II I

     
      
   
       

I

III

I

II

II

I

\

THE EFFECT OF SHORT-TERM GROUP
COUNSELING AND COGNITIVE LEARNING
ON A MEASURE 0F SELF -ACTUALIZATION

0F COUNSELORS IN TRAINING

Thesis fat the Degree of Ph. D.
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
WAYNE ROWE
1971

R 2434 I 7
WI I LIBRAR Y
Michigan State
University

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

31293 00642 713

 

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

Actualization of Counselors in Traininq
presented by

The bffect of Short-term Group Counneling

and Connitive Learning on a Reasure of Self-

Hayne Rowe

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph,12, degree in Cgunseli ng

 

Date July 504 197L I

0-7539

    
 
 
 

 

 

- JN‘Sme av '

~ IIUAG 3 SIINS'
. EIW'INL‘:

LIBRARY emosns

.mppmcmm

ABSTRACT

THE EFFECT OF SHORT-TERM GROUP COUNSELING
AND COGNITIVE LEARNING ON A MEASURE OF
SELF-ACTUALIZATION OF COUNSELORS
IN TRAINING

BY
Wayne Rowe

The primary purpose of this study was to assess
the effect which short-term group counseling and a cogni-
tive learning experience may have on the Personal Orien-
tation Inventory (POI), a measure of self-actualization.
It was suggested that influences other than those usually
attributed to group counseling may account in part for
changes previously found on devices of this sort.

Seventy-two counselor candidates were assigned
to the following treatments: group counseling, leader
theory consistent with self-actualization; group counsel-
ing, leader theory based on social-learning; seminar pre-
senting self-actualization concepts in a favorable manner;
placebo treatment; inactive control. Treatment was admin-
istered 14 hours during 8 sessions. Pre- and post-testing
was carried out with the POI and Carkhuff's Discrimination

Test.

Wayne Rowe

Pre-test scores were used as covariates in a
series of multivariate and univariate analyses of covari-
ance. Treatment effects could not be demonstrated at the
.05 level of significance using any of the scales which
were employed.

An analysis of possible factors contributing to
the obtained results included issues related to: theory,
sampling, design and statistical treatment, measurement,

and presentation and control of treatments.

THE EFFECT OF SHORT-TERM GROUP COUNSELING
AND COGNITIVE LEARNING ON A MEASURE OF
SELF-ACTUALIZATION OF COUNSELORS

IN TRAINING

BY

Wayne Rowe

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Counseling, Personnel Services
and Educational Psychology

1971

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES I O O O O O C O O 0

Chapter

I.

II.

III.

IV:

THE PROBLEM, RATIONALE, AND
RELATED RESEARCH . . . . .

Need . . . . . . . . . .
Purpose . . . . . . . . .
Theory . . . . . . . . .
Review of the Literature
Hypotheses . . . . . . .
Overview . . . . . . . .

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN AND
METHODOLOGY 0 O O C O O I 0

Subjects . . . . . . . .
Treatments . . . . . . .
Procedures . . . . . . .
Instruments . . . . . . .
Testable Hypotheses . . .
Design and Statistical

Analysis . . . . . . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . .

ANALYSIS OF RESULTS . . . .

Preliminary Data . . . .
Treatment Effects . . . .
Non-Experimental Data . .
Summary . . . . . . . . .

SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION . .

Summary . . . . . . . . .
Discussion . . . . . . .
Conclusion . . . . . . .

‘;iii

Page

UlobU'IOJNH |-’

P4P

16
17
27
27
31

32
34

35

35
36
39
41

43
43

45
51

LIST OF REFERENCES . . . . .

APPENDICES
Appendix
Appendix
Appendix
Appendix

Appendix

Typescript of Leader-
Member Interactions
Instructions to Judges

Activity Evaluation Form
Table A.1 Mean POI Sub-

scale Scores

Table A.2 Mean, Variance,
and Standard Deviation of

All Variables

iv

Page
53
S7
57
60
61

62

65

Table

2.1

3.2

3.3

3.5

A.1

LIST OF TABLES

Test for Difference in Leader
Responses . . . . . . . . . . . .

Graphic Representation of the
Research Design . . . . . . . . .

Summary of Pre- and Post-test
Scores of Major Interest . . . .

Multivariate Test of Hypothesis 1

POI Scores . . . . . . . . . . .

Overall ANCOVA Analysis of Major
POI scales 0 O O O O O O O O O 0

Overall ANCOVA Analysis of
Discrimination Test . . . . . . .

Test for Pre- and Post-test
Differences . . . . . . . . . . .

Mean POI Sub-scale Scores . . . .

Mean, Variance, and Standard
Deviation of All Variables . . .

Page

26

33

36

37

38

38

39
62

65

CHAPTER I

THE PROBLEM, RATIONALE,

AND RELATED RESEARCH

Need

 

The recommendation that counselor trainees be pro-
vided with preparation and experience in group counseling
has been set forth in both the policy statement of the
American Personnel and Guidance Association (1961) and the
position on standards for counselor preparation of the
Association for Counselor Education and Supervision (1967).
However, the particular value of such experience has not
been explicitly stated. Purposes could reasonably be ad-
vanced which would range from strictly didactic goals, on
one hand, to "deep" therapeutic objectives, on the other.

In their comprehensive appraisal of group counsel-
ing research, Gazda and Larsen (1968) conclude that "group
counseling research is inconclusive (p. 64)." Yet many
counselor training programs seem to take for granted that
participation in group counseling will result in benefi-
cial personality changes among counselors-in-training.

A commonly held position is that participation in

group counseling enhances the potential of the prospective

counselor because of the type of presumed personality change
likely to take place as a result of the group experience.
Proponents of this general View have emphasized such points
as emotional growth (Wirt, Betz, and Engle, 1969), personal
growth (Hurst and Jensen, 1968), experiencing real self
(McLain, 1969), and self-understanding (McKinnon, 1969).
Support for this position is seen in research which has
purported to assess such alterations through the use of a
variety of personality instruments such as the Edwards Per-
sonal Preference Schedule, parts of the Minnesota Multipha-
sic Personality Inventory, self-concept Q-sorts, various
projective devices, and the Personal Orientation Inventory.
However, since changes in behavior are not measured
directly by these instruments, it is not clear whether score
changes on such devices can be attributed solely to the
therapeutic value of group counseling or if cognitive pro-
cesses keyed to the implicit model of psychological adjust-
ment may contribute to the measured effect. Therefore,
there is a need to compare the effects associated with group
counseling and a cognitive presentation on a typical person-
ality instrument and other measures of relevance to the

field of counseling.

PUE BOSE

The primary purpose of the study was to assess the

effect upon counselor trainees which three kinds of learning

experience may have on a measure of self-actualization.
In addition, the effect of these experiences upon a mea-
sure of ability to discriminate counselor responses of
varied therapeutic utility was investigated.

The experiences which were provided included par-
ticipation in group counseling presented by leaders of
two different theoretical orientations and participation
in a lecture-discussion group. In one treatment the group
leader had an orientation consistent with the concept of
self-actualization. In another treatment the group leader
had an orientation which was not consistent with the con—
cept of self-actualization. In the third treatment, the
content of the lecture-discussion sessions was chosen to
present the concept of self-actualization in a favorable
manner.

The objective was to determine if any of these
experiences can be demonstrated to produce a significant
effect on the measures employed when administered to sub-

jects who are counselors-in-training.

Theory
Fundamental to the notion that participation in
group counseling has therapeutic utility in counselor ed-
ucation programs is the premise that counseling effective-
ness increases as the counselor more closely approximates

an "ideal" state of psychological well-being. Terms used

by theorists to indicate this model condition include fully-
functioning (Rogers, 1963), authentic (Jourard, 1966), self-
actualized (Maslow, 1967), and'whole (Carkhuff and Berenson,
1967). In each case the effectiveness of the counselor is
thought to be affected positively to the extent that his
personality incorporates attributes of the construct which
may be used.

Counselor preparation, from this point of View,
ought to include some attempt to foster and guide the "per-
sonal growth" of the prospective counselor because of the
presumed relationship between psychological well-being or
fulfillment (approximation to the model) and counseling ca-
pability. Particular aspects of "personal growth" which
have been cited as having potential beneficial effects for
prospective counselors include: self— and other-acceptance,
empathic understanding, and inter-personal sensitivity
(Hurst and Jensen, 1968); self-knowledge and perceptive
skills (Seegars and McDonald, 1963); self concept develOp-
ment (Wirt, Betz, and Engle, 1969); self-understanding
(Anderson and Cabianca, 1970; Bonney and Gazda, 1966;
McKinnon, 1969).

Group counseling, from this point of view, has as
its major purpose the alteration of the self along these or
other similar dimensions. While other more limited or spe-
cific purposes for group counseling have been advanced

(Krumboltz, 1968; Muro, 1968; Orton, 1965; Zimpfer, 1968),

proponents of this point of View emphasize affective devel-
opment, rather than cognitive learning focused upon group
dynamics, leader roles, particular techniques, and the like.
At issue is the question of whether changes of a therapeutic
nature can be attributed to the kinds of evidence which has

been gathered on counselor trainees.

