea
rch
Que
stio
ns/
Obj
ectiv
es
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
ethn
icity
, rel
igio
n, d
isab
ility
, age
) am
ong
clie
nt, s
uper
vise
e/ps
ycho
ther
apis
t, an
d su
perv
isor
to c
onsi
der t
he m
ultip
le w
orld
view
s an
d th
e ef
fect
s of t
hese
upo
n th
e as
sess
men
t an
d tre
atm
ent o
f the
clie
nt
• A
ddre
ssin
g th
ese
dive
rsity
com
pete
nce
fact
ors
and
prov
idin
g fe
edba
ck a
nd tr
aini
ng w
hen
supe
rvis
ees d
o no
t dem
onst
rate
ade
quat
e co
mpe
tenc
e ar
e im
porta
nt su
perv
isor
re
spon
sibi
litie
s •
In th
e co
llabo
rativ
e su
perv
isor
y re
latio
nshi
p,
the
supe
rvis
ee is
em
pow
ered
to a
ddre
ss
dive
rsity
issu
es su
ch a
s gen
erat
ion
(age
) and
cu
lture
to re
flect
on
diff
eren
t per
spec
tives
•
Oth
er fa
ctor
s aff
ectin
g ef
fect
ive
clin
ical
su
perv
isio
n in
clud
e su
perv
isor
y al
lianc
e,
addr
essi
ng p
erso
nal f
acto
rs a
nd
coun
tertr
ansf
eren
ce in
supe
rvis
ion,
co
mpe
tenc
es, s
elf-
asse
ssm
ent,
feed
back
, ev
alua
tion,
and
eth
ical
and
lega
l com
pete
ncie
s
Fale
nder
, Sh
afra
nske
, an
d O
fek
(201
4)
• To
exp
lore
the
stre
ngth
s and
em
ergi
ng
com
pete
ncie
s of t
he
supe
rvis
ee a
nd th
e cl
inic
al a
nd
supe
rvis
ion
com
pete
ncie
s of t
he
supe
rvis
or.
• To
add
ress
es th
e st
ate
of th
e lit
erat
ure
on
Met
a-th
eore
tical
fr
amew
ork
with
cas
e ex
ampl
e
N/A
N
/A
• In
dev
elop
ing
a st
rong
supe
rvis
ory
allia
nce,
the
pers
onal
cha
ract
eris
tics a
nd b
ehav
iors
of t
he
supe
rvis
or su
ch a
s war
mth
, em
path
y,
genu
inen
ess,
resp
ect,
flexi
bilit
y, a
no
njud
gmen
tal s
tanc
e, a
nd tr
ansp
aren
cy a
re
impo
rtant
fact
ors
• Su
perv
isor
s are
mor
e lik
ely
to b
uild
and
m
aint
ain
effe
ctiv
e su
perv
isor
y re
latio
nshi
ps
and
to p
rom
ote
train
ee se
lf-ef
ficac
y by
usi
ng
supe
rvis
ory
skill
s suc
h as
enc
oura
ging
de
velo
pmen
tally
app
ropr
iate
aut
onom
y,
expr
essi
ng c
onfid
ence
and
trus
t in
train
ees’
65
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r R
esea
rch
Que
stio
ns/
Obj
ectiv
es
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
effe
ctiv
e cl
inic
al
supe
rvis
ion
and
the
spec
ific
know
ledg
e,
skill
s, an
d at
titud
es
that
com
pris
e co
mpe
tent
su
perv
isio
n
• To
pro
vide
a b
rief
sum
mar
y of
re
sear
ch o
n se
vera
l pa
rticu
lar p
ivot
al
area
s, i.e
. alli
ance
, m
ultic
ultu
ral
com
pete
nce,
lega
l an
d et
hica
l iss
ues
• To
pro
vide
a se
lf-
asse
ssm
ent d
evic
e fo
r bot
h cu
rren
t su
perv
isor
s and
su
perv
isor
s-in
- pr
epar
atio
n to
as
sess
read
ines
s, co
mpe
tenc
e, a
nd
area
s in
whi
ch
addi
tiona
l tra
inin
g an
d ex
perie
nce
are
desi
rabl
e
• To
pro
vide
a
vign
ette
illu
stra
ting
the
impl
emen
tatio
n of
eff
ectiv
e
abili
ties,
prov
idin
g po
sitiv
e as
wel
l as
cons
truct
ive
feed
back
, dem
onst
ratin
g th
eir o
wn
clin
ical
exp
ertis
e in
the
serv
ice
of tr
aine
e gr
owth
, and
bei
ng re
spon
sive
to su
perv
isee
’s
indi
vidu
al le
arni
ng st
yles
• B
est p
ract
ices
aro
und
mul
ticul
tura
l com
pete
nce
incl
ude
self-
awar
enes
s of o
ne’s
ow
n m
ultip
le
cultu
ral i
dent
ities
and
the
impa
ct o
f sup
ervi
sor
wor
ldvi
ew o
n su
perv
isio
n an
d th
e cl
inic
al
wor
k, a
dopt
ing
a po
sitio
n of
cul
tura
l hum
ility
, ex
erci
sing
met
a-co
mpe
tenc
e, a
nd n
ot
erro
neou
sly
assu
min
g on
e is
com
pete
nt in
fa
cilit
atin
g cu
ltura
lly re
spon
sive
supe
rvis
ion
• En
gagi
ng in
refle
ctiv
e pr
actic
e an
d id
entif
ying
ar
eas f
or fu
rther
gro
wth
in m
ultic
ultu
ral
com
pete
nce
is p
art o
f a c
omm
itmen
t to
a lif
etim
e of
lear
ning
– a
cor
e va
lue
in
prof
essi
onal
psy
chol
ogy
– an
d pe
rtine
nt
espe
cial
ly to
issu
es o
f mul
ticul
tura
l co
mpe
tenc
e
• A
supe
rvis
or’s
tran
spar
ency
in a
ckno
wle
dgin
g ga
ps o
r lim
itatio
ns in
kno
wle
dge
or th
e ch
alle
nges
in im
plem
entin
g cu
lture
-sen
sitiv
e ap
proa
ches
to tr
eatm
ent p
rovi
des a
n op
enin
g fo
r mut
ual d
iscu
ssio
n an
d m
odel
s met
a-co
mpe
tenc
e an
d co
mm
itmen
t to
enha
ncin
g m
ultic
ultu
ral c
ompe
tenc
e
• Tr
aine
e di
sclo
sure
is a
nec
essa
ry c
ompo
nent
fo
r eff
ectiv
e su
perv
isio
n. W
ithou
t suc
h di
sclo
sure
, a su
perv
isor
can
not c
onfid
ently
ca
rry
out t
he su
perv
isor
y ta
sks o
f pro
tect
ing
the
66
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r R
esea
rch
Que
stio
ns/
Obj
ectiv
es
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
supe
rvis
ion
prac
tices
tra
inee
’s c
lient
s and
hel
ping
to p
rom
ote
to
train
ee’s
com
pete
nce
Her
bert
and
Cal
dwel
l (2
015)
• To
def
ine
clin
ical
su
perv
isio
n an
d ba
rrie
rs to
su
perv
isio
n
• To
exa
min
e th
e de
velo
pmen
tal
proc
ess i
n pr
ogre
ssin
g fr
om
coun
selo
r to
supe
rvis
or ro
les
• To
revi
ew e
ffec
tive
prac
tices
in g
roup
su
perv
isio
n
• To
dis
cuss
m
ultic
ultu
ral
pers
pect
ives
on
supe
rvis
ion
• To
iden
tify
clin
ical
su
perv
isio
n st
rate
gies
con
sist
ent
with
goo
d et
hica
l pr
actic
e
Con
cept
ual/
theo
retic
al
fram
ewor
k
N/A
N
/A
• Is
sues
of d
iver
sity
in a
ge, d
isab
ility
, eth
nici
ty,
gend
er, r
elig
ious
aff
iliat
ion
and
spiri
tual
ity,
sexu
al o
rient
atio
n, a
nd/o
r soc
ioec
onom
ic st
atus
ar
e em
bedd
ed in
eve
ry p
rofe
ssio
nal a
nd so
cial
re
latio
nshi
p an
d, a
s a re
sult,
how
we
perc
eive
on
e an
othe
r will
be
man
ifest
ed w
ithin
the
supe
rvis
ory
rela
tions
hips
• It
is a
lway
s the
supe
rvis
or’s
resp
onsi
bilit
y to
in
itiat
e an
d ad
dres
s mul
ticul
tura
l asp
ects
• Su
perv
isor
s, w
ho a
re sk
illed
in se
lf-di
sclo
sing
th
eir c
ultu
ral h
erita
ge, b
iase
s, va
lues
, and
w
orld
view
s con
sist
ent w
ith th
eir s
uper
viso
ry
styl
e, c
an o
ffer
a sa
fe e
nviro
nmen
t for
the
coun
selo
r with
a m
ore
regr
esse
d ra
cial
iden
tity,
so
that
gre
ater
self-
awar
enes
s occ
urs t
o pr
omot
e ch
ange
Lada
ny
(201
4)
• To
pre
sent
a
conc
eptu
aliz
atio
n of
the
theo
retic
al,
empi
rical
, and
pr
actic
al e
lem
ents
Con
cept
ual/
theo
retic
al
fram
ewor
k
N/A
N
/A
• Su
perv
isor
s con
tinue
to p
ose
chal
leng
es d
ue to
m
ultic
ultu
rally
mis
guid
ed n
otio
ns a
bout
su
perv
isio
n an
d ps
ycho
ther
apy,
or b
y m
inim
izin
g or
alto
geth
er ig
norin
g m
ultic
ultu
ral
issu
es, p
artic
ular
ly in
rela
tion
to g
ende
r, ra
ce,
67
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r R
esea
rch
Que
stio
ns/
Obj
ectiv
es
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
of su
perv
isor
fa
ilure
s
• To
pro
vide
re
com
men
datio
ns
for i
ncre
asin
g su
perv
isor
succ
ess
and
limiti
ng
supe
rvis
or fa
ilure
sexu
al o
rient
atio
n, a
nd o
ther
var
iabl
es su
ch a
s di
sabi
lity,
soci
al c
lass
, and
relig
ion
• R
acia
l mic
roag
gres
sion
s hav
e be
en h
ighl
ight
ed
as p
robl
emat
ic in
supe
rvis
ory
dyad
s (D
ress
el,
Con
soli,
Kim
, & A
tkin
son,
200
7), a
nd tr
aine
es
of c
olor
hav
e be
en fo
und
to e
xper
ienc
e su
perv
isor
s as c
ultu
rally
unr
espo
nsiv
e in
co
mpa
rison
to W
hite
trai
nees
(Bur
kard
et a
l.,
2006
)
• W
ith a
dvan
ces i
n m
ultic
ultu
ral t
rain
ing
at th
e gr
adua
te le
vel,
supe
rvis
ors a
re n
ow o
ften
the
leas
t mul
ticul
tura
lly a
dept
mem
ber o
f the
su
perv
isor
y dy
ad, f
orm
ing
wha
t has
bee
n re
ferr
ed to
as r
egre
ssiv
e re
latio
nshi
ps
(Con
stan
tine,
200
1)
• W
ithou
t the
des
ire fo
r, or
eng
agem
ent i
n,
supe
rvis
or tr
aini
ng, s
uper
viso
rs w
ill li
kely
co
ntin
ue to
dem
onst
rate
mul
ticul
tura
l in
com
pete
nce
and
not p
rovi
de e
ffec
tive
supe
rvis
ion
• W
ithou
t suc
h tra
inin
g, su
perv
isor
s are
not
lik
ely
to fa
cilit
ate
mul
ticul
tura
l gro
wth
in
train
ees,
such
as e
nhan
cing
thei
r gen
der o
r ra
cial
iden
tity
or in
crea
sing
thei
r mul
ticul
tura
l kn
owle
dge
or sk
ills i
n ps
ycho
ther
apy
3 ov
erar
chin
g re
com
men
datio
ns fo
r sup
ervi
sors
w
ho a
spire
to b
ecom
e ex
celle
nt in
the
field
: •
Trai
ning
68
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r R
esea
rch
Que
stio
ns/
Obj
ectiv
es
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
• A
sses
smen
t
• A
ccou
ntab
ility
Wat
kins
(2
012)
•
To e
xam
ine
the
last
30
-yea
r per
iod
of
supe
rvis
or
deve
lopm
ent
theo
ry,
mea
sure
men
t, an
d qu
antit
ativ
e an
d qu
alita
tive
stud
y •
To p
rovi
de a
co
ntem
pora
ry st
atus
re
port
on th
is
subj
ect
• To
iden
tify
som
e im
porta
nt m
atte
rs
for r
esea
rch
and
prac
tical
co
nsid
erat
ion
Lite
ratu
re
revi
ew;
theo
retic
al
fram
ewor
k
N/A
N
/A
• A
s of t
he m
id-1
990s
, psy
chot
hera
py su
perv
isor
de
velo
pmen
t had
bee
n de
clar
ed "t
he ri
ches
t yet
m
ost u
ntap
ped
face
t of t
he c
linic
al su
perv
isio
n en
deav
or"
• Fi
ve su
perv
isor
dev
elop
men
t mod
els h
ad b
een
prop
osed
• A
ll th
e m
odel
s wer
e ju
dged
to b
e qu
ite si
mila
r in
stru
ctur
e, se
emed
clin
ical
ly v
alid
, yet
re
mai
ned
inco
mpl
ete
in so
me
resp
ects
(e.g
., la
ckin
g a
trans
ition
theo
ry) b
ecau
se o
f the
ir ne
wne
ss
• A
ttent
ion
to a
nd in
tere
st in
psy
chot
hera
py
supe
rvis
or d
evel
opm
ent a
ppea
red
to b
e hi
gh,
and
all i
ndic
atio
ns su
gges
ted
that
this
are
a w
as
pois
ed a
nd p
rimed
to b
e ta
ken
to it
s nex
t lev
el
of c
once
ptua
l, ex
perim
enta
l, an
d pr
actic
al
scru
tiny
and
soph
istic
atio
n
• Fo
ur p
artic
ular
mec
hani
sms t
hat e
mer
ged
as
criti
cal a
nd p
ivot
al fo
r cha
nge
and
grow
th
acro
ss m
odel
s: (1
) suf
ficie
nt in
tere
st in
bei
ng
and
desi
re to
impr
ove
as a
supe
rvis
or; (
2)
open
ness
to o
ne’s
supe
rviso
ry se
lf-ex
perie
ncin
g; (3
) cap
acity
for a
nd w
illin
g em
brac
e of
supe
rvis
ory
self-
exam
inat
ion
and
self-
refle
ctio
n; a
nd (4
) act
ion,
pra
ctic
e, a
nd
expe
rimen
tatio
n (e
.g.,
with
rega
rd to
69
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r R
esea
rch
Que
stio
ns/
Obj
ectiv
es
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
supe
rvis
ion
skill
s, st
rate
gy d
eplo
ymen
t, an
d al
lianc
e fo
rmat
ion)
• Tr
aini
ng in
supe
rvis
ion
mat
ters
• Th
e re
ach
of th
e ps
ycho
ther
apy
supe
rvis
or is
br
oad,
far,
and
affe
ctin
g
• In
the
supe
rvis
ion
train
ing
expe
rienc
e,
supe
rvis
ors s
trive
to e
nhan
ce th
e le
arni
ng a
nd
deve
lopm
ent o
f the
ir su
perv
isee
s and
, ac
cord
ingl
y, th
eir s
uper
vise
es’ p
atie
nts
• U
nfor
tuna
tely
, the
dev
elop
men
tal p
roce
ss,
traje
ctor
y, a
nd e
xper
ienc
es o
f the
supe
rvis
or
have
rem
aine
d m
ore
mys
tery
than
man
ifest
for
far t
oo lo
ng
Wat
kins
(2
014)
•
To d
iscu
sses
the
mos
t pre
ssin
g ne
eds
curr
ently
co
nfro
ntin
g cl
inic
al
supe
rvis
ion
• To
exa
min
e w
here
su
perv
isio
n is
now
re
lativ
e to
four
ar
eas:
(a)
supe
rvis
ion
train
ing
and
prac
tice;
(b)
mea
sure
men
t; (c
) di
ffer
ence
and
di
vers
ity; a
nd (d
) re
sear
ch
Com
para
tive
liter
atur
e re
view
N/A
N
/A
Diff
eren
ce a
nd D
iver
sity
:
• D
iffer
ence
and
div
ersi
ty a
re n
ow p
rom
inen
tly
feat
ured
in c
urre
nt su
perv
ision
com
pete
ncy
fram
ewor
ks
• W
hate
ver t
he c
ount
ry o
f orig
in, a
cqui
ring
mul
ticul
tura
l com
pete
nce
appe
ars t
o no
w b
e in
tern
atio
nally
con
side
red
to b
e a
supr
emel
y si
gnifi
cant
, int
egra
l asp
ect o
f sup
ervi
sion
pr
actic
e •
The
liter
atur
e on
supe
rvis
ion
mul
ticul
tura
l is
sues
has
gro
wn
cons
ider
ably
ove
r the
last
20
year
s and
con
tribu
ted
to a
bet
ter u
nder
stan
ding
ab
out i
ts p
ract
ice
and
limita
tions
•
Parti
cula
r eff
orts
to c
reat
e m
odel
s or t
heor
etic
al
visi
ons a
bout
mul
ticul
tura
l fac
tors
and
thei
r im
port
and
impa
ct o
n su
perv
isio
n ha
ve a
lso
been
evi
dent
acr
oss t
he la
st tw
o de
cade
s
70
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r R
esea
rch
Que
stio
ns/
Obj
ectiv
es
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
• Th
e re
ality
rem
ains
that
mul
ticul
tura
l su
perv
ision
is st
ill “
one
of th
e ne
wes
t kid
s on
the
mul
ticul
tura
l blo
ck, a
nd a
s suc
h, m
any
of
the
emer
ging
mod
els a
nd re
sear
ch a
re y
et to
be
clea
rly p
rogr
amm
atic
and
inte
rrela
ted”
Res
earc
h:
• Th
e nu
mbe
r of s
uper
visi
on st
udie
s pro
duce
d ea
ch y
ear s
till t
ends
to b
e so
mew
hat l
imite
d •
Estim
ates
hav
e in
dica
ted
that
app
roxi
mat
ely
10
supe
rvis
ion
inve
stig
atio
ns a
ppea
r ann
ually
•
That
lim
ited
outp
ut c
an b
e se
en a
s pot
entia
lly
cons
train
ing
rese
arch
adv
ance
men
t
Wes
tefe
ld
(200
9)
• To
exa
min
e cu
rren
t m
odel
s and
issu
es
rela
ted
to
psyc
hoth
erap
y su
perv
isio
n
Lite
ratu
re
revi
ew
N/A
N
/A
3 su
perv
isio
n m
odel
s are
impo
rtant
mod
els t
hat
have
mad
e m
ajor
a m
ajor
con
tribu
tion
to th
e fie
ld
of c
ouns
elin
g ps
ycho
logy
:
• D
evel
opm
enta
l app
roac
h •
Syst
ems a
ppro
ach
• In
terp
erso
nal a
ppro
ache
s •
Div
ersi
ty is
one
of t
he m
ost n
egle
cted
are
as in
su
perv
ision
trai
ning
and
rese
arch
(“Fa
lend
er &
Sh
afra
nske
, 200
4, p
.115
) •
Div
ersi
ty e
xper
ienc
es in
trai
ning
com
bine
d w
ith p
erso
nal e
xper
ienc
es in
volv
ing
dive
rsity
re
sulte
d in
hig
her s
core
s rel
ated
to
mul
ticul
tura
l com
pete
nce
• H
ighe
r am
ount
s of c
ours
ewor
k in
m
ultic
ultu
ralis
m, a
ttend
ing
wor
ksho
ps o
n m
ultic
ultu
ralis
m, a
nd h
avin
g ha
d su
perv
isio
n in
a
mul
ticul
tura
l situ
atio
n al
l con
tribu
ted
to a
71
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r R
esea
rch
Que
stio
ns/
Obj
ectiv
es
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
high
er sk
ill le
vel i
n te
rms o
f mul
ticul
tura
l co
mpe
tenc
e
72
Clin
ical
Sup
ervi
sion
– E
mpi
rica
l Stu
dies
and
Pub
licat
ions
A
utho
r(s)
/ Y
ear
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n
Inst
rum
enta
tion
Sam
ple
Maj
or F
indi
ngs
Atk
inso
n an
d W
oods
(2
007)
• To
pro
vide
cu
rren
t sur
vey
data
from
qu
alifi
ed
psyc
holo
gist
s ab
out e
ffec
tive
supe
rvis
ion
Qua
litat
ive
stud
y us
ing
focu
s gro
ups
• Pr
oprie
tary
qu
estio
nnai
re
• N
=93
educ
atio
nal
psyc
holo
gist
s •
71 o
f the
re
spon
dent
s had
ex
perie
nce
of
supe
rvis
ing
a tra
inee
ps
ycho
logi
st •
22 d
id n
ot h
ave
supe
rvis
ing
expe
rienc
e
• 49
resp
onde
nts
iden
tifie
d th
at th
ey
had
been
su
perv
ised
as a
tra
inee
with
in th
e la
st fi
ve y
ears
•
43 re
spon
dent
s ha
d no
t
• EP
s rat
ed th
e sta
tem
ent “
supe
rvisi
on
offe
rs g
uida
nce,
pro
blem
-sol
ving
and
su
ppor
t app
ropr
iate
to th
e ne
eds o
f the
tra
inee
,” a
s the
mos
t im
porta
nt in
fa
cilit
atin
g a
succ
essf
ul tr
aine
e pl
acem
ent
• Th
e se
cond
hig
hest
mea
n ra
ting
give
n to
“ef
fect
ive
com
mun
icat
ion
betw
een
the
supe
rviso
r and
trai
nee”
em
phas
izes
the
impo
rtanc
e of
co
mm
unic
atio
n as
a c
ore
conc
ept o
f su
perv
isio
n in
est
ablis
hing
a tr
ustin
g re
latio
nshi
p an
d an
eff
ectiv
e pa
rtner
ship
bet
wee
n su
perv
isor
and
tra
inee
•
Diff
icul
ties w
ith th
e su
perv
isor
y re
latio
nshi
p an
d w
ith e
ffec
tive
com
mun
icat
ion
wer
e pe
rcei
ved
to b
e th
e m
ost s
igni
fican
t bar
riers
to
effe
ctiv
e tra
inee
supe
rvis
ion
Col
eman
(2
006)
•
Are
ther
e id
entif
iabl
e pr
oces
s co
mpo
nent
s of
mul
ticul
tura
l co
unse
lor
train
ing
that
in
fluen
ce
train
ees’
Qua
litat
ive
anal
yses
of
criti
cal
inci
dent
s
• D
emog
raph
ic
ques
tionn
aire
•
Mul
ticul
tura
l En
viro
nmen
t In
vent
ory-
Rev
ised
(MEI
-R)
• C
ritic
al In
cide
nt
Prot
ocol
• N
=59
grad
uate
st
uden
ts •
15%
mas
ter’
s lev
el
• 80
% d
octo
ral-l
evel
•
20%
men
/75%
w
omen
•
Ave
rage
age
: 28
• 24
% A
fric
an
Am
eric
an/B
lack
, 5%
Asi
an
Thre
e ty
pes o
f inf
luen
tial p
roce
ss
com
pone
nts i
n m
ultic
ultu
ral c
ouns
elor
tra
inin
g:
• Ex
perie
nces
with
col
leag
ues f
rom
di
vers
e cu
ltura
l bac
kgro
unds
in th
eir
mul
ticul
tura
l tra
inin
g •
Did
actic
and
exp
erie
ntia
l cou
rse
com
pone
nts
73
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r R
esea
rch
Que
stio
ns/
Obj
ectiv
es
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n
Inst
rum
enta
tion
Sam
ple
Maj
or F
indi
ngs
deve
lopm
ent
of th
e M
CC
? •
Doe
s the
m
ultic
ultu
ral
envi
ronm
ent
of th
e tra
inin
g pr
ogra
m a
ffec
t th
e di
ffer
ent
proc
esse
s?
• D
o tra
inee
s of
colo
r and
W
hite
trai
nees
ha
ve d
iffer
ent
expe
rienc
es in
th
eir
deve
lopm
ent
of th
e M
CC
?
Am
eric
an, 5
9%
Euro
pean
A
mer
ican
/Whi
te
• 7%
Lat
ina/
o •
3% B
i/Mul
tirac
ial
• Ex
perie
nces
with
cul
tura
lly d
iver
se
othe
rs in
thei
r per
sona
l liv
es a
s bei
ng
Coo
k an
d H
elm
s (1
988)
• To
stud
y th
e qu
ality
of
cros
s-cu
ltura
l in
divi
dual
th
erap
ist
supe
rvis
ion
Fact
or
anal
ysis
•
Bar
rett-
Lenn
ard
Rel
atio
nshi
p In
vent
ory
(BLR
I) •
Wor
thin
gton
and
R
oehl
ke’s
m
easu
res o
f sa
tisfa
ctio
n •
Pers
onal
dat
a sh
eet
• N
=225
non
-C
auca
sian
stud
ents
w
ho w
ere
enro
lled
in c
linic
al a
nd
coun
selin
g ps
ycho
logy
pr
ogra
ms
• 57
% w
omen
•
57%
Bla
cks
• A
ge ra
nge
betw
een
26-3
1
5 no
north
ogon
al d
imen
sion
s wer
e id
entif
ied:
• Su
perv
isor
’s li
king
•
Emot
iona
l dis
com
fort
• C
ondi
tiona
l int
eres
t •
Con
ditio
nal l
ikin
g •
Unc
ondi
tiona
l lik
ing
Find
ings
:
• Th
e co
mbi
natio
n of
supe
rvis
or’s
lik
ing
and
cond
ition
al in
tere
st
cons
iste
ntly
con
tribu
ted
to g
reat
er
satis
fact
ion
74
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r R
esea
rch
Que
stio
ns/
Obj
ectiv
es
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n
Inst
rum
enta
tion
Sam
ple
Maj
or F
indi
ngs
Lada
ny,
Mor
i, an
d M
ehr
(201
3)
• To
iden
tify
supe
rvis
or
skill
s, te
chni
ques
, an
d be
havi
ors
that
wer
e de
emed
ef
fect
ive
in
faci
litat
ing
supe
rvis
ee
grow
th v
s. th
ose
skill
s, te
chni
ques
, an
d be
havi
ors
that
wer
e in
effe
ctiv
e, o
r lim
ited
or
hind
ered
su
perv
isee
gr
owth
•
To e
xam
ine
the
rela
tions
hip
betw
een
effe
ctiv
e an
d in
effe
ctiv
e su
perv
isor
be
havi
or a
nd
supe
rvis
ion
proc
ess a
nd
outc
ome,
sp
ecifi
cally
th
e
Mix
ed-
met
hod
desi
gn,
qual
itativ
e an
d qu
antit
ativ
e in
quiry
• Su
perv
isee
ev
alua
tion
of
supe
rvis
or fo
rm
• W
orki
ng A
llian
ce
Inve
ntor
y/Su
perv
isi
on-S
hort
Form
(W
AI/S
-Sho
rt)
• Su
perv
isor
y St
yles
Inve
ntor
y (S
SI)
• Su
perv
isor
Sel
f-D
iscl
osur
e In
dex
(SSD
I)
• Tr
aine
e D
iscl
osur
e Sc
ale
(TD
S)
• Ev
alua
tion
Proc
ess W
ithin
Su
perv
isio
n In
vent
ory
(EPS
I)
Trai
nees
:
• N
=128
•
100
fem
ale,
27
mal
e, 1
unk
now
n •
Ave
rage
age
: 35.
