___

• Aladağ, M. (2014). Psikolojik danışman eğitiminin farklı düzeylerinde bireyle psikolojik danışma uygulaması süpervizyonunda kritik olaylar. Ege Eğitim Dergisi, 2(15), 428-475.
• Atik, Z. (2017). Psikolojik danışman adaylarının bireyle psikolojik danışma uygulaması ve süpervizyonuna ilişkin değerlendirmeleri. Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Ankara, Türkiye.
• Atik, Z. ve Yıldırım, İ. (2017). Süpervizyonda Değerlendirme Süreci Envanteri Türkçe Formu’nun Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması. Ege Eğitim Dergisi, 18(1), 146-173.
• American Psychological Association. (2015). Guidelines for clinical supervision in health service psychology. American Psychologist, 70, 33–46. doi: 10.1037/a0038 112.
• Bahrick, A. S. (1989). Role induction for counselor trainees: Effects on the supervisory working alliance. Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University. https://www.proquest.com/docview/303821611?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true adresinden elde edilmiştir.
• Bambling, M. ve King, R. (2014). Supervisor social skill and supervision outcome. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, 14, 256–262.
• Behling, J., Curtis, C. ve Foster, S. A. (1988). Impact of sex-role combinations on student performance in field instruction. The Clinical Supervisor, 6, 161-168. doi:10.1300/J001v06n03_12
• Bernard, J. M. ve Goodyear, R. K. (2019). Fundamentals of clinical supervision. MA: Pearson.
• Borders, L. D. ve Brown, L. L. (2005). The new handbook of counseling supervision (2. bs.). NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Association.
• Bordin, E. S. (1979). The generalizability of the psychoanalytic concept of the working alliance. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice, 16(3), 252–260. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0085885
• Bordin, E. S. (1983). A working alliance based model of supervision. The Counseling Psychologist, 11(1), 35-42.
• Büyükgöze-Kavas, A. (2011). An evaluation regarding individual and group counseling practicums. Turkish Educational Sciences Journal, 9(2), 411-432.
• Brown, T. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
• Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2. bs.). New York, NY: Routledge.
• Cliffe, T., Beinart, H. ve Cooper, M. (2016). Development and validation of a short version of the supervisory relationship questionnaire. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 23(1), 77-86.
• Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs. 2016. CACREP Standards. https://www.cacrep.org/for-programs/2016-cacrep-standards/ adresinden elde edilmiştir.
• Crockett, S. ve Hays, D. G. (2015). The influence of supervisor multicultural competence on the supervisory working alliance, supervisee counseling self‐efficacy, and supervisee satisfaction with supervision: A mediation model. Counselor Education and Supervision, 54(4), 258-273. doi:10.1002/ceas.12025
• Edwards, P. J., Roberts, I., Clarke, M. J., DiGuiseppi, C., Wentz, R., Kwan, I., ... ve Pratap, S. (2009). Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires. Cochrane database of systematic reviews, (3). doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000008.pub4
• Efstation, J. F., Patton, M. J. ve Kardash, C. M. (1990). Measuring the working alliance in counselor supervision. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 37(3), 322-329. doi: 10.1037/0022-0167.37.3.322
• Ellis, M. V. (1991). Critical incidents in clinical supervision and in supervisor supervision: Assessing supervisory issues. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38(3), 342-349.
• Fernández-Ballesteros, R. ve Botella, J. (2008). Self-report measures. Evidence-based outcome research: A practical guide to conducting randomized controlled trials for psychosocial interventions, 95-122.
• Fernando, D. M. ve Hulse‐Killacky, D. (2005). The relationship of supervisory styles to satisfaction with supervision and the perceived self‐efficacy of master's‐level counseling students. Counselor education and supervision, 44(4), 293-304. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6978.2005.tb01757.x
• Friedlander, M. L. ve Ward, L. G. (1984). Development and validation of the Supervisory Styles Inventory. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31(4), 541-557. doi: 10.1037/0022-0167.31.4.541
• Ghazali, N. M., Jaafar, W. M. W., Tarmizi, R. A. ve Noah, S. M. (2016). Influence of supervisees’ working alliance on supervision outcomes: A study in Malaysia context. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 6(1), 9-14. doi:10.7763/IJSSH.2016.V6.609
• Gonsalvez, C. J., Hamid, G., Savage, N. M. ve Livni, D. (2017). The supervision evaluation and supervisory competence scale: Psychometric validation. Australian Psychologist, 52(2), 94-103.
• Gunn, J. E. ve Pistole, M. C. (2012). Trainee supervisor attachment: Explaining the alliance and disclosure in supervision. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 6(4), 229–237. doi: 10.1037/a0030805
• Haynes, R., Corey, G. ve Moulton, P. (2003). Clinical supervision in the helping professions: A practical guide. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole-Thomson Learning.
• Hindes, Y. L. ve Andrews, J. J. W. (2011). Influence of gender on the supervisory relationship: A review of the empirical research from 1996 to 2010. Canadian Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy, 45(3), 240-261.
• Holloway, E. (1995). Clinical supervision: A systems approach. Sage: Thousand Oaks.
• Horrocks, S. ve Smaby, M. H. (2006). The supervisory relationship : Its impact on trainee personal and skills development. Compelling Perspectives on Counselling: VISTAS, 173-176.
• Jain, S. ve Angural, V. (2017). Use of Cronbach’s alpha in dental research. Medico Research Chronicles, 4(3), 285-291.
• Karpenko, V. ve Gidycz, C. A. (2012). The supervisory relationship and the process of evaluation: Recommendations for supervisors. The Clinical Supervisor, 31(2), 138-158.
