81,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
- Kategorie: Fachliteratur
- Sprache: Englisch
This widely adopted and accessible introductory text for counselors-in-training and emerging researchers provides a foundational understanding of the primary research methods used in counseling and how these concepts can be applied to research design. Writing in a clear and conversational tone, the authors emphasize the importance of ethics and multicultural issues in informing research, demonstrate a professional counselor identity within the framework of research, and outline specific evidence-based and empirically supported findings for counseling practice.
This book contains four parts tht explain the practitioner-scholar model and the research process, quantitative and qualitative research methodology and design, and research measurement and program evaluation. Key features include a discussion of the fundamentals of statistics, practical research design illustrations in each chapter, guidelines for the development of an initial study, and suggested activities that synthesize and apply chapter content.
New to this edition is a glossary to assist readers with the technical terms discussed in the text and a test manual and PowerPoints for instructors' use, which are available by request from the American Counseling Association.
*Requests for digital versions from ACA can be found on www.wiley.com
*To purchase print copies, please visit the ACA website https://imis.counseling.org/store/
*Reproduction requests for material from books published by ACA should be directed to [email protected]
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 672
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2022
Ähnliche
Table of Contents
Cover
Title Page
Copyright Page
Preface
Acknowledgments
About the Authors
About the Contributors
Part I: The Essence of Research in the Counseling Profession
Chapter 1: The Counselor as a Practitioner-Scholar
Scientist-Practitioner Versus Practitioner-Scholar
Integrating the Models: A Case Example
Positivist Versus Constructivist Approaches
Understanding Epistemology and Methodology
Chapter Summary
Suggested Activities
References
Chapter 2: The Research Process
Choosing a Research Topic
Using Consultation and Resources
Finding What’s Out There: Reviewing the Literature
Defining the Gap . . . What Do I Still Need to Know?
Operationalizing the Study: Research Questions or Hypotheses
Chapter Summary
Suggested Activities
References
Chapter 3: Ethical and Multicultural Issues in Counseling Research
How Did We Get Here?
The IRB
Federal Guidelines and Exceptions
Minimal Risk
ACA Code of Ethics
Completing the IRB Protocol
Chapter Summary
Suggested Activities
References
Chapter 4: Types of Research
Unifying Concepts in Quantitative Research
Unifying Concepts in Qualitative Research
Trends in Counseling Research
What Do We Really Want to Know? Examining the Evidence of Counseling
Choosing a Type of Research
Where Do You Find Counseling Research?
Chapter Summary
Suggested Activities
References
APPENDIX 4.A Scope of Articles and Author Guidelines for Journals From the American Counseling Association (ACA), Its Divisions, and Other Counseling Organizations
Part II: Quantitative Research Designs
Chapter 5: Fundamental Concepts in Quantitative Research
Defining Constructs and Variables
Measuring Constructs and Variables
Understanding Statistics and Error
The Nature of Hypothesis Testing
Chapter Summary
Suggested Activities
References
Chapter 6: Examining Relationships
Why Conduct Correlational Research?
Elements of Correlational Research
Correlation Analyses
Designing Correlational Research
Chapter Summary
Suggested Activities
References
Chapter 7: Examining Differences Between Groups
Why Conduct Between-Groups Analyses?
A Heuristic Example
Elements of Between-Groups Analyses
Experimental Design Models
Components for Evaluation
Designing a Between-Groups Study
Chapter Summary
Suggested Activities
References
Chapter 8: Examining Differences Within Groups and Single-Case Research Designs
Why Conduct Within-Subjects Research?
Elements of Within-Subjects Research
Design Models
Components for Evaluation
Survey and Longitudinal Research
Designing Research Studies to Address Trends and Change Over Time
Chapter Summary
Suggested Activities
References
Chapter 9: Synthesizing Research Results Using Meta-Analysis
Why Conduct a Meta-Analysis?
Elements of a Meta-Analysis
Reporting and Interpreting Meta-Analysis Results
Heterogeneity Among the Sample of Studies
Considerations for Interpreting Meta-Analysis Results
Chapter Summary
Suggested Activities
References
Part III: Qualitative Research Designs
Chapter 10: Fundamental Concepts in Qualitative Research
Postpositivism
Critical Theory
Constructivism
Components of a Qualitative Study
The Purpose of Qualitative Research
The Conceptual Framework of Qualitative Research
Data Collection
Data Analysis
Reporting of Results
Chapter Summary
Suggested Activities: Thought Experiments
References
Chapter 11: Multiple Perspectives on a Phenomenon: The Qualitative Lenses
The Phenomenon of Interest
Phenomenology
Grounded Theory
Consensual Qualitative Research
A Discussion of Qualitative Methodology
Chapter Summary
Suggested Activities: Mindful Curiosity
Suggested Readings by Methodology
References
Part IV: Practice-Based Research
Chapter 12: Measurement in Counseling Research
Why Focus on Measurement in Counseling Research?
What Constitutes a Well-Designed Measure in Counseling Research?
Evidence Based on Test Content
Evidence of Response Processes
Evidence of Internal Structure
Evidence of Relationships to Other Variables
Evidence of Consequences of Testing
Should You Develop a Measure?
Chapter Summary
Suggested Activities
References
Chapter 13: Program Evaluation
Defining Program Evaluation
Program Evaluation, Accountability, and Policy: A Case Example
History of Program Evaluation
Cultural Competence in Program Evaluation
Basics of Program Evaluation
Conducting Program Evaluation
Putting It All Together
Chapter Summary
A “Cheat Sheet” for Designing and Developing a Model for Program Evaluation
Suggested Activities
References
Glossary
Index
Technical Support
End User License Agreement
List of Tables
Chapter 4
TABLE 4.1 A Simple Comparison of Preexperimental, Quasi-Experimental, and True...
Chapter 5
TABLE 5.1 Descriptive Statistics and Correlations for the Forgiveness Reconcil...
