ORIGINAL ARTICLES

Reliability and Validity Assessment of the Supervisory Ability Scale Among Psychological Supervisors in China

  • ZENG Fanmin ,
  • SHYU Shi-Sen ,
  • XI Juzhe ,
  • YUE Yameng ,
  • XU Jun
Expand
  • 1Psychological Health Education Center, Southwest Minzu University, Chengdu 610041, China;
    2Graduate Institute of Counseling and Rehabilitation Counseling, Kaohsiung Normal University, Kaohsiung 81148, China;
    2School of Psychology and Cognitive Science, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062, China;
    2Affiliated Mental Health Center East China Normal University, Shanghai 200335, China;
    2Shanghai Key Laboratory of Mental Health and Psychological Crisis Intervention, Shanghai 200062, China;
    2Nanjia Psychological Counseling Center, Shanghai 200030, China

Online published: 2025-09-03

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to test the reliability and validity of the Supervisory Ability Scale (revised version), based on the Systematic Approach to Supervision (SAS) model, among psychological supervisors in China's mainland.
Methods: A convenience sampling method was used in this study to collect relevant data on psychological supervisors in two stages through the online questionnaire platform Wenjuanxing. The two waves of data collection were conducted more than six months apart. In the first stage, item analysis and exploratory factor analysis were conducted using the 224 valid responses obtained from Shanghai, Changsha, and Hangzhou with the 77-item version of the Supervisory Ability Scale. In the second stage, confirmatory factor analysis was performed using the 276 valid responses collected from different regions across China with the 44-item version.
Results: The final revised version of the scales had a total of 27 items, covering supervision relationship, supervision functions and tasks, and supervision context, explaining 58.822% of the overall variance. The internal consistency coefficients of each dimension ranged from 0.653 to 0.747. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the scale model fit well (χ2=743.692, df=321, χ2/df=2.317, TLI=0.901,IFL=0.911, RMSEA=0.069, SRMR=0.042, CFI=0.911, GFI=0.833); The correlations between various dimensions and the criterion-related measures were all significant (r=0.552-0.716).
Conclusion: The Supervisory Ability Scale (revised version) has good reliability and validity and can be used as an effective tool for clinical supervisory ability assessment.

Cite this article

ZENG Fanmin , SHYU Shi-Sen , XI Juzhe , YUE Yameng , XU Jun . Reliability and Validity Assessment of the Supervisory Ability Scale Among Psychological Supervisors in China[J]. Psychological Communications, 2025 , 8(2) : 114 -120 . DOI: 10.12100/j.issn.2096-5494.225017

