เปรียบเทียบวิธี

	ระบบการให้คะแนนการแก้ไขความร้าวฉาน	มาตรวัดข้อตกลงระหว่างผู้ป่วยและนักจิตบำบัด
สาขาวิชา	การวิจัยจิตบำบัด	การวิจัยจิตบำบัด
ตระกูล	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
ปีกำเนิด	1993	1965
ผู้ริเริ่ม	Jeremy D. Safran, J. Christopher Muran	Edward H. Nash, Robert Hoehn-Saric
ประเภท	Observer/Clinician-rated	Client/Therapist-rated
แหล่งต้นตำรับ	Safran, J. D., Muran, J. C., & Samstag, L. W. (1994). Resolving therapeutic alliance ruptures: A task analytic investigation. In A. O. Horvath & L. S. Greenberg (Eds.), The working alliance: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 225–255). New York: John Wiley & Sons.	Nash, E. H., Hoehn-Saric, R., Battle, C. C., Stone, A. R., Imber, S. D., & Frank, J. D. (1965). Systemic preparation of patients for psychotherapy: Effects on therapy behavior and outcome. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 2(4), 267–281.
ชื่อเรียกอื่น	RRRS, Alliance Rupture Rating Scale, Rupture Resolution Scale	PTAS, Goal Agreement Scale
ที่เกี่ยวข้อง	4	4
สรุป	The Rupture Resolution Rating System (RRRS) is an observer-based measure designed to assess the quality of therapist response to alliance ruptures and the degree to which ruptures are resolved within psychotherapy sessions. Developed by Safran and Muran, the RRRS operationalizes the principle that ruptures—temporary breaks in empathy, collaboration, or understanding between therapist and client—are normal therapy events and that how therapists repair them predicts therapeutic benefit. The RRRS codes the presence, severity, and resolution of ruptures, revealing therapist skill in navigating relational challenges.	The Patient-Therapist Agreement Scale (PTAS) measures the degree to which client and therapist agree on therapy goals, treatment focus, and expected treatment duration—a core component of the therapeutic alliance. Developed by Nash and colleagues in their foundational study of psychotherapy preparation, the PTAS operationalizes the principle that shared understanding of 'what we're working on and how long it will take' predicts engagement and outcome. It is used primarily in research and training to assess goal alignment and identify mismatches that may undermine treatment.