Review of the Literature

 

It is generally agreed that group counseling exper-
ience is often accepted as an element in counselor educa-
tion programs in spite of little experimental evidence con-
cerning the value of such activities (Betz, 1969; Wirt,
Betz, and Engle, 1969). In a brief analysis of the litera-
ture, Betz (1969) identified several limitations, some of
which include the following: (a) the literature is largely
descriptive; (b) counselor educators and trainees evaluate
group experiences positively; and (c) the measure of outcome
employed in the few experimental studies reported is usually
a pencil-paper device--an indirect measure of performance.
This condition is unfortunate because any situation in which
theoretical investments are heavy and tangible evidence is
sparse may not be a climate that is hospitable to reason.
Given (a) and (b), above, it is difficult to accept non-
experimental evaluations of group counseling effects. In
addition, the interpretation of data under (c) must be care-

fully examined. The survey reported below represents a

rather comprehensive review of the literature on group coun-
seling with counselor trainees. Other reports of particular
relevance are also included.

Several studies have attempted to determine whether
participation in group counseling did, in fact, bring about
some positive change in the personality structure of coun-
selor trainees. Gazda and Ohlsen (1961) reported on 34 sub-
jects who were given 14 hours of group counseling over a
seven week period. Estimates of changes in subjects' "men-
tal health" were made from an omnibus battery which included
the following: a Picture Story Test, Brownfains's Self-
Rating Inventory, a modified Behavior Rating Scale, and the
Edwards Personal Preference Schedule (EPPS). Results at
the post test interval indicated no change on the Picture
Story Test, no change on the Self-Rating Inventory, less
desirable scores on the Behavioral Rating Scale, and changes
on four of 15 scales of the EPPS. At the six month follow-
up interval no control group comparisons were available and
results indicated non-significant gains on the Self-Rating
Inventory, non-significant gains on the Behavior Rating
Scale, and changes on three of the 15 scales of the EPPS.
The Picture Story Test was not administered at this time.
Fourteen months after the conclusion of the treatment, 27
of the subjects completed a questionnaire or were inter-
viewed, and 14 subjects were available to take the Picture

Story Test. Results on the latter showed significant

increase in self-acceptance, though no such gain in accep-
tance of others. Of the 27 subjects who completed the
questionnaire, 22 reported that group counseling had been
beneficial, two said it had not, and three reported that
it had, in fact, hurt them. The authors conclude that,
while strict interpretation of the hypotheses tested would
prove negative, on the basis of the combined data, the evi-
dence may be sufficient to prove the value of group coun-
seling. The evidence, as reported above, clearly does not
support this conclusion in any compelling fashion.

Hurst and Jensen (1968) reported on six subjects
who were given the Human Development Institute's Relation-
ship Improvement Program along with ten weekly T-Group ses-
sions. These subjects were compared with others who par-
ticipated in a reading/discussion seminar or who received
no treatment. Assessment devices included the Berger
Scales of Acceptance of Self and of Others, the Attitude
Toward Self (As) and Attitude Toward Others (Ac) scales of
the MMPI, and Self-Acceptance and Other-Acceptance scales
adapted from the Butler-Haigh Q-sort. In addition, pre
and post-test measures were taken on counselees seen by
the subjects to determine if any differential gains in aca-
demic achievement or personal and social adjustment were
evident. Results indicated that the treatment group of
interest made increases significantly higher on scores of
the As and A0 scales of the MMPI. No other significant

findings were reported.

Significant gains were reported (McKinnon, 1969)
on one of five scales of a Thematic Apperception Instru-
ment and one of five dimensions on a Counselor Response
Scale by students who participated in group counseling
while enrolled in practicum (N = 7). No such gains were
found for counselor trainees in group counseling who were
not in practicum, nor for those in practicum but not in
group counseling. More important, no significant differ-
ences between treatments and control were found on any of
the measures administered at post-test.

Wirt, Betz, and Engle (1969) investigated the ef-
fects of group counseling on the self concepts of counselor
trainees. Seventeen subjects received 14 hours of group
counseling over a fourteen week period. Statistical analy-
ses revealed a positive change in the measured self con-
cepts of the experimental group. However, differences be-
tween the experimental and control groups after treatment
remained non-significant. An interpretation of the results
is difficult in this case because scores of subjects who
dropped out of the control group are included in the pre-
test data and other data suggest a lack of initial equiva-
lence between groups.

An attempt to compare changes in inter- and intra-
personal functioning as the result of participation in T-
Group activities and participation in a didactically ori-

ented class was reported by Eiben (1971). An unspecified

number of beginning counselor candidates were given group
counseling or traditional classroom instruction on group
methods for two hours per week for approximately 14 weeks.
Assessment of level of functioning was done using the Per-
sonal Orientation Inventory (POI). Comparison of mean
scores at pre- and post-testing revealed significant gains
on 11 of the 12 scales of the POI for the group participa-
ting in counseling. On the same basis, the group receiv-
ing didactic instruction showed significant gains on four
scales. When gains between pre- and post-testing on each
scale were compared between each group, four favored the
didactic group and eight favored the counseled group--one
of which reached significance. Inspection of the data in-
dicates that this finding is the result of an unexplained,
isolated decrease on this scale by the didactic group,
rather than the result of positive gain by those in group
counseling. Eiben's interpretation, that the concept
being measured cannot be taught but must be lived, seems
rather strained. No differences were apparent at post-
testing between the two groups on any of the 12 scales.
Other less ambitious studies have been reported.
Seegars and McDonald (1963) provided an "interaction
group" experience to eight student counselors in an at-
tempt to increase self knowledge and perceptive skills.
While the gross data were in support of the expressed pur-

poses, subjective evaluation of questionnaire responses

10

form the basis of their evidence. Role change during group
counseling was studied by Gazda and Bonney (1965) using
counselor trainees as subjects. After 20 hours of treat-
ment during a seven week period, a significant increase

was detected in the roles of information giver, interpreter,
non-participant, and aggressor. Methodological problems
restricted the implications which the authors were able to
generate. Reddy (1970) tested to see if six students en-
tering practicum would perceive each other as having greater
levels of empathy, regard, and congruence as a result of
four days of intensive group counseling. Further, would
clients of these group members perceive these levels the
same as other group members did? Considering the small num-
ber of subjects involved, the lack of controls, and the sta-
tistical procedures employed, little confidence can be
placed on the findings suggested.

Several studies have pointed up issues which may
have special relevance for the topic of this study. Per-
sonal report of benefits gained as a result of group coun-
seling must be looked upon with caution. Prediger and
Baumann (1970) reported a study in which 30 groups of stu-
dents were given group counseling one 40 minute period per
week for approximately nine months. Although no gains were
found on any of the 30 outcome variables included in the de-
sign, subjects receiving the treatment condition consistently

reported the experience as having greater benefit than did

11

subjects in the controls. This sort of problem is illus-
trated by the tortuous discussion in the Leib and Snyder
(1967) study in which students who were removed from a
required class for special treatment showed similar pos-
itive gains in psychological adjustment whether given
group counseling or an academic lecture. The latency
phenomenon ascribed to the Gazda and Ohlsen (1961) follow
up data, it is suggested, may be a less parsimonious ex-
planation of just this effect.

Another issue to be considered concerns the use
of indirect measures of inferred psychological constructs.
Inspection of the studies reviewed above shows the prepon-
derance of self-report measures found in the literature.
Two questions are pertinent. Is group counseling assoc-
iated with changes in self-reports of counselors in train-
ing? Are changes in self-reports associated with predicted
behavioral correlates? Apostal and Muro (1970) gave 20
prospective counselors approximately 50 hours of group
counseling in 13 weeks with the purpose of increasing self
understanding. Experimental and control subjects were pre-
and post-tested on the EPPS and the Motivation Analysis
Test (MAT). In addition, personality sketches were devel-
oped for each subject on the basis of the pre-test data.
Findings indicated that subjects experiencing group coun-
seling changed significantly more than control subjects on

two of the 25 scales involved, results which could be

12

attained by chance. In addition, self understanding, oper-
ationalized as self recognition ability, was not changed
when measured by the ability to correctly identify one's
own personality sketch.

The same sort of problem recurs in a study reported
by Culbert, Clark, and Bobele (1968). Two groups of uni-
versity students were given 28 hours of group counseling
over a 14 week period with the purpose of promoting authen—
tic interaction and increased self-awareness. Assessment
procedures involved the use of the POI and the Problem Ex-
pression Scale (PES), a measure of self-aware behavior.
Significant changes toward improved psychological adjust-
ment were found for one group, while the other group was
found to be in an advanced state of adjustment on the pre-
test and post-test. However, POI changes for individuals,
regardless of group, did not correlate with indexes for
measuring individuals' change on the PES. This would in-
dicate a discrepancy between the way in which subjects re-
port their self—percepts and report their behavior. This
raises a serious question about the practice of using in-
direct measures to infer therapeutic growth or gain.

According to Bonney (1965), it would be poor judg-
ment to ignore pressures toward conformity and to regard
gains or growth through group counseling solely as the re-
sult of intrapsychic phenomena. Drawing from research in

social psychology, he points out that the elements which

13

cause unusual susceptibility to conformity pressures, emo-
tionality and novelty, are both present in the group coun-
seling setting. In these situations an individual becomes
highly dependent on group norms or authority statements for
his response choice. One possible explanation for self-
reports changing while behavior does not may be that the
individual has been persuaded to describe himself in altered
ways without the necessity for changing habitual patterns of
acting.

