Date of Award




Document Type


Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)


Department of Educational and Counseling Psychology


Counseling Psychology

Content Description

1 online resource (vii, 60 pages)

Dissertation/Thesis Chair

Michael V Ellis

Committee Members

Jessica L Martin, Arpana G Inman


Clinical supervision, Supervisee nondisclosure, Training, Cross-cultural counseling, Counselors, Self-disclosure, Multiculturalism, Educational counseling

Subject Categories

Counseling Psychology


This study sought to understand the circumstances under which supervisee nondisclosure (SND; e.g., Siembor, 2012) is more or less likely to occur by identifying potential constructs that may relate to SND. Specifically, this study investigated the extent to which supervisees’ perceptions of the supervisory working alliance (SWA; Bahrick et al., 1991) and supervisor multicultural competence (SMC; Inman, 2006) contributed uniquely and jointly to SND. Accordingly, it was hypothesized that the SWA would be uniquely and inversely related to SND controlling for SMC and that supervisee perceptions of SMC would be uniquely and inversely related to SND controlling for the SWA. It was further hypothesized that the SWA and SMC would contribute jointly and inversely to SND. A sample (N = 221) of predominantly White (68.2%), female (80.0%), psychology (74.7%) trainees participated in a study on their experiences in multicultural clinical supervision. Consistent with theorizing, SMC and the SWA significantly contributed jointly and inversely to SND, accounting for 42% of the variability in SND. In addition, the inverse and unique relation between the SWA and SND was significant, with a large effect size of 23%, supporting previous research investigating this association (e.g., Ladany et al., 1996; Mehr et al., 2010). Unexpectedly, supervisee ratings of SMC did not contribute uniquely to SND, with none of the variance in SND accounted for by SMC. From a descriptive standpoint, it was noteworthy that the findings differed markedly from previous research (e.g., Ladany et al., 1996; Yourman & Farber, 1996) in that the overall level of SND was much lower and the types of SND most frequently identified in the literature (i.e., clinical mistakes and negative reactions to supervision) were endorsed at much lower rates or were not applicable for this sample. Implications of the findings for research, theory, practice, and training, are discussed.