TRAINING OF RESIDENT ASRIRTIINFS FIND PEER GROUP
RIF-RIDERS IN THE COMMUNICATION INTERACTIONIII.
PROCESS PRIIID OF FIIIPRTIIID UNDERSTANDING
OF STUDENT FEELING RND STUDENT
DEPTH DF SELF EXPLORATION
’ ‘ 7 Them for the Degree Of, PTI D '
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY ’ ‘ ' ' ‘

 

1971

   
 

 
 

LIBRARY
Michigan Stan:
llnivcnfity

 

This is to certify that the

 

thesis entitled

Training of Resident Assistants and Peer Group
Members in the Communication Interactional
Process Skills of Empathic Understanding of Student

Feeling and Student Depth of Self-Exploration
presented by

Kathleen Rosina Scharf

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph. D. degree in magi—Counseling

 

 

Date August 13, 1971

0-7639

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

”'5‘ v‘..

8.5‘¢.‘-i

"It;
Min-

'r!
U

 

 

 

CSS
I ~ ‘
V‘ urflergr ‘11.“
| I
‘h I
I€.pers‘ T

l A“,
“us. Two tr
EXP‘Frie

ABSTRACT

TRAINING OF RESIDENT ASSISTANTS AND PEER GROUP
MEMBERS IN THE COMMUNICATION INTERACTIONAL
PROCESS SKILLS OF EMPATHIC UNDERSTANDING
OF STUDENT FEELING AND STUDENT
DEPTH OF SELF-EXPLORATION

BY

Kathleen Rosine Scharf

The purpose of this study was to compare the
effectiveness of two different approaches to the training
of undergraduate paraprofessional mental health workers or
"helpers." This investigation attempted to determine the
kinds of trainee behavior evidenced following an intensive
40-hour training program conducted during five consecutive
days. Two training programs were used--a modified IPR
experience and a modified communications skills train-
ing program. The outcomes of both treatments were com-
pared to each other, to a comparison group of resident
assistants trained extensively in a 38—hour IPR program
which was conducted over a six-month period of time, and
to a comparison group of professional counselors.

Both the experimental training procedures—-the
modified IPR experience and the modified communication

skills program--were designed to increase the "interpersonal

 

 

communicatzo:

1‘ ““"vv
gcals unatii;
‘ 1 ...' ..
fine fCliOwiT.:
tlve to the :

Rise trainees

I.- . “‘ " ,
much would :

 

ghe trainees
:ELFQI‘St'Jieg‘

hall.

'uyer‘h
wall
and
help
I
er S ’10:}:

Kathleen Rosine Scharf

communication skills" of student helpers. Four general
goals underlying both of the training programs included
the following: to make trainees more aware of and sensi-
tive to the feelings and concerns of their peers; to pro-
vide trainees with listening and communication skills
which would facilitate understanding between them and the
students desiring help; to offer student helpers effective
ways of responding to and behaving with students; and to
give trainees an increased awareness of the impact of the
helper-student interaction in the college and residence
hall.

Therefore the "interpersonal communication skills"
of interest in this study included both helper empathic
understanding and the helper's ability to use affective,
understanding, specific, and eXploratory responses to
student concerns. Helper empathic understanding was de-
fined as the helper's sensitivity to current feelings, as
evidenced by his verbal facility to communicate this
understanding to a student in a language attuned to the
peer's current feelings (Carkhuff, 1969b). Helper affec-
tive responses made reference to the emotions, feelings,
or fears of a client. Understanding responses communi-
cated to the student that the helper understood or was
trying to understand what the student was eXpressing, both
verbally and non-verbally. Specific responses were the

helper's honest statements of the core concerns being

 

Dresenteu. C;

 

C3163 meme;

cent to EV" ‘

:1!“
‘ ' v"“"‘ w-
.U“O*‘..H “.3:-
J
‘4. ‘

Kathleen Rosine Scharf

presented, either explicitly or implicitly, verbally or
non-verbally, by the student. Exploratory responses indi-
cated whether the helper encouraged or permitted the stu—
dent to explore his concerns.

This study compared the relative effectiveness of
the Carkhuff and the Kagan training models when used with
undergraduate paraprofessional "helpers." In this in-
vestigation, both training models were modified in the
following manner. While Carkhuff usually included the
five dimensions of E, R, G, C, and Ex in his five-step
training process, this study focused on only two dimen—
sions--the E and Ex scales. Therefore, the modified
Carkhuff training model in this study included discrimi-
nation training using two rating scales (E and Ex), empathy
training, role-playing, group feedback and discussion, and
client interviews. The training program was conducted as
an intensive 40—hour experience over a period of five
days.

Kagan's IPR process usually included a lecture on
facilitative conditions, stimulated confrontation recall,
Client or counselor recall, and mutual recall. This study
Imodified the IPR process in the following ways. The CVRS
Was not used in the lecture on facilitative conditions.
The E and Ex scales were used instead. In this way, the
C3VRS could be used as an unbiased criterion measure across
aldl groups. Stimulation confrontation recall (filmed

Stimulus) was omitted and tape-rating and empathy training

‘1!!!

"‘91-:

 

I
were substit-l

intensive :12;

H c ' ' _ ~
On .ac111::t-‘

with a client

TLRV+D
u; _

 

2 n4,. ~
“Shane: tC c.

Kathleen Rosine Scharf

were substituted for this phase of training. Thus the
intensive modified IPR training model included a lecture
on facilitative conditions in the helping process, tape-
rating, empathy training, role-playing, videotaped feed-
back, client, counselor, and mutual recall, and interview
with a client.

Thirty-five undergraduate "helpers" were randomly
assigned to one of the two experimental training programs
--the intensive modified IPR process (ITM-I) or the in-
tensive modified communication skills training (ITM-II).
Two comparison groups were also used in the analysis of
helper behavior. The training comparison group (ETM)
included 22 undergraduate resident assistants who were
trained in helping behaviors over a six-month period of
time. A second comparison group (PCG) included pro-
fessional counselors employed by a university counseling
center.

Following training, two samples of helper behavior
were collected from all groups. An audiotaped interview
with a student and a paper-and-pencil test of affective
Sensitivity were collected two weeks after training in
all four treatment groups——ITM—I, ITM-II, ETM, and PCG.
JEight weeks later, an audiotaped interview with a student
a1'16. the test of affective sensitivity were again collected
1J1 both of the experimental treatment groups--ITM-I and

I'I‘M-II--and in the professional counselor group—-PCG.

pr

 

These sar;-e.—

*‘Hra‘; “I.“w
ads-v blonnbtnu

‘

 

 

V
.._t

i.
.l'v'lty S" ,
L‘Q‘lh
“~wer's '

. a2» 1

*4.

L
53:

7',

#:3ic
.n testep

Kathleen Rosine Scharf

These samples were used to assess the levels of helper
functioning in each of the groups used in this study.

Six criterion measures were used to evaluate the
helper's interview behavior. Carkhuff's Empathic Under—
standing Scale was used to assess helper empathic re-
sponses to student concerns during the audiotaped inter-
view. Kagan's Counselor Verbal Response Scale was used
to measure the helper's ability to use affective, under-
standing, specific, and exploratory responses to student
communications during the interview process. The composite
CVRS score and the CVRS subscores--CVRS-A, CVRS-U, CVRS-E,
and CVRS-S-—were used in the analyses of helper interview
behavior. An additional measure--Kagan's Affective Sensi—
tivity Scale was used as a paper—and-pencil test of the
helper's ability to judge what a client, seen in a video-
taped counseling session, was feeling about himself and
about his counselor.

Thus, the overall design used in this study incor—
porated two schemes. A posttest design was used to test
theeeffectiveness of training on helper behavior between
theIfOur comparison groups--the intensive modified IPR
tnaining, the intensive modified communication skills
Paradigm, the extensive IPR training experience, and the
Enofessional counselors group. A post-delayed posttest
design tested the effectiveness of training between the

two experimental treatment groups--the intensive modified

 

'PR training

«A‘- wv— A.» .
cardulj..;'-a..
A

per; P of t»;

l w...
n 0..“-
test the one:

two experirer.

 

 

G
t 9 risk C:
hlpothesls
“ “S“: 0'23-
Signiflcantl.
rem le‘lels.
EESt the diff

Kathleen Rosine Scharf

IPR training, the intensive modified communication skills
paradigm--and the professional counselors group over a
period of two months.

A multivariate analysis of variance was used to
test the overall differences in group means between the
two experimental training paradigms for undergraduate
paraprofessional helpers (ITM-I, ITM-II) and two compari-
sons (ETM, PCG). The null hypothesis, that there would
be no differences between treatment levels on all vari-
ables, was rejected in the multivariate case (p < .10).
The overall alpha level was set at .10 to compensate for
the risk of a Type II error--false acceptance of the
hypothesis. In the univariate case, the means on the
CVRS-A, CVRS-U, CVRS-E, and EU variables were shown to be
significantly different (p < .10) across the four treat-
ment levels. Scheffé post hoc comparisons were used to
test the differences between the four treatment levels--
ITM-I, ITM-II, ETM, and PCG-—on the CVRS-A, CVRS-U, CVRS-E,
and EU variables. Significant differences (p < .10) were
found between the ITM-II and ETM groups on the CVRS-A and
between the ITM-II and PCG groups on the CVRS-U and
CVRS-E variables. Significant differences were not de-
tected between the ITM-I and ITM-II groups, between the
lint-I and ETM groups, or between the ITM-I and PCG groups
CHI all six of the variables used in this analysis. Signifi-

cant differences were also not detected between the ITM-II

“9‘1

 

 

cf the two 5-,.

It)

Kathleen Rosine Scharf

and PCG groups on the CVRS-A and EU variables. Nor were
significant differences detected between the ITM-II and
ETM groups on the CVRS-U, CVRS-E, and EU variables.

A repeated measures analysis of variance was used
to test the differences within and between the group means
of the two experimental training groups--ITM-I, ITM-II--
and one comparison group--PCG. The null hypothesis, that
there would be no difference in the means of the three
groups on the ASS, CVRS, and EU variables-~collectively or
individually—-across the testing periods, failed to be
rejected. The hypothesis testing the TAM and TA inter-
actions also failed to be rejected. Though not hypothe-
sized in this analysis, a treatment main effect was found
(p < .05). Significant differences between both the
experimental groups--ITM-I, ITM-II--and the professional
counselors group were evidenced in the repeated measures
analysis.

The multivariate analysis and Scheffé post hoc
comparisons suggested that significant differences in
helper behavior existed in the following areas. The pro-
fessional counselors used significantly more understanding
and exploratory responses to student concerns during an
interview than did the undergraduates trained intensively
in.communication skills. Differences were not detected in
interview behavior or levels of affective sensitivity

between the undergraduates trained intensively in IPR and

EIS

r
5
fi"

Q
'7‘
-v
A
-
LA.¢\4

C

u

H‘
HIC

.A

.
rf‘" '-
t¢oVDC
,. o.
.a-
.

(a

r».

 

Man

.0 a

C

ova

cbabilit

Iv
Us
e

i

«A
0

h

:1 SEC
etude that S
'~rejecti

A .
tCC‘Jr l
aSQV\~‘

Kathleen Rosine Scharf

those helpers trained extensively in IPR. There also
seemed to be no differences in interview behavior and
levels of affective sensitivity between the professional
counselors and those helpers trained intensively in IPR.
Yet the repeated measures analysis suggested that the pro-
fessional counselors functioned at higher levels of em-
pathic understanding, affective sensitivity, and Counselor
Verbal Response dimensions than either of the experimental
trainee groups-~those helpers trained intensively in IPR
and those trainees in the communication skills paradigm.
The repeated measures results differed with the multi-
variate analysis. Traditionally, caution is observed in
interpreting the acceptance of a null hypothesis. The
probability of a Type II error--false acceptance--could
occur in such "acceptance." It is considered safer to
assume that statistical inference delineates the conditions
of rejecting a hypothesis or of failing to reject a
hypothesis rather than suggesting the acceptance of a

null hypothesis.

 

 

in Part

Departing

TRAINING OF RESIDENT ASSISTANTS AND PEER GROUP
MEMBERS IN THE COMMUNICATION INTERACTIONAL
PROCESS SKILLS OF EMPATHIC UNDERSTANDING
OF STUDENT FEELING AND STUDENT

DEPTH OF SELF-EXPLORATION

BY

Kathleen Rosine Scharf

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

 

fl ,

AA ' t Rt,
“(I 'V
wby..rl~:“ N)

“
Vim. -
11,.

; Pr" WISI‘
AAA¢~Q~.\ d\\., ‘

1972

 

CO Copyright by
KATHLEEN ROSINE SCHARF

1972.

DED ICAT ION

To my supervisors,
Marilyn MacKenzie
Gordon Hall
John Powell
Bill Kell
and

Cecil Williams,

because they cared enough

to help me explore and grow.

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENT S

My journey has been a long one and yet it is just
a beginning. Along that path of growth, many people
reached out to help me. I cannot thank them all but I
would like to mention those who have been with me this
year.
--To Norm Kagan, my chairman, for his ingenuity and
enthusiasm.
--To Sam Plyler, for his deep friendship and under—
standing.
--To Cecil and Bette Williams, for their continuing
friendship and encouragement through my years at MSU.
--To Andy Porter, for his moral support and his belief
that I could learn and understand.
--To Bill Kell, for his reaching out to me in my
growth as a person and as a therapist.
--To Bob Dendy and Jim Archer, for struggling through
this dissertation with me.
--To Tom Spierling, for his understanding in my deep-

est moments of doubt.

iii

--To Leslie and Barry Wolfe, for their creativity,
understanding, friendship, and comfort during these
last few months.

--To Mary Heiserman, for her comradeship and company
through the graduate program.

-—To my trainers, Bob Van Noord, Tom Zarle, Jim
Archer, Roger Landvoy, Greg Rathjen, and Tom
Spierling, for their willingness to give of them-
selves and warm friendship.

--To my raters, Bob Van Noord, Karen Rowe, and Dave
Cabush, for their patience and special friendship.

--To Paul Schauble, Al Grzegorek, and Dick Hark, for
being themselves.

--To Bob Wilson, for his guidance, encouragement,
and insight.

--To John, Bev, John, and Jeff Powell, for sharing
themselves and their home with me.

--To Marilyn Wendland, for her caring and support.

--To Liz Monroe and Dale Cook, for their concern and
loyalty.

--To my clients and supervisees who taught me about
growing.

--To the staff of Holmes Hall, especially Judd
Carlberg, and the staff of Lyman Briggs College

for their enthusiasm, support, and cooperation.

iv

'1’!
Ill‘llll'l’l‘
nl'

 

 

--To the Resident Assistants of Holmes Hall and the
Peer Group Members of Lyman Briggs College for their
willingness to help with this study.

--To my family who grew to understand why I wanted

to be me.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter Page
I. THE PROBLEM . . . . . . . . . . . 1
General Statement . . '. . . . . . 1
Specific Problem. . . . . . . . . 2
Definition of Terms. . . . . . . . 3
Need for Research . . . . . . . . 5
Delimitations. . . . . . . . . . 7
Theory . . . . . . . . . . 9
Assumptions and Review of Research Which
Supports Assumptions. . . . . . . 18
Specific Objectives. . .‘ . . . . . 25
Hypotheses. . . . . . . . . . . 26
Overview of the Training Programs . . . 28
Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . 29
II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE. . . . . . . 31
Use of Paraprofessionals . . . . . . 32
Carkhuff Training Paradigm . . . . . 42
Kagan and His Associates . . . . . . 54
Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . 65
III. DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . 66
Design . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
Population. . . . . . . . . . . 72
Sample . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
Experimental Procedures . . . . . . 78
Day 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
Day 2 and Day 3 . . . . . . . . . 82
Day 4 and 5 . . . . . . . . . . 88
Instrumentation . . .. . . . . . . 90
Collection of Data . . . . . . . 99
Preparation of the Audiotapes for Rating. 101
Reliability of Judges' Ratings . . . . 102
Analysis of the Data . . . . . . . 105
Hypotheses. . . . . . . . . . . 107
Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . 108

vi

Chapter

IV. ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS . . . . . . .
Hypotheses Related to the Between
Treatment Groups Design. . . . .
Hypotheses of the Within Treatment
Groups Design . . . . . . . . .
Summary. . . . . . . . . . . .
V. SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS. . . .
sumary O O O O O O O O O O O 0
Discussion. . . . . . . . . .
Observations and Speculations . . . .
Implications for Future Research . . .
BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . .
APPENDICES
Appendix
A. The Empathic Understanding in Interpersonal
Processes Scale and Rating Form. . . .
B. The IPR Counselor Verbal Response Scale and
Rating Form . . . . . . . . . .
C. Helpee Self-Exploration in Interpersonal
Processes Scale . . . . . . . . .
D. Role and Function of the Inquirer. . . .
E. Trainer's Manual-—ITM-I Training Procedures
F. Trainer's Manual—-ITM—II Training
Procedures. . . . . . . . . .
(3. Memo to Professional Counselors . . . .
. Reliability Raw Data . . . . . . . .
13. The Affective Sensitivity Scale . . . .

vii

Page

110

110

118
126

130
130
140
146
150

152

158

162

172
175

177

183
188
189
190

3.4.

LIST OF TABLES

Helper Tasks, Goals, Training Exercises in
ITM-I and in ITM-II o o o o o o o 0

Description of Volunteers. . . . .
Summary of the Experimental Procedures . .

Kuder-Richardson Formula 20 Reliability
Coefficients and Other Related Data for
Seven Sample Groups . . . . . . . .

Overview of Three Studies Designed to
Determine Interrater Reliability on the
CVRS O O O O O O O O O I C O 0

Average Tape and Item Interrater Reliability
Coefficients for Each Dimension of the
CVRS on Three Separate Studies . . . .

Interrater Reliabilities--CVRS . . . . .

Mean Scores of Six Counselors at Various
Levels of Training on Each of the
Dimensions of the CVRS . . . . . . .

ANOVA Table and Computation of Reliability
of Ratings on the CVRS (Counselor Verbal
Response Scale) . . . . . . . . .

ANOVA Table and Computation of Reliability
of Ratings on the E Scale . . . . . .

Raw Data--Group and Cell Means for the
Multivariate ANOVA . . . . . . . .

Univariate F Test Results. . . . . . .

Differences in the Group Means on the
CVRS-A O O O O O O O O O O O 0

viii

Page

30
76

80

92

96

97

98

99

104

104

112

113

114

4.11,

4.4.
H.l.

 

Table

4.4.

Differences in the
CVRS-U O O O 0

Differences in the
CVRS-E O O O 0

Differences in the Group Means on the EU

Raw Data for Three
Across Times. .

Transformed Scores

Group Means on the

Group Means on the

Comparison Groups

ANOVA Table of Transformed Scores .

Post-Hoc Comparisons of the T Main Effect.

Summary of the Hypotheses and Results

Reliability Raw Data. . . . . .

ix

Page

115

116

117

120
121
123
125
129

189

 

 

 

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

3.1. Experimental Design, Three Non-equivalent
Samples . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

3.2. Analysis Between Groups, Treatments,
Measures. . . . . . . . . . . . 69

3.3. Analysis Within Groups, Treatments,
Measures, Administrations . . . . . . 71

CHAPTER I

THE PROBLEM

General Statement

 

This study is an attempt to contribute to the
solution of the general problem of improving mental health
among students on a college campus. More specifically,
this study will compare the effectiveness of two different
approaches to the training of undergraduate paraprofes-
sional mental health workers or "helpers." The investi-
gation will attempt to determine the kinds of trainee
behavior evidenced following an intensive 40-hour train-
ing experience conducted during five consecutive days in
each of the two approaches. In the analysis of helper
behavior following training, two comparison groups are
used. One comparison group includes undergraduates who
were trained extensively in a 38-hour IPR program which
was conducted over a six-month period of time. A second
comparison group includes professional trained counselors
who are currently employed by a university counseling

center.

Specific Problem

 

This investigation is of the training of under—"
graduate helpers in working with peer vocational and
personal needs in the university environment. On the
Michigan State University campus, resident assistants and
academic aides--such as Peer Group members--are students
employed to be helpful to their peers. Resident assistants
are student personnel who function as resource persons,
friends, listeners, and helpers to students living in the
residence halls. Peer Group members are concerned with
promoting academic growth within the Lyman Briggs resi-
dential college. Their activities include identification
‘of peer academic problems and referral of students to
apprOpriate college staff; they also conduct groups, tutor
students, and lead seminars. These two groups of student
helpers are the sources of lay mental health workers to
be trained to have an even greater impact on peer growth
in the university environment.

This study will investigate two training procedures,
each of which is designed to increase the "interpersonal
communication skills" of student helpers. These inter-
personal communication skills include helper empathic
understanding as measured by Carkhuff's Empathic Under-
standing in Interpersonal Processes (see Appendix A) and
the helper's ability to use affective, understanding,

specific, and exploratory responses (Kagan's IPR Counselor

 

 

 

n!
U]
' fi

Verbal Response Scale--see Appendix B). A secondary
skill, student self-eXploration as measured by Carkhuff's
Helpee Self-Exploration in Interpersonal Processes (see
Appendix C), is used during training but not as an outcome

measure .

Definition of Terms

 

In this investigation special terms are defined
as follows.

Affective Sensitivity Scale.-—A scale which pur—
ports to measure affective sensitivity as a test of
empathy (Kagan, Krathwohl, Goldberg, Campbell, Schauble,
Greenberg, Danish, Resnikoff, Bowes, & Bondy, 1967). This
multiple choice test requires the student helper to judge
what the client, seen in a videotaped counseling session,

is feeling about himself and about the counselor.

Communication Skills Training.--An approach to

 

the training of helpers. This five—step procedure was
designed by Carkhuff and his associates to " . . . cog-
nitively and experientially . . . " (Carkhuff & Truax,
1965a, 1965b) train helpers in four dimensions of helper
behavior--empathy, regard, concreteness, and genuineness--
and one dimension of helpee behavior--exploration of

feelings.

Counselor Verbal Response Scale.--A scale which

describes a helper's response to client communication in

terms of four dimensions: affective—cognitive; under-
standing-non-understanding; specific-non-specific; and
exploratory-non-exploratory. These dimensions represent
aspects of helper behavior and seem to be associated with
the progress of the client. Affective responses generally
make references to the emotions, feelings, or fears of the
client. Understanding responses communicate to the stu-
dent that the helper understands or is trying to under-
stand what the student is expressing, both verbally and
non-verbally. Specific responses are honest statements

by the helper of the core concerns being presented either
explicitly or implicitly, verbally or non-verbally by the
student. EXploratory responses indicate whether the
helper encourages or permits the student to eXplore his

concerns (see Appendix B).

Empathic Understanding.--Helper sensitivity to

 

current feelings as evidenced by his verbal facility to
communicate this understanding to a student in a language

attuned to the peer's current feelings (Carkhuff, 1969b).

Helper Behavior.--The helper's verbal responses to

 

student statements of concern. These helper responses are
assumed to be a measure of the communications of the helper

during the interview.

Inguirer.--The third person in a helper-student

relationship. The inquirer conducts the recall session

for the helper and/or the student. The role and function
of the inquirer is to act as a neutral stimulus who
facilitates examination of the underlying dynamics of an
interaction. The inquirer tries to avoid establishing

a new relationship with the person being recalled by
focusing attention on the video playback rather than on

himself.

Interpersonal Process Recall.--A series of tasks

 

designed to intensify and accelerate counselor and/or
helper training. IPR uses video playback of an interview
session in order to stimulate recall of the dynamics under-

lying a helper-student interaction.

Stimulated Recall Session.--A phase in the IPR

 

procedure in which the videotape of an interview session
is played back and an inquirer encourages the trainee to

examine the underlying dynamics of an interaction.

Training Program.—-A structured sequence of

 

experiential tasks between a group of trainees and a
trainer. These tasks are designed to promote trainee

growth in facilitative behaviors.

Need for Research

 

The need for increased contact and communication
between mental health workers--such as teachers,

counselors, administrators, and social workers--and the

 

 

population in general has been discussed by several
authors (Brown, 1965; Crakhuff & Truax, 1965a, 1965b,
1966; Harvey, 1964; Magoon & Golann, 1966; Rioch, Elkes,
Flint, Usdansky, Newman, & Silber, 1963; Schmidt, 1968;
Zunker & Brown, 1966). Unrest in urban communities and

on college campuses has emphasized this need. Yet
identity needs and needs for interpersonal closeness still
seem to be a crucial concern of the pOpulation in general.
For example, students are currently vocal about defining
their rights, their roles, and the kinds of impact they
might have on the university as a whole. Much of this
protest is legitimate and has led to positive changes, but
some of the protest seems to be the result of interpersonal
frustration which may be partially attributable to a
breakdown in effective communication in the university
community.

Several investigators have suggested the use of
lay personnel in promoting mental health and academic—
vocational adjustment (Brown, 1965; Truax & Carkhuff,
1965a, 1965b; Rioch, gt 31., 1963; Schlossberg, 1966;
Zunker & Brown, 1966). Conflict about the role of lay
professionals has focused on the use of such individuals
as aides or assistants only, as opposed to the use of
lay persons in the direct counseling or interview process.
Carkhuff (1968) and Schlossberg (1966) have both defined

five areas in which lay helpers could be useful. They

can be effective in working with peer vocational and per-
sonal needs in the environment, in fulfilling some of the
manpower needs of the helping professions, in increasing
the effectiveness of services being offered, in assisting
peer develOpment of a sense of identity, and in helping

maximize peer potential.