TABLE 5.2 Common Effect Size Measures and Conventions for Interpretation
Chapter 7
TABLE 7.1 AUDIT Scores for Men and Women
Chapter 8
TABLE 8.1 Nonoverlapping Pairs From Figure 8.1 (Ikonomopoulos et al., 2015)
List of Illustrations
Chapter 5
FIGURE 5.1 The 68-95-99 Rule With Standard Scores
Chapter 6
FIGURE 6.1 Nonlinear Relationship Between Coping and Behavioral Problems for A...
FIGURE 6.2 Shared and Unique Variance
FIGURE 6.3 Plot of Moderation in Regression
FIGURE 6.4 Path Model Standardized Beta Weights for Trauma Symptoms, Forgivene...
Chapter 7
FIGURE 7.1 Comparison of a
t
Distribution With a Normal Distribution
Chapter 8
FIGURE 8.1 A Case Example of an A-B Design From Ikonomopoulos et al. (2015)
FIGURE 8.2 A Case Example of an A-B-A Design From Ikonomopoulos et al. (2015)
FIGURE 8.3 A Visual Depiction of Results of a Within-Subjects Design
Chapter 9
FIGURE 9.1 Forest Plot Example of Effect Sizes, Confidence Intervals (CIs), an...
FIGURE 9.2 Funnel Plot of Individual Studies’ Hedges’s
g
Effect Sizes and Rela...
Chapter 13
FIGURE 13.1 Logic Model: ABC Psychiatric Rehabilitation Program
FIGURE 13.2 Accountability Bridge Model
Guide
Title Page
Copyright Page
Preface
Acknowledgments
About The Authors
About the Contributors
Table of Contents
Begin Reading
Glossary
Index
Technical Support
Wiley End User License Agreement
Pages
i
ii
v
vi
vii
viii
ix
xi
xii
xiii
xiv
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
283
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
Counseling Research
A Practitioner-Scholar Approach
Richard S. Balkin and David M. Kleist
American Counseling Association2461 Eisenhower Avenue, Suite 300Alexandria, VA 22314www.counseling.org
Copyright © 2023 by the American Counseling Association. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. Except as permitted under the United States Copyright Act of 1976, no part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the written permission of the publisher.
American Counseling Association2461 Eisenhower Avenue, Suite 300 | Alexandria, VA 22314
Publisher | Carolyn C. Baker
Digital and Print Development Editor | Nancy Driver
Senior Production Manager | Bonny E. Gaston
Copy Editor | Elaine G. Dunn
Cover and text design by Bonny E. Gaston
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Balkin, Richard S., author. | Kleist, David M., author.Title: Counseling research : a practitioner-scholar approach / Richard S. Balkin, David M. Kleist.Description: Second edition. | Alexandria, VA : American Counseling Association, [2022] | Includes bibliographical references and index. |Identifiers: LCCN 2022020488 | ISBN 9781556204074 (paperback)Subjects: LCSH: Counseling psychology—Research—Methodology. | Counseling psychology—Practice.Classification: LCC BF636.65 .B35 2022 | DDC 158.3072—dc23/ eng/20220711LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2022020488
Preface
Most of the counseling graduate students I (Rick) know do not wake up in the morning thinking, “Hot damn, I get to go to my research class today!” Rather, most of the students I have had in my research course come to class, at least in the beginning, with a lot of anxiety, much of which centers on discomfort with math. Honestly, I am not any different from the majority of counseling graduate students who have had this experience. When I was a graduate student, I walked into my research classes with the same emotions as most graduate students in counseling. I was anxious and felt unprepared. My experience with math was tumultuous at best. Much of counseling research is dependent on statistics, but I want to emphasize to you that research is not a computational nightmare but rather a process with logical steps to enhance our knowledge of the counseling profession. In fact, the math is not too difficult, as all we do is add, subtract, multiply, divide, and square root. So, relax! The math is not really the main part. Focus on the process.
Of course, counseling research is not solely dependent on quantitative methods. I asked David M. Kleist to join me as a coauthor given his expertise in qualitative research as well as our successful collaborations in the past. You will find in this book a strong overview of qualitative research and common approaches used in counseling research that inform practice. Counselors make great qualitative researchers because of the natural fit of hearing clients’ narratives and establishing meaning with them. These same skills can be used in developing meaningful counseling research.
The language used to describe research methods is technical, and both David and I attempt to reduce the confusion by using a conversational tone in this text. There will be times when the material may seem a little dry, but I think this book excels in providing research examples specific to counseling and bridging the technicalities of research and the realities of practice. Ultimately, research is a useless exercise if it is not utilized to enhance the counseling practice.
In this book, we strive to address two audiences: the counselor-in-training and the emerging researcher. If you are just being introduced to research in counseling, you will find this book helpful in providing an understanding of the primary methods of research used in the counseling profession. However, we also attempt to provide a bridge to individuals who have an understanding of research and wish to apply concepts to design studies. Hence, we feel this book will be useful to the master’s student just beginning to understand research as well as to those considering topics for a thesis, dissertation, or the development of an initial study. To accommodate this broad audience, we include sections on research designs, respective to the content covered, near the end of each chapter. To assist with synthesizing and applying the content of each chapter, we provide a “Suggested Activities” section at the end of each chapter.
The text is divided into four parts. Part I, “The Essence of Research in the Counseling Profession,” provides an overview of the practitioner-scholar model (Chapter 1), which informs the content of and approach to the book and emphasizes the connection between counseling practice and research. An introduction to the research process is presented in Chapter 2, addressing the choice of a research topic, review of the literature, and data collection and analysis. An emphasis on multicultural counseling and issues of diversity is essential to counseling, and the research process is no exception. We thus highlight research ethics and multicultural issues in Chapter 3. Chapter 4 includes an overview of the types of research that are delineated further in future chapters.
Part II, “Quantitative Research Designs,” provides detailed descriptions of experimental (Chapters 5, 7, and 8) and correlational (Chapter 6) research. Meta-analysis is covered in Chapter 9 to provide an understanding of a genre of quantitative research that is especially important in identifying empirically supported treatments. Single-case research design is discussed in Chapter 8; this can be an important method for counseling researchers and practitioners who wish to evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention or treatment but do not have access to large numbers of potential participants.
