Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29723012›Full record

ArticlePsychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors2018

Rating motivational interviewing fidelity from thin slices.

Derek D Caperton, David C Atkins, Zac E Imel

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Derek D CapertonDepartment of Educational Psychology, University of Utah.
David C AtkinsDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington.ORCID 0000-0002-5781-9880
Zac E ImelDepartment of Educational Psychology, University of Utah.
University of Utah · USUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

Implementation of Technology-Based Evaluation of Motivational InterviewingR01AA018673 · NIAAA · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI ATKINS, DAVID CHARLES, NARAYANAN, SHRIKANTH · 2010 to 2020
$5.9M
Development and feasibility of computer based fidelity monitoring for MIR34DA034860 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI IMEL, ZACHARY E. · 2013 to 2015
$739k
Using Technology to Scale Up the Evaluation of Motivational InterviewingK02AA023814 · NIAAA · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI ATKINS, DAVID CHARLES · 2015 to 2019
$690k
National Institutes of Health; National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and AlcoholismNIAAA NIH HHS K02 AA023814NIAAA NIH HHS R01 AA018673NIDA NIH HHS R34 DA034860
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Monitoring fidelity to psychosocial treatments is critical to dissemination, process and outcome research, and internal validity in efficacy trials. However, the costs required to behavior code fidelity to treatments like motivational interviewing (MI) over many therapists and sessions quickly become intractable. Coding less of a session accelerates the process, but it is not clear how much of a session must be evaluated to capture the fidelity of the entire session. The present study used a "thin slice" (Ambady & Rosenthal, 1992) paradigm to explore the degree to which variously sized thin slices of MI fidelity related to fidelity ratings for a full session. We randomly selected contiguous and noncontiguous segments of MI sessions at each whole percent of sessions (i.e., a slice consisting of 1% of session utterances, another at 2%, etc.). We then computed MI fidelity scores from these segments and calculated agreement with fidelity ratings obtained from the full session. We compared thin slice agreement with full sessions against interrater agreement and found that approximately a third of a session (9 min, 26 seconds in our sample) had sufficient agreement to approach interrater levels. These results provide a reference for researchers and clinicians to make efficient and informed use of their behavior coding resources. In addition, our results add to the behavior slicing literature, indicating that small therapist behavior samples adequately describe overall session behavior. (PsycINFO Database Record

Indexed as

HumansMotivational Interviewing

Identifiers

PMID29723012
PMCPMC6013354
OpenAlexW2799692335

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.