The limited support which the studies cited supply
to the notion that personality change of significance does
indeed occur in group counseling with prospective counselors
may be further questioned when the special characteristics
of these subjects are considered. Counselors in training
may be more sophisticated toward the nuances and implica-
tions of what transpires in the group than most participants.
They may also recognize that, besides being a potention
"growth" experience, the group may represent an evaluative
procedure in which they are, in effect, on display. Fur-
thermore, they may observe certain attitudes, values, state-
ments, and styles of behavior reacted to positively, while
others are punished or ignored. Kramer (1968) has reported
a positive conditioning effect on three verbal response
classes when reinforced concurrently by the leader in a
small group setting. The relative sophistication of coun-

selors would increase the likelihood that even subtle cues

14

could be discriminated. This would seem to point up the
possibility that leaders of groups made up of counselor
trainees may well be involved in shaping the verbal behav-
ior of these individuals toward the acceptance of key at-
titude and value statements consistent with the model of
psychological adjustment held by that leader, and on which
the various measurement devices may be based.

In short, influences other than those associated
with simple group counseling may be operating to the ex-
tent that they constitute valid alternative explanations
for the meager results currently available. Such explan-
ations could provide hard data concerning the utility of

group counseling for counselor education programs.

Hypotheses

 

In view of the above, the following questions, as
they apply to counselor trainees, were investigated. Are
there different effects as a result of participation in
group counseling or participation in lecture-discussions
when the model of psychological adjustment used in the
measuring instrument is: (1) consistent with the theo-
retical orientation of the group leader; (2) not consis-
tent with the theoretical orientation of the group leader;
or (3) explicitly taught in a lecture-discussion class.
Further, are any effects shown to generalize to simulated
counseling behavior on the kind of performance measure

employed?

15

To investigate these items of interest the follow-

ing hypotheses were tested:

I. Subjects who receive any of the proposed treatments
will receive higher scores on the self-actualization
test than will control subjects.

II. There will be no difference in the self-actualization
scores of subjects between any of the proposed treat-
ments.

III. There will be no difference between subjects who
receive any of the proposed treatments and control

subjects on the discrimination test.

Overview

The organization of the study is as follows. In
Chapter II, the experimental subjects, treatments, and in-
struments are described, along with a statement of the spe-
cific procedures which were employed. Testable hypotheses
are developed and the research design is identified. In
addition, the type of statistical treatment and the level
of significance to be used are described. In Chapter III
the results of the data analysis are reported. Chapter IV
includes a discussion of these results and a summary of the

study.

CHAPTER II
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

After consideration of the issues and hypotheses
presented in the previous Chapter, organization of an

experimental study was carried out.

Subjects

Students enrolled in the master's degree level
counseling practicum at Michigan State University during
the spring term of 1971 were the treatment subjects for
this study. Of the 69 students initially available, 63
students became subjects of the study. Six students were
excluded for the following reasons: unable to take the
pre-test or post-test (2 gs), reluctance to take part in
the study treatment sessions (2 Ss), failure to meet the
required attendance criteria for the treatment sessions
(1 S), and termination of enrollment status (1 S), In
addition, nine students were identified as being members
of the same counselor training program, but were not en-
rolled in practicum. These subjects constituted an inac-

tive control group.

16

17

The resulting group of experimental subjects con-
sisted of 37 trainees in the school counselor program and
26 trainees in the rehabilitation counselor program. In-
cluded were 29 males and 34 females with ages ranging from
21 to 48 years, a median age of 24 years, and a mean age
of 25.6 years.

Twenty-nine subjects had received bachelor's de-
grees from Michigan State University, 11 received their
degree from other colleges or universities in Michigan,
and 23 from colleges or universities outside the state.
Psychology was the most common undergraduate major (15 gs).
Sixteen subjects were prepared in secondary education, with
a variety of major fields represented. Other areas strongly
represented were social sciences (12 gs) and elementary edu-
cation (8 Ss). Less common majors were art (2 Se), foreign
language (2 gs), and business (2 Se). Thirty-four subjects
reported no teaching experience, fourteen had one year or

less, and three had more than four years teaching experience.

Treatments

 

Five treatment conditions were employed.

Treatment 1

 

Group counseling involving affective interaction
was used to promote the personal development of group mem-

bers. The leader was guided by the definition of Gazda,

18

Duncan, and Meadows (1967), which emphasizes interpersonal
communication focused on conscious thought and behavior.
In this model personal concerns are shared among individ-
uals who are not debilitated by their problems. Attention
is directed toward feelings rather than cognitive data.
Permissiveness, orientation to reality, and affective dis-
closure are involved in a setting of mutual trust, under-
standing, and support. The theoretical orientation of the
group leader was consistent with the construct of self-
actualization as a model of psychological adjustment. The
remarks of the group leader could be associated with a
point of view in which an ideal model of psychological

well-being is valued.

Treatment 2

 

Group counseling involving affective interaction
was used to promote the personal development of group mem—
bers. The leader was guided by the definition of Gazda,
Duncan, and Meadows (1967), which emphasizes interpersonal
communication focused on conscious thought and behavior.
In this model personal concerns are shared among individ—
uals who are not debilitated by their problems. Attention
is directed toward feelings rather than cognitive data.
Permissiveness, orientation to reality, and affective dis-
closure are involved in a setting of mutual trust, under-

standing, and support. The theoretical orientation of the

19

group leader was not consistant with the construct of self-
actualization as a model of psychological adjustment. The
remarks of the group leader could be associated with a

point of view in which social-learning theory is valued.

Treatment 3

 

A seminar in lecture-discussion format was used to
present content which emphasized the importance of ideal
models of psychological adjustment and their relationship
to positive counselor behavior. The time was divided about
equally between leader presentations and group discussions.
Printed material Was handed out from Carkhuff and Berenson
(1967), Bugental (1965), and Maslow (1967). Films were
shown of Perls and Rogers interviewing a client and ex-
plaining their respective approaches. Concepts such as
"fully-functioning," "authentic," "whole," and "self-
actualized" were discussed. Research and opinion which
related personality constructs such as these to favorable
counselor performance was presented. The leader assumed
a directive role, avoided focusing attention on affective

comments, and emphasized the cognitive content involved.

Treatment 4

 

A seminar in which varied activities were presented
served as the active control treatment. Two criteria were

used to eliminate inappropriate activities for this

20

treatment purpose: it should not require predominately
affective interaction; it should not focus on any model
of ideal psychological adjustment or related terminology.
Representative activities which were presented include
the following learning experiences: discussion of prob-
lems encountered in various practicum field settings;
training in providing objective, helpful feedback for
the improvement of counseling strategies; practice in
using this skill in response to films, video tapes, and
audio tapes presented by the leader and seminar members;
instruction in specific techniques such as problem solv-
ing strategies, relaxation training, assertive training
techniques, and behavior contracting; discussion of mem-
bers' on-going counseling cases. The leader acted as an

instructor and resource person.

Treatment 5

 

The inactive control group was made up of students
from the same training program who were currently enrolled
in some other university course but were not enrolled in
practicum. No contact was made with these subjects other
than for pretesting and post-testing.

Group counseling under Treatment 1 employed two
separate leaders (one for each sub-group), both of whom
were advanced doctoral students with considerable exper-

ience in group processes. The training of one was in

21

clinical psychology and his expressed theoretical orienta-
tion was Gestalt. The training of the other was in coun-
seling psychology and his statement of theoretical persua-
sion indicated a commitment to the views of Perls, primar-
ily and Rogers, secondarily, in terms of group procedures.
The experience of the former included 110 hours as a group
participant, 140 hours supervised training in group leader-
ship, and 190 hours leadership of therapeutic and personal
growth groups. The later reported some 400 hours as a
group member, 96 hours supervised training in group leader-
ship, and 160 hours leadership of group counseling sessions.

Group counseling under Treatment 2 was carried out
by a leader with a doctorate in counseling psychology. His
stated theoretical orientation was behavioral--based on
Skinner, Bandura, and Ulmann and Krasner. The experience
of this leader included 90 hours as a group participant,

75 hours of supervised leadership training at the post-
doctoral level, and 900 hours of leadership of group coun-
seling sessions.

To illustrate the differences in leader responses
between treatment groups 1 and 2, the following excerpts
have been selected from tape recordings which were made of
the third, fifth, and seventh group sessions. The first

three excerpts are from Treatment 1.

l. M But I'm still here.
M: humm. . . you know you could call this
bullshit if you want to, but I really

22

do . . . ahh . . . I really do worry about
what the other person's going to feel.
That's in it, too . . . I know . . . even
if I am going to check someone off my list,
I won't, you know . . . maybe there's some-
thing about me in there, too . . . you
know . . . I am sure, but I really do care
about, you know, I don't want . . .

I am sure that that feels different for you
to say that than it did the first time you
said about not wanting to see someone crumr
ble. Didn't that, the time you said it now,
didn't it feel different to you?

Yeh.

Ok. So you know I believe you.

Hmm.

It's too bad that you had to be hammered
that hard . . . to give up those real car-
ing feelings that you do have for people.
Somehow I feel as though I've . . .

there's an irreverant side to me . . .
somehow I feel as though I've just been
saved.

I expect you to call those feelings in you
all kinds of dirty names. I really expect
you to do that. You've been running from
it for too damned long to face them flush
right now. You can call them anything you
want, I guess, but I . . . it won't shake
my trust any.