Delimitations

 

Two modified training programs will be investi-
gated--one version of Kagan's IPR process and of Carkhuff's
communication skills training. The IPR process usually
includes a four-step process-~a lecture on facilitative
conditions; simulated confrontation recall (filmed stimu-
lus); counselor, client, and mutual recall; and individual
interviews. In this study, simulation confrontation recall
will be deleted. The lecture on facilitative conditions
will omit the CVRS scale and use Carkhuff's E and EX
scales instead. Thus the CVRS could be used as an un-
biased measure across all groups following training.
Carkhuff's scheme includes a five-step process in the
facilitative conditions of helper empathic understanding,
regard, genuineness, and concreteness, and helpee self-
exploration. This study will use the same five—step
process, but will focus only on the facilitative dimensions
of helper empathic understanding and helpee self-

exploration.

An attempt will be made to assess facilitative
conditions offered by professional counselors to students.
Students interviewed by the counselors and trainees are
similar. No long-term therapy interviews will be included
in the sample; all interviews are structured as a one-time
only meeting. Instructions to the clients are, "If you
feel the person whom you will be seeing is helpful, please
feel free to discuss a personal concern." Instructions to
the trainees and counselors were, "Relate to the person
you will be seeing as you would ordinarily do in order to
be helpful to him." These instructions will be used to
help control the structure of the interview.

Post and delayed-post measures will be collected.
Delayed-post measures, measuring retention of helper be-
haviors, will be taken to study trainee behavior over time.
No premeasures on the CVRS and B will be taken since random
assignment of trainees to groups and treatments is employed.

No assessment will be made of supervisor behavior
during training. Supervisors will be randomly assigned to
treatment and then trained independently. These pre—
cautions will be taken to prevent some sources of super-
visor bias. The investigator will serve as a program
coordinator and will daily brief each trainer. This might
partially control for deviation from the training
procedures.

All findings in this study must be interpreted

within the confines of the above delimitations.

Theory

The theoretical bases for each of the training
models in this study are described here. Basic to the
helping process is the interaction between the helper and
the student being helped. The dynamics of that inter-
action seem crucial to the kinds of growth which may
occur as the result of that contact. Three variables need
consideration—-the helper, the student being helped, and
the helper-student relationship. An underlying assumption
in discussing these variables is that the helper-student
interaction involves relatively normal behavior--behavior
essential to the develOpmental process of a student, as
he learns how to meet his needs within his current environ—

ment, and as he seeks to know himself and others.

The Helper

 

The helper brings a dynamic personal Gestalt to
the helping relationship (Kell & Mueller, 1966). He
brings a whole history of past relationships, experiences,
and ways he has learned to c0pe with stresses, anxieties,
and developmental problems. The helper also has a "pre-
sent." This "present" includes his current feelings,
fears, expectations of others, concerns, hostilities, and
satisfactions or dissatisfactions with his interpersonal

relationships.

10

The Student

 

The student likewise adds his own personality con-
figuration to the helper-student interaction (Kell &
Mueller, 1966). In asking for assistance, the student is
experiencing some degree of stress about a concern. This
concern may be the result of a new experience, a reflection
of a long history of such conflict, or a kind of inter-
personal impasse in the student's process of coping with
his environment. The student also has his own anxieties,
fears, feelings, c0ping behaviors, hostilities, and experi-
ences with interpersonal relationships.

The Helper-Student
Relationship

The third variable in this theoretical construct
is the reciprocal impact of the helper and student—-the
kind of impact the helper has on the student and the kinds
of responses the student elicits from the helper. In the
context of the interaction, the helper can be verbally and
non-verbally responding to the aspects of the student's
behavior. This may be more related at times to the helper's
Gestalt than to the student's field of experience. Simi-
larly, during the interview the student may experience
Other concerns in addition to the one he is expressing;
and these concerns may be the result of the dynamics of

the interaction.

11

Kagan and Schauble (1969) observed that while a
counselor and a client are discussing experiences outside
the counseling relationship, they can be at the same time
experiencing conflicting feelings about the relationship
itself. Feelings typically evidenced in their studies were
the client's concern that the counselor might hurt or re—
ject him, the client's concern that the counselor might
make an affectionate, dependent, or seductive approach
toward him, the client's concern that his own hostile feel-
ings toward the counselor might emerge, and the client's
concern that his own affectionate, dependent, or seductive
impulses toward the counselor might be acted out. Danish
and Kagan (1969) believe that these conflictual feelings
exist in most interpersonal relationships.

The above authors focus on the client half of the
interaction. Grzegorek (1971) and Spivak (1970), on the
other hand, both assumed that counselors needed to look at
these factors in themselves. It may be possible that the
counselor is also experiencing his own concerns about these
four areas. For instance, the counselor may be concerned
about hurting or rejecting the client. The counselor may
be concerned that the client will make an affectionate,
dependent, or seductive approach toward him. The counselor
may be wondering about his own hostile feelings toward the
client; and the counselor may be frightened about his own
affectionate, dependent, or seductive impulses being acted

out with the client.

12

Developmental Tasks

It is important to consider the kinds of develop-
mental tasks that a helper needs to learn in order to be
helpful to another person in stress. Kagan's and Cark—
huff's theoretical models differ in their consideration of
counselor and client develOpmental tasks in the helping
process.

Kagan and his associates (1967) delineated four
tasks that a counselor needed to learn in order to become
effective in his interpersonal communications. These
tasks were defined as follows.

1. The counselor needs to become aware of and sensi-
tive to the elements of effective communication.

The counselor needs to have some cognitive notions

or theories about the underlying elements of effec-

tive interpersonal communication. In some ways
this can be a model of what constitutes the pro-
cess of being helpful. Counselor behaviors, then,
are an operational expression of this model.

Several researchers (Kagan, et 31., 1967; Rogers,

1957; Carkhuff, 1966; Truax, Carkhuff, & Douds,

1964) have identified several elements of com-

munication which may be crucial in effective

interpersonal encounters.
2. The counselor needs to become aware of and sensi-
tive to his own feelings. The counselor must

first understand and own his feelings, so that he

13

can eventually understand how the client experi—
ences feelings. In addition, the counselor must
recognize how he communicates his feelings to the
client. He may come to recognize how these are
communicated verbally or non—verbally, subtly or
overtly.

The counselor must become aware of and sensitive

 

to the client's communication. In order to be

 

helpful, the counselor needs to become aware of

the client's feelings and experiences, from the
context of the client's Gestalt (Rogers, 1957).

At times, this skill is defined as accurate empathy
(Rogers, 1957; Truax & Carkhuff, 1967). Some re-
searchers have posited this skill as a central
ingredient in the helping process. Truax and
Carkhuff (1967) suggest that "the therapist's

ability to perceive and communicate, accurately

 

 

and with sensitivity, the feelings of the patient
and the meaning of those feelings" (p. 284) is
central to the helping process.

The counselor must be aware of the bilateral

 

nature of the counseling interaction. It is

 

important that the counselor understands that
the counselor and client have a reciprocal impact
upon each other. The counselor serves as a

stimulus to the client during the interview.

14

Likewise the client elicits counselor behaviors
during the session. Kell and Mueller (1966) ex-
plain that in order to understand the counseling
process, the counselor needs to examine his own
previous behaviors which might have triggered the
client's thoughts, feelings, and affective changes.
Also the interaction between the counselor and the
client in the current relationship affects the
choice and sequence of the content in the inter—
view (Kell & Mueller, 1966). Psychoanalytic

theory presents the notions of transference and
countertransference as a way of conceptualizing the
bilateral nature of the therapeutic interaction.
Transference is defined as the " . . . emotional
reaction of the patient to the therapist in which
he directs his impulses and attitudes toward the
therapist" (Patterson, 1966, p. 321). The psycho-
analytic therapist must be aware of the dynamics

of the client's transference. In addition, the
therapist needs to be cognizant of his own counter-
transference attitudes; and he must be able to
control them, and to substitute appropriate atti-
tudes toward the client. The psychoanalytic pro-
cess then consists of the develOpment of the
transference and its resolution between the

therapist and the client (Patterson, 1966).

15

Finally, dimensions of the counselor-client
interaction may be related to the dimensions
of the client's interpersonal encounters outside

of the interview.

In their conceptual model, Truax and Carkhuff
(1967) explain that the counselor needs to learn and to
communicate at minimally facilitative levels four helper
behaviors or conditions. The counselor needs to be at
least a minimally effective communicator of empathic
understanding, respect, concreteness, and genuineness.
Empathic understanding is defined as helper sensitivity to
current feelings as evidenced by his verbal facility to
communicate this understanding to a student in a language
attuned to the client's current feelings. The counselor
communicates respect when he warmly accepts the client's
experience as part of that person, without imposing con-
ditions or evaluations. The counselor is genuine when he
is freely and deeply himself in the helping relationship.
His responses are sincere rather than phony; these re-
sponses express the counselor's real feelings rather than
his defensive feelings. Lastly, counselor concreteness
is defined as the helper's ability to directly discuss
specific feelings and experiences related to the client's
concerns. Truax and Carkhuff (1967) explain that the
levels of these helping behaviors communicated by the

counselor to the client during the helping interaction

16

affect the level of client behavior in that process.

These authors consider that a client who stays at low
levels of self-exploration may be the result of a
counselor who is functioning at low levels of facilitative
behaviors. Thus, progress or deterioration in the helping
process can be related to the levels of counselor dimen-
sions offered in the counseling relationship.

Important client tasks in the helping process have
also been investigated. Rogers (1957) explains that it
the counselor provides six basic conditions in the thera-
peutic relationship, E222 constructive personality change
in the client can occur. Truax and Carkhuff (1967) con-
sider one client behavior in the therapeutic process--
client self—exploration. They prOpose that at level five
of client self-eXploration, "the person is fully and
actively focusing upon himself and exploring himself and
his world. He actively and spontaneously engages in an
inward probing to newly discovered feelings and experi-
ences about himself" (see Appendix C--the Ex Scale).

These investigators sketchily describe client develop-
mental tasks.

Kagan and his associates (1967) discuss four
client developmental tasks which are presumed to be neces-
sary if growth is to occur in the helping process. The

client owns his discomfort; he admits his own anxiety and

 

unhappiness. He begins to see that his feelings are tied to

17

concerns, peOple, fears, or other significant sources.

He "owns" and accepts his anxiety. The client commits

 

himself to change; he wants to change, says so, and

 

c00perates with the counselor. The client not only faces
his problem directly but also is willing to face the

consequences of changing. The client begins to differenti-

 

ate stimulii; he begins to realize that peOple and events

 

are individual and he learns to respond to them as such.

The fourth task focuses on the client behaving differently

 

during the counseling interview. He also reports noticing
behavior changes in his everyday life. The client explores
his problems more reasonably and redefines his relationship
with the counselor. He engages in new behavior with the
counselor and describes to the counselor new behaviors in
his everyday life.

These researchers have focused primarily on the
helping process as it occurs in therapy or counseling.
Some investigators suggest that a helping process can
also occur between a lay professional and a client. This
investigation considers the helping process as it might
occur between students on a college campus. Several
sources of student trainees can be identified within the
university. This study questions what training pro-
cedures could be used to increase effective helper be—
haviors, what kinds of growth can occur following an
intense training program of short duration, and whether

these behaviors can be maintained over a period of time.

18

Assumptions and Review of Research
Which Supports Assumptions

 

 

In the context of this study, the university is

 

identified as an agent of student academic and personal-

 

social growth. Educational institutions primarily struc-

 

ture programs for the develOpment of the student's in-
tellectual skills. Yet the student's personal and social
development also occurs within that setting and is in-
creasingly of concern to university faculty. Teacher-
student, administrator-student, counselor-student, student-
student interactions and relationships thus have the
potential of fostering or deterring this postadolescent
growth (Carkhuff, 1966; Rogers, 1957). Also, student
needs for identity, freedom, self-eXploration, self-
direction, dependence-independence, self—realization,
creativity, social sensitivity, and intellectual skills
all impinge on the structure, goals, atmosphere, and
staff of the university (Carkhuff, 1966). For student
growth and adjustment to occur, then,effective com—
munication between staff and students is necessary.

This study assumes that elements of minimally
effective communication can be identified. Researchers
have posited that elements of good communication can be
identified and that the level of these conditions can
have either constructive or deteriorative consequences
(Carkhuff & Truax, 1966). Interpersonal learning occurs

in such relationships as parent-child, teacher-student,

19

and counselor-client. Success or failure in interpersonal
learning can be related to the type and quality of certain
dimensions in the interaction. Rogers (1957) delineated

six conditions which he posited as necessary in a counsel-

ing relationship. Two people must be aware of each other;

,a__-_..._a———--—wo—-

 

‘—~__

_.... — ..h_.

they must be in psychological contact with each other.

._..__,_' H...— ‘_—— .———_~____
a

The client is in a state of anxiety and the counselor is

‘ ‘ M“. -____ .-
“6%
—~—‘__

congruent or integrated in the relationsh1p. The counselor

m... .,_“
“*‘fi

experiences acceptance of the client (unconditional posi-

‘h-_ “mm ‘mm_k _.. .fl. —.—_- ___,
w ——.__.. __ _
' ‘w Mm wuo—a—Oflfi” F"

tive regard) as well as an empathic understanding of the
M M\‘
client's internal frame of reference. He endeavors to
11.——r It

communicate this understanding to the client. The com-

 

 

 

munication of the counselor's empathy and acceptance must
be minimally achieved.

In addition, three helper dimensions and one
client characteristic have been shown to be related to
the constructive growth of the client in a variety of
settings, regardless of orientation (Carkhuff & Truax,
1966; Truax & Carkhuff, 1967). These variables include
the helper's empathic understanding; the helper's com-
munication of respect; the helper's genuineness; and the
client's ability and willingness to eXplore his own feel-
ings, thoughts, and fears.

Counselor and client behaviors in effective inter-
personal communication have been identified by Kagan and

his associates (Kagan, gt gt., 1967; Kagan, Schauble,

20

Resnikoff, Danish, & Krathwohl, 1969; Kagan & Schauble,
1969). Effective counselor verbal behaviors are defined
in terms of various effective modes of response. The
counselor makes reference to or encourages some affective

or feeling aspect of the client's communication--affective

 

response. The counselor is able to convey to the client

 

his awareness of and sensitivity to the client's feelings

and concerns--understanding response. The counselor

 

deals with the core of the client's concern and is honest

in the labels he uses--specific response. The counselor

 

also encourages the client to be the more active of the
two in exploring his feelings; and the counselor provides

an opportunity for the client to do so--exploratory

 

response. Specific client variables are also associated

 

with client change and growth. The client owns his dis-
comfort; he commits himself to change; he differentiates
stimuli; and the client behaves differently with his
counselor.

Robinson (1955) focused on counselor and client
response dimensions which played a crucial role in the
interactional learning process. Counselor variables in-
cluded the counselor's attitude of acceptance of the
client, his response to the core of the client's feeling,
his shared responsibility with the client for the progress
of the interview, and the degree to which the counselor's

remarks tended to probe client statements. Dimensions of

21

client behavior were the degree of the client's motivation,
the stage the client had reached in thinking about his
problem, the role the client expected the counselor to
play, the type of problem with which the client entered
counseling, and client proclivities, such as dependence,
aggression, and transference.

Research also supports the assumption that elements
of effective communication can be learned and incorporated
within an individual's behavioral repertoire. Paradigms
for training persons in effective interpersonal skills
usually have been sketchily reported in the literature,
and the elements of interpersonal communication have been
subjected to much controversy. Kagan and his associates
(1967) described four major developmental tasks which face
a counselor in learning about the process of effective
interpersonal communication. According to this description
the trainee becomes increasingly aware of the elements of
good counseling; and the dimensions of counselor behaviors
which characterize effective counseling are defined. The
trainee becomes sensitive to, and understands, a greater
amount of client communication. He also becomes aware of
and sensitive to his own feelings during the counseling
session. Finally the helper becomes sensitive to the
bilateral or reciprocal nature of the counseling inter-
action; he perceives ways in which the dynamics of both
the counselor and the counseled may serve to either

expedite or inhibit the relationship.

 

”I”: .Jr ”HH- r.avb.. .. r“;

as.

 

22

Kagan's Interpersonal Process Recall (IPR) tech-
niques have been used to stimulate recall of the underlying
dynamics involved in such interpersonal interactions as
those between counselor and client and teacher and
learner (Kagan & Schauble, 1969). The IPR process in-
volved three steps. A counselor and client first con-
ducted an interview which was videotaped and, immediately
after the interview, the counselor left the room and an
"inquirer" entered the room. Then the inquirer and the
client played back the interview in order to discuss
recalled feelings or thoughts (Kagan, gt gt., 1967; Kagan
& Schauble, 1969). Significant differences were found in
the use of IPR in counselor education and in the acceler-
ation of client growth in counseling (Kagan, gt gt., 1967;
Schauble, 1970; Spivack, 1970; Grzegorek, 1971).

In another training paradigm, a five-stage training
process in effective growth—producing dimensions was de-
lineated (Truax & Carkhuff, 1965a, 1967b). In this train-
ing process the trainees were didactically taught thera-
peutic dimensions of helper empathic understanding (E),
helper respect (R), helper genuineness (G), and client
self-exploration (Ex). Trainees then practiced discrimi-
nation of five levels of each of the four dimensions.
During empathy training, the trainee listened to a
client's statements and then wrote a response in terms
<3f both the feeling and the content of the communication.

Experiential role-playing exercises enabled the trainees

23

to practice and evaluate their own facilitative behaviors,
using research dimensions as measures. Trainees then con-
ducted initial interviews with a client. Following the
initial interview, the trainee's behaviors were rated and
feedback about those behaviors was provided.

Research evidence indicated that lay persons and
graduate students could be trained to function at minimally
facilitative levels in E, R, and G (Carkhuff, 1968).
Length of the training programs ranged from twenty hours
to one year (Berenson, Carkhuff, & Myrus, 1966; Carkhuff,
1968; Carkhuff & Truax, 1965b). After about 100 hours of
training, lay helpers and graduate students functioned at
levels of facilitative conditions comparable to experi—
enced professionals (Carkhuff & Truax, 1965b). Following
16 hours of training in the research dimensions, volunteer
college students demonstrated significantly greater im—
provement than did their controls, as measured by rated
taped interviews, interviewee reports, self—reports, and
reports of significant others (Berenson, Carkhuff, & Myrus,
1966). Fourth semester rehabilitation counselor trainees
functioned at significantly higher levels of communication
than both first semester rehabilitation students and
fourth semester philOSOphy students (Anthony & Carkhuff,
1970).

Training programs of academic lay and professional

counselors have also been discussed by researchers (Brown,

24

1965; Zunker & Brown, 1966). Following 50 hours of identi—
cal training, student counselors were found to be as
effective as professional counselors in the criteria of
communication of information, impact on counseled stu-
dents' academic achievement, and satisfaction ratings of
the students counseled (Zunker & Brown, 1966).

Thus, it can be assumed that lay personnel can be

 

at least minimally effective facilitators in promoting

 

student growth. There is research evidence to indicate

 

that lay persons can effect significant constructive
changes in the clients whom they see (Carkhuff, 1968).
Hospitalized neurOpsychiatric patients in lay counselor

led groups showed significant improvement, as compared to
controls, on such measures as a pre-post Anxiety Scale
(Carkhuff & Truax, 1965a). Lay personnel engaged hos-
pitalized patients in a depth of interpersonal exploration
commensurate with that of experienced therapists and
graduate students (Carkhuff & Truax, 1965b). In another
study, 30 out of 49 neurOpsychiatric outpatients seen by
lay counselors showed some improvement as measured by
clinical ratings (Rioch, gt gt., 1963). Freshmen counseled
by students showed significant improvements, as compared

to controls, on such dimensions as test-retest differential
(Study Habits and Attitudes), grades, and quality point
ratios (Brown, 1965). Student counselors achieved signifi-
cantly better results in promoting freshman growth than

professional counselors on certain outcome measures, such

_
l

25

as client use of study skills knowledge, client satis—
faction, and grade point ratios (Zunker & Brown, 1966).
The rationale of this study has thus been based
on four assumptions. The university can be identified as
an agent of student academic and personal-social growth.
The elements of minimally effective communication can be
identified. The elements of effective communication can
be learned and incorporated within an individual's be-
havioral repertoire. Lay personnel can be at least
minimally effective facilitators of their peers' growth.
This investigation then tests how much growth in helper
behavior can be evidenced as the result of an intensive
training experience, what kinds of helper growth can be
evidenced in each of the two intensive training programs
used, and whether helper behavior can be maintained over

time.

Specific Objectives

 

Training of Resident Assistants and Peer Groupers
includes four general goals. In this study the training
attempts to make trainees more aware of and sensitive to
the feelings and concerns of their peers, while it also
seeks to provide trainees with listening and communication
skills which facilitate understanding between them and
students desiring help. The training programs attempt to
offer student helpers effective ways of responding to and

behaving with students, and also to give trainees an

26

increased awareness of their role and impact as helpers
in the college and residence hall.

Specific skills identified in this study as
facilitating increased communication and understanding
within the milieu include helper empathic understandipg
(E) and helper use of affective, understanding, specific,

and eXploratory responses (Kagan's CVRS) to student com-

 

munication.

Hypotheses

 

This study will compare the effectiveness of both
the Kagan and Carkhuff approaches to the training of
undergraduate paraprofessional mental health workers or
"helpers." Both models seem to be effective training
procedures. Thus, one hypothesis in this study predicts
that there will be no differences in trainee group levels
of Empathic Understanding (E), Counselor Verbal Response
Scale (CVRS) dimensions, and Affective Sensitivity Scale
(ASS) scores between the trainees who receive modified
IPR training procedures and those trainees who receive
modified communications skill training (Truax-Carkhuff
paradigm).

Carkhuff (1968) suggests that lay persons can be
trained to function at minimally facilitative levels of
helPer conditions in relatively short periods of time.
ThuS, the second hypothesis predicts that there will be

no differences in trainee group levels of Empathic

27

Understanding (E), Counselor Verbal Response Scale (CVRS)
dimensions, and Affective Sensitivity Scale (ASS) scores
between the experimental trainee groups (IPR and/or com—
munication skills 40-hour intensive programs) and those
trainees who receive approximately the same amount of
training in IPR over a six-month period of time--the
treatment comparison group.

Carkhuff (1968) also proposes that lay helpers can
function at levels essentially as high or higher than pro-
fessional trainees or counselors. Thus, the third
hypothesis predicts that there will be no differences in
helper group levels of Empathic Understanding (E), Counse-
lor Verbal Response Scale (CVRS) dimensions, and Affective
Sensitivity Scale (ASS) scores between the experimental
trainees (IPR and/or communication skills programs) and
the comparison group of trained professional counselors.

The fourth hypothesis tests whether helper be-
haviors following training remain at the same level in the
environment over a period of time. Grzegorek (1971) sug—
gests that levels of helper behavior following treatment
can be maintained over a period of time following train-
ing (four weeks after treatment). Thus the last hypothesis
in this study predicts that there will be no differences
in the modified IPR and modified communication skills
trainees' levels of Empathic Understanding (E), Counselor

Verbal Response Scale (CVRS) dimensions, and Affective

28

Sensitivity Scale (ASS) scores two weeks after training

compared to eight weeks after training.

Overview of the Training Programs

 

Two training programs were used in this study.
Intensive Training Model I (ITM-I) is the intensive
(short-term) modified IPR program. The procedures are
fully described in Appendix E. The model for this program
was developed by Kagan and his associates (1967). Inten—
sive Training Model II (ITM-II) is the intensive (short-
term) modified communication skills program. Procedures
are fully described in Appendix F. The model for this
program was develOped by Carkhuff and his associates
(Carkhuff & Truax, 1965a, 1965b).

Both training models used four sources of learning
--the didactic, the experiential, the role model, and the
actual interview process. The didactic mode refers to the
direct shaping of behavior. In this process, facilitative
behaviors were defined, operationalized, practiced, and
rated. The experiential mode included role-playing exer-
cises with a trainee—client and with coached clients; these
exercises then were used as a type of practicum experience
for the trainees. Through the use of the role model,
facilitative helper behaviors were modeled by the trainers
and were shaped and practiced by the trainees. Interviews
with coached and actual clients were used so that the

trainees could test their facilitative behaviors in an

29

experience which closely approximated their job experience.
Table 1.1 delineates the helper tasks, the goals related

to each develOpmental task, and the trainee exercises in
both ITM-I and ITM-II which were used to achieve each

develOpmental task.