4 •
85%
Eur
opea
n A
mer
ican
/Whi
te;
6%
His
pani
c/La
tino(
a), 4
% A
fric
an
Am
eric
an/B
lack
; 2%
Asi
an
Am
eric
an o
r Pa
cific
Isla
nd; 2
%
Oth
er
Bes
t Sup
ervi
sors
:
• N
=128
•
85%
Whi
te; 4
%
His
pani
c/La
tino;
4%
Afr
ican
A
mer
ican
; 3%
A
sian
Am
eric
an;
2% O
ther
•
56%
fem
ale,
41%
m
ale
• 87
% h
ad d
octo
ral
degr
ee
Wor
st S
uper
viso
rs:
• N
=128
The
mos
t eff
ectiv
e su
perv
isor
skill
s, te
chni
ques
, and
beh
avio
rs:
• En
cour
aged
aut
onom
y •
Stre
ngth
ened
the
supe
rvis
ory
rela
tions
hip
• Fa
cilit
ated
ope
n di
scus
sion
The
mos
t ine
ffec
tive
supe
rvis
or sk
ills,
tech
niqu
es, a
nd b
ehav
iors
:
• D
epre
ciat
ed su
perv
isio
n •
Perf
orm
ed in
effe
ctiv
e cl
ient
co
ncep
tual
izat
ion
and
treat
men
t •
Wea
kene
d th
e su
perv
isor
y re
latio
nshi
p
• Em
pow
erin
g th
e su
perv
isee
via
en
cour
agin
g au
tono
my
and
faci
litat
ing
open
ness
to th
e su
perv
isee
’s id
eas i
s va
lued
by
supe
rvis
ees
•
Supe
rvis
ors w
ho w
ere
able
to
dem
onst
rate
thei
r clin
ical
kno
wle
dge,
th
at is
, to
self-
disc
lose
clin
ical
in
form
atio
n th
at w
as re
leva
nt to
the
supe
rvis
ees p
rese
ntin
g co
ncer
ns a
nd
was
in th
e se
rvic
e of
the
supe
rvis
ee,
seem
ed p
artic
ular
ly h
elpf
ul
•
Feed
back
that
was
pos
itive
and
ch
alle
ngin
g se
emed
to b
e un
ique
ly
bene
ficia
l to
supe
rvis
ees
75
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r R
esea
rch
Que
stio
ns/
Obj
ectiv
es
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n
Inst
rum
enta
tion
Sam
ple
Maj
or F
indi
ngs
supe
rvis
ory
wor
king
al
lianc
e,
supe
rvis
or
styl
e,
supe
rvis
or
self-
disc
losu
re,
supe
rvis
ee
nond
iscl
osur
e,
and
supe
rvis
ee
eval
uatio
n •
To d
eter
min
e th
e di
ffer
ence
s be
twee
n th
e be
st a
nd w
orst
su
perv
isor
s in
rela
tion
to th
e su
perv
isor
y w
orki
ng
allia
nce,
su
perv
isor
st
yle,
su
perv
isor
se
lf-di
sclo
sure
, su
perv
isee
no
ndis
clos
ure,
an
d su
perv
isee
ev
alua
tion
• 87
% W
hite
; 5%
H
ispa
nic/
Latin
o;
2% A
fric
an
Am
eric
an; 2
%
Asi
an;
• A
ppro
x. 5
0/50
fe
mal
e/m
ale
• 82
% h
ad d
octo
ral
degr
ee
76
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r R
esea
rch
Que
stio
ns/
Obj
ectiv
es
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n
Inst
rum
enta
tion
Sam
ple
Maj
or F
indi
ngs
Mag
nuso
n,
Wilc
oxon
, an
d N
orem
(2
000)
• To
exa
min
e in
effe
ctiv
e su
perv
isio
n pr
actic
es
• To
iden
tify
coun
terp
rodu
ctiv
e su
perv
isor
y be
havi
ors a
nd
to d
evel
op a
sc
hem
a fo
r ca
tego
rizin
g th
ese
beha
vior
s
Res
earc
h qu
estio
ns:
• W
hat
beha
vior
s lea
d to
the
perc
eptio
n of
in
effe
ctiv
e su
perv
isio
n?
• W
hat,
if an
y,
patte
rns
emer
ge fr
om
thes
e be
havi
ors?
Qua
litat
ive
met
hod
• Se
mi-s
truct
ured
in
terv
iew
s •
N=1
1 •
Cou
nsel
ors w
ho
repr
esen
ted
vario
us
prof
essi
onal
ex
perie
nces
•
8 m
en/3
wom
en
• 4
stat
es
• 3
ethn
ic g
roup
s re
pres
ente
d:
Afr
ican
Am
eric
an,
His
pani
c, a
nd
Euro
pean
A
mer
ican
•
Taug
ht in
co
unse
lor
educ
atio
n pr
ogra
ms o
r pr
actic
ed in
pr
ivat
e se
tting
s, sc
hool
s, U
CC
s, an
d ju
veni
le
corr
ectio
n fa
cilit
ies
• 10
wer
e cl
inic
al
supe
rvis
ors
Ana
lyse
s of t
he in
terv
iew
dat
a yi
elde
d tw
o br
oad
cate
gorie
s of f
indi
ngs:
(a)
over
arch
ing
prin
cipl
es o
f lou
sy
supe
rvis
ion
and
(b) g
ener
al sp
here
s of
lous
y su
perv
isio
n
Lous
y Su
perv
isio
n: O
vera
rchi
ng
Prin
cipl
es (O
P)
• O
P 1:
Unb
alan
ced
• O
P 2:
Dev
elop
men
tally
inap
prop
riate
•
OP
3: In
tole
rant
of d
iffer
ence
s. •
OP
4: P
oor m
odel
of
prof
essi
onal
/per
sona
l attr
ibut
es
• O
P 5:
Unt
rain
ed
• O
P 6:
Pro
fess
iona
lly a
path
etic
Lous
y Su
perv
isio
n: G
ener
al S
pher
es
(GS)
• G
S 1:
Org
aniz
atio
nal/a
dmin
istra
tive
• G
S 2:
Tec
hnic
al/c
ogni
tive
• G
S 3:
Rel
atio
nal/a
ffec
tive
Mur
phy
and
Wrig
ht
(200
5)
• To
exa
min
e th
e us
e of
po
wer
in th
e su
perv
isor
y
Qua
litat
ive
•
Sem
i-stru
ctur
ed
inte
rvie
ws
• N
=11
supe
rvis
ees
in a
n ac
adem
ic
clin
ical
trai
ning
pr
ogra
m
Them
es fo
r sup
ervi
sors
’ pow
er u
ses
incl
uded
:
• D
iscu
ssio
ns o
f pow
er
• Em
pow
erin
g su
perv
isee
s
77
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r R
esea
rch
Que
stio
ns/
Obj
ectiv
es
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n
Inst
rum
enta
tion
Sam
ple
Maj
or F
indi
ngs
rela
tions
hip
from
su
perv
isee
s’
pers
pect
ives
• 8
fem
ales
/3 m
ales
•
100%
Cau
casi
an
• A
ge ra
nge:
23-
38
• 6
in m
aste
r’s-
leve
l pr
ogra
m; 5
in
doct
oral
-leve
l pr
ogra
m
• M
ix o
f rel
igio
us
pref
eren
ces (
a va
riety
of
Chr
istia
n id
entit
ies,
i.e.
Cat
holic
and
Lu
ther
an)
• Pr
omot
ing
an a
tmos
pher
e of
safe
ty
• C
olla
bora
ting
with
supe
rvise
es
• Im
posi
tion
of st
yle/
orie
ntat
ion
• M
isus
es o
f pow
er, i
.e. v
iola
tion
of
conf
iden
tialit
y
Them
es fo
r sup
ervi
sees
’ pow
er u
ses
incl
uded
:
• Su
perv
isee
-pee
r pow
er
• Su
perv
isee
s as c
onsu
mer
s •
With
hold
ing
info
rmat
ion
Rec
omm
enda
tions
:
• B
ecau
se sa
fety
is c
lear
ly id
entif
ied
as
bein
g ve
ry im
porta
nt in
supe
rvis
ion,
su
perv
isor
s sho
uld
thin
k ab
out w
hat
they
can
do
to fa
cilit
ate
a sa
fe
envi
ronm
ent i
n su
perv
isio
n •
Supe
rvis
ors c
an a
ctiv
ely
colla
bora
te
with
and
em
pow
er th
eir s
uper
vise
es
• Su
perv
isor
s can
be
clea
r abo
ut th
eir
expe
ctat
ions
, in
part
by p
rovi
ding
ex
plic
it ex
pect
atio
ns th
at a
re li
nked
to
sum
mat
ive
and
form
ativ
e ev
alua
tions
of
supe
rvis
ees
Rus
sell
and
Yar
hous
e (2
006)
• To
ass
ess h
ow
syst
emat
ical
ly
relig
ion
/ sp
iritu
ality
is
inco
rpor
ated
in
to
Surv
ey
• W
eb-b
ased
su
rvey
(18-
item
s)
• N
=139
APA
-ac
cred
ited
pre-
doct
oral
inte
rnsh
ip
site
s
• Rel
igio
n/sp
iritu
ality
is m
ost o
ften
addr
esse
d in
inte
rnsh
ip tr
aini
ng w
hen
clie
nts b
ring
it up
• R
elig
ion/
spiri
tual
ity is
pro
cess
ed
furth
er in
the
cont
ext o
f sup
ervi
sion
78
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r R
esea
rch
Que
stio
ns/
Obj
ectiv
es
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n
Inst
rum
enta
tion
Sam
ple
Maj
or F
indi
ngs
psyc
holo
gy
prog
ram
s • R
elat
ivel
y fe
w in
tern
ship
site
s pro
vide
m
ore
form
al tr
aini
ng in
re
ligio
n/sp
iritu
ality
79
Lite
ratu
re R
evie
w T
able
: Mul
ticul
tura
l Sup
ervi
sion
M
ultic
ultu
ral S
uper
visio
n –
The
oret
ical
Pub
licat
ions
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
Cha
ng,
Hay
s, an
d Sh
offn
er
(200
3)
• To
exa
min
e th
e be
nefit
s and
ch
alle
nges
rela
ted
to c
ross
-raci
al
supe
rvis
ion
• To
dis
cuss
the
sign
ifica
nce
of
inte
grat
ing
raci
al
iden
tity
deve
lopm
ent i
n th
e su
perv
isio
n pr
oces
s
Lite
ratu
re
Rev
iew
Con
cept
ual/
Theo
retic
al
N/A
N
/A
• C
ross
-rac
ial s
uper
visi
on se
rves
as a
rich
lear
ning
op
portu
nity
and
a so
urce
for p
erso
nal a
nd
prof
essi
onal
gro
wth
. It a
lso
prov
ides
an
oppo
rtuni
ty to
incr
ease
supe
rvis
or a
nd
supe
rvis
ee’s
leve
ls o
f mul
ticul
tura
l aw
aren
ess,
know
ledg
e, a
nd sk
ills a
s the
y ex
amin
e ho
w
cultu
ral v
aria
bles
impa
ct c
ouns
elin
g an
d su
perv
isio
n •
A re
view
of t
he li
tera
ture
sugg
ests
that
it is
the
supe
rvis
ors’
resp
onsi
bilit
y to
add
ress
raci
al a
nd
cultu
ral i
ssue
s with
thei
r sup
ervi
sees
, yet
su
perv
isor
s ofte
n ig
nore
or a
void
cul
tura
l iss
ues
• A
lack
of a
war
enes
s of r
acia
l and
cul
tura
l si
mila
ritie
s and
diff
eren
ces b
etw
een
the
supe
rvis
or a
nd su
perv
isee
, or a
lack
of a
ttent
ion
to c
ultu
rally
rele
vant
issu
es, w
ill n
egat
ivel
y im
pact
the
rela
tions
hip
and
may
hin
der t
he
supe
rvis
ee’s
futu
re su
cces
s in
mul
ticul
tura
l co
unse
ling
•
Cro
ss-r
acia
l com
pete
nce
can
be e
nhan
ced
by
fost
erin
g m
ultic
ultu
ral t
rain
ing
in g
ener
al. W
hen
addr
essi
ng ra
cial
iden
tity
issu
es in
supe
rvis
ion,
it
is e
ffec
tive
to fo
cus i
nitia
lly o
n se
lf-aw
aren
ess
• St
rate
gies
that
enc
oura
ge b
oth
the
supe
rvis
or a
nd
the
supe
rvis
ee to
add
ress
raci
al id
entit
y is
sues
in
clud
e jo
urna
ling
and
the
use
of c
ritic
al
inci
dent
s
80
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
• A
noth
er st
rate
gy in
volv
es th
e us
e of
dya
ds a
nd
shar
ing
of st
orie
s in
grou
p su
perv
isio
n to
ac
know
ledg
e di
ffer
ence
s and
sim
ilarit
ies o
f rac
ial
grou
ps a
nd d
iscu
ss th
eir s
ourc
es
• A
dditi
onal
stra
tegi
es in
clud
e re
adin
g an
d w
ritin
g as
sign
men
ts a
ddre
ssin
g is
sues
rela
ted
to ra
cial
id
entit
y, st
ruct
ured
imm
ersi
on a
nd e
xper
ient
ial
expe
rienc
es (e
.g.,
visi
ting
cultu
ral c
ente
rs a
nd
atte
ndin
g cu
ltura
l act
iviti
es),
and
the
use
of ro
le
play
s in
indi
vidu
al su
perv
isio
n
Chr
istia
nsen
et
al.
(201
1)
• To
exa
min
e th
e ex
perie
nces
of 7
di
vers
e th
erap
ists
in
a su
perv
isio
n co
urse
as t
hey
wre
stle
d w
ith th
e re
al-w
orld
ap
plic
atio
n of
m
ultic
ultu
ral
supe
rvis
ion
Cas
e ex
ampl
es
N/A
N
/A
• R
ace
very
muc
h st
ill m
atte
rs, n
ot o
nly
in th
e liv
es
of c
lient
s, bu
t als
o be
twee
n su
perv
isor
s and
su
perv
isee
s •
Opp
ortu
nitie
s for
incr
easi
ng th
e m
ultic
ultu
ral
sens
itivi
ty o
f bot
h th
erap
ists
and
supe
rvis
ors
occu
r dur
ing
the
supe
rvis
ion
proc
ess
Des
pite
diff
erin
g ba
ckgr
ound
s, se
vera
l sim
ilarit
ies
emer
ged
acro
ss c
ase
exam
ples
:
• In
all
case
exa
mpl
es, n
egat
ive
emot
iona
l re
actio
ns w
ere
pres
ent (
i.e.,
disc
omfo
rt, a
nxie
ty,
and
ange
r) •
All
of th
ese
inst
ance
s of m
ultic
ultu
ral s
uper
visi
on
wer
e un
plan
ned;
they
occ
urre
d sp
onta
neou
sly
out
of th
e co
nten
t of t
hera
py o
r sup
ervi
sion
•
All
of th
e th
erap
ists
invo
lved
dis
cuss
the
need
for
thei
r sup
ervi
sor’s
supp
ort a
nd v
alid
atio
n of
thei
r ex
perie
nces
, inc
ludi
ng th
eir n
egat
ive
emot
iona
l re
actio
ns
• Th
ere
is a
cle
ar n
eed
in a
ll of
thes
e ex
ampl
es fo
r a
safe
spac
e w
ithin
whi
ch to
com
mun
icat
e an
d
81
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
proc
ess t
hese
exp
erie
nces
at t
he su
perv
isor
y le
vel,
rath
er th
an o
n th
e th
erap
eutic
leve
l
Col
lins a
nd
Piet
erse
(2
008)
• To
dis
cuss
2
pers
pect
ives
on
the
Mul
ticul
tura
l C
ouns
elin
g C
ompe
tenc
ies:
fix
ed g
oal a
nd
proc
ess
• To
ope
ratio
naliz
e ac
tive
raci
al/c
ultu
ral
awar
enes
s •
To c
ritiq
ue
curr
ent t
rain
ing
appr
oach
es fr
om
a pr
oces
s pe
rspe
ctiv
e •
To d
iscu
ss th
e cr
itica
l inc
iden
t an
alys
is a
s a to
ol
for i
ncre
asin
g ra
cial
/cul
tura
l aw
aren
ess
Lite
ratu
re
revi
ew w
ith
criti
que
and
criti
cal
inci
dent
an
alys
is
N/A
N
/A
• Th
e an
alys
is o
f a c
ritic
al in
cide
nt sh
ould
in
corp
orat
e fo
ur c
ore
elem
ents
: ack
now
ledg
men
t, co
nfro
ntat
ion,
refle
ctio
n, a
nd c
omm
itmen
t •
Aut
hors
reco
mm
end
that
edu
cato
rs re
view
and
im
plem
ent C
IAB
T an
d ot
her t
rain
ing
mod
els t
hat
affe
ct th
e pr
oces
s asp
ect o
f mul
ticul
tura
l co
mpe
tenc
e an
d pr
omot
e ac
tive
raci
al/c
ultu
ral
awar
enes
s •
Cou
nsel
or e
duca
tors
and
rese
arch
ers n
eed
grea
ter
empi
rical
und
erst
andi
ng o
f the
und
erly
ing
proc
esse
s of m
ultic
ultu
ral c
ompe
tenc
e an
d in
com
pete
nce
to b
ette
r inf
orm
mul
ticul
tura
l tra
inin
g st
rate
gies
•
Bec
ause
this
invo
lves
con
stru
cts a
nd p
heno
men
a th
at a
re u
ncon
scio
us a
nd d
iffic
ult t
o m
easu
re, t
he
auth
ors r
ecom
men
d th
at re
sear
cher
s use
a v
arie
ty
of re
sear
ch m
etho
ds
Eklu
nd,
Aro
s-O
’Mal
ley,
an
d M
urrie
ta
(201
4)
• To
exp
lore
cu
ltura
l fac
tors
im
pact
ing
supe
rvis
ion
• To
out
line
raci
al
iden
tity
deve
lopm
ent
mod
els a
nd th
eir
Lite
ratu
re
revi
ew w
ith
case
ex
ampl
es
N/A
N
/A
Lite
ratu
re re
view
was
con
duct
ed in
the
follo
win
g ar
eas:
• C
ultu
ral M
atch
•
Whi
te P
rivile
ge
• C
omm
unic
atio
n St
yles
•
Trai
ning
and
Sup
ervi
sion
•
Rac
ial I
dent
ity D
evel
opm
ent M
odel
s
82
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
appl
icat
ion
with
in
the
cont
ext o
f cu
ltura
lly
com
pete
nt
supe
rvis
ion
• To
hig
hlig
ht b
est
prac
tice
cons
ider
atio
ns fo
r en
gagi
ng in
ef
fect
ive
mul
ticul
tura
l su
perv
isio
n
• W
hite
Rac
ial I
dent
ity D
evel
opm
ent M
odel
•
Fram
ewor
k fo
r Mul
ticul
tura
l Sup
ervi
sion
•
Bes
t Pra
ctic
e C
onsi
dera
tions
in M
ultic
ultu
ral
Supe
rvis
ion
The
follo
win
g B
est P
ract
ice
Con
side
ratio
ns in
MC
Su
perv
isio
n w
ere
mad
e:
• D
iscu
ss c
ultu
ral s
imila
ritie
s and
diff
eren
ces
• Sh
ow g
enui
ne in
tere
st in
and
resp
ect f
or th
e su
perv
isee
’s u
niqu
e cu
lture
•
Cre
ate
a sa
fe a
nd in
clus
ive
setti
ng
• M
odel
and
impa
rt m
ultic
ultu
ral c
ompe
tenc
ies
• V
alue
ong
oing
pro
fess
iona
l dev
elop
men
t op
portu
nitie
s •
App
ly a
mul
ticul
tura
l fra
mew
ork
for s
uper
visi
on
Estra
da,
Fram
e, a
nd
Will
iam
s (2
004)
• To
exa
min
e th
e im
porta
nce
of
mea
ning
ful
disc
ussi
on o
f rac
e an
d et
hnic
ity in
cr
oss-
cultu
ral
supe
rvis
ion
• To
iden
tify/
sh
owca
se
com
mon
err
ors i
n cr
oss-
cultu
ral
supe
rvis
ion
• To
pre
sent
st
rate
gies
for
effe
ctiv
e cr
oss-
Lite
ratu
re
revi
ew; c
ase
exam
ple
N/A
N
/A
It is
the
supe
rvis
or’s
resp
onsi
bilit
y to
faci
litat
e th
e fo
llow
ing
exam
inat
ions
in a
clim
ate
of sa
fety
, tru
st,
and
com
fort…
Mak
ing
Supe
rvis
ion
Safe
:
• A
ckno
wle
dgin
g th
eir p
erso
nal a
nd p
rofe
ssio
nal
pow
er is
a fi
rst s
tep
in b
uild
ing
a sa
fe c
limat
e fo
r th
e su
perv
isee
•
Avo
id u
sing
pow
er in
arb
itrar
y an
d de
stru
ctiv
e w
ays a
nd m
ust b
e in
tent
iona
l abo
ut a
ddre
ssin
g th
e po
wer
inhe
rent
in th
e su
perv
isor
y re
latio
nshi
p •
Cre
ate
a cl
imat
e of
hon
esty
and
trus
t whe
rein
su
perv
isee
s hav
e th
e op
portu
nity
for h
onin
g th
eir
coun
selin
g sk
ills a
s wel
l as a
ddre
ssin
g th
e pe
rson
al a
nd c
onte
xtua
l iss
ues t
hat a
rise
83
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
cultu
ral
supe
rvis
ion
• R
aise
the
issu
es o
f rac
ial a
nd e
thni
c di
ffer
ence
, of
expe
ctat
ions
, and
fear
s
Con
duct
ing
Supe
rvis
or a
nd S
uper
vise
e Se
lf-A
sses
smen
t:
• It
is c
ritic
al fo
r bot
h su
perv
isor
s and
supe
rvis
ees
to c
onsi
der t
heir
own
raci
al a
nd e
thni
c ba
ckgr
ound
s and
bel
ief s
yste
ms a
nd h
ow th
ese
may
impa
ct th
e su
perv
isor
y re
latio
nshi
p •
One
stra
tegy
to in
crea
se a
war
enes
s of r
acia
l and
et
hnic
iden
tity
is fo
r bot
h th
e su
perv
isor
and
su
perv
isee
to p
repa
re c
ultu
ral g
enog
ram
s •
Oth
er a
venu
es fo
r exp
lorin
g ra
cial
and
eth
nic
iden
tity
issu
es in
clud
e th
e us
e of
raci
al id
entit
y in
vent
orie
s •
Supe
rvis
ors a
nd su
perv
isee
s wor
king
with
ra
cial
ly d
iffer
ent c
lient
s are
enc
oura
ged
to se
lf-ad
min
iste
r the
raci
al id
entit
y in
vent
orie
s and
di
scus
s the
resu
lts in
supe
rvis
ion
Embr
acin
g Le
arni
ng O
ppor
tuni
ties
• Ta
king
resp
onsi
bilit
y fo
r lea
rnin
g ab
out t
he ra
cial
pa
ttern
s and
pra
ctic
es o
f the
ir et
hnic
ally
div
erse
cl
ient
s
Supe
rvis
ors a
nd su
perv
isee
s mut
ually
und
erta
ke th
e ta
sk o
f lea
rnin
g ab
out c
lient
s’ ra
cial
and
eth
nic
cont
ext
Fale
nder
, B
urne
s, an
d El
lis (2
013)
• To
pro
vide
ba
ckgr
ound
kn
owle
dge
and
cont
ext f
or
com
pete
ncy-
Lite
ratu
re
revi
ew w
ith
theo
retic
al
and
N/A
N
/A
• Th
ere
exis
ts a
crit
ical
nee
d w
ithin
app
lied
psyc
holo
gy to
und
erst
and
and
prom
ote
supe
rvis
ion
usin
g a
com
pete
ncy-
base
d m
ultic
ultu
ral f
ram
ewor
k
84
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
base
d cl
inic
al
supe
rvis
ion
• To
show
case
a
dive
rsity
of
met
hodo
logi
cally
so
und
empi
rical
ap
proa
ches
to
stud
y ef
fect
ive
supe
rvis
ion,
in
clud
ing
mul
ticul
tura
lly
com
pete
nt
supe
rvis
ion,
and
co
mpa
rativ
e pe
rspe
ctiv
es o
n su
perv
isio
n cr
oss-
cultu
rally
conc
eptu
al
impl
icat
ions
A
utho
rs p
rovi
de v
alua
ble
guid
ance
for s
uper
viso
rs
abou
t eff
ectiv
e su
perv
isio
n an
d th
e co
mpl
exiti
es o
f in
tern
atio
nal,
cros
s-cu
ltura
l, an
d m
ultic
ultu
ral g
roup
su
perv
isio
n; th
ey o
ffer
6 im
plic
atio
ns:
1. F
acili
tatin
g an
d en
gagi
ng in
the
trans
form
atio
n to
co
mpe
tenc
y-ba
sed
supe
rvis
ion
rem
aini
ng
min
dful
of p
ower
, per
spec
tive,
and
the
cultu
ral
and
dive
rsity
rela
tivity
and
con
text
of
com
pete
ncie
s 2.
Enc
oura
ging
met
hodo
logi
cal a
dvan
ces a
nd n
ew
cons
truct
s in
supe
rvis
ion
rese
arch
3.
Atte
ndin
g to
mul
tiple
iden
titie
s of c
lient
(s),
supe
rvis
ees,
and
supe
rvis
ors
4. T
rans
latin
g ro
bust
resu
lts in
to fr
amew
orks
for
train
ing
of su
perv
isor
s. 5.
Con
duct
ing
rese
arch
on
effe
ctiv
enes
s of
supe
rvis
ion
train
ing
for s
uper
vise
es in
de
velo
pmen
t and
for m
ore
expe
rienc
ed
supe
rvis
ors
6. I
ncre
asin
g at
tent
ion
to c
ross
-nat
iona
l stu
dies
of
supe
rvis
ion
prac
tice,
inte
rnat
iona
l com
pete
ncy
stan
dard
s, an
d ev
olvi
ng p
ract
ices
and
gui
delin
es
in th
e in
tern
atio
nal a
rena
Foo
and
Rod
olfa
(2
013)
• To
exp
lore
how
th
e TC
P M
ajor
C
ontri
butio
n,
“Mul
ticul
tura
l C
linic
al
Supe
rvis
ion
and
Ben
chm
arks
: Em
piric
al
Supp
ort
Com
men
tary
N
/A
N/A
Th
e ar
ticle
ope
ratio
naliz
ed n
umer
ous b
ench
mar
ks
and
prov
ided
a sp
ecifi
c pa
thw
ay to
hel
p su
perv
isor
s be
com
e in
crea
sing
ly m
ultic
ultu
rally
com
pete
nt
Wor
king
Alli
ance
in su
perv
isio
n is
key
to fo
ster
ing
train
ee le
arni
ng
• Th
e be
st su
perv
isor
s bui
ld st
rong
supe
rvis
ory
rela
tions
hips
•
Use
of e
mpa
thy
and
enco
urag
emen
t
85
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
Info
rmin
g Pr
actic
e an
d Su
perv
isor
Tr
aini
ng,”
can
be
appl
ied
to th
e re
finin
g of
co
mpe
tenc
ies f
or
the
prof
essi
on o
f ps
ycho
logy
• Pr
ovid
e po
sitiv
e an
d ch
alle
ngin
g fe
edba
ck
Supe
rvis
or U
se o
f Sel
f/Sel
f-D
iscl
osur
e: ju
dici
ous
use
of se
lf-di
sclo
sure
by
supe
rvis
ors w
as v
ery
help
ful t
o su
perv
isee
s
Empo
wer
ing
Supe
rvis
ees:
• En
cour
agin
g au
tono
my
and
open
ness
to tr
aine
es’
idea
s •
Abi
lity
to re
flect
on
own
role
s and
pow
er w
as
parti
cula
rly h
elpf
ul to
supe
rvis
ees
Cro
ss-C
ultu
ral C
ompe
tenc
ies
• La
ck o
f aw
aren
ess →
har
mfu
l to
supe
rvis
ees o
f co
lor
Ethi
cal B
ehav
iors
: the
re is
a n
eed
for s
uper
viso
rs to
fr
ame
and
mod
el e
thic
al b
ehav
ior f
or su
perv
isee
s
Men
tors
hip:
par
ticul
arly
effe
ctiv
e ap
proa
ch fo
r tra
inee
s of c
olor
Foua
d et
al.