. . parts of you. That you kind of gave
up when you did that change.
uh huh.
Umm, do you know what those are? . . . I
think they are the things that glow out
of her, too.
Might be.
'Cause . . . ahh, you know, appreciation
for music sounds to me like kind of one
of those things . . .
Yea, I had that pulled out of me, too.
Except I realized the guy that did that
to me, and I've never really forgiven him
for that. 'Caust that was my one way that
I . . . you know, when we talk about that
self-actualization thing, that was the one
thing that I ever did that I really self-
actualized on. 'Cause I was an all-state
band type thing. And, ahh, like, you get
all of those instruments around you, you

23

know . . . and it's like a feeling . . .
like it's wierd . . . you have to do

it . . . and somehow I had that pulled
out of me, too.

You meant when you were playing it was
really an emotional thing for you.

Yea. Right.

And you felt good at it. You were good
at it.

You know, I either trust them, or I don't,
you know. And I do shut people off. If

I find out that someone has done some-
thing to me, that's it. It is a self pre-
servation thing.

How in the hell do you know? Like . . .
how can you make sense out of that situa-
tion, and know what her intent was and
know how much the other chick distorted

it to you. You can't ever know that.

And unless you go back to her with the
feelings you've got about her, and get
that straight . . . there's nothing you
can be clear about. The only thing you
can be clear about is what is between

the two of you.

0k, it's not right, but it works.

Oh, shit. It works to what end?

It keeps . . . like everybody who is
around me I can trust because of the pro-
cess. If I can't trust them, they're not
around me. Maybe it's your . . .

Do you completely ignore her? Since

then . . . I want you to see what you're
saying is crap, because you haven't ignored
her.

No, no, no. It's in here. That's where
it happens.

Ok, well . . .

And it's not at all fair, you're right.
The sad part is that it is not fair to you.
I mean, it's not going to kill her. But it
is not fair to you. I mean, because you
got scared once, you know, you never risk
again with her of having something. You
shut the door to her forever.

Hmm.

And so you get cheated out of whatever you
could have with her.

24

The following three excerpts are from Treatment 2:

l. L: Well, I like it. Ah . . . my wife . . .
she likes it. My daughter likes it. I
get a lot of reinforcement there. And
uhh . . . if I don't . . . ahh . . . I . . .
I am still struggling with it as you can
see, because to keep it looking what I
think is nice you ought to wash it about
every two to three days, which, I get busy
doing other things and I don't like to
wash it that often. When my wife rein-
forces me, she tells me, "It really doesn't
take that much time. And you look so nice
after you've done it . . . keep your hair
washed." It's not dirty . . . it just
gets . . . oily. And I guess it is dirty,
too, but not real dirty. Ah . . . this. . .
as I was saying, is me, ah, was a contrived
thing. I thought this out. How can I
change myself to where I liked myself bet-
ter, and part of it was clothes, uhh . . .
physical appearance, uhh, but this changed
me internally too . . . because I felt
very good about myself, ahh . . . in terms
of you know . . . ahh . . . I get enough
stroking from other people about it, espe-
cially from my family. That's enough
really . . . so I changed myself.

M: Yes, but you must have thought about it,
you know, like before you went ahead and
actually, it came consciously. There must
have been something that was starting to
bother you and grate and irritate under-
neath.

L: There are no little people inside of me,
as I said,

M: Oh.

L: causing things to happen. I learn; I
relearn; I unlearn. There are no devils;
there are no angels. There are no little
men. There's nothing inside of me.

2. M: . . . in the school system where they came
in every morning with a clipboard and de-
manded to know what I had done the week
before trying to teach human relations.

M: Who's they?

M: The supervision, the principal and the
administration. They bugged the heck out
of me. Because I don't think you teach

Mo
L

25

human relations, anyway. I felt a great
deal of pressure there . . . and I might
add a great deal of hostility.

So you are your prior learning history.

You rigfiffhoW'feel a particular way toward
Mary . . . which you can intellectualize . .
but you can't really own your own feelings.
You know she's too . . . to me too . . .
Well, why are you giving us this history
then for?

I don't know.

You trying to tell Mary something?

I really don't know.

Probably trying to explain to me why you
are like you are.

Don't you think he's trying to tell himself
something? He's trying to put it all to-
gether for himself . . .

You know, I can't tie this in with being
sensitive to people. I think you're delud-
ing yourself.

Something different everyday?

Ok, but I think so far I'm not particularly
fond of . . .

It's all right.

I'd like to find out if there is something
that I would like.

Does that matter? Do you have to be fond
of us?

Do I have to be.

Yah.

Before I make the judgment that he's a no
good guy I'd like to find out if there is
something there.

Keep watching each week, maybe you'll find
something. (laughter) Maybe you can shape
him . . . find the way you like and reward
him somehow.

Maybe I like him.

What's your word for it?

Although different leader viewpoints between Treat-

ments 1 and 2 were assumed, no systematic assessment of such

differences was attempted. However, it was of critical im-

portance that affective interaction be similar in all groups

involved in group counseling, both under Treatment 1 and

26

Treatment 2. An experimental check adapted from Betz (1963),
was employed for this purpose. Tape recordings of one and
one-half hour duration were made from the third, fifth, and
seventh group sessions. Six units of analysis were randomly
selected from each session for each group. The individual
unit selected for analysis was a group leader's response
along with the member(s) response which immediately preceded
and precipitated the leader's remark (Appendix A).

This procedure produced 72 member-leader response
units, 36 from Treatment 1 and an equal number from Treat-
ment 2, which were randomly assigned a location number
(1 to 72) and converted to typescripts. The typescripts
were submitted to two judges (advanced Ph.D. candidates)
with instructions to identify the leader response as likely
to promote affective or cognitive interaction (Appendix B).
Ratings of the judges were in agreement on 61 of the 72
items (85%). Comparison of evaluations assigned to each
treatment group was done for combined judge's ratings by
using a chi-square test with a two-way contingency table
(Hays, 1963). A significant chi-square was interpreted as
evidence that leader responses differed on the affective—

cognitive dimension between treatment groups 1 and 2.

Table 2.1 Test for Difference in Leader Responses

 

 

Observed Necessary df p
Chi-square Chi-square

3.836 3.842 1 N.S.

 

27

As shown in Table 2.1, no significant differences
were found. It was concluded from these data that the level
of affective response provided by the leader under either

treatment condition was not different.

Procedures

 

All students enrolled in the counseling practicum
were randomly assigned to one of the active treatment groups.
Thus, the class was divided into four activities, correspond-
ing to the treatments, which were carried on simultaneously
throughout the term. Since there was a morning and an after-
noon section of this class, each treatment consisted of two
sub-groups, ranging from seven to ten members.

Pre-testing on the POI and the Discrimination test
was done during the first class meeting. During the second
and ninth class meeting treatment activities of one hour
duration were held. During each of the six intervening
weekly classes, treatments of two hours duration took place.
Therefore, each group was treated for fourteen hours over
an.eight week period. Post-testing on the POI and Discrim-

ination test was done immediately after the eighth treat-

ment session.

Instruments

 

Assessment of subjects' level of psychological well-

being was done using the Personal Orientation Inventory

28

(POI), an instrument developed by Shostrom (1966) to mea-
sure the self—actualization level of subjects. It is a
150 item questionnaire of forced dichotomous choices in-
volving behavior and value judgments. Scores are reported
on two major scales involving time orientation (Tc) and
other/inner motivation (I). The sum of Tc + I represents
the total self-actualization level.

Ten sub-scales, each of which is considered to be
an important conceptual element of self-actualization, are
also provided.

1. Self-Actualizing Values (SAV): affirmation

 

of values held by self-actualized persons.

2. Existentiality (Ex): reported ability to
react situationally without rigid adherence to prin-
ciples.

3. Feeling Reactivity_(Fr): reported sensitivity

 

to responsiveness to one's own feelings.

4. Spontaneity (S): reported preference to re-

 

act spontaneously rather than cautiously.

5. Self-Regard (Sr): affirmation of self because

 

of one's worth or strength.

6. Self-Acceptance (Sa): affirmation of self in

 

spite of weakness or deficiencies.

7. View of the Nature of Man (Nc): reported con-

 

structive view of the nature of man.

29

8. Synergy (Sy): reported perspective which
avoids dichotomies.

9. Acceptance of Aggression (A): reported pre-
ference for owning one's aggressiveness rather than
a denial or repression of one's aggressiveness.

10. Capacity for Intimate Contact (C): reported
preference for developing intimate relationships with
others which are characterized by a lack of mutual

expectations or feelings of obligation.

Validity data for the POI has usually been of two
sorts. In one kind, groups of subjects are identified as
being well adjusted or poorly adjusted on a basis such as
clinical judgment (Shostrom, 1964), process in therapy
(Shostrom and Knapp, 1966), or the fact of hospitalization.
Results indicate that mean scores of such groups differ in
the hypothesized directions from the comparison groups that
were used. Another kind of study has attempted to estab-
lish the concurrent validity of the POI through the rela-
tionship with other personality tests. Results indicate
that relationships exist between POI measures and the
Social I.E. (Si), Depression (D), and Psychastenia (Pt)
scales of the MMPI (Shostrom and Knapp, 1966) and between
POI measures and the construct of neuroticism employed in
the Eysenck Personality Inventory (Knapp, 1965).