Part III, “Qualitative Research Designs,” provides an understanding of qualitative research. Chapter 10 describes key philosophies, concepts, and ideas about qualitative research and the development and design of qualitative studies. Chapter 11 provides an understanding of preeminent methodologies of qualitative inquiry and how they connect to the purpose, design, and analysis of qualitative research.
Part IV, “Practice-Based Research,” is concerned with the development of measures that may be used for research and evaluation and for conducting program evaluations. Measurement is an essential component of research, and both practitioners and researchers often use measures to demonstrate efficacy and accountability. Program evaluation provides a connection between research and practice, and the process of program evaluation may incorporate elements of the various methods discussed in the text.
Throughout the book, we emphasize practical research examples relevant to counseling practice and highlight opportunities to reflect on these examples in the “Suggested Activities” sections. Regardless of the extent of your training, we hope you will appreciate the importance of being a consumer of research—that when you join the American Counseling Association, you also benefit from the flagship journal Journal of Counseling & Development, division journals, and the multitude of resources this organization offers to advance the counseling profession. We hope that after reading this primer on research design, emerging researchers will be able to pursue further research studies and advanced coursework feeling well informed about the research process.
New to This Edition
In this second edition, we update theory, approaches, and research techniques as they apply to the counseling profession to inform practice and, perhaps, to evolve from being a research consumer to a research producer. In addition to citing the most up-to-date counseling research as examples and activities for the concepts introduced in this text, some of the highlighted revisions include the following:
An examination of counseling research in light of the replication crisis––the difficulty in replicating findings of empirical research (Open Science Collaboration, 2015)
An update to publishing counseling research and expansion of publication outlets
Revision of research ethics considering the publication of the Revised Common Rule (Office for Human Research Protections, 2018)
An update and stronger understanding of inferential statistics and their limitations (we expand on the concepts related to statistical significance, effect size, and confidence intervals)
An expansion of single-case research design and application to counseling research
Extending understanding of meta-analysis and how such studies benefit the counseling profession
A thorough revision of qualitative research and approaches
The development and utilization of measures in counseling research
Additional models related to program evaluation
The addition of a glossary to assist with technical terms discussed in the text (terms that are in bold italics in the text appear in the glossary)
Supplemental materials for instructors, including a test bank of multiple-choice questions and PowerPoints for each chapter (available from the American Counseling Association)
Although the goal of this second edition is to provide a foundational understanding to applying research to the counseling profession, we also provide discussion of technical elements to designing studies for those who might wish to engage in the research process.
References
Office for Human Research Protections. (2018).
Revised common rule.
https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/regulations/finalized-revisions-common-rule/index.html
Open Science Collaboration. (2015, August 28). Estimating the re-producibility of psychological science.
Science
,
349
(6251), Article aac4716.
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac4716
Acknowledgments
I (Rick) thank Quentin Hunter, A. Stephen Lenz, Michael J. Walsh, and Kaytlin Stackpole for their contributions to this book. And to David M. Kleist, thank you for joining me as a coauthor and contributing to the qualitative portion of this book. I needed someone to provide balance and expertise, and I am grateful for your friendship and collaboration. Most important, I thank my wife, Melissa, and my children, Abigail, Gabriela, and Isabel, for their endless patience with me.
I (David) thank Rick for your patience with my process and belief in my ability to contribute to the book. I also thank my wife, Jill, and children, Nathan and Mattie, who have provided unwavering belief in me as a person, father, and counselor educator. Finally, I thank all the doctoral students at Idaho State University who have expanded the envelope of qualitative research’s relevance to the counseling profession.
We both wish to express our appreciation to Sheerah Neal Keith and Keon Stewart, who served as research assistants for this second edition and the development of instructor resources, and Carolyn Baker, the staff at the American Counseling Association, and the individuals who reviewed this text.
About the Authors
Richard S. Balkin, PhD,
is a professor and coordinator of educational research in the School of Education at the University of Mississippi. He is editor of the
International Journal for the Advancement of Counselling
; past editor of the
Journal of Counseling & Development
, the flagship journal of the American Counseling Association (ACA); and past president of the Association for Assessment and Research in Counseling. His primary research interests include counseling outcomes, research methods, counseling adolescents, and cultural differences in counseling. He is a fellow of ACA, past recipient of the ACA Extended Research Award, ACA Best Practices Research Award, the Association for Counselor Education and Supervision (ACES) Legacy Award, and Counseling Vision and Innovation Award.
Rick has published more than 100 peer-reviewed articles, books, and book chapters, the majority quantitative in nature. He is the author of Practicing Forgiveness: A Path Toward Healing (Oxford University Press, 2021) and Assessment in Counseling: Practice and Applications (Oxford University Press, 2018) and has authored book chapters on research methods as well as several journal articles related to research methods.
David M. Kleist, PhD,
is a professor and chair of the Department of Counseling at Idaho State University. He is currently on the editorial board of
The Qualitative Report
and has held past editorial positions with
Counseling and Values
and
The Family Journal.
He has chaired more than 23 qualitative dissertations in his 27 years at Idaho State University. He is a past president of ACES, was an ACES Legacy Award recipient in 2019, received the Rocky Mountain Association for Counselor Education and Supervision Lifetime Achievement Award in 2017, and has been honored with the International Association of Marriage and Family Counselors Mentoring Award. He has twice been selected as a master teacher at Idaho State University. His primary research interests include qualitative research methods, triadic supervision, and reflective processes in counselor education and supervision.
About the Contributors
Quentin Hunter, PhD,
is an assistant professor in the Department of Leadership and Counseling at Eastern Michigan University. Dr. Hunter has served as president of the Kentucky Association for Multicultural Counseling and Development and the Kentucky Society for Sexual, Affectional, Intersex, and Gender Expansive Identities and serves as an associate editor for the
International Journal for the Advancement of Counselling
. His counseling experience includes work with individuals across the life span in hospital, community-based, school, and private practice settings. His research interests include evaluating outcomes in supervision and counseling using single-case research design, reality therapy and choice theory, and special populations in counseling.