(200
9)
• To
out
line
core
fo
unda
tiona
l and
fu
nctio
nal
com
pete
ncie
s in
prof
essi
onal
ps
ycho
logy
ac
ross
thre
e le
vels
of
prof
essi
onal
de
velo
pmen
t: re
adin
ess f
or
prac
ticum
, re
adin
ess f
or
Con
cept
ual
fram
ewor
k N
/A
N/A
C
ompe
tenc
y fo
r Sup
ervi
sion
and
Tra
inin
g, A
rea
D:
Aw
aren
ess o
f Fac
tors
Aff
ectin
g Q
ualit
y:
Rea
dine
ss fo
r Int
erns
hip:
• K
now
ledg
e ab
out t
he im
pact
of d
iver
sity
on
all
prof
essi
onal
setti
ngs a
nd su
perv
isio
n pa
rtici
pant
s in
clud
ing
self
as d
efin
ed b
y A
PA p
olic
y •
Dem
onst
rate
s aw
aren
ess o
f rol
e of
opp
ress
ion
and
priv
ilege
on
supe
rvis
ion
proc
ess
Rea
dine
ss fo
r Ent
ry to
Pra
ctic
e:
• U
nder
stan
ding
of o
ther
indi
vidu
als a
nd g
roup
s an
d in
ters
ectio
n di
men
sion
s of d
iver
sity
in th
e
86
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
inte
rnsh
ip, a
nd
read
ines
s for
en
try to
pra
ctic
e •
To se
rve
as a
re
sour
ce fo
r tho
se
char
ged
with
tra
inin
g an
d as
sess
ing
for
com
pete
nce
cont
ext o
f sup
ervi
sion
pra
ctic
e, a
ble
to e
ngag
e in
re
flect
ion
on th
e ro
le o
f one
’s se
lf on
ther
apy
and
in su
perv
isio
n •
Dem
onst
rate
s int
egra
tion
of d
iver
sity
and
m
ultip
le id
entit
y as
pect
s in
conc
eptu
aliz
atio
n of
su
perv
isio
n pr
oces
s with
all
parti
cipa
nts (
clie
nts,
supe
rvis
ee, s
uper
viso
r)
• D
emon
stra
tes a
dapt
atio
n of
ow
n pr
ofes
sion
al
beha
vior
in a
cul
tura
lly se
nsiti
ve m
anne
r as
appr
opria
te to
the
need
s of t
he su
perv
isio
n co
ntex
t and
all
parti
es in
it
• A
rticu
late
s and
use
s div
ersi
ty a
ppro
pria
te
repe
rtoire
of s
kills
and
tech
niqu
es in
supe
rvis
ory
proc
ess
• Id
entif
ies i
mpa
ct o
f asp
ect o
f sel
f in
ther
apy
and
supe
rvis
ion
Gar
rett
et a
l. (2
001)
•
To a
ddre
ss th
e ne
ed fo
r cul
tura
l re
spon
sive
ness
in
supe
rvis
ion
and
prov
ide
supe
rvis
ors w
ith a
pa
radi
gm to
hel
p th
em w
ork
mor
e ef
fect
ivel
y w
ith
supe
rvis
ees,
give
n di
ffer
ence
s in
val
ues a
nd
belie
f sys
tem
s, in
terp
reta
tion
of
expe
rienc
es,
stru
ctur
e
Theo
retic
al
fram
ewor
k N
/A
N/A
V
ISIO
N is
use
ful f
or re
latin
g th
e on
goin
g in
tera
ctio
nal p
roce
ss o
f cul
ture
in th
e w
ay th
at
supe
rvis
or a
nd su
perv
isee
:
V (V
alue
s and
Bel
ief S
yste
ms)
: stru
ctur
e th
eir
phen
omen
al w
orld
in te
rms o
f Val
ues a
nd b
elie
f sy
stem
s
I (In
terp
reta
tion
of E
xper
ienc
es):
resp
ond
to th
e in
tern
al a
nd e
xter
nal s
timul
i of t
heir
phen
omen
al
wor
ld b
y In
terp
retin
g th
eir e
xper
ienc
es a
nd
ascr
ibin
g m
eani
ngs
S (S
truct
urin
g): S
truc
ture
thei
r phe
nom
enal
wor
ld
acco
rdin
g to
per
sona
l/cul
tura
l mea
ning
s and
pr
efer
ence
s tha
t pro
vide
app
ropr
iate
ave
nues
for
goal
-dire
cted
beh
avio
rs a
nd e
xpec
tatio
ns
87
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
pref
eren
ces,
inte
ract
iona
l st
yle,
ope
ratio
nal
stra
tegi
es, a
nd
perc
eive
d ne
eds
of su
perv
isee
s •
To d
escr
ibe
the
VIS
ION
mod
el o
f cu
ltura
l re
spon
sive
ness
as
a pr
actic
al m
eans
of
supe
rvis
ors
expl
orin
g m
ultic
ultu
ral
issu
es in
the
supe
rvis
ory
rela
tions
hip
I (In
tera
ctio
nal S
tyle
): en
gage
in in
tera
ctiv
e le
arni
ng
and
self-
expr
essi
on th
roug
h an
Inte
ract
iona
l sty
le o
f ve
rbal
and
non
verb
al c
omm
unic
atio
n in
soci
al
grou
ps a
nd th
e su
rrou
ndin
g en
viro
nmen
t tha
t re
quire
s a c
ontin
uous
pro
cess
of a
dapt
atio
n
O (O
pera
tiona
l Stra
tegi
es):
deve
lop
Ope
ratio
nal
stra
tegi
es a
nd p
roce
dure
s for
acc
ompl
ishi
ng th
eir
expe
ctat
ions
and
goa
ls
N (N
eeds
, Per
ceiv
ed):
deve
lop
a pa
rticu
lar
pers
pect
ive
in se
ekin
g to
fulfi
ll pe
rcei
ved
phys
ical
, m
enta
l, sp
iritu
al (e
mot
iona
l) an
d en
viro
nmen
tal
Nee
ds
Gra
y an
d Sm
ith
(200
9)
• To
intro
duce
an
appr
oach
to
supe
rvis
ion
that
en
hanc
es th
e su
perv
isor
’s
cultu
ral
resp
onsi
vene
ss
and
atte
ntio
n to
th
e in
fluen
ce o
f di
vers
ity
• To
des
crib
e st
rate
gies
to
iden
tify
the
supe
rvis
ee’s
pe
rson
al q
ualit
ies
Theo
retic
al
fram
ewor
k (p
ostm
oder
n an
d co
nstru
ctiv
ist
pers
pect
ives
); ca
se e
xam
ple
N/A
N
/A
The
auth
ors p
ropo
se in
corp
orat
ing
the
conc
eptu
al
inte
rsec
tion
of th
ese
two
ther
apy
appr
oach
es to
set
the
stag
e fo
r a fr
amew
ork
for s
uper
visi
on:
• A
ttent
ive
to th
e as
pect
s of d
iffer
ence
foun
d in
the
rela
tions
hip
betw
een
supe
rvis
or a
nd su
perv
isee
an
d •
Dis
tingu
ishe
d by
refle
ctiv
e co
mm
unic
atio
n an
d qu
estio
ns (o
r RC
Q) a
s a c
ompr
ehen
sive
dia
logi
c an
d re
curs
ive
proc
ess
Solu
tion-
Focu
sed:
• So
cial
ize
the
supe
rvis
ee to
a so
lutio
n-fo
cuse
d su
perv
isor
y fo
rmat
•
Focu
s on
“exc
eptio
ns”
(or a
tim
e w
hen
the
supe
rvis
ee h
as e
xper
ienc
ed so
me
degr
ee o
f
88
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
and
skill
s tha
t co
uld
be a
cces
sed
in o
rder
to fo
ster
co
mpe
tent
pr
actic
e
succ
ess;
hel
p su
perv
isee
repe
at w
hat h
as w
orke
d in
the
past
and
to g
ain
conf
iden
ce in
his
/her
ab
ility
to m
ake
impr
ovem
ents
for t
he fu
ture
•
Expl
ore
copi
ng: a
sk c
opin
g qu
estio
ns
• Em
phas
ize
help
ing
the
supe
rvis
ee c
onst
ruct
a
posi
tive
visi
on o
f his
/her
futu
re w
ork
with
a
clie
nt
• U
se “
scal
ing
ques
tions
” to
iden
tify
usef
ul
“diff
eren
ces”
for t
he su
perv
isee
• C
ompl
imen
t the
supe
rvis
ee fo
r hav
ing
tried
to
solv
e a
prob
lem
•
Pay
atte
ntio
n to
wha
t was
atte
nded
to o
r ign
ored
in
supe
rvis
ion
sess
ions
Nar
rativ
e:
• Li
sten
to th
e su
perv
isee
’s “
story
” •
Dism
antle
stuc
k “s
torie
s”
• D
econ
stru
ct li
miti
ng n
arra
tives
•
Enga
ge a
pre
ferr
ed re
ality
•
Enga
ge o
utsi
der w
itnes
ses
• U
tiliz
e m
etap
hors
Hird
, C
aval
ieri,
D
ulko
, Fe
lice,
and
H
o (2
001)
• To
pro
vide
an
over
view
of t
he
expe
rienc
es o
f 4
psyc
holo
gist
s-in
-tra
inin
g as
su
perv
isee
s in
mul
ticul
tura
l su
perv
isio
n re
latio
nshi
ps
• To
und
erst
and
supe
rvis
ees’
Lite
ratu
re
revi
ew; c
ase
exam
ples
N/A
N
/A
Con
cept
ualiz
atio
n an
d Ex
perie
nce
of M
ultic
ultu
ral
Supe
rvis
ion:
• M
ultic
ultu
ral s
uper
visi
on c
onsi
ders
and
in
tegr
ates
mul
tiple
cul
tura
l int
erac
tions
as t
hey
occu
r with
in th
e tri
adic
pro
cess
of t
he su
perv
isor
, su
perv
isee
, and
clie
nt
• A
lthou
gh v
aria
tions
in th
e de
finiti
on a
nd
oper
atio
naliz
atio
n of
mul
ticul
tura
l sup
ervi
sion
ex
ist,
all s
uper
visi
on e
xper
ienc
es n
eed
to
inte
grat
e cu
lture
into
the
proc
ess
89
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
need
s and
pe
rspe
ctiv
es fo
r cu
ltura
lly
inte
grat
ed
supe
rvis
ion
• To
dis
cuss
m
ultic
ultu
ral
issu
es d
urin
g su
perv
isio
n •
To p
rovi
de
reco
mm
enda
tions
fo
r fac
ilita
ting
the
deve
lopm
ent o
f ef
fect
ive
mul
ticul
tura
l su
perv
isio
n
Effe
cts o
n th
e D
ynam
ics o
f Sup
ervi
sion
R
elat
ions
hip
due
to C
ultu
ral D
iffer
ence
s:
• C
ultu
ral i
nter
actio
ns g
reat
ly a
ffec
t the
dyn
amic
s of
supe
rvis
ion
rela
tions
hip
• Po
wer
diff
eren
ces b
y ra
ce, e
thni
city
, gen
der,
or
othe
r cul
tura
l fac
tor a
lso
cont
ribut
e to
the
qual
ity
of th
e su
perv
isor
y ex
perie
nce
• Th
e gr
eate
st c
ost o
f not
disc
ussi
ng
mul
ticul
tura
lism
ins s
uper
visi
on ty
pica
lly o
ccur
s fo
r tho
se w
ho h
ave
the
leas
t soc
iopo
litic
al a
nd
cont
extu
al p
ower
(i.e
. the
supe
rvis
ee a
nd th
e cl
ient
)
How
to In
trodu
ce C
ultu
ral I
ssue
s int
o th
e Su
perv
isor
y R
elat
ions
hip:
• C
onve
rsat
ions
abo
ut m
ultic
ultu
ralis
m sh
ould
oc
cur e
arly
in su
perv
isio
n, in
par
ticul
ar to
dis
pel
any
prec
once
ptio
ns a
nd a
ssum
ptio
ns th
at m
ight
un
derm
ine
the
supe
rvis
ion
proc
ess
• Se
lf-di
sclo
sure
s of v
ulne
rabi
lity
and
stru
ggle
by
an e
xper
ienc
ed m
ento
r can
be
com
forti
ng to
su
perv
isee
s, pr
ovid
ing
a m
odel
by
whi
ch
supe
rvis
ees c
an a
ddre
ss th
eir o
wn
bias
es a
nd
assu
mpt
ions
as t
hey
unde
rsta
nd a
nd in
tegr
ate
mul
ticul
tura
lism
•
Con
side
r the
use
of s
emi-s
truct
ured
que
stio
ns to
pr
ompt
the
disc
ussi
on o
f cul
tura
l iss
ues i
n th
e su
perv
isio
n pr
oces
s
Ass
essm
ents
of M
ultic
ultu
ral C
ompe
tenc
ies:
• M
ultic
ultu
ral A
war
enes
s-K
now
ledg
e-Sk
ills
Surv
ey (M
AK
SS)
90
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
• C
ross
Cul
tura
l Cou
nsel
ing
Inve
ntor
y-R
evis
ed
(CC
CI-R
) •
Mul
ticul
tura
l Cou
nsel
ing
Inve
ntor
y (M
CI)
Hol
low
ay
and
Wol
leat
(1
994)
• To
exa
min
e cl
inic
al
supe
rvis
ion
in
prof
essi
onal
ps
ycho
logy
from
th
e pe
rspe
ctiv
e of
ge
nder
(to
desc
ribe
supe
rvis
ion
with
in th
e co
ntex
t of
gen
der a
nd
pow
er)
Theo
retic
al
fram
ewor
k w
ith c
ase
exam
ples
N/A
N
/A
• Th
is a
rticl
e co
nfirm
s the
legi
timat
e po
wer
in
here
nt in
the
role
of s
uper
viso
r reg
ardl
ess o
f w
heth
er a
mal
e or
fem
ale
is in
the
role
•
Gen
der r
ole
char
acte
ristic
s com
e to
pla
y,
how
ever
, with
in th
e tra
inee
role
•
A su
bord
inat
e po
sitio
n of
freq
uent
acq
uies
cenc
e is
rein
forc
ed in
tera
ctio
nally
for f
emal
e tra
inee
s •
Cen
tral t
o su
perv
isio
n is
the
role
of p
ower
and
in
volv
emen
t in
the
supe
rvis
ory
rela
tions
hip
and
the
inte
ntio
ns o
f the
supe
rvis
or a
s she
or h
e de
sign
s way
of t
each
ing
and
lear
ning
that
are
ne
cess
arily
in a
con
text
of a
pro
fess
iona
l and
hi
erar
chic
al re
latio
nal s
truct
ure
Inm
an a
nd
DeB
oer
Kre
ider
(2
013)
• To
off
er tw
o su
perv
isor
y in
terv
entio
ns, t
he
Crit
ical
Eve
nts
Mod
el a
nd th
e H
euris
tic M
odel
of
Non
-op
pres
sive
In
terp
erso
nal
Dev
elop
men
t to
high
light
the
use
of a
m
ultic
ultu
rally
co
mpe
tent
fr
amew
ork
in
Con
cept
ual/
Theo
retic
al
N/A
N
/A
• A
s a k
ey c
ompo
nent
to e
ffec
tive
psyc
hoth
erap
y tra
inin
g, c
linic
al su
perv
isio
n an
d m
ultic
ultu
ral
com
pete
ncie
s hav
e be
en c
onsi
dere
d co
re
com
pete
ncie
s in
the
prov
isio
n of
eth
ical
pra
ctic
e •
Res
pons
ibili
ty fa
lls o
n tra
inin
g pr
ogra
ms a
nd
supe
rvis
ors t
o pr
epar
e tra
inee
s and
supe
rvis
ees
for t
he o
ngoi
ng p
ursu
it of
mul
ticul
tura
l co
mpe
tenc
e •
Theo
ry su
gges
ts th
at su
perv
isor
mod
elin
g of
cu
ltura
lly a
ppro
pria
te d
iscu
ssio
ns a
nd
inte
rven
tions
, as w
ell a
s ack
now
ledg
men
t of t
heir
own
limits
rega
rdin
g m
ultic
ultu
ral k
now
ledg
e,
faci
litat
es su
perv
isee
dev
elop
men
t and
co
mpe
tenc
e in
the
mul
ticul
tura
l are
na
91
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
psyc
hoth
erap
y an
d su
perv
isio
n •
Res
earc
h in
dica
tes t
hat t
he p
rovi
sion
of
mul
ticul
tura
lly c
ompe
tent
supe
rvis
ion
posi
tivel
y in
fluen
ces m
ultic
ultu
ral c
ouns
elin
g kn
owle
dge,
cu
ltura
l em
path
y, m
ultic
ultu
ral c
ouns
elin
g se
lf-ef
ficac
y, su
perv
isor
y w
orki
ng a
llian
ce a
nd
satis
fact
ion
with
supe
rvis
ion,
and
lear
ning
ou
tcom
es
• Th
e C
ritic
al E
vent
s Mod
el is
an
inte
rper
sona
l ap
proa
ch th
at e
mph
asiz
es m
ultic
ultu
rally
co
mpe
tent
cou
nsel
ing
and
supe
rvis
ion
with
in a
n ev
ents
-bas
ed m
odel
•
Ther
e ar
e, c
urre
ntly
, tw
o st
udie
s tha
t hav
e ai
med
to
pro
vide
em
piric
al su
ppor
t for
the
Crit
ical
Ev
ents
Mod
el
• Th
e m
odel
em
phas
izes
supe
rvis
ee le
arni
ng a
nd
grow
th, a
nd c
onsi
ders
the
supe
rvis
ory
wor
king
al
lianc
e to
be
the
“fou
ndat
ion
for e
ffec
tive
supe
rvisi
on”
• B
ased
on
the
ther
apeu
tic w
orki
ng a
llian
ce, t
he
supe
rvis
ory
mul
ticul
tura
l wor
king
alli
ance
is
com
pose
d of
thre
e fa
ctor
s: th
e em
otio
nal b
ond,
an
agr
eem
ent o
n su
perv
isor
y go
als,
and
an
agre
emen
t on
the
task
s of s
uper
visi
on.
Mul
ticul
tura
l em
path
y ai
ds in
est
ablis
hing
a
stro
ng b
ond
• Th
e su
perv
isor
y al
lianc
e ca
n be
the
focu
s of w
ork
(fig
ure)
in su
perv
isio
n an
d ca
n al
so se
rve
as th
e ba
ckdr
op (g
roun
d), o
n w
hich
oth
er su
perv
isor
y w
ork
is a
ddre
ssed
•
Thre
e th
eore
tical
stru
ctur
es c
ombi
ne to
mak
e up
m
ultic
ultu
ral s
uper
visi
on: s
uper
vise
es’
mul
ticul
tura
l com
pete
nce
as th
erap
ists
,
92
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
supe
rvis
ors’
mul
ticul
tura
l com
pete
nce,
and
cl
ient
–sup
ervi
see–
supe
rvis
or c
ultu
ral i
dent
ity
inte
ract
ions
•
The
Heu
ristic
Mod
el o
f Non
-opp
ress
ive
Inte
rper
sona
l Dev
elop
men
t (H
MN
ID) i
s hel
pful
in
det
erm
inin
g th
e w
ays i
n w
hich
mul
ticul
tura
l id
entit
ies (
i.e.,
gend
er, r
ace,
eth
nici
ty, s
exua
l or
ient
atio
n, d
isab
ility
, soc
ioec
onom
ic st
atus
, age
, re
ligio
n, e
tc.)
of e
ach
mem
ber o
f the
supe
rvis
ory
triad
inte
ract
and
impa
ct th
e th
erap
eutic
and
su
perv
isor
y re
latio
nshi
ps
• Th
eory
sugg
ests
that
mos
t su
perv
isor
y/th
erap
eutic
succ
esse
s evo
lve
from
pa
ralle
l-adv
ance
d in
tera
ctio
ns; p
rogr
essi
ve
inte
ract
ions
lead
to h
ighe
st g
ains
in m
ultic
ultu
ral
com
pete
nce
in su
perv
isee
s/cl
ient
s; a
nd
supe
rvis
ory/
ther
apeu
tic fa
ilure
s are
mor
e lik
ely
to o
ccur
with
in re
gres
sive
inte
ract
ions
Lada
ny,
Frie
dlan
der
and
Nel
son
(200
5)
• To
dis
cuss
m
ultic
ultu
ral
chal
leng
es in
su
perv
isio
n
• To
con
cept
ualiz
e m
ultic
ultu
ral
supe
rvis
ion
as
inco
rpor
atin
g th
ree
theo
retic
al
stru
ctur
es:
supe
rvis
ees’
m
ultic
ultu
ral
com
pete
nce
as
ther
apis
ts, c
lient
-
Con
cept
ual/
Theo
retic
al
N/A
N
/A
• To
ass
ess a
nd e
nhan
ce m
ultic
ultu
ral a
bilit
ies i
n th
eir s
uper
vise
es, s
uper
viso
rs m
ust p
osse
ss th
ese
abili
ties t
hem
selv
es
• Th
e le
ss m
ultic
ultu
rally
ade
pt th
e su
perv
isor
, the
m
ore
likel
y th
ere
is c
onfli
ct in
the
supe
rvis
ory
rela
tions
hip,
with
neg
ativ
e co
nseq
uenc
es fo
r the
th
erap
eutic
serv
ices
off
ered
to c
lient
s •
The
task
for t
he su
perv
isor
is to
iden
tify
the
type
of
inte
ract
ion
occu
rrin
g in
the
ther
apy
rela
tions
hip
to fa
cilit
ate
the
mos
t pos
itive
su
perv
isio
n ex
perie
nce
poss
ible
•
In su
perv
isio
n, p
roce
sses
and
out
com
es c
an b
e pr
edic
ted
base
d on
inte
rper
sona
l rel
atio
nshi
p in
tera
ctio
ns
93
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
supe
rvis
ee-
supe
rvis
or
cultu
ral i
dent
ity
inte
ract
ions
, and
su
perv
isor
s’
mul
ticul
tura
l co
mpe
tenc
e
• It
mig
ht b
e ex
pect
ed th
at p
rogr
essi
ve a
nd
para
llel-a
dvan
ced
rela
tions
hips
cha
ract
eriz
e th
e m
ost p
rodu
ctiv
e su
perv
isio
n pr
oces
ses a
nd
outc
omes
, whe
reas
par
alle
l-del
ayed
and
re
gres
sive
inte
ract
ions
pro
duce
the
leas
t eff
ectiv
e on
es
• M
ore
adva
nced
rela
tions
hips
enj
oy a
stro
ng
supe
rvis
ory
allia
nce
and
obse
rvab
le g
ains
in
supe
rvis
ee’s
mul
ticul
tura
l com
pete
nce,
whe
reas
th
e la
tter m
ight
hav
e a
wea
k al
lianc
e an
d no
gr
owth
in c
ultu
ral c
ompe
tenc
e
• Su
perv
isor
s mus
t und
erta
ke th
eir o
wn
jour
ney
tow
ard
mul
ticul
tura
l dev
elop
men
t suc
h as
re
adin
g re
leva
nt li
tera
ture
and
atte
ndin
g co
ntin
uing
edu
catio
n se
min
ars t
hat a
ddre
ss
vario
us m
ultic
ultu
ral i
ssue
s
Mur
phy-
Shig
emat
su
(201
0)
• To
pre
sent
pe
rson
al
expe
rienc
es
thro
ugh
narr
ativ
e as
a w
ay o
f co
ntrib
utin
g kn
owle
dge
of th
e ra
cial
and
cul
tura
l dy
nam
ics i
n su
perv
isio
n •
To u
se
mic
roag
gres
sion
s to
exa
min
e ra
cial
ex
perie
nces
in
supe
rvis
ion
Pers
pect
ive
N/A
N
/A
• Su
perv
isor
s of c
olor
are
not
onl
y ta
rget
s of
disc
rimin
atio
n bu
t als
o pe
rpet
rato
rs
• Th
e de
nial
of s
uper
vise
es’ i
dent
ities
reve
als a
la
ck o
f res
pect
and
em
path
y, c
reat
ing
sign
ifica
nt
barr
iers
to a
goo
d su
perv
isor
y re
latio
nshi
p •
An
area
of p
rofe
ssio
nal d
evel
opm
ent f
or
supe
rvis
ors o
f col
or is
und
erst
andi
ng th
e di
vers
e id
entit
ies o
f our
supe
rvis
ees,
who
are
in
crea
sing
ly m
ultie
thni
c an
d tra
nsna
tiona
l •
Supe
rvis
ors o
f col
or a
lso
need
to re
flect
on
thei
r ow
n id
entit
ies a
nd h
ow th
ey im
pede
or e
nhan
ce
the
qual
ity o
f sup
ervi
sion
•
The
prof
essi
onal
dev
elop
men
t of s
uper
viso
rs o
f co
lor c
an b
e en
hanc
ed b
y ris
king
vul
nera
bilit
y,
94
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
owni
ng e
ntitl
emen
ts, a
nd a
ssum
ing
an a
ttitu
de o
f “n
ot k
now
ing”
Obe
r, G
rane
llo,
and
Hen
field
(2
009)
• To
pro
pose
a
mod
el o
f su
perv
isio
n th
at
enha
nces
m
ultic
ultu
ral
coun
selo
r co
mpe
tenc
e in
de
velo
pmen
tally
ap
prop
riate
way
s:
Syne
rgis
tic
Mod
el o
f M
ultic
ultu
ral
Supe
rvis
ion,
(S
MM
S)
Con
cept
ual/
Theo
retic
al
N/A
N
/A
• Th
e Sy
nerg
istic
Mod
el o
f Mul
ticul
tura
l Su
perv
isio
n is
an
inte
grat
ion
of 3
exi
stin
g m
odel
s to
pro
vide
con
cret
e an
d pr
actic
al g
uida
nce
for
supe
rvis
ors w
ishi
ng to
enh
ance
supe
rvis
ee
mul
ticul
tura
l com
pete
nce
in p
erso
nally
m
eani
ngfu
l and
dev
elop
men
tally
app
ropr
iate
w
ays
• Th
e m
odel
atte
nds t
o bo
th c
onte
nt a
nd p
roce
ss
with
in th
e su
perv
isor
y se
ssio
n an
d pr
omot
es
mul
ticul
tura
l cou
nsel
or c
ompe
tenc
e th
roug
h in
crea
sing
cog
nitiv
e co
mpl
exity
, sel
f-re
flect
ion,
an
d st
ruct
ured
inte
rven
tions
•
Des
pite
a p
revi
ous c
all t
o in
tegr
ate
deve
lopm
enta
l and
mul
ticul
tura
l sup
ervi
sion
m
odel
s, a
com
preh
ensi
ve m
odel
has
yet
to
emer
ge
• A
trul
y co
mpr
ehen
sive
mod
el m
ust (
a)
inco
rpor
ate
deve
lopm
enta
l asp
ects
of s
uper
visi
on
by d
efin
ing
the
stag
es o
f dev
elop
men
t and
pr
ovid
ing
spec
ific
inte
rven
tions
to h
elp
supe
rvis
ees m
ove
to h
ighe
r lev
els o
f cog
nitiv
e de
velo
pmen
t; (b
) pro
vide
an
oppo
rtuni
ty to
di
scus
s the
supe
rvis
ees’
mul
ticul
tura
l co
mpe
tenc
e an
d he
ight
en a
war
enes
s of
mul
ticul
tura
l iss
ues w
ithin
the
supe
rvis
ory
rela
tions
hip;
and
(c) b
e ba
sed
on th
e pr
ofes
sion
’s
firm
ly h
eld
stan
ce a
bout
the
appr
opria
te c
onte
nt
for m
ultic
ultu
ral c
ouns
elin
g an
d su
perv
isio
n, th
e M
CC
s
95
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
• Th
e SM
MS
emer
ges f
rom
two
exis
ting
mod
els o
f su
perv
isio
n (o
ne d
evel
opm
enta
l and
the
othe
r m
ultic
ultu
ral),
whi
ch, w
hen
com
bine
d w
ith th
e M
CC
s, fo
rm a
n in
tegr
ated
and
syne
rgis
tic m
odel
th
at c
an b
e us
ed to
hel
p de
velo
p su
perv
isee
s’
mul
ticul
tura
l com
pete
nce
Prie
st
(199
4)
• To
pre
sent
an
over
view
of
supe
rvis
ion
issu
es
that
may
occ
ur
whe
n su
perv
isor
s ar
e et
hnic
m
inor
ity
mem
bers
and
su
perv
isee
s are
et
hnic
maj
ority
m
embe
rs
Con
cept
ual/
Theo
retic
al
N/A
N
/A
• B
efor
e di
scus
sing
cul
tura
l diff
eren
ces a
nd
sim
ilarit
ies w
ith su
perv
isee
s, su
perv
isor
s sho
uld
assi
st th
e st
uden
t in
iden
tifyi
ng a
ny p
reex
istin
g pr
ejud
ices
or f
aulty
cog
nitio
ns re
late
d to
wor
king
w
ith d
iver
se c
ultu
res
• Th
e su
perv
isor
has
an
inhe
rent
resp
onsi
bilit
y to
en
hanc
e th
e su
perv
isee
’s c
ultu
ral k
now
ledg
e ba
se
with
out a
llow
ing
the
stud
ent t
o en
gage
in
ster
eoty
ping
•
Supe
rvis
ors c
an m
inim
ize
the
likel
ihoo
d of
su
perv
isee
s ste
reot
ypin
g cl
ient
s if i
t is
cons
iste
ntly
exp
lain
ed th
roug
hout
supe
rvis
ion
that
ther
e is
no "g
ener
ic c
ultu
ral c
lient
” •
The
sing
ular
Asi
an A
mer
ican
, Afr
ican
Am
eric
an,
Nat
ive
Am
eric
an, o
r His
pani
c A
mer
ican
sim
ply
does
not
exi
st
Prie
st (1
994)
pos
ited
that
eff
ectiv
e su
perv
isor
s:
Stag
e 1:
firs
t go
thro
ugh
the
proc
ess o
f den
ying
th
at th
ere
are
appr
ecia
ble
cultu
ral d
iffer
ence
s tha
t in
fluen
ce su
perv
isio
n •
Stag
e 2:
invo
lves
a re
cogn
ition
of c
ultu
ral
diff
eren
ces w
ithou
t act
ually
kno
win
g w
hat t
o do
w
ith th
e in
form
atio
n •
Stag
e 3:
is re
pres
ente
d by
an
atte
mpt
to id
entif
y di
ffer
ence
s and
sim
ilarit
ies b
etw
een
and
amon
g
96
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
the
resp
ectiv
e cu
lture
s tha
t mak
e an
impa
ct o
n th
e su
perv
isor
y re
latio
nshi
p •
Stag
e 4:
repr
esen
ts th
e su
perv
isor
’s a
ttem
pt to
se
lf-id
entif
y by
dis
cern
ing
whe
re h
e or
she
fits i
n th
e ov
eral
l cul
tura
l sch
ema
• St
age
5: th
e su
perv
isor
beg
ins t
o ap
prec
iate
cu
ltura
l dis
tinct
iven
ess a
nd id
entif
ies t
houg
ht,
proc
ess,
and
com
mun
icat
ion
patte
rns t
hat
faci
litat
e su
perv
isio
n an
d as
sist
the
supe
rvis
ee in
le
arni
ng c
ouns
elin
g sk
ills
• St
age
6: is
cha
ract
eriz
ed b
y th
e su
perv
isor
bei
ng
able
to fo
rmul
ate
mul
tiple
supe
rvis
ory
met
hodo
logi
es th
at a
re re
spec
tful o
f the
su
perv
isee
’s c
ultu
re a
nd in
tera
ctiv
e st
yle,
whi
le
rem
aini
ng p
rofe
ssio
nal i
n na
ture
and
scop
e
Ryd
e (2
000)
•
To e
xplo
re b
est
prac
tice
in
rela
tion
to
cultu
rally
se
nsiti
ve
supe
rvis
ion
Theo
retic
al
fram
ewor
k N
/A
N/A
•
It is
impo
rtant
to b
ecom
e co
nsci
ous o
f the
su
perv
isor
’s o
wn
cultu
re
• H
abitu
al w
ays o
f thi
nkin
g m
ay a
rise
out o
f cu
ltura
l ass
umpt
ions
and
not
out
of p
erso
nal
path
olog
y •
Supe
rvis
ors a
lso
exis
t in
a cu
lture
whi
ch is
no
mor
e or
less
val
id th
an th
e cl
ient
’s b
ut m
ay le
ad
to u
s hol
ding
diff
eren
t val
ues a
nd a
ssum
ptio
ns
• D
ialo
gue
will
thro
w u
p cu
ltura
l cla
shes
and
thes
e m
ay b
e a
frui
tful w
ay o
f und
erst
andi
ng a
nd
nego
tiatin
g cu
ltura
l diff
eren
ces
• Su
perv
isor
s will
wor
k m
ore
sens
itive
ly if
they
fa
mili
ariz
e th
emse
lves
with
the
type
s and
rang
e of
diff
eren
ces t
hat m
ay e
xist
in o
rder
that
they
ca
n re
cogn
ize
them
whe
n th
ey a
rise
97
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
• It
is g
ood
to b
e se
nsiti
ve to
the
diff
eren
ces t
hat
mig
ht e
mer
ge b
oth
in th
e su
perv
isor
y an
d th
e th
erap
y re
latio
nshi
p •
To fa
cilit
ate
this
sens
itivi
ty, s
uper
viso
rs n
eed
not
only
to ta
ke a
n ac
tive
inte
rest
in o
ther
cul
ture
s an
d ar
eas o
f diff
eren
ce b
ut n
ever
to a
ssum
e th
at
they
und
erst
and
the
clie
nt’s
cul
tura
l wor
k •
Star
t with
an
inte
rest
in fi
ndin
g ou
t fro
m th
e ot
her w
hils
t als
o ac
cept
ing
one’
s ow
n no
t kn
owin
g
Mod
e 1:
Foc
us o
n th
e cu
lture
of t
he c
lient
and
thei
r co
ntex
t
Mod
e 2:
Fin
d w
ays o
f res
pond
ing
to th
e cu
ltura
l di
ffer
ence
s and
the
hidd
en c
ultu
ral a
ssum
ptio
ns
impl
icit
in th
e su
perv
isee
’s in
terv
entio
ns
Mod
e 3:
Atte
nd to
the
cultu
re in
here
nt in
the
rela
tions
hip
betw
een
the
clie
nt a
nd th
e su
perv
isee
Mod
e 4:
Foc
us o
n th
e cu
ltura
l ass
umpt
ions
of t
he
supe
rvis
ee
Mod
e 5:
Atte
nd to
the
cultu
ral d
iffer
ence
s ex
perie
nced
in th
e he
re-a
nd-n
ow c
ultu
ral d
ynam
ics
betw
een
clie
nt a
nd su
perv
isee
and
how
they
are
m
irror
ed in
the
supe
rvis
ion
rela
tions
hip
Mod
e 6:
Atte
nd to
ow
n cu
ltura
l ass
umpt
ions
Mod
e 7:
Atte
nd to
the
wid
er c
onte
xt in
whi
ch th
e w
ork
is d
one,
par
ticul
arly
org
aniz
atio
nal,
soci
al, a
nd
polit
ical
98
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
Suth
akar
an
(201
1)
• To
pre
sent
the
use
of a
nalo
gies
as
ano
ther
m
etho
d to
pr
omot
e m
ultic
ultu
ral
com
pete
nce
durin
g su
perv
isio
n.
