IJSP Number 8, 2026

International Journal of Supervision in Psychotherapy, Number 8, 2026 Page | 51 A second major limitation is the under-theorization of self-regulation and professional identity within supervision models. Although implicitly acknowledged as relevant, these dimensions are rarely integrated explicitly into coherent conceptual frameworks that explain the mechanisms through which supervision supports their development [20, 21]. Without such theoretical articulation, the relationship between supervision, self-regulation, and identity often remains descriptive rather than explanatory. Moreover, most existing conceptualizations are developed in clinical contexts, creating difficulties for transfer to educational and psychosocial domains. Without clear delimitations, there is a risk of unjustified medicalization of educational processes or superficial use of relational concepts without theoretical integration [7]. These limits point to the need for a conceptual framework that explicitly integrates the relational, reflective, self-regulatory, and identity dimensions of supervision in ways adapted to educational and psychosocial contexts, creating space for new explanatory concepts that capture the deep educational function of supervision. 4. SELF-REGULATION AS A RELATIONAL PROCESS IN SUPERVISION 4.1. SELF-REGULATION: CONCEPTUAL CLARIFICATIONS Self-regulation is a central construct in contemporary psychological and educational literature, associated with individuals’ capacity to manage emotions, thoughts, and behaviors in pursuit of personal and professional goals. Because the term is used across varying theoretical frameworks, conceptual clarification is necessary in the context of supervision and professional development. Emotional self-regulation is defined as the ability to monitor, modulate, and integrate emotional reactions adaptively in relation to contextual demands [16]. In relational professions, this dimension is essential because constant exposure to emotionally charged situations requires the capacity to tolerate ambivalence, frustration, and uncertainty. Neuropsychological literature highlights that emotional self-regulation is not purely intrapsychic; it develops relationally through repeated co-regulation experiences [14]. Cognitive self-regulation refers to processes through which individuals plan, monitor, and evaluate their own thinking and learning strategies. In educational psychology, it includes metacognitive capacities such as self-monitoring, cognitive flexibility, and strategic adjustment based on feedback [18]. In supervision, cognitive self-regulation is supported through guided reflection, critical practice analysis, and integrating experience into a coherent conceptual framework. Professional self-regulation represents an integrative extension of emotional and cognitive dimensions, defined as the ability to manage one’s professional role, boundaries, values, and ethical decisions in complex practice contexts. This form of self-regulation is closely related to professional identity development and the capacity to maintain coherence between the personal and professional self [17, 21]. From this perspective, professional self-regulation cannot be separated from the relational and institutional context in which professional activity occurs. Overall, in this paper, self-regulation is understood as a multidimensional and dynamic process integrating emotional, cognitive, and professional components, profoundly influenced by relational experiences within supervision.