A. Stephen Lenz, PhD, LPC, NCC,
is department chair and a professor of counselor education at Texas A&M University–San Antonio. Dr. Lenz has worked with children, adolescents, adults, and families as a licensed professional counselor in community-based, university, and private practice counseling settings. He is a specialist in the treatment of trauma and use of positive psychology interventions. His research interests include community-based program evaluation, counseling outcome research, the development and evaluation of psychological assessments, and meta-analysis.
Kaytlin Stackpole, BS,
is a current graduate student in the University of South Carolina School of Medicine’s rehabilitation counseling program. She works as a graduate assistant to members of the faculty and contributes to research design, implementation, and data collection. As an active member in the program, she also sits on the board for the Rehabilitation Counseling Student Association as the treasurer. She received her bachelor of science degree in psychology with a minor in sociology in 2020 from the University of North Georgia. Her research interests include treatment interventions of eating disorders, program evaluation, development of psychological assessments, and effectiveness of animal-assisted activities.
Michael J. Walsh, PhD,
is a clinical associate professor in the University of South Carolina School of Medicine’s rehabilitation counseling program. Dr. Walsh has been active in the national counseling arena, having served two terms as president of the Association for Humanistic Counseling and one term as a member of the American Counseling Association’s (ACA) Governing Council. He also served on ACA’s Ethics Committee (2010–2013 and 2015–2018) and as cochair of that committee in 2011. He continues to serve ACA in various capacities, most recently as ACA’s parliamentarian (2020–2021) and as a member of various committees and task forces. In addition to working as a counselor educator, he is active in the field, providing consulting and training to various mental health and vocational agencies while maintaining an active private practice in professional counseling.
Part IThe Essence of Research in the Counseling Profession
If the role of research in the counseling profession was not a primary motivation for you to pursue a graduate degree in counseling, you are probably similar to most graduate students in the counseling profession. That being said, professional counseling—and as an extension, counselor education—is not a static profession. Understanding how research is generated is important to maintaining competence and making contributions to an ever-changing field. Research traditions within the counseling profession emanate primarily from education and psychology. Hence, examining research traditions in these fields is important to understanding research within a counseling framework. In this book, we emphasize the practitioner-scholar model, a model that places emphasis on the utility of research in the practice of counseling.
Along with introducing the practitioner-scholar model, in this section we introduce the research process from the conceptualization of a study to the dissemination of the findings. Because most counseling research is dependent on volunteer participants, we highlight the role of ethics as identified in federal law and the ACA Code of Ethics (American Counseling Association, 2014). Finally, we introduce the traditional families of research—quantitative and qualitative research—and explore their place within the context of empirically supported treatments, evidenced-based practice, and best practice. An overview of these methods and concepts are given in this section, with more detailed explanation in subsequent chapters.
References
American Counseling Association. (2014).
ACA code of ethics.
https://www.counseling.org/resources/aca-code-of-ethics.pdf
Chapter 1The Counselor as a Practitioner-Scholar
This chapter introduces orientations toward research and provides conceptualizations to approaching research. The discussions regarding research orientation may seem academic and unimportant to the counseling professional. However, we believe that an understanding of orientation can set the stage for how a counselor appreciates research, becomes an intelligent consumer of research, and emerges as a producer of research. In this chapter, you will be exposed to two predominant ideologies of the role of research within the counseling profession (i.e., the scientist-practitioner model and the practitioner-scholar model) and two philosophies that govern one’s approach to conducting research (i.e., positivist and constructivist).
Scientist-Practitioner Versus Practitioner-Scholar
The scientist-practitioner model and the practitioner-scholar model originated from psychology and had an impact on the philosophy of training. As these models have been adapted in higher education, the question of which model is appropriate for future practitioners, academics, and researchers has been widely debated. The essence of these debates, with respect to counseling, is focused on developing competent practitioners and scholars who can utilize new information and generate knowledge to move the counseling profession forward.
A committee representing various professionals in psychology, medicine, and education approved the scientist-practitioner model in 1949 in Boulder, Colorado; hence, the model is often referred to as the Boulder model. The emphasis in this model is that psychologists should adhere to the scientific method when engaging in applied practices. The scientist-practitioner model might therefore incorporate the following assumptions for counseling:
There is a solid link between research and practice.
The skills necessary to be a competent counselor are also necessary to be a competent researcher.
Institutions that endorse the scientist-practitioner model may have a stronger culture of research but emphasize competence in practice as well. (Stoltenberg et al., 2000)
However, the scientist-practitioner model is not universally accepted across psychology or other social science fields. Healy (2017) indicated that what happens in counseling may not be reflected in what occurs in laboratory settings. The nuances of a counseling relationship may not be a central focus to interventions that occur from a manualized treatment. Sometimes what occurs in counseling and the interactions that promote healing for a client cannot be duplicated for others because of the uniqueness of the client and the client-counselor relationship. Hence, alternative models to the scientist-practitioner approach were necessary to account for these experiences.
An alternative model—the practitioner-scholar model—was approved in 1973 with the understanding that such a model might be more appropriate for future professionals (e.g., PsyD) who wish to focus primarily on clinical work. The emphasis on integrating research into practice was not lost; however, more focus was placed on clinical training as opposed to the generation and dissemination of research (Stoltenberg et al., 2000).
Counseling differs from psychology in many respects, particularly regarding training and philosophical views of wellness, mental health, and well-being. “Counseling is a professional relationship that empowers diverse individuals, families, and groups to accomplish mental health, wellness, education, and career goals” (Kaplan et al., 2014, p. 366). No other profession defines what it does primarily through a working relationship and by encompassing the aforementioned global constructs.
Another distinguishing characteristic of counseling is that a license to practice independently is granted with the attainment of a master’s degree in counseling; in psychology, one must attain a doctorate to practice independently in most states. Hence, a practitioner-scholar model may be more appropriate for professional counselors, because the emphasis in coursework and training is on applied practice. Not until one wishes to obtain a doctorate in counselor education, usually granted with a PhD, does the emphasis shift to research. The doctor of philosophy is a research degree, and therefore a strong balance between research and practice likely is obtained. As both models attempt to bridge research to practice, they serve as ideologies to which counseling students may align their interests consistent with how they are developing within the profession. Although counselors-in-training may initially align with the practitioner-scholar model early in their development, the pursuit of a doctorate may result in an inclination toward the scientist-practitioner model. However, Healy (2017) noted that a commitment to scientific approaches should be considered in light of effective practice, particularly when the science cannot be replicated.