Con
cept
ual/
Theo
retic
al
N/A
N
/A
• M
ultic
ultu
ral c
ompe
tenc
e tra
inin
g ha
s see
med
to
affe
ct k
now
ledg
e an
d sk
ills a
cqui
sitio
n m
ore
than
th
e fa
cilit
atio
n of
self-
awar
enes
s •
Cha
nges
in se
lf-aw
aren
ess m
ay h
ave
the
mos
t im
pact
in c
ultiv
atin
g m
ultic
ultu
ral c
ouns
elin
g co
mpe
tenc
e •
Self-
awar
enes
s is p
erce
ived
to fa
cilit
ate
cultu
ral
empa
thy,
whi
ch c
ontri
bute
s to
mor
e cu
ltura
lly
sens
itive
cou
nsel
ing
•
A n
umbe
r of m
ultic
ultu
ral s
chol
ars h
ave
sugg
este
d pl
acin
g m
ore
emph
asis
on
incl
udin
g ex
perie
ntia
lly b
ased
aff
ectiv
e le
arni
ng a
s a
com
pone
nt o
f mul
ticul
tura
l tra
inin
g to
impr
ove
the
self-
awar
enes
s and
cul
tura
l em
path
y of
co
unse
lors
-in-tr
aini
ng
• Ex
perie
ntia
l lea
rnin
g, c
ompa
red
with
trad
ition
al
dida
ctic
lear
ning
, has
mor
e ca
paci
ty to
pro
mot
e a
trans
form
atio
n in
one
’s a
ttitu
des a
nd b
elie
fs
• U
sing
ana
logi
es a
s an
expe
rient
ial l
earn
ing
tool
in
supe
rvis
ion
to e
nhan
ce se
lf-aw
aren
ess a
nd
cultu
ral e
mpa
thy
has t
he p
oten
tial t
o be
hel
pful
in
a nu
mbe
r of w
ays
• A
nalo
gies
pro
vide
an
effe
ctiv
e m
eans
of
proc
essi
ng m
ultic
ultu
ral i
ssue
s with
supe
rvis
ees
who
hav
e ha
d lim
ited
expo
sure
to m
embe
rs o
f di
vers
e cu
lture
s by
allo
win
g th
em to
take
on
the
pers
pect
ive
of th
e "o
ther
” •
The
use
of a
nalo
gies
can
pro
vide
a sa
fe st
rate
gy
to p
roce
ss to
pics
that
can
be
conf
usin
g or
an
xiet
y- p
rovo
king
99
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
• Su
perv
isor
s nee
d to
cre
ate
a sa
fe e
nviro
nmen
t th
at is
con
duci
ve fo
r sup
ervi
sees
to st
retc
h an
d gr
ow
Yab
usak
i (2
010)
•
To d
escr
ibe
barr
iers
to th
e in
tegr
atio
n of
di
vers
ity is
sues
in
to su
perv
isio
n tra
inin
g •
To im
plem
ent
peda
gogy
de
velo
ped
for
dive
rse
and
unde
rser
ved
popu
latio
ns
Theo
retic
al
fram
ewor
k N
/A
N/A
A
t lea
st fi
ve b
arrie
rs im
pede
d di
vers
ity tr
aini
ng in
su
perv
isio
n:
• Su
perv
isee
s wer
e af
raid
to d
iscu
ss c
olor
and
race
in
a “
Whi
te”
envi
ronm
ent.
They
fear
ed th
at th
ey
may
be
perc
eive
d as
mak
ing
excu
ses f
or th
eir
poor
per
form
ance
or u
sing
thei
r eth
nici
ty a
s a
defe
nse,
or “
seen
as p
atho
logi
cally
pre
occu
pied
w
ith c
olor
and
disc
rimin
atio
n”
• M
any
supe
rvis
ors f
elt i
nade
quat
ely
train
ed o
n di
vers
ity is
sues
. In
som
e ca
ses,
train
ees k
new
m
ore
than
thei
r sup
ervi
sor
• Th
ere
was
a la
ck o
f em
piric
al e
vide
nce
to su
ppor
t th
e m
odel
s of e
thni
c an
d cr
oss-
cultu
ral t
rain
ing
and
thei
r rel
atio
nshi
p to
trea
tmen
t •
Psyc
holo
gica
l tra
inin
g ra
rely
focu
sed
on se
lf-kn
owle
dge
and
expl
orat
ion
• Th
e pr
oces
s of d
iver
sity
edu
catio
n its
elf—
the
expl
orat
ion
of p
erso
nal c
ultu
ral b
iase
s and
pr
ejud
ices
—in
duce
d re
sist
ance
, def
ensi
vene
ss
and
inhi
bitio
n in
stud
ents
This
arti
cle
prop
oses
that
supe
rvis
ors:
• W
ork
with
in th
e su
perv
isee
s’ Z
one
of P
roxi
mal
D
evel
opm
ent (
ZPD
) •
Use
med
iate
d le
arni
ng e
xper
ienc
es th
at
inte
ntio
nally
cre
ate
colla
bora
tive
lear
ning
en
viro
nmen
ts a
nd m
ento
ring
rela
tions
hips
(i.e
. Ta
o m
ento
ring
rela
tions
hip)
100
Mul
ticul
tura
l Sup
ervi
sion –
Em
piri
cal S
tudi
es a
nd P
ublic
atio
ns
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
Anc
is a
nd
Mar
shal
l (2
010)
• To
inve
stig
ate
the
proc
ess,
clim
ate,
an
d ac
tiviti
es o
f su
perv
isio
n th
at,
from
the
train
ee’s
pe
rspe
ctiv
e,
atte
nded
co
mpe
tent
ly to
m
ultic
ultu
ral
issu
es
Qua
litat
ive:
in
-dep
th,
sem
i-st
ruct
ured
in
terv
iew
s (4
5-60
m
inut
es)
• In
terv
iew
qu
estio
ns w
ere
deve
lope
d us
ing
Anc
is
and
Lada
ny’s
(2
001)
m
ultic
ultu
ral
fram
ewor
k fo
r co
unse
lor
supe
rvis
ion
• N
=4 g
radu
ate
stud
ents
from
2
doct
oral
pr
ogra
ms i
n ps
ycho
logy
at 2
so
uthe
aste
rn
univ
ersi
ties
• 1
Euro
pean
A
mer
ican
he
tero
sexu
al m
an
in c
ouns
elin
g ps
ycho
logy
pr
ogra
m
• 1
Asi
an A
mer
ican
he
tero
sexu
al
wom
an in
co
unse
ling
psyc
holo
gy
• 1
Euro
pean
A
mer
ican
lesb
ian
in c
linic
al
psyc
holo
gy
• 1
Euro
pean
A
mer
ican
he
tero
sexu
al m
an
in c
linic
al
psyc
holo
gy
• A
ge ra
nge
= 27
-41
Dom
ain
A1:
Sup
ervi
sor-
Focu
sed
Pers
onal
Dev
elop
men
t
• D
emon
stra
tes s
treng
ths a
nd
limita
tions
of m
ultic
ultu
ral k
now
ledg
e •
Proa
ctiv
ely
intro
duce
s mul
ticul
tura
l is
sues
in su
perv
isio
n •
Self-
disc
lose
s cul
tura
l bia
ses,
cultu
ral
back
grou
nd, v
alue
s, an
d/or
ex
perie
nces
•
Dem
onst
rate
s aw
aren
ess o
f the
cl
inic
al si
gnifi
canc
e of
raci
sm a
nd
oppr
essi
on
Dom
ain
A2:
Sup
ervi
see-
Focu
sed
Pers
onal
Dev
elop
men
t
• Fa
cilit
ates
dis
cuss
ions
of t
he im
pact
of
supe
rvis
ees’
cul
tura
l bac
kgro
und
on c
lient
s •
Enco
urag
es in
crea
sed
mul
ticul
tura
l aw
aren
ess v
ia d
iscu
ssio
ns a
nd
activ
ities
Dom
ain
B: C
once
ptua
lizat
ion
• En
cour
ages
con
side
ratio
n of
cul
tura
l as
sum
ptio
ns a
nd c
ouns
elor
st
ereo
typi
ng
• A
ctiv
ely
enga
ges s
uper
vise
e in
an
expl
orat
ion
of th
e cl
ient
’s p
ersp
ectiv
e
Dom
ain
C: I
nter
vent
ions
101
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
• M
inim
um o
f 2
supe
rvis
ed
clin
ical
ex
perie
nces
•
Hig
h de
gree
of
inte
rest
in M
C
issu
es
• B
elie
ved
that
su
perv
isor
de
scrib
ed
dem
onst
rate
d co
mpe
tenc
e in
w
orki
ng w
ith
dive
rse
clie
nts
• V
ery
satis
fied
with
the
degr
ee to
w
hich
div
ersi
ty
issu
es w
ere
addr
esse
d in
su
perv
isio
n
• En
cour
ages
con
side
ratio
n of
the
clie
nt’s
role
in g
oal s
ettin
g •
Enco
urag
es su
perv
isee
to fa
cilit
ate
the
clie
nt’s
aw
aren
ess r
egar
ding
soci
al
issu
es
Dom
ain
D: P
roce
ss
• C
onve
ys a
n ac
cept
ance
of c
ultu
ral
diff
eren
ces i
n su
perv
isor
y re
latio
nshi
ps
• Fa
cilit
ates
a sa
fe a
nd o
pen
supe
rvis
ory
clim
ate
in w
hich
the
supe
rvis
ee c
an b
e vu
lner
able
and
take
risk
s •
Initi
ates
and
eng
ages
in d
iscu
ssio
ns
abou
t pow
er d
ynam
ics
Dom
ain
E: E
valu
atio
n
• Id
entif
ies t
he su
perv
isee
’s
mul
ticul
tura
l stre
ngth
s and
w
eakn
esse
s •
Mul
ticul
tura
l dis
cuss
ions
pos
itive
ly
affe
cted
clie
nt o
utco
mes
Ban
ks-
John
son
(200
2)
• To
exp
lore
the
supe
rvis
ors’
th
ough
ts,
feel
ings
, and
vi
ews o
n su
ch
topi
cs a
s: ra
ce o
r et
hnic
ity e
ffec
ts
on th
e dy
ad; t
he
proc
ess o
f ad
dres
sing
Qua
litat
ive
cros
s-ca
se
anal
ysis
Sem
i-stru
ctur
ed
inte
rvie
ws
• N
=4 su
perv
isor
s of
col
or fr
om
diff
eren
t rac
ial o
r et
hnic
gro
ups
• A
ll w
ere
non-
Whi
te
• A
ll w
ere
over
21
•
All
had
expe
rienc
e
• R
ace
does
impa
ct th
e su
perv
isor
y re
latio
nshi
p w
hen
both
the
supe
rvis
or
and
supe
rvis
ee a
re p
eopl
e of
col
or
• Th
e pa
rtici
pant
s ind
icat
ed th
e im
porta
nce
of a
ddre
ssin
g be
twee
n an
d w
ithin
gro
up d
iffer
ence
s in
supe
rvis
ion
Ana
lyse
s of t
he in
terv
iew
s in
rela
tion
to
the
liter
atur
e re
veal
ed 3
maj
or th
emes
:
102
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
cultu
ral f
acto
rs
with
in th
e dy
ad;
inte
ract
ions
w
ithin
the
dyad
; an
d ot
her t
opic
s as
they
aro
se in
th
e in
terv
iew
•
To c
ontri
bute
to
the
wor
k on
the
phen
omen
on o
f cu
ltura
l and
sp
ecifi
cally
raci
al
fact
ors i
n m
ultic
ultu
ral
supe
rvis
ion
whe
n bo
th th
e su
perv
isor
and
th
e su
perv
isee
are
pe
rson
s of c
olor
supe
rvis
ing
pers
ons o
f col
or
• Th
e im
porta
nce
of in
trodu
cing
cu
ltura
l fac
tors
• Th
e im
pact
of c
ultu
ral v
aria
bles
on
the
rela
tions
hip
• Th
e po
wer
dyn
amic
s and
how
pow
er
is in
here
nt in
the
role
of s
uper
viso
r
2 m
ajor
them
es th
at e
mer
ged
that
wer
e no
t dis
cuss
ed in
the
liter
atur
e re
view
: •
How
with
in-g
roup
sim
ilarit
ies
influ
ence
the
rela
tions
hip
• S
uper
visi
on o
f per
sons
with
di
sabi
litie
s and
the
effe
ct o
n th
e re
latio
nshi
p
2 im
plic
atio
ns fo
r gra
duat
e pr
ogra
ms:
• A
ddre
ssin
g cu
ltura
l var
iabl
es a
t the
be
ginn
ing
of th
e su
perv
isor
y re
latio
nshi
p an
d in
fusi
ng c
ultu
ral
awar
enes
s thr
ough
out t
rain
ing
and
thro
ugho
ut a
ll le
vels
of t
he
prof
essi
on
• Th
ese
impl
icat
ions
app
ly to
co
unse
lor e
duca
tors
, men
tal h
ealth
pr
actit
ione
rs, a
nd c
ouns
elin
g pr
ofes
sion
al o
rgan
izat
ions
103
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
Ber
tsch
et
al. (
2014
) •
Wha
t typ
es o
f ge
nder
rela
ted
even
ts (G
REs
) do
train
ees
expe
rienc
e in
ps
ycho
ther
apy
supe
rvis
ion?
•
How
do
supe
rvis
ors a
ttend
to
thes
e G
REs
? •
Wha
t is t
he
rela
tions
hip
betw
een
the
inte
rven
tions
that
su
perv
isor
s use
an
d th
e re
solu
tion
of th
e cr
itica
l ev
ent?
•
Wha
t is t
he
rela
tions
hip
betw
een
GR
Es,
the
supe
rvis
ory
wor
king
alli
ance
, an
d su
perv
isee
s’
perc
eptio
ns o
f th
eir s
uper
viso
rs’
mul
ticul
tura
l co
mpe
tenc
e as
it
rela
tes t
o G
REs
?
Con
sens
ual
Qua
litat
ive
Res
earc
h-M
odifi
ed
(CQ
R-M
)
• D
emog
raph
ic
form
•
Gen
der-
Rel
ated
Eve
nts
Que
stio
nnai
re
(GEQ
) •
The
Wor
king
A
llian
ce
Inve
ntor
y/Su
per
visi
on-S
hort
(WA
I/S-S
hort)
•
Cro
ss-C
ultu
ral
Cou
nsel
ing
Com
pete
ncy
Inve
ntor
y-R
evis
ed
(CC
CI-R
)
• N
=81
• 78
% w
omen
, 16
% m
en
• A
ge ra
nge:
23-
53
• 80
% W
hite
, 6%
B
lack
, 4%
B
iraci
al, 3
%
His
pani
c/La
tinas
/La
tinos
, 1%
M
ultir
acia
l •
56%
in P
h.D
. pr
ogra
ms,
20%
in
PsyD
pro
gram
s, 16
% m
aste
rs
leve
l •
31%
com
plet
ing
inte
rnsh
ip, 5
2%
in a
dvan
ced
prac
ticum
tra
inin
g, 1
0% in
fir
st y
ear o
f tra
inin
g •
37%
in U
CC
, 21
% in
CM
H,
14%
in h
ospi
tals
, 22
% in
oth
er
setti
ngs
• G
ende
r bia
s and
dis
crim
inat
ion
cont
inue
to e
xist
in th
e su
perv
isor
y re
latio
nshi
p •
4 ty
pes o
f GR
Es re
porte
d by
co
unse
ling
train
ees:
o
Gen
der D
iscr
imin
atio
n o
Gen
der I
dent
ity In
tera
ctio
ns
o A
ttrac
tion
o Po
wer
Dyn
amic
s •
Whi
le su
perv
isor
s atte
nded
to G
REs
us
ing
vario
us in
terv
entio
ns, t
he m
ost
freq
uent
ly u
sed
inte
rven
tion
(ther
apeu
tic p
roce
ss, e
xplo
ratio
n of
fe
elin
gs, f
ocus
on
skill
s, an
d fo
cus o
n se
lf-ef
ficac
y) w
ere
sign
ifica
ntly
re
late
d to
the
reso
lutio
n st
age
• G
REs
rela
ted
to G
ende
r D
iscr
imin
atio
n w
ere
sign
ifica
ntly
and
ne
gativ
ely
rela
ted
to th
e su
perv
isor
y w
orki
ng a
llian
ce a
nd su
perv
isee
s’
perc
eptio
ns o
f sup
ervi
sors
’ gen
der-
rela
ted
mul
ticul
tura
l com
pete
nce
• In
add
ress
ing
the
GR
E, tr
aine
es
repo
rted
11 p
rimar
y su
perv
isor
in
terv
entio
ns th
at fo
cuse
d on
: th
erap
eutic
pro
cess
, exp
lora
tion
of
feel
ings
, ski
lls, s
elf-
effic
acy,
m
ultic
ultu
ral a
war
enes
s, no
rmal
izin
g ex
perie
nce,
cou
nter
trans
fere
nce,
kn
owle
dge,
supe
rvis
ory
allia
nce,
ev
alua
tion,
and
par
alle
l pro
cess
104
Bha
t and
D
avis
(2
007)
• To
inve
stig
ate
the
role
of r
ace,
raci
al
iden
tity
attit
udes
an
d w
orki
ng
allia
nce
in
coun
selin
g su
perv
isio
n us
ing
data
obt
aine
d fr
om su
perv
isor
s in
supe
rvis
ory
dyad
s
Res
earc
h qu
estio
ns:
• D
o su
perv
isor
y dy
ads w
ith
para
llel h
igh
raci
al id
entit
y in
tera
ctio
ns h
ave
the
stro
nges
t w
orki
ng a
llian
ce
from
the
pers
pect
ive
of
supe
rvis
ors?
•
Do
supe
rvis
ory
dyad
s with
pa
ralle
l low
raci
al
iden
tity
inte
ract
ions
hav
e th
e w
eake
st
wor
king
alli
ance
fr
om th
e pe
rspe
ctiv
e of
su
perv
isor
s?
• D
o m
atch
ed
supe
rvis
ory
dyad
s (i.
e., b
oth
Qua
ntita
tive
•
Dem
ogra
phic
qu
estio
nnai
re
• W
hite
Rac
ial
Iden
tity
Atti
tude
Sca
le
(WR
IAS)
•
Col
or R
acia
l Id
entit
y A
ttitu
de S
cale
(P
RIA
S)
• Pe
rcep
tions
of
Supe
rvis
ee
Rac
ial I
dent
ity
for W
hite
s (P
SeR
IW)
• Pe
rcep
tions
of
Supe
rvis
ee
Rac
ial I
dent
ity
for P
OC
(P
SeR
IP)
• W
orki
ng
Alli
ance
In
vent
ory-
Supe
rvis
or
vers
ion
(WA
I-S)
• N
=119
co
unse
ling
supe
rvis
ors i
n a
mid
-wes
tern
stat
e (8
0 fe
mal
e, 3
9 m
ale)
• A
ge ra
nge:
31-
74
• Su
perv
isio
n ex
perie
nce:
be
twee
n 6
mon
ths-
40 y
ears
• Ea
rned
mas
ter’s
de
gree
= 9
0,
doct
orat
e de
gree
=
21, “
othe
r”
qual
ifica
tions
= 8
• 87
repo
rted
a m
ean
of 1
6.59
ho
urs o
f spe
cific
tra
inin
g in
m
ultic
ultu
ral
issu
es
• W
hite
(90.
8%),
Afr
ican
Am
eric
an
(8.4
%),
Latin
o (n
=1)
• W
hite
su
perv
isee
s (7
8.2%
), A
fric
an
Am
eric
ans
(20.
2%),
Mid
dle
East
ern
(1.7
%).
• R
esul
ts re
veal
ed th
e st
rong
est
wor
king
alli
ance
for s
uper
viso
r-su
perv
isee
pai
rs w
ith h
igh
raci
al
iden
tity
deve
lopm
ent a
nd th
e w
eake
st
wor
king
alli
ance
for p
airs
with
low
ra
cial
iden
tity
deve
lopm
ent
• Th
e di
ffer
ence
in su
perv
isor
y w
orki
ng
allia
nce
betw
een
the
four
raci
al
iden
tity
grou
ps (p
aral
lel h
igh,
par
alle
l lo
w, p
rogr
essi
ve, a
nd re
gres
sive
) was
si
gnifi
cant
with
a sm
all t
o m
ediu
m
effe
ct si
ze
• Po
st h
oc te
sts r
evea
led
a sig
nific
ant
diff
eren
ce in
wor
king
alli
ance
mea
ns
betw
een
the
para
llel h
igh
grou
p an
d th
e pa
ralle
l low
gro
up, a
nd b
etw
een
the
regr
essi
ve g
roup
and
the
para
llel
low
gro
up
• N
o st
atis
tical
ly si
gnifi
cant
diff
eren
ce
was
foun
d in
wor
king
alli
ance
for t
he
four
raci
al m
atch
ing/
nonm
atch
ing
grou
ps o
f sup
ervi
sory
dya
ds
105
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
supe
rvis
or a
nd
supe
rvis
ee o
f the
sa
me
race
) rep
ort
a st
rong
er
supe
rvis
ory
wor
king
alli
ance
th
an u
nmat
ched
ra
cial
dya
ds?
Bur
kard
, K
nox,
C
lark
e,
Phel
ps, a
nd
Inm
an
(201
4)
• To
exa
min
e su
perv
isor
s’
expe
rienc
es o
f pr
ovid
ing
diff
icul
t fee
dbac
k w
hen
supe
rvis
ors
and
supe
rvis
ees
wer
e of
diff
eren
t cu
ltura
l ba
ckgr
ound
s
Qua
litat
ive
•
Dem
ogra
phic
fo
rm
• Se
mi-
stru
ctur
ed
inte
rvie
w
prot
ocol
• N
=17
supe
rvis
ors
(14
psyc
holo
gist
s; 3
po
st-
inte
rnsh
ip/a
ll-bu
t-di
sser
tatio
n gr
adua
te
stud
ents
) •
10 in
cou
nsel
ing
psyc
holo
gy, 7
in
clin
ical
ps
ycho
logy
•
12 fe
mal
e/5
mal
e
• A
ge ra
nge:
28-
53
• 9
Euro
pean
A
mer
ican
, 3
Afr
ican
A
mer
ican
, 2
Asi
an A
mer
ican
, 1
Bira
cial
, 1
Inte
rnat
iona
l, 1
Latin
a
• N
ot o
nly
do c
ultu
ral d
iffer
ence
s be
twee
n su
perv
isor
s and
supe
rvis
ees
influ
ence
the
feed
back
pro
cess
in
supe
rvis
ion,
the
type
of c
ultu
ral t
opic
(e
.g.,
diff
icul
ty c
onne
ctin
g w
ith c
lient
s, un
will
ingn
ess t
o in
tegr
ate
cultu
ral
issu
es in
to w
ork
with
clie
nts)
may
als
o in
fluen
ce th
e fe
edba
ck p
roce
ss in
su
perv
isio
n •
EASR
s (Eu
rope
an A
mer
ican
su
perv
isor
s) a
ddre
ssed
spec
ific
coun
selin
g sk
ills (
e.g.
