Comparing English and Spanish Speaking Therapists’ Coaching Behaviors

• In Event: Early Childhood Parent Coaching Interventions: Examining Adaptations and Coaching Process

Abstract

Evidence-based Behavioral Parent Training interventions (BPTs) like Parent-Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT) are best-practice treatments for externalizing behavior problems in young children. In PCIT, therapists coach parent-child dyads during sessions to encourage the use of skills taught in therapy and to reinforce positive child behaviors. Different coaching styles have been associated with faster skill acquisition and improved parent engagement. For example, responsive coaching techniques (e.g., praising a parent for using a skill) have been shown to play a role in parental skill acquisition, while directive coaching techniques (e.g., telling a parent to use a skill) have not (Barnett et al., 2017). Although this treatment model has been shown to be efficacious in treating child behavior problems, Spanish-speaking families have been shown to take longer to master skills taught during treatment (Ramos et al., 2018). Therefore, it may be of particular interest to compare English and Spanish speaking therapists’ coaching behaviors used during sessions, to identify strategies to improve therapist behaviors and promote treatment success for Spanish-speaking families.

In this study, previously recorded PCIT sessions were transcribed and coded using the Therapist-Parent Interaction Coding System (TPICS), an empirically-validated coding system, in order to compare English and Spanish speaking therapists’ coaching behaviors. Use of both directive and responsive coaching techniques were compared, as well as overall therapist and parent verbalizations.

Results suggested that coaching styles varied significantly between sessions conducted in Spanish and English. In Spanish sessions, therapists had more total verbalizations (M = 69.25, SD = 15.33) than in English sessions (M = 42.70, SD = 13.47), t (47) = -6.19, p <.001. This included significantly higher rates of directive coaching statements for Spanish sessions (M = 28.81, SD = 15.11) than English sessions (M = 16.36, SD = 8.57), t (20) = -3.06, p = .006 and higher rates of responsive coaching (Spanish: M = 29.19, SD = 12.76; English M = 20.82, SD = 8.13), t (21) = -2.40, p = .026. Specifically, in Spanish sessions, therapists used significantly more unlabeled praises (Spanish: M = 11.06, SD = 5.22, English: M = 3.67, SD = 3.29), t (21) = -5.19, p < .001. Though Spanish sessions included more coaching statements, targets for improving the specificity and ideally effectiveness of coaching for Spanish-speaking clinicians will be discussed.

Authors

• Yessica Green Rosas, University of California - Santa Barbara
  Presenting Author

• Miya Barnett, University of California, Santa Barbara
  Non-Presenting Author

• Kristen McCabe, University of San Diego
  Non-Presenting Author