Brief Description

The SEQ-24 is a self-report psychometric tool used to capture the client’s immediate, subjective experience of a psychotherapy session. It is a revised version of the original SEQ and includes 24 pairs of opposing adjectives (e.g., “deep – superficial,” “intense – mild”) that assess the client’s perception of the session’s helpfulness, emotional tone, and overall impact.

Purpose

The purpose of the SEQ-24 is to evaluate the perceived quality of each therapy session as experienced by the client. It provides insight into the therapeutic relationship, emotional connection, cognitive involvement, and perceived effectiveness of the session.

Scoring Method

Participants respond to each pair of adjectives using a 7-point bipolar scale, indicating where their experience falls between the two extremes. The items are grouped into key dimensions such as Depth, Smoothness, Arousal, and Positivity. Subscale scores are calculated as the average of the relevant items, with higher scores reflecting stronger endorsement of that experience (e.g., greater depth or satisfaction).

Validity

The SEQ-24 demonstrates solid construct validity, supported by factor analyses that consistently confirm its multidimensional structure. It correlates well with other measures of therapeutic alliance, client satisfaction, and session outcome, making it a valuable tool for both clinical use and psychotherapy research.

Reliability

Internal consistency is high, with Cronbach’s alpha values typically exceeding 0.80 for each subscale. Test-retest reliability across consecutive sessions is also acceptable, supporting its use in ongoing treatment evaluation.

Data Analysis and Use

Data are analyzed using descriptive statistics and mean scores for each dimension. The SEQ-24 can be used to track client perceptions over time, assess the impact of specific sessions, and inform therapists’ practice. It is commonly used in psychotherapy research, clinical training, and routine outcome monitoring.

References

Stiles, W. B. (1980). Measurement of the impact of psychotherapy sessions. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 48, 176–185.
Elliott, R., & Shapiro, D. A. (1992). Client and therapist as analysts of significant events. In S. Toukmanian & D. Rennie (Eds.), Psychotherapy process research: Paradigmatic and narrative approaches (pp. 163–186). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Elliott, R., Stiles, W. B., & Shapiro, D. A. (1993). Are some psychotherapies more equivalent than others? Psychological Bulletin, 113(3), 398–410.