• Koçyiğit-Özyiğit, M. (2019). Bireyle psikolojik danışma uygulaması dersinde grup süpervizyonu sürecinin incelenmesi: Bir durum çalışması. Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi, Ege Üniversitesi, İzmir, Türkiye.
• Ladany, N. ve Lehrman-Waterman, D. E. (1999). The content and frequency of supervisor self-disclosures and their relationship to supervisor style and the supervisory working alliance. Counselor Education and Supervision, 38, 143–160. https ://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6978.1999.tb005 67.x.
• Ladany, N., Mori, Y. ve Mehr, K. E. (2013). Effective and ineffective supervision. The Counseling Psychologist, 41(1), 28-47. doi:10.1177/0011000012442648
• Ladany, N., Walker, J. A. ve Melincoff, D. S. (2001). Supervisory style: Its relation to the supervisory working alliance and supervisor self‐disclosure. Counselor Education and Supervision, 40(4), 263-275.
• Lehrman-Waterman, D. ve Ladany, N. (2001). Development and validation of the Evaluation Process Within Supervision Inventory. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 48(2), 168- 177. doi: 1037//0022-0167.48.2.168
• Lizzio, A., Wilson, K. ve Que, J. (2009). Relationship dimensions in the professional supervision of psychology graduates: Supervisee perceptions of processes and outcome. Studies in Continuing Education, 31(2), 127-140.
• Meydan, B. (2020). Turkish first-time supervisees’ disclosure and nondisclosure in clinical supervision. Qualitative Research in Education, 9(1), 1-31.
• Meydan, B. (2019). Facilitative and hindering factors regarding the supervisory relationship based on supervisors' and undergraduate supervisees' opinions. Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction, 9(1), 171-208.
• Meydan, B. ve Denizli, S. (2018). Turkish undergraduate supervisees' views regarding supervisory relationship. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research , 74, 1-23.
• Meydan, B. ve Koçyiğit, M. (2019). The supervisory relationship experiences of Turkish first-time and advanced supervisees. Qualitative Research in Education, 8(1), 89-121.
• Min, R. M. (2012). Impact of the supervisory relationship on trainee development. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(18), 168-177. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1233/eacb1f0a76ec147e39ebe54aed62e14573b5.pdf adresinden elde edildi.
• Muse-Burke, J. L., Ladany, N. ve Deck, M. D. (2001). The supervisor relationship. In L. J. Bradley & N. Ladany (Eds.), Counselor supervision: Principles, process, and practice (3rd ed., pp. 28-62). Philadelphia: Brunner-Routledge.
• Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric methods. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
• Palomo, M., Beinart, H. ve Cooper, M. J. (2010). Development and validation of the Supervisory Relationship Questionnaire (SRQ) in UK trainee clinical psychologists. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 49(2), 131-149.
• Pearce, N., Beinart, H., Clohessy, S. ve Cooper, M. (2013). Development and validation of the Supervisory Relationship Measure: A self‐report questionnaire for use with supervisors. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 52(3), 249-268.
• Ramos-Sánchez, L. L., Esnil, E., Goodwin, A., Riggs, S., Touster, L. O., Wright, L. K., … Rodolfa, E. (2002). Negative supervisory events: Effects on supervision and supervisory alliance. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 33(2), 197-202. doi:10.1037//0735-7028.33.2.19.
• Rønnestad, M. H. ve Lundquist, K. (2009). The Brief Supervisory Alliance Scale. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Psychology, Oslo, Norway.
• Sabella, S. A., Schultz, J. C. ve Landon, T. J. (2020). Validation of a brief form of the supervisory working alliance inventory. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 63(2), 115-124.
• Satorra, A. ve Bentler, P. M. (2001). A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moment structure analysis. Psychometrika, 66, 507-514. doi: 10. 1007/BF02296192
• Schacht, A. J., Howe, H. E. ve Berman, J. J. (1989). Supervisor facilitative conditions and effectiveness as perceived by thinking-and feeling-type supervisees. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 26(4), 475.
• Smith, T. R., Younes, L. K. ve Lichtenberg, J. W. (2002). Examining the Working Alliance in Supervisory Relationships: The Development of the Working Alliance Inventory of Supervisory Relationships. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, Chicago, IL.
• Son, E. ve Ellis, M. V. (2013). A cross-cultural comparison of clinical supervision in South Korea and the United States. Psychotherapy, 50(2), 189–205. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033115
• Stewart-Hopkins, P. F. (2012). Correlations between supervisory relationships and effectiveness: Self-perceptions of supervisor and supervisee. Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi, University of Cincinnati.
• Tangen, J. L. ve Borders, L. D. (2016). The supervisory relationship: A conceptual and psychometric review of measures. Counselor Education and Supervision, 55, 159–181.
• Wainwright, N. A. (2010). The development of the Leeds Alliance in Supervision Scale (LASS): A brief sessional measure of the supervisory alliance. University of Leeds. https://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/1118/1/Nigel_Antony_Wainwright_DClinCsychol_THESIS_2010_.pdf adresinden elde edilmiştir.
• Watkins, C. E. (2014). The supervisory alliance as quintessential integrative variable. Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy, 44, 151–161.
• White, V. E. ve Queener, J. (2003). Supervisor and supervisee attachments and social provisions related to the supervisory working alliance. Counselor Education and Supervision, 42(3), 203-218.
• Worthington, E. L. ve Stern, A. (1985). Effects of supervisor and supervisee degree level and gender on the supervisory relationship. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 32(2), 252-262.