, com
mun
icat
ion
patte
rns,
atte
ndin
g, a
ctiv
e lis
teni
ng, u
se
of re
stat
emen
ts, q
uest
ions
and
re
flect
ions
of f
eelin
gs),
whi
le S
RC
s (s
uper
viso
rs o
f col
or) a
ddre
ssed
su
perv
isee
s’ c
ultu
ral i
nsen
sitiv
ity
• Th
ere
may
be
stro
ng d
iffer
ence
s in
prov
idin
g su
perv
isio
n fe
edba
ck a
bout
sk
ills i
n co
ntra
st to
per
sona
lity-
base
d fe
edba
ck
• A
lign
the
focu
s of s
uper
visio
n w
ith
spec
ific
goal
s tha
t are
est
ablis
hed
at th
e on
set o
f sup
ervi
sion
106
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
• It
is re
com
men
ded
that
dur
ing
initi
al
supe
rvis
ion
sess
ions
, sup
ervi
sors
and
su
perv
isee
s set
spec
ific
goal
s, in
clud
ing
thos
e re
late
d to
cul
tura
l co
mpe
tenc
e •
Furth
erm
ore,
not
all
cultu
ral
com
pete
ncy
goal
s can
be
antic
ipat
ed a
t th
e be
ginn
ing
of su
perv
isio
n; th
us, i
t is
impo
rtant
that
supe
rvis
ors t
ake
the
lead
in
setti
ng e
xpec
tatio
ns w
ith su
perv
isee
s th
at su
ch is
sues
will
be
addr
esse
d in
su
perv
isio
n
Bur
kard
et
al. (
2006
) •
To e
xam
ine
supe
rvis
ees’
ex
perie
nces
of
cros
s-cu
ltura
l su
perv
isio
n w
hen
supe
rvis
ors w
ere
resp
onsi
ve o
r un
resp
onsi
ve to
cu
ltura
l iss
ues
Qua
litat
ive
stud
y •
Dem
ogra
phic
fo
rm
• Se
mi-
stru
ctur
ed
inte
rvie
w
prot
ocol
Supe
rvis
ees:
• 26
doc
tora
l st
uden
ts in
pr
ofes
sion
al
psyc
holo
gy
prog
ram
s •
100%
wom
en
• A
ge ra
nge:
24-
48
• 13
Eur
opea
n A
mer
ican
s •
13 S
uper
vise
es o
f C
olor
(SEC
s)
Inte
rvie
wer
s and
A
udito
rs:
• 2
rese
arch
team
s (T
eam
A
inte
rvie
wed
onl
y SE
Cs;
Tea
m B
• C
ultu
rally
resp
onsi
ve a
nd
unre
spon
sive
supe
rvis
ion
expe
rienc
es
wer
e qu
ite p
ower
ful e
vent
s. Fo
r the
se
parti
cipa
nts,
the
even
ts a
ffec
ted
not
only
the
supe
rvis
ees b
ut a
lso th
e su
perv
isio
n re
latio
nshi
p an
d cl
ient
tre
atm
ent
• M
ost a
spec
ts o
f EA
SEs’
and
SEC
s’
expe
rienc
es o
f cul
tura
lly re
spon
sive
ev
ents
wer
e qu
ite p
aral
lel,
but t
heir
expe
rienc
es o
f cul
tura
lly u
nres
pons
ive
even
ts w
ere
quite
div
erge
nt
Cul
tura
lly R
espo
nsiv
e Ev
ents
•
Impo
rtant
supe
rvis
ion
beha
vior
s tha
t m
ay b
e us
ed to
enh
ance
cul
tura
l re
spon
sive
ness
: ask
ing
ques
tions
ab
out c
ultu
ral i
ssue
s, en
cour
agin
g su
perv
isee
s to
elab
orat
e on
co
ncep
tual
izat
ions
that
incl
ude
cultu
ral i
ssue
s, or
cha
lleng
ing
107
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
inte
rvie
wed
onl
y EA
SE’s
) su
perv
isee
s to
cons
ider
how
the
clie
nt’s
cul
tura
l bac
kgro
und
may
be
influ
enci
ng h
er o
r his
cur
rent
situ
atio
n or
pro
blem
•
Onl
y SE
Cs r
epor
ted
expe
rienc
ing
disc
omfo
rt w
ith re
gard
to th
e cu
ltura
lly re
spon
sive
eve
nt →
Su
perv
isor
s nee
d to
be
awar
e of
how
po
wer
ful t
heir
resp
onsi
vene
ss, o
r lac
k th
ereo
f, to
cul
tura
l iss
ues m
ay b
e fo
r su
perv
isee
s and
that
for s
ome
SEC
s, re
spon
sive
ness
may
be
a ra
re
expe
rienc
e •
Cul
tura
lly re
spon
sive
eve
nt y
ield
ed
posi
tive
effe
cts o
n su
perv
isee
s’
clin
ical
cas
es
Cul
tura
lly U
nres
pons
ive
Even
ts
• SE
Cs p
erce
ived
thei
r sup
ervi
sors
as
activ
ely
wor
king
to d
iscr
edit
or
disc
ount
the
impo
rtanc
e of
cul
tura
l is
sues
in th
erap
y •
The
cultu
rally
unr
espo
nsiv
e ev
ent
(whe
ther
act
ivel
y or
pas
sive
ly, i
gnor
e or
dis
coun
t cul
tura
l iss
ues)
yie
lded
ne
gativ
e re
actio
ns fr
om b
oth
EASE
s an
d SE
Cs,
incl
udin
g an
ger,
frus
tratio
n, a
nd d
isap
poin
tmen
t •
SEC
s des
crib
ed m
ore
inte
nse
and
inw
ard-
focu
sed
nega
tive
cons
eque
nces
than
thei
r EA
SE
coun
terp
arts
(e.g
., di
stru
stin
g th
eir
Euro
pean
Am
eric
an su
perv
isor
,
108
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
feel
ing
mor
e gu
arde
d du
ring
supe
rvis
ion,
hid
ing
thei
r em
otio
nal
• SE
Cs e
xpre
ssed
mor
e co
ncer
n ab
out
the
effe
ct o
f the
cul
tura
lly
unre
spon
sive
eve
nt o
n cl
ient
trea
tmen
t th
an d
id E
ASE
s
Con
stan
tine
and
Sue
(200
7)
• To
inve
stig
ate
the
spec
ific
form
s of
raci
al
mic
roag
gres
sion
s th
at m
ight
occ
ur
in su
perv
isor
y re
latio
nshi
ps
betw
een
Bla
ck
supe
rvis
ees a
nd
Whi
te su
perv
isor
s an
d th
e is
sues
th
at m
ight
ch
arac
teriz
e th
ese
inci
dent
s
Qua
litat
ive
anal
ysis
•
Sem
i-st
ruct
ured
in
terv
iew
pr
otoc
ol
• 10
Bla
ck
supe
rvis
ees w
ho
wer
e en
rolle
d in
ei
ther
an
adva
nced
pr
actic
um o
r ex
tern
ship
cou
rse
in o
ne o
f thr
ee
doct
oral
pr
ogra
ms i
n ei
ther
cou
nsel
ing
or c
linic
al
psyc
holo
gy in
the
north
east
ern
U.S
. •
8 fe
mal
e/2
mal
e •
Age
rang
e: 2
5-38
•
6 su
perv
isee
s re
porte
d th
at th
eir
supe
rvis
or w
as a
W
hite
wom
an/4
in
dica
ted
that
th
eir s
uper
viso
r w
as a
Whi
te m
an
• Th
eme
1: In
valid
atin
g Ra
cial
–Cul
tura
l Is
sues
: Man
y of
the
Bla
ck su
perv
isee
s in
this
stud
y in
dica
ted
that
thei
r Whi
te
supe
rvis
ors a
t tim
es te
nded
to
min
imiz
e, d
ism
iss,
or a
void
di
scus
sing
raci
al–c
ultu
ral i
ssue
s in
supe
rvis
ion
• Th
eme
2: M
akin
g St
ereo
typi
c A
ssum
ptio
ns A
bout
Bla
ck C
lient
s
• Th
eme
3: M
akin
g St
ereo
typi
c A
ssum
ptio
ns A
bout
Bla
ck
Supe
rvis
ees
• Th
eme
4: R
eluc
tanc
e to
Giv
e Pe
rfor
man
ce F
eedb
ack
for F
ear o
f B
eing
Vie
wed
as R
acis
t
• Th
eme
5: F
ocus
ing
Prim
arily
on
Clin
ical
Wea
knes
ses:
Sev
eral
Bla
ck
supe
rvis
ees i
ndic
ated
that
thei
r Whi
te
supe
rvis
ors t
ende
d to
focu
s prim
arily
on
thei
r clin
ical
def
icits
(as o
ppos
ed
to a
lso
prov
idin
g fe
edba
ck a
bout
cl
inic
al st
reng
ths)
109
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
• Th
eme
6: B
lam
ing
Clie
nts o
f Col
or
for P
robl
ems S
tem
min
g Fr
om
Opp
ress
ion:
Sev
eral
Bla
ck
supe
rvis
ees n
oted
that
thei
r Whi
te
supe
rvis
ors t
ende
d to
bla
me
clie
nts o
f co
lor f
or th
e ci
rcum
stan
ces t
hat
brou
ght t
hem
to c
ouns
elin
g, e
ven
whe
n su
ch is
sues
seem
ed to
be
rela
ted
to p
reju
dice
, rac
ism
, dis
crim
inat
ion,
an
d ot
her f
orm
s of o
ppre
ssio
n
• Th
eme
7: O
ffer
ing
Cul
tura
lly
Inse
nsiti
ve T
reat
men
t R
ecom
men
datio
ns: S
ever
al B
lack
su
perv
isee
s in
this
stud
y re
porte
d th
at
thei
r sup
ervi
sors
mad
e tre
atm
ent
reco
mm
enda
tions
that
did
not
app
ear
to b
e cu
ltura
lly se
nsiti
ve, a
nd th
ese
train
ees s
eem
ed to
bel
ieve
that
the
reco
mm
enda
tions
wer
e tie
d to
raci
sm
or u
nexa
min
ed c
ultu
ral b
iase
s
Dre
ssel
et
al. (
2007
) •
To u
se th
e D
elph
i m
etho
d to
id
entif
y sp
ecifi
c be
havi
ors
char
acte
rizin
g bo
th su
cces
sful
an
d un
succ
essf
ul
mul
ticul
tura
l su
perv
isio
n, a
s id
entif
ied
by
know
ledg
eabl
e pr
actic
ing
Del
phi
met
hod
• R
espo
nse
form
co
ntai
ning
the
defin
ition
s of
succ
essf
ul a
nd
unsu
cces
sful
m
ultic
ultu
ral
supe
rvis
ory
beha
vior
s
• Tr
aini
ng d
irect
ors
from
34
UC
Cs
that
bel
onge
d to
th
e A
ssoc
iatio
n of
C
ouns
elin
g C
ente
r Tra
inin
g A
genc
ies
(AC
CTA
) •
Rou
nd 1
: 34
pote
ntia
l pan
elis
ts
• R
ound
2: 2
1 pa
nelis
ts w
ho
• Th
e m
ost i
mpo
rtant
beh
avio
ral
elem
ent t
hat i
s inv
olve
d in
succ
essf
ul
mul
ticul
tura
l sup
ervi
sion
is “c
reat
ing
a sa
fe e
nviro
nmen
t for
dis
cuss
ion
of
mul
ticul
tura
l iss
ues”
•
Alth
ough
the
core
supe
rviso
ry
beha
vior
s may
con
tribu
te to
su
cces
sful
mul
ticul
tura
l sup
ervi
sion
, sp
ecifi
c m
ultic
ultu
ral i
ssue
s mus
t als
o be
add
ress
ed if
mul
ticul
tura
l su
perv
isio
n is
to b
e su
cces
sful
110
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
prof
essi
onal
s in
volv
ed in
tra
inin
g an
d su
perv
isio
n at
U
CC
s
resp
onde
d to
R
ound
1
• R
ound
3: 1
8 pa
nelis
ts fr
om
Rou
nd 2
•
Res
pons
es w
ere
rece
ived
from
13
pane
lists
Succ
essf
ul m
ultic
ultu
ral s
uper
visi
on:
• 35
succ
essf
ul M
C su
perv
isio
n be
havi
ors c
an b
e or
dere
d in
to 3
di
men
sion
s: su
perv
isor
y ta
sks;
m
ultic
ultu
ral s
uper
viso
ry re
latio
nshi
p;
pers
onal
and
pro
fess
iona
l gro
wth
of
the
succ
essf
ul m
ultic
ultu
ral s
uper
viso
r •
Supe
rvis
ory
task
s: a
dmin
istra
tive
and
info
rmat
iona
l beh
avio
rs
• M
ultic
ultu
ral s
uper
viso
ry re
latio
nshi
p:
requ
ires t
he c
ore
cond
ition
s of
open
ness
, gen
uine
ness
, em
path
y, a
nd
war
mth
; it m
ust a
lso
prov
ide
the
need
ed sa
fety
asp
ects
that
invi
te a
di
scus
sion
of m
ultic
ultu
ral i
ssue
s, va
lues
, and
idea
s, an
d ho
w th
ey
influ
ence
the
clin
ical
inte
ract
ion
Uns
ucce
ssfu
l mul
ticul
tura
l sup
ervi
sion
:
• Su
perv
isor
s’ la
ck o
f aw
aren
ess o
f th
eir o
wn
raci
al, e
thni
c, a
nd c
ultu
ral
bias
es a
s bei
ng th
e m
ost d
etrim
enta
l to
mul
ticul
tura
l sup
ervi
sion
•
Lack
of s
ensi
tivity
to th
e im
pact
of
cultu
re
• In
flexi
bilit
y on
the
part
of th
e su
perv
isor
•
Mis
guid
ed in
tent
ions
•
Faili
ng to
est
ablis
h a
wor
king
alli
ance
•
Faili
ng to
reco
gniz
e th
e po
wer
of t
he
supe
rvis
ory
role
111
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
Dua
n an
d R
oehl
ke
(200
1)
• D
id su
perv
isor
s, as
a g
roup
, ex
pres
s pos
itive
at
titud
es to
war
ds
thei
r rac
ially
di
ffer
ent
supe
rvis
ee a
nd
mak
e ac
tive
effo
rts to
add
ress
cu
ltura
l and
raci
al
diff
eren
ces
betw
een
them
? •
How
did
su
perv
isee
s, as
a
grou
p, p
erce
ive
thei
r sup
ervi
sors
’ at
titud
es,
beha
vior
s, an
d pe
rson
al
char
acte
ristic
s?
• H
ow w
ould
su
perv
isor
s’ a
nd
supe
rvis
ees’
pe
rcep
tions
of
each
oth
er’s
ch
arac
teris
tics,
beha
vior
s, an
d at
titud
es p
redi
ct
thei
r sat
isfa
ctio
n w
ith th
e su
perv
isor
y re
latio
nshi
p?
Surv
ey
desi
gn
• C
ross
-Rac
ial
Supe
rvis
ion
Surv
ey (w
ith
scal
ed it
ems
and
open
-en
ded
ques
tions
)
• 60
pre
-doc
tora
l in
tern
s (40
men
an
d 20
wom
en)
• 58
supe
rvis
ors
(30
men
and
28
wom
en)
• Fr
om 4
9 U
CC
in
tern
ship
s tha
t w
ere
scat
tere
d ac
ross
the
U.S
. •
Supe
rvis
ees:
77%
fr
om c
ouns
elin
g ps
ycho
logy
, 16%
fr
om c
linic
al
psyc
holo
gy, 7
%
from
pro
fess
iona
l sc
hool
pro
gram
s
• Su
perv
isee
s wer
e m
ore
sens
itive
to
cultu
ral/r
acia
l iss
ues t
han
wer
e su
perv
isor
s •
Supe
rvis
ors r
epor
ted
mak
ing
mor
e ef
forts
to a
ddre
ss c
ultu
ral i
ssue
s tha
n su
perv
isee
s per
ceiv
ed
• Sa
tisfa
ctio
n w
ith su
perv
isio
n w
as
rela
ted
to su
perv
isee
s’ se
lf-di
sclo
sure
an
d dy
ad m
embe
rs’ p
erce
ived
pos
itive
at
titud
es to
war
d ea
ch o
ther
112
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
Fuku
yam
a (1
994)
•
To e
xplo
re th
e us
eful
ness
of
elic
iting
“cr
itica
l in
cide
nts”
in
supe
rvis
ion
and
its a
pplic
abili
ty to
m
ultic
ultu
ral
supe
rvis
ion
rese
arch
Phen
omen
olog
ical
ap
proa
ch
(Crit
ical
In
cide
nts)
• B
rief
ques
tionn
aire
to
solic
it “c
ritic
al
inci
dent
s”
• N
=18
raci
al-
ethn
ic m
inor
ity
stud
ents
who
co
mpl
eted
in
tern
ship
at a
n A
PA a
ppro
ved
pre-
doct
oral
in
tern
ship
site
(U
CC
s)
• 12
wom
en/6
men
•
Res
pond
ents
: 10
(6 w
omen
/4 m
en)
• Et
hnic
ities
re
pres
ente
d:
Afr
ican
A
mer
ican
, Asi
an
Am
eric
an, L
atin
an
d C
arib
bean
Is
land
s, an
d In
tern
atio
nal
3 ca
tego
ries o
f pos
itive
crit
ical
inci
dent
s re
late
d to
mul
ticul
tura
l iss
ues:
• O
penn
ess a
nd su
ppor
t •
Cul
tura
lly re
leva
nt su
perv
ision
•
Opp
ortu
nitie
s to
wor
k in
mul
ticul
tura
l ac
tiviti
es
2 ca
tego
ries o
f neg
ativ
e cr
itica
l inc
iden
ts
rela
ted
to m
ultic
ultu
ral i
ssue
s:
• La
ck o
f sup
ervi
sor c
ultu
ral a
war
enes
s •
Que
stio
ning
supe
rvis
ee a
bilit
ies
Gen
eral
find
ings
:
• Et
hnic
min
ority
inte
rns e
xpre
ssed
co
ncer
ns fo
r sup
port
and
reco
gniti
on
of c
ompe
tenc
y fr
om th
eir s
uper
viso
rs
• M
ultic
ultu
ral i
ssue
s in
supe
rvis
ion
wer
e sa
lient
for e
thni
c tra
inee
s and
ha
ve im
porta
nt im
plic
atio
ns fo
r tra
inin
g •
It is
reco
mm
ende
d th
at su
perv
isor
s re
ceiv
e tra
inin
g in
mul
ticul
tura
l iss
ues
and
that
supe
rvis
ors i
nitia
te d
iscu
ssio
n of
mul
ticul
tura
l iss
ues w
ith
supe
rvis
ees
• O
n an
org
aniz
atio
nal l
evel
, act
iviti
es
such
as e
thni
c w
alk-
in h
ours
, spe
cial
in
tere
st c
ouns
elin
g gr
oups
, bro
wn
bag
sem
inar
s on
mul
ticul
tura
l iss
ues,
and
inte
rn se
min
ars s
erve
to e
nhan
ce
mul
ticul
tura
l tra
inin
g
113
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
Gar
dner
(2
002)
•
To e
xplo
re w
hat
fact
ors i
n th
e su
perv
isor
y re
latio
nshi
p co
ntrib
ute
to a
gr
owth
-pr
omot
ing
clim
ate
vs. a
gr
owth
-lim
iting
cl
imat
e, a
s pe
rcei
ved
by
cros
s-cu
ltura
l su
perv
isee
s
Com
para
tive
met
hod
of
qual
itativ
e re
sear
ch
• C
ultu
ral
Pers
pect
ive
Inte
rvie
w
(CPI
)
• N
=8 su
perv
isee
s •
7 A
fric
an
Am
eric
ans,
1 W
hite
Am
eric
an
• 7
fem
ales
, 1 m
ale
• A
ges 2
4-50
•
Rec
eive
d su
perv
isio
n by
a
supe
rvis
or fr
om a
di
ffer
ent e
thni
city
•
All
from
gra
duat
e co
unse
lor
educ
atio
n pr
ogra
ms a
t un
iver
sitie
s in
the
Mid
wes
t and
so
uthe
rn re
gion
s of
the
U.S
.
Gro
wth
-pro
mot
ing
fact
ors:
• C
ompe
tenc
e of
the
supe
rvis
or a
s pe
rcei
ved
to b
e kn
owle
dgea
ble,
to
have
dem
onst
rate
d go
od fa
cilit
ativ
e sk
ills,
and
to h
ave
poss
esse
d at
tribu
tes
of c
ompa
ssio
n, c
once
rn, f
airn
ess,
and
hone
sty
• In
terp
erso
nal b
ond
betw
een
supe
rvis
or a
nd su
perv
isee
(rew
ardi
ng
supe
rvis
ory
expe
rienc
e if
supe
rvis
ors
wer
e de
scrib
ed a
s bei
ng re
cept
ive,
de
dica
ted,
gen
uine
, hum
ble,
em
path
ic,
resp
ectfu
l, an
d hu
mor
ous)
Gro
wth
-lim
iting
fact
ors:
• C
ultu
ral i
nsen
sitiv
ity
• C
omm
unic
atio
n st
yles
•
Crit
ical
feed
back
Gat
mon
et
al. (
2001
) •
Supe
rvis
ory
disc
ussi
ons a
bout
cu
lture
: are
si
mila
ritie
s and
di
ffer
ence
s in
term
s of
ethn
icity
, gen
der,
and
sexu
al
orie
ntat
ion
disc
usse
d in
su
perv
isio
n? If
so
, who
initi
ates
Qua
ntita
tive
expl
orat
ory
stud
y
• Th
e W
orki
ng
Alli
ance
In
vent
ory
(Hor
vath
&
Gre
enbe
rg,
1989
) •
The
Supe
rvis
ion
Que
stio
nnai
re-
Rev
ised
(W
orth
ingt
on
& R
oehl
ke,
1979
)
• N
=289
pre
-do
ctor
al
psyc
holo
gy
inte
rns
• Eu
rope
an
Am
eric
ans:
73
.4%
•
Afr
ican
A
mer
ican
s: 6
.6%
•
Asi
an A
mer
ican
s:
5.9%
•
Chi
cano
/Lat
ino:
5.
2%
Supe
rvis
ory
Dis
cuss
ions
of C
ultu
ral
Var
iabl
es
• Lo
w fr
eque
ncy
and
lack
of i
nitia
tion
of d
iscu
ssio
ns (o
f cul
tura
l var
iabl
es)
durin
g su
perv
isio
n w
ere
note
d in
all
area
s inv
estig
ated
, par
ticul
arly
re
gard
ing
sexu
al o
rient
atio
n in
whi
ch
55%
of s
uper
vise
es in
itiat
ed th
ese
disc
ussi
ons
Cul
tura
l Dis
cuss
ions
and
Sup
ervi
sory
A
llian
ce
114
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
thes
e di
scus
sion
s?
• C
ultu
ral
disc
ussi
ons a
nd
supe
rvis
ory
allia
nce
and
satis
fact
ion:
do
train
ees w
ho
disc
uss
supe
rvis
or-
supe
rvis
ee
sim
ilarit
ies a
nd
diff
eren
ces r
epor
t hi
gher
sa
tisfa
ctio
n ra
tes
with
supe
rvis
ion
and
enha
nced
w
orki
ng a
llian
ce
with
thei
r su
perv
isor
s tha
n tra
inee
s who
do
not d
iscu
ss
sim
ilarit
ies a
nd
diff
eren
ces?
• Q
ualit
y of
di
scus
sion
s: d
oes
the
qual
ity o
f the
su
perv
isor
y di
scus
sion
s rel
ate
to th
e su
perv
isor
y w
orki
ng a
llian
ce
and
inte
rn
• D
iscu
ssio
n of
cu
ltura
l va
riabl
es
ques
tions
•
Dem
ogra
phic
qu
estio
ns
• Je
wis
h/C
auca
sian
: 5.2
%
• M
ultir
acia
l: 3.
1%
• A
rab
Am
eric
ans:
0.
3%
• W
omen
/Men
: 70
%/3
0%
• W
hen
cultu
ral v
aria
bles
are
dis
cuss
ed
in th
e su
perv
isor
y re
latio
nshi
p,
supe
rvis
ees r
epor
t sig
nific
antly
hig
her
satis
fact
ion
with
supe
rvis
ion
and
an
enha
nced
wor
king
alli
ance
Qua
lity
of C
ultu
ral D
iscu
ssio
n an
d Su
perv
isio
n
• Pr
ovid
ing
an a
tmos
pher
e of
safe
ty,
dept
h of
dia
logu
e, a
nd fr
eque
nt
oppo
rtuni
ties t
o di
scus
s cul
tura
l va
riabl
es in
the
supe
rvis
ory
rela
tions
hip
sign
ifica
ntly
con
tribu
te to
bu
ildin
g al
lianc
es a
nd in
crea
sing
sa
tisfa
ctio
n
Cul
tura
l Mat
ch a
nd S
uper
viso
ry A
llian
ce
• It
is n
ot th
e cu
ltura
l mat
ch b
etw
een
supe
rvis
or a
nd su
perv
isee
itse
lf th
at is
im
porta
nt b
ut th
e pr
esen
ce a
nd q
ualit
y of
the
disc
ussi
on o
f diff
eren
ce a
nd
sim
ilarit
y •
Whe
n di
ffer
ence
s exi
st, d
iscu
ssio
ns
shou
ld o
ccur
and
supe
rvis
ors s
houl
d be
bet
ter e
quip
ped
to in
itiat
e th
em
115
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
satis
fact
ion
with
su
perv
isio
n?
• C
ultu
ral m
atch
an
d th
e in
fluen
ce
on w
orki
ng
allia
nce:
doe
s su
perv
isor
y m
atch
on
the
cultu
ral v
aria
bles
st
udie
d re
late
to
the
supe
rvis
ory
wor
king
alli
ance
an
d in
tern
sa
tisfa
ctio
n w
ith
supe
rvis
ion?
Gre
en a
nd
Dek
kers
(2
010)
• To
exp
lore
the
rela
tions
hip
betw
een
atte
ndin
g to
po
wer
and
di
vers
ity in
cl
inic
al
supe
rvis
ion
for
thei
r inf
luen
ces
on su
perv
isee
le
arni
ng
outc
omes
from
th
e pe
rspe
ctiv
e of
su
perv
isee
s and
su
perv
isor
s
Res
earc
h qu
estio
ns:
Surv
ey
• D
emog
raph
ic
info
rmat
ion
• Fe
min
ist
Supe
rvis
ion
Scal
e (F
SS)
• Su
perv
isio
n Fe
edba
ck
Form
(SFF
)
42 su
perv
isee
s fr
om C
OA
MFT
E-ac
cred
ited
prog
ram
s
• 81
% fe
mal
e •
95%
het
eros
exua
l •
76%
Whi
te, 7
%
Afr
ican
A
mer
ican
/Bla
ck,
2% A
sian
, 5%
La
tino/
His
pani
c,
5%
Bira
cial
/Mul
tirac
ial
, 5%
Oth
er
• A
vera
ge a
ge: 2
8
• Fr
om su
perv
isee
s’ p
ersp
ectiv
e,
atte
ndin
g to
pow
er a
nd d
iver
sity
in
supe
rvis
ion
influ
ence
d sa
tisfa
ctio
n w
ith su
perv
isio
n an
d le
arni
ng
outc
omes
•
From
supe
rvis
ors’
per
spec
tive,
ther
e w
ere
no si
gnifi
cant
eff
ects
of
atte
ndin
g to
pow
er a
nd d
iver
sity
in
clin
ical
supe
rvis
ion
on su
perv
isor
sa
tisfa
ctio
n w
ith su
perv
isio
n or
su
perv
isee
lear
ning
out
com
es
116
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
• A
re su
perv
isor
s in
trai
ning
in
stitu
tions
at
tend
ing
to
pow
er a
nd
dive
rsity
? •
Are
atte
ndin
g to
po
wer
and
at
tend
ing
to
dive
rsity
rela
ted
to sa
tisfa
ctio
n w
ith su
perv
isio
n?
• A
re a
ttend
ing
to
pow
er a
nd
atte
ndin
g to
di
vers
ity re
late
d to
supe
rvis
ee
lear
ning
ou
tcom
es?
