In this study, the author reviewed 32 studies, published in The Australian Journal of Rehabilitation Counselling (AJRC) from 1995 to 2000, that examined the authors' theoretical perspectives and how the authors and/or rehabilitation counsellors (RCs) as research participants defined quality practice. Their theoretical perspectives ranged from systems, psychological and psychosocial theories and specific disability or minority group issues. These theoretical perspectives were examined in relation to the methods of quality practice advocated by AJRC authors and/or their RC-research participants, these being: relationship building, assessment, goal setting, affective and vocational counselling, case management, self-care, and evaluation of services. Notwithstanding a commendable diversity in the range of theory and quality practice reported, several AJRC authors observed a lack of clarity regarding the professional identity of RCs; and the research papers lacked consistency and clarity in defining the characteristics of RC-participants. There were also opposing views concerning where RCs stood in relation to other stakeholders in the rehabilitation process. Further research is recommended to better understand the diversity evident in the roles and functions of Australian RCs in different rehabilitation settings.