M.E. / MS issues and Efficacy

When respondents ratings for ‘M.E. / MS issues’ are combined and compared to Efficacy2 a correlation can be seen:

Graph/ M.E. / MS Issues and Efficacy2

It can be seen in the above charts that those who gave higher ratings to items in the M.E. / MS issues section also tended to submit higher values for the efficacy measures. This is a clear trend, though a few respondents give significantly better efficacy ratings with lower M.E./MS issues ratings suggesting that they found benefits in counselling without necessarily exploring these particular issues usefully. When all the data for M.E. issues are sorted in a graph, low to high ratings, the difference between what respondents who want counselling think would be useful, and what respondents who received counselling found useful, can be seen:

Graph/ M.E. group Had counselling, M.E. Issues

Graph/ M.E. group Want counselling, M.E. Issues

(Note: individual respondent ratings for multiple criteria cannot be read in these charts)

Many factors might contribute to the differences in these two charts. Many who received counselling worked on these issues but did not find the work helpful. Considering the comments submitted it seems that in some instances the relationship might not have been sound, trust, acceptance and understanding may have been lacking - and judgements and psychologizing were perceived. It can be seen that for the group who want counselling 'Family Background' was rated overall lowest, but for those that received counselling this item is much closer to the average.

Back to 8/ Feeling hurt by people's misunderstanding - HOME - Next, 10/ How counselling works