• A
vera
ge y
ears
of
clin
ical
ex
perie
nce:
2.1
6
22 su
perv
isor
s fro
m
CO
AM
FTE-
accr
edite
d pr
ogra
ms
• 68
% fe
mal
e •
96%
het
eros
exua
l •
96%
Whi
te
• A
vera
ge a
ge: 4
2 •
Ave
rage
yea
rs o
f cl
inic
al
expe
rienc
e: 1
4.65
Her
nánd
ez,
Tayl
or, a
nd
McD
owel
l (2
009)
• To
exp
lore
the
expe
rienc
es o
f ra
cial
and
eth
nic
min
ority
AA
MFT
su
perv
isor
s du
ring
thei
r tra
inin
g ye
ars a
s su
perv
isee
s and
as
act
ive
clin
ical
su
perv
isor
s •
To u
nder
stan
d ho
w d
iver
sity
is
sues
impa
ct
Con
sens
ual
Qua
litat
ive
Res
earc
h
• Se
mi-
stru
ctur
ed
inte
rvie
w
• 10
AA
MFT
ap
prov
ed
supe
rvis
ors
betw
een
the
ages
of
36
and
62
• 9
fem
ales
/1 m
ale
• 9
iden
tifie
d as
he
tero
sexu
al; 1
as
bise
xual
•
Chi
cana
, Pue
rto
Ric
an, S
outh
A
sian
, Asi
an
Chi
nese
, Mix
ed,
3 th
emes
em
erge
d su
mm
ariz
ing
ethn
ic
min
ority
supe
rvis
ors’
exp
erie
nces
as
supe
rvis
ees-
in-tr
aini
ng:
• La
ck o
f pro
cess
ing
soci
al lo
catio
n an
d di
vers
ity d
imen
sion
s: M
ost
parti
cipa
nts i
n ou
r stu
dy fe
lt th
at th
eir
supe
rvis
ors c
ondu
cted
supe
rvis
ion
from
a E
uroc
entri
c pe
rspe
ctiv
e th
at
deni
ed th
eir i
dent
ities
and
soci
al
loca
tions
•
Mis
use
of p
ower
by
supe
rvis
ors:
Pa
rtici
pant
s in
this
stud
y ex
pose
d m
isus
es in
pow
er b
y su
perv
isor
s,
117
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
train
ing
and
supe
rvis
ion
Afr
ican
A
mer
ican
, and
C
hine
se
• C
lass
ba
ckgr
ound
: ra
nge
betw
een
Low
er C
lass
and
U
pper
Mid
dle
Cla
ss
• R
ange
of
expe
rienc
es a
s su
perv
isor
s:
betw
een
4-20
ye
ars
incl
udin
g ex
perie
ncin
g ov
ert r
acis
m in
su
perv
isio
n (e
.g. s
uper
viso
rs u
sing
ra
cial
slur
s, gi
ving
less
atte
ntio
n to
the
train
ing
of su
perv
isee
s of c
olor
) •
Lack
of m
ento
rshi
p in
the
prof
essi
on:
Parti
cipa
nts i
n ou
r stu
dy re
ferr
ed
freq
uent
ly to
men
torin
g an
d su
ppor
t th
at w
as e
ssen
tial t
o th
eir g
row
th a
s th
erap
ists
and
whi
ch c
ame
from
ou
tsid
e of
thei
r sup
ervi
sory
re
latio
nshi
ps
Hird
, Tao
, an
d G
loria
(2
005)
• To
exa
min
e th
e se
lf-re
porte
d m
ultic
ultu
ral
supe
rvis
ion
com
pete
nce
of
Whi
te a
nd
Rac
ial/E
thni
c M
inor
ity (R
EM)
supe
rvis
ors
with
in ra
cial
ly
sim
ilar a
nd
raci
ally
diff
eren
t su
perv
isio
n dy
ads
Qua
ntita
tive
• Tw
o-pa
ge
surv
ey
(res
earc
her-
deve
lope
d qu
estio
ns a
nd
a st
anda
rdiz
ed
mea
sure
) •
Cro
ss-C
ultu
ral
Cou
nsel
ing
Com
pete
nce
Inve
ntor
y-R
evis
ed
• N
=442
su
perv
isio
n dy
ads
• 31
6 ra
cial
ly-
sim
ilar d
yads
•
126
raci
ally
-di
ffer
ent d
yads
•
In ra
cial
ly-s
imila
r dy
ads,
Whi
te
supe
rvis
or/W
hite
su
perv
isee
(9
3.4%
), R
EM
supe
rvis
or/R
EM
supe
rvis
ee (6
.6&
) •
In ra
cial
ly-
diff
eren
t dya
ds,
75%
wer
e W
hite
su
perv
isor
s with
R
EM su
perv
isee
s,
• O
vera
ll, R
EM su
perv
isor
s rep
orte
d m
ore
MC
supe
rvis
ion
com
pete
nce
than
Whi
te su
perv
isor
s. •
In ra
cial
ly si
mila
r dya
ds, R
EM
supe
rvis
ors s
pent
sign
ifica
ntly
mor
e tim
e ad
dres
sing
cul
tura
l iss
ues i
n su
perv
isio
n th
an W
hite
supe
rvis
ors
• W
hite
supe
rvis
ors d
iscu
ssed
cul
tura
l is
sues
sign
ifica
ntly
mor
e w
ith ra
cial
ly
diff
eren
t sup
ervi
sees
than
raci
ally
si
mila
r sup
ervi
sees
•
Supe
rvis
ors d
iffer
ed in
whi
ch c
ultu
ral
issu
es th
ey d
iscu
ssed
and
con
side
red
appl
icab
le to
supe
rvis
ion
118
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
25%
wer
e R
EM
supe
rvis
ors w
ith
Whi
te
supe
rvis
ees
• Su
perv
isor
s:
near
ly 5
0/50
m
ale/
fem
ale
Inm
an
(200
6)
• To
inve
stig
ate
the
dire
ct a
nd in
dire
ct
effe
cts o
f m
arria
ge a
nd
fam
ily th
erap
y tra
inee
s’
perc
eptio
ns o
f th
eir s
uper
viso
rs’
mul
ticul
tura
l co
mpe
tenc
e in
su
perv
isio
n on
th
e su
perv
isor
y w
orki
ng a
llian
ce,
train
ees’
m
ultic
ultu
ral
com
pete
nce
(cas
e co
ncep
tual
izat
ion
abili
ties i
n et
iolo
gy a
nd
treat
men
t), a
nd
perc
eive
d su
perv
isio
n sa
tisfa
ctio
n
Qua
ntita
tive
• D
emog
raph
ic
Form
•
Supe
rvis
or
Mul
ticul
tura
l C
ompe
tenc
e In
vent
ory
(SM
CI)
• W
orki
ng
Alli
ance
-Tr
aine
e V
ersi
on
(WA
I-T)
• M
ultic
ultu
ral
Cas
e C
once
ptua
lizat
ion
Abi
lity
dete
rmin
ed b
y a
codi
ng
syst
em
• Su
perv
isio
n Sa
tisfa
ctio
n Q
uest
ionn
aire
(S
SQ)
• N
=147
•
26 m
ales
/121
fe
mal
es
• A
ge ra
nge:
21-
72
• C
auca
sian
: 103
; A
fric
an
Am
eric
an: 1
2;
Asi
an A
mer
ican
: 13
; His
pani
c A
mer
ican
: 13;
N
ativ
e A
mer
ican
: 1;
Bira
cial
: 3; D
id
not s
peci
fy: 2
•
Mas
ter’s
leve
l: 90
; pos
tgra
duat
e le
vel:
15; d
octo
ral
leve
l: 37
; did
not
sp
ecify
: 5
• A
lthou
gh su
perv
isor
mul
ticul
tura
l co
mpe
tenc
e w
as d
irect
ly a
nd
posi
tivel
y as
soci
ated
with
supe
rvis
ory
wor
king
alli
ance
and
supe
rvis
ion
satis
fact
ion,
supe
rvis
or m
ultic
ultu
ral
com
pete
nce
had
a di
rect
, but
neg
ativ
e,
rela
tions
hip
with
trai
nee
etio
logy
co
ncep
tual
izat
ion
abili
ties
(mul
ticul
tura
l cas
e co
ncep
tual
izat
ion
abili
ties m
ay b
e in
fluen
ced
by
varia
bles
bey
ond
thos
e as
sess
ed in
th
is st
udy
such
as s
elf-
awar
enes
s and
se
lf-co
nfid
ence
) •
Supe
rvis
ory
wor
king
alli
ance
serv
ed
as a
sign
ifica
nt p
ositi
ve m
edia
tor i
n th
e re
latio
nshi
p be
twee
n su
perv
isor
m
ultic
ultu
ral c
ompe
tenc
e an
d su
perv
isio
n sa
tisfa
ctio
n •
A su
perv
isor
y re
latio
nshi
p th
at
invo
lves
an
impl
emen
tatio
n of
cu
ltura
l com
pete
nce
thro
ugh
a m
utua
l ag
reem
ent o
n go
als a
nd ta
sks r
elat
ed
to a
focu
s on
mul
ticul
tura
l iss
ues m
ay
prov
ide
for g
reat
er su
perv
isio
n sa
tisfa
ctio
n
119
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
Jern
igan
, G
reen
, H
elm
s, Pe
rez-
Gua
ldro
n,
and
Hen
ze
(201
0)
• To
exp
lore
raci
al
dyna
mic
s fro
m
the
pers
pect
ive
of
supe
rvis
ees o
f C
olor
with
in
supe
rvis
ion
dyad
s w
ith su
perv
isor
s of
Col
or
Qua
litat
ive
expl
orat
ory
stud
y
• D
emog
raph
ic
data
•
Sem
i-st
ruct
ured
su
rvey
• 6
supe
rvis
ees o
f C
olor
(with
su
perv
isor
s of
Col
or)
• 3
mas
ters
/3
doct
oral
-leve
l st
uden
ts in
the
depa
rtmen
t of
coun
selin
g ps
ycho
logy
at a
un
iver
sity
on
the
east
coa
st
• Su
perv
isee
s rep
orte
d th
at th
eir
supe
rvis
ors e
vide
nced
a ra
nge
of
resp
onse
s to
race
bei
ng in
trodu
ced
into
the
supe
rvis
ory
rela
tions
hip
• A
lthou
gh so
me
resp
onde
nts
dem
onst
rate
d an
und
erst
andi
ng o
f the
ne
cess
ity to
initi
ate
conv
ersa
tions
ab
out r
ace
and
cultu
re in
supe
rvis
ion,
th
ey re
porte
d th
at th
eir s
uper
viso
rs
did
not;
cons
eque
ntly
, the
se
inte
ract
ions
pro
ved
to b
e pr
oble
mat
ic
• D
espi
te h
avin
g to
initi
ate
conv
ersa
tions
abo
ut ra
ce, t
heir
supe
rvis
ors w
ere
rece
ptiv
e to
the
disc
ussi
on a
nd c
halle
nged
supe
rvis
ees
to c
ontin
ue to
eng
age
in th
e di
alog
ue;
supe
rvis
ees i
n su
ch re
latio
nshi
ps
subs
eque
ntly
repo
rted
grow
th-
fost
erin
g ex
perie
nces
. •
Res
pond
ents
’ des
crip
tions
of d
yads
, co
mpr
ised
of t
wo
peop
le o
f Col
or,
wer
e no
t nec
essa
rily
posi
tive
whe
n di
scus
sion
s of r
ace
in su
perv
isio
n w
ere
the
focu
s •
Not
all
peop
le-o
f Col
or su
perv
isor
s ar
e in
here
ntly
bet
ter a
t und
erst
andi
ng
raci
al a
nd c
ultu
ral i
nfor
mat
ion,
sole
ly
beca
use
they
are
peo
ple
of C
olor
•
Supe
rvis
ees o
f Col
or fr
eque
ntly
re
porte
d an
inte
rnal
izat
ion
of se
lf-do
ubt a
nd in
com
pete
nce
whe
n th
ey
perc
eive
d th
at th
eir s
uper
viso
rs w
ere
120
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
not o
pen
to d
isco
urse
abo
ut ra
ce
with
in su
perv
isio
n •
Trai
nees
of C
olor
, who
end
orse
d th
e im
porta
nce
of u
sing
raci
al a
nd c
ultu
ral
conc
eptu
aliz
atio
ns in
cou
nsel
ing
prac
tice,
wer
e de
terr
ed fr
om d
oing
so
whe
n th
eir s
uper
viso
rs d
id n
ot p
rovi
de
supp
ort o
r enc
oura
gem
ent.
The
impa
ct
of a
regr
essi
ve su
perv
isio
n re
latio
nshi
p w
as b
oth
psyc
holo
gica
lly
taxi
ng a
nd h
ad n
egat
ive
cons
eque
nces
fo
r the
trai
ning
exp
erie
nce
for
supe
rvis
ees o
f col
or
• Pr
ogre
ssiv
e dy
ads w
ere
desc
ribed
as
educ
ativ
e an
d gr
owth
-fos
terin
g in
bo
th p
erso
nal a
nd p
rofe
ssio
nal
dom
ains
Kad
uvet
toor
et
al.
(200
9)
• To
exa
min
e th
e re
latio
nshi
p be
twee
n m
ultic
ultu
ral
even
ts in
gro
up
supe
rvis
ion,
gr
oup
clim
ate,
an
d su
perv
isee
m
ultic
ultu
ral
com
pete
nce
Mix
ed
qual
itativ
e/q
uant
itativ
e de
sign
• M
ultic
ultu
ral
Even
ts in
G
roup
Su
perv
isio
n Q
uest
ionn
aire
(M
EGSQ
) •
Gro
up C
limat
e Q
uest
ionn
aire
-Sh
ort F
orm
(G
CQ
-S)
• C
ross
-Cul
tura
l C
ouns
elin
g In
vent
ory-
Rev
ised
(C
CC
I-R)
• 13
6 th
erap
ists
in
train
ing
• 94
wom
en/2
5 m
en/1
7 un
spec
ified
•
7 id
entif
ied
as
Afr
ican
A
mer
ican
, 5
Asi
an A
mer
ican
, 7
Latin
o/a,
1
Mid
dle
East
ern,
1
nativ
e A
mer
ican
, 95
Whi
te, 2
B
iraci
al, 2
Oth
er,
• Th
e di
scov
ery-
orie
nted
app
roac
h yi
elde
d 19
6 he
lpfu
l and
hin
derin
g m
ultic
ultu
ral e
vent
s am
ong
136
parti
cipa
nts
• Th
e m
ost c
omm
on e
vent
s inc
lude
d m
ultic
ultu
ral l
earn
ing
and
peer
vi
cario
us le
arni
ng
• Su
perv
isee
s sug
gest
ed im
prov
ing
thei
r gro
up su
perv
isio
n th
roug
h be
tter
inte
grat
ion
of m
ultic
ultu
ral i
ssue
s and
m
ore
supe
rvis
or in
volv
emen
t •
Reg
ardi
ng g
roup
clim
ate,
supe
rvis
ees
repo
rting
pee
r vic
ario
us le
arni
ng o
r m
ultic
ultu
ral l
earn
ing
expe
rienc
ed
high
er g
roup
eng
agem
ent,
whe
reas
121
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
• D
emog
raph
ic
Que
stio
nnai
re
and
16
Uns
peci
fied
• 4
iden
tifie
d as
ga
y, le
sbia
n, o
r qu
eer;
7 as
bi
sexu
al; 1
06 a
s he
tero
sexu
al; a
nd
19 d
eclin
ed to
sp
ecify
•
29 m
aste
r’s le
vel
stud
ents
; 88
doct
oral
leve
l; 19
un
spec
ified
•
42 c
ross
-rac
ial
supe
rvis
ory
dyad
s
mis
appl
icat
ions
of m
ultic
ultu
ral
theo
ry re
late
d to
hig
her r
epor
ts o
f gr
oup
conf
lict
• In
crea
sed
mul
ticul
tura
l lea
rnin
g an
d ex
tra-g
roup
mul
ticul
tura
l eve
nts
posi
tivel
y re
late
d to
supe
rvis
ees’
m
ultic
ultu
ral c
ompe
tenc
e w
here
as
mul
ticul
tura
l con
flict
s with
su
perv
isor
s, m
isap
plic
atio
n of
m
ultic
ultu
ral t
heor
y, a
nd th
e ab
senc
e of
mul
ticul
tura
l eve
nts n
egat
ivel
y re
late
d to
supe
rvis
ee m
ultic
ultu
ral
com
pete
nce
Kis
sil,
Dav
ey, &
D
avey
(2
015)
• To
exa
min
e th
e as
soci
atio
ns
betw
een
accu
ltura
tion,
su
perv
isor
s’
mul
ticul
tura
l co
mpe
tenc
e, a
nd
clin
icia
ns’ s
elf-
effic
acy
in a
sa
mpl
e of
153
im
mig
rant
th
erap
ists
cu
rren
tly
prac
ticin
g in
the
U.S
.
Qua
ntita
tive
• D
emog
raph
ic
Surv
ey
• Th
e A
mer
ican
-In
tern
atio
nal
Rel
atio
ns
Scal
e (A
IRS)
•
The
Cou
nsel
or
Act
ivity
Sel
f-Ef
ficac
y Sc
ales
(C
ASE
S)
• Th
e Su
perv
isor
M
ultic
ultu
ral
Com
pete
nce
• N
=153
•
137
fem
ale/
16
mal
e •
Age
rang
e: 2
3-69
•
Age
of a
rriv
al to
th
e U
S: 1
4-46
•
Num
ber o
f yea
rs
livin
g in
the
US:
0-
30
• W
hite
: 42;
Asi
an:
17;
His
pani
c/La
tino:
8;
Mid
dle
East
ern:
5;
Afr
ican
/Bla
ck/A
fric
an A
mer
ican
: 2;
Bira
cial
: 4;
• Pe
rcei
ved
prej
udic
e, n
ot le
vel o
f ac
cultu
ratio
n, w
as si
gnifi
cant
ly
asso
ciat
ed w
ith fo
reig
n-bo
rn th
erap
ists
’ cl
inic
al se
lf-ef
ficac
y •
Perc
eive
d su
perv
isor
s’ m
ultic
ultu
ral
com
pete
nce
was
sign
ifica
ntly
as
soci
ated
with
ther
apis
ts’ c
linic
al se
lf-ef
ficac
y •
Fore
ign-
born
ther
apis
ts fe
el m
ore
clin
ical
ly se
lf- e
ffic
acio
us w
hen
thei
r su
perv
isor
s are
mul
ticul
tura
lly
com
pete
nt
• It
is e
spec
ially
impo
rtant
for c
linic
al
supe
rvis
ors t
o op
enly
dis
cuss
and
ac
tivel
y ex
plor
e cr
oss-
cultu
ral
inte
ract
ions
with
fore
ign-
born
su
perv
isee
s, in
clud
ing
all p
arts
of t
he
122
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
Inve
ntor
y (S
MC
I) O
ther
: 22;
Rac
e no
t ind
icat
ed: 5
2 tra
inin
g tri
ad a
nd th
e so
ciop
oliti
cal
cont
ext (
supe
rvis
or/s
uper
vise
e,
ther
apis
t/clie
nt, t
hera
pist
/larg
er
com
mun
ity w
here
ther
apis
t wor
ks)
• Su
perv
isor
s can
enc
oura
ge fo
reig
n-bo
rn su
perv
isee
s to
mor
e de
eply
ex
amin
e th
eir e
xper
ienc
es o
f ac
cultu
ratio
n an
d an
y pe
rcei
ved
prej
udic
e in
the
Uni
ted
Stat
es to
id
entif
y ho
w th
ese
expe
rienc
es m
ight
em
erge
dur
ing
ther
apeu
tic e
ncou
nter
s w
ith U
.S. c
lient
s •
Kno
win
g th
at e
xper
ienc
es o
f pre
judi
ce
in th
e U
nite
d St
ates
hav
e th
e po
tent
ial
to re
duce
thei
r for
eign
-bor
n su
perv
isee
s’ se
nse
of c
linic
al se
lf-ef
ficac
y, su
perv
isor
s can
enc
oura
ge
fore
ign-
born
ther
apis
ts to
dis
cuss
pr
ejud
icia
l exp
erie
nces
and
how
to
man
age
them
•
Supe
rvis
ors w
ho v
alue
the
pers
pect
ive
that
fore
ign-
born
ther
apis
ts b
ring
to
ther
apeu
tic e
ncou
nter
s in
the
U.S
. can
he
lp th
eir s
uper
vise
es fe
el m
ore
valid
ated
and
wor
thy
and,
as a
resu
lt,
mor
e cl
inic
ally
self-
effic
acio
us
123
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
Lada
ny,
Inm
an,
Con
stan
tine,
an
d H
ofhe
inz
(199
7)
• To
test
the
hypo
thes
is th
at
supe
rvis
ees’
m
ultic
ultu
ral c
ase
conc
eptu
aliz
atio
n ab
ility
and
self-
repo
rted
mul
ticul
tura
l co
mpe
tenc
e ar
e fu
nctio
ns o
f the
ir ra
cial
iden
tity
and
thei
r sup
ervi
sors
’ in
stru
ctio
n to
fo
cus o
n m
ultic
ultu
ral
issu
es
Qua
ntita
tive
• D
emog
raph
ic
ques
tionn
aire
•
Cul
tura
l Id
entit
y A
ttitu
de S
cale
(C
IAS)
•
Whi
te R
acia
l Id
entit
y A
ttitu
de S
cale
(W
RIA
S)
• C
ross
-Cul
tura
l C
ouns
elin
g In
vent
ory—
Rev
ised
(C
CC
I-R)
• N
=116
ps
ycho
logy
tra
inee
s •
84 fe
mal
e/30
m
ale,
2 d
id n
ot
indi
cate
) •
52 d
octo
ral-l
evel
tra
inee
s; 6
4 m
aste
r’s-
leve
l co
unse
lor t
rain
ees
• A
ge ra
nge:
21-
58
• W
hite
: 75;
A
fric
an
Am
eric
an: 2
0;
Asi
an A
mer
ican
: 11
; Lat
ino:
8;
Nat
ive
Am
eric
an:
1; B
iraci
al: 1
•
72%
of
resp
onde
nts n
oted
ha
ving
take
n at
le
ast o
ne c
ours
e on
eth
nic
and
raci
al d
iver
sity
is
sues
• R
acia
l ide
ntity
was
sign
ifica
ntly
re
late
d to
self-
repo
rted
mul
ticul
tura
l co
mpe
tenc
e •
Rac
ial i
dent
ity fo
r bot
h PO
C a
nd
Whi
te g
roup
s was
not
sign
ifica
ntly
re
late
d to
mul
ticul
tura
l cas
e co
ncep
tual
izat
ion
abili
ty
• Se
lf-re
porte
d m
ultic
ultu
ral c
ompe
tenc
e w
as n
ot fo
und
to b
e si
gnifi
cant
ly
rela
ted
to m
ultic
ultu
ral c
ase
conc
eptu
aliz
atio
n ab
ility
•
Supe
rvis
ors’
inst
ruct
ion
to fo
cus o
n m
ultic
ultu
ral i
ssue
s was
sign
ifica
ntly
re
late
d to
con
cept
ualiz
atio
ns o
f a
mul
ticul
tura
l tre
atm
ent s
trate
gy
Mor
i, In
man
, and
C
aski
e (2
009)
• To
exp
lore
the
rela
tions
hip
betw
een
inte
rnat
iona
l tra
inee
s’
accu
ltura
tion
leve
l and
cul
tura
l di
scus
sion
on
Qua
ntita
tive
•
Dem
ogra
phic
qu
estio
nnai
re
• A
mer
ican
-In
tern
atio
nal
Rel
atio
ns
Scal
e (A
IRS)
• N
=104
in
tern
atio
nal
train
ees
• 84
fem
ale/
18
mal
e, (2
un
know
n)
• A
vera
ge a
ge: 3
0
• St
uden
ts w
ho h
ad lo
wer
acc
ultu
ratio
n le
vels
but
gre
ater
cul
tura
l dis
cuss
ion
show
ed m
ore
satis
fact
ion
with
su
perv
isio
n •
Supe
rvis
or m
ultic
ultu
ral c
ompe
tenc
e po
sitiv
ely
influ
ence
d in
tern
atio
nal
124
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
supe
rvis
ion
satis
fact
ion
• To
exa
min
e th
e m
edia
ting
effe
ct
of c
ultu
ral
disc
ussi
ons o
n th
e re
latio
nshi
p be
twee
n pe
rcei
ved
supe
rvis
or
mul
ticul
tura
l co
mpe
tenc
e an
d tra
inee
sa
tisfa
ctio
n w
ith
supe
rvis
ion
• In
tern
atio
nal
Stud
ent
Supe
rvis
ion
Scal
e-M
ultic
ultu
ral
Dis
cuss
ion
(ISS
S-M
D)
• Su
perv
isor
M
ultic
ultu
ral
Com
pete
ncy
Inve
ntor
y (S
MC
I) •
Supe
rvis
ion
Satis
fact
ory
Que
stio
nnai
re
(SSQ
)
• 32
in c
ouns
elin
g ps
ycho
logy
pr
ogra
m; 3
3 in
cl
inic
al
psyc
holo
gy
prog
ram
; 13
in
mar
riage
and
fa
mily
ther
apy
prog
ram
; 7 in
sc
hool
ps
ycho
logy
/cou
nsel
ing;
4 in
soci
al
wor
k; 7
in o
ther
ty
pes o
f pro
gram
(e
.g.,
I/O
Psyc
holo
gy);
8 in
un
know
n pr
ogra
m
• D
octo
ral-l
evel
: 72
; Mas
ter’s
le
vel:
22;
Unk
now
n pr
ogra
m: 1
0
train
ees’
exp
erie
nce
with
supe
rvis
ion
both
dire
ctly
and
indi
rect
ly
• A
lthou
gh in
tern
atio
nal t
rain
ees
expe
rienc
ed m
ore
satis
fact
ion
whe
n th
ey p
erce
ived
thei
r sup
ervi
sors
as
cultu
rally
com
pete
nt, t
he le
vel o
f cu
ltura
l dis
cuss
ion
parti
ally
exp
lain
s th
e re
latio
nshi
p be
twee
n su
perv
isor
m
ultic
ultu
ral c
ompe
tenc
e an
d in
tern
atio
nal t
rain
ees’
satis
fact
ion
with
su
perv
isio
n
Nils
son
and
And
erso
n (2
004)
• To
exp
lore
the
rela
tions
hips
am
ong
accu
ltura
tion
coun
selin
g se
lf-ef
ficac
y, ro
le
ambi
guity
, and
th
e su
perv
isor
y w
orki
ng a
llian
ce
Surv
ey
• C
ouns
elin
g Se
lf-Es
timat
e In
vent
ory
(CO
SE)
• R
ole
Con
flict
an
d R
ole
Am
bigu
ity
Inve
ntor
y (R
CR
AI)
• 42
inte
rnat
iona
l st
uden
ts e
nrol
led
in A
PA-
accr
edite
d pr
ofes
sion
al
psyc
holo
gy
prog
ram
s •
Parti
cipa
nts
repr
esen
ted
20
Inte
rnat
iona
l stu
dent
s who
repo
rted
bein
g le
ss a
ccul
tura
ted
also
repo
rted:
• Le
ss c
ouns
elin
g se
lf-ef
ficac
y •
Wea
ker s
uper
viso
ry w
orki
ng a
llian
ces
• M
ore
role
diff
icul
ties i
n su
perv
isio
n •
Mor
e di
scus
sion
of c
ultu
ral i
ssue
s in
supe
rvis
ion
125
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
in in
tern
atio
nal
stud
ents
• A
mer
ican
-In
tern
atio
nal
Rel
atio
ns
Scal
e (A
IRS)
•
Supe
rvis
ory
Wor
king
A
llian
ce
Inve
ntor
y-Tr
aine
e Fo
rm
(SW
AI-
Trai
nee
Form
) •
Inte
rnat
iona
l St
uden
t Su
perv
isio
n Sc
ale
(ISS
S)
coun
tries
and
6
cont
inen
ts
• 62
% w
omen
•
62%
in c
linic
al
psyc
holo
gy
prog
ram
s •
31%
in
coun
selin
g pr
ogra
ms
• 7%
in sc
hool
ps
ycho
logy
pr
ogra
ms
Nin
omiy
a (2
012)
• To
exp
lore
the
expe
rienc
e of
A
sian
fore
ign-
born
ther
apis
ts o
f su
perv
isio
n w
ith
Euro
pean
-A
mer
ican
su
perv
isor
s
Res
earc
h qu
estio
ns:
• W
hat w
as th
e ex
perie
nce
of
Asi
an fo
reig
n-bo
rn th
erap
ists
in
cros
s-cu
ltura
l su
perv
isio
n w
ith
Euro
pean
-
Qua
litat
ive
In-d
epth
in
terv
iew
s gu
ided
by
open
-en
ded
ques
tions
ab
out
supe
rvis
ory
expe
rienc
es
• N
=7 A
sian
fo
reig
n-bo
rn
ther
apis
ts
• 5
fem
ale/
2 m
ale
•
Ave
rage
age
: 27-
43
• 3
Japa
nese
, 1
Taiw
anes
e, 1
C
hine
se, 1
Sou
th
East
Asi
an, 1
In
dian
Incl
usio
n cr
iteria
:
• In
divi
dual
s who
w
ere
ethn
ical
ly
Asi
an
• A
sian
fore
ign-
born
ther
apist
s’
expe
rienc
es o
f cro
ss-c
ultu
ral
supe
rvis
ion
with
Eur
opea
n-A
mer
ican
su
perv
isor
s var
ied
from
a p
ositi
ve a
nd
supp
ortiv
e to
a c
halle
ngin
g an
d di
ffic
ult
• Fo
reig
n-bo
rn tr
aine
e le
vel o
f ac
cultu
ratio
n w
as li
kely
to a
ffec
t the
su
perv
isor
y w
orki
ng a
llian
ce b
ecau
se
cultu
ral a
nd la
ngua
ge b
arrie
rs in
su
perv
isor
y dy
ads m
ight
pre
vent
the
deve
lopm
ent o
f a p
ositi
ve su
perv
isor
y w
orki
ng a
llian
ce
• A
s the
fore
ign-
born
trai
nees
pr
ocee
ded
in th
eir c
linic
al tr
aini
ng,
they
bec
ame
mor
e ac
cultu
rate
d, th
eir
lang
uage
and
cul
tura
l bar
riers
de
crea
sed,
and
thei
r lev
el o
f clin
ical
126
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
Am
eric
an
supe
rvis
ors?
•
Wha
t cha
lleng
es
did
the
Asi
an
fore
ign-
born
su
perv
isee
s ex
perie
nce
in
supe
rvis
ion
with
th
e Eu
rope
an-
Am
eric
an
supe
rvis
or?
• H
ow d
id
diff
eren
ces i
n cu
lture
influ
ence
th
e su
perv
isor
y pr
oces
s and
re
latio
nshi
p be
twee
n th
e Eu
rope
an-
Am
eric
an
supe
rvis
or a
nd
the
Asi
an fo
reig
n-bo
rn su
perv
isee
?
• In
divi
dual
s who
w
ere
born
and
gr
ew u
p in
Asi
a •
Stud
ents
-in-
train
ing
and
grad
uate
s fro
m
accr
edite
d pr
ofes
sion
al
psyc
holo
gy
doct
oral
pr
ogra
ms i
n th
e U
.S.