Test-retest reliability coefficients of .71 and

.84 for the To and I scales, respectively, have been

30

reported (Klavetter and Mogar, 1967). Reliability of the
POI with the subjects of this study, as estimated by the
Kuder-Richardson (KR-20) formula, was .89 and .90 for pre-
test and post-test administrations, respectively.

Of secondary interest, the ability to correctly
identify the potential effectiveness of various counselor
responses was assessed using the Carkhuff (1969) Discrim-
ination Test (D/T). This device consists of sixteen client
stimulus items, each of which is followed by four hypothet-
ical counselor responses. The subject rates each counselor
response on a nine point scale in terms of potential effec-
tiveness. A score is derived on the basis of the summed
absolute deviation from the correct rating, a value deter-
mined by expert.concensus. For purposes of this study, the
task presented by this instrument, rapid evaluation of a
counselor response, may be regarded as a simulation of the
decision process encountered during actual counseling when
the counselor is formulating a response to a previous
client remark.

Carkhuff (1969) has suggested that the ability to
discriminate responses of potentially greater effectiveness
from those of lesser facilitative utility is a necessary,
though not sufficient, element in the ability to commun-
icate effectively with clients. Studies of discriminative
ability (Carkhuff, Collingwood, and Renz, 1969; Carkhuff,

Friel, and Kratochvil, 1969) indicate that subjects rated

31

high in facilitative communication are high in discrimin-
ative ability, although discriminative level is not directly
related to communicative ability. Consistent with this
thinking and the concept of the "whole" person (Carkhuff and
Berenson, 1967), improved intra-personal functioning would
be reflected in increased discriminative skill.

In addition, subjects were asked to evaluate the
activity (treatment) in which they took part. An evaluation
form (Appendix C) was provided as a means to systematize
the responses on the dimensions of value, enjoyment, and as
a specific learning experience.

Finally, subjects receiving group counseling were
asked to keep a log of their reactions to each session.

This was done to generate data for non-controlled post-hoc

analysis.

Testable Hypotheses

 

In order to determine the differential effect of
the treatments which were used on the measures employed,
it was necessary to demonstrate, first, that differences
existed after treatment between experimental and control
groups. Should such a difference appear, it would require
that differences between experimental treatments be inves-
tigated.

To examine these relationships the following

hypotheses were formulated:

32

 

There is no difference in post-test scores between
subjects in groups receiving experimental and control
treatments.

If not, then

2. T1 - ______ = 0

There is no difference in post-test scores between
subjects in groups receiving Treatment 1 those receiv-

ing Treatment 2 and 3.

3. T1 - T = 0

There is no difference in post-test scores between
subjects in groups receiving Treatment 1 and Treatment

2.

Since inactive control subjects (T5) were not admin-
istered the D/T, hypothesis 1 on this measure was formulated

in the alternative form given above.

Design and Statistical Analysis

The study was intended to compare differences between
groups after, and as a result of, participation in one of
three experimental treatments. A 5 x 2 matrix, with groups

nested within treatments, was utilized. The design, a

33

variant of the pre-test, post-test, control group pattern
described in Campbell and Stanley (1966), may be graphically

represented as shown in Table 2.2

Table 2.2 Graphic Representation of the Research Design

 

 

at
R 01 T1 06 Key:
R 02 T2 07 0l . . . 05= Pre-test
R 03 T3 08 T1 . . . T3 = Experimental treatment
R 04 T4 09 T4 = Placebo treatment
05 (T5) 010 (T5) = Inactive control
06 . . . 010 = Post-test

 

The initial statistical treatment was a multivar-
iate analysis of covariance using planned comparisons in
which pre-test scores were used as covariates. Post-test
scores and all POI scales were the dependent variables.
Analysis was across treatments, with groups nested.

Following this, the most pertinent measures, Tc,
I, and D/T score, were subjected to overall univariate
ANCOVA analysis for main effects due to treatment. In
the former case the alpha level was .05. However, since
separate tests were used in the univariate analysis, the
alpha level was set at .017 in order to maintain the in-

tegrity of the test.

34

Summary

Counselor trainees were assigned to one of five

treatment conditions:

1. group counseling in which the leader's model
of psychological adjustment was consistent with the
measurement device

2. group counseling in which the leader's model
was not consistent with the assumptions of the mea-
surement device

3. a seminar in which the model of adjustment
implicit in the measurement device was given a favor-
able presentation

4. a placebo treatment

5. an inactive control group.

Pre- and post-testing on the Personal Orientation Inven-
tory and the Discrimination Test was carried out.

A 5 x 2 design matrix was adopted and provision
made to test the dependent variables by both multivariate
and univariate analysis of covariance. The basic hypoth-
esis, that experimental subjects would receive higher

scores after treatment than control subjects, was presented.

CHAPTER III
ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

Statistical analyses were calculated at the Michi-
gan State University Computer Center on the Control Data
3600 computer system. Data reported below were generated
by a multivariate analysis of covariance program developed

by Finn (1967).

Preliminary Data

Mean scores at pre- and post-testing on the two
major scales of the Personal Orientation Inventory (POI)
and on the Discrimination Test (D/T) for all treatment
groups are shown in Table 3.1

Complete POI sub-scale scores are reported in
Appendix D. Mean, variance, and standard deviation of all
measures for all subjects are listed in Appendix E.

An initial test of the relationship between the
dependent variable and the specified covariates was per-
formed in order to determine the appropriateness of the
covariance model. For the POI, multiple regression coef-
ficients ranged from .60 to .86 for predicting each variable
from the set of covariables. The overall chi-square test
of the hypothesis of no association between the dependent

35

36

Table 3.1 Summary of Pre- and Post-test Scores of Major

 

 

 

Interest.
T1 T2 T3 T4 T5
Pre-test
Tc 17.81 16.13 16.06 17.73 18.78
I 88.81 89.88 88.75 89.40 89.00
D/T 53.50 49.12 55.37 45.10 --
Post-test
Tc 17.63 17.88 17.63 18.20 18.22
I 94.50 98.69 95.86 94.60 93.67
D/T* 45.00 44.90 44.40 40.67 --
Gain
Tc - .18 1.75 1.57 .47 - .56
I 5.69 8.81 7.11 5.20 4.67
D/T 8.50 4.32 10.97 4.43 --

 

*Note: Decreased D/T scores indicate gain.

variables and covariates produced a value of 351.2 which,
with 144 degrees of freedom, is significant beyond .0001.
For the D/T the multiple regression coefficient was .59

for predicting post-test score from pre-test score. Hence,

in both cases, it was concluded that ANCOVA was appropriate.

Treatment Effects

 

Hypothesis 1:
There is no difference in post-test scores between
subjects in groups receiving experimental and control

treatments.

37

Results of the multivariate analysis of hypothesis
1 using POI scores are shown in Table 3.2. Since a signifi-
cant F-ratio was not obtained, the hypothesis of no differ-
ence remains in effect. This is interpreted as indicating
that no difference exists after treatment between experimen-
tal and control subjects as measured by the set of POI

scales taken as a whole.

Table 3.2 Multivariate Test of Hypothesis
1: POI Scores

 

 

F-ratio df p

 

.484 12,39 <.91

 

Given this result, it was decided that the scales
of secondary importance be eliminated from further inves-
tigation and that the basic scales of the POI, Tc and I,
be subjected to an overall ANCOVA analysis to determine
whether any treatment effects were present in the data.

As shown in Table 3.3, results were negative. This would
indicate that no difference exists after treatment between
any combination of treatment groups, as measured by the
major scales of the POI.

Results of the overall ANCOVA analysis of the
D/T data are shown in Table 3.4. No significant effects

were found. This would indicate that no difference exists

38

after treatment between any combination of treatment groups,

as measured by the Discrimination test.

Table 3.3 Overall ANCOVA Analysis of Major POI Scales

 

 

 

MS MS
Scale Between Within F p
Tc 3.19 4.63 .688 <.604
I 115.28 46.01 2.506 <.0515

df = 4, 60

 

Table 3.4 Overall ANCOVA Analysis of Discrimination

 

Test
MS MS
Between Within F p
51.76 129.34 .40 <.753

df = 3, 54

 

In total, these data confirm that no treatment
effects could be demonstrated in this study using the mea-
sures which were employed. Therefore, hypotheses 2 and 3

are answered in the negative by default and require no

further data.

39

Non-experimental Data

 

It should be clear that further data do not speak
to the empirical questions which were investigated. They
may, however, provide some basis for improving future in-

vestigations.

Pre- and Post-test Comparison

 

Casual observation appeared to indicate an increase
in POI scores over all subjects between pre- and post-test-
ing. In addition, a similar decline in D/T scores was noted.
Whether this difference represented chance variation was
tested by ANOVA for D/T and combined I and Tc scores. As
indicated in Table 3.5, a significant increase had occurred

in both cases.

Table 3.5 Test for Pre- and Post-test Differences.

