title: Are competence frameworks fit for practice? Examining the validity of competence frameworks for CBT, psychodynamic, and humanistic therapies.
abstract: Practitioners transporting psychological therapies from a research context to clinical settings need to know what competences they should demonstrate to maintain congruence with the evidence base. This study explores the validity of a suite of competence frameworks for cognitive behavior therapy (CBT), humanistic, and psychodynamic therapies developed to aid the transportation process. Experienced psychological therapists (N = 111) undertook a Q-sort of 100 items, drawn from frameworks representing each of the modalities and including a set of pantheoretical generic competences, rating items as characteristic or uncharacteristic of their orientation. There were significant differences in the way competences were assigned, with practitioners strongly favoring items from their own modality framework and eschewing items from the others. These results confirm the validity of the items within the frameworks; their utility and application is discussed.
authors.affiliation: a Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology , University College London , London , UK.
authors.forename: Anthony D
authors.initials: AD
authors.lastname: Roth
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D002983:Clinical Competence; D015928:Cognitive Behavioral Therapy / Q000379:methods* / Q000592:standards; D055317:Evidence-Based Practice; D005260:Female; D006808:Humanism; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011613:Psychotherapy / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards; D064889:Psychotherapy, Psychodynamic / Q000379:methods* / Q000592:standards; D011779:Q-Sort; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires
keywords: Q-sort; competence; competence framework; psychological therapy