About 50% of psychological research, which extends to counseling research, cannot be reproduced (Balkin & Lenz, 2021; Open Science Collaboration, 2015). In other words, there is an expectation that if a study is replicated with a similar group of participants, then a similar set of results should be reproduced. Unfortunately, however, this does not happen about half the time. Part of this lies with the problem of how we interpret statistical significance, which we will discuss in Chapter 5.
Because human-subjects research often involves variance in participants, a common critique might be that findings in counseling research may not be easy to replicate because of the presence or lack of presence of diverse participants. Yong (2018) countered this critique by noting that the diversity of a sample appears to have minimal impact on the replication of the results. Rather, the over-reliance of statistical testing on constructs that are unstable and highly sensitive to change (e.g., emotional states, wellness, coping) likely influences the difficulty in replicating research (Balkin & Lenz, 2021).
Integrating the Models: A Case Example
Prior to beginning work on my doctorate, I (Rick) was employed at an acute care psychiatric hospital as a counselor for adolescents. To be admitted to the unit, adolescents had to meet criteria for being a danger to self or others. One of my clients was Ronny, a gay 14-year-old teen with a history of substance use, suicidality, truancy, and oppositional behavior at school. He had been court ordered into the hospital after getting caught performing lewd acts with another boy in the school bathroom. Unlike most adolescent clients who would begin earning privileges and working up the level system after 48 hours, Ronny remained under 15-minute observation by the nursing staff because of his persistent threats to harm himself and his tendency to steal sugar packets from the cafeteria during meals and lick the packets when he thought no one was watching. Ronny did not make much progress during individual or group sessions. He consistently indicated that he would rather be in juvenile detention than in the hospital, as he thought he would be more likely to get together with other males in detention. He also indicated that if he left the hospital, he would continue to use drugs and may try to harm himself.
Ronny was resistant to establishing any type of working alliance with any of the staff at the hospital. The standard milieu of care consisting of individual and group counseling and 12-step support was not effective. Supportive therapeutic approaches and confrontation also did not appear to work. Frustrated with my lack of progress with Ronny, I sought consultation from my supervisor. After processing my conceptualization of Ronny, my supervisor indicated, “Well, if nothing in the book is working, you might need to throw out the book and try something different.”
So I brought Ronny into my office for his next individual session and told him that, given his lack of progress, I was recommending him to long-term treatment, which would likely be court ordered by the judge. Ronny expressed his displeasure with this plan, indicating that he would rather the judge send him to juvenile detention. I told Ronny that if that was what he preferred, he could make that happen: “The judge is going to give you the opportunity to speak after he reads my recommendation. If you cuss him out, he will probably send you to detention.” Ronny thought that was a great idea, so we role-played the scenario and rehearsed a number of highly inappropriate names he could call the judge in hopes that he would get sent to detention.
The next day, Ronny went to court. On reviewing my letter, the judge cleared the courtroom so that it was just Ronny, his parents, me, and the judge. The judge read out loud the letter that indicated Ronny’s lack of progress, his behavior in the hospital, and my recommendation for long-term treatment. The judge then asked, “Ronny, what do you have to say for yourself?” Ronny stood up, looked at the judge—and burst into tears. The judge responded, “Well, I guess I have no choice but to follow your counselor’s recommendation and order you to long-term treatment.”
Ronny’s reaction—crying in the courtroom after the letter was read—was the first genuine affect he had shown since he had been hospitalized. It was the first instance of any emotional distress displayed by Ronny. So, what does this mean with respect to research?
Research informed my work as a counselor. My primary theoretical orientation was Glasser’s reality therapy, but when I saw how resistant Ronny was to not making any changes in his behaviors, I tried other approaches, such as focusing on being supportive and empathic as well as being confrontational. Whereas most clients appeared to make progress within 48 hours, Ronny required the highest level of care and documentation after 3 weeks. I do not believe that continued reliance on traditional, evidence-based treatment, as required by the scientist-practitioner model, would have been beneficial for Ronny.
The practitioner-scholar model, in contrast, allowed me to trust my instincts and experience with the client to get some type of therapeutic effect. I am not suggesting that evidence-based protocols be routinely dismissed. In fact, such protocols may be effective with clients. Stoltenberg and Pace (2007) emphasized that the scientist-practitioner model is an integrative, reciprocal model. If that is the case, the main difference between these models may in fact be the underlying philosophy rather than the implementation. Counselors should be aware of both models and understand that they need to balance research and applied skills rather than emphasize one model over the other.
Positivist Versus Constructivist Approaches
Exploring the philosophical underpinnings of counseling research may appear to be primarily an academic exercise. Nevertheless, similar to the orientation of practitioner-scholar versus scientist-practitioner, an understanding of positivism and constructivism is about not only how a counselor conducts research but also who the counselor is as a person. Are you a little skeptical about that last statement—that research and counseling are so inherently related and part of a counselor’s identity?
When academics discuss the philosophical underpinnings of research, they are talking about epistemology—the manner in which knowledge is generated. Positivism, also known as empiricism, is the belief that knowledge is generated from what can be observed and measured. Hence, research from a position of positivism relies on empirical data—data that were collected and assigned value. Positivism is tied to deductive reasoning (Trochim, 2006). If data can be observed and measured, then phenomena can be understood and generalized to the appropriate population. In other words, the goal of positivism is to gain a broad understanding of an experience that can be applied to many people after empirical data are analyzed. Many counseling theories, such as behaviorism, cognitive theory, and rational emotive behavior theory, use a positivist perspective. In each of these theories, measurement and evidence play a prominent role. For example, counselors who practice rational emotive behavior therapy may ask the client for evidence of a specific belief in order to identify the belief as rational or irrational.