 

 

 

ms MS
Between Within F p
D/T 3087.00 161.54 19.11 <.0001
df = 1, 62
901 3741.13 70.79 52.35 <.0001
df = 1, 71

 

Group Counseling Logs

 

Participants in group counseling were asked to

keep a log of their reactions to group sessions. Although

40

they were assured anonymity and were asked not to sign their
name, they were also informed that handing in this material
was voluntary. Unfortunately, two of the four groups turned
in such few returns that comparison of reactions was ruled
out. Subjective appraisal of the limited responses seemed
to confirm a sequence of stages or phases in group develop-
ment similar to those described by Foley and Bonney (1965),
and Tuckman (1965). Also, the effect of a recognized set
number of sessions on member reactions, as noted by Mahler
(1971), seemed present. Thus, while the intention of pre-
senting logs as voluntary was to avoid an atmosphere of
coercion, the result was to eliminate the log as a source

of useful information.

Subject Evaluation

 

Three weeks following the termination of treat-
ments, subjects were contacted in another setting and asked
to evaluate the activity in which they took part. Forty-
nine of the 63 subjects (78%) were located and responded to
a standardized questionnaire (Appendix C). Thirty-five in-
dicated that their activity (treatment) was a valuable
learning experience; eleven did not. Thirty-six felt that
it was enjoyable; eleven said no. To a global evaluation
of the benefit which they attributed to the activity, 21
indicated it to have had much worth, 20 stated it was some-

what worthwhile, and eight felt it to be of little value.

41

Marked differences appeared when these results
were analyzed on a group basis. Group 1 under Treatment
1 and group 7 under Treatment 4 had decidely negative
evaluations. For instance, they accounted for five of the
eight opinions that their activity was of little worth and
eight of the eleven reactions that it was not a valuable
learning experience. The remaining six groups expressed

strongly positive opinions.

Summary

Evidence indicating a correlation between depen-
dent variables and specified covariates was found, thus
supporting the intention to use ANCOVA as the statistical
model.

No evidence of difference after treatment between
experimental and control subjects was found using the POI
scales in a multivariate analysis of covariance. Further,
no difference between any treatment groups was evident using
the two major scales of the POI in an overall ANCOVA test.
In addition, no difference between any treatment groups was
found at post-test on the D/T using an overall ANCOVA pro-
cedure. Concluding that no treatment effect could be demon-
strated, hypotheses 2 and 3 were not tested.

Non-experimental data was also reported. One source,
group counseling logs, appeared to lose any utility due to

the small number which were returned. However, gains over

42

all subjects between pre- and post-testing were noted on
both total POI score and D/T score. Subject evaluation of
participation in the various treatment conditions was gen-

erally positive, with apparent differences between groups.

CHAPTER IV

SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION

Summary

The purpose of this study was to assess the ef-
fect which short-term group counseling and a cognitive
learning experience may have on a measure of self-actual-
ization and, secondarily, on a simulation of counselor per-
formance. Much of the existing literature in counselor ed-
ucation seems to accept the notion that group counseling
has utility in counselor education programs because of the
affective learning or reorientation which may take place,
rather than development of more specific competencies.
Changes on various personality measures, of which the Per-
sonal Orientation Inventory (POI) is representative, are
considered sufficient evidence to support this position.

It was suggested that influences other than those
usually attributed to group counseling may account in part
for changes found on the measures which have been used. If
so, the basis for determining the utility of group counsel-
ing in counselor education programs would need to be re-

examined.

43

44

Subjects of the study were 72 master's degree
candidates in counseling at Michigan State University.
Three experimental conditions were developed. In one,
subjects participated in group counseling in which the
leader's views were consistent with the model of adjust-
ment on which the POI is based. In another, subjects
participated in group counseling in which the leader's
views were inconsistent with this model. In the third,
subjects participated in a lecture-discussion seminar in
which the model of adjustment on which the POI is based
was presented in a favorable manner. Placebo treatment
and inactive control conditions were included. Treatments
were maintained for 14 hours over eight sessions. The ob-
jective was to compare the effects which would result from
a cognitive presentation and from experience in group coun-
seling with and without the opportunity for extraneous
learning which would tend to improve scores on the measure
which was employed.

A 5 x 2 design matrix was developed, with groups
nested within treatments. Pre-test scores were used as
covariates and provision was made for both multivariate
and univariate analyses. The basic hypothesis was that
experimental subjects would receive higher scores after
treatment than would control subjects. Secondary hypothe-
ses were designed to determine the effect of each experimen-

tal treatment.

45

Preliminary analysis revealed the ANCOVA model
to be appropriate. However, no differences were apparent
at the .05 level between experimental and control subjects
with POI scores used in a multivariate test. Further in-
vestigation using the major scales of the POI and the Dis-
crimination Test showed that no significant differences
existed between any of the treatment groups on these mea-
sures. Hence, it was concluded that no effects due to

treatment could be demonstrated.

Discussion

 

The present study showed no significant treatment
effects. Although some factors may remain hidden and in-
teractions between known elements may remain undiscovered,
recognized sources of potential error can be usefully re-
viewed in retrospect. The results obtained may be attri-
buted, at least, to the following possible contributory
factors: theory, sampling, design and statistics, instru-

mentation, and treatment. Each will be considered below.

Theory

A possible cause of the outcome of the study might
be an error in, or misinterpretation of, the literature. In
regard to interpretation, it seems clear that the literature,
for the most part, takes for granted that personality may be

affected by group counseling. Whether persons can be

46

measurably affected by group counseling, is difficult to
assess. However, research reported in Chapter I suggests
that some success with personality devices such as the POI
has been demonstrated with counselor trainees. Since suf-
ficient evidence is not available, this source of error

must remain a possibility.

Sample

Sampling problems tend to be more severe in survey
studies than in experimental research. However, the per-
tinent question here concerns whether the subjects of this
study differ systematically from those in earlier reported
studies in any characteristic which might affect their per-
formance on the measures which were employed. Unfortunately
no direct comparison can be made.

It is known that Michigan State University had no
special selection criteria in effect when this class of
candidates for the master's degree in counseling was admit-
ted. Inspection of the data in Chapter II reveals no ap-
parent discrepancy on the demographic dimensions reported
which would indicate these subjects to be unrepresentative
of counselor candidates at other universities. In sum,
there is no evidence which would appear to indicate the
presence of characteristics which would make these subjects

a unique group.

47

Design and Statistical Treatment

 

The general concern in this respect is whether any
effects could have been distorted or obscured because of the
way the study was organized or analyzed. There are at least
two considerations relating to design and statistical matters
which warrant comment.

First, as indicated by the degrees of freedom which
are reported, the individual subject has been treated as the
experimental unit of analysis in this study. Although this
cannot prOperly be justified, the procedure has become a con-
vention in group counseling research at this stage of its
development because doing so may allow weaker effects to be
noticed. Therefore, to have done so in this study could have
acted to cause spurious effects to appear, rather than acting
to obscure real effects.

Second, since Treatments 1 and 4 employed two lead-
ers and Treatments 2 and 3 used only one, in the latter case
treatment and leader are confounded. This is unfortunate
because, particularly in Treatments 1 and 2, it is likely
that the effectiveness with which individuals can deliver
such a treatment may vary considerably. For instance, lead-
er ineffectiveness could depress subject gains in some treat-
ments, perhaps obscuring overall treatment effects. In this

case, however, inspection of mean gain for Treatments 2 and

48

3 does not seem to support this suspicion. In fact, no
group x treatment effect was discovered in any of the tests
reported in Chapter III.

It is concluded, then, that no factors related to
the design or statistical procedures have been identified

which would act to obscure real treatment effects.

Instruments

 

The discussion of problems associated with mea-
surement will be limited to the POI since that instrument
was the main concern of this study. The reliability of the
POI with this group of subjects, as reported in Chapter II,
seems adequate indeed. However, the use of a self report
of this type with subjects sophisticated in respect to the
concepts involved needs to be explored.

For example, what might account for the general
increase in scores which was observed? One possibility
could be some change in the expectancy set of the subjects.
Contrary to published results on the fakability of the POI
(Foulds, 1971), preliminary results of a study in progress
by this author indicate the POI to be highly susceptible
to differential instructions given to beginning teacher
candidates. If this, indeed, be the case, changing expec-
tancy, desire to please, or other similar sets could sub-
stantially alter post-test scores. A provocative consider-

ation may be the fact that the two groups identified in

49

Chapter III as not valuing their treatment experience may
be seen in Appendix D to have the least observed gain in
total POI score. Other groups compared against these, in
fact, would be significantly different.

ISuch speculation is tempting. However, the ques-
tion, often raised in the literature, of whether devices
such as these are capable of measuring the kind and extent
of change which might be expected from group counseling

with counselor trainees remains unanswered.

Treatments

 

Under this rubric such concerns as the adequate
presentation or control of the treatment conditions ought
to be considered.

A recurring issue, often invoked to explain a
lack of anticipated findings, involves the necessary time
for group counseling to have some measurable effect. The
studies cited in Chapter I ranged from 50 to 14 hours of
treatment administered over 14 weeks to four days. Zimpfer
(1968) states that most group counseling research has been
conducted with from 8 to 16 sessions. Gazda and Larsen's
(1968) survey of group counseling research through 1967
found the average treatment to consist of 17 hours and 17
weeks. Reporting mean rather than median quantities is
somewhat misleading because the existence of a few long-

term studies acts to inflate the figures given. The

50

presentation of treatment in this study, 14 hours over 8
sessions, is probably of less duration than the typical
study reported. Therefore, this must be considered a pos-
sible factor contributing to the lack of treatment effects
reported in Chapter III.