Summary

This study is designed to assess helper growth
evidenced as the result of an intensive training eXperi-
ence focused on helper behaviors. Two training models—-
intensive modified IPR and intensive modified communication
skills training-—were used during the week prior to the
fall term of 1970. These two treatments are compared with
each other and with two comparison groups. One comparison
group includes resident assistants who had been trained
in the IPR process over a period of six months. The
second comparison group includes professional trained
counselors. Carkhuff's Empathic Understanding Scale (E),
Kagan's Counselor Verbal Response Scale (CVRS) dimensions,
and Kagan's Affective Sensitivity Scale (ASS) are used
as criterion measures of helper behaviors in all groups.

The literature pertinent to paraprofessional
training is reviewed in Chapter II. Procedures, method-
<Jlogy, and analysis techniques are described in Chapter
IIII. Results of the statistical analyses are discussed in
CHIapter IV. In Chapter V the conclusions, summary, and

implications for future research are considered.

30

Table 1.1

Helper Tasks, Goals, Training Exercises in ITM-I and in ITM-II

 

Helper DevelOpmental
Tasks and Related
Goals

Training Exercises
ITM-I
(Modified IPR)

Training Exercises

ITM-II

(Modified Communication
Skills)

 

Trainees become aware of
and understand the ele-
ments of facilitative
munication .

Goals

1. To operationally
define facilitative
behaviors.

2. To determine how and
when facilitative
behaviors can be
used.

3. To develop a sense
of “helpful" and
“non-helpful“
responses.

4. To establish criteria
by which trainees can

judge their own be-
haviors.

Trainees learn the five
levels of the E and Ex
scales.

Trainees learn to dis-
criminate the five
levels of each scale.

Trainees listen to audio-
taped client statements
and formulate their own
responses in terms of E
(empathy training).

Trainees learn the five
levels of the B and Ex
scales.

Trainees learn to dis-
criminate the five levels
of each scale.

Trainees listen to audio-
taped client statements
and formulate their own
responses in terms of B
(empathy training).

 

Trainees experientially
learn their own facili-
tative behaviors and how
these are communicated.

Goals

1. To help trainees
begin to shape and
practice their own
facilitative
behaviors.

2. To provide trainees
with feedback and
exploration of their
own facilitative
behaviors.

3. To reinforce facili-
tative behaviors.

Trainees role-play the
counselor-client inter-
action. That interaction
was videotaped and
“recalled.“

Trainees learn the in-
quirer role in the IPR
process.

Helper Recall.

Client recall.

Mutual recall of both

the helper and the
student.

Trainees role-play the
counselor-client inter-
action. That interaction
was audiotaped and rated.

Trainees rated helper
behavior using the 8 scale.

Trainer and trainees pro-
vide feedback to the
trainee-helper.

Group discussion about the
helper-student interaction.

 

.Trainees become more
aware of and sensitive
to the aspects of client
communication.

Goals

1. To aid trainees to
define student self-
explorative behavior.

2., To determine how and
when student explora-
tory behaviors occur.

3. To develop a sense of
“helpful“ and “non—
helpful“ exploration.

Trainees learn the Ex
Scale.

Trainees role-play
student concerns.

Client recall.
Mutual recall.

Interview with a
coached client.

Trainees learn the Ex

scale.

Trainees role-play
student concerns.

Trainees rate student
behavior using the Ex
scale.

Group discussion of the
helper-student interaction.

Interview with a coached
client.

 

Trainees achieve an aware-
ness of the client-helper
interaction.

9.1.1-

1. To help trainees ex-
plore the impact of
helper behavior on
the client.

2. To aid trainees in
understanding the
impact of client be-
havior on the helper.

3. To aid trainee ex-
ploration of the
underlying dynamics
of the helper-client
interaction.

 

Client recall.
Helper recall.
Mutual IPR recall.

Interview with a
coached client.

Group discussion of the
helper-client interaction.

Trainees rate helper
behavior using the E scale.
Trainees rate client
behavior using the la scale.

Interview with a coached
client.

 

 

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

The research literature related to both the use
and training of paraprofessionals will be discussed in
this chapter. These areas are directly related to the
theoretical assumptions and hypotheses discussed in
Chapter I. This chapter delineates the variables of
interest in the study of paraprofessional helpers, identi-
fies the contributions of previous research, and discusses
limitations of these descriptive and experimental studies.

The use of lay professionals has been the subject
of much controversy in the literature. Conflict about the
use of lay helpers and their training has focused on their
role as aides or assistants to professional counselors as
opposed to the use of paraprofessionals in the direct
counseling or interview process (Schlossberg, 1966; Cark-
huff & Truax, 1965a; Carkhuff, 1966; Magoon & Golann,
1966). The first section of this chapter will critique
£5tudies related to the use of paraprofessionals. The
ruaxt portion of this chapter will discuss research related

ti) the Carkhuff model of training lay helpers. The third

31

32

section will present investigations of the Kagan model of
training helpers in facilitative behaviors. The final
section will summarize the status of the current research

and present the rationale for this study.

Use of Paraprofessionals

 

Studies have reported the use of paraprofessionals
in several helping relationships, including academic
advisement, individual counseling, group counseling,
group training, and social adjustment. Some researchers
have attempted to compare the functioning of lay helpers
with professionals in the helping situation. These studies
raised important questions concerning the kinds of useful
services that could be provided by paraprofessionals in a
social setting.

Two studies have evaluated the use of undergraduate
student counselors in academic advisement activities.

Brown (1965) assessed the functioning of undergraduate
helpers in a freshman orientation program at a southwest
Texas college. A 40-hour training experience was conducted
prior to the orientation program. Student helpers were
trained to perform three guidance activities, including
conducting survival orientation meetings in the residence
halls, interpreting tests at the college guidance center,
and providing study skills guidance to freshmen in the
dormitory. During the orientation program student leaders

used these skills with small groups of freshmen (six per

33

counselor). Freshmen counseled by trained students
scored significantly higher on two measures of study
behavior than did uncounseled freshmen. At the end of
the first semester, freshmen counseled by student helpers
averaged .6 letter grade higher than did uncounseled
freshmen. The author also found that freshman counselees
evaluated the student—to-student counseling approach
quite positively. The author concluded that academic
adjustment guidance provided by student helpers produced
significant improvement in the scholastic adjustment
and achievement of counseled freshmen. Yet Brown did
not consider other intervening factors which might have
influenced these results. An attention factor, whether
provided by students or professionals, could play a
crucial role in the outcome behavior of counseled
freshman. Other variables related to a freshman's
first semester grade point average include successful
adjustment to the college setting by the student,
intervention by a professor or friend at crucial
times, or a freshman's scholastic motivation. Yet
these were not controlled in this study.

In a follow-up study, Zunker and Brown (1966)
assessed the effectiveness of trained student counselors
as opposed to the impact of professional school counselors

in academic guidance activities. Prior to the orientation

34

program, a 50—hour training program in academic advisement
skills had been conducted for both student and professional
counselors. The three types of evaluation used in this
study were the effectiveness of communicating information
about academic adjustment problems and their solutions,
the impact of counseling on subsequent academic achieve—
ment, and the acceptability ratings of counseling by the
counselees. Student-counseled freshmen evaluated the
program significantly higher than did freshmen counseled
by professional counselors. On a counseling comprehension
test, students counseled by the paraprofessionals retained
significantly more of the communicated information than
did the professionally counseled students. Test—retest
scores on an effective study test were not significantly
different between the two groups of counseled students.
Grade point averages for student-counseled freshmen
(especially males) were significantly higher than the
grade point averages of professionally counseled students.
Zunker and Brown concluded that student counselors were

as effective as professionals on all measures taken. Yet
objective ratings of the helping process provided by
either type of helper were not considered in this study.
Criteria of helper effectiveness were based only on the
behavior and perceptions of those counseled. While this
outcome measure is commonly used in the research litera-

ture, it is difficult to assess how much of the client

35

criterion behavior is attributable to the impact of the
helper and how much is related to the motivation of the
client. It seems that the satisfaction ratings may have
given some notions about freshman perception of counseling
effectiveness but a grade point average may not be a
mirror of effective counseling. Also, student acceptance
ratings may have been biased by such factors as the lay
helper's eagerness to help, by the credibility of a stu-
dent helper in the perceptions of incoming freshmen, or by
modeling. Yet these studies do suggest that undergraduates
can be trained to be effective helpers in academic advise-
ment.

Some researchers have investigated the use of para-
professionals in the personal counseling process. Rioch,
Elkes, Flint, Usdansky, Newman, and Silber (1963) tested
the hypothesis that carefully selected, mature para-
professionals could be trained within two years to do
psychotherapy under limited conditions. The authors
described four phases of their investigation--recruitment,
selection, training, and evaluation. From a volunteer
sample of 80, eight 40-year-old women were selected for
training as mental health counselors. Training was in-
tensively focused on psychotherapy; experiences included
intensive supervision, on-the-job training, and course
work in the theory and practice of psychotherapy. Follow-
ing the first year of training, these investigators used

Objective ratings of trainee interview behavior, supervisor

36

ratings, instructors' ratings, and trainee self-reports to
assess trainee growth. Measures of client behavior were
also used. The results presented in this study were
descriptive data on post—therapy diagnostic tests. Six
percent of the clients seen by the mental health counselors
showed marked improvement. Fifty-five percent of the
clients showed slight or moderate improvement. Thirty-
nine percent showed no change at all. Average ratings on
trainee interview behavior, from supervisors, instructors,
and ratings of an interview were in the satisfactory range.
But self-ratings of interview behavior tended to be higher.

Magoon and Golann (1966) conducted a descriptive
follow-up study on the trained mental health counselors.
This research occurred during the first 18 months of the
trainees' employment in a counseling service. These re-
searchers investigated the kinds of vocational roles these
trainees performed on their jobs and assessed the quality
of their job behavior. The majority of the trainees' work
performance was spent in such direct and indirect client
services as interviewing and supervision. Supervisors and
co-workers rated all the trainees' work performance as
average or above average. The authors concluded that
after two years of employment, these trainees provided
credible mental health services in the judgment of their
supervisors and co-workers.

Harvey (1964) reported that closely supervised

trained lay professionals provided marriage counseling

37

services in Australian social work agencies. Following
15 months of training, these paraprofessionals conducted
programs of education in marriage and family living and
provided counseling help to clients. The author reported
that in a three-year period of time, 15% of the cases seen
by the trainees were successfully terminated. Twenty—six
percent of their clients showed some improvement. While
Harvey's study presented descriptive information about the
use of paraprofessionals in the counseling process, in-
vestigation of the level of trainee functioning in that
process was omitted.

Two investigators have attempted to assess the
impact of lay helpers in the group helping process.
Archer (1971) evaluated the effectiveness of undergraduate
paraprofessional group leaders with their peers in a col-
lege dormitory setting. Two kinds of group experiences
were studied; interpersonal communication skills training
and encounter-developmental approaches were the treatments
used by the two groups of lay helpers with their peers.
The author questioned how paraprofessionals using a
structured training model which employed IPR videotape
feedback, IPR affect simulation, and tape rating would
compare with undergraduate group leaders providing an
unstructured encounter approach. To assess student
leader effectiveness, the author used the following
measures of peer behavior--affective sensitivity, self-

actualization, psychological insight in relationships, and

38

depth of typical peer relationships. Students in the
structured group experience scored significantly higher
than the students in the developmental groups in the depth
of their peer relationships. The author concluded that
with appropriate training and weekly supervision, under—
graduates could function as paraprofessional group leaders
for interpersonal skills groups. Yet the effectiveness of
these paraprofessional leaders needs further consideration.
The structure of the IPR training model used in training
may have been a crucial factor in this study. Specific
phases of the training model thus need evaluation. For
instance, the kinds of peer growth evidenced as the result
of the IPR videotape feedback experiences as opposed to
the growth evidenced as the result of simulation con—
frontation recall might yield important information in
future studies.

Paraprofessional trainees have also led therapy
groups with hospitalized patients (Carkhuff & Truax,
1965a). These lay personnel (three aides, one volunteer
worker, and one industrial therapist) had been trained in
a five—step approach to the learning of facilitative be-
haviors in the helping process. The helper's empathic
understanding, regard, concreteness, genuineness, and the
client's self-exploration were the variables of interest
in training. Criterion measures of trainee effectiveness
included client discharge rate from the hospital, pre-

post ward behavior ratings of patients, and pre—post

5'_"..'

e
was."

39

psychodiagnostic ratings. There were significant differ-
ences on the following behavior indices-—degree of psycho-
logical disturbance, degree of interpersonal concern, and
overall improvement between clients in the groups led by
paraprofessionals and clients who received no counseling.
Carkhuff and Truax (1965a) concluded that paraprofessional
group leaders could effect significant improvement in their
clients. However, the attention given these clients in
the groups and the possibility of biased ratings on the
wards may be two limiting factors in this study. While
outcome criteria, such as client behavior following treat-
ment, are important, study of the actual helper behavior
during the process is needed.

Paraprofessionals have also been trained to aid
students in their adjustment to a new, stressful social
environment. Carkhuff and Griffin (1970) trained adult
black human relations specialists to work with black stu—
dents in newly integrated junior high schools. Fourteen
trainees were selected on the basis of their pre—training
levels CHE facilitative behaviors. Training focused on
empathy, respect, concreteness, and genuineness. Follow-
ing 150 hours of intensive training, these specialists
worked with black students who were experiencing difficulty
in making an educational and/or social adjustment. To
evaluate helper behaviors, trainee levels of facilitative
behaviors were compared to non-trainee levels of function-

ing during interviews with students. Satisfaction ratings

40

from administrators, teachers, counselors, and clients
were additional criteria. Trainees differed significantly
from nontrainees on all five indices of helper behavior

as measured by tape ratings, client evaluation, trainee
written responses to standard tapes, and trainee discrimi-
nation of helpful behaviors. The authors concluded that
these specialists appeared to have a potent impact on the
black students. In a follow-up study, made one year after
training, these specialists functioned in the areas of
direct counseling, training, and teaching of interpersonal
skills. While these specialists seemed to be quite useful
in aiding social adjustment, it might be important that
future follow-up studies investigate whether the trainees'
levels of facilitative behaviors continue to be maintained
in the environment.

Armstrong (1969) analyzed the differences between
students in counseling and students not in counseling with
regard to the quality of their relationships with intimate
friends as therapeutic agents. On the Barrett-Lennard
Relationship Inventory, there were no significant differ-
ences between counseled and non-counseled students in their
use of friends to help with problems and in rating their
friends' accessibility and helpfulness. Students in both
groups listed intimate friends as their first choice when
Considering helpful people in the environment. The

author concluded that intimate friendships were potentially

41

therapeutic and that the dynamics of those relationships
had a strong "behind the scenes" impact on the person's
mental health. The author, however, did not identify the
sources of help resulting from the friend relationship.
While friends may be important helpers, the investigator
did not identify the therapeutic conditions of that
relationship.

Truax and Lister (1970) compared the effects on
client progress in three treatment conditions with a pro—
fessional counselor alone,with a professional counselor
assisted by a secretarial aide, and with a counselor aide
working alone under close supervision. The untrained
counselor aides were selected from a secretarial staff.
Clients were randomly assigned to one of the treatment
conditions and were counseled for at least nine months.

A five-point rating scale developed by the Arkansas Reha-
bilitation Service was used to evaluate client progress.
Truax and Lister found that the greatest client improve-
ment occurred when aides handled cases alone; the least
client improvement resulted from counselors assisted by
aides. But, McArthur (1970) questioned the kinds of
helper-client interaction that might have occurred in
this study. It was unclear what kinds of casework were
conducted and dimensions of helper behavior were not
discussed.

These investigations into the use of parapro-

fessionals in several helping processes have presented

42

data to support the notion that lay helpers could provide
useful services to their clients under such limited con-
ditions as close supervision, intensive training, or re-
stricted caseload. But these articles have not investi-
gated the effectiveness of comparative training procedures

used with lay professionals.

Carkhuff Training Paradigm

 

Research in the Carkhuff model of facilitative
processes grew out of Rogers' original investigations into
the helping relationship. This model considered three
classes of variables which were considered relevant to the
helping interaction. First person variables were defined
as parents, teachers, counselors, therapists, or para-
professional helpers. Second person variables included
children, students, or clients. The third group of vari—
ables--contextual variables--focused on the quality of the
relationship, the length of treatment, and the levels of
facilitative conditions provided in the relationship.
These variables were studied alone and in their various
interactions (Carkhuff, 1967). Carkhuff (1967) prOposed
that a central core of facilitative conditions was the
most critical contextual variable in all helping relation-
ships. Five dimensions formed the "core" of facilitative
processes--helper empathic understanding (E), helper re-
gard (R), helper genuineness (G), helper concreteness (C),

and client self-exploration (Ex). Progress or deterioration

43

in the helping process was related to the levels of these
dimensions in the relationship. For research purposes,
each of these constructs was Operationalized into a five-
point scale (Carkhuff & Berenson, 1967). The five levels
of helper empathic understanding are defined in Appendix
A, and the five levels of client self-exploration are de-
fined in Appendix C. On all research scales, level three
was identified as the minimally facilitative level of client
or trainee constructive growth. Most of the research was
devoted to the validation of these assumptions. Carkhuff
and his associates have conducted studies of the training
model itself, comparison studies of trained parapro-
fessionals' and professional helpers' interview behaviors,
investigations of the effect of supervisor functioning on
trainee learning, and research in which training proce-

dures were used as a therapeutic technique.

Training Model

 

Carkhuff and his associates devised a five-step
process in the training of paraprofessional and professional
helpers (Carkhuff & Truax, 1965a, 1965b; Truax, Carkhuff,

& Douds, 1964). Trainees were didactically taught the
therapeutic dimensions (E, R, G, C, and Ex). They then
learned to discriminate the levels of each of these
dimensions by rating audiotaped helper and client re-
sponses. During empathy training, trainees wrote their

own responses to audiotaped client statements. The fourth

44

step was focused on the trainees' role—playing helper-
client interactions and their evaluation of their own
behaviors, using the research scales. Finally, these
helpers interviewed actual clients and, following the
interview, received feedback about the levels of their
facilitative behaviors.

Research evidence supported the notion that a
variety of subject groups could be trained to function
at minimally facilitative levels on the research dimensions.
Following 100 hours of training, twelve advanced graduate
students and five lay helpers functioned at levels com-
parable to that of experienced therapists while conducting
clinical interviews (Carkhuff & Truax, 1965b). Analysis
of the data revealed that there were no significant differ-
ences between the three groups of helpers (experienced
therapists, advanced graduate students, and lay personnel)
on the E, R, and Ex dimensions. However, there were sig-
nificant differences in favor of the professionals on the
C dimension. Carkhuff and Truax thus concluded that lay
therapists and graduate students could be trained to pro-
vide facilitative conditions in a therapeutic setting.
Yet results also suggested that on the congruence dimension,
experienced helpers seemed to be more freely and deeply
themselves in the therapeutic encounter.

Several aSpects of the above investigation were

criticized by Berenson, Carkhuff, and Myrus (1966).

45

Because there was a lack of pre-post testing, it was
difficult for researchers to assume that all training
groups were similar in ability and that they had indeed
changed during the training period. Comparison groups,
such as a training control group and a no-training control
group, had not been included in the study. Also it was
difficult to hypothesize which dimensions lead to client
interpersonal change. To overcome these limitations,
Berenson, Carkhuff, and Myrus (1966) investigated the
effects of training college student helpers in the facili-
tative dimensions. Thirty-six trainees were randomly
assigned to one of three groups--a group which had been
trained in the five research dimensions and had had a
four-hour group counseling experience (Group I), a group
which had been trained via discussions only (Group II),
and a no-training control group (Group III). Four pre and
post criterion measures were collected in all three groups.
These included objective ratings of an audiotaped inter-
view, an inventory report of the interview by the trainee,
an inventory report of the interview by the client, and

an inventory report of trainee behavior by significant
others-—roommates. All groups functioned slightly below
level two on all dimensions prior to training. After 16
hours of training, there were significant differences be-
tween student helpers in Group I and trainees in Group III
on all indices. There were significant differences between

Group I and Group II on two indices--the client inventory

46

and roommate ratings. There were significant differences
between Group II and Group III on two indices--the client
inventory and self-reports. Berenson, Carkhuff, and Myrus
therefore concluded that a systematically implemented pro—
gram in helper behaviors was superior to both a loosely
structured program and to no training at all. Yet, in
this study, the independence of the measures can be
questioned. It is not clear which measures differentiated
clearly between all the groups. Also the lack of signifi—
cant differences between groups on the ratings of taped
interviews could indicate that limited training, regardless

of the orientation, nets similar results in helper growth.

Comparative Studies

Martin, Carkhuff, and Berenson (1966) compared the
levels of facilitative behaviors elicited by friends and
by professional counselors. Each of the sixteen clients
included in this sample was interviewed by a professional
counselor anui then by their absent immediate friend. On
the objective ratings of audiotaped interviews, the
counselors performed at significantly higher levels of
E, R, C, G, and Ex than did the friends of the students.
The authors concluded that these results may have suggested
that a critical difference existed between the therapy pro-
cess and the everyday living process. Future investigations
are needed to define these differences and how they might

effect the helping process.

47

Carkhuff, Kratochvil and Friel (1968) investi-
gated the effects of graduate training on trainee discrimi-
nation and communication of the facilitative dimensions.
Interview behaviors and discrimination scores of first and
fourth year clinical students were compared with those of
first and fourth year non-clinical students. The authors
assumed that high levels of communication would be related
to high levels of discrimination. A significant difference
was found in the discrimination of facilitative behaviors

between fourth year students (clinical and non-clinical)

and first year students (clinical and non-clinical). There
were no significant differences in interview behavior
between first and fourth year students (clinical and non-
clinical) and between advanced clinical trainees and ad-
vanced non-clinical trainees. These investigators raised
the concern that graduate training might have a deteriora-
tive impact on trainee communication skills. While trainee
discrimination skills seemed to improve, trainee interview
behaviors seemed to deteriorate over the course of train-
ing. The authors did not define which aspects of graduate
training contributed to the deteriorative process. Longi—
tudinal studies may be needed to define these "sources of
deterioration."

Anthony and Carkhuff (1970) hypothesized that ad-
‘vanced trainees in rehabilitation counseling would demon—
strate significantly higher levels of functioning on the

facilitative dimensions than beginning trainees in that

48

program. They also proposed that both beginning and ad-
vanced rehabilitation trainees would demonstrate signifi-
cantly higher levels of functioning on the research
dimensions than a control group of beginning and advanced
philosophy graduate students. A third hypothesis stated
that there would be no significant differences between the
advanced trainees in rehabilitation counseling and their
trainers on the research dimensions. Analysis of tape
ratings and discrimination scores revealed that there were
no significant differences in communication and discrimi-
nation skills between the first year rehabilitation stu—
dents and the first year philOSOphy students. There were
significant differences in the levels of E, R, G, and C
between advanced rehabilitation students and advanced
philosophy students. The authors concluded that, in this
study, graduate training in rehabilitation counseling had
a constructive impact on trainee helper behavior. Again
in this study, it was difficult to hypothesize which
aspects of training contributed constructively to trainee
growth.

The last two comparative studies relied on outcome
measures to reflect the impact of the training process.
While this is an acceptable criterion measure, the train—
ing process itself has been undefined in these studies.
The researchers have failed to explain which training

procedures influenced trainee growth in either direction.

49

Carkhuff (1968) contended that both the training model
studies and the comparative investigations supported the
assumption that lay persons could be trained to function
at minimally facilitative levels of helper behavior. He
also stated that lay personnel could effect constructive
behavior change in their clients. In addition, studies of
graduate training programs have raised critical questions
concerning the effectiveness of professional training on
trainee growth. Yet, these results have posed a whole
host of new unanswered questions.
Are the results, for example, attributable to differ-
ences in a) the trainees themselves, b) differences in
the selection processes, c) differences in the training
personnel, d) differences in the training programs
pr0per, e) differences in treatment procedures, f)
evaluation of trainees, 9) any of the above, or h)
all of the above? (Carkhuff, 1968, p. 119)
All these sources of variation need investigation in future
studies. However, some research pertaining to one variable

in the training process--the supervisor--has been con-

ducted.

Supervision Process

 

Truax, Carkhuff, and Douds (1964) attempted to
describe a theory of supervision which would integrate both
the didactic and experiential modes of learning for trainee
growth. The didactic portion of supervision relied heavily
upon the use of tape-recorded psychotherapy sessions and
upon research scales which might quantify essential

aspects of the helping relationship for the trainee. The

50

supervisor-trainee relationship was basically defined as a
therapeutic encounter; the supervisor needed to provide
at least minimally facilitative levels of E, R, and C to
promote trainee self-exploration in the supervision process.
The supervisor served not only as a role model of facili-
tative behaviors for the trainee but also provided the
trainee with a relationship in which the trainee could
experience the facilitative levels of E, R, C, and Ex.
Pierce and Schauble (1970) used this model to
investigate the changes over time (one year) in the be-
havior of counseling interns on the facilitative dimensions
during a supervisory experience. They hypothesized that
supervisees of high level supervisors would gain signifi-
cantly in their rated levels of functioning on E, R, C, and
G; that supervisees of low functioning supervisors would
not gain in their levels of facilitative behaviors; and
that supervisees of high functioning supervisors would
score significantly higher on the facilitative dimensions
than supervisees of low functioning supervisors. Audio-
taped interviews were collected from the trainees at six-
week intervals throughout the year; and analysis of the
(objective ratings supported all three of the hypotheses.
{These authors then concluded that the supervisor and the
:supervisory relationship were critical variables when
c3<Dnsidering trainee growth. The supervisor could have

Gaither a constructive or deteriorative impact on trainee

 

51

behavior. Future investigations are needed to define the
other sources of variation in this learning process.
Training as a Therapeutic
Technique

Several researchers have prOposed that training
techniques might be appropriately used as therapeutic
techniques with clients (Pierce & Drasgow, 1969; Carkhuff
& Bierman, 1970; Cabush, 1971). The client was viewed as
a product of his past experiences and the critical core of
these experiences involved relationships with other human
beings. Thus, sources of client difficulty were hypothe-
sized to be interpersonal in nature. Treatment then was
conceptualized as a learning or relearning process, which
was also interpersonal in nature.