Constructivism, broadly speaking, asserts that knowledge is generated by individual perception, or construction, of reality and thus knowledge. Knowledge is generated through the construction of meaning with varying degrees of emphasis on the individual (personal construct theory; Kelly, 1955) to construction of meaning occurring primarily within cultural contexts (e.g., narrative therapy [White & Epston, 1990]; relational-cultural theory [Comstock et al., 2008]) and social relations (Kang et al., 2017). Constructivism is more aligned with many popular counseling theories that endorse a phenomenological perspective (e.g., Adlerian, person-centered, existential, and personal construct theories). Constructivism purports that the ever-changing knowledge of human experiencing, essential to counseling research, is best described not through measurement but through an understanding of the meaning of the human experience. Meaning is always context-bound and, depending on the qualitative method, can vary in its degree of emphasis on internal construction to relational interactions and conditions that influence meaning.
Ontologically speaking (i.e., What can be known?), constructivists believe that reality cannot be directly known; only humans’ meaning making of the world around them can be known. Epistemologically speaking (i.e., What is the relationship between knower and known?), constructivists believe that knowledge is constructed by the knower (you and I) through our interaction with the world around us and our sense organs (Kang et al., 2017; Kelly, 1955; Schwandt, 2000), with inductive reasoning at its foundation and language, not numerical labels, as the means of capturing understanding. The focus for research is not on knowledge that is found through strict adherence to the scientific method but on how research participants and researchers interpret the phenomenon and the data. Knowledge products of research are viewed not as generalizable across all time and contexts but as context-bound; thus, conclusions made are directed at the context from which the research was conducted.
But stepping into the world of constructivism is not so simple. You see, there is a wide range of philosophical positions, or stances, under this broad constructivist umbrella that a practitioner-scholar can take that have major impacts on the conceptualization and design of research and on data analysis (see Chapter 10 for more on constructivism, critical theory, and action research). For example, from what has been called a weak constructivist stance (Schwandt, 2000), a phenomenological study might commence seeking to understand the experience of sexual abuse survivors. But from a strong or radical social constructivist stance (Cottone, 2017), one might engage in participatory action research that seeks pragmatic change in treatment with such survivors. Here, research might commence with sexual abuse survivors, but the focus is not merely on their experience but also on pragmatic solutions to treatment dilemmas with abuse survivors wherein these survivors are viewed as core-searchers actively working with the practitioner-scholar. Curious about what this might look like? Oh wait, there is so much more in terms of constructivism’s influence on research design and, most important, the relationship between the researcher and those researched. Even in counseling research, it is all about relationships (Kottler & Balkin, 2017).
Understanding Epistemology and Methodology
As alluded to before, discussing epistemology is mainly an academic exercise but does provide a perspective on how counselors approach research and eventually identify a methodological approach. Choosing positivism versus constructivism is not a requirement for engaging in research. More than likely, counselors will develop their philosophy over time and may even align their ideology in a manner that is consistent with their theoretical orientation. However, as counselors engage in research, a discussion of methodology is pertinent. Methodology is the systematic process used to gather information. Whereas epistemology refers to beliefs about how knowledge is generated, methodology is the process undertaken to acquire information (Trochim, 2006).
Conducting research and disseminating research findings is a formal process that requires expertise, transparency, and engagement. As intelligent consumers and potential producers of research, counselors need to know that the findings of a research study are credible. Hence, the methods used by the researcher must stand up to critique through peer review and possibly public presentation. A good study is transparent, rigorous, and defendable.
The transparency of the research methods extends to what was done and the rationale for the procedure. Such details allow other researchers to replicate the study in case further verification is warranted or desired. The methodology of a research study should follow a prescribed system of data collection and analysis. Following a prescribed system entails using a research methodology that is appropriate for the study and grounded in the discipline.
Research methodology is not an overly creative process (although the opportunity to explore a topic and generate new knowledge can be!). In addition, research studies are not perfect. Ultimately, counseling research is highly dependent on evaluating human experiences, which are fraught with subjectivity. Even empirical studies grounded in measurement and supposed objectivity rely much on statistics, which contain error––inaccuracies in data or lack of precision in the research process or findings. In empirical studies, researchers identify the amount of error that they are willing to tolerate and typically report error-related scores and measures. Researchers who choose to use narrative data (e.g., in qualitative studies) need to be concerned about subjectivity and bias, especially because they are the filter through which the narrative data derive meaning. Regardless of whether error is due to researcher bias (which can happen in quantitative research as well as qualitative research) or measurement and/or statistical error, no study is perfect, and researchers need to identify the type of error present in a study and either state how the error was addressed or minimized or identify the error as a limitation.
Another issue related to transparency is rigor. A rigorous study will have a detailed, accurate procedure. Researchers who use methods that allow for multiple types of error and bias produce results that are spurious (i.e., random and not easily replicable). Especially when the effect of a treatment or intervention is being studied, counseling researchers need to be aware of treatment fidelity—that is, the consistency of a treatment or intervention. A research study should be replicable, and this may be considerably easier when scientists conduct studies in, for example, the physical sciences. However, the social sciences, and counseling research in particular, are dependent on consistency at a very human level. In human-subjects research, there will be variability in the quality, interpretation, and replication of interactions, even for the most manualized or scripted treatments.
Take for example a study conducted by Cox et al. (2015), which investigated the effectiveness of a “cognitive behavior counseling intervention for offenders with mental illness who were incarcerated” (p. 471). Cox et al. used a single-case research design to evaluate the effectiveness of a program to decrease psychiatric symptoms for offenders diagnosed with mental illness. The following treatment was administered:
After participants agreed to engage in the study by signing the informed consent form, we administered the assessment instruments and initiated the intervention. Baseline (A) measurements of the PHQ [Patient Health Questionnaire] were collected on alternating days for 1 week prior to initiation of the intervention. The treatment group was a single cohort in a closed-group format. We implemented a closed-group format to promote the ability for group members to develop safe relationships over the duration of the group term and reduce the elements of guardedness and distrust that can be familiar within correctional settings. The group met weekly for 90-minute sessions on 12 consecutive Friday mornings. Each session included brief, didactic instruction on a topic within the ARRAY model and practice applying the skills in relation to a current relationship or to the development of a personal relapse-prevention plan. During group sessions, the group facilitators followed the ARRAY manual structure of session plan (i.e., brief introductory affirmation, meditation reading, didactic lesson, skill practice, and closing process time). Directly following the conclusion of each session, participants completed the PHQ (B) and included an individualized alpha-numeric identifier. Inventories were collected, labeled by date and session number, and stored in a secure location on-site. Finally, in the postintervention phase, PHQ (A) surveys were administered on alternating days for 1 week after the final group session as a follow-up measure. (p. 475)
In reviewing treatment fidelity, Cox et al. identified issues of structure, content, and time as essential to replicating the treatment method. They cited a manualized treatment approach so that the study could be easily replicated.