Control of treatment conditions has been a serious
and persistent problem in group counseling research. For
purposes of this study a more precise description of group
counseling was undesirable in terms of restricting the lead-
ers to predetermined roles with prearranged activities. In-
stead, the intent was to allow them flexibility within the
boundaries which were provided. This was done in an attempt
to provide a modal kind of treatment as a ground against
which the other aspects of the experimental manipulation
could be contrasted. On the other hand, while non-specific
description of treatment does not preclude obtaining an
effect, it acts to cast suspicion on the power of the treat-
ment conditions if no effect is found.

Contrary to what might be expected, the major prob-
lem of controling treatment conditions may have occurred not
within the counseled groups, Treatments 1 and 2, but within
the placebo control, Treatment 4. As this study was orig-
inally conceptualized, no problem was foreseen in controling
the affective interchange level within Treatments 3 and 4.
Therefore, no attempt was made to monitor this dimension as

was provided for with Treatments 1 and 2. However, subjects

51

in group 2 under Treatment 4, initially reluctant partici-
pants, were found on the Activity Evaluation Form to be
particularly strong advocates of the personal qualities of
their seminar leader. It seems possible then that this
group became another, unidentified, experimental treatment.
Interestingly, gains made by this group were noticeably
higher than those of other groups designated as being con-
trols.

It therefore seems possible that problems asso-
ciated with the presentation and control of treatments
were encountered and may have contributed to the outcome

of this study.

Conclusion

The essential question asked by this research con-
cerned whether coqnitive learning might account for changes
on personality measures used in group counseling studies
with counselor trainees and, thereby, constitute a viable
alternative explanation to the inference that psychological
adjustment had taken place. Unfortunately, no answer is
forthcoming since this study was unable to demonstrate dif-
ferential levels of measured psychological well-being as a
result of the treatments which were provided.

The direct conclusion to be drawn on the basis of
the results of this study is that participation in group

counseling or the cognitive learning experience, as presented,

52

caused no additional increment on the measures which were
used. Thus, in this case, treatment was no more effective
than no treatment. While consideration must be given to
the matters presented in the discussion above, it may also
be true that group counseling is an ineffectual experience
for purposes which depend upon personality assessment. Re-
sults such as those reported here have brought the sugges-
tion from Apostal and Muro (1970) "that group counseling

as a practical procedure cannot be justified on the basis
of important personality changes in prospective counselors.
Perhaps, however, it may be justified on other grounds,
such as contributing to effective training in group counsel-
ing skills through actual participation in the process,

(p. 62)."

The issues presented point up the difficulty of
research in counselor education as attempts are made to
evaluate the kinds of experiences provided in training pro-
grams. The basis for the utility of group counseling with

counselor candidates remains unclear.

LIST OF REFERENCES

LIST OF REFERENCES

American Personnel and Guidance Association. Standards
for the preparation of school Counselors.
Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1961, 32, 402-407.

 

Anderson, D. G., & Cabianca, W. A. The "micro-lab": An
introduction to group process. Counselor Educa-
tion and Supervision, 1970, a, 299-300.

 

 

Apostal, R. A., & Muro, J. J. Effects of group counsel-
ing on self-reports and on self-recognition abil-
ities of counselors in training. Counselor Edu-
cation and Supervision, 1970, r0, 56-63.

 

 

Association for Counselor Education and Supervision.
Standards for the preparation of secondary school
counselors--l967. Personnel and Guidance Journal,
1967, 46, 96-106. -

 

Betz, R. L. A study of the effects of two types of group
counseling on the counseling performance of coun-
selor candidates. Unpublished doctoral disserta-
tion, Michigan State University, 1963.

Betz, R. L. Effects of group counseling as an adjunctive
practicum experience. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 1969, r6, 528-533.

 

 

Bonney, W. C. Pressures toward conformity in group coun-
seling. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1965,
43, 970-973.

 

Bonney, W. C., & Gazda, G. M. Group counseling experi-
ences: Reactions by counselor candidates. Coun-
selor Education and Supervision, 1966, 5, 205:2II.

 

Bugental, J. F. T. The search for authenticity. New York:
Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1967.

Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. Experimental and quasi-
experimental designs for research. ChiCago: Rand
McNally, 1966.

 

 

53

54

Carkhuff, R. Helping and human relations. New York: Holt,

Rinehart & Winston, 1969.

Carkhuff, R. R., & Berenson, B. G. Beyond counseling and

 

therapy. New York: Holt, Rinéfiart & Winston,

Carkhuff, R. R., Collingwood, T., & Renz, L. The effects

of didactic training in discrimination upon trainee
level of discrimination and communication. Journal
of Clinical Psychology, 1969, 8, 104-107.

Carkhuff, R. R., Kratochvil, D., & Friel, T. The effects

of professional training: The communication and
discrimination of facilitative conditions. Journal
of Counseling Psychology, 1968, r5, 68-74.

Culbert, S. A., Clark, J. V., & Bobele, H. K. Measures of

Eiben,

change toward self-actualization in two sensitivity
training groups. Journal of Counseling Psychology,
1968, 13! 53-57.

R. E. Impact of a participatory group experience on
counselors in training. Paper given at American
Personnel and Guidance Association, Atlantic City,
April, 1971. '

Finn, J. Multivariance: Fortanyprogram for univariate and

Foley,

Foulds,

Gazda,

Gazda,

Gazda,

multivariate analysis of variance and covariance.
State University of New York at Buffalo, 1967.

W. J., & Bonney, W. C. A developmental model for
counseling groups. Personnel and Guidance Journal,
1965, 44, 125-128.

 

M. L., & Warhime, R. G. Effects of a "fake good"
response set on a measure of self-actualization.
Jgurnal of Counseling Psychology, 1971, r8, 279-
280.

G. M., & Bonney, W. C. Effects of group counseling
on role behavior of counselors in training. Coun-
selor Education and Supervision, 1965, 4, l91-I97.

G. M., Duncan, J. A., & Meadows, M. E. Group coun-
seling and group procedures--report of a survey.
Counselor Education and Supervision, 1967, 6, 305-
310.

G. M., & Larsen, M. J. A comprehensive appraisal of
group and multiple counseling research. Journal of
Research and Development in Education, 1968, r, 57-132.

 

55

Gazda, G., & Ohlsen, M. The effects of short-term group
counseling on prospective counselors. Personnel
and Guidance Journal, 1961, 42, 634-638.

 

Hays, W. L. gratistics for psychologists. New York:
Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1963.

Hurst, J. C., & Jensen, V. H. Personal growth: An ingre-
dient in counselor education programs? Counselor
Education and Supervision, 1968, 4, 12-17.

Jourard, S. M. Counseling for authenticity. In C. E.
Beck (Ed.), Guidelines for guidance. Dubuque:
W. C. Brown, 1966.

Klavetter, R. E., & Mogar, R. E. Stability and internal
consistency of a measure of self-actualization.
Psychological Reports, 1967, 44, 422-424.

Knapp, R. R. Relationship of a measure of self-actualiza-
tion to neuroticism and extraversion. Journal of
Consulting Psycholo , 1965, 42, 168-172.

Kramer, H. C. Effects of conditioning several responses
in a group setting. Journal of Counseling‘ngchol—
pgy, 1968, 4;, 58-62.

Krumboltz, J. D. A behavioral approach to group counseling
and therapy. Journal of Research and Development
in Education, 1968, I, 3-18.

Leib, J. W., & Snyder, W. U. Effects of group discussions
on underachievement and self-actualization. Journal
of Counseling Psychology, 1967, 44, 282-285.

Mahler, C. A. Group counseling. Personnel and Guidance
Journal, 1971, 42, 601-608.

Maslow, A. H. Self-actualization and beyond. In J. F. T.
Bugental (Ed.), Challenges of humanistic psychol-
ggy, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967:

McClain, E. W. A program for increasing counselor self
understanding. Counselor Education and Supervision,
1969, 4, 296-302.

McKinnon, D. W. Group counseling with student counselors.
Counselor Education and Supervision, 1969, 4,
1953200.

56

Muro, J. J. Some aspects of the group counseling practicum.
Counselor Education and Supervision, 1968, 4,
371-378.

 

Orton, J. W. Areas of focus in supervising counseling prac-
ticum students in groups. Personnel and Guidance
Journal, 1965, 44, 167-170.

 

Prediger, D. J., & Baumann, R. R. Developmental group
counseling: An outcome study. Journal of Coun-
seling Psychology, 1970, 41, 527-533.

 

 

Reddy, W. B. Sensitivity training as an integral phase of
counselor education. Counselor Education and Super-
vision, 1970, g, 110- 115.

Rogers, C. R. The fully functioning person. ngchotherapy:
Theory, Research and Practice, 1963, 4, 17-26.

 

 

Seegars, J. E., & McDonald, R. L. The role of interaction
groups in counselor education. Journal of Counsel-
ing Psychology, 1963, 42, 156-162.

 

 

Shostrom, E. L. A test for the measurement of self-actual-
ization. Educational and Psychological Measurement,
1964, 44, 207-218.

 

Shostrom, E. L. Manual, Personal Orientation Inventory .
San Diego: Education and Industrial Testing Service,
1966.

Shostrom, E. L., & Knapp, R. R. The relationship of a mea-
sure of self-actualization (POI) to a measure of
pathology (MMPI) and to therapeutic growth. Ameri-
can Journal of Psychotherapy, 1966, 20, 193- 252.

