Factors promoting multicultural dialogues in clinical supervision: A dyadic study



Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title



Given the continued prioritization of multicultural competence in psychology, the need for supervisors to address multicultural variables impacting the supervisory triad is imperative. Engagement in multicultural dialogues has been linked with myriad positive outcomes, yet supervisors sparsely initiate them. The researcher of this study explored what factors were associated with attention to multicultural variables in supervision. A total of 48 participants, 30 of whom comprised 15 supervisory dyads, completed an online survey featuring an author-generated demographics and supervision questionnaire, the Multicultural Awareness, Knowledge, and Skills Survey (D’Andrea, Daniels, & Heck, 1991), the Supervisory Working Alliance Inventory (Efstation, Patton, & Kardash, 1990), the Supervisory Satisfaction Questionnaire (Ladany, Hill, Corbett, & Nutt, 1996), the Supervisee Levels Questionnaire—Revised (McNeill, Stoltenberg, & Romans, 1992), the White Racial Identity Attitude Scale (Helms, 2002a, 2002b; Helms & Carter, 1990a), and the People of Color Racial Identity Attitude Scale (Helms, 1995a, 1995b; Helms & Carter, 1990b). Power was limited given the study’s sample size, which likely impacted findings. There were no significant differences between supervisors’ and supervisees’ perceptions of cultural similarities within the supervisory dyad; frequencies of initiating multicultural dialogues; or frequency of discussions about visible and less visible identities in supervision. The investigator found a positive, non-significant association between supervisees’ developmental level and frequency of engagement in multicultural dialogues (as perceived by supervisors) but a negative, non-significant relationship between variables for supervisees; a positive, non-significant relationship between each members’ self-reported multicultural competence (MC) and perceived strength of the supervisory working alliance (SWA); a positive, non-significant relationship between supervisor MC and supervisees’ satisfaction with supervision; and a positive, non-significant relationship between supervisees’ levels of racial identity development (RID) and supervisor MC, but negative, non-significant relationships between supervisees’ RID and satisfaction with supervision and SWA. Supervisors’ RID did not partially mediate the relationship between supervisors’ and supervisees’ MC. Effect sizes provided support for future replication studies among larger samples. As extant literature has focused primarily on the perspectives of either supervisors or supervisees, the findings of the current study foster support for continued examination of factors promoting multicultural dialogues among multiple members within the supervisory triad.



Supervision, Clinical supervision, Multicultural, Multicultural competence, Supervisory dyad