Pierce and Drasgow (1969) tested the feasibility
of training seven male psychiatric patients on the re-
search dimensions of E, R, G, and C as a way of increasing
their levels of interpersonal functioning. These patients
received 20 hours of communication training in the research
dimensions. Four comparison groups were used in this
study. These included a group of patients receiving no
treatment at all, a group receiving drug therapy, a group
ireceiving individual therapy, and a group receiving group
'therapy. Pre-post criterion measures were collected across
allgroups, and these were rated on the research dimensions.

Iknalysis of the data revealed that the training group

52

demonstrated significant changes in interpersonal function—
ing over the period of training. There were also signifi-
cant differences in levels of functioning between the
training group and all four control groups following train-
ing. These authors concluded that psychiatric inpatients
could significantly improve their levels of interpersonal
functioning in 20 hours of communication training. A major
implication for treatment seemed to be that progress in
interpersonal relations was related to systematic training
or treatment. Additional investigations are needed to
study the effects of treatment in different client pOpu-
lations.

Carkhuff and Bierman (1970) used discrimination and
communication training as a form of therapy for parents of
emotionally disturbed children. Five treatment groups were
studied in this sample. One group of ten parents received
25 hours of group therapy with a high functioning therapist.
A third group had 25 hours of group therapy with a moderate
functioning leader; and a fourth group had 25 hours of group
therapy with a low functioning counselor. The fifth group
received no treatment at all. Pre and post measures were
collected from all parents and their children on indices
<3f communication, discrimination, personality adjustment,
iind interaction between parent and child. Analysis of the
<iata revealed a significant improvement in the levels of

Communication and discrimination for the training group as

53

compared to the other four groups. Yet, pre to post
changes of parental functioning with their children were
not significant in any of the treatment groups. Thus, a
limitation in this study was that skills learned by parents
in training were not generalized to the parent-child re—
lationship. This warrants serious consideration. One
would assume that a transfer of learning from training to
everyday relationships is crucial if treatment is to be
considered effective.

Cabush (1971) evaluated the issue of whether
clients could be trained to respond to their own problems
at minimally facilitative levels of E, R, G, and C.
Twenty-two college students seeking personal-social
counseling were randomly assigned to one of two treatment
groups. Group I received six hours of discrimination and
communication training in facilitative self-responding,
and Group II received six hours of traditional counseling.
As a post measure, all subjects were asked to respond as a
helper to three problem statements taken from a recording
of their own intake interview. Analysis revealed signifi-
cant differences between the two groups on their levels of
E, R, C, and G. Group I responded at level three and
higher on all dimensions while Group II responded at
level two. This study prOposed a new direction for ex-
ploration in using training techniques as a mode of

treatment.

 

54

In light of the research discussed in these
sections, it seems that the Carkhuff training model might
be effective in training undergraduate paraprofessional
helpers. However, the the Carkhuff model usually did not
compare this training model with other innovative modern
methods. This study will attempt to compare the effective-
ness of the Carkhuff training model with the effectiveness
of another training procedure in facilitative communi-
cation. The Carkhuff paradigm is but one model for the
training of helpers. Kagan's IPR process for training

helpers in facilitative communication is another model.

Kagan and His Associates

 

Kagan and his associates (1967) developed the
Interpersonal Process Recall (IPR) method as a proposed
training model in counselor education (Kagan, Krathwohl,
Goldberg, Campbell, Schauble, Greenberg, Danish, Resnikoff,
Bowes, & Bondy, 1967). The IPR project grew out of a need
to provide accurate means of interpreting behavior in
interpersonal processes. These researchers wanted to find
ways of gaining knowledge about the underlying dynamics of
human interactions. The feelings, thoughts, anxieties,
fears, hostilities, and reactions expressed verbally or
non-verbally, explicitly or implicitly by each person in
a dyadic interaction were of special interest. These
researchers assumed that the ability to understand the

total communication of another person was basic to normal

55

functioning in society. They also assumed that it was
important for a person to understand his own communication
in his interactions with others.

Because it was often difficult for a trainee or a
client to both introspect and interact simultaneously with
another person in a normal manner, these authors devised
techniques which would allow a person to interact at one
time and introspect concerning that interaction at another
time. If a subject were given enough cues or clues to help
him relive an original experience, then he might be able
to explore, in depth, his interpersonal interactions. He
could focus on the meanings of the thoughts and feelings
which were expressed in an interaction. Affect simulation,
videotape feedback, and stimulated recall techniques were
used to facilitate these kinds of learnings.

Several areas of Kagan's research are directly
related to this study, including studies of the effective-
ness of the IPR training model itself, investigations of
the use of IPR techniques in supervision, and consider-
ations of the use of IPR in the acceleration of client

growth in therapy.

Training_Procedures

A four-step training model in facilitative be-
haviors was develOped by Kagan and his associates (1967).
The four steps included the following processes. Counselor

trainees watched a videotaped counseling session and were

56

didactically taught "dimensions of effective communi-
cation." The purpose of this experience was to help
trainees become more aware of and sensitive to the ele-
ments of facilitative communication. Next, trainees were
exposed to simulation confrontation recall. They were
videotaped while watching films which engaged the viewer
in a simulated relationship. Actors on these films por-
trayed various emotions such as hostility, rejection,
anger, and seduction. Immediately following this experi-
ence, an inquirer recalled the original experience with
the trainee and aided the trainee in recalling the feel-
ings and thoughts which he experienced during the original
session. The aim of this exercise was to sensitize the
trainee to his own feelings. The third step included
counselor or client recall. Trainees conducted an inter-
view with a client, and this interview was videotaped;
immediately following the interview, an inquirer recalled
the original interaction with the counselor or the client.
This technique was used to further sensitize the trainee
to his own feelings and to the feelings of the client.
The final step in the IPR process was mutual recall.
Following a videotaped interview, an inquirer or super-
visor recalled the original interaction with bgth the
counselor and the client. The trainee was thus aided in
understanding the bilateral nature of the counseling

relationship and the trainee then began to recognize the

(3

57

impact which he had on the client and the impact which
the client had on him.

Danish and Brodsky (1970) described the procedures
of a preliminary effort to sensitize policemen to their
aggressive feelings and self—control problems. Stimulus
films which focused on varying intensities of communicated
rejection were shown to 30 police trainees. Trainees were
to imagine that the actor was speaking to each one of them
personally and individually. The attention of the trainees
thus was directed toward the handling of strong personal
feelings in stressful situations. The overall goal of this
project was to help trainees become more aware of their
aggressive thresholds and of the ways in which they might
lose emotional control. A limitation of this study was
that no attempt was made to investigate the effectiveness
of this training procedure. It is difficult to determine
what changes in trainee behavior resulted from this
experience.

Spivack (1970) compared the effects of a tra-
ditional counselor training approach with the effects of
a developmental task approach in counselor training. The
traditional model used lectures, discussions, and demon-
strations as training techniques. The developmental task
paradigm incorporated the use of affect simulation and
IPR recall. Four learning tasks were identified as
crucial in both approaches. These included sensitizing

trainees to their own feelings during an interaction, both

58

sensitizing and helping trainees understand client com-

munication during an interview, promoting trainee aware-

ness of the elements of effective communication, and both

sensitizing and helping trainees understand the bilateral

nature of the counseling interaction and its mutual impact
on both the counselor and client. A pre—mid-post test

design was used in this study. Treatment procedures were

reversed at the midpoint of training. This investigator

found that, in an interview with a coached client, the IPR

group scored significantly higher than the traditional

group on the understanding, specific, and exploratory sub—

scales of the CVRS. In a role-play situation, the IPR

Group scored significantly higher than the traditional

group on all scales of the CVRS. There were no significant

differences between groups on the Empathic Understanding

Scale or on the Affective Sensitivity Scale.

Grzegorek (1971) tested the effects of two

approaches to counselor training on the post-training inter-

View behaviors of prison counselors. Both approaches--the

e>§periential-accepting (EA) and the cognitive-intellectual
(CII)--were based on four counselor developmental tasks.
'Trlis investigator attempted to determine whether trainee

learning was more related to affective involvement or to

cOgnitive involvement. Pre-, post-, and delayed—post

meEasures were collected. Following 80 hours of training,

t1Iere were no significant differences between the two

59

groups on affective sensitivity as measured by the ASS.

The EA group scored significantly higher than the CI groups
on the Empathic Understanding scale and on the understand—
ing, specific, and exploratory subscales of the CVRS. This
author concluded that the experiential—accepting approach
(affective learning) had a significant\overall effect on
counselor performance in training.

Both the Spivack (1970) and the Grzegorek (1971)
studies supported the notion that the IPR process could be
eeffectively used with counselor trainees. However, research
Imas not considered the efficacy of this training model with
puaraprofessional helpers. This study, then, will attempt to
tmest the kinds of paraprofessional trainee growth that might
1363 evidenced as the result of an intensive IPR experience.
Because of time limitations, the simulation confrontation

(ifilms) eXperience will be deleted in this study.

Supervision

 

The IPR process has also been used in the super—
'Vfiision of counselor trainees. Kagan and his associates
(1.967; Goldberg, 1967) formulated a supervisory experi-
elice that was based on the four counselor developmental
tlasks. Trainees needed to become aware of the elements of
good counseling. Counselor-trainees needed to understand
and become sensitive to a greater amount of client com-
nIunication, while also becoming sensitive to their own

feelings during the counseling session. Finally, these

6O

helpers needed to become sensitive to the bilateral feature
of the counseling interaction. The IPR tasks of stimulated
recall and videotape feedback were used to facilitate
trainee learning of these tasks. Trainees in this project
interviewed their clients for 30 minutes weekly over a
period of six weeks. The traditional supervision group
spent 60 minutes after each interview reviewing the audio-
taped session with their supervisor. The IPR supervision
groups' sequential experience was as follows. Immediately
following the first two interviews, a lS-minute client
recall and a 45—minute counselor recall were conducted by
an inquirer. For the next two sessions, trainees conducted
Client recalls for each other. A supervisor conducted 60-
minute mutual recalls for the last two interviews. Both
Supervisory eXperiences were found to be effective in pro-
mOting pre to post trainee changes in interview behavior.
But the IPR supervision trainees showed significantly
greater gains on the CVRS dimensions than those trainees
in the traditional supervision groups. The authors con—
c311.1ded that a sequential series of supervisory experiences
uSing the IPR methods were effective in training counselors
during a practicum. Kagan and Goldberg did not, however,
investigate the impact of the supervisor's personality or

level of functioning on trainee growth.

61

Acceleration of Client Progress
in Therapy

Kagan and his associates (1967) observed that the
IPR techniques seemed to accelerate the counseling pro-

cess. That is, the impasses and plateaus which usually

hindered the counseling or therapy process were diminished.

Studies were conducted to appraise the accelerating effect

of the IPR process on client progress in therapy. Four

therapeutic variables were defined as criteria of client

growth in the counseling relationship. Client develop—

mental tasks included the following. The client owned his

discomfort. He admitted the feelings of anxiety or un-

happiness and began to specify the sources of his concerns,

fears, and discomfort. The client committed himself to

The client stayed with the problem, confronted

change.

it, and tried to work out other coping behaviors. The

gglient differentiated stimulii. That is, the client began

t1) differentiate his own emotions and accurately perceived

tile emotions of others and their reactions to him. Finally,

.Efile client behaved differently with his counselor. He re-

dGafined his relationship with others and with the counselor.
Kagan and Schauble (1969) and Danish and Kagan

(1.969) reported positive initial findings concerning the

‘JSSe of affect stimulation with clients in therapy. In

t1'lese studies clients were exposed to various kinds and

(ifiigrees of emotional situations on a film. The client's

1Te‘actions to these stimulus films were videotaped. After

62

each exposure, a counselor and the client reviewed the
videotaped behavior. Thus the client's videotaped be-
havior became the focus for a personal counseling session.
These initial studies suggested that affective simulation
within the IPR process might accelerate a client's ability
to perceive, differentiate, and gain insight into his
reactions.

The use of stimulated recall in therapy has also
been investigated. Experimentation in the therapy process
had been structured in the following manner. A counselor
and a client conducted a counseling interview which was
videotaped. Immediately following the interview, the
counselor and client recalled the interaction separately
‘with an inquirer. Thus, both the counselor and the client
examined the interpersonal communication process.

Kagan, Krathwohl, and Miller (1963) reported in
their initial studies that the use of these procedures with
Clients and counselors enabled these subjects to reveal
at length and in depth much of their subtle or semi-
<Conscious behaviors during an interview.

Woody, Krathwohl, Kagan, and Farquhar (1965) found
‘that the use of hypnosis with stimulated recall further
Eiccelerated client movement in counseling. These in—
vestigators assumed that hypnosis could be used to facili-
1Zate uncovering of insightful and useful material in the

lfiecall sessions. This study covered seven counseling

63

sessions. Four interviews were used as an orientation to
hypnosis. IPR techniques were used in the last three
sessions. Clinical assessment of the counseling and re—
call protocols seemed to support the initial hypothesis.
Following hypnosis, clients seemed to be more analytical,
and more verbal in their insights than they had been prior
to the hypnotic experience. These authors concluded that
using both hypnosis and the IPR procedures heightened
client sensitivity and involvement in introspective
eXploration. In a clinical case, Resnikoff, Kagan, and
Schauble (1970) suggested that even in an excellent thera-
peutic relationship, the IPR process could facilitate
heightened clarity between counselor and client. All
these studies proposed that the use of IPR could acceler-
ate client movement in therapy. Yet all the relevant vari-
ables needed validation in experimental studies. For
instance, the investigators did not identify which vari-
ables had the most influence on client insight (Kagan,
Resnikoff, Danish, & Krathwohl, 1969). The role of the
inquirer might have been as powerful a stimulus for client
introspection as the stimulus value of the videotape feed—
lDack. Several experimental studies are needed to define
tfluese and other sources of variation.

Schauble (1970) investigated the combined effects
CDf affect simulation and stimulated recall on client move-

HMent in therapy. This author integrated both techniques

64

into a proposed sequential program of treatment. During
the first phase of treatment, the client experienced
simulated confrontation recall. The client was video-
taped while watching the stimulus films. An inquirer re-
called with the client the feelings, thoughts, and fears
which the client experienced during the original session.
During the second phase of treatment, the IPR client recall
technique was used after each counseling session. Mutual
recall was incorporated during the last phases of therapy.
IDuring mutual recall, the client and his counselor re-
‘Viewed their counseling interaction with an inquirer.
(Zlient subjects in this study were randomly assigned either
to an experimental IPR counseling group or to a traditional
counseling group. The first and sixth counseling sessions
inere audiotaped and later rated on the four client growth
‘variables. This researcher found that clients in the IPR
<group changed significantly on all dimensions of client
Inovement. There were no significant pre to post differ—
eences in behavior for clients in the traditional counseling
sgroups. The author concluded that the IPR treatment pro-
sgram was an effective accelerator of client growth during
ilhe initial stages of therapy. But, the effectiveness of
tile IPR process in later stages of therapy was not dis-
Cnassed and still warrants investigation.

In light of the research discussed in this section,

jut seems that the Kagan training model might also be

65

effective in training undergraduate paraprofessional
helpers. However, the research has not considered the
effects of an intensive training experience in the IPR
process alone on helper behaviors. Thus this study will
attempt to test the kinds of trainee growth that might be
evidenced in a 40-hour IPR training eXperience. This
training program will be conducted over a five-day period
of time. Also, the Kagan studies usually incorporated the
CVRS as a way of teaching the elements of facilitative
communication. This study will delete the CVRS and use
Carkhuff's E and Ex scales instead. In this way the CVRS

can be used as an unbiased criterion measure across all

treatment and comparison groups.

Summary

Current research has prOposed that lay helpers
Inight provide useful services to their clients under such
<:onditions as close supervision, intensive training, or
.restricted caseloads. Studies have also suggested that
looth the Kagan and Carkhuff training models might be
Imatentially effective in training helpers in facilitative
<:ommunication. However, investigations have not con-
ESidered the effects of an intensive training experience
llsing either model. This study will compare the effective-

ness of an intensive Kagan and an intensive Carkhuff

approach to the training of helpers.

CHAPTER III

DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

Design
In order to test the hypotheses stated in Chapter I,

a research design was formulated that would permit two com-
parisons of helper affective sensitivity and interview be-
havior. The levels of helper affective sensitivity and
interview behavior that needed to be compared were between
experimental and comparison groups and within these groups.
To make these analyses, the overall design incorporated two
schemes--a post-test design and a post-delayed post test

design. The overall design is graphically represented in

Figure l .

POst- test Design

The post-test design allowed analysis of helper
affective sensitivity and interview behavior between the
experimental groups (ITM-I, ITM-II) and the comparison
groups (ETM, PCG) . This plan minimized the possibility of
Several confounding variables by controlling for threats to
internal validity. A group of effects--same season of the

year, events on campus--occurred simultaneously with the

66

67

 

01,2,3 X1 01,2,3 01,2,3 x2 O1,2,3
R 01 x3 01,2,3 01,2,3
R 01 X4 01,2,3 01,2,3
x o 0

 

Code

01 = The ASS dependent variable

02 = The CVRS dependent variable (composite scores and
subscores)

03 = The E dependent variable

X1 = The Extensive Training Group (ETM)--Spring term,
1970, four weeks

X2 = The Extensive Training Group (ETM)--Fall term,
1970, four weeks

X3 = The Intensive Modified IPR Training Group (ITM-I)
--Fall term, 1970, one week/8-week delayed-post

X4 = The Intensive Modified Communication Skills Group
(ITM-II)—-Fall term, 1970, one week/8-week
delayed-post

X5 = Professional Counselor Group (PCG)

R = Random assignment

Figure 3.1

Experimental Design
Three Non-equivalent Samples

68

training process. These historical effects can influence
the treatment results. But because all subjects took the
posttest at the same time, these effects were the same
across all subjects. Also, the subjects in all groups did
not know the purposes of the post-testing. Instrumentation
effects--changes in the measuring instruments themselves
over several testing periods--at times can account for ob-
served score differences between groups. But since these
tests were administered once, such changes could not occur.
In addition, statistical regression effects can occur when
there is an imperfect correlation between a pretest and a
posttest and when subjects are selected because of atypical
scores on a pretest. Since subjects were not selected as
eatypical, a regression effect did not likely occur. The

{most-test design is graphically represented in Figure 2.

Eflgst-delayed Post Test Design

A second design, a post-delayed post test design,
FKErmitted analysis of helper affective sensitivity and
irrterview behavior within the two experimental groups
(ITEPJQ ITM-II) and one comparison group (PCG). Previous
J=‘esearch (Spivack, 1970; Grzgorek, 1971) had established
tine effectiveness of the IPR model in training counselors.
Llikewise, Carkhuff and Truax (1965a; 1965b) have discussed
tine effectiveness of the communication skills paradigm in
training lay helpers. This study assumed that past

ITesearch had already suggested that training in either

69

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6
Gl
T1 g;
G4
G5
T2 :3
G8
T3 330
Gll
T4 gig
G14
9e13,
T1 = Extended Training Model (ETM)
T2 = Intensive Training Model I (ITM-I)
T3 = Intensive Training Model II (ITM-II)
T4 = Professional Counselor Group (PCG)
G = Groups
M1 = ASS measure
M2 = The A subscale of the CVRS
M3 = The U subscale of the CVRS
M4 = The E subscale of the CVRS
M5 = The S subscale of the CVRS
M6 = The E scale

Analysis Between

Figure 3.2

Groups, Treatments, Measures

70

model promoted trainee growth in facilitative communication.
But research studies had not compared the kinds of trainee
growth evidenced in each training experience over a period
of time. Thus, this investigation needed a design in which
these comparisons could be made. The post-delayed post-
test design was useful for such comparisons. The design is
graphically represented in Figure 3.

Dependent and Independent
'Variables

The dependent variables in this study included the
scores on the Affective Sensitivity Scale (ASS), the com-
jposite score on the Counselor Verbal Response Scale (CVRS),
four subscores on the CVRS--the Affective, Understanding,
IBXploratory, and Specific subscores-—and ratings on the
Imnpathic Understanding (E) scale. As treatment was ad—
rninistered to groups of trainees, only group means could
hue used for analysis in this study. The independent vari-
allle in this investigation was defined as levels of treat—
Huant or training of helpers. There were four levels of
tilis variable: the extensive IPR training experience over
a 19eriod of six months (ETM),* the intensive modified IPR
training experience over the period of a week (ITM-I), the
irltensive modified communication skills training experi-

eruze over the period of a week (ITM-II), and a professional

cOunselors group (PCG).

\

*For a complete description of the ETM experience,
SQe Dendy (1971) .

71

Al A2

M1 M2 M3 M1 M2 M3

 

G5
G6
G7

 

G8
G9
G10

 

G11
G12
G13

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Al

A2

M1

M2

M3

Intensive Training Model I (ITM—I)
Intensive Training Model II (ITM-II)
Professional Counselor Group (PCG)
Groups

Post-testing Administration (two weeks after
training)

Delayed-post testing Administration (eight weeks
after training)

ASS measure
CVRS composite score

Rating of an interview on the E scale

Figure 3.3

Analysis Within Groups, Treatments,
Measures, Administrations

72

Population

 

The population for this study consisted of all the
"helpers" employed by Michigan State University for the
academic year 1970-1971. These "helpers" were hired by the
university to provide services for students in a variety of
settings. Some of the identified helpers employed by the
university included professional counselors, academic ad-
visors, physicians, nurses, student academic aides, and
student resident assistants. Professional counselors,
social workers, and counseling interns provided personal—
social and educational-vocational counseling for students
requesting these services. These helpers worked in six
branches of the counseling center located on the university
campus. Academic advisors are university staff who helped
students plan their undergraduate or graduate academic
programs. These advisors worked in each of the colleges
within the university setting. Physicians and nurses pro—
vided health and medical services to students, working in
a university health service setting. Student academic
aides were employed by the university to promote peer aca-
demic growth in various campus settings. For example,
student tutors were hired by several colleges to assist
undergraduates who requested specific academic or course
guidance and instruction. Lyman Briggs College, a resi-
dential science-math college, employed student personnel

to facilitate peer academic growth within the residential

73

college. Resident assistants included graduate and under-
graduate student personnel who were employed by the uni-
versity as resource persons, friends, listeners, and helpers
for students living in the residence halls. These helpers
focused on facilitating peer social growth and adjustment

in the residence hall and in the university as a whole.
These assistants worked in the 40 residence halls on the

university campus.

Sample

From this pOpulation of helpers, three groups of
helpers volunteered to be subjects in this study. The
three non-equivalent samples included 35 student "helpers"
from one dormitory-—the experimental treatment group--
22 resident assistants from another dormitory (Dendy, 1971)
--the training comparison group-—and 9 professional counse-
lors from the university counseling center--the professional

counselor comparison group.

Experimental Treatment Group

 

Twenty-two untrained resident assistants (R.A.s)
and 13 Peer Group members comprised this sample. The
undergraduate resident assistants were hired by the uni-
versity to work with students in one dormitory during the
1970-1971 academic year. The Peer Group members were
hired by the residential college (located in the same

dormitory) to facilitate peer academic growth in that

74

dormitory for the 1970—1971 academic year. These subjects
had requested a training experience in helper behaviors.
The experimental unit formed from this sample was
defined as a group of six trainees and one supervisor-
trainer. Each student volunteer (N = 35) was randomly
assigned to one of six experimental units. A supervisor—
trainer (N = 6) was randomly assigned to one of the six
experimental units. Each of the experimental units (N = 6)
was then randomly assigned to treatment groups (ITM-I,
N = 3 or ITM-II, N = 3). Each of the experimental units
received treatment simultaneously in six different
locations. This precaution was taken to insure that
treatment was administered independently to each experi-

mental unit.

Treatment Comparison Group

 

Twenty—two untrained undergraduate resident
assistants from another dormitory and training program com-
prised this sample. These R.A.s had also requested a
training experience in helper behaviors. The training of
these R.A.s was discussed in the Dendy (1971) study. The
treatment comparison unit for this sample was defined as
a group of five or of six resident assistants and two
supervisor-trainers. Group membership was formed in the
following manner. Each student volunteer (N = 22) was
randomly assigned to one of four treatment comparison

units, each supervisor-trainer (N = 8) was also randomly

75

assigned to treatment units. The four treatment units
received the extensive IPR training experience in another
dormitory over a period of six months.