Tuckman, B. W. Developmental sequence in small groups.
ngchological Bulletin, 1965, 44, 384-399.

Wirt, M., Betz, R., & Engle, K. The effects of group coun-
seling on the self concepts of counselor candidates.
Counselor Education and Supervision, 1969, 8, 189-
200.

Zimpfer, D. G. Some conceptual and research problems in
group counseling. The School Counselor, 1968,
42, 326-333.

 

APPENDIX A

Typescript of Leader-Member Interactions

57

Typescript of Leader-Member
Interactions

And if I--if you could just convince these people,
you know, "Forget it! I like you the way you are.
You do what you do best." Being a housewife is
sometimes just as artistic and just as great as
being a college professor or having a degree.

But, I think maybe Betty can identify with this.
There are unique those certain people who really
grind it into you. You know, and it is kind of
traumatic and you remember those kinds of people.

I guess, cause I was laying on the ground, and

the floor wouldn't let go, and I wouldn't be . . .
on the floor, I don't know how this thing is re-
lated to trust. Whereas, like falling, I think,
to me it seems more--we11, you'd better be there,
I trust you to be there. If you're not, I'm going
to hurt myself.

O.K., want to do a falling exercise?

That there's more effective ways for me to behave,
like if I get very angry or, ah, very hurt I'll
cry. And that doesn't help. I should do some-
thing different from that. Because it--it doesn't
help anything. And I've got to change that kind
of . . . If I just sit there and cry rather than
tell people what I feel . . .

But that's hard to do if you feel like if you get
angry that it's your fault, and you did something
bad. The crying must mean guilt or something. . .

I guess I feel like, I don't care who drops out or
anything. It's just like you make up your own
mind and the rest of us can get started.

I guess that this is kind of difficult for me in
the sense that, um, well in the sense that there
was no intent or plan or reason for being together
in a group providing this kind of treatment. So
its kind of a hodge-podge of a lot of people put
together.

That was another thing I just remembered. What
reinforced that was after the group then you went
to Joe and began at a different level again. I
said . . . you just reinforced my distrust. That's
some feelings and reactions . . .

I guess I have a feeling that, Dick, you have a lot
of difficulty understanding how I can blast a guy
and then--and still at the same time like him and
be friends with him.

10.

11.

12.

58

And we don't even know what you're thinking--you're
just keeping it in your head and twirling it round
and round inside you.

Yah. Well, I'm sure there's nothing there that . .
It's either that, or you really don't just give a
shit about us.

You were severely stressing my ability to accept
human difference, which I've always . . .

I'd like some just personal things. Did I overdo
it today?

Yah, it was coming out in a game all the time.
How is it supposed to be? Is it supposed to be
not fun? -

I guess that's something I never even considered.
(Laughter)

How about that.

(I wonder) Did you find that you were able to
look at yourself alot or were you still holding
back in some way?

I never hurt so much in my life as during those
times. Since that time it has really gotten . . .
I've got someone to care me and what more do I
want.

Did you marry your wife just to have a companion?

I don't think it's--you're as much aware of it
when you make that decision to start out with.

I think it comes a little bit later. At least
it did with me.

Does it come--I guess I heard you say--like we
could--you're speaking about work or . . . even-
tually we'll freak out or something. I guess
essentially you're pulling up, away from a group
of friends, going somewhere else where you don't
have to do this all again and make friends, make
a place. This is the thing you would like to
avoid?

No one else ever has guts enough to say things
like that.

Pardon?

No one else ever has guts enough to say things
like this and probably may people have felt
that way.

But, you know, . . . I said I was feeling that
way but it doesn't necessarily mean that's the
way she was feeling.

13.

14.

15.

59

I guess it's the whole newness of the situation
that gets me very upset and takes me a long time
to establish myself.

Especially if you don't approach, especially if
you hold back.

I don't understand why the other ones left.
Um, I do--and I don't understand either.

And that really kind of bothers me, too. You

know, cause I don't want to--I want to contri-
bute, but I just don't have--I don't know what
to contribute.

I think that's kind of putting yourself down.

Total script contains 72 units of analysis.

APPENDIX B

Instructions to Judges

60
Instructions to Judges

Here are 72 counselor responses from group counsel-
ing sessions to be judged. Each member or group statement
(M) is followed by the group leader response (L) made to
that statement .

If the group leader's response:

Focuses on interpersonal or group feelings,

Reflects the expression of affect (feeling),
Would tend to elicit affective responses, or
Would tend to cause examination of feelings,

Then: Write "A" following the number corresponding
to the member-leader statement being considered.

If the group leader's response:

Focuses on content produced by an individual
or the group,

Reflects the expression of cognitive material
(content),

Would tend to elicit cognitive responses, or
Would tend to cause examination of content,
Then: Write "C" following the number corresponding

to the member-leader statement being considered.

APPENDIX C

Activity Evaluation Form

61

Activity Evaluation Form

To what extent do you feel that your small
group activity during spring Practicum was
worthwhile to you?

Much Somewhat Little

Was it enjoyable?

Yes No

Was it a valuable learning experience?

Yes NO

Name of Group Leader

 

ADM. PQM.

Comments:

APPENDIX D

Mean POI Sub-scale Scores

62

Table A.1 Mean POI Sub-scale Scores

 

 

 

 

Group 1 Group 2
Pre Post Pre Post
Treatment 1
I 84.00 86.86 92.56 100.44
Tc 16.29 15.71 19.00 19.22
SAV 21.14 22.14 20.56 21.22
Ex 20.43 22.00 24.00 27.44
Fp 16.00 15.86 17.11 19.11
S 12.43 12.71 13.11 15.11
Sp 12.00 13.14 13.33 13.56
Sa 14.71 14.43 18.44 20.56
Nc 11.00 11.57 12.11 11.56
Sy 6.86 7.29 7.44 7.78
A 16.00 17.00 17.78 19.44
C 17.57 18.86 19.44 23.44
Treatment 2

I 89.71 97.29 90.00 99.78
Tc 15.14 17.57 16.89 18.11
SAV 20.86 21.29 19.89 22.33
Ex 23.14 25.14 23.78 27.56
Fp 17.57 18.29 17.00 19.11
S 12.71 13.57 13.11 14.89
Sr 11.71 12.86 12.11 13.11
Sa 17.00 18.29 16.56 18.33
Nc 12.14 13.14 12.89 13.33
Sy 7.29 7.71 7.00 8.22
A 16.71 17.86 18.00 19.33
C 19.14 21.71 20.00 21.56

 

63

 

 

 

 

 

Table A.1 (Cont.)
Group 1 Group 2
Pre Post Pre Post
Treatment 3
I 93.50 100.00 84.00 91.75
Tc 17.00 17.50 15.13 17.75
SAV 21.00 21.75 20.00 20.38
Ex 23.38 25.75 20.63 23.37
Fp 18.88 19.13 15.50 17.25
S 13.00 15.38 12.75 13.88
Sp 12.88 13.13 12.25 12.13
Sa 16.75 18.75 13.63 18.13
Nc 12.75 12.38 12.25 12.63
Sy 7.88 7.75 7.25 7.25
A 18.62 20.50 16.00 17.13
C 20.63 22.13 17.88 19.39
Treatment 4

I 86.44 89.78 93.83 101.83
Tc 17.11 17.44 18.67 19.33
SAV 20.44 21.33 20.67 22.00
Ex 22.89 25.00 24.00 27.50
Fr 17.00 16.44 17.17 18.83
S 12.44 13.56 14.00 14.67
Sp 11.44 11.44 14.67 13.33
Sa 16.33 16.44 18.00 19.33
No 11.56 12.00 12.50 12.00
Sy 7.67 7.22 7.67 8.17
A 14.56 16.22 19.17 20.50
C 20.00 20.00 20.00 23.50

 

64

Table A.1 (Cont.)

 

 

 

Group 1 Group 2
Pre Post Pre Post
Treatment 5

I 90.80 94.00 86.75 93.25
Tc 18.00 17.20 19.75 19.50
SAV 21.00 20.80 20.75 20.50
Ex 24.60 25.00 21.50 23.25
Fr 15.40 16.60 17.25 17.00
S 13.60 14.40 12.50 12.75
Sr 12.60 12.80 13.50 13.50
Sa 19.00 19.00 15.50 19.00
Nc 11.00 12.80 12.25 12.25
Sy 7.00 7.00 7.75 8.00
A 15.80 17.40 15.00 17.00
C 22.20 21.60 19.25 20.00

 

APPENDIX E

Mean, Variance, and Standard

Deviation of All Variables

65

Table A2. Mean, Variance, and Standard Deviation of
'All’Variables.

 

 

 

Variable Mean Variance S.D.
I 95.65 41.61 6.45
Tc 17.89 4.38 2.09
SAV 21.43 3.74 1.94
Ex 25.36 4.76 2.19
Fr 17.86 3.70 1.92
S 14.18 2.99 1.73
Sr 12.85 2.71 1.65
Sa 18.18 6.42 2.53
Nc 12.36 3.07 1.75
Sy 7.64 1.31 1.14
A 18.31 4.61 2.15
C 21.25 5.61 2.37
D/T 43.79 129.34 11.37

 

MICHIGRN STATE UNIV. LIBRARIES
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
31293006427136