IJSP Number 8, 2026

International Journal of Supervision in Psychotherapy, Number 8, 2026 Page | 58 often accompanied by conceptual fragmentation, in which dimensions such as reflection, self-regulation, and professional identity are addressed separately or remain implicitly assumed. In this context, it becomes necessary to formulate a minimal integrative conceptual framework that does not compete with existing models but offers a structure for articulating the fundamental dimensions of supervision as an educational process. By “minimal,” we mean a framework general enough to be broadly applicable, yet precise enough to guide theoretical reflection and formative practice. The proposed framework starts from the premise that supervision, reflective practice, self-regulation, and professional identity are not parallel processes but interdependent dimensions of a unified formative process, mediated by relationship and supported by the function of reflective holding. 7.2. COMPONENTS OF THE PROPOSED FRAMEWORK To support clarity and transferability, we identify four central components conceptualized not as separate entities but as processes co-constituted within reflective supervision. (a) Supervision is defined as a structured educational relational space with an explicit formative role, characterized by role clarity, ethical delimitation, and a professional development goal. Within this frame, supervision functions as a support for reflective holding, providing relational conditions necessary for reflection and self-regulation. (b) Reflection is conceptualized as a guided process of exploring and organizing professional experience. It involves cognitive distancing, narrative articulation, and meaning integration, facilitated by the relational structure of supervision and by the function of reflective holding. (c) Self-regulation is approached as a relational and developmental process that includes emotional, cognitive, and behavioral dimensions of professional functioning. Self-regulation is not treated as an isolated competence but as an emergent capacity supported through co-regulation and guided reflection within supervision. (d) Professional identity is understood as a dynamic meaning structure resulting from integrating professional experiences into a coherent narrative about the self as a practitioner. It develops progressively through reflection, self- regulation, and relational validation, functioning simultaneously as an outcome and an active factor of the formative process. Thus, reflective holding is conceptualized as a transversal relational condition that enables the integrated functioning of these components. 7.3. RELATIONSHIPS AMONG COMPONENTS Relationships among the four components are conceptualized as circular, recursive, and mutually influential rather than as sequential stages of a linear training process. Supervision creates the relational reflective holding frame that makes guided reflection on