Professional Counselor
Comparison Group

 

 

A memo requesting volunteers was sent to the
entire staff (N = 62) of the university counseling center
(see c0py of memo in Appendix G). Nine professional
counselors volunteered for this study. Four of these
helpers had the Ph.D. in counseling or clinical psycho-
logy. Five volunteers were counseling interns, who were
Ph.D. candidates in clinical or counseling psychology.
The internship, a competitively awarded assignment, was
one of the final stages in their Ph.D. training. One
counselor had a master's degree in social work. All of
these helpers had received practicum training and super—
vision in counseling. The range of experience for these
counselors was 0 to 9 years. In the counseling agency,
these counselors worked primarily with clients who ex-
pressed personal-social concerns. Four of these counse-
lors had also supervised counseling trainees in clinical
and counseling psychology. These counselors used Rogerian,
existential, or eclectic techniques in counseling.

The comparison unit for this group was defined as
a group of three counselors. Group membership was formed
by randomly assigning each of these counselors (N = 9)

to one of the three comparison units.

76

Table 3.1 describes each sample in graphic form.
Dimensions included in this chart are size of sample, sex,

years of experience as a helper, and years of college

 

 

 

education.

Table 3.1

Description of Volunteers

Experimental Comparison

ITM-I ITM-II ETM PCG
Total N 18 17 22 9
Males 12 7 11 6
Females 6 10 ll 3
Years of Experience
as a Helper 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-9
Years of College
Education 1—3 1-3 1-3 6-9

 

In addition to the experimental and comparison
group subjects, several other sources of personnel used in
this study must be described. These include six supervisor-

trainers and three raters.

Supervisor-trainers

 

Six male supervisor-trainers were leaders of the
experimental training groups. Three of these trainers
were advanced Ph.D. candidates in counseling psychology
and were also beginning counseling interns. They had

Completed their practicum experience and had been in

77

supervision for one year. One trainer had a Ph.D. in
personnel services and was a beginning post—doctoral
intern. He had completed his practicum experience and
had been in supervision for one year. Two of the trainers
were beginning Ph.D. candidates—-one in counseling psy-
chology and one in political science. They had been
trained and supervised as leaders of sensitivity groups
for one year. These trainers had led peer sensitivity
groups in the dormitory for one year.

Each of the six trainers was randomly assigned to
experimental units and then to treatment groups. The
coordinator of this study trained each supervisor
separately in the treatment procedures. This precaution
was taken to prevent supervisor bias in this study; the
supervisor, then, was trained in his procedures only. He
had no knowledge of the hypotheses of this study, of the
other experimental procedures, or of the kinds of compari-
sons being made in this study. As an additional check on
supervisor functioning, the investigator-coordinator con—
sulted daily with each of the trainers. This precaution
was taken to insure that the trainers understood the
training procedures for each day and that each supervisor
was providing the treatment experiences prescribed for
that day. The training manual used by the three trainers
in Treatment I is described in Appendix E. The training
manual used by the three trainers in Treatment II is

described in Appendix F.

78

Raters

Three advanced Ph.D. candidates in counseling
psychology were used as judges. All three raters were
experienced in the use of the CVRS and E scales; they
had just finished rating tapes, using these scales, in
another study. One training session was held with these
raters to check their use of the measures. Reliability
of these judges' ratings is discussed in a later section
of this chaper. To prevent rater bias the raters had no
knowledge of either the research hypotheses, or the group

assignments.

Experimental Procedures

 

Two treatment procedures were used in this study--
an intensive modified IPR training experience (ITM-I), and
a modified communication skills training (ITM-II). Pro—
cedures for both treatments were used over a five-day
period during the week prior to fall term, 1970. Each
trainee group met with its supervisor for five days;
these training meetings lasted for a period of four hours
in the morning and four hours in the afternoon. Each group
met in its assigned room for the entire training experi—
ence; these training facilities were located at six
different places on the university campus. Facilities
used for ITM-I included a classroom in the education
building, an IPR facility--an interview room and a video-

tape equipment room--in the education building, and an IPR

79

facility in the university counseling center. Facilities
used for ITM-II included a student lounge in the men's
dormitory, a student lounge in the women's dormitory, and
a conference room in the residential college.

The succeeding sections describe the training
procedures used each day in both of the treatment groups
(ITM-I and ITM-II). A summary of the eXperimental pro-
cedures within the framework of the overall design is

presented in Table 3.2.

lieu

The morning exercises were the same for all eXperi-
mental treatment groups. The Affective Sensitivity Scale
(ASS) was administered to the entire group. The test re-
sults were to be used as a premeasure if warranted.
Following tflua testing exercise, the trainees were told
that the purpose of the training program was to help them
sharpen their skills as helpers. The four goals included
in this discussion were--to help trainees become aware of
the elements of helpful communication, to help trainees
understand and become sensitive to a greater amount of
student communication, and to help the trainees become
sensitive to the bilateral nature of the helping inter-
action. This was the only time that the entire group met
as a whole. During the rest of the training program, each

group met with its supervisor only.

80

Table 3.2

Summary of the Experimental Procedures

 

Intensive‘Modified
IPR Experience (ITM-I)

Intensive Modified
Communication Skills (ITM-II)

 

 

 

 

 

Day 1

9:00 A.M. General group meeting. All subjects were administered the
ASS measure. General purpose of the training program was
discussed.

1:00 P.M. First group meeting with the First grOUp meeting with the
supervisor-trainer. Discrimi- supervisor-trainer. Discrimi-
nation training using the Ex nation training using the Ex
scale and audiotaped stimuli. scale and audiotaped stimuli.

3:00 P.M. Discrimination training using Discrimination training using
the E scale and audiotaped the E scale and audiotaped
stimuli. stimuli.

5:00 P.M. Sessions end. Sessions end.

Day 2 and Day73

9:00 A.M. Empathy training using audio- Empathy training using audio-
taped stimuli. taped stimuli.

10:30 A.M. Introduction to Mini-Practicum. Introduction to Mini-Practicum.
Introduction to role-play ex- Introduction to role-play ex-
ercises, videotape feedback, ercises, and group feedback
and role of the inquirer. session using the E scale.

1:00 P.M. Role-play interviews. Role-play interviews. Group
Client recalls. feedback sessions using the

E and Ex scales.

3:30 P.M. Role-play interviews. Role-play interviews. Group

Helper recalls. feedback sessions and dis-
cussions using the E and Ex
scales.

5:00 P.M. Sessions end. Sessions end.

Day 4 and Day 5

9:00 A.M. Interview with client. Interview with client. Group
Mutual recall. feedback and discussion session

using the E and Ex scales.

10:00 A.M. Interview with client. Interview with client. Group
Mutual recall. feedback and discussion session

using the E and Ex scales.

1:00 P.M. Interview with client. Interview with client. Group
Mutual recall. feedback and discussion session

using the E and Ex scales.

3:00 P.M. Interview with client. Interview with client. Group
Mutual recall. feedback and discussion session

using the E and Ex scales.

5:00 P.M. Sessions end. Sessions end.

 

81

During the afternoon sessions, each group met
separately with its supervisor. The training procedures
in both treatment groups (ITM—I and ITM-II) were the same.
Training exercises focused on two trainee skills--dis-
crimination of the five levels of the Ex (Client Self-
EXploration in Interpersonal Processes) scale and dis—
crimination of the five levels of the E (Empathic Under-
standing) scale. In each group, the supervisor first
introduced the basic concepts of the Ex scale to the
trainees; he then defined the five levels of this scale
to the trainees (see Appendix C). The trainees then
practiced discriminating the five levels of the Ex scale
in the following manner. Trainees listened to a series
of audiotaped client statements and, immediately following
each statement, rated the client's communication at one
of the five levels of the Ex scale. Trainees and the
supervisor then discussed each rating in order to clarify
the use of the Ex scale. The overall purpose of this
procedure was to help the trainees begin to understand
and become aware of a greater amount of student communi-
cation.

The supervisor and the trainees used similar pro-
cedures with the E scale. The supervisor explained the
basic concepts of the E scale and defined the five levels
of this measure to the trainees (see Appendix A). The

trainees then practiced discriminating the five levels of

82

the E scale. The trainee group listened to a series of
audiotaped helper response to client statements. Immedi-
ately following each counselor response, the trainees rated
the helper response at one of the five levels of the E
scale. The trainee group then discussed their ratings
with the supervisor in order to clarify the use of this
scale. The major goal of this exercise was to enable
trainees to become more aware of the elements of facili-
tative helper communication and to help them begin to
Operationally define helper facilitative behavior. These
exercises, then, were designed to aid trainee development
of a sense of "helpful" and "non-helpful" responses to
student communication. The trainees were also aided in
determining when and how these facilitative behaviors
might be appropriately used with students requesting

assistance.

Day 2 and Day 3

 

The exercises for the second and third days were
focused on helping the trainees transfer the didactic
learnings of the first day into expressed helper behavior.
Tasks included exercises in which the trainees in both
experimental treatments sequentially began to eXperience
and shape their own facilitative behaviors. The skill of
Empathic Understanding was of special interest.

The first experience during the morning session was

called empathy training. During this exercise each group

83

of trainees in ITM-I and in ITM-II practiced responding to
audiotaped client statements, focusing especially on the
skill of Empathic Understanding. The format for this
technique was as follows. Trainees listened to a series
of client audiotaped statements. Following each communi-
cation, trainees wrote a response to that client's state-
ment. Trainees were encouraged to make their responses
in the form of positive or reflective statements rather
than in the form of questions. For instance, a trainee
was encouraged to respond to a client statement in terms
of both the client's feelings and the content of the
client's communication. Rather than asking, "Well, how
does that make you feel?" trainees were encouraged to use
positive statements such as, "You're pretty upset about
the relationship with your girl." During the last portion
of this exercise, trainees verbally responded to the audio—
taped client statements. They then discussed their re-
sponses with the supervisor. The supervisor sought to help
the trainees respond with at least minimally facilitative
responses (level three on the E scale). The major purpose
of this technique was to help trainees begin to formulate
their own responses in terms of a student's feelings and
the content of his communication.

The next steps in the training process attended to
the experiential mode of learning helping behaviors. The
procedures in Treatment I are different from the procedures

in Treatment II.

84

.1911:

The supervisor-trainer introduced the experiential
mode of learning to the trainees by modeling with the
trainees the experiences which would be included in the
practicum. The immediate purpose of this practicum session
was to help trainees begin to experientially learn about
their own facilitative behaviors and how these are com—
municated to a student. First, two trainees role—played a
helping interview. The instructions to the trainee-client
were, "All of us either in the present or during the past
year have had a number of experiences which have been
difficult. If you feel the person whom you will be seeing
is helpful, please feel free to discuss these experiences."
Instructions to the trainee-helper were, "Relate to the
person you will be seeing as you would ordinarily do in
order to be helpful to him." With these instructions in
mind, the trainees conducted a lO-minute interview which
was videotaped. Immediately following this interview, the
supervisor conducted a recall session with the trainee-
client for 20 minutes. During this recall session the
trainer was modeling the inquirer role for the trainees.
After the recall session, the supervisor discussed the role
and function of the recaller (see Appendix D) with the
trainees. The trainees themselves would function as
recallers during the rest of the practicum experience.

This step in the learning process served as a prototype of

85

the experiences that would follow during the rest of the
training program. Use of this scheme also provided
trainees with feedback and exploration of their facili-

tative behaviors.

ITM-II

The supervisor introduced the experiential mode of
learning to the trainees; and he modeled with the trainees
the experiences that would be included in the practicum.
First, two trainees role-played a helping interview. In-
structions to the trainee-client were, "All of us either
in the present or during the past year have had a number
of experiences which have been difficult. If you feel the
person whom you will be seeing is helpful, please feel free
to discuss these experiences." Instructions to the trainee-
helper were, "Relate to the person you will be seeing as
you would ordinarily do in order to be helpful to him."
With these instructions in mind, the trainees conducted a
lO-minute interview which was audiotaped. The rest of the
group observed the interaction. Immediately following the
interview, the trainee group rated three portions of the
taped interview using the E scale. The group then dis—
cussed the helper's behavior with him. This step in the
learning process was also a prototype of the experiences
which would follow in the practicum. The aim of this
practicum session was to help the trainees begin to

experientially learn about their own facilitative behaviors

86

and how these behaviors were communicated to a student.
Also, use of this scheme provided the trainees with feed-
back and exploration about their helping behaviors.
During the afternoon sessions of the second and
third day, training exercises in both groups attempted to
accomplish three goals with the trainees-—to provide
trainees with experiences in the helping relationship via
role-playing exercises, to provide trainees with feedback
about their own facilitative behaviors, and to help the
trainees become sensitive to the aspects of their own and
of the client's communication. Exercises for the after—
noon sessions in both treatments were designed to accom-

plish these goals.

we
During the afternoon sessions, the trainees con-
ducted the recalls of the videotaped interviews. These
trainees first conducted recalls with the trainee-helpers.
For instance, immediately following each role-played
interview, the trainee—inquirer conducted a recall session
with the trainee-helper. During this review session, the
inquirer facilitated the helper's exploration of his
underlying thoughts, fears, feelings, and anxieties about
himself in the interview and about the trainee-client.
The inquirer did not assume an evaluative role but served
as a partner in the helper's process of self-exploration

(see Appendix D). This technique was included to help

87

both trainees become sensitive to the helper's communi—
cation process and its impact on the trainee—client. Both
trainees could also begin to explore which behaviors
facilitated the helping process and which behaviors
deterred this process.

Trainees also conducted recall sessions with the
trainee-clients. During the review session, the inquirer
facilitated the client's exploration of his underlying
thoughts, feelings, fears, and anxieties about himself and
about the trainee-helper. The inquirer kept the trainee—
client focused on the original videotaped interaction.

In this exercise, both trainees eXplored the client's
feelings together. Thus both trainees could become sensi-
tive to the aspects of client communication. They could
also begin to explore and understand the elements of the

communication process between a helper and a student.

ITM-II

During the afternoon sessions, these trainees role-
played helper-student interactions. The lO-minute inter-
actions were audiotaped. The rest of the trainee group
observed the interview. Immediately following the inter-
view, the entire group (trainer, observers, role-players)
rated three segments of the audiotaped session using the
E and Ex scales. The E scale was used to rate the helper's
level of empathic understanding while the Ex scale was

used to rate the client's level of self-eXploration.

88

Then the observers and the trainer discussed their ratings
with the role-players. Thus, both the trainee-helper and
the trainee-client received feedback about the levels of
their functioning in the communication process. The pur—
poses of these exercises were to aid trainee understanding
and awareness of the communication process of the client's

communications, and of the helper's communications.

Day 4 and 5

 

The procedures on the last two days were designed
to help trainees achieve an awareness of the underlying
dynamics of the helper-student interaction; trainees ex-
plored the kinds of impact which their behaviors had on a
client. Likewise, these trainees considered the kinds of
impact the client's behavior had on the helper during an
interview. To bring the training experience closer to the
future job experience of the trainees, client volunteers
were used in both treatment groups. These clients pre-
sented concerns which might be similar to concerns pre-
sented by students in the dormitory. The experiences in
ITM-I were structured differently than those procedures in

ITM-II.

ITM-I
Each trainee conducted a lO—minute interview with
a client. Instructions to the clients and to the helpers

were the same as those described for Days 2 and 3. The

89

interview session was videotaped. Immediately after the
interview, a trainee-inquirer conducted a mutual recall
with both the client and the trainee-helper. In mutual
recall, the inquirer reviewed the videotaped interaction
with the client and the counselor simultaneously. The
recaller thus aided client gpd helper simultaneously to
explore and tell each other the underlying feelings,
thoughts, fears, and anxieties that might have occurred
during the original interaction. Following the recall
session, the trainer, observers, client, and trainee-
helper discussed the entire process, clarifying any
questions about the interaction process between the
helper and the client. These procedures attempted to
promote trainee awareness of the bilateral nature of the

helping relationship.

ITM-II

Each trainee conducted a 15-minute interview with
a client. Instructions to the helper and to the client
were the same as those described for Days 2 and 3. The
interview session was audiotaped; and the rest of the
trainee group observed the interaction between the helper
and the client. Immediately following the interview, the
entire group (trainer, observers, trainee—helper, and
client) rated five portions of the original interview
using the E and Ex scales. The trainee group rated the

helper's behavior using the E scale and then rated the

90

client's behaviors using the Ex scale. The trainees then
discussed their ratings with both the helper and the
client. These procedures were used to facilitate trainee
eXploration of the communication process between the
helper and the client.

This section summarized the training procedures
used in both experimental groups and the goals of each
training experience. The next section of this chapter
will describe the instruments used to evaluate the
effects of the training procedures on helper behaviors

in this study.

Instrumentation

 

Two scales were used to evaluate all subjects'
levels of functioning in an audiotaped interview with a
student. These measures were Kagan's Counselor Verbal
Response Scale and Carkhuff's Empathic Understanding
Scale. One measure was used to evaluate all subjects'
levels of affective sensitivity—-Kagan's Affective Sensi—
tivity Scale.

The Affective Sensitivity
Scale (ASS)

 

 

This scale purported to measure affective sensi-
tivity as a test of empathy (Kagan, pp al., 1967). This
multiple choice test (see Appendix I) required the
trainees to judge what a videotaped client was feeling

and thinking about his concerns, about himself, or about

91

his counselor. The videotaped stimuli for this test were
a number of excerpts from videotaped counseling inter-
views. Each excerpt was two to three minutes in length.
Following each segment, the viewer answered two or three
questions about that scene. The correct answers to indi-
vidual test items were taken from three sources--clinical
judges, clinical judges with a case history of the client,
and protocols of the recall sessions (Kagan, pp pp., 1967).
Kagan, Krathwohl, pp pp. (1967) conducted a number
of investigations into the reliability of Form B of the
ASS. Table 3.3 summarizes the data. Seven sample groups
were included in these studies. Two NDEA groups (J and K)
were each administered Form B on a pretest-posttest basis
over a period of six months. One group of undergraduate
students in a midwest university (P) were tested one week
apart. Three groups in NDEA institutes (I, L, M) were
tested once. One group of practicing school counselors
(N) was also tested once. Reliability estimates thus
ranged from .53 to .76. A test-retest correlation coef—
ficient was also calculated for Group P, the under-
graduate population (Kagan, pp pp., 1967). This was .75.
Revised'Form B was used with all the students in sample P.
The validity of Revised Form B was investigated
in a number of studies (Kagan, pp pp., 1967). In con—
current validity studies, correlations of .35, .59, and

.64 were obtained between therapist's rankings of a

92

 

 

 

 

 

on. mm.m em 2
he. mm.m em 2
we. mm.m mm 4
Ho. mm.w mm H
mm. mm. mo.m mo.m mm om m
mm. mm. nm.o nm.m Hm Hm &
on. mm. mm.n an.o nm em h
ummuumom ummnmum umouumom ammumum ummuumom ummuoum

masonw

om MHDEHom coauMH>mo cnmccmum muomnnsm mo umnEdz mHmEmm

concumcoflmunmpsm

 

mesouw mHmEmm cm>wm MOM memo omumamm umsuo can
mucmfloflmmmoo muflaflnmwamm om mHsEuom QOmpumconuumcsm

m.m OHQMB

?

93

subject's sensitivity and the subject's ASS score. In a
predictive validity study, Kagan (1967) reported a corre-
lation of .49 between initial ASS scores in a year long
NDEA institute and later peer ratings of effectiveness.
In construct validity investigations, groups of counselor
trainees increased significantly (at the .025 and .005
levels) during a pretest to posttest training period of
six months (Kagan, pp pp., 1967).

The ASS was used in this study to measure trainee
growth in affective sensitivity as the result of a train—
ing experience. The ASS was also administered to subjects
in the comparative groups.

The Empathic Understanding in

Interpersonal Processes II
(E) Scale

 

 

 

This scale was developed by Carkhuff from Truax's

Accurate Empathy Scale. This revised five-point scale

 

attempted to measure levels of helper empathic understand-
ing during live observations or tape recordings of counsel—
ing or therapy interviews. Empathic Understanding was
defined as the helper's sensitivity to current feelings

of a client and his verbal ability to communicate this
understanding in a language attuned to a client's current
feelings. The five levels of empathic behavior were
defined as follows. At level 1, the helper did not

eXpress that he was listening, understanding, or being

sensitive to the feelings of the client, the helper

94

responses detracted significantly from the communications
of the client. At level 2, the counselor tended to re-
spond in such a way that he subtracted noticeable affect
from the client's communication. At level 3, the helper
responded to the client with affect and meaning that was
essentially the same as that expressed by the client, but
the counselor responded to the client's surface feelings
only. This was defined as the minimal level of facili-
tative interpersonal functioning. At level 4, the helper's
responses added deeper feeling and meaning to the client's
eXpressions. At level 5, the counselor responded with
full awareness of the client's deepest thoughts and feel-
ings and accurately expressed the client's feelings at a
level deeper than the client himself was able to eXpress
(this scale is further described in Appendix A).

The E scale received extensive validation in
different counseling settings and with a variety of client
populations (Truax & Carkhuff, 1967). The scale was re-
written to attempt to increase greater reliability.
Martin, Carkhuff, and Berenson (1966) reported the
following rate—rerate reliabilities for three judges
over a one-week interval--.99, .99, and .95. Inter-
rater reliabilities in the same study were .93, .87, and
.73. Carkhuff, Krathochvil, and Friel (1968) reported
intrarater reliabilities of .90, .99, and .94 for this
scale. Interrater reliabilities in this study were .88,

.87, and .85.

95

The E scale was used in this investigation to
measure the level of helper interview behavior in all
treatment and comparison groups.

The Counselor Verbal Response
Scale (CVRS)

 

 

This scale was developed by Kagan and his associ-
ates (1967) to measure four dimensions of a counselor's
response to a client communication. The CVRS required a
rater to describe the counselor's response in terms of
four dimensions. These dimensions were affective—
cognitive, understanding-nonunderstanding, specific-
nonspecific, and exploratory-nonexploratory. An affective
response made reference to or encouraged some affective
or feeling aspect of the client's communication while a
cognitive response referred primarily to the cognitive
component of a client's statement. Counselor understand-
ing was defined as the helper's ability to convey to the
client his awareness of and sensitivity to the client's
feelings. The counselor responded in a nonunderstanding
manner when he failed to be aware of and sensitive to the
client's statements. A specific counselor response dealt
with the core of the client's concern; a nonspecific
response either dealt peripherally or with complete
disregard for the client's concern. An exploratory
response encouraged the client to explore his feelings
and provided him with an opportunity to explore his

concerns whereas a nonexploratory response typically

96

restricted the client's freedom to explore (these
dimensions are more fully described in Appendix B).
The CVRS was used to rate a series of individual
client-counselor verbal units. The unit was defined as
a client statement and a counselor response. The usual
procedure was to rate 20 consecutive client-counselor
units in an interview. The judge was required to describe
every counselor response on each of the four dimensions.
The CVRS had been used to measure the change in
counselor behavior within and between various approaches
to training. Kagan and his associates (1967) described
three studies designed to determine interrater reliability
on the CVRS. An overview of these studies is presented
in Table 3.4. The reliability coefficients for these
samples are presented in Table 3.5. Interrater relia-
bility was calculated using Ebel's technique (Ebel in

Mehrens & Ebel, 1967).

Table 3.4

Overview of Three Studies Designed to Determine
Interrater Reliability on the CVRS

 

 

Stud No. of No. of Mode of Type of
y Judges Tapes Presentation Rating
A 4 6 Audio 20 responses each
tape
B 3 14 Video 20 responses each
tape
C 3 53 Video 4-minute timed

segment

 

97

Table 3.5

Average Tape and Item Interrater Reliability
Coefficients for Each Dimension of the CVRS
on Three Separate Studiesa

 

 

Aff.- Und.- Spec.- Exp.-
Study Cogn. Nund. Nspec. Nexp.
A Tape .80 .81 .70 .87
Item .638 .568 .524 .549
B Tape .824 .873 . .682 .839
Item_ .625 .506 .454 .450
C Tapeb

Item .637 .508 .524 .549

 

aThe formula used to derive the estimate of the
reliability of individual ratings is:

M- - M
x
M— + (k-l)M
x

 

r:

where

3
ll

mean square for error,
M; = mean square for persons, and

k = number of raters.

bBecause of the unequal number of rateable re-
sponse, units within any given timed segment, only item
reliability estimates were calculated.

Aff.-Cogn. = Affective—cognitive; Und.-Nund. =
Understanding-nonunderstanding; Spec.-Nspec. = Specific-
nonspecific; Exp.—Nexp. = Exploratory-nonexploratory.

98

Spivack (1970) and Grzegorek (1971) also reported
interrater reliabilities of two judges using the CVRS. In
these studies, the CVRS was used to measure change in
counselor behavior pre-training, mid-training, post-
training, and delayed post-training. The interrater

reliabilities in these studies are presented in Table 3.6.