References

[1] 刘健, 刘露, 陈秀红, 张冄冄, 杨翠茹. (2018). 自我反思与洞察力量表中文版在精神障碍患者中应用的效度和信度. 中国心理卫生杂志, 32(5), 369-374.
[2] 吕韵, 刘梦云, 顾天意, 朱旭. (2024). 临床与咨询心理学专业人员胜任力的评估方法. 心理科学, 47(1), 237-245. doi:10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20240128
[3] 宗敏, 吕大为, 贾晓明. (2018). 实习心理咨询师及其督导师对督导期待过程的定性研究. 中国心理卫生杂志, 32(10), 822-828.
[4] 徐西森. (2005). SAS取向谘商督导能力评量表之编制研究. 中国辅导学报, 18, 153-201.
[5] 李成志, 谭莉娜, 莫圣开, 韦秋玲, 唐峥华. (2023). 广西高校心理咨询从业者接受心理督导的现状及其影响因素分析. 心理月刊, 18(8), 215-218. doi: 10.19738/j.cnki.psy.2023.08.067
[6] 杨妲. (2020). 督导工作联盟问卷的编制(硕士学位论文). 西南交通大学, 成都.
[7] 林令瑜, 钱铭怡, 王浩宇, 庄淑婕. (2017). 国内心理咨询一对一督导的伦理实践情况调查. 中国心理卫生杂志, 31(1), 25-29.
[8] 樊富珉, 黄蘅玉, 冯杰. (2002). 心理咨询与治疗工作中督导的意义与作用. 中国心理卫生杂志, 16(9), 648-652.
[9] 王东美, 钱铭怡, 樊富珉, 江光荣. (2022). 中国临床与咨询心理学百年发展简史(1921—2021). 中国临床心理学杂志, 30(2), 454-460. doi: 10.16128/j.cnki.1005-3611.2022.02.041
[10] 简单心理, 第一财经商业数据中心. (2024). 2023—2024心理健康及行业人群洞察报告:心理咨询师执业现状及群体特点. 2024-03-20取自 https://www.sohu.com/a/765586154_121123709
[11] 贾晓明. (2014). 当代中国心理咨询与心理治疗的反思与探讨. 北京理工大学出版社..
[12] 中国心理学会临床与咨询心理学专业机构和专业人员注册系统. (2025. 注册人员查询. 2025-06-20 取自2025). 注册人员查询. 2025-06-20 取自http://www.chinacpb.net/public/index.php/index/index/zcrycx.html
[13] 周蜜, 赵嘉路, 贾晓明. (2022). 高校危机干预督导中受督导者对督导师的期待.中国临床心理学杂志, 30(6): 1492-1496,1503. doi: 10.16128/j.cnki.1005-3611.2022.06.045.
[14] Bennett, R E. (2019) 教育测量的未来趋势.教育测量与评价, 3, 3-14,18. doi: 10.16518/j.cnki.emae.2019.03.001
[15] Fitch J. C., Pistole M. C., & Gunn J. E. (2010). The bonds of development: An attachment-caregiving model of supervision.Clin Superv, 29(1), 20-34. doi: 10.1080/07325221003730319
[16] Goodyear, R. K. (2014). Supervision as pedagogy: Attending to its essential instructional and learning processes.Clin Superv, 33(1), 82-99. doi: 10.1080/07325223.2014.918914
[17] Grant A. M., Franklin J., & Langford P. (2002). The Self-reflection and Insight Scale: A new measure of private self-consciousness.Soc Behav Personal, 30(8), 821-835. doi:10.2224/sbp.2002.30.8.821
[18] Holloway, E. L. (1987). Developmental models of supervision: Is it development?.Prof Psychol-Res Pr, 18(3), 209-216.
[19] James I. A., Milne D., Marie-Blackburn I., & Armstrong P. (2007). Conducting successful supervision: Novel elements towards an integrative approach.Behav Cogn Psychoth, 35(2), 191. doi:10.1017/s1352465806003407
[20] Loganbill C., Hardy E., & Delworth U. (1982). Supervision: A conceptual model.Couns Psychologist, 10(1), 3-42. doi:10.1177/001100 0082101002
[21] Ober A. M., Granello D. H., & Henfield M. S. (2009). A synergistic model to enhance multicultural competence in supervision.Couns Educ Superv, 48(3), 204-221. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6978.2009.tb00075.x
[22] Page, S., & Wosket, V. (2001). Supervising the counsellor: A cyclical model., 2nd ed. Brunner-Routledge; APA PsycInfo.
[23] Pearson, Q. M. (2006). Psychotherapy-driven supervision: Integrating counseling theories into role-based supervision.J Ment Health Couns, 28(3), 241-252.
[24] Silva, S., & Sousa, D. (2022). Existential psychotherapy supervision: The supervisor’s perspective.J Humanist Psychol, 62(3), 397-417. doi:10.1177/0022167818802905
[25] Tajmirriyahi M., Ta V. P., & Ickes W. (2020). Measuring egocentrism as a trait-like personality attribute: The development and validation of the Egocentrism Scale.Psychol Stud, 65(4), 481-488. doi:10.1007/s12646-020-00586-4
[26] Watkins, C. E. (2017). Convergence in psychotherapy supervision: A common factors, common processes, common practices perspective. J Psychother Integr, 27(2), 140-152. doi:10.1037/int0000040
Outlines

/

〈 〉