Premium
The impact of psychotherapy sessions: Internal structure of the Dutch Session Evaluation Questionnaire (SEQ)
Author(s) -
Hafkenscheid Anton.
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
psychology and psychotherapy: theory, research and practice
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.102
H-Index - 62
eISSN - 2044-8341
pISSN - 1476-0835
DOI - 10.1348/147608308x380750
Subject(s) - session (web analytics) , psychology , varimax rotation , replicate , sample (material) , mood , dimension (graph theory) , clinical psychology , inter rater reliability , rating scale , computer science , psychometrics , statistics , developmental psychology , mathematics , cronbach's alpha , chemistry , chromatography , world wide web , pure mathematics
The Session Evaluation Questionnaire (SEQ), intended to measure the impact of psychotherapy sessions, is a self‐rating instrument consisting of 21 bipolar adjective scales in semantic differential format. The SEQ may be conceived as a bridge between psychotherapy process and outcome. Since its introduction in 1980, the original American SEQ has been translated in different languages. However, the reliability and validity of the SEQ have only been assessed for the American SEQ so far. Objectives. The present study attempted to replicate the dimensional structure of the American SEQ for the Dutch version. Design. SEQ data were collected in a heterogeneous convenience sample of 96 patients, producing 2074 SEQ ratings, with each patient completing at least four SEQ forms over the course of her/his treatment. Methods. Exploratory factor analyses (principal component analyses with varimax rotation) were used to establish the dimensional structure of the Dutch SEQ. In the American and English studies, factor analyses were only performed on each of the SEQ parts (session evaluation and post‐session mood) separately. No factor analyses were run with all 21 items included in the analyses. Different from the English and American studies, the internal structure of the Dutch SEQ was not only established for the separate parts, but was also determined by treating the SEQ as a single 21 item rating scale. Results. Replicating the American and English data analyses, the Depth dimension could convincingly be replicated in the Dutch sample. Moreover, the Smoothness and Positivity dimensions could be recovered in the Dutch sample to a large extent. Different from the American SEQ, the Arousal dimension did not appear as a distinct dimension at all. Factor analyses of all 21 items yielded no more than two interpretable dimensions, encompassing about half of the SEQ items. Conclusion. The basic psychological concepts in which the American SEQ is rooted‐evaluation and mood‐ also appear in the Dutch SEQ version. However, the results of the current study do not justify a simple transfer of the four American SEQ dimensions to the Dutch SEQ version.