Table 3.6

Interrater Reliabilities—-CVRS

 

Experimental

 

 

 

 

 

Study Condition A U S E Total
Spivack Role-Play Interview
(1970) Pre-Measure .972 .977 .977 .985
Mid-Measure .962 .979 .981 .968
Post-Measure .992 .997 .971 .992
Coached Client
Interview
Pre-Measure .940 .939 .939 .935
Mid-Measure .979 .971 .974 .979
Post-Measure .950 .943 .943 .930
Grzegorek Interview Tapes
(1971) Pre-Tapes .93 .96 .96 .96 .96
Post-Tapes .99 .98 .98 .98 .99
Delayed Post-
Tapes .99 .97 .98 .98 .98

 

The data from the Kagan studies A and C were used
to further test the validity of the scale's dimensions
(Kagan, pp pp., 1967). This was done to see if the scale
differentiated counselors at different levels of experi—

ence. The data are presented in Table 3.7. In all but

99

one case there was a clear differentiation between counse-

lors at different ability levels on the CVRS dimensions.

Table 3.7

Mean Scores of Six Counselors at Various Levels of

Training on Each of the Dimensions of the CVRS

 

 

Counselor Affect Und. Spec. Exp. Eff. Total
A 9.75 17.25 15.25 11.25 15.75 69.25
B 9.25 9.00 7.75 10.00 7.50 43.50
C 11.25 17.25 12.00 16.25 15.50 72.25
D 2.25 7.50 5.25 8.00 3.50 26.60
E 5.25 6.75 6.00 8.00 5.75 31.75
F 1.00 2.00 1.00 5.25 .50 9.75

 

Counselor: A = Ph.D. candidate rated good by
supervisor; B = Ph.D. candidate rated weak by supervisor;
C = School counselor rated good by supervisor; D = M.A.
practicum rated poor by supervisor; E = Beginning practicum;
F = Beginning practicum.

These reported reliability and validity studies
(Kagan, pp pp., 1967; Spivack, 1970; Grzegorek, 1971) indi-
cated that the CVRS could be used to rate helper interview
behavior. In this investigation, the CVRS was used to

rate helper interview behavior across all treatment and

comparison groups.

Collection of Data

 

Two weeks after training, two samples of trainee

helping behavior were taken. The Affective Sensitivity

100

Scale (ASS) was administered to both the eXperimental
treatment groups (ITM-I, ITM-II) and to the comparison
groups (ETM, PCG). This instrument attempted to measure
the levels of helper affective sensitivity across all
groups following training. At the same time, an audio—
taped interview with a student (selected by the trainee)
was collected from all subjects in the experimental and
comparison groups. This interview was to be a sample of
the level of helper behavior in an interview. These audio—
tapes were later rated by judges using the CVRS and E
scales.

Eight weeks after training, the Affective Sensi-
tivity Scale (ASS) was again administered to the experi—
mental groups (ITM-I, ITM-II). This delayed post-test
was administered to measure the level of trainee affective
sensitivity two months after the training period. At the
same time, an audiotaped interview with a student was
collected from each subject in the experimental groups
(ITM-I and ITM-II) and from each member of the professional
counselor group. This interview was to be a sample of the
level of helper behavior in an interview. These audio-
tapes were later rated by judges using the CVRS and E
scales.

These post and delayed post criterion measures
were used to investigate the levels of helper behavior

in all groups. The scores on these measures were analyzed

101

to test the differences between the eXperimental and
comparison groups and within these groups over a period

of time.

Preparation of the Audiotapes for Rating

 

All audiotapes, post and delayed post, from all
groups-~experimental and comparison—-were randomly assigned
to three master rating tape groups. This precaution was
taken to prevent a rater bias. That is, the identity of
the tape could be concealed. The judges could not know
whether each audiotape was a post or delayed post measure
or whether it represented the experimental groups or the
comparison groups.

The master rating tapes were prepared in the
following manner. A three-minute excerpt from the first
third of each interview was rerecorded onto the master
tape. Following a one-minute pause, a five-minute portion
from the middle of the interview was rerecorded. Follow-
ing another minute pause, a three-minute segment from the
final portion of the interview was rerecorded. This
procedure was followed for all tapes.

‘When all tapes had been transcribed to the master
tapes, the three master tape rating groups were then
randomly assigned to judges. The judges independently
rated helper behavior on these master tapes using the

CVRS dimensions and the E scale. Totals for each judge

102

on the CVRS dimensions were calculated. Totals for each

judge on the E scale were computed and then averaged.

Reliabilipy of Judges' Ratings

 

Reliability of the three judges' ratings was
established on a sample of 12 interview tapes. In this
study, the judges independently rated counselor responses
on the four dimensions of the CVRS scale. The totals for
each dimension were calculated. In addition, these
judges independently assigned a rating on the E scale
for three portions of each interview. The three ratings
then were totaled and averaged.

Hoyt (in Mehrens & Ebel, 1967) suggested a formula
for estimating the reliability of a test which was based
on analysis of variance. Hoyt proposed that this model
provided a better estimate of test reliability than the
split-half method. Ebel (in Mehrens & Ebel, 1967) applied
Hoyt's proposal to two ways of estimating rater reliability.
One procedure estimated the reliability of judges over a
set of ratings. This technique was used when several
judges' ratings were available for each of a number of
subjects. The second approach estimated the reliability
of individual ratings. This technique estimated the
reliability when only an individual judge's score was
available for a number of subjects. This second procedure

was therefore appropriate for this study. The data for

103

this investigation were based on an individual judge's

 

score.

The reliability formula suggested by Ebel was as
follows:

M— — M
r = X
M— + (k-1)M
x

where

r = the reliability coefficient,

k = the number of raters,

M = the Mean Square of tapes by rater interaction,

and

M; = the Mean Square of tapes.

The reliability raw data for the CVRS and E scales are
presented in Appendix H. Table 3.8 presents the Analysis
of Variance Table and computation of the raters' relia-
bility on the CVRS. Table 3.9 presents the Analysis of
Variance Table and computation of the raters' reliability
on the E scale.

Table 3.8 indicated that the reliability for the
ratings on the CVRS was .747. Table 3.9 indicated that
the reliability for the ratings on the E scale was .479.
While the reliability coefficient for the CVRS was
acceptable, the reliability coefficient for the E scale

was low.

104

Table 3.8

ANOVA Table and Computation of Reliability of Ratings
on the CVRS (Counselor Verbal Response Scale)

 

 

 

Sources Reduced Sum Degrees of Mean
of Squares Freedom Square
Grand Mean 41480.111 1 41480.111
Total 7607.889 35 217.368
Rater 1919.389 2 959.694
Tape 4729.222 11 429.929
Rater x Tape 959.278 22 43.604
r = 429.92923 - 43.602525

 

Table 3.9

429.92923 + (3-l)43.603535 =

ANOVA Table and Computation of Reliability of

Ratings on the E Scale

 

 

 

Source Reduced Sum Degrees of Mean

S of Squares Freedom Square

Grand Mean 131.637 1 131.637
Total 7.811 35 0.225
Rater 1.435 2 0.717
Tape 4.208 11 0.383
Rater x Tape 2.238 22 0.102

r .382572 - .101716 .479

 

.382572 + (3-1).1017l6 =

105

Analypis of the Data

 

The unit for statistical analysis in this study
was defined as a group mean. Group means must be used
since treatments were administered independently to groups
of trainees. Individual scores were not appropriate for
statistical analysis (Campbell & Stanley, 1963). Group
means were calculated for the ASS scores; for the A, E, U,
and S subscores of the CVRS; for the composite CVRS scores;
and for the EU average ratings.

Two separate analyses were needed in this investi-
gation. A multivariate analysis of variance tested the
differences in means between the four treatment groups on
the two-week posttest. A repeated measures analysis of
variance tested the differences in means between the three
treatment groups and between the post and delayed-post
tests.

The Multivariate Analysis
of Variance

 

Since it was necessary to evaluate six dependent
variables--the ASS, A, U, E, S subscales of the CVRS, and
the EU--simultaneously, a multivariate analysis of vari—
ance procedure was used to analyze the posttest data of
the four treatment groups—-ITM-I, ITM-II, ETM, and PCG.
Thus, this analysis included an overall test of the
significance of the main effects of treatments and

measures between the four treatment groups. Since this

106

procedure is insensitive to differences in the scaling of
variables, the raw data could be used for analysis.
Scheffé post-hoc comparisons were used to test the differ—
ences between the means of specific treatment groups if
separate univariate tests were significant.

The assumptions underlying this model included
the following. The dependent variables were assumed to
be multivariate normal in distribution. The variances of
the dependent variables were assumed to be equal across
treatment groups. Errors of measurement were assumed to
be normally distributed across the treatment populations
(Cooley & Lohnes, 1971; Morrison, 1967).

Hummel and Sligo (1971) suggested that the multi-
variate model could be especially useful when the cost of
a Type I error-—false rejection of the hypotheses—-was
high.

Rppeated Measures Analysis
of Variance

 

 

A repeated measures analysis of variance was used
to analyze the general effects of the ITM-I, ITM-II, and
PCG treatments across all the dependent variables at both
the post and delayed-post test. In this analysis, the
dependent variables were treated as levels of helper be-
havior. Scores on each of these variables were converted
to a standard metric by dividing the raw score on each
variable by the standard deviation of the pooled variance

across times and groups for that variable. Scores were

107

transformed to obtain additivity of treatment effects
accross measures. The ANOVA assumption of independence
was met since the group means were used as the experi—
mental unit and each experimental unit was independent
of every other one. The Geisser-Greenhouse conservative
F test was used in this analysis since there was some
question concerning the assumption of equal population
correlation coefficients. The assumption of equal pOpu—
lation correlation coefficients might have been violated
in this investigation. That is, the correlation between
the CVRS and the EU in this sample might not be equal to
either the correlation between the CVRS and the ASS or to
the correlation between the EU and ASS.

Thus, this analysis tested for the main effects
of treatments, times, or periods of testing, and repeated
measures. This analysis also tested for the effects of
the treatment-measure interaction, time-measure inter—
action, and treatment-time—measure interaction. Tukey
post-hoc comparisons were used to test the differences

between treatments.

Hypotheses

 

The hypotheses for the between groups, treatments,

and measures analyses were as follows:

Hol: There will be no differences in the means of
the four training models--ITM-I, ITM—II,
ETM, and PCG--or the ASS, CVRS-A, CVRS-U,
CVRS-E, CVRS-S, and EU variables.

Ho :

Ho

HO

HO

H0

108

There will be no differences in the means of
any of the dependent variables between the
ITM-I and ITM—II groups.

There will be no differences in the means of
any of the dependent variables between the
ITM-I and ETM groups.

There will be no differences in the means of
any of the dependent variables between the
ITM-I and PCG groups.

There will be no differences in the means of
any of the dependent variables between the
ITM—II and ETM groups.

There will be no differences in the means of
any of the dependent variables between the
ITM-II and PCG groups.

The hypotheses for the within treatments, times,

and measures analyses were as follows.

H07:

There will be no differences in the means of
the treatment groups (ITM-I, ITM-II, PCG)

on the ASS, CVRS, and EU variables, collec-
tively or individually, between the post and
delayed-post testing periods.

There will be no interaction of treatments,
measures, and testing periods.

There will be no interaction of treatment
and administration periods.

Summary

Thirty-five undergraduate "helpers" were randomly

assigned to one of two experimental training procedures.

One approach incorporated rating scales, role-playing, IPR

109

videotape feedback and recall, and client interviews for
training of paraprofessional helpers. The second approach
used rating scales, role-playing, group feedback and dis—
cussion, and client interviews for training of lay helpers.
Both the levels of affective sensitivity of the experimental
groups and five measures of their interview behavior were
compared with the levels of these behaviors evidenced in
two comparison groups. The treatment comparison group con-
sisted of 22 resident assistants trained extensively in
the IPR process over a period of six months. A second
comparison group included nine professional counselors.

The overall design used in this study incorporated two
schemes. A posttest design was used to test the effec-
tiveness of training on helper behavior between the four
treatment groups. A post-delayed posttest design tested
the effectiveness of training within the two experimental
treatment groups and one comparison group over a period

of two months.

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS

An analysis of the data is presented in this

chapter. Each hypothesis is restated. The data, analyses,

and results relevant to each hypothesis are discussed.

Hypotheses Related to the Between
Treatment Groups Design

 

Ho - There will be no differences in the means of
the four training models--ITM—I, ITM-II, ETM,
and PCG--on the ASS, CVRS-A, CVRS—U, CVRS-E,
CVRS-S, and EU variables.

This hypothesis was formulated to compare group
means between the four groups used in this study-—the
intensive modified IPR training, the intensive modified
communication skills training, the extensive IPR training,
and the professional counselors group. A multivariate
analysis of variance technique was used to test this
hypothesis. Since this statistical procedure is insensi-
tive to differences in the scaling of variables, the raw
data were analyzed. The overall alpha level was set at

.10 to compensate for the risk of a Type II error--false

acceptance of the hypothesis. Since this investigator

110

111

wanted to increase the probability that the test would
correctly reject the null hypothesis, the alpha level was
set at .10 rather than at .05 or .01. The raw data--
group and cell means--for the four treatment groups are
presented in Table 4.1.

The multivariate F test statistic for testing the
equality of mean vectors was 2.0059 with 18 and 14.6274
degrees of freedom. This test was significant at the .10
level, indicating that the treatments differed in the
multivariate case. A series of univariate F tests was
run to test the differences between treatment levels on
each of the six variables-~ASS, CVRS-A, CVRS-U, CVRS-E,
CVRS-S, and EU. This procedure required that the sum of
the alpha levels in the six univariate F tests not exceed
the overall alpha level. Therefore, the alpha level set
for each of the univariate F tests was .0167. Results of
the univariate F tests are presented in Table 4.2.

Results of the univariate tests suggested that on
the CVRS-A, CVRS-U, CVRS—E, and EU treatments differed.
Differences were not significant on the ASS and CVRS-S
variables.

Since there were significant differences on the
CVRS-A, CVRSéU,3CVRS-E, and EU means between the four
treatment groups, Scheffé post-hoc comparisons were used
to identify which of the comparison groups differed. The

following hypotheses described the comparisons of interest.

112

.mcmmz Hamu u x “mmsomo n w “bcmEummHB u B "@600

 

 

 

osm.m mms.ma omm.ms mmm.ms mmo.m omm.ms m
mm.s oo.m mm.m mm.HH oa.m om.ms saw 166ml
oo.m om.ss oo.mH om.ms oo.k oo.~s mam a
os.m om.oa 00.04 oo.ms mm.s om.sv «Ho 9
mm.m ms.ms ms.ma om.os o~.m oo.mv Haw
ome.m www.ms om~.ss mem.ma mmm.m Nsm.ss m
sv.m mm.ms mm.ss mm.ma 4H.m om.Hs oau 129ml
ms.~ mm.ms ms.HH ms.qa om.os oo.ms mm m
Gm.m sa.ma 05.4H 4H.ss mm.k mm.ms me a
mm.~ on.ms H4.ma No.ms Ha.m mm.ms so
ome.s so~.m oop.m mam.m mmo.a www.mm m
. . . . . . HHuzeHc
as H mm NH 00 m 00 OH so so am mu m
om.a os.s os.s ov.o ov.m oo.mm me e
ms.H ss.s om.s mm.m mm.H mm.om so
has.a mmv.oa mmm.k 504.0H osm.~ kmo.mm m
mm.a oo.ma om.oa om.ma om.m no.4m mu AHIZBMV
so.s om.m o~.m ov.m oe.m km.km mm a
4G.H om.m oo.m om.m mm.a mm.He Ho
am mumm>o summ>o oumm>o dumm>o mm< masons mam>mq
mmHsmmmz “cmfimmHB

 

<>oz< mumaum>fluasz one MOM names Hamu paw msouollmpmo 3mm

H.e magma

113

Table 4.2

Univariate F Test Results

 

 

ASS 10.938961 5.4845
CVRS-A 4.097002 7.7152*
CVRS-U 5.973748 8.5660*
CVRS-E 8.922307 9.7458*
CVRS-S 10.095882 2.1510
EU 0.168827 7.2492*

 

*Significant at the .10 level.

Ho

2:

HO

HO

HO

HO

There will be no differences in the means on
any of the dependent variables between the
ITM-I and ITM—II groups.

There will be no differences in the means on
any of the dependent variables between the
ITM—I and ETM groups.

There will be no differences in the means on
any of the dependent variables between the
ITM—I and PCG groups.

There will be no differences in the means on
any of the dependent variables between the
ITM—II and ETM groups.

There will be no differences in the means on
any of the dependent variables between the
ITM-II and PCG groups.

The Scheffé method of post-hoc comparisons per-

Initted all pairwise and complex comparisons between

114

treatment levels in an analysis which had unequal cell
frequencies. In this study Tl had an N of 3, T2 had an

N of 3, T had an N of 4, and T had an N of 4. Thus the

3 4

Scheffé method was appropriate for the comparisons of
interest. Since the univariate F tests failed to reject
the hypotheses on the ASS and CVRS-S measures, no com—
parisons were warranted. As for the univariate ANOVA's,
an alpha level of .0167 was required for the post-hoc
analyses in order to maintain an overall alpha level of

.10. Results of the Scheffé comparisons on the CVRS-A

are presented in Table 4.3

Table 4.3

Differences in the Group Means on the CVRS-A

 

 

 

Treatment T1 T2 T3 T4
Levels (ITM—I) (ITM-II) (ETM) (PCG)
Treatment
Means 2.910 1.633 8.293 6.053
T1
(ITM—I) 2.910 -l.277 -5.383 -3.l43
T2
(ITM-II) 1.633 -6.660* -4.420
T3
(ETM) 8.293 2.240

 

*Significant Scheffé pairwise comparisons (a < .10).

115

Using the Scheffé formula, the absolute difference

in the means of the pairwise comparisons--ITM-I versus ETM,

ITM-II versus ETM, ITM-I versus PCG,

and ITM-II versus

PCG--on the CVRS-A had to exceed a value of 6.324 in order

to be significant at the

parison ITM-I versus ITM—II, the difference had to be

.10 or less level.

For the com-

6.744. Thus, on the CVRS-A, the Scheffé post-hoc compari-

sons indicated that there was a significant difference

between ITM-II and ETM groups.

Significant differences

were not detected for the remaining pairwise comparisons

on the CVRS-A.

Results of the Scheffé post-hoc comparisons on the

CVRS—U are presented in Table 4.4.

Table 4.4

Differences in the Group Means on the CVRS-U

 

 

 

Treatment T1 T2 T3 T4
Levels (ITM-I) (ITM-II) (ETM) (PCG)
Treatment
Means 10.467 8.243 15.273 16.383
T1
(ITM-I) 10.467 2.224 —4.806 -5.916
T2
(ITM—II) 8.243 -7.030 -8.l40*
T3
(ETM) 15.273 -1.110

 

*Significant Scheffé pairwise comparison (a i .10).

116

Using the Scheffé formula, the absolute differ—
ences in the means of the pairwise comparisons--ITM-I
versus ETM, ITM-II versus ETM, ITM-I versus PCG, and
ITM—II versus PCG--on the CVRS-U had to exceed a value of
7.613 in order to be significant at the .10 or less level.
For the comparison ITM-I versus ITM—II, the difference had
to be 8.144. Thus, on the CVRS-U, the Scheffé post-hoc
comparison indicated that there was a significant differ-
ence between ITM-II and PCG groups. Significant differ-
ences were not detected for the remaining pairwise com-
parisons on the CVRS-U.

Results of the Scheffé post-hoc pairwise comparisons

on the CVRS-E are presented in Table 4.5.

Table 4.5

Differences in the Group Means on the CVRS-E

 

 

 

Treatment T1 T2 T3 T4
Levels (ITM—I) (ITM-II) (ETM) (PCG)
Treatment
Means 7.233 5.700 —4.047 15.820
T1
(ITM—I) 7.233 1.533 -7.047 -8.587
T2
(ITM-II) 5.700 -8.580 -10.120*
T3
(ETM) 14.280 -1.54

 

*Significant Scheffé pairwise comparison (a i .10).

117

Using the Scheffé formula, the absolute differ-
ence in the means of the pairwise comparisons--ITM-I
versus ETM, ITM-II versus ETM, ITM-I versus PCG, and
ITM-II versus PCG-—on the CVRS-E had to exceed a value of
9.306 in order to be significant at the .10 level. For
the comparison ITM-I versus ITM-II, the difference had to
be 9.951. Thus, on the CVRS-E, the Scheffé post-hoc
comparisons indicated that there was a significant differ—
ence between the ITM-II and PCG groups. Significant
differences were not detected for the remaining pairwise
comparisons on the CVRS-E.

Results of the Scheffé post-hoe comparisons on the

EU are presented in Table 4.6.

Table 4.6

Differences in the Group Means on the EU

 

 

 

Treatment T1 T2 T3 T4
Levels (ITM-I) (ITM—II) (ETM) (PCG)
Treatment
Means 1.767 1.640 2.630 2.810
T1
(ITM-I) 1.767 0.137 -.863 -1.043
T2
(ITM-II) 1.630 -l.000 -1.180
T3

(ETM) 2.630 -0.l80

 

118

Using the Scheffé formula, the absolute difference
in the means of the pairwise comparisons-—ITM—I versus ETM,
ITM-II versus ETM, ITM-I versus PCG, and ITM-II versus PCG--
on the EU had to exceed a value of 1.280 in order to be
significant at the .10 level. For the comparison ITM-I
versus ITM-II, the difference had to be 1.367. On the EU,
significant differences were not detected for any of the
pairwise comparisons.

The post-hoc analyses of the between treatment
groups differences failed to reject Hypotheses 2, 3, and
4. Hypothesis 5 was rejected only in the case of the
CVRS-A variable. Hypothesis 6 was rejected for the CVRS-U
and CVRS-E variables. These differences were not pre-
dicted in Chapter I. Earlier predictions hypothesized that
there would be no differences between the treatment groups.
Failure to reject Hypotheses 2, 3, and 4 may have been due
to the small sample sizes or to large variances in the
variables of interest in this study.

Hypotheses of the Within Treatment
Gropps Design

 

Ho ‘ There will be no differences in the means of
the treatment groups (ITM-I, ITM—II, PCG) on
the ASS, CVRS, and EU variables, collec-
tively or individually, between the post

and delayed-post testing periods.

Ho ° There will be no interactions between treat-
ments, measures, and testing periods.

119

Ho : There will be no interactions between treat-

ment and test administration periods.

These hypotheses were formulated to compare the
group means on the ASS, CVRS, and EU variables within the
three comparison groups—-ITM-I, ITM—II, and PCG——across
the post and delayed-post testing periods. A repeated
measures analysis of variance was used to test the differ-
ences in the means of the ITM-I, ITM-II, and PCG groups
on all the dependent variables, across the post and delayed-
post testing periods. Since the repeated measures tech-
niques were sensitive to different scaling metrics, the
raw scores--group means--on each of the variables had to
be converted to a standard metric. These transformations
were performed by dividing each of the raw scores on each
of the variables by the standard deviation of the pooled
variance across times and groups for that variable. The
scores were transformed to obtain additivity of effects
across measures. Thus the transformed scores rather than
the raw scores were used in the analysis. The raw scores
are presented in Table 4.7; the transformed group and cell
means are presented in Table 4.8.

In a repeated measures analysis of variance, the
F statistic for testing effects involving a repeated
measures dimension assumes that the population corre-
lation coefficients between the measures used in this

study are equal. The assumption of equal population

120

 

 

 

 

d d
m .Mmm.o u om ecu M0 m “Hom.m u mm>o on» M0 m
“om.m u mmd ecu Mo m “mBOHHOM mm OMOB OHQMMMm> some MOM mddOMm cam mmEMu mmOMom mam>ma
McmEMmmMM ecu cMcMM3 mmOcMMMm> UOHOOQ ecu MO chMMmM>mp cMmcsmum mce “muoz
.cmwz QSOMO n m “mQOOMO n O “McmEummMe u E ”mpou
mmm.m omm.am mo.me mev.m mm.om mo.ov m
>H.m mm.mm no.mv ha.m mm.mv em.mv mo
oo.m mm.mm wo.mv mm.m Ho.mm no.me mo mom
Mw.m mm.mm no.mv mm.m mm.mm hm.mv no
omm.a omn.am nmo.nm omm.H www.mm www.mm m
mo.m he.mm mk.mm MG.M oo.Mm oo.mm so AHHIEMWV
hm.a oo.ma mm.nm om.H oo.am oo.mm mo 9
mm.a mv.mm oo.nm mn.H mm.ma om.om em
ooh.a mmm.mm omm.mm nmh.a mvo.Hm nmo.mm m
mo.~ oo.sq 5M.vm mm.M om.ov no.4m mo AHuzewc
hm.a m~.~m oo.me nw.H om.mm hm.nm No B
mm.H Hm.ma hm.mm vo.a mm.mm mm.Hv Ho
Dm mm>o mmd Dm mm>o mmfl deOMo mam>mq
Aumomucmwmamoc Aumomc MsmEMmmMa
m coMMMMMmMcMEpc H :oMMMMMmMcMEc<

 

mmefla mmOMom mQSOMw cOmMMmeOO OOMSB MOM memo 3mm

h.v manna

.cmmz QSOMO u x “mQDOMw n w “McmEummMB n B "mcou

 

121

 

 

 

ms4.m msm.m mmm.sM 44m.m sm4.m s4o.mM cums
HHMMO>O
omm.s 004.m Mmm.om omm.o mmm.m smm.om m
Mmo.m 4k~.4 so~.om NmM.4 Mmm.4 no~.o~ mo
mmo.m M4o.4 som.om mm4.4 mm4.m som.o~ mo mom
mm4.> Mmm.m omo.om Nmo.m 44o.m om4.om so
mM4.4 on~.m mmm.44 m44.4 km4.~ m4m.mM m
mmk.m 4m4.~ M4~.4M 44m.4 N4~.m 4mm.hs mu AHHuzch
mam.m mmm.M st.4M mn~.4 omM.~ omm.sM 46 a
444.4 ons.m Mem.44 Mno.m Mmo.~ mom.44 mo
hMo.m moo.m kmm.4M mmo.m omm.m 044.4M m
mmm.m mam.4 mMM.mM mwm.m mm~.m 04m.mM mo iMuzemc
sma.4 kmm.m 4mm.mM sms.4 mam.~ www.ma No a
mmm.4 mmm.M OHM.MM Nsm.4 mom.m mom.mH Mo
am mm>o mm4 am mm>o mm<
mQDOMm mam>mq
AMmOMIpowmaoov humomc MamaummMa

m GOMMMMMmMcMEp< H GOMMMMMmMcMEpd

 

mmMoom cmEMoMmQMMB

m.v OHQMB

122

correlation coefficients might have been violated in this
investigation. That is, the correlation between the CVRS
and the EU in this sample may not be equal to either the
correlation between the CVRS and the ASS or to the corre-
lation between the EU and ASS. Since there was some doubt
concerning the assumption of equal population correlation
coefficients, the Geisser-Greenhouse conservative F test--
which does not make the assumption-~was used in the analy-
sis of the data.