Rigor may also be affected when there are flaws in the methodology. Sometimes researchers inadvertently collect the wrong type of data. Take a variable such as age, for example. Adolescents are typically defined as being between ages 12 and 17. So assume a researcher uses the following categories:
If the researcher has data from a 17-year-old participant, is the 17-year-old participant likely to be more similar to an 18-year-old (adult) or a 12-year-old (adolescent)? Of course, the 17-year-old participant probably has more in common with the adult participants than the younger adolescent participants, but this information is lost when naturally occurring continuous data (e.g., age, income, weight) are artificially categorized. Although some variables may be easier to categorize (e.g., sex, ethnicity, religion), variables such as age, income, or scores on a test are better studied in their naturally occurring continuous state. Otherwise, information is lost.
For instance, Christian et al. (2020) studied self-reports of college enrollment for graduating high school seniors. Socioeconomic status (SES) was included in the analyses and operationally defined as a variable based on whether a student qualified for free or reduced lunch. Consider the ramification on addressing SES through this criterion. Does such a variable truly take into account the nature of SES? Will researchers uncover the effect of high SES based on this criterion? Do students who do not qualify for free or reduced lunch necessarily fit into the same grouping as students who might come from families in the top 1% of income? Unfortunately, this is a common occurrence in social science research, and as a result, we truly do not know the impact of SES on student learning or outcomes.
Ultimately, published research is not necessarily perfect research. There are always limitations, and these should be identified within the study. Yet the significance of the findings should not be overshadowed by the limitations. In this regard, a study should be defendable—readers of a study should be able to understand the identified merits of the research and to replicate the methods.
Published research in the counseling profession goes through a blind peer-review process—that is, a process in which the manuscript is reviewed by experts in the field, the author of the manuscript remains unknown to the reviewers, and the reviewers remain unknown to the author. There is therefore merit to research that is published in counseling journals.
Chapter Summary
In this chapter, we presented the underlying philosophies that govern the research traditions in counseling with the ultimate goal of informing the counseling profession and bridging the technical aspects of research with the realities of counseling practice. Sometimes research may appear overly nuanced and technical. The methods and terminology used may seem foreign. We hope that by understand- ing how knowledge is generated in counseling research within the framework of transparency, rigor, and utility, counseling practitioners will continue to grow in their work with clients by improving their practice based on rigorous research methodologies.
Suggested Activities
Read the following article and discuss the questions below in small groups or as a class:
Lenz, A. S., Perepiczka, M., & Balkin, R. S. (2013). Evidence for the mitigating effects of a support group for attitudes toward statistics.
Counseling Outcome Research and Evaluation
,
4
(1), 26–40.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2150137812474000
What parts of the article were easy to understand? What parts were difficult?
Anxiety about research and research courses is normal. What is your experience so far?
Based on the article, to what extent do you believe that a support group would be beneficial to decreasing anxiety about statistics and research?
What do you think are prevalent attitudes regarding research in counseling?
How do you identify the importance of research in the counseling profession?
Discussion: Identify variables that are artificially categorized (e.g., we discussed SES in Christian et al., 2020).
What are the benefits and consequences of coding data in this way?
Find a study that used artificially categorized variables.
What type of information was collected?
What information was lost?
Was this addressed in the limitations?
Read the following article and discuss the questions below in small groups or as a class:
Cox, R. m., Lenz, A. S., & James, R. K. (2015). A pilot evaluation of the ARRAY program with offenders with mental illness.
Journal of Counseling & Development
,
93
(4), 471–480.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jcad.12045
What parts of the article were easy to understand? What parts were difficult?
Based on the article, to what extent do you believe that the intervention was effective to the population under study? What type of evidence was presented that indicated efficacy or lack of efficacy?
References
Balkin, R. S., & Lenz, A. S. (2021). Contemporary issues in reporting statistical, practical, and clinical significance in counseling research.
Journal of Counseling & Development, 99
(2), 227–237.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jcad.12370
Christian, D. D., Stuckey, A. G., Boykin, A. A., & Adams, J. J. (2020). Predicting college enrollment of graduating high school seniors: How accurate is self-report?
Professional School Counseling, 23
(1, Pt. 3), 1–10.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2156759X20903512
Comstock, D. L., Hammer, T. R., Strentzsch, J., Cannon, K., Parsons, J., & Salazar, G., II. (2008). Relational-cultural theory: A framework for bridging relational, multicultural, and social justice competencies.
Journal of Counseling & Development, 86
(3), 279–287.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6678.2008.tb00510.x
Cottone, R. R. (2017). In defense of radical social constructivism.
Journal of Counseling & Development, 95
(4), 465–471.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jcad.12161
Cox, R. m., Lenz, A. S., & James, R. K. (2015). A pilot evaluation of the ARRAY program with offenders with mental illness.
Journal of Counseling & Development, 93
(4), 471–480.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jcad.12045
Healy, P. (2017). Rethinking the scientist-practitioner model: On the necessary complementarity of the natural and human science dimensions.
European Journal of Psychotherapy & Counselling, 19
(3), 231–251.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13642537.2017.1348376
Kang, Z., Kim, H., & Trusty, J. (2017). Constructivist and social constructionist career counseling: A Delphi study.
The Career Development Quarterly, 65
(1), 72–87.
https://doi.org/10.1002/cdq.12081
Kaplan, D. M., Tarvydas, V. M., & Gladding, S. T. (2014). 20/20: A vision for the future of counseling: The new consensus definition of counseling
. Journal of Counseling & Development, 92
(3), 366–372.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6676.2014.00164.x
Kelly, G. A. (1955).
