Supervision Relationship in Korean and International Research Trends: Focusing on quantitative research from 1988 to 2023

Objectives The purpose of this study is to analyze the research trends of Korean and international supervision relationship quantitative research, to summarize the flow of research, and to suggest directions for future research based on this. Methods For this purpose, the paper was collected as a tool for measuring supervision relationship and supervision relationship through data retrieval of Korean academic paper DB and EBSCOhost academic retrieval system, which is an international academic DB, and 63 papers were selected for final analysis. The analysis criteria consisted of the basics of the thesis, research topics, measurements, measurements and related variables, research subjects, and research methods. Results First, as for the number of papers by year of publication, a total of 42 papers were researched starting from 1988 in foreign countries, and 21 papers were researched starting from 2006 in Korea. Second, the trend of each research topic was the process-performance research in Korea and international research, followed by scale development research. Third, the Working Alliance Inventory (Bahrick, 1990) was used the most in Korea, and the Working Alliance Inventory developed by Bahrick(1990) was used most overseas. In addition to the working alliance developed by Bahrick(1990), several scales such as Supervisory Working Alliance Inventory (Efstation, Patton, & Kardash, 1990) were developed and used. Fourth, the variables used in the quantitative study of supervision relationship were supervision process-performance variables. Fifth, there were many studies on supervisee subjects at home and abroad. Conclusions This study outlined the measurements, research variables, and trends of each research subjects used in quantitative studies related to the supervision relationship. Through this, not only the supervision working alliance but also the supervision relationship variables that have been the focus of the study were specifically identified. The limitations of previous studies and implications for future supervision relationships were presented.