• In
divi
dual
s who
w
orke
d w
ith a
t le
ast 1
Eur
opea
n-A
mer
ican
su
perv
isor
dur
ing
clin
ical
trai
ning
; ex
perie
nced
ch
alle
ngin
g su
perv
isor
y ev
ents
; and
had
aw
aren
ess o
f the
im
pact
of c
ultu
ral
diff
eren
ces o
n th
e su
perv
isor
y pr
oces
s and
re
latio
nshi
p in
cr
oss-
cul
tura
l su
perv
isio
n
com
pete
ncy
incr
ease
d; a
s a re
sult,
th
eir s
uper
viso
ry a
llian
ce te
nded
to b
e m
ore
posi
tive
and
colla
bora
tive
• B
oth
the
supe
rvis
or’s
gen
eral
co
mpe
tenc
y an
d m
ultic
ultu
ral
com
pete
ncy
affe
cted
the
Asi
an
fore
ign
train
ee’s
supe
rvis
ory
expe
rienc
es a
nd w
orki
ng a
llian
ce w
ith
Euro
pean
-Am
eric
an su
perv
isor
s •
Cul
tura
l diff
eren
ces m
ade
a si
gnifi
cant
impa
ct o
n th
e pr
oces
s and
th
e re
latio
nshi
p in
the
cros
s-cu
ltura
l su
perv
isio
n be
twee
n th
e A
sian
fo
reig
n-bo
rn tr
aine
es a
nd th
e Eu
rope
an-A
mer
ican
supe
rvis
ors
• Th
e re
sults
indi
cate
d th
at th
e sk
ill
diff
icul
ties a
nd d
efic
its o
f Asi
an
fore
ign
supe
rvis
ees m
ay b
e ca
used
by
thre
e co
ntex
tual
fact
ors:
wor
king
in a
no
vel t
reat
men
t mod
ality
, wor
king
w
ith a
new
pop
ulat
ion,
and
wor
king
in
a n
ovel
clin
ical
setti
ng, w
hen
supe
rvis
ees w
ere
in th
e ea
rly st
ages
of
thei
r clin
ical
trai
ning
as f
orei
gn-b
orn
train
ees
127
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
Pow
ers
(201
5)
• To
exa
min
e A
fric
an A
mer
ican
su
perv
isee
s’
perc
eptio
n of
th
eir E
uro
Am
eric
an
supe
rvis
ors’
aw
aren
ess o
f ra
cial
and
cul
tura
l di
ffer
ence
s, cu
ltura
lly-a
war
e re
spon
ses,
and
the
impa
ct o
f ra
cial
and
cul
tura
l di
ffer
ence
s on
the
supe
rvis
ory
rela
tions
hip
Qua
litat
ive
(mul
tiple
ca
se st
udy)
• Sc
reen
ing
Form
•
Dem
ogra
phic
qu
estio
nnai
re
• In
terv
iew
s •
Supe
rvis
ory
Wor
king
A
llian
ce
Inve
ntor
y (S
WA
I)
• N
=8 A
fric
an
Am
eric
an fe
mal
e as
soci
ate-
leve
l lic
ense
d co
unse
lors
who
re
side
d in
the
sout
heas
tern
re
gion
of t
he
Uni
ted
Stat
es.
• A
ge ra
nge:
26-
42
• M
inim
um o
f 1
year
and
a
max
imum
of 3
ye
ars o
f pos
t-lic
ensu
re
expe
rienc
e
In a
n ex
amin
atio
n of
the
perc
eptio
ns o
f ra
cial
and
cul
tura
l diff
eren
ces,
supe
rvis
or
awar
enes
s, an
d th
e pe
rcei
ved
impa
ct o
f ra
ce a
nd c
ultu
re o
n th
e su
perv
isor
y re
latio
nshi
p, 6
maj
or th
emes
em
erge
d:
• C
ultu
ral i
dios
yncr
asie
s •
Supe
rvis
ees’
am
biva
lenc
e •
Cul
tura
l con
tact
•
Mic
roag
gres
sion
s •
Pow
er d
iffer
entia
l •
Hea
lthy
skep
ticis
m
• Su
perv
isor
s lac
ked
unde
rsta
ndin
g an
d aw
aren
ess o
f how
supe
rvise
es
perc
eive
d th
e im
pact
of r
acia
l and
cu
ltura
l diff
eren
ces o
n th
e su
perv
isor
y re
latio
nshi
p •
Alth
ough
the
parti
cipa
nts n
oted
that
cu
ltura
l diff
eren
ces a
re a
poi
gnan
t to
pic,
they
adm
itted
ly d
o no
t dis
cuss
th
em in
supe
rvis
ion
as it
rela
tes t
o th
e su
perv
isor
- sup
ervi
see
rela
tions
hip
• Pa
rtici
pant
s all
note
d di
scus
sing
race
an
d cu
lture
rela
ted
to th
eir c
lient
s, bu
t di
d no
t dire
ctly
eng
age
in d
iscu
ssin
g th
e ra
cial
and
cul
tura
l diff
eren
ces
betw
een
them
and
thei
r sup
ervi
sor
• Th
e m
ajor
ity o
f the
par
ticip
ants
felt
that
add
ress
ing
raci
al a
nd c
ultu
ral w
as
a sh
ared
resp
onsi
bilit
y be
twee
n th
e su
perv
isor
and
supe
rvis
ee
• Se
ven
of th
e pa
rtici
pant
s des
crib
ed
thei
r sup
ervi
sor’s
lack
of
128
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
unde
rsta
ndin
g of
the
Afr
ican
A
mer
ican
cul
ture
•
Whi
le th
ey fe
lt th
at th
eir s
uper
viso
r ha
d a
cont
extu
al u
nder
stan
ding
of
mul
ticul
tura
lism
, thi
s und
erst
andi
ng
did
not t
rans
late
into
aw
aren
ess o
f the
cu
ltura
l diff
eren
ces a
nd th
eir i
mpa
cts
on m
ultic
ultu
ral r
elat
ions
hips
•
Parti
cipa
nts a
ttrib
uted
thei
r su
perv
isor
’s la
ck o
f und
erst
andi
ng o
f th
eir c
ultu
re to
a c
ultu
ral g
ap
• A
lthou
gh su
perv
isee
s did
not
dire
ctly
di
scus
s the
ir ow
n cu
ltura
l diff
eren
ces
with
thei
r sup
ervi
sors
, the
ir as
sess
men
ts o
f the
ir su
perv
isor
s’
mul
ticul
tura
l aw
aren
ess w
ere
base
d up
on d
iscu
ssio
ns a
bout
Afr
ican
A
mer
ican
clie
nts w
ith th
eir s
uper
viso
r •
Parti
cipa
nts’
per
cept
ions
of t
heir
supe
rvis
or’s
mul
ticul
tura
l com
pete
nce
and
awar
enes
s neg
ativ
ely
impa
cted
th
e su
perv
isor
y w
orki
ng a
llian
ce
• Fi
ve o
f the
par
ticip
ants
repo
rted
expe
rienc
ing
raci
al m
icro
aggr
essi
ons
and
bein
g st
ereo
type
d •
Thes
e ex
perie
nces
impa
cted
the
supe
rvis
ory
rela
tions
hip
as w
ell a
s the
su
perv
isor
y w
orki
ng a
llian
ce
Sohe
ilian
, In
man
, K
linge
r, Is
enbe
rg,
• To
exa
min
e w
hat
topi
cs o
r asp
ects
of
m
ultic
ultu
ralis
m
Dis
cove
ry-
orie
nted
qu
alita
tive
appr
oach
• O
nlin
e su
rvey
co
nduc
ted
thro
ugh
• N
=102
su
perv
isee
s •
78%
wom
en/2
2%
men
1. C
onte
nt o
f Cul
tura
l Top
ics D
iscu
ssed
•
Rev
eale
d 9
subc
ateg
orie
s •
Rac
e w
as h
ighl
ight
ed a
s one
of t
he
mos
t com
mon
ly e
xplo
red
topi
cs
129
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
and
Kul
p (2
014)
ar
e di
scus
sed
whe
n m
ultic
ultu
ral
even
ts w
ere
the
focu
s in
supe
rvis
ion
• To
und
erst
and
wha
t sup
ervi
sory
in
terv
entio
ns a
re
perc
eive
d as
sa
lient
and
cu
ltura
lly
sens
itive
by
supe
rvis
ees
• To
und
erst
and
how
the
supe
rvis
ee’s
pe
rcep
tions
of t
he
supe
rvis
ory
expe
rienc
e an
d th
e in
terv
entio
ns
used
mig
ht
influ
ence
su
perv
isee
’s w
ork
with
clie
nts
Surv
ey
Mon
key
• Pa
rtici
pant
de
mog
raph
ic
ques
tionn
aire
•
Supe
rvis
or
mul
ticul
tura
l co
mpe
tenc
e qu
estio
nnai
re
• Eu
rope
an
Am
eric
ans:
68%
•
Het
eros
exua
l: 88
%
• A
ge ra
nge:
22-
67
(mea
n ag
e of
29
.34)
•
Hig
hest
deg
ree:
M
aste
r’s
• Pr
actic
um
setti
ngs:
ac
adem
ic/c
olle
ge
coun
selin
g ce
nter
s (48
%);
com
mun
ity
men
tal h
ealth
ag
enci
es (2
6%);
hosp
ital s
ettin
gs
(13%
); pr
ivat
e pr
actic
e (4
%)
• C
linic
al
expe
rienc
e: 4
-24
mon
ths
• 92
%ta
ken
at le
ast
one
MC
cou
rse
• 69
% re
porte
d at
tend
ing
at le
ast
one
MC
w
orks
hop
durin
g a
MC
com
pete
nt m
omen
t in
supe
rvis
ion
(N=4
3)
• G
ende
r-re
late
d di
scus
sion
s was
the
seco
nd m
ost f
requ
ent t
opic
s add
ress
ed
in su
perv
isio
n (N
=25)
•
Ther
e se
emed
to b
e an
inte
rest
in
talk
ing
abou
t iss
ues r
elat
ed to
et
hnic
ity a
nd re
ligio
n/sp
iritu
ality
•
Oth
er d
emog
raph
ic d
omai
ns (i
.e. S
ES
and
sexu
al o
rient
atio
n) w
ere
min
imal
ly a
ddre
ssed
in su
perv
isio
n.
2. C
onte
nt o
f MC
-Com
pete
nt S
uper
viso
r In
terv
entio
ns
• Th
e m
ost c
omm
on su
perv
isio
n in
terv
entio
n w
as fa
cilit
atin
g ex
plor
atio
n or
edu
catio
n on
spec
ific
cultu
ral i
ssue
s (N
=27)
•
A se
cond
com
mon
inte
rven
tion
was
di
scus
sing
cul
tura
lly a
ppro
pria
te
ther
apeu
tic sk
ills a
nd in
terv
entio
n (N
=27)
•
Faci
litat
ing
self-
awar
enes
s (N
=25)
an
d ch
alle
ngin
g su
perv
isee
/enc
oura
ged
open
ness
(N
=16)
wer
e sa
lient
and
freq
uent
in
terv
entio
ns
3. C
onte
nt o
f How
the
MC
Exp
erie
nce
Aff
ecte
d Su
perv
isee
s’ W
ork
with
C
lient
s •
Supe
rvis
ees m
odify
ing
the
treat
men
t ap
proa
ch (N
=56)
130
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
• Su
perv
isee
s dev
elop
ing
a m
ore
cultu
rally
com
plex
clie
nt
conc
eptu
aliz
atio
n (N
=18)
•
Supe
rvis
ees r
ecog
nizi
ng p
erso
nal
limita
tions
and
gai
ning
gre
ater
self-
awar
enes
s as a
cou
nsel
or (N
=22)
•
Enga
ging
mor
e em
path
ical
ly w
ith
clie
nts (
N=2
2)
Tayl
or,
Her
nand
ez,
Der
i, R
anki
n, a
nd
Sieg
el
(200
7)
• To
exp
lore
how
et
hnic
min
ority
su
perv
isor
s in
tegr
ate
inte
rsec
tions
of
dive
rsity
in
clin
ical
su
perv
isor
y pr
actic
es
Con
sens
ual
Qua
litat
ive
Res
earc
h (C
QR
)
• Se
mi-
stru
ctur
ed
inte
rvie
w w
ith
an o
pen-
ende
d fo
rmat
• N
=10
AA
MFT
ap
prov
ed
supe
rvis
ors
• A
ges:
36-
62
• 9
fem
ales
/1 m
ale
• 9
iden
tifie
d as
he
tero
sexu
al/1
as
bise
xual
•
Supe
rvis
ory
expe
rienc
e:
betw
een
4-20
Thre
e ar
eas o
f im
porta
nce
emer
ged
from
pa
rtici
pant
s:
• Su
perv
isor
s’ in
itiat
ive
in in
tegr
atin
g di
vers
ity
• Th
e im
pact
of s
ocia
l loc
atio
n on
cu
rren
t sup
ervi
sion
pra
ctic
es
• Th
e ne
ed fo
r men
torin
g th
e ne
xt
gene
ratio
n of
ther
apis
ts
Topo
rek,
O
rtega
-V
illal
obos
, an
d Po
pe-
Dav
is
(200
4)
• To
und
erst
and
how
exp
erie
nces
in
mul
ticul
tura
l su
perv
isio
n in
fluen
ced
supe
rvis
ees’
de
velo
pmen
t •
To e
xplo
re h
ow
issu
es o
f cul
ture
ar
e ex
perie
nced
by
bot
h
Qua
litat
ive
anal
yses
of
criti
cal
inci
dent
s
• B
ackg
roun
d qu
estio
nnai
re
(dem
ogra
phic
in
form
atio
n;
desc
riptio
n of
su
perv
isee
s’
leve
l of
mul
ticul
tura
l tra
inin
g)
• M
ultic
ultu
ral
Supe
rvis
ion
Crit
ical
• To
tal o
f 17
supe
rvis
ees a
nd
11 su
perv
isor
s at
a la
rge
mid
-A
tlant
ic
univ
ersi
ty
• 5
supe
rvis
ee a
nd
5 su
perv
isor
s w
ere
mat
ched
dy
ads
• M
ultic
ultu
ral i
ncid
ents
in su
perv
isio
n in
fluen
ce th
e su
perv
isio
n pr
oces
s and
th
e m
ultic
ultu
ral c
ompe
tenc
e of
su
perv
isor
s and
supe
rvis
ees (
the
influ
ence
may
be
posit
ive
or n
egat
ive,
de
pend
ing
on th
e na
ture
of t
he
supe
rvis
ory
rela
tions
hip
and
the
man
ner i
n w
hich
the
cultu
ral i
ssue
s w
ere
addr
esse
d)
• Po
sitiv
e in
fluen
ces a
s a re
sult
of a
va
riety
of s
uper
viso
ry b
ehav
iors
may
re
sult
in a
n in
crea
se in
supe
rvis
ees’
131
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
supe
rvis
ors a
nd
supe
rvis
ees
• To
iden
tify
reco
mm
enda
tions
fo
r tra
inin
g ba
sed
on th
e ex
perie
nces
of
grad
uate
co
unse
ling
supe
rvis
ees a
nd
thei
r sup
ervi
sors
Inci
dent
s Q
uest
ionn
aire
•
Cou
nsel
ing
expe
rienc
e: 0
-8
year
s
mul
ticul
tura
l com
pete
nce,
par
ticul
arly
in
the
area
of a
war
enes
s.
Con
tent
/Situ
atio
n an
d C
ultu
ral V
aria
bles
• A
war
enes
s: T
he m
ost s
triki
ng
influ
ence
of p
ositi
ve e
xper
ienc
es o
f m
ultic
ultu
ral i
ncid
ents
was
incr
ease
d aw
aren
ess f
or b
oth
supe
rvis
ors a
nd
supe
rvis
ees.
Aw
aren
ess w
as re
flect
ed
in m
any
diff
eren
t for
ms,
incl
udin
g se
lf-di
sclo
sure
s, th
eore
tical
di
scus
sion
s, co
ntac
t with
cul
tura
l di
ffer
ence
s, co
mm
unic
atio
n, in
sigh
t-or
ient
ed in
terv
entio
ns, a
nd o
ther
su
perv
isor
y in
tera
ctio
ns
• Sk
ills D
evel
opm
ent:
Supe
rvis
ors’
ga
ins i
n cu
ltura
l sen
sitiv
ity a
s a re
sult
of th
e se
lf-di
sclo
sure
of s
uper
vise
es
and
othe
r ins
ight
-orie
nted
in
terv
entio
ns
• Ex
posu
re: A
lthou
gh su
perv
isee
s did
no
t ind
icat
e th
at e
xpos
ure
to c
ultu
ral
diff
eren
ces w
as in
fluen
tial i
n th
eir
deve
lopm
ent,
supe
rvis
ors d
id b
elie
ve
that
exp
osur
e w
as in
fluen
tial i
n th
eir
supe
rvis
ees’
dev
elop
men
t
Wie
ling
and
Mar
shal
l (1
999)
• To
gai
n an
un
ders
tand
ing
of
the
vario
us
cultu
ral f
acto
rs
that
influ
ence
the
supe
rvis
or-tr
aine
e
Qua
ntita
tive
•
36-it
em
surv
ey
• D
emog
raph
ic
ques
tionn
aire
• N
=50
• 24
AA
MFT
cl
inic
al
mem
bers
, 22
stud
ent
mem
bers
, 4
• Th
e ex
perie
nce
of h
avin
g a
cros
s-
cultu
ral s
uper
viso
ry re
latio
nshi
p in
an
d of
itse
lf di
d no
t gua
rant
ee th
at
stud
ents
will
hav
e "b
ette
r" c
ultu
ral
dive
rsity
trai
ning
132
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
rela
tions
hip
whe
n at
leas
t one
of
thes
e in
divi
dual
s is
a m
embe
r of a
n et
hnic
min
ority
gr
oup
asso
ciat
e m
embe
rs
• 33
fem
ale/
17
mal
e)
• A
ge ra
nge:
24-
63
• 43
Ang
lo; 2
H
ispa
nic;
2
Jew
ish;
1 O
ther
• 7
with
BA
de
gree
s; 3
2 M
A/M
S; 1
1 Ph
.D.
• M
FTs b
elie
ved
that
ther
e w
as g
reat
er
pote
ntia
l for
gro
wth
and
self-
awar
enes
s pro
vide
d by
cro
ss-c
ultu
ral
supe
rvis
ory
rela
tions
hips
; and
on
the
rare
occ
asio
ns th
at th
ey d
id o
ccur
, th
ese
rela
tions
hips
wer
e hi
ghly
re
gard
ed a
nd v
alue
d
• Th
e re
spon
dent
s who
had
bee
n su
perv
ised
by
som
eone
from
a
diff
eren
t rac
ial a
nd/o
r eth
nic
back
grou
nd fr
om th
eir o
wn
rate
d th
e na
ture
of t
hose
supe
rvis
ory
expe
rienc
es a
s bei
ng b
ette
r tha
n su
perv
isor
y ex
perie
nces
with
per
sons
of
the
sam
e ba
ckgr
ound
•
Find
ings
em
phas
ized
the
need
for
grea
ter c
ultu
ral d
iver
sity
in M
FT
train
ing
prog
ram
s •
Alth
ough
MFT
s rea
lize
the
impo
rtanc
e of
mul
ticul
tura
lism
and
cr
oss-
cultu
ral s
uper
visi
on in
the
field
, th
ey a
re n
ot fr
eque
ntly
pro
vide
d th
e op
portu
nity
to d
iscu
ss m
ultic
ultu
ral
issu
es in
trai
ning
, or t
o be
supe
rvis
ed
by, o
r ass
ocia
te w
ith c
olle
ague
s tha
t co
me
from
a d
iffer
ent r
ace
and/
or
ethn
icity
than
thei
r ow
n
Find
ings
from
this
stud
y:
• D
ocum
ent t
he la
ck o
f cro
ss-c
ultu
ral
supe
rvis
ory
expe
rienc
es in
the
field
of
MFT
133
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
• En
cour
age
futu
re re
sear
ch o
n th
e ef
fect
iven
ess a
nd re
latio
nal p
roce
sses
of
cro
ss-c
ultu
ral s
uper
viso
ry
rela
tions
hips
•
Und
ersc
ore
the
need
for m
ore
ethn
ic
min
ority
stud
ents
to b
e re
crui
ted
into
M
FT tr
aini
ng p
rogr
ams
Won
g,
Won
g, a
nd
Ishi
yam
a (2
013)
• To
inve
stig
ate
wha
t hel
ped
and
wha
t hin
dere
d in
cr
oss-
cultu
ral
supe
rvis
ion
Inte
rvie
w
via
the
Crit
ical
In
cide
nts
Tech
niqu
e
• “T
hink
of a
tim
e w
hen
a su
perv
isor
has
do
ne o
r sai
d so
met
hing
that
yo
u fe
lt w
as
an e
xam
ple
of
effe
ctiv
e (o
r in
effe
ctiv
e)
supe
rvis
ion.
Pl
ease
exp
lain
w
hy y
ou ju
dge
that
to b
e a
help
ful (
or
unhe
lpfu
l) in
cide
nt”
• N
=25
visi
ble
min
ority
gra
duat
e st
uden
ts a
nd e
arly
co
unse
ling
prof
essi
onal
s •
Rec
ruite
d fr
om
the
coun
selin
g ps
ycho
logy
de
partm
ents
of 5
C
anad
ian
univ
ersi
ties a
nd 2
un
iver
sitie
s in
the
U.S
. •
19 w
omen
/6 m
en
• A
vera
ge a
ges f
or
wom
en a
nd m
en
wer
e 32
and
37,
re
spec
tivel
y •
13 C
hine
se-
Can
adia
ns; 4
In
do-C
anad
ians
; 3
Firs
t Nat
ions
; 2
Japa
nese
-C
anad
ians
; 1
Afr
o-C
anad
ian;
1
• A
tota
l of 1
50 p
ositi
ve in
cide
nts a
nd
191
nega
tive
inci
dent
s wer
e id
entif
ied
5 Po
sitiv
e Th
emes
• Pe
rson
al a
ttrib
utes
of t
he su
perv
isor
•
Supe
rvis
ion
com
pete
ncie
s •
Men
torin
g •
Rel
atio
nshi
p •
Mul
ticul
tura
l sup
ervi
sion
co
mpe
tenc
ies
5 N
egat
ive
Them
es
• Pe
rson
al d
iffic
ultie
s as a
vis
ible
m
inor
ity
• N
egat
ive
pers
onal
attr
ibut
es o
f the
su
perv
isor
(bad
or h
arm
ful
supe
rvis
ors)
•
Lack
of a
safe
and
trus
ting
rela
tions
hip
• La
ck o
f mul
ticul
tura
l/cro
ss-c
ultu
ral
com
pete
ncie
s •
Lack
of s
uper
visi
on c
ompe
tenc
ies
134
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
Kor
ean-
Can
adia
n; a
nd 1
La
tin-C
anad
ian
Yan
g (2
004)
•
To in
vest
igat
e th
e pe
rcep
tions
that
A
sian
Am
eric
an
supe
rvis
ees h
ave
abou
t the
cr
edib
ility
and
m
ultic
ultu
ral
com
pete
nce
of
supe
rvis
ors
Qua
ntita
tive
•
Dem
ogra
phic
qu
estio
nnai
re
• Su
inn-
Lew
A
sian
Sel
f-Id
entit
y A
ccul
tura
tion
Scal
e (S
L-A
SIA
) •
Asi
an V
alue
s Sc
ale
(AV
S)
• Su
perv
isor
C
ross
-Cul
tura
l C
ouns
elin
g In
vent
ory
(SC
CC
I, m
odifi
ed
CC
CI-
R)
• Su
perv
isor
Ef
fect
iven
ess
Rat
ing
Scal
e (S
ERS;
m
odifi
ed
CER
S)
• N
=25
3 A
sian
an
d A
sian
A
mer
ican
gr
adua
te
stud
ents
in
clin
ical
and
co
unse
ling
psyc
holo
gy
prog
ram
s acr
oss
the
U.S
.
• 20
8 fe
mal
e/44
m
ale
• A
vera
ge a
ge:2
2-54
• G
ener
atio
n of
im
mig
ratio
n=1s
t-6
th
• In
tern
atio
nal
stud
ent =
42
• D
octo
ral l
evel
: 20
4; M
aste
r’s
leve
l: 43
• #
of w
eeks
of
clin
ical
su
perv
isio
n
• Su
perv
isor
eth
nic
grou
p m
embe
rshi
p an
d re
spon
sive
ness
to c
ultu
ral i
ssue
s ha
ve si
gnifi
cant
impa
ct o
n A
sian
A
mer
ican
supe
rvis
ee’s
per
cept
ions
.
• Su
perv
isor
resp
onsi
vene
ss to
cul
ture
m
ay h
ave
grea
ter i
mpa
ct th
an
supe
rvis
or e
thni
c gr
oup
mem
bers
hip
• C
ouns
elor
s’ p
erce
ptio
ns o
f su
perv
isor
s may
be
impa
cted
by
the
will
ingn
ess o
f the
supe
rvis
ees t
o in
tegr
ate
cultu
ral i
ssue
s in
supe
rvis
ion
• Su
perv
isor
s, re
gard
less
of t
heir
ethn
ic
grou
p m
embe
rshi
p, w
ho d
o no
t in
itiat
e an
d ex
plic
itly
addr
ess c
ultu
ral
issu
es, w
ere
gene
rally
vie
wed
as l
ess
cred
ible
and
not
as m
ultic
ultu
rally
co
mpe
tent
as t
hose
who
did
initi
ate
and
addr
ess t
hese
issu
es
135
Aut
hor(
s)/
Yea
r
Res
earc
h Q
uest
ions
/ O
bjec
tives
Res
earc
h A
ppro
ach/
D
esig
n In
stru
men
tatio
n Sa
mpl
e M
ajor
Fin
ding
s
rece
ived
= 0
to
270
• Et
hnic
Gro
up: 4
di
d no
t spe
cify
, 40
Asi
an m
ulti-
ethn
ic; 1
03
Chi
nese
; 31
Japa
nese
; 30
Kor
ean;
18
Filip
ino;
12
Vie
tnam
ese;
11
Indi
an/S
outh
A
sian
; 2
Hm
ong;
1 T
hai;
1 un
spec
ified
A
sian
136
References
Ancis, J. R., & Ladany, N. (2001). A multicultural framework for counselor supervision. In L. J.
Bradley & N. Ladany (Eds.), Counselor supervision: Principles, process, and practice
(3rd ed., pp. 63–90). New York, NY: Brunner-Routledge.
Atkinson, C., & Woods, K. (2007). A model of effective fieldwork supervision for trainee
educational psychologists. Educational Psychology in Practice, 23(4), 299–316.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02667360701660902
Banks-Johnson, A. (2002). Perceptions of the supervisory relationship: Minority supervisors
working with minority supervisees. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A, 63,
94.
Barnett, J. E., & Molzon, C. H. (2014). Clinical supervision of psychotherapy: Essential ethics
issues for supervisors and supervisees. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 70(11), 1051–
1061. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22126
Bertsch, K. N., Bremer-Landau, J. D., Inman, A. G., DeBoer Kreider, E. R., Price, T. A., &
DeCarlo, A. L. (2014). Evaluation of the critical events in supervision model using
gender related events. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 8(3), 174–
181. https://doi.org/10.1037/tep0000039
Bhat, C. S., & Davis, T. E. (2007). Counseling supervisors’ assessment of race, racial identity,
and working alliance in supervisory dyads. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and
Development, 35(2), 80–91. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2007.tb00051.x
Borders, D. L. (2014). Best practices in clinical supervision: Another step in delineating effective
supervision practice. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 68(2), 151–162.
https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.2014.68.2.151
137
Burkard, A. W., Johnson, A. J., Madson, M. B., Pruitt, N. T., Contreras-Tadych, D. A.,
Kozlowski, J. E. M., . . . Knox, S. (2006). Supervisor cultural responsiveness and
unresponsiveness in cross-cultural supervision. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53(3),
288–301. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.53.3.288
Burkard, A. W., Knox, S., Clarke, R. D., Phelps, D. L., & Inman, A. G. (2014). Supervisors’
experiences of providing difficult feedback in cross-ethnic/racial supervision. The
Counseling Psychologist, 42(3), 314–344. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000012461157
Cashwell, C. S., Looby, E. J., & Housley, W. F. (2008). Appreciating cultural diversity through
clinical supervision. The Clinical Supervisor, 15(1), 75–85.
https://doi.org/10.1300/j001v15n01_06
Chang, C. Y., Hays, D. G., & Shoffner, M. F. (2003). Cross-racial supervision: A developmental
approach for White supervisors working with supervisees of color. The Clinical
Supervisor, 22(2), 121–138. https://doi.org/10.1300/j001v22n02_08
Christiansen, A. T., Thomas, V., Kafescioglu, N., Karakurt, G., Lowe, W., Smith, W., &
Wittenborn, A. (2011). Multicultural supervision: Lessons learned about an ongoing
struggle. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 37(1), 109–119.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-0606.2009.00138.x
Coleman, M. N. (2006). Critical incidents in multicultural training: An examination of student
experiences. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 34(3), 168–182.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2006.tb00036.x
Collins, N. M., & Pieterse, A. L. (2008). Critical incident analysis based training: An approach
for developing active racial/cultural awareness. Journal of Counseling & Development,
85(1), 14–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6678.2007.tb00439.x
138
Constantine, M. G., & Sue, D. W. (2007). Perceptions of racial microaggressions among Black
supervisees in cross-racial dyads. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54(2), 142–153.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.54.2.142
Cook, D. A., & Helms, J. E. (1988). Visible racial/ethnic group supervisees’ satisfaction with
cross-cultural supervision as predicted by relationship characteristics. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 35(3), 268–274. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.35.3.268
Dressel, J. L., Consoli, A. J., Kim, B. S. K., & Atkinson, D. R. (2007). Successful and
unsuccessful multicultural supervisory behaviors: A Delphi poll. Journal of Multicultural
Counseling and Development, 35(1), 51–64. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-
1912.2007.tb00049.x
Duan, C., & Roehlke, H. (2001). A descriptive “snapshot” of cross-racial supervision in
university counseling center internships. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and
Development, 29(2), 131–146. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2001.tb00510.x
Eklund, K., Aros-O’Malley, M., & Murrieta, I. (2014). Multicultural supervision: What
difference does difference make? Contemporary School Psychology, 18(3), 195–204.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40688-014-0024-8
Estrada, D., Frame, M. W., & Williams, C. B. (2004). Cross-cultural supervision: Guiding the
conversation toward race and ethnicity. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and
Development, 32, 307–319.
