|
Article Excerpt
Directors of clinical training in mental health programs report that videotaping is one of the most common means of supervision (Romans, Boswell, Carlozzi, & Ferguson, 1995). Despite this prevalence of use, there is little literature that provides guidelines for supervisors on how to conceptualize and use video recordings in supervision. The purpose of this article is to review the extant literature on the use of videotaping in supervision, to proffer an empirically supported model of supervision that can be used to guide supervisory interventions surrounding videotape use, and to present concrete suggestions to supervisors on how to use videotaping with their trainees in supervision.
* Review of the Literature
Historically, the 1940s marked the initial use of audio recording in psychotherapy training (Schnarch, 1981). By the 1960s, audio recording had become standard practice in most training settings. Video recording was introduced more gradually into training programs during the 1960s and eventually gained widespread use as a training tool (Gelso, 1974). As videotaping capabilities became more prevalent, some research on the use of videotape in supervision was undertaken, but no programmatic research on the use of the method emerged.
A review of the literature on the use of videotaping in supervision reveals that few specific guidelines have been presented for supervisors on how to properly utilize video recording for supervisory purposes. Rather, this work has been focused more on the specific advantages and disadvantages of the use of video recording for supervision. Advantages included the utility of videotape as (a) a means of information storage and dissemination, (b) a medium to bring about changes in trainee self-perception, (c) a tool for enhanced self-analysis by trainees, (d) a way for supervisors to more accurately evaluate trainees, and (e) a way for trainees and supervisors to re-experience the therapy session. Supervisors viewed videotaping as a way in which a variety of information could be acquired, including the affective content of sessions, client reactions, counselor skills/actions, and the observation of nonverbal behaviors (Schnarch, 1981).
With respect to research on applications, utilization of videotape in supervision appeared to bring trainees' perceptions of their performance more in line with supervisors' perceptions (Gelso, 1974; Poling, 1968; Walz & Johnston, 1963). In addition, videotape appeared to help trainees demonstrate an increased level of self-awareness of their behaviors (Chodoff, 1972; Star, 1977; Walz & Johnston, 1963) and allowed trainees to develop an increased sense of objectivity concerning their clinical work (Anderson & Brown, 1955; Goldhammer, 1969). Videotape was also reported to bring the client to life for the supervisor and increase the supervisor's involvement (Aveline, 1992). Videotape also provides supervisors with fact-based and impartial information on client progress in therapy, thereby allowing for more objective evaluation of both trainee and client status (Chodoff, 1972; Yenawine & Arbuckle, 1971). In fact, some scholars have argued that relying on trainee self-report in supervision has serious drawbacks, including the poor reliability of trainees' reporting, trainees' perceptual biases in the interpretation of events, and the pressure trainees feel to present an overly positive impression to supervisors of their clinical work (Noelle, 2002).
Conversely, potential disadvantages in the use of videotape in supervision included increased evaluation anxiety for trainees that might result in diminished performance. For example, Roulx (1969) found increased physiological measures of perceived threat and anxiety (e.g., increased heart rate and skin temperature) among practicum students who were informed that their session would be videotaped and reviewed by their supervisor as compared with those who were told that their session was not going to be taped and reviewed. Niland, Duling, Allen, and Panther (1971) found that video monitoring of trainee sessions for supervisory purposes inhibited trainee performance. Trainees tended to see audiotaping as less inhibiting. However, Schnarch (1981) asserted that the use of video recording itself may not be inherently anxiety-provoking; instead, trainee fear and anxiety are most likely generalized reactions to psychotherapy training. For example, Yenawine, and Arbuckle (1971) surveyed master's-level students in their second practicum about their experiences using video recording during their supervision. Initially, these trainees felt more anxious than those trainees who were being audiotaped only. However, after two meetings with the supervisor reviewing the video recordings, trainees' levels of anxiety decreased and actually became lower than those of trainees who were being audiotaped. Ellis, Krengel, and Beck (2002) examined supervisee anxiety and performance in trainees who were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: audiotaping the trainee, for his or her personal review, in a therapy room in which there was a large mirror; being videotaped for a supervisor whom the trainee met just before the counseling session began; and being instructed to focus empathically on the clients without being audio or video recorded. After being placed in one of the three groups, all participants met with a client for an initial counseling session. Following this session, trainees' performance and levels of anxiety were assessed. The results suggested that the condition to which trainees were assigned did not reflect significant differences in performance or level of anxiety.
In addition to advantages and disadvantages related to the trainee and supervisor, the use of video recording may also have an impact on trainees' clients. In general, clients can have occasional negative reactions to video and audio recording, such as increased defensiveness and inhibited self-disclosure (Aveline, 1992; Gelso, 1974); however, these client reactions have tended to be short-lived (Redlich, Dollard, & Newman, 1950) because clients discovered in later sessions that their discomfort was not...
|