This investigation predicted in Chapter I that the
levels of helper behavior would remain at the same levels
over a period of time. Thus Hypothesis 7 predicted no
differences on the A (times) main effect and on the AM
interaction (times by measures) within the three compari-
son groups. In the test of the A main effect (post and
delayed-post periods), the critical value of the conser-
vative F test, at the .05 alpha level of significance was
5.99. This new alpha level was set to control for the
possibility of a Type I error—-a false rejection Of the
null hypothesis. The critical value of the conservative
F test for the AM interaction was also 5.99 at the .05
level. As predicted the tests of the A main effect and
of the AM interaction failed to reject Hypothesis 7. (See
ANOVA table of transformed scores presented in Table 4.9.)

Caution must be observed in interpreting the
failure to reject a null hypothesis. Failure to reject a

null hypothesis does not mean that the hypothesis is

123

Table 4.9

ANOVA Table of Transformed Scores

 

 

Sources of Sum of Degrees of Mean F
Variation Squares Freedom Square Ratio
T 98.823 2 49.411 54.569*
G(T) 5.433 6 .905

A .028 l .028 .028
TA .432 2 .216 .219
GA(T) 5.922 6 .987

M 2173.410 2 1086.705 700.089*
TM 3.885 4 .971 .626
GM(T) 18.627 12 1.552

AM .207 2 .103 .202
TAM .229 4 .057 .112
GAM(T) 6.126 12 .510

Total 2313.120 53

 

*Significant at a i .05 using a conservative test.

Code:
trations; M

T = Treatment; G = Groups; A = Adminis-

Measures;

Main Effects

TAM;

Interactions =

TA, TM, AM, TAM; Error Terms = G(T), GA(T), GM(T), GAM(T).

124

accepted. Statistical inference is not good in supporting
a null hypothesis because there is an unknown probability
of a Type II error-—false acceptance of a hypothesis.
Examination of the raw data in Table 4.7 will reveal that
there are small differences in observed raw data metric.
For instance, the EU scale metric itself ranges from one
to five. The range of scores on this scale for the treat—
ment means in this study from post to delayed-post tests
is as follows: T1 = 1.767 versus 1.760, T = 1.630 versus

2

1.620, and T3 = 2.443 versus 2.593. Likewise, the range

of scores--treatment means--on the ASS is as follows:

Tl 38.057 versus 38.280, T2 = 38.287 versus 37.027, and

T3 = 46.03 versus 46.03. This seems to be a quite narrow

range of scores which might occur in helper behaviors in

a larger pOpulation.

Hypothesis 8 predicted no differences on the TAM
interaction (treatment by times by measures). In the test
of the TAM interaction, the critical value of the conser-
vative F test at the .05 level of significance was 5.14.
The test of the TAM interaction failed to permit rejection
of Hypothesis 8.

Hypothesis 9 predicted no differences on the TA
interaction (treatment by times). In the test of the TA
interaction, the critical value of the conservative F
test at the .05 level of significance was 5.14. The test
of the TA interaction failed to permit rejection of

Hypothesis 9.

125

Failure to reject Hypotheses 7, 8, and 9 seemed to
indicate that there were no differences within the compari-
son group means as measured by the ASS, CVRS, and EU vari-
ables across the post and delayed—post testing periods.
Inspection of the ANOVA table did reveal significant
differences (p p .05) between the means of the comparison
groups as tested by the T (treatment) and by the M (mea-
sures) main effects. This investigation was not inter—
ested in a measures main effect. But this investigation
was interested in treatment main effects. The means of
the treatment main effects were: T = 8.356, T = 7.890,

1 2
and T = 10.964. Since the test of the treatment main

3
effect was significant at the .05 level, Tukey post-hoc
comparisons were used to investigate the T main effect.
The absolute differences in the means of these comparisons
had to exceed 2.383 in order to be significant at the .05

level. Results on the Tukey post-hoc comparisons are

presented in Table 4.10.

Table 4.10

Post-Hoc Comparisons of the T Main Effect

 

 

 

Treatment T1 T2 T3
Levels (ITM-I) (ITM-II) (PCG)
Treatment
Means 8.357 7.890 10.964
Tl (ITM—I) .467 -2.607*
T2 (ITM-II) -3.074*

 

*Significant Tukey comparison (a i .05).

126

Results of the Tukey comparisons indicated that
there were significant differences (a i .05) in the treat-
ment means for the following pairs-~ITM-I versus PCG and
ITM-II versus PCG. Thus it seemed that in this analysis
there were significant differences between both of the
experimental groups (ITM-I and ITM-II) and the professional
counselor group (PCG) as measured by the treatment means--
a composite of all the variables for that treatment level.
These results are somewhat contradictory to the findings
of the multivariate test. The multivariate analysis re-
vealed no statistical differences between ITM-I and the
PCG groups. Differences between the ITM-II and PCG groups
were found on the CVRS-U and CVRS-E. The repeated measures
findings seem much clearer than the multivariate findings.
One reason for the discrepancy in the findings may be that
the repeated measures analysis is a more sensitive and
powerful test than the multivariate tests for the type of
multivariate data in this study. The lack of a TM and TA
interaction suggests that the pairwise differences between
treatment levels holds across all three independent vari-

ables.

Summary

A multivariate analysis of variance was used to
test the overall difference in group means between the
two experimental training paradigms for undergraduate

paraprofessional helpers (ITM-I, ITM-II) and two

127

comparison groups of helpers (ETM, PCG). The null
hypothesis that there would be no differences between
treatment levels was rejected in the multivariate case

(a i .10). In the univariate case, the treatment group
means on the CVRS-A, CVRS-U, CVRS-E, and EU variables were
shown to be significantly different (a i .10). Scheffé
post-hoc pariwise comparisons were used to test the
differences between the four treatment levels (ITM-I,
ITM-II, ETM, PCG) on the CVRS-A, CVRS-U, CVRS-E, and EU
variables. Significant differences were found between
the ITM-II and ETM groups on the CVRS-A and between the
ITM-II and PCG groups on the CVRS-U and CVRS-E variables.
Significant differences were not detected between the
ITM-I and ITM-II groups, between the ITM—I and ETM groups,
or between the ITM-I and PCG groups on any of the six
dependent variables when analyzed by the multivariate.
Significant differences were also not detected between
the ITM—II and PCG groups on the CVRS-A and EU variables
and significant differences were not detected between the
ITM—II and ETM groups on the CVRS-U, CVRS-E, and EU vari-
ables. These results are partly contradicted in the later
analyses.

A repeated measures analysis of variance was used
to test the differences within the group means of the two
experimental training groups (ITM-I, ITM-II) and one
comparison group (PCG). The null hypothesis--that there

would be no difference within the means of the three groups

128

on the ASS, CVRS, and EU variables--collective1y or
individually--across the testing periods, failed to be
rejected. The hypotheses testing the TAM and TA inter-
actions also failed to be rejected. But the treatment
main effect was significant at the .05 level. Significant
differences between both the experimental groups (ITM-I,
ITM-II) and the professional counselors group were found.

Table 4.11 presents a summary of the hypotheses of
interest in this study and the results of the analyses.
The summary and conclusions of this investigation are

discussed in Chapter V.

129

Table 4.11

Summary of the Hypotheses and Results

 

 

Hypothesis Test a Decision

1 Multivariate ANOVA .10 Reject
2 Scheffé post—hoc

comparisons .0167 Failed to reject
3 Scheffé post—hoc

comparisons .0167 Failed to reject
4 Scheffé post-hoc

comparisons .0167 Failed to reject
5 Scheffé post—hoc Reject for the

comparisons .0167 CVRS-A
6 Scheffé post-hoc Reject for the

comparisons .0167 CVRS-U and CVRS-E
7 Repeated Measures

ANOVA .05 Failed to reject
8 Repeated Measures

ANOVA .05 Failed to reject
9 Repeated Measures

ANOVA .05 Failed to reject

 

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS

Summary

This study compared the effectiveness of two
different approaches to the training of undergraduate para-
professional mental health workers or "helpers." The in-
vestigation attempted to determine the kinds of trainee
behavior evidenced following an intensive 40-hour training
program conducted during five consecutive days. Two train-
ing programs were used--a modified IPR experience and a
modified communication skills training program. The out-
comes of both treatments were compared to each other, to
a comparison group of resident assistants trained exten-
sively in a 38-hour IPR program which was conducted over
a six-month period of time, and to a comparison group of
professional counselors.

Both the experimental training procedures--the
modified IPR experience and the modified communications
skills program--were designed to increase the "inter-
personal communications skills" of student helpers. Four
general goals underlying both of the training programs

included the following: to make trainees more aware of

130

131

and sensitive to the feelings and concerns of their peers;
to provide trainees with listening and communication skills
which would facilitate understanding between them and the
students desiring help; to offer student helpers effective
ways of responding to and behaving with students; and to
give trainees an increased awareness of the impact of the
helper-student interaction in the college and residence
hall.

Therefore the "interpersonal communication skills"
of interest in this study included both helper empathic
understanding and the helper's ability to use affective,
understanding, specific, and exploratory responses to stu-
dent concerns. Helper empathic understanding was defined
as the helper's sensitivity to current feelings, as evi-
denced by his verbal facility to communicate this under-
standing to a student in a language attuned to the peer's
current feelings (Carkhuff, 1969b). Helper affective
responses made reference to the emotions, feelings, or
fears of a client. Understanding responses communicated
to the student that the helper understood or was trying to
understand what the student was expressing, both verbally
and non-verbally. Specific responses were the helper's
honest statements of the core concerns being presented,
either explicitly or implicitly, verbally or non-verbally,
by the student. Exploratory responses indicated whether
the helper encouraged or permitted the student to explore

his concerns.

132

Carkhuff and his associates (1964, 1965a, 1965b)
proposed a paradigm for the training of paraprofessionals
in helping behaviors. Carkhuff posited that there was a
central core of facilitative conditions in all helping
processes. Four helper variables in this process were
defined as empathic understanding (E), regard (R), genuine-
ness (G), and concreteness (C). The client variable was
defined as self-exploration (Ex). Carkhuff then devised
a five-step training program in the facilitative dimensions
for lay helpers. Trainees were didactically taught the
therapeutic dimensions of E, R, G, C, and Ex. Trainees
then learned to discriminate the levels of each of these
dimensions by rating audiotaped helper and client responses
using the research scales. During empathy training,
trainees wrote their own responses to audiotaped client
statements. The trainees then focused on role-playing
helper-client interactions and then evaluating their be-
haviors using the research scales. Finally, these helpers
interviewed actual clients and, following each interview,
received feedback about the levels of their facilitative
behaviors.

Research evidence suggested that a variety of
trainee groups could be trained to function at minimally
faCilitative levels on the research dimensions. Addi-
tional investigations proposed that lay persons could be

trained to effect constructive behavior change in their

133

clients. In light of these research studies, it seemed
that the Carkhuff training model might be effective in
training undergraduate paraprofessional helpers. Yet, the
research had not compared the effects of the Carkhuff model
with other approaches to training.

Kagan and his associates (1967) develOped the
Interpersonal Process Recall (IPR) as another prOposed
training model in helping behaviors. This model was
originally developed as an approach to counselor edu-
cation. These researchers sought ways of gaining knowl-
edge about the underlying dynamics of human relationships;
thus, the thoughts and feelings of both the counselor and
the client during the interview process were of special
interest. Techniques were devised which would allow a
helper or a client to interact at one time and then intro-
spect concerning that interaction at another time. Affect
stimulation, videotape feedback, and stimulated recall
were used to facilitate the interpersonal learning process.

Thus, the IPR process involved four steps--a
lecture on facilitative conditions; stimulated confron-
tation recall (filmed stimulus); counselor, client, and
mutual recall; and individual interviews. Trainees were
didactically taught the elements of effective communication
by watching films of experienced counselors with clients
and then discussing with a trainer the crucial elements

of that interpersonal communication. During stimulated

134

confrontation recall, a client was videotaped while watch-
ing stimulus films which portrayed various emotions, such
as anger, hostility, and seduction. An inquirer recalled
with the client the feelings and thoughts which the client
experienced during the original session. During the third
phase, the trainees experienced IPR counselor or client
recall. Following an interview with a client, an inquirer
would review this videotaped interaction with either the
counselor or the client. In mutual recall, the last phase
of training, the inquirer would recall the videotaped
interaction with the counselor and the client together.
The four IPR techniques just described were used
to facilitate particular kinds of trainee learning.
Trainees needed to become aware of and sensitive to the
elements of effective communication; they needed to under-
stand and become sensitive to the client's communications
during the helping process. At the same time, the trainees
needed to understand and become sensitive to their own
feelings during a counseling session. Finally they needed
to become sensitive to the bilateral nature of the counsel—
ing interaction; that is, they needed to become sensitized
to the reciprocal impact of the counselor on the client
and the client on the counselor. Goldberg (1967), Spivack
(1970), and Grzegorek (1971) obtained data which supported
the notion that the IPR process could be effectively used

with counselor trainees. Research also suggested that the

135

Kagan model might be effective in training lay helpers but
previous studies have not yet tested this contention.

This study compared the relative effectiveness of
the Carkhuff and the Kagan training models when used with
undergraduate paraprofessional "helpers." In this investi-
gation, both training models were modified in the following
manner. While Carkhuff usually included the five dimensions
of E, R, G, C, and Ex in his five-step training process,
this study focused on only two dimensions--the E and Ex
scales. Therefore, the modified Carkhuff training model
in this study included discrimination training using two
rating scales (E and Ex), empathy training, role—playing,
group feedback and discussion, and client interviews. The
training program was conducted as an intensive 40-hour
experience over a period of five days.

Kagan's IPR process usually included a lecture on
facilitative conditions, stimulated confrontation recall,
client or counselor recall, and mutual recall. This study
modified the IPR process in the following ways. The CVRS
was not used in the lecture on facilitative conditions.
The E and Ex scales were used instead. In this way, the
CVRS could be used as an unbiased criterion measure across
all groups. Stimulation confrontation recall (filmed

stimulus) was omitted* and tape-rating and empathy training

 

*This experience was included in the Spivack (1970),
(lrzegorek (1971), Schauble (1970), Dendy (1971), and Archer
(1971) studies but was not used by Goldberg (1967).

136

were substituted for this phase of training. Thus the
intensive modified IPR training model included a lecture
on facilitative conditions in the helping process, tape-
rating, empathy training, role-playing, videotaped feed-
back, client, counselor, and mutual recall, and interview
with a client.

Thirty—five undergraduate "helpers" were randomly
assigned to one of the two experimental training programs
--the intensive modified IPR process (ITM-I) or the inten-
sive modified communication skills training (ITM-II).

Two comparison groups were also used in the analysis of
helper behavior. The training comparison group (ETM) in-
cluded 22 undergraduate resident assistants who were
trained in helping behaviors over a six-month period of
time. A second comparison group (PCG) included pro-
fessional counselors employed by a university counseling
center.

Following training, two samples of helper behavior
were collected from all groups. An audiotaped interview
with a student and a paper-and-pencil test of affective
sensitivity were collected two weeks after training in all
four treatment groups--ITM-I, ITM-II, ETM, and PCG. Eight
weeks later, an audiotaped interview with a student and
the test of affective sensitivity were again collected in
both of the experimental treatment groups—-ITM-I and

ITM-II--and in the professional counselor group--PCG.

137

These samples were used to assess the levels of helper
functioning in each of the groups used in this study.

Six criterion measures were used to evaluate the
helper's interview behavior. Carkhuff's Empathic Under-
standing Scale (see Appendix A) was used to assess helper
empathic responses to student concerns during the audio-
taped interview. Kagan's Counselor Verbal Response Scale
(the CVRS--see Appendix B) was used to measure the helper's
ability to use affective, understanding, specific, and
exploratory responses to student communications during the
interview process. The composite CVRS score and the CVRS
subscores-—CVRS-A, CVRS-U, CVRS-E, and CVRS-S--were used
in the analyses of helper interview behavior. An addi—
tional measure-—Kagan's Affective Sensitivity Scale (the
ASS--see Appendix C)--was used as a paper-and-pencil test
of the helper's ability to judge what a client, seen in
a videotaped counseling session, was feeling about him-
self and about his counselor.

Thus, the overall design used in this study incor-
porated two schemes. A posttest design was used to test
the effectiveness of training on helper behavior between
the four comparison groups--the intensive modified IPR
training, the intensive modified communication skills
paradigm, the extensive IPR training experience, and the
professional counselors group. A post-delayed post test

design tested the effectiveness of training between the

138

two eXperimental treatment groups-~the intensive modified
IPR training, the intensive modified communication skills
paradigm, and the professional counselors group over a
period of two months.

Hypotheses relevant to the basic questions in this
study were as follows.

Hypotheses related to the between treatment
groups design

 

 

Hol: There will be no differences in the means of
the four training models--ITM-I, ITM-II, ETM,
and PCG--on the ASS, CVRS-A, CVRS-U, CVRS-E,
CVRS-S, and EU variables.

H02: There will be no differences in the means of
any of the dependent variables between the
ITM-I and ITM-II groups.

Ho - There will be no differences in the means on
any of the dependent variables between the
ITM-I and ETM groups.

H04: There will be no differences in the means on
any of the dependent variables between the
ITM-I and PCG groups.

Ho ' There will be no differences in the means on
any of the dependent variables between the
ITM-II and ETM groups.

Ho - There will be no differences in the means on
any of the dependent variables between the
ITM-II and PCG groups.

139

Hypotheses related to the within treatment
groups design

 

 

H07: There will be no differences in the means of
the treatment groups--ITM-I, ITM-II, and PCG
--on the ASS, CVRS, and EU variables, collec-
tively or individually, between the post and
delayed-post testing periods.

H08: There will be no interactions between
treatments, measures, and testing periods.
H09: There will be no interactions between

treatment and test administration periods.

A multivariate analysis of variance was used to
test the overall differences in group means between the
two experimental training paradigms for undergraduate para—
professional helpers (ITM-I, ITM-II) and two comparisons
(ETM, PCG). The null hypothesis, that there would be no
differences between treatment levels on all variables, was
rejected in the multivariate case (p < .10). The overall
alpha level was set at .10 to compensate for the risk of
a Type II error—-false acceptance of the hypothesis. In
the univariate case, the means on the CVRS-A, CVRS-U,
CVRS-E, and EU variables were shown to be significantly
different (p < .10) across the four treatment levels.
Scheffé post-hoc comparisons were used to test the differ—
ences between the four treatment levels--ITM—I, ITM-II,
ETM, and PCG--on the CVRS-A, CVRS-U, CVRS-E, and EU vari—
ables. Significant differences (p < .10) were found

between the ITM-II and ETM groups on the CVRS-A and between

140

the ITM-II and PCG groups on the CVRS—U and CVRS-E vari-
ables. Significant differences were not detected between
the ITM-I and ITM-II groups, between the ITM-I and ETM
groups, or between the ITM-I and PCG groups on all six of
the variables used in this analysis. Significant differ—
ences were also not detected between the ITM-II and PCG
groups on the CVRS-A and EU variables. Nor were signifi-
cant differences detected between the ITM-II and ETM
groups on the CVRS-U, CVRS-E, and EU variables.

A repeated measures analysis of variance was used
to test the differences within and between the group means
of the two experimental training groups--ITM-I, ITM-II-—
and one comparison group--PCG. The null hypothesis that
there would be no difference in the means of the three
groups on the ASS, CVRS, and EU variables--collectively
or individually--across the testing periods failed to be
rejected. The hypothesis testing the TAM and TA inter-
actions also failed to be rejected. Though not hypothe-
sized in this analysis, a treatment main effect was found
(p < .05). Significant differences between both the
experimental groups--ITM-I, ITM—II-—and the professional
counselors group were evidenced in the repeated measures

analysis.

Discussion

 

This section will present conclusions drawn from

the results of the statistical analyses, will discuss

141

possible limitations of the study and will consider the
confounding variables which might have affected the outcome

results.

Results of the Analysis

 

The comparison groups used in this study included
the undergraduates trained intensively in IPR, the helpers
trained intensively in a communication skills paradigm, the
helpers trained extensively in IPR, and the professional
counselors. The multivariate analysis and Scheffé post—
hoc comparisons suggested that significant differences in
helper behavior existed in the following areas. The pro-
fessional counselors used significantly more understanding
and exploratory responses to student concerns during an
interview than did the undergraduates trained intensively
in communication skills. Differences were not detected in
interview behavior or levels Of affective sensitivity be—
tween the undergraduates trained intensively in IPR and
those helpers trained extensively in IPR. There also
seemed to be no differences in interview behavior and
levels of affective sensitivity between the professional
counselors and those helpers trained intensively in IPR.
Yet the repeated measures analysis suggested that the pro-
fessional counselors functioned at higher levels of
empathic understanding, affective sensitivity, and Counse-
lor Verbal Response dimensions than either of the eXperi-

mental trainee groups--those helpers trained intensively in

142

IPR and those trainees in the communication skills paradigm.
The repeated measures results differed with the multi-
variate analysis. Traditionally, caution is observed in
interpreting the acceptance of null hypothesis. The
probability of a Type II error-—false acceptance--cou1d
occur in such "acceptance." It is considered safer to
assume that statistical inference delineates the conditions
of rejecting a hypothesis or of failing to reject a hy-
pothesis rather than suggesting the acceptance of null
hypothesis.

In considering the conclusions drawn from the data
in this study, several issues must be considered. These
include the levels of helper functioning evidenced follow—
ing training, the limited samples of helper functioning in
the environment, and the low rater reliability on the EU
scale.

Levels of Helper Functioning
Followinngraining

 

 

It was interesting to note that even though the
trainees in ITM-I and ITM-II were taught the EU scale--the
ITM-II group were especially "drilled" on this scale--the
interview behaviors of these helpers still remained low.
On both the post and delayed-post measures, the level of
helper behavior was below level three on the EU scale.
Level three was defined by Carkhuff as the minimally

facilitative level of helper empathic understanding. This

143

raised some question concerning the use of didactic
material to influence helper communicated behavior on a
certain dimension, such as the dimension of helper empathic
understanding. Cognitive knowledge of a dimension did not
seem to guarantee communication of that dimension. In
their studies, Carkhuff, Kratochvil, and Friel (1968) sug—
gested that the discrimination of the facilitative dimen—
sions of empathic understanding, respect, and genuineness
did not directly correlate with the communication of those
dimensions in an interview process.

Carkhuff (1968) claimed that paraprofessional
helpers could be trained to function at minimally facili-
tative levels of E, R, C, and G in as few as 20 hours of
training. The training program in his study was conducted
over a period of several weeks. The Dendy (1971) study
trained undergraduate paraprofessionals in a 38-hour pro-
gram which was conducted over a period of six months. The
mean helper behavior evidenced following training in the
Dendy (1971) study was 2.630. These studies raised the
question whether training conducted over a longer period
of time might be more effective than an intensive training
experience. Longer periods of training and supervision
might effect greater gains in trainee behavior than would
the short-term training.

Carkhuff (1968) also suggested that lay helpers

could function at levels as high (never lower) than

144

professional counselors. Yet, in this study, the repeated
measures analysis indicated that the professional counse-
lors functioned at higher levels of affective sensitivity,
empathic understanding, and CVRS dimensions than did under-
graduate helpers in either of the experimental training
programs. It seemed that future research was needed to
define both the possible effects of long-term training
versus short-term training and the efficacy of professional
helper functioning on client progress as compared to para-
professional functioning in the helper process.