Falender, C. A., Burnes, T. R., & Ellis, M. V. (2013). Multicultural clinical supervision and
benchmarks: Empirical support informing practice and supervisor training. Counseling
Psychologist, 41(1), 8–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000012438417
139
Falender, C. A., & Shafranske, E. P. (2004). The practice of clinical supervision. In C. A.
Falender & E. P. Shafranske (Eds.), Clinical supervision: A competency-based approach
(pp. 3–35). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
https://doi.org/10.1037/10806-001
Falender, C. A., & Shafranske, E. P. (2007). Competence in competency-based supervision
practice: Construct and application. Professional Psychology: Research & Practice,
38(3), 232–240. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.38.3.232
Falender, C. A., & Shafranske, E. P. (2014). Clinical supervision: The state of the art. Journal of
Clinical Psychology, 70(11), 1030–1041. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22124
Falender, C. A., Shafranske, E. P., & Ofek, A. (2014). Competent clinical supervision: Emerging
effective practices. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 27(4), 393–408.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09515070.2014.934785
Foo, K. N. M. R., & Rodolfa, E. R. (2013). Putting the benchmarks into practice: Multiculturally
competent supervisors-effective supervision. Counseling Psychologist, 41(1), 121–130.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000012453944
Fouad, N. A., & Chavez-Korell, S. (2014). Considering social class and socioeconomic status in
the context of multiple identities: An integrative clinical supervision approach. In C. A.
Falender, E. P. Shafranske, & C. J. Falicov (Eds.), Multiculturalism and diversity in
clinical supervision: A competency-based approach (pp. 145–162). Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14370-006
Fukuyama, M. A. (1994). Critical incidents in multicultural counseling supervision: A
phenomenological approach to supervision research. Counselor Education and
Supervision, 34(2), 142–151. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6978.1994.tb00321.x
140
Gardner, R. M. (2002). Cross cultural perspectives in supervision. Western Journal of Black
Studies, 26(2), 98–106.
Garrett, M. T., Borders, L. D. A., Crutchfield, L. B., Torres-Rivera, E., Brotherton, D., & Curtis,
R. (2001). Multicultural SuperVISION: A paradigm of cultural responsiveness for
supervisors. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 29(2), 147–158.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2001.tb00511.x
Gatmon, D., Jackson, D., Koshkarian, L., Martos-Perry, N., Molina, A., Patel, N., & Rodolfa, E.
(2001). Exploring ethnic, gender, and sexual orientation variables in supervision: Do they
really matter? Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 29(2), 102–113.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2001.tb00508.x
Gray, S. W., & Smith, M. S. (2009). The influence of diversity in clinical supervision: A
framework for reflective conversations and questioning. The Clinical Supervisor, 28(2),
155–179. https://doi.org/10.1080/07325220903324371
Green, M., & Dekkers, T. (2010). Attending to power and diversity in supervision: An
exploration of supervisee learning outcomes and satisfaction with supervision. Journal of
Feminist Family Therapy, 22(4), 293–312.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08952833.2010.528703
Herbert, J. T., & Caldwell, T. A. (2015). Clinical supervision. In F. Chan, N. L. Berven, & K. R.
Thomas (Eds.), Counseling theories and techniques for rehabilitation and mental health
professionals (pp. 443–462). New York, NY: Springer.
Hernández, P., & McDowell, T. (2010). Intersectionality, power, and relational safety in context:
Key concepts in clinical supervision. Training and Education in Professional
Psychology, 4(1), 29–35. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017064
141
Hernández, P., Taylor, B. A., & McDowell, T. (2009). Listening to ethnic minority AAMFT
approved supervisors: Reflections on their experiences as supervisees. Journal of
Systemic Therapies, 28(1), 88–100. https://doi.org/10.1521/jsyt.2009.28.1.88
Hird, J. S., Cavalieri, C. E., Dulko, J. P., Felice, A. A. D., & Ho, T. A. (2001). Visions and
realities: Supervisee perspectives of multicultural supervision. Journal of Multicultural
Counseling & Development, 29(2), 114–130. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-
1912.2001.tb00509.x
Hird, J., Tao, K., & Gloria, A. (2005). Examining supervisors’ multicultural competence in
racially similar and different supervision dyads. The Clinical Supervisor, 23(2), 107–
122. https://doi.org/10.1300/j001v23n02_07
Holloway, E. L., & Wolleat, P. L. (1994). Supervision: The pragmatics of empowerment.
Journal of Educational & Psychological Consultation, 5(1), 23–43.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532768xjepc0501_2
Inman, A. G. (2006). Supervisor multicultural competence and its relation to supervisory process
and outcome. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 32(1), 73–85.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-0606.2006.tb01589.x
Inman, A. G., & DeBoer Kreider, E. (2013). Multicultural competence: Psychotherapy practice
and supervision. Psychotherapy, 50(3), 346–350. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032029
Jernigan, M. M., Green, C. E., Helms, J. E., Perez-Gualdron, L., & Henze, K. (2010). An
examination of people of color supervision dyads: Racial identity matters as much as
race. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 4(1), 62–73.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018110
142
Kaduvettoor, A., O’Shaughnessy, T., Mori, Y., Beverly, C. I. I. I., Weatherford, R. D., &
Ladany, N. (2009). Helpful and hindering multicultural events in group supervision:
Climate and multicultural competence. Counseling Psychologist, 37(6), 786–820.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000009333984
Kissil, K., Davey, M., & Davey, A. (2015). Foreign-born therapists: How acculturation and
supervisors’ multicultural competence are associated with clinical self-efficacy. Journal
of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 43(1), 38–57.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2015.00063.x
Ladany, N. (2014). The ingredients of supervisor failure. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 70(11),
1094–1103. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22130
Ladany, N., Friedlander, M. L., & Nelson, M. L. (2005). Heightening multicultural awareness:
It’s never been about political correctness. In N. Ladany, M. L. Friedlander, & M. L.,
Nelson (Eds.), Critical events in psychotherapy supervision: An interpersonal approach
(pp. 53–77). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
https://doi.org/10.1037/10958-003
Ladany, N., Inman, A. G., Constantine, M. G., & Hofheinz, E. W. (1997). Supervisee
multicultural case conceptualization ability and self-reported multicultural competence as
functions of supervisee racial identity and supervisor focus. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 44(3), 284–293. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-0167.44.3.284
Ladany, N., Mori, Y., & Mehr, K. E. (2013). Effective and ineffective supervision. Counseling
Psychologist, 41(1), 28–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000012442648
143
Magnuson, S., Wilcoxon, S. A., & Norem, K. (2000). A profile of lousy supervision:
Experienced counselors’ perspectives. Counselor Education and Supervision, 39(3), 189–
202. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6978.2000.tb01231.x
Mori, Y., Inman, A. G., & Caskie, G. I. L. (2009). Supervising international students:
Relationship between acculturation, supervisor multicultural competence, cultural
discussions, and supervision satisfaction. Training and Education in Psychology, 3(1),
10–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013072
Murphy, M. J., & Wright, D. W. (2005). Supervisees’ perspectives of power use in supervision.
Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 31(3), 283–295. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-
0606.2005.tb01569.x
Murphy-Shigematsu, S. (2010). Microaggressions by supervisors of color. Training and
Education in Professional Psychology, 4(1), 16–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017472
Nilsson, J. E., & Anderson, M. Z. (2004). Supervising international students: The role of
acculturation, role ambiguity, and multicultural discussions. Professional Psychology:
Research & Practice, 35(3), 306–312. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.35.3.306
Ninomiya, Y. (2012). Asian foreign-born therapist experience of cross-cultural supervision with
European-American supervisors (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest
Dissertations & Theses Global. (1017861409)
Ober, A. M., Granello, D. H., & Henfield, M. S. (2009). A synergistic model to enhance
multicultural competence in supervision. Counselor Education and Supervision, 48(3),
204–221. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6978.2009.tb00075.x
144
Powers, Y. O. (2015). A case study exploring African American supervisees’ experience of
supervision with Euro-American supervisors. Dissertation Abstracts International
Section A, 76.
Priest, R. (1994). Minority supervisor and majority supervisee: Another perspective of clinical
reality. Counselor Education and Supervision, 34(2), 152–158.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6978.1994.tb00322.x
Russell, S. R., & Yarhouse, M. A. (2006). Training in religion/spirituality within APA-accredited
psychology predoctoral internships. Professional Psychology: Research & Practice,
37(4), 430–436. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.37.4.430
Ryde, J. (2000). Supervising across difference. International Journal of Psychotherapy, 5(1),
37–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/13569080050020254
Soheilian, S. S., Inman, A. G., Klinger, R. S., Isenberg, D. S., & Kulp, L. E. (2014).
Multicultural supervision: Supervisees’ reflections on culturally competent supervision.
Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 27(4), 379–392.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09515070.2014.961408
Suthakaran, V. (2011). Using analogies to enhance self-awareness and cultural empathy:
Implications for supervision. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development,
39(4), 206–217. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2011.tb00635.x
Taylor, B. A., Hernandez, P., Deri, A., Rankin, P. R., & Siegel, A. (2007). Integrating diversity
dimensions in supervision. The Clinical Supervisor, 25(1), 3–21.
https://doi.org/10.1300/j001v25n01_02
Toporek, R. L., Ortega-Villalobos, L., & Pope-Davis, D. B. (2004). Critical incidents in
multicultural supervision: Exploring supervisees’ and supervisors’ experiences. Journal
145
of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 32(2), 66–83.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2004.tb00362.x
Watkins, C. E., Jr. (2012). Development of the psychotherapy supervisor: Review of and
reelections on 30 years of theory and research. American Journal of Psychotherapy,
66(1), 45–83. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.2012.66.1.45
Watkins, C. E., Jr. (2014). Clinical supervision in the 21st century: revisiting pressing needs and
impressing possibilities. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 68(2), 251–272.
https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.2014.68.2.251
Westefeld, J. S. (2009). Supervision of psychotherapy: Models, issues, and recommendations.
Counseling Psychologist, 37(2), 296–316. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000008316657
Wieling, E., & Marshall, J. P. (1999). Cross-cultural supervision in marriage and family therapy.
Contemporary Family Therapy, 21(3), 317–329.
Wong, L. J., Wong, P. P., & Ishiyama, F. I. (2013). What helps and what hinders in cross-
cultural clinical supervision: A critical incident study. The Counseling Psychologist,
41(1), 66–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000012442652
Yabusaki, A. S. (2010). Clinical supervision: Dialogues on diversity. Training and Education in
Professional Psychology, 4(1), 55–61. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017378
Yang, P. H. (2004). The effects of supervisor cultural responsiveness and ethnic group similarity
on Asian American supervisees’ perceptions of supervisor credibility and multicultural
competence. Dissertation Abstracts International, 65, 6681.
147
Multicultural Supervisory Behaviors and Practices Part I Instructions: On the following page, there are 20 specific multicultural supervisory behaviors. As you read through the behaviors, please rate the behaviors into one of two categories based on its importance on addressing diversity issues in clinical supervision. The two categories are:
Less
Important
More Important
Please ONLY include 10 behaviors in EACH category.
Category Rating
Multicultural Supervisory Behaviors
Less More Initiating dialogue during supervision about supervisees’ own racial/ethnic identity
development Acknowledging and discussing realities of racism/oppression during supervision Encouraging supervisee to share, within supervision, their personal and professional
cultural background and experiences Communicating acceptance of and respect for supervisee’s own culture and
perspectives through verbal phrases Articulating a commitment to develop multicultural competence by discussing
expectations within the first two supervision sessions Consulting colleagues willingly about my own reactions to racial/ethnic concerns as a
result of any supervision experience Providing supervisee with a multiculturally diverse caseload to ensure breadth of
clinical experience Listening [to] and providing affirming statements to demonstrate genuine respect [for]
supervisee’s ideas about how culture influences the clinical interaction Inviting supervisee to explore and discuss possible existence of personal cultural biases
and prejudices on the conceptualization and practice with clients Acknowledging and discussing power issues in supervision that may be related to
racial/ethnic multicultural differences Self-disclosing own development of self-awareness about cultural/ethnic identity,
biases, and limitations Addressing feelings of discomfort experienced by trainees concerning multicultural
issue Acknowledging, discussing, and providing affirming statements that demonstrate
respect for racial/ethnic multicultural similarities and differences between myself and supervisee, and discussing feelings concerning these similarities and/or differences
Encouraging discussion regarding multicultural issues by presenting myself non-defensively such as maintaining an open posture and calming tone of voice when supervisee shows feelings of anger, rage, and/or fear when these issues are raised during supervision
148
Creating a safe (nonjudgmental, supportive) environment for discussion of multicultural issues, values, and ideas through the use of verbal and nonverbal communication
Initiating respectful and explicit discussions about the importance of culture/multicultural issues during supervision
Engaging supervisee actively in discussions to explore clients’ cultural perspectives Identifying and discussing racial/ethnic cultural differences reflected in parallel process
issues (supervisor/supervisee and supervisee/client) Providing recommended multicultural readings and related training experiences to
supervisee Modeling for supervisee by initiating, attending to, and demonstrating interest and
respect for client’s intersecting identities and culture during case conceptualization and discussion
Additional important behavior(s) not listed above (please specify) -
Part II Instructions: On the following page, there are 10 specific multicultural supervisory behaviors that you have just rated as “more important”. As you read through the behaviors again, please rate the behaviors into one of two categories based on its importance on addressing diversity issues in clinical supervision. The two categories are:
1 2
Most Important Moderately Important
Please ONLY include 5 behaviors in EACH category.
Category Rating Multicultural Supervisory Behaviors Most Moderat
e 10 specific behaviors rated as “more important” from Part I will be carried over/populated in this table for participants to rate again.
149
Permission to use the results (supervisory behaviors) from Successful and Unsuccessful Multicultural Supervisory Behaviors: A Delphi Poll
from: Jeana Dressel <[email protected]> to: [email protected] date: Sun, Aug 26, 2018 at 8:51 PM subject: Re: Request for Permission: Successful and Unsuccessful
Multicultural Supervisory Behaviors: A Delphi Poll I, Jeana L. Dressel, Ph.D., give Yeung Chan permission to use the results (supervisory behaviors) from my 2007 study, Successful and Unsuccessful Multicultural Supervisory Behaviors: A Delphi Poll” in your research survey. Supervision was a favorite area for me as a psychologist and diversity was of concern to me then as well as now in these tense times we are in. I’m pleased that my study can be of help to you and I wish you the best with your research and completing your graduate degree. Jeana L Dressel, PhD [email protected]
151
Demographic Questionnaire
Instructions: For each item, please type in your answer or select the answer choice that is most appropriate. If there is not an answer that is appropriate, select “other” and type your response in the box provided. If you prefer not to answer any item, you may leave it blank. What is your age? ________________________________ What gender do you identify with? _________________________________ Please describe your race/ethnicity. _____________________________________ What is your sexual orientation? _____________________________________ Which of the following best describes your primary theoretical orientation? Choose only one. A. Behavioral B. Cognitive C. Existential D. Experiential/Gestalt E. Feminist F. Humanistic G. Integrative/Eclectic H. Interpersonal (IPT) I. Multicultural J. Postmodern Constructive K. Psychoanalytic L. Psychodynamic/Relational M. Rogerian/Person-centered N. Systems/Family Systems O. Other ________________________________________________ Which of the following best describes the setting(s) of your most recent work/training/teaching site(s)? A. Armed Forces Medical Center B. Child/Adolescent Psychiatric/Pediatrics C. Community Mental Health Center D. Consortium E. Medical School
152
F. Prison/Other Correctional Facility G. Private General Hospital H. Private Outpatient Clinic I. Private Practice J. Private Psychiatric Hospital K. School District L. State/County/Other Public Hospital M. University Counseling Center N. Veterans Affairs Medical Center O. Other ________________________________________________ Are you an APA Division 45 Member? A. Yes B. No How many years have you been licensed? ____________________________________ Are you currently supervising any trainees/interns? A. Yes B. No (Please provide reason why) ________________________________________ How many years have you provided/been providing supervision as a licensed professional? ________________________________________ Approximately how many supervisees have you supervised in the last 10 years? ________________________________________ Approximately how many supervisees have you supervised in the last 3 years? _________________________________________ Based on your current work schedule (or on average), how many trainees/interns do you supervise each week? _________________________________________ Based on your current work schedule (or on average), how many hours per week do you spend on direct supervision (both individual and group)? ________________________________________ Based on your current work schedule (or on average), how many hours per week do you spend on indirect supervision (such as reviewing session notes and recordings)?
153
_________________________________________ How often do your trainees/interns bring up issues related to culture/diversity during supervision?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Never
Very Rarely
Rarely
Sometimes
Often
Very Often
Always
How often do you as a supervisor bring up issues related to culture/diversity during supervision?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Never
Very Rarely
Rarely
Sometimes
Often
Very Often
Always
During the last two licensure cycles, how many workshops/trainings related to supervision did you attend? ___________________________ During the last two licensure cycles, how many workshops/trainings related to multicultural supervision did you attend? ___________________________ During the last two licensure cycles, how many books/articles related to supervision did you read? ___________________________ During the last two licensure cycles, how many books/articles related to multicultural supervision did you read? ___________________________ Please elaborate on any relevant supervision/multicultural supervision training experience prior to the last two licensure cycles. ________________________________________________________________ Did you take a course in clinical supervision as part of your graduate education? A. Yes B. No
154
Did you take a course in culture/diversity as part of your graduate education? C. Yes D. No Have you ever received supervision of supervision? E. Yes F. No When you were a trainee/intern, how often did you bring up issues related to culture/diversity during supervision?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Never
Very Rarely
Rarely
Sometimes
Often
Very Often
Always
When you were a trainee/intern, how often did your supervisors bring up issues related to culture/diversity during supervision?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Never
Very Rarely
Rarely
Sometimes
Often
Very Often
Always
156
Subject: Invitation for Research Participation Dear ListServ Manager, I am a doctoral student in clinical psychology at Pepperdine University. As part of my dissertation project, I am investigating the best supervisory practices to address diversity issues in clinical supervision. It would be much appreciated if you would kindly post the invitation for research participation announcement attached below on the ListServ website. Participation in this study entails completing an online survey to rate the importance of specific supervisory behaviors that address diversity issues in clinical supervision. Information regarding participant demographics and supervision experience will also be collected; however, no identifying information is collected as part of this study. Completion time for this study is approximately 15 minutes. Study participation poses no greater than minimal risk, as participants will be asked their opinions about the impact of hypothetical supervision practices and experiences. This study has been approved by the Institutional Review Board at Pepperdine University. If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me, at [email protected]. You may also contact Dr. Edward Shafranske, Dissertation Chairperson, at [email protected] or Dr. Judy Ho, Chairperson of the Pepperdine University Graduate and Professional Schools Institutional Review Board, at [email protected]. Thank you in advance for your assistance with the completion of this study. Sincerely, Yeung Chan, M.A. Clinical Psychology Doctoral Student Pepperdine University
157
ListServ Research Participation Invitation Announcement
Subject: Invitation to Participate in Research Study on Multicultural Supervisory Behaviors and Practices
Greetings! I am a doctoral student in clinical psychology at Pepperdine University. As part of my dissertation project, I am investigating the best supervisory practices to address diversity issues in clinical supervision. This study has been approved by the Graduate and Professional Schools Institutional Review Board of Pepperdine University; a copy of the approval letter is available by request. Participation in this study is expected to last no more than 15 minutes. A link to the web address of the surveys can be found below. Thank you in advance for your assistance with the completion of this study. http://pepperdine.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_aY1qOnRLX6S8qbj Sincerely, Yeung Chan, M.A. Clinical Psychology Doctoral Student Pepperdine University
159
Subject: Invitation for Research Participation Dear ListServ Manager, A few weeks ago, I sent you an invitation for study participation to be posted on the ListServ website. If you have already posted this invitation, I truly appreciate you taking the time to do so and would be grateful if you would post the announcement once again. Information about the study sent in my previous correspondence can be found below. I am a doctoral student in clinical psychology at Pepperdine University. As part of my dissertation project, I am investigating the best supervisory practices to address diversity issues in clinical supervision. It would be much appreciated if you would kindly post the invitation for research participation announcement attached below on the ListServ website. Participation in this study entails completing an online survey to rate the importance of specific supervisory behaviors that address diversity issues in clinical supervision. Information regarding participant demographics and supervision experience will also be collected; however, no identifying information is collected as part of this study. Completion time for this study is approximately 15 minutes. Study participation poses no greater than minimal risk, as participants will be asked their opinions about the impact of hypothetical supervision practices and experiences. This study has been approved by the Graduate and Professional Schools Institutional Review Board of Pepperdine University; a copy of the approval letter is available by request. If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me, at [email protected]. You may also contact Dr. Edward Shafranske, Dissertation Chairperson, at [email protected] or Dr. Judy Ho, Chairperson of the Pepperdine University Graduate and Professional Schools Institutional Review Board, at [email protected]. Thank you in advance for your assistance with the completion of this study. Sincerely, Yeung Chan, M.A. Clinical Psychology Doctoral Student Pepperdine University
160
ListServ Research Participation Invitation Announcement Subject: Invitation to Participate in Research Study on Multicultural Supervisory Behaviors and Practices
Greetings! I am a doctoral student in clinical psychology at Pepperdine University. As part of my dissertation project, I am investigating the best supervisory practices to address diversity issues in clinical supervision. This study has been approved by the Graduate and Professional Schools Institutional Review Board of Pepperdine University; a copy of the approval letter is available by request. Participation in this study is expected to last no more than 15 minutes. A link to the web address of the surveys can be found below. Thank you in advance for your assistance with the completion of this study.
http://www.qualtrics.com/ Sincerely, Yeung Chan, M.A. Clinical Psychology Doctoral Student Pepperdine University
162
Subject: Invitation for Research Participation Dear Participant, I am a doctoral student in clinical psychology at Pepperdine University. As part of my dissertation project, I am investigating the best supervisory practices to address diversity issues in clinical supervision. I believe that with your particular background and experience, you are in the unique position of offering invaluable opinions and insights that will be helpful to trainees and their supervisors. I would greatly appreciate your assistance with my study. Participation in this study is entirely voluntary and is expected to last no more than 15 minutes. Participation in this study entails completing an online survey to rate the importance of specific supervisory behaviors that address diversity issues in clinical supervision. Information regarding your demographics and supervision experience will also be collected; however, no identifying information is collected as part of this study. Study participation poses no greater than minimal risk, as you will be asked your opinions about the impact of hypothetical supervision practices and experiences. This study has been approved by the Graduate and Professional Schools Institutional Review Board of Pepperdine University; a copy of the approval letter is available by request. By completing the surveys, you are acknowledging that you have been informed of study procedures and are giving your consent to participate. The surveys are on the website Qualtrics. A link to the web address of the surveys can be found below this message. If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me, at [email protected]. You may also contact Dr. Edward Shafranske, Dissertation Chairperson, at [email protected] or Dr. Judy Ho, Chairperson of the Pepperdine University Graduate and Professional Schools Institutional Review Board, at [email protected]. Thank you in advance for your assistance with the completion of this study. Sincerely, Yeung Chan, M.A. Clinical Psychology Doctoral Student Pepperdine University
http://www.qualtrics.com/
164
Dear Participant, A few weeks ago, I sent you an invitation for study participation. If you have not completed this brief survey, I hope that you will consider participating in this opportunity to inform supervision practices for future trainees and their supervisors. If you have already completed this survey, I truly appreciate you taking the time to do so. The link to access the survey and information about the study sent in my previous correspondence can be found below.
http://www.qualtrics.com/
I am investigating the best supervisory practices to address diversity issues in clinical supervision. I believe that with your particular background and experience, you are in the unique position of offering invaluable opinions and insights that will be helpful to trainees and their supervisors. I would greatly appreciate your assistance with my study. Participation in this study is entirely voluntary and is expected to last no more than 15 minutes. Participation in this study entails completing an online survey to rate the importance of specific supervisory behaviors that address diversity issues in clinical supervision. Information regarding your demographics and supervision experience will also be collected; however, no identifying information is collected as part of this study. Study participation poses no greater than minimal risk, as you will be asked your opinions about the impact of hypothetical supervision practices and experiences. This study has been approved by the Graduate and Professional Schools Institutional Review Board of Pepperdine University; a copy of the approval letter is available by request. By completing the surveys, you are acknowledging that you have been informed of study procedures and are giving your consent to participate. The surveys are on the website Qualtrics. A link to the web address of the surveys can be found below this message. If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me, at [email protected]. You may also contact Dr. Edward Shafranske, Dissertation Chairperson, at [email protected] or Dr. Judy Ho, Chairperson of the Pepperdine University Graduate and Professional Schools Institutional Review Board, at [email protected]. Thank you in advance for your assistance with the completion of this study. Sincerely, Yeung Chan, M.A. Clinical Psychology Doctoral Student Pepperdine University
166
Dear Participant: My name is Yeung Chan and I am a doctoral student in clinical psychology at Pepperdine University, Graduate School of Education and Psychology, who is currently in the process of recruiting individuals for my study entitled, “Best Practices in Addressing Diversity in Clinical Supervision: A Survey of Experienced Supervisors.” The professor supervising this project is Dr. Edward Shafranske. The study is designed to investigate the best supervisory practices to address diversity issues in clinical supervision. Please understand that your participation in my study is strictly voluntary. The following is a description of what your study participation entails, the terms for participating in the study, and a discussion of your rights as a study participant. Please read this information carefully before deciding whether or not you wish to participate. If you should decide to participate in the study, you will be asked to complete a web-based survey containing specific supervisory behaviors and asked to rate the importance of each behavior on addressing diversity issues in clinical supervision. You will also be asked for demographic information about you and your supervision experience. It should take approximately 15 minutes to complete the survey you have been asked to complete. Although minimal, there are potential risks that you should consider before deciding to participate in this study. These risks include potential for discomfort resulting from responding to hypothetical supervision practices and experiences that may have been encountered before or will be encountered in the future, boredom and fatigue, and time spent responding to survey. In the event you do experience emotional discomfort as a result of viewing or responding to the survey, it is recommended that you speak with someone whom you trust. If you experience any other adverse events, please notify the investigator and/or discontinue participation. There may be no direct benefit to you as a result of participating in the study; however, your participation may further current understanding of multicultural clinical supervision and be of benefit to future trainees and supervisors. If you should decide to participate and find you are not interested in completing the survey in its entirety, you have the right to discontinue at any point without being questioned about your decision. You also do not have to answer any of the questions on the survey that you prefer not to answer--just leave such items blank. After approximately three weeks, a reminder note will be sent to you to complete the survey. Since this note will go out to everyone, I apologize ahead of time for sending you these reminders if you have complied with the deadline. If the findings of the study are presented to professional audiences or published, no information that identifies you personally will be released. The data will be kept in a secure manner for at least five years at which time the data will be destroyed. If you have any questions regarding the information that I have provided above, please do not hesitate to contact me. If you have further questions or do not feel I have adequately addressed your concerns, please contact Dr. Edward Shafranske at [email protected]. If
167
you have questions about your rights as a research participant, contact Dr. Judy Ho, Chairperson of the Graduate and Professional Schools IRB, Pepperdine University, at [email protected]. By completing the survey, you are acknowledging that you have read and understand what your study participation entails, and are consenting to participate in the study. Thank you for taking the time to read this information, and I hope you decide to complete the survey. You are welcome to a brief summary of the study findings in about 1 year. If you decide you are interested in receiving the summary, please email me. Sincerely, Yeung Chan, M.A. Clinical Psychology Doctoral Student [email protected]
169
NOTICE OF APPROVAL FOR HUMAN RESEARCH
Date: February 12, 2019 Protocol Investigator Name: Yeung Chan Protocol #: 18-10-889 Project Title: Best Practices in Addressing Diversity in Clinical Supervision: A Survey of Experts School: Graduate School of Education and Psychology Dear Chan: Thank you for submitting your amended exempt application to Pepperdine University’s Institutional Review Board (IRB). We appreciate the work you have done on your proposal. The IRB has reviewed your submitted IRB application and all ancillary materials. Upon review, the IRB has determined that the above entitled project meets the requirements for exemption under the federal regulations 45 CFR 46.101 that govern the protections of human subjects. Your research must be conducted according to the proposal that was submitted to the IRB. If changes to the approved protocol occur, a revised protocol must be reviewed and approved by the IRB before implementation. For any proposed changes in your research protocol, please submit an amendment to the IRB. Since your study falls under exemption, there is no requirement for continuing IRB review of your project. Please be aware that changes to your protocol may prevent the research from qualifying for exemption from 45 CFR 46.101 and require submission of a new IRB application or other materials to the IRB. A goal of the IRB is to prevent negative occurrences during any research study. However, despite the best intent, unforeseen circumstances or events may arise during the research. If an unexpected situation or adverse event happens during your investigation, please notify the IRB as soon as possible. We will ask for a complete written explanation of the event and your written response. Other actions also may be required depending on the nature of the event. Details regarding the timeframe in which adverse events must be reported to the IRB and documenting the adverse event can be found in the Pepperdine University Protection of Human Participants in Research: Policies and Procedures Manual at community.pepperdine.edu/irb. Please refer to the protocol number denoted above in all communication or correspondence related to your application and this approval. Should you have additional questions or require clarification of the contents of this letter, please contact the IRB Office. On behalf of the IRB, I wish you success in this scholarly pursuit. Sincerely, Judy Ho, IRB Chairperson cc: Dr. Lee Kats, Vice Provost for Research and Strategic Initiatives Mr. Brett Leach, Regulatory Affairs Specialist