Retraction of Keum et al. (2021).

Reports the retraction of "Do therapists improve in their ability to assess clients' satisfaction? A truth and bias model" by Brian TaeHyuk Keum, Katherine Morales Dixon, Dennis M. Kivlighan Jr., Clara E. Hill and Charles J. Gelso ( Journal of Counseling Psychology , 2021[Oct], Vol 68[5], 608-620). The following article (https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000525) is being retracted. This retraction is at the request of coauthors Kivlighan, Hill, and Gelso after the results of an investigation by the University of Maryland Institutional Review Board (IRB). The IRB found that the study included data from between one and four therapy clients of the Maryland Psychotherapy Clinic and Research Laboratory (MPCRL) who either had not been asked to provide consent or had withdrawn consent for their data to be included in the research. Keum and Dixon were not responsible for obtaining and verifying participant consent but agreed to the retraction of this article. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2020-51285-001.) We used the truth and bias model to examine changes in tracking accuracy and under/overestimation (directional bias) on therapists' judgments about clients' satisfaction. We examined 3 factors of clinical experience that could moderate accuracy: (a) overall level of acquaintanceship with a client, operationalized as treatment length (i.e., less or more time seeing a client), (b) time point in therapy with a specific client, operationalized as session number (i.e., earlier or later in treatment with a client), and (c) order (1st client seen, 2nd client seen . . . last client seen across two years of training in a psychology clinic) in which clients were seen. We conducted a three-level hierarchical linear modeling using data on 6054 sessions, nested in 284 adult clients, nested in 41 doctoral student therapists providing open-ended psychodynamic individual psychotherapy. We found that therapists were able to accurately track client-rated session evaluations with less underestimation (i.e., lower tendency to estimate that clients were less satisfied than they actually were) as they gained experience (both treatment length and client order). Furthermore, therapists exhibited greater tracking accuracy gains over the span of shorter treatments and when working with clients earlier in their clinical training. In longer treatments and with clients seen later in training, tracking accuracy was stable and consistent. Implications for research and practice are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).