The psychology of personal constructs.
Norton.
Kottler, J. A., & Balkin, R. S. (2017).
Relationships in counseling and the counselor’s life.
American Counseling Association.
Lenz, A. S., Perepiczka, M., & Balkin, R. S. (2013). Evidence for the mitigating effects of a support group for attitudes toward statistics.
Counseling Outcome Research and Evaluation, 4
(1), 26–40.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2150137812474000
Open Science Collaboration. (2015, August 28). Estimating the re-producibility of psychological science.
Science, 349
(6251), Article aac4716.
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac4716
Schwandt, T. (2000). Three epistemological stances for qualitative inquiry: Interpretivism, hermeneutics, and social constructionism. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.),
Handbook of qualitative research
(2nd ed., pp. 189–213). Sage.
Stoltenberg, C. D., & Pace, T. M. (2007). The scientist-practitioner model: Now more than ever.
Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy, 37
(4), 195–203.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10879-007-9054-0
Stoltenberg, C. D., Pace, T. M., Kashubeck-West, S., Biever, J. L., Patterson, T., & Welch, I. D. (2000). Training models in counseling psychology: Scientist-practitioner versus practitioner-scholar.
The Counseling Psychologist, 28
(5), 622–640.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000000285002
Trochim, W. M. K. (2006, October 20).
Research methods knowledge base
(2nd ed.).
http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/
White, M., & Epston, D. (1990).
Narrative means to therapeutic ends.
Norton.
Yong, E. (2018, November 19). Psychology’s replication crisis is running out of excuses.
The Atlantic
.
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/11/psychologys-replication-crisis-real/576223/
Chapter 2The Research Process
In this chapter, we walk you through the research process, from choosing a topic and reviewing previous research and literature to planning data collection and analysis. Although the choices available may seem overwhelming at times, we advocate that research is a systematic process in which each step in the process informs the next.
Choosing a Research Topic
In counseling research, the topics of study a researcher chooses are often the result of who the researcher is as a person as much as the researcher having a sincere interest in the topic. More than likely, the two are related, as research interests may be generated from personal experiences that influence the questions a researcher wishes to answer. This does not mean that research ideas are grounded in personal self-interest. Rather, research ideas often reflect a passion. Keep in mind that the research you initiate should sustain your attention for several months, and in the case of a dissertation perhaps a year or more. Choosing research topics that reflect your personal passion is important.
However, sometimes research interests are generated more from need than from an identified passion. For example, perhaps you are working with a client diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder, and you have limited experience working with clients who have this diagnosis. One option might be to refer to a counselor with more experience. But another option is to seek supervision and consultation, review extant research related to autism spectrum disorder, and improve your competency in working with clients who present with the disorder.
Regardless of your setting, you will likely encounter clients who attend counseling and present with problems that are unique or outside of your identified areas of training. Also, keep in mind that although this text addresses the research process, from conceptualization to data collection and analysis to the reporting of findings, you may engage in all these steps or perhaps just some of them, especially as a practitioner and consumer of research. Consider the following as an example of some of the initial steps of the research process most counselors will engage.
Using Consultation and Resources
When I (Rick) started working in an outpatient counseling center, I quickly had three new clients, all of whom had identified compulsive behaviors related to cybersex. Because I completed my master’s degree in 1992, this topic was not an area that was addressed in my training, and despite numerous hours of continuing education in addiction, most of my training related to substance use as opposed to process addictions (see Smith, 2015). Consistent with the ACA Code of Ethics (American Counseling Association, 2014), I sought consultation to help address what I felt were deficits related to my understanding of internet addiction (Watson, 2015). My consultant was established in treating addictions and recommended that I read work by Patrick Carnes, a noted scholar on addiction, and in particular sex addiction. Hence, working with clients who identified issues outside of my area of expertise necessitated acquiring consultation and resources that I might not have sought out otherwise. In this case, the need to develop competence in a particular area outweighed my passion for a particular topic. In addition, having an understanding of research helped me identify appropriate resources that would be helpful in serving my clients.
A not-so-uncommon experience is having difficulty choosing a research topic. People often have difficulty selecting a single topic because they have varied or numerous interests or because they feel anxious or uncertain about where to begin the process. The former is usually the easier of the two to handle. A research study in counseling is not likely to metamorphose the profession, but each study has the potential to add to the knowledge base of the profession. No one can or should choose a research topic for you; this is something that emerging researchers must figure out for themselves. However, be aware that developing a researcher identity means establishing a research agenda that can be multifaceted. You do not need to choose the research topic but rather a research topic. Although it helps to choose a topic you are truly passionate about, having a topic that you are interested in and that can sustain your attention over a moderate to long period of time is most important.
Conceptualizing a research study as part of a longer term agenda may be helpful. This allows researchers to initiate a research agenda in manageable portions. For example, for my (Rick) doctoral dissertation in 2004, I initiated research on therapeutic goal attainment for adolescents in crisis. Two articles were developed from this dissertation exploring gender differences in therapeutic goal attainment for adolescents in crisis (Balkin & Roland, 2005) and a model for therapeutic goal attainment for adolescents in crisis (Balkin & Roland, 2007). Further research explored the relationship between therapeutic goal attainment and various psychosocial factors (e.g., Balkin et al., 2011), culminating in the creation of an instrument to measure therapeutic goal attainment for adolescents in crisis (Balkin, 2013, 2014). Essentially, my experiences working as a counselor for adolescents admitted into crisis care in a psychiatric hospital setting were the catalyst for a dissertation and more than 15 years of published research (e.g., Balkin & Russo, 2021). Hence, the research was influenced by professional experience, passion for the topic, and a line of research in which one study built on another.
However, not every study needs to be part of an extended research agenda, and often a person’s first experiences with research are in assisting more established researchers with a particular study. As novice researchers engage in their first few independent studies, some apprehension and anxiety are normal. Working with colleagues and engaging in supervised research help make this experience manageable and provide the necessary skills to be able to engage in more independent research. The process of becoming a competent researcher is not so different from that of becoming competent as a counselor.
Develop research skills.
