Three viewpoints on the therapeutic alliance. Similarities, differences, and associations with psychotherapy outcome

This study tested three systems for measuring patient and therapist contributions to the therapeutic relationship. Scales with parallel dimensions were used by patients, therapists, and clinician judges to rate the same therapy hours. The sample consisted of 42 patients selected on specific criteria for their suitability for brief psychotherapy (20 sessions). They were treated by experienced psychodynamic therapists and therapeutic change was assessed by six outcome measures. Similarities and differences between the three perspectives of the alliance and their association with outcome were examined. There were significant correlations between patients', therapists', and nonparticipant judges' ratings of the patients' positive and negative contributions and the therapists' positive contributions, but no agreement between the three perspectives in their estimates of therapists' negative contributions. Within each measurement system, patients' and therapists' positive contributions to the relationship were the best predictors of outcome. In conclusion, the results suggest that the patients' and therapists' ratings of the treatment relationship, although influenced by subjective bias, agree to some extent with the nonparticipant judges' ratings and are more powerful in predicting the outcome of psychotherapy.