Title: Rediscovering the Impact of
Attachment Theory on Counseling Supervision
Author: Stephen P. Hebard, The
University of North Carolina at Greensboro
What was the purpose of this literature review?
The
purpose of this literature review was to analyze the existing conceptual and
empirical research regarding the use of Attachment Theory as a way to
conceptualize the supervisory relationship. Although there are few empirical
studies on supervisor and supervisee attachment, attachment does appear to
influence the supervisory working alliance, counselor professional development,
compulsive avoidance of closeness to one’s supervisor, and counselor
self-efficacy. Nevertheless, the research does not fully encompass appropriate
definitions of attachment. Understanding attachment as a theory of emotion and
emotion regulation may improve the existing literature and provide more
impactful implications for practicing supervisors.
Major findings or points:
· As
conceptualized by the majority of supervision researchers working with
attachment, supervision can be considered an attachment relationship.
·
By providing a secure base (grounding, holding, and freeing
supervisees while stimulating their wonder and awe in becoming a therapist) and
a safe haven (comfort and security in the face of danger), the supervisory
relationship may function optimally.
·
Attachment
styles between supervisor and supervisee interact to affect the supervisory
relationship.
· Supervisor
attachment style carries a large amount of influence on the relationship. A
secure supervisor attachment style is preferred.
· Supervisee
attachment avoidance and compulsive self-reliance are especially unfavorable in
that they negatively impact important supervision outcomes.
Major caveats:
Current
conceptualizations of attachment in supervision are operationally defined
differently than how Bowlby and Ainsworth, the founders of Attachment Theory,
described the concept. Further, the belief that the supervisor-supervisee
relationship is indicative of an attachment bond, a very specific and
emotionally critical affectional bond, is a major assumption of the current
literature. Additionally, measurement of attachment has significant flaws (i.e.,
issues with self-report of one’s attachment style, using categorical vs.
dimensional data) and many empirical studies have used unreliable or primarily
clinically relevant instruments in research.
Thus, researchers of Attachment Theory in supervision must agree to an
operational definition of the theory to bolster the literature and improve its
clinical application.
What does this research mean for counseling practice, settings,
and or training?
Supervisors
must become accustomed to determining the extent to which supervisee behaviors
are reflective of a desire to maintain safety. For instance, overly independent
or hypervigilant supervisees may need to process the supervisory relationship
with a supervisor. Additionally, it is very important for supervisors to
determine how they can provide a safe haven and secure base for each individual
supervisee. This may not look the same for every supervisee, depending on their
specific ways of regulating their emotions in response to perceived threats.
Research on attachment in supervision highlights the importance of monitoring
self, other, and the interaction between both parties in hopes of providing the
best services possible.
Labels: Attachment, Supervision,
Working Alliance
For Further Reading:
Fitch, J. C., Pistole, M., & Gunn, J.
E. (2010). The bonds of development: An attachment-caregiving model of supervision. The Clinical
Supervisor, 29, 20-34.
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R.
(2003). The attachment behavioral system in adulthood: Activation,
psychodynamics and interpersonal processes. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology
(vol. 35, pp. 53-152). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2008).
Attachment theory and affect regulation. In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver
(Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory,
research and clinical applications (2nd ed., pp. 503-531). New
York: Guilford.
Pistole, M., & Watkins, C. (1995).
Attachment theory, counseling process, and supervision. The Counseling Psychologist, 23,
457-478
Riggs, S., & Bretz, K. (2006).
Attachment processes in the supervisory relationship: An exploratory
investigation. Professional Psychology:
Research and Practice, 37, 558–566.
Watkins, C. R., & Riggs, S. (2012).
Psychotherapy supervision and attachment theory: Review, reflections, and
recommendations. The Clinical
Supervisor, 31, 256-289.
No comments:
Post a Comment