![[ Visit Client Website ]](images/banner.gif)
Motivational Interviewing (MI) is an evidence-based, client-centered approach designed to enhance an individual's motivation and commitment to behavior change. Widely used across human services, MI has become a core competency in social work education, where it is used to help students develop essential counseling competencies. As MI training becomes more prevalent in Master of Social Work (MSW) programs, there is interest in evaluating tools that measure student confidence in applying MI techniques.
The Motivational Interviewing Confidence Scale (MICS), developed by Martin and Larson (2021), is a 24-item self-report instrument that assesses confidence in MI skills. The scale is structured around the four key processes of MI—Engaging, Focusing, Evoking, and Planning. While preliminary research supports the scale’s potential, the MICS has not been tested within graduate social work education. Validating tools like the MICS is crucial for tracking student growth and guiding curriculum development.
This study aimed to assess the internal consistency and factor structure of the MICS among MSW students enrolled in a practicum-based course. A secondary aim was to examine whether self-reported confidence varied by instructional format, comparing in-person versus online learning. With virtual education playing a larger role in graduate training, understanding its impact on students’ perceived competence is increasingly important.
Methods
Data were drawn from a larger study evaluating the University of Utah Virtual Motivational Interviewing (VMI) App (Benson, et al, 2025) designed to support MI skill development. A pre- and post-test design was implemented with MSW students enrolled in practicum courses offered in both in-person and online formats. Throughout the course, students engaged in MI-focused activities and used the VMI App to practice and rate their MI skills. The MICS was administered at the beginning and end of the course. Internal consistency of the MICS was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha, and structural validity was examined using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), testing alignment with MI’s four-process model.
Results
Preliminary analyses showed excellent internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.99). CFA results offered partial support for the theorized four-factor model, suggesting some alignment with MI’s core processes. Post-test scores indicated a significant increase in MI confidence following the training, with improvements observed across all domains. No significant differences were found between in-person and online learners.
Conclusions and Implications
Findings support the MICS as a reliable tool for measuring MI confidence among MSW students. Its use can enhance evaluation of training outcomes and inform curriculum development. While results are promising, further research is recommended to confirm the scale’s validity across diverse educational settings and to explore its ability to predict actual MI performance in practice.