Premium
Beyond ethnic match: Effects of client–therapist cognitive match in problem perception, coping orientation, and therapy goals on treatment outcomes
Author(s) -
Zane Nolan,
Sue Stanley,
Chang Janet,
Huang Lillian,
Huang John,
Lowe Susana,
Srinivasan Shobha,
Chun Kevin,
Kurasaki Karen,
Lee Evelyn
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
journal of community psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.585
H-Index - 86
eISSN - 1520-6629
pISSN - 0090-4392
DOI - 10.1002/jcop.20067
Subject(s) - psychology , cognition , ethnic group , distress , perception , coping (psychology) , clinical psychology , interpersonal communication , psychotherapist , cognitive therapy , social psychology , psychiatry , neuroscience , sociology , anthropology
This study examined the outcome effects of cognitive match between Asian and White outpatient clients and their therapists. Many clinicians believe that one hindrance to the treatment of ethnic minority clients is that therapists and clients may not share common assumptions and attitudes about therapy and about the problems that are presented in treatment. The study investigated client–therapist similarity in their perceptions of the presenting problem, coping orientation, and expectations about treatment goals. This study constituted a more rigorous test of the cognitive match hypotheses in that it was prospective in nature, used separate and independent sources for the cognitive predictors, employed multiple outcome measures, and focused on specific attitudes and perceptions that are quite salient and relevant to treatment. Cognitive match on treatment goals was predictive of session impact. Moreover, cognitive matches in avoidant coping orientation and in perceived distress associated with interpersonal problems were predictive of certain treatment outcomes. The findings may help explain why clients matched on ethnicity with their therapists tend to stay longer in treatment and do better in psychotherapy. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Comm Psychol 33: 569–585, 2005.