Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.657999
Title: What is the process by which placement supervisors make difficult decisions in trainee assessment
Author: Anderson, Claire
Awarding Body: Lancaster University
Current Institution: Lancaster University
Date of Award: 2012
Availability of Full Text:
Access through EThOS:
Abstract:
The literature review section of this thesis explores trainee nondisclosure in supervision. Adopting a narrative approach, the review argues that evaluation in supervision presents barriers to open disclosure, and has a detrimental impact on the intended functions of supervision. Eight empirical studies of supervisee nondisclosure were reviewed. Key findings relate to the apparent role of nondisclosure as a self-protective impression management strategy for supervisees in evaluative supervision. The review highlights a weakness in the existing literature in reference to the lack of focus of research on nondisclosure which is likely to be problematic. The review suggests that the evaluative component of supervision may be a motivator for nondisclosure particularly in reference to perceived clinical mistakes and difficulties within the supervisory relationship. Implications of problematic nondisclosure are identified, and recommendations for clinical practice and future research are made. The research paper section of the thesis presents a qualitative study investigating the process by which supervisors make difficult decisions in their assessment of trainee clinical psychologists. Following a grounded theory approach, seven supervisors were interviewed regarding their experiences of making difficult assessment decisions. The emergent model provides a representation of the complex interplay between contextual and personal processes involved in this process. Three core systems were identified following analysis of the data, namely cultural context, processes of assessment, and supervisor's perspective. The study findings are discussed with reference to existing research and policy, and key implications for training are identified. The critical review highlights some of the nuances of the context in which the research study was conducted, with the aim of informing others considering engaging in similar research. The review presents reflections on the impact of my previous experience in drawing me to study supervisory assessment processes, contextual factors of research, and the impacts on myself as the chief researcher.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (D.Clin.Psychol.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.657999  DOI: Not available
Share: