Skill Assessment Discuss your experiences taking the the Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Working Alliance Self-Efficacy Scale and the Arab-Muslim IAT: What strengths and weaknesses are revealed in the scale and assessment? Revisit your response to the Unit 1 discussion question "How does your identity align with the Thomas and Schwarzbaum discussion of oppression? Explain how your identity and experiences with oppression are connected to your scores on the scale and assessment. Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Working Aliance Self-Efficacy Scales (LGB-WASES) Acronym: LGB-WASES Source Used: The majority of metadata for this record was created from PsycINFO Record: 2009-01388-005 Purpose: The Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Working Alliance Self-Efficacy Scales (LGB-WASES) was developed to provide reliable and valid measure designed to assess counselors’ LGB-affirmative self-efficacy beliefs with regard to their ability to form a working alliance with an LGB client. Description: The Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Working Alliance Self-Efficacy Scales (LGB-WASES, 2009) was constructed to provide reliable and valid measure designed to assess counselors’ LGB-affirmative self-efficacy beliefs with regard to their ability to form a working alliance with an LGB client. The development of the LGB-WASES was based on a synthesis of theory on the working alliance (Bordin, 1979, 1994) and LGB-affirmative counseling (APA, 2000; Fassinger, 1991; Fassinger & Richie, 1997; Perez et al., 2000). Items were developed by the authors for each of the three theorized components of the working alliance (i.e., goals, tasks, bond). An initial pool of 90 items was written for the experimental form of the LGB-WASES. Three doctoral-level counseling psychology graduate students and three licensed mental health professionals reviewed and then rated each item for fit with the hypothesized subscale. Additionally, graduate students and the mental health professionals provided feedback on the clarity of items, and indicated if items reflected the types of concerns that students may experience when learning to work with and form a working alliance with an LGB client. These procedures resulted in 19 items being rewritten and the deletion of six items. This item development process resulted in 84-items for the experimental version of LGB-WASES. Participants (303 psychology students) were asked to respond to the items on an 11-point scale ranging from 0 to 10 (0 = cannot do at all, 5 = moderately certain can do, 10 = certain can do). A Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin value of .98 was found, indicating that the sample size and distribution of values were appropriate for a factor analysis. The Test of Sphericity was also significant (p < .01), indicating multivariate normality and suggesting that the data set was appropriate for a factor analysis. Factor analyses resulted in the retention of 32 items for the final measure, and a three-factor solution accounted for 73% of the total variance. Factor 1 accounte.

1. Skill Assessment
Discuss your experiences taking the the Lesbian, Gay, and
Bisexual Working Alliance Self-Efficacy Scale and the Arab-
Muslim IAT:
What strengths and weaknesses are revealed in the scale and
assessment?
Revisit your response to the Unit 1 discussion question "How
does your identity align with the Thomas and Schwarzbaum
discussion of oppression? Explain how your identity and
experiences with oppression are connected to your scores on the
scale and assessment.
Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Working Aliance Self-Efficacy
Scales (LGB-WASES)
Acronym:
LGB-WASES
Source Used:
The majority of metadata for this record was created from
PsycINFO Record: 2009-01388-005
Purpose:
The Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Working Alliance Self-Efficacy
Scales (LGB-WASES) was developed to provide reliable and
valid measure designed to assess counselors’ LGB-affirmative
self-efficacy beliefs with regard to their ability to form a
working alliance with an LGB client.
Description:
The Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Working Alliance Self-Efficacy
Scales (LGB-WASES, 2009) was constructed to provide reliable

2. and valid measure designed to assess counselors’ LGB-
affirmative self-efficacy beliefs with regard to their ability to
form a working alliance with an LGB client. The development
of the LGB-WASES was based on a synthesis of theory on the
working alliance (Bordin, 1979, 1994) and LGB-affirmative
counseling (APA, 2000; Fassinger, 1991; Fassinger & Richie,
1997; Perez et al., 2000). Items were developed by the authors
for each of the three theorized components of the working
alliance (i.e., goals, tasks, bond). An initial pool of 90 items
was written for the experimental form of the LGB-WASES.
Three doctoral-level counseling psychology graduate students
and three licensed mental health professionals reviewed and
then rated each item for fit with the hypothesized subscale.
Additionally, graduate students and the mental health
professionals provided feedback on the clarity of items, and
indicated if items reflected the types of concerns that students
may experience when learning to work with and form a working
alliance with an LGB client. These procedures resulted in 19
items being rewritten and the deletion of six items. This item
development process resulted in 84-items for the experimental
version of LGB-WASES. Participants (303 psychology students)
were asked to respond to the items on an 11-point scale ranging
from 0 to 10 (0 = cannot do at all, 5 = moderately certain can
do, 10 = certain can do). A Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin value of .98
was found, indicating that the sample size and distribution of
values were appropriate for a factor analysis. The Test of
Sphericity was also significant (p < .01), indicating multivariate
normality and suggesting that the data set was appropriate for a
factor analysis. Factor analyses resulted in the retention of 32
items for the final measure, and a three-factor solution
accounted for 73% of the total variance. Factor 1 accounted for
60% of the variance and consisted of 13 items. This factor was
named Emotional Bond. The second factor consisted of 13 items
and accounted for 9% of the variance. This factor was named
Task. Factor 3 consisted of six items and accounted for an
additional 4% of the variance. This factor was named Goal.

3. Using Cronbach’s alpha coefficients we computed internal
reliability estimates, which were: Emotional Bond (.97), Task
(.96), Goal (.94), and LGB-WASES total scale (.98). The total
scale scores of the Counselor Activity Self-Efficacy Scales and
Multicultural Counseling Inventory were used to examine
convergent validity. Results indicated that both counselor
general self-efficacy (correlations from .19 to .43) and
multicultural counseling competency (correlations from .35 to
.46) were positively and moderately related to LGB-WASES
subscale and total scores. The LGB-WASES had moderate (r = -
.39) to strong (r = -.63) inverse correlations with Attitudes
Toward Lesbians and Gay Men subscales, indicating that less
negative attitudes toward lesbians and gay men were associated
with higher perceived abilities among counselor trainees in
developing an emotional bond, developing counseling goals and
identifying appropriate counseling tasks. (PsycTESTS Database
Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
Test Year:
2009
Author:
Burkard, Alan W.; Pruitt, Nathan T.; Medler, Barbara R.; Stark-
Booth, Ann M.
Email:
Burkard, Alan W.:
[email protected]
Affiliation:
Burkard, Alan W.. Marquette University, Department of
Counseling and Educational Psychology, Milwaukee,
Wisconsin, United States
Pruitt, Nathan T.. Marquette University, Department of
Counseling and Educational Psychology, Milwaukee,
Wisconsin, United States
Medler, Barbara R.. Private Practice, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

4. Stark-Booth, Ann M.. North Dakota State University Counseling
Center, Educational Counseling and Chemical Dependency
Counseling Services, North Dakota, United States
Correspondence:
Burkard, Alan W., Marquette University, Department of
Counseling and Educational Psychology P. O. Box
1881Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States, 53201-1881,
[email protected]
Instrument Type:
Rating Scale
Format:
Thirty-two-item measure; 11-point scale ranging from 0 to 10 (0
= cannot do at all, 5 = moderately certain can do, 10 = certain
can do).
Language Present:
English
Language Available:
English
Construct:
Working Alliance; Self Efficacy
Test File:
Full text; 999900319_full_001.pdf
Commercial Availability:
No
Permissions:
May use for Research/Teaching
Fee:
No
Test Items Available:
Yes
Classification:
7900 Treatment, Rehabilitation, and Therapeutic Processes
Reliability:
Internal consistency: Internal consistency coefficient alphas
were .98, .97, .96, .94 for the total scale and Bond, Task, and

5. Goals factors, respectively. Test-retest reliability: The stability
coefficients were in the moderate to high range on Factors 1
(Bond; r = .90) and 2 (Task; r = .79), and total scale (r = .83),
whereas Factor 3 was in the low range (Goal; r = .63).
Validity:
Convergent validity: Using the total scale scores of the CASES
and MCI to examine convergent validity, both counselor general
self-efficacy (correlations from .19 to .43) and multicultural
counseling competency (correlations from .35 to .46) were
positively and moderately related to LGB-WASES subscale and
total scores. Discriminant validity: There were no strong
associations between LGB-WASES scales and the SDS,
although the Goal subscale had a statistically significant
correlation of small magnitude (r = .23). Additionally, the LGB-
WASES had moderate (r = -.39) to strong (r = -.63) inverse
correlations with the ATLG subscales.
Factor Analysis:
No factor analysis indicated.
Methodology:
1000 Test Validity
1040 Convergent Validity
1060 Discriminant Validity
1100 Test Reliability
1110 Internal Consistency
1140 Test-Retest Reliability
Number of Test Items:
The LGB-WASES consists of 32 items with a three-factor
model: (a) Emotional Bond, (b) Establishing Tasks, and (c)
Setting Goals.
Administration Method:
Paper

6. Age Group:
Adulthood (18 yrs & older); Young Adulthood (18-29
yrs); Thirties (30-39 yrs); Middle Age (40-64 yrs)
Population Group:
Human; Male; Female
Other Population Details:
Location: US
Sample: Counseling Trainees
Keywords:
Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Working Alliance Self-Efficacy
Scales; Test Development; Lesbian; Gay; Bisexual; Working
Alliance; Counseling Self Efficacy
Index Terms:
Bisexuality; Counselor Characteristics; Factor
Structure; Homosexuality; Lesbianism; Professional
Competence; Test Construction; Test Reliability; Test
Validity; Therapeutic Alliance
Source Citation:Test Development
Burkard, Alan W. (2009). Validity and reliability of the
Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual Working Alliance Self-Efficacy Scales.
Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 3(1), 37-46.
doi: 10.1037/1931-3918.3.1.37
PsycINFO Record
:
2009-01388-005
Test Release Date:
20110912
Test Correction Date:
20151109
Digital Object Identifier:
http://dx.doi.org.library.capella.edu/10.1037/t00319-000
Accession Number:9999-00319-000