Table 4.
Concordance between therapist and observer ratings on the DBT AC-I items
| Frequencies (n = 100 sessions) | Concordance | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| True Positive | True Negative | False Positive | False Negative | % Agreement | AC1 | |
| Diary card | 85 | 3 | 5 | 7 | 88.0 | 0.86 |
| Organize by targets | 75 | 1 | 18 | 6 | 76.0 | 0.69 |
| Emotion focus | 77 | 0 | 16 | 7 | 77.0 | 0.71 |
| Describe specifically | 74 | 2 | 14 | 10 | 76.0 | 0.68 |
| Chain analysis | 57 | 6 | 15 | 22 | 63.0 | 0.41 |
| Teach new information | 93 | 0 | 4 | 3 | 93.0 | 0.92 |
| Generate solutions | 77 | 8 | 11 | 4 | 85.0 | 0.80 |
| Activate new behavior | 56 | 11 | 25 | 8 | 67.0 | 0.45 |
| Provide coaching feedback | 81 | 3 | 7 | 9 | 84.0 | 0.80 |
| Generalize new learning | 64 | 5 | 23 | 8 | 69.0 | 0.54 |
| Reinforcement | 95 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 95.0 | 0.95 |
| Aversive contingencies | 88 | 2 | 1 | 9 | 90.0 | 0.88 |
| Informal exposure | 85 | 0 | 5 | 10 | 85.0 | 0.83 |
| Challenge cognitions | 87 | 0 | 3 | 10 | 87.0 | 0.85 |
| Validation level 4 | 91 | 0 | 1 | 8 | 91.0 | 0.90 |
| Validation level 5 | 89 | 2 | 8 | 1 | 91.0 | 0.90 |
| Validation level 6 | 91 | 0 | 8 | 1 | 91.0 | 0.90 |
| Warm engagement | 98 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 98.0 | 0.98 |
| Self-disclosure | 90 | 0 | 1 | 9 | 90.0 | 0.89 |
| Direct confrontation | 78 | 2 | 11 | 9 | 80.0 | 0.75 |
| Unorthodox irreverence | 97 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 97.0 | 0.97 |
| Balanced style and strategies | 73 | 4 | 13 | 10 | 77.0 | 0.69 |
| Model dialectical thinking | 58 | 9 | 26 | 7 | 67.0 | 0.47 |
| Consultation to the client | 98 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 98.0 | 0.98 |
| Suicidal behaviors protocol | 90 | 1 | 3 | 6 | 91.0 | 0.90 |
“True positive” = rated as adherent by both therapists and observers
“True negative” = rated as non-adherent by both therapists and observers
“False positive” = rated as adherent by therapists and non-adherent by observers
“False negative” = rated as non-adherent by therapists and adherent by observers