This non-experimental field study examined the relationship between participant reported experiences of relational depth (RD) with their individual counselors in substance use disorder (SUD) treatment and participant reported motivation to change substance use. Participants in the study were clients enrolled in inpatient and outpatient levels of substance use disorder treatment. A total of 78 clients (aged 18-77, with mean age 35.97, 80.1% Caucasian, 11.5% African-American, 3.8% Hispanic, 1.3% Asian, 1.3% multiracial, 1.3% other) with SUDs participated in the study. Results demonstrated that treatment process variables explained approximately 42% of the variance in participant recognition scores. Specifically, substance abuse community support involvement (β = .598, rs2 = .908, p < .001) and relational depth (β = .184, rs2 = .178, p = .045) were found to be significant predictors of participant recognition of a substance use problem. From these results, one may tentatively conclude that community support and the development of relational depth in SUD treatment are valuable additions to standard SUD treatment. Extended results are described and summarized using text, tables, and figures. The study has practical and clinical implications for counselors working with clients in substance use disorder treatment particularly concerning the length of individual counseling.

Background: Relational depth (RD) is gaining empirical attention as a well-articulated phenomenon within therapeutic relationship literature. Despite this, with the exception of a small number of client-focused studies, research of this issue is relatively sparse and predominantly reflects upon therapeutic work from a person-centred orientation. Aims and Methods: The aim of this research was to explore clients’ experiences of RD within individual Cognitive Behavioural Therapy. Eight clients, who had self-identified at least one helpful relational moment with their therapist, were interviewed about their experience. The interviews were transcribed and analysed employing Grounded Theory methods. Findings and Discussion: Four core categories emerged from the analysis. These were: (1) the experience of the therapist, (2) the experience of self, (3) the experience of the therapy relationship, and (4) the perceived impact/effects of the moment of RD. Each core category and the corresponding subordinate codes are described by illustrative quotes from the participants. Following this, each finding is discussed in relation to RD research and beyond. Conclusions: This research project ultimately demonstrates that clients who have worked with a cognitive behavioural therapist can and do experience RD during their individual therapy. The like-by-like comparison of the findings with previous RD research indicated a high degree of convergence. Nevertheless, when differences are present, clients’ RD experience is influenced and to some extent contained by dissimilarity in experience between therapist and non-therapist clients. This is also manifested through theoretical differences of the given therapeutic approach. No negative impact or effect was described by the clients as a result of their experience of a moment of RD. The implications of the findings are highlighted and future research is suggested.

This study aimed to explore supervisee and supervisor experiences of relational depth (RD) within the supervisory relationship and its association with supervisee level of counselor self-efficacy (CSE). Participants in the study were master's level counseling students and their doctoral supervisors in a practicum course. A total of 52 supervisees (aged 22-57; 19.2% male, 80.8% female) and 18 supervisors (aged 25-46; 16.7% male, 83.3% female) participated in the study. Results demonstrated that supervisee perception of the relationship explained approximately 15% of the variance in supervisee CSE. Specifically, supervisee perception of supervisory working alliance (SWA; β = .406, rs2=.997, p = .025) was found to be a significant predictor of CSE while supervisee RD was not a significant unique predictor (β = -.033, rs2=.370, p = .850), with most of the variance explained by RD being shared with SWA. Results also demonstrated that the supervisor perception of the relationship did not significantly explain variance in supervisee CSE. From these results, one may tentatively conclude that the supervisory relationship contributes to CSE, and that RD, as it is currently being measured, may not able to account for variance above or beyond that of the SWA. Extended results are described and summarized using text, tables, and figures. The study has practical and research implications for counselor educators, supervisors, and researchers in the RD field.

This research provides in depth analysis of how qualified and experienced doctoral therapists and graduates of the professional doctorate counselling programmes, understood and made sense of their experiences in working at a depth of engagement in therapy. A qualitative approach of interpretative phenomenological analysis is the methodology used. This provides rich, detailed analysis of individuals' accounts where idiographic focus and participants' lived experiences remain central. Six Doctoral counselling therapists were individually interviewed via a semi-structured interview schedule. Participants' counselling orientations varied, with most describing themselves as integrative practitioners. Six accounts were examined separately and then analysed. Clusters and themes developed. Themes were also analysed to ascertain convergence and divergence in participants' accounts. Implications are discussed with data rooted in verbatim extracts and embedded within relevant literature. The study presents super-ordinate themes of, 'the indefinable', 'spiritual in nature', 'levels of encounter', 'dissolution of boundaries', 'personally challenging', 'nourishing of the self' and 'professional questioning'. Findings show how participants called upon phenomenological perspectives, epistemological lenses, spiritual and neurobiological discourses and counselling theory, used interchangeably, to try and understand their experiences. The study also points to practitioners crossing interpersonal boundaries, their fear of being judged by the counselling community and their reluctance to take certain aspects of the phenomenon to supervision. The implications of the research highlight whole areas of experiencing that are not being supervised and show challenges on many levels for the counselling community. Such an IPA study also highlights divisions and commonalities in how participants make sense of the phenomenon and a contribution is offered indicating where further research would be helpful. Overall this research study invites a greater awareness and greater openness to understand the ripples and challenges practitioners face from working at a depth of engagement.