Therapeutic relationship elements and therapy session outcomes: Protocol for a longitudinal study of the patient’s perspective.

<ns4:p> <ns4:bold>Background:</ns4:bold> There is a growing recognition of the key role of the therapeutic relationship in the outcomes of psychotherapy. However, current understanding of its specific components, their interplay and related patient-therapist dynamics is limited. </ns4:p> <ns4:p> <ns4:bold>Objective:</ns4:bold> (a) To validate two self-report measures to assess subjective affective reactions of patients toward their psychotherapists during specific therapy sessions, and (b) to explore the relationships and dynamics among four elements of the therapeutic relationship: patient reactions toward the therapist, working alliance, alliance ruptures and repairs, and the real relationship. </ns4:p> <ns4:p> <ns4:bold>Methods:</ns4:bold> This study uses a nonrandomized, two-time point longitudinal design. The target population is adult patients currently engaged in individual psychotherapy for heterogeneous mental conditions. Participants are recruited through two online recruitment platforms: Research for Me and ResearchMatch. Data collection involves administering two surveys through the Qualtrics online survey platform. The baseline survey assesses information about the most recent therapy session and the preceding week, while the follow-up survey collects data on the subsequent therapy session and the days leading up to it. </ns4:p> <ns4:p> <ns4:bold>Discussion:</ns4:bold> This research offers three main contributions: (a) it furthers evidence-based assessment in psychotherapy by creating and validating two novel, succinct self-report tools; (b) it enhances theoretical understanding within therapeutic relationship research by exploring the significant impact of patients' perceptions of relationship elements on session outcomes variability; and (c) it will identify therapeutic relationship elements that can either enhance or hinder the overall relationship quality and session outcomes. </ns4:p> <ns4:p> <ns4:bold>Ethics and dissemination:</ns4:bold> The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. The results will be published in indexed peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant psychology and psychiatry conferences. </ns4:p>