The Dendy (1971) study found no significant differ-
ences in the levels of helper functioning, as measured by
the ASS, CVRS, and EU, between a group of resident
assistants trained extensively in the IPR process and a
group of professional counselors. The undergraduate
paraprofessionals in the Dendy (1971) study had been
trained over a period of six months. In contrast, this
study found significant differences in the levels of
helper functioning between each of the experimental in—
tensive trainee groups and a group of professional
counselors. Differences in the post-training results
between the Dendy study and this study might result from
two factors. The total number of training hours were
similar in both studies--Dendy used 38 hours, this study
used 40 hours. Yet the Dendy training was conducted over

a period of six months while this study conducted training

145

over a period of five days. The longer period of training
might have allowed trainees to integrate the helper be—
haviors more thoroughly than did the intensive training
models. Also, this study deleted the stimulation confron-
tation (filmed stimulus) recall experience, while the
Dendy (1971) study included this technique in training.
Future research might be warranted to investigate the
effects of this technique on overall trainee growth in
helping behaviors.

Limited Sample and Range
of Helper Behavior

 

 

Only two kinds of helper behavior were collected
across all groups in this study. These samples included
helper responses to student concerns in a one interview
situation (post and delayed-post times) and a paper-and-
pencil test of affective sensitivity (post and delayed-
post times). These two samples might not have shown a
representative picture of the helpers' behaviors as they
occurred in the environment. Several interview samples
with different kinds of students might be needed to present
a more accurate picture of helper behavior in the interview
process. Kagan and his associates (1967) indicated that
the CVRS could discriminate the differences in helper
behavior in a one interview sample. Goldberg (1967) sug-
gested that a four-minute segment was as effective as a

10- or 15—minute segment of interview behavior in

146

determining changes in counselor behavior. Yet examination
of the raw data revealed that the range of scores between
the treatment groups on the EU scale was quite narrow.

The group mean raw scores on the EU scale ranged from 1.630
to 2.810 on the posttest design and from 1.620 to 2.593 on
the repeated measures design. Likewise, the range of the
composite CVRS transformed scores was small--from 2.270 to
5.400. These ranges of helper behavior seemed to be quite
compacted.

Low Rater Reliability
on the EU Scale

 

 

The low rater reliability on the EU scale appeared
to present another concern in this study. It seemed that
the interpretation of the EU results could be questioned.
This low reliability could have caused a lack of differen-
tiation between the treatment groups on this scale--
especially in the multivariate analysis of variance. Yet,
the repeated measures analysis seemed to be a sensitive
enough test to be unaffected by the low rater reliability.
Differences in treatment levels were detected on the EU

scale in the repeated measures analysis.

Observations and Speculations
During and after the training period, the investi-
gator observed several other factors which might have had
a bearing on the results of this investigation. On the

third day of training, the trainees in both experimental

147

treatments began to experience fatigue. Since the training
procedures were collapsed into five consecutive days,
trainees seemed to feel many demands on their performance
during training. By the fourth and fifth day, these
trainees seemed to have reached an "over—saturation" point.
That is, since so many new experiences were compacted into
such a short time, it might have been difficult for these
trainees to integrate the kinds of learning included in the
latter days of training. The cumulative effect of such
massed practice in both of the intensive training models
might have caused a deterioration in trainee learning.
Trainees might not have had enough time to integrate the
training eXperiences in a period of five days. If the
training experiences had been spaced over a period of
several weeks, trainees might have had an opportunity to
introspect about their helping behaviors, to practice or

to experiment with new behaviors in their everyday environ—
ment, and to consider ways in which they personally wanted
to grow as helpers.

In the intensive modified communication skills
groups, trainees began to request a sensitivity group
experience. During the first two days of training, these
"helpers" began to focus on their own and on other trainees'
behaviors. While the IPR trainees seemed to be given the
Opportunity to introspect about their personal behaviors
during IPR recall, the communication skills trainees had

less direct Opportunity for introspection. In the ITM-II

148

treatment, group feedback and discussions centered on the
use of rating scales to interpret behavior. More direct

methods of introspection might have included IPR recall,

group counseling, or sensitivity group experience.

No training procedures were offered during fall
term. This was done to partially control for the confound—
ing variable of additional training during the post and
delayed—post periods. Yet the investigator received re-
quests for additional training from the trainees in both
experimental groups. At times, trainees seemed disappointed
about having to wait until winter and spring terms for
these experiences. Trainees might have found that the
treatment procedures started a "growth process" in helper
behaviors which later became stifled or frustrated during
the waiting period. During winter and spring terms of the
same school year, the undergraduate "helpers" asked that the
investigator return to their staff meetings to consult with
them about their growth as helpers. These eXperiences sug-
gested that extended supervision and consultation might be
crucial in the training of lay helpers in facilitative
communication.

Several investigators have defined helper behaviors
which seemed to influence client growth. Kagan and his
associates (1967) suggested four develOpmental tasks that
a helper needed to learn so that he could become effective

in his interpersonal communications. The helper needed to

149

become aware of and sensitive to the elements of effective
communication. The counselor needed to understand and
become sensitive to his own feelings while also attempting
to understand and become sensitive to the client's communi-
cations during an interview process. Finally, the helper
needed to become aware of the bilateral nature of the
counseling interaction. Carkhuff and his associates (1964,
1965a, 1965b) posited that a helper needed to learn how to
effectively communicate four kinds of helper conditions to
the client. The counselor needed to be able to communicate
at least minimally facilitative levels of empathic under-
standing, respect, genuineness, and concreteness to a
client if constructive growth was to occur. This investi-
gation, however, used only one dimension of helper be-
havior for training. Trainees and supervisors both
questioned if this skill was sufficient in the helping
process. They seemed to feel that empathic understanding
was not enough. Many trainees eXpressed a need for train-
ing in additional helping behaviors, such as assertiveness,
confrontation, genuineness, and self-disclosure.

Archer (1971) found that undergraduate para—
professionals using an integrated IPR training model could
train other undergraduates to have more effective inter-
Personal skills. The author's data indicated that with
aPPI'Opriate training and supervision, undergraduates could

function as paraprofessional group leaders for interpersonal

150

skills groups. In addition to these findings, Archer found
that undergraduate "helpers" could become important re-
ferral agents for students in need of long-term counseling
assistance. The undergraduate paraprofessional might also
become a crucial intervention source in the dormitory or
college setting. While lay helpers might not be apprOpri-
ate for students in need of long-term therapy, these para-
professionals might provide short-term helpful services to

the students in the dormitory and college.

Implications for Future Research

 

The results of this study seemed to raise several

questions which could be considered in future research.

A replication comparative study should be carried out

using the same procedures with other samples of under-
graduate helpers. Other sources of these "helpers" include
resident assistants from other dormitories, student

tutors, and undergraduate volunteer workers in the city's
social agencies.

The efficacy of individual training of lay pro-
fessionals in facilitative communication versus group
training of paraprofessionals had not previously been
tested in the Carkhuff model. Training in communication
skills was usually conducted in small groups. Future
studies might consider the effects of individual training

also.

151

Comparative studies are still needed to investi-
gate the functioning of professional helpers as compared
to the levels of paraprofessional behavior. This need
for research is emphasized by the results of this study,
which questioned the Carkhuff contention that parapro-
fessionals functioned at levels equal to (but never less
than) professional helpers.

The procedures used in this study were logically
planned by the experimenter. Other investigations are
needed to examine the ordering of training tasks in both
the Carkhuff and Kagan models.

The influence of a high or low functioning
inquirer on trainee growth seemed to warrant consideration.
Pierce and Schauble (1970) described the possible influ-
ence of supervisor functioning on trainee growth. But the
impact of the inquirer's level of functioning had not
been investigated in the Kagan model.

Additional studies might investigate the effec—
tiveness of a 40-hour training program conducted over a
longer period of time. For instance, the efficacy of a
40-hour (two-month) training program in helping behaviors
Could be compared to an intensive 40-hour training program
Of five days (see Dendy, 1971). Other measures of helping
behaviors which may be learned by trainees need to be
defined, operationalized, and used as dependent variables

in future studies.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anthony, W. A., & Carkhuff, R. R. Effects of training on
rehabilitation counselor trainee functioning.
Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 1970, 13,
333—342. —

 

Archer, James, Jr. Undergraduates as paraprofessional
leaders of interpersonal communication skills
training groups using an integrated IPR (Inter-
personal Process Recall) videotape feedback/
affect simulation training model. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University,
1971.

Armstrong, J. C. Perceived intimate friendship as a
quasi-therapeutic agent. Journal of Counseling
Psyphologyp 1969, pp, 137-141.

 

Berenson, B. G., Carkhuff, R. R., & Myrus, P. The inter-
personal functioning and training of college
students. Journal of Counseling Psychology,
1966, p3, 441—446.

 

Berenson, B. G., Mitchell, K. M., & Moravec, J. A.
Level of therapist functioning, patient depth of
self-exploration and type of confrontation.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1968, pp,
136—139.

 

Brown, W. F. Student-to-student counseling for academic
adjustment. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1965,
2, 811-8170

 

Cabush, David W. Outcome effects of training college stu-
dent clients in facilitative self-responding.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State
University, 1971.

Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. EXperimental and quasi-
experimental designs for research. Chicago:
Rand, McNally and Co., 1963.

 

152

153

Carkhuff, R. R. Differential functioning of lay and
professional helpers. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 1968, pp, 117-126.

 

 

Carkhuff, R. R. Toward a comprehensive model of facili-
tative interpersonal processes. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 1967, pp, 67-72.

 

 

Carkhuff, R. R. Training in the counseling and thera-
peutic practices: Requiem or reveille? Journal
of Counseling Psychology: 1966, pp, 360-367.

 

Carkhuff, R. R., & Bierman, R. Training as a preferred
mode of treatment of parents of emotionally
disturbed children. Journal of Counselipg
Psychology, 1970, pp, 157-161.

 

 

Carkhuff, R. R., & Griffin, A. H. The selection and train-
ing of human relations specialists. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 1970, pp, 433-450.

 

 

Carkhuff, R. R., Krathochvil, D., & Friel, T. Effects of
professional training: Communication and discrimi—
nation of facilitative conditions. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 1968, pp, 68-74.

 

 

Carkhuff, R. R., & Truax, C. B. Lay mental health
counseling: The effects of lay group counseling.
Journal of Counseling Psychology: 1965, 22, 426-
431.

 

Carkhuff, R. R., & Truax, C. B. Toward explaining success
and failure in interpersonal learning eXperiences.
Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1966, pp, 723-728.

 

Carkhuff, R. R., & Truax, C. B. Training in counseling
and psychotherapy: An evaluation of an integrated
didactic and experiential approach. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 1965, pg, 333-336.

 

Cooley, W. W., & Lohnes, P. R. Multivariate data anapysis.
New York: Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1971.

Danish, S. J., & Brodsky, S. L. Training of policemen in
emotional control and awareness. American Psycho-

Danish, S. J., & Kagan, N. Emotional simulation in
counseling and psychotherapy. Psychotherapy:
Theory, Research and Practice, 1969, p, 261-263.

 

154

Dendy, R. F. A model for the training of undergraduate
residence hall assistants as paraprofessional
counselors using videotape playback techniques
and interpersonal process recall. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University,
1971.

Ebel, R. L. Estimates of the relatibility of ratings.
In W. A. Henrens & R. L. Ebel (Eds.), Principles
of educational and psychological measurement.
Chicago: Rand McNally and Co., 1967.

 

 

Goldberg, A. D. A sequential program for supervising
counselors using the interpersonal process recall
technique. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Michigan State University, 1967.

Greenberg, B. S., Kagan, N., & Bowes, J. Dimensions of
empathic judgments of clients by counselors.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1969, pp,
303-308.

 

Grzegroek, A. E. A study of the effects of two types of
emphasis in counselor training used in conjunction
with simulation and videotaping. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University,
1971.

Harvey, L. V. The use of non-professional auxiliary
counselors in staffing a counseling service.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1964, 348-351.

Hays, W. L. Statistics for psychologists. New York:
Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1963.

 

Hoyt, C. J. Test reliability estimated by analysis of
variance. In W. A. Mehrens & R. L. Ebel (Eds.),
Princpples of educational and psychological
measurement. Chicago: Rand McNally and Co.,
1967.

 

Hummel, T. J., & Sligo, J. R. Empirical comparison of
univariate and multivariate analysis of variance
procedures. Psychological Bulletin, 1971, pp,
49-570

 

Kagan, N., Krathwohl, D. R., & Miller, R. Stimulated
recall in therapy using video tape--a case study.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1963, pg, 237-
243.

155

Kagan, N., Krathwohl, D. R., Goldberg, A. D., Campbell,
R. J., Schauble, P. G., Greenberg, B. 8., Danish,
S. J. Resnikoff, A., Bowes, J., & Bondy, S. B.
Studies in human interaction: Interpersonal
process recall stimulated by videotape. East
Lansing: Educational Publication Services, 1967.

 

Kagan, N., & Schauble, P. G. Affect simulation in inter-
personal process recall. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 1969, pp, 309-313.

 

Kagan, N., Schauble, P., Resnikoff, A., Danish, S., &
Krathwohl, D. Interpersonal process recall.
Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 1969, pgg,
365-374.

Kell, B. L., & Mueller, W. J. Impact and change: A
study of counseling relationships. New York:
Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1966.

 

Kirk, R. E. Experimental design: Procedures for the
behavioral sciences. Belmont, Calif.: Brooks/
Cole Publishing Co., 1969.

 

Magoon, T. A., & Golann, S. E. Nontraditionally trained
women as mental health counselors/psychotherapists.
Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1966, pp, 788-793.

 

Martin, J. C., Carkhuff, R. R., & Berenson, B. G. Process
variables in counseling and psychotherapy: A
study of counseling and friendship. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 1966, pp, 356-359.

McArthur, C. G. Comment on "effectiveness of counselors
and counselor aides." Journal of Counseling
Ppychology, 1970, pp, 335-336.

 

Morrison, D. F. Multivariate statistical methods.
New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1967.

Patterson, C. H. Theories of counseling and psychotherapy.
New York: Harper and Row, 1966.

Pierce, R. M., & Drasgow, J. Teaching facilitative inter-
personal functioning to psychiatric inpatients.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1969, pp, 295-
298.

Pierce, R. M., & Schauble, P. G. Graduate training of
facilitative counselors: The effects of indi-
vidual supervision. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 1970, pp, 210-215.

 

156

Resnikoff, A., Kagan, N., & Schauble, P. G. Acceleration
of psychotherapy through stimulated videotape
recall. American Journal of Psyphotherapy, 1970,
pp, 102-111.

Rioch, M. J., Elkes, C., Flint, A. A., Usdansky, B. S.,
Newman, R. G., & Silber, E. National Institute
of Mental Health pilot study in training mental
health counselors. American Journal of Ortho-
psychiatpy, 1963, 33, 678-689.

 

 

Robinson, F. P. The dynamics of communication in counsel-
ing. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1955, p,
163-169.

 

Rogers, C. R. The necessary and sufficient conditions of
therapeutic personality change. Journal of Con-
sulting Psychology, 1957, pp, 95-103.

 

 

Schauble, P. G. The acceleration of client progress in
counseling and psychotherapy through interpersonal
process recall. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Michigan State University, 1970.

Schlossberg, N. K. Sub-professionals: To be or not to
be. Counselor Education and Supervision, 1966,
p, 108-113.

Schmidt, L. D. Comment on "differential functioning of
lay and professional helpers." Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 1968, pp, 127-129.

 

Spivack, J. D. The use of developmental tasks for training
counselors using interpersonal process recall.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State
University, 1970.

Truax, C. B., & Carkhuff, R. R. Toward effective counsel-
ing and psychotherapy: Training and practice.
Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company, 1967.

Truax, C. B., & Lister, J. L. Effectiveness of counselors
and counselor aides. Journal of Counseling
PgYChOlOgXI 1970’ ll, 331-3340

 

Truax, C. B., Carkhuff, R. R., & Douds, J. Toward an
integration of the didactic and experiential
approaches to training in counseling and psycho-
therapy. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1964,
‘pp, 240-247.

157

Woody, R. H., Krathwohl, D. R., Kagan, N., & Farquhar,
W. W. Stimulated recall in psychotherapy using
hypnosis and video tape. The American Journal of
Clinical Hypnosis, 1965, 1, 234-241.

 

Zunker, V. G., & Brown, W. F. Comparative effectiveness
of student and professional counselors. Personnel

 

and Guidance Journal, 1966, pp, 738-743.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

THE EMPATHIC UNDERSTANDING IN INTERPERSONAL

PROCESSES SCALE AND RATING FORM

APPENDIX A
THE EMPATHIC UNDERSTANDING IN INTERPERSONAL

PROCESSES SCALE AND RATING FORM

Empathic Understanding in Interpersonal
Processes, II

 

 

A Scale for Measurement1
Robert R. Carkhuff
Level 1

The verbal and behavioral expressions of the first person
either do not attend to or detract significantly from the
verbal and behavioral expressions of the second person(s)
in that they communicate significantly less of the second
person's feelings than the second person has communicated
himself.

 

 

Examples: The first person communicates no awareness of
even the most obvious, may be bored or dis-
interested or simply operating from a precon-
ceived frame of reference which totally excludes
that of the other person(s).

 

 

1The present scale "Empathic understanding in inter-
personal processes" has been derived in part from "A Scale
for the measurement of accurate empathy" by C. B. Truax
which has been validated in extensive process and outcome
research on counseling and psychotherapy (summarized in
Truax & Carkhuff, 1967) and in part from an earlier version
which has been validated in extensive process and outcome
research on counseling and psychotherapy (summarized in
Carkhuff & Berenson, 1967). In addition, similar measures
of similar constructs have received extensive support in
the literature of counseling and therapy and education.
The present scale was written to apply to all interpersonal

158

159

In summary, the first person does everything but express
that he is listening, understanding or being sensitive to
even the feelings of the other person in such a way as to
detract significantly from the communications of the second
person.

Level 2

While the first person responds to the expressed feelings

.of the second person(s), he does so in such a way that he

subtracts noticeable affect from the communications of the
second person.

 

Examples: The first person may communicate some awareness
of obvious surface feelings of the second person
but his communications drain off a level of the
affect and distort the level of meaning. The
first person may communicate his own ideas of
what may be going on but these are not con-
gruent with the expressions of the second
person.

In summary, the first person tends to respond to other than
what the second person is expressing or indicating.

Level 3

The expressions of the first person in response to the
expressed feelings of the second person(s) are essentially
interchangeable with those of the second person in that
they express essentially the same affect and meaning.

 

Example: The first person responds with accurate under-
standing of the surface feelings of the second
person but may not respond to or may misinterpret
the deeper feelings.

 

processes and represent a systematic attempt to reduce the
ambiguity and increase the reliability of the scale. In
the process many important delineations and additions have
been made, including in particular the change to a syste-
matic focus upon the additive, subtractive or interchange-
able aspects of the levels of communication of understand-
ing. For comparative purposes: Level 1 of the present
scale is approximately equal to Stage 1 of the Truax scale.
The remaining levels are approximately correspondent:
Level 2 and Stages 2 and 3 of the earlier version; Level 3
and Stages 4 and 5; Level 4 and Stages 6 and 7; Level 5
and Stages 8 and 9. The levels of the present scale are
approximately equal to the levels of the earlier version
of this scale.

160

The summary, the first person is responding so as to neither
subtract from nor add to the expressions of the second per-
son; but he does not respond accurately to how that person
really feels beneath the surface feelings. Level 3 consti-
tutes the minimal level of facilitative interpersonal
functioning.

Level 4

The responses of the first person add noticeably_to the
expressions of the second person(s) in such a way as to
express feelings a level deeper than the second person was
able to express himself.

 

Example: The facilitator communicates his understanding
of the expressions of the second person at a
level deeper than they were expressed, and thus
enables the second person to experience and/or
express feelings which he was unable to express
previously.

In summary, the facilitator's responses add deeper feeling
and meaning to the eXpressions of the second person.

Level 5

The first person's responses add significantly to the feel-
ing and meaning of the expressions of the second person(s)
in such a way as to (l) accurately express feelings levels
below that the person himself was able to express or (2) in
the event of ongoing deep self-exploration on the second
person's part to be fully with him in his deepest moments.

Examples: The facilitator responds with accuracy to all of
the person's deeper as well as surface feelings.
He is "together" with the second person or
"tuned in" on his wavelength. The facilitator
and the other person might proceed together to
eXplore previously unexplored areas of human
existence.

In summary, the facilitator is responding with a full
awareness of who the other person is and a comprehensive
and accurate empathic understanding of his most deep feel-
ings.

RATER NO.

 

161

SUBJECT NO.

 

Empathic Understanding

1

2

3

4

5

 

Section 1

 

Section 2

 

 

 

 

 

Section 3

 

 

APPENDIX B

THE IPR COUNSELOR VERBAL RESPONSE SCALE

AND RATING FORM

IPR COUNSELOR VERBAL RESPONSE SCALE

The scale was develOped as a part of a
project supported by a grant from the U.S.
Department of Health, Education and Welfare,
Office of Education, "Exploration of the
Potential Value of Interpersonal Process
Recall Technique (IPR) for the Study of
Selected Educational Problems" (Project Nos.
7-32-0410-216 and 7-32-0410-270).

162

163

IPR COUNSELOR VERBAL RESPONSE SCALE

The Counselor Verbal Response Scale is an attempt
to describe a counselor's response to client communication
in terms of four dichotomized dimensions: (a) affect-
cognitive; (b) understanding-nonunderstanding; (c) specific-
nonspecific; (d) exploratory-nonexploratory. These dimen-
sions have been selected because they seem to represent
aspects of counselor behavior which seem to make theo-
retical sense and contribute to client progress.

The unit for analysis is the verbal interaction
between counselor and client represented by a client state-
ment and counselor response. A counselor response is rated
on each of the four dimensions of the rating scale, with
every client-counselor interaction being judged inde-
pendently of preceding units. In judging an individual
response the primary focus is on describing how the counse-
lor responded to the verbal and nonverbal elements of the

client's communication.

Description of Rating Dimensions

 

I. Affect-cognitive dimension
The affective-COgnitive dimension indicates whether

a counselor's response refers to any affective component of

164

a client's communication or concerns itself primarily with
the cognitive component of that communication.

A. Affective Responses--Affective responses

 

generally make reference to emotions, feelings, fears, etc.
The judge's rating is solely by the content and/or intent
of the counselor's response, regardless of whether it be
reflection, clarification, interpretation. These responses
attempt to maintain the focus on the affective component
of a client's communication. Thus they may:
(a) Refer directly to an explicit or implicit reference
to affect (either verbal or nonverbal) on the part of
the client. .
Example: "It sounds like you were really angry at
him."
(b) Encourage an expression of affect on the part of the
client.
Example: "How does it make you feel when your
parents argue?"
(c) Approve of an expression of affect on the part of the
client.
Example: "It doesn't hurt to let your feelings out
once in a while, does it?"
(d) Presents a model for the use of affect by the client.
Example: "If somebody treated me like that I'd really
be mad."
Special care must be taken in rating responses which use
the word "feel." For example, in the statement "Do you
feel that your student teaching experience is helping you
get the idea of teaching?", the phrase "Do you feel that"
really means "do you think that." Similarly the expression

"How are you feeling?" is often used in a matter-of-fact,

conversation manner. Thus, although the verb "to feel"

165

is used in both these examples, these statements do not

represent responses which would be judged affective."

B. Cognitive Responses--Cognitive responses deal

 

primarily with the cognitive element of a client's com-
munication. Frequently such responses seek information of
a factual nature. They generally maintain the interaction
on the cognitive level. Such responses may:
(a) Refer directly to the cognitive component of the
client's statement.
Example: "So then you're thinking about switching
your major to chemistry?"
(b) Seeks further information of a factual nature from
the client.
Example: "What were your grades last term?"
(c) Encourage the client to continue to respond at the
cognitive level.
Example: "How did you get interested in art?"
II. Understanding-nonunderstanding dimension
The understanding-nonunderstanding dimension indi-

cates whether a counselor's response communicates to the

client that the counselor understands or is seeking to

 

 

understand the client's basic communication, thereby

 

encouraging the client to continue to gain insight into
the nature of his concerns.

A. Understanding responses--Understanding re-
sponses communicate to the client that the counselor under-
stands the client's communication--the counselor makes
apprOpriate reference to what the client is expressing or

trying to express both verbally and nonverbally—-or the

166

counselor is clearly seeking enough information of either
a cognitive or affective nature to gain such understand-
ing. Such responses:

(a) Directly communicate an understanding of the client's
communication.
Example: "In other words, you really want to be
treated like a man."

(b) Seek further information from the client in such a
way as to facilitate both the counselor's and the
client's understanding of the basic problems.
Example: "What does being a man mean to you?"

(c) Reinforce or give approval of client communications
which exhibit understanding.
Example: CL: "I guess then when people criticize
me, I'm afraid they'll leave me."

CO: "I see you're beginning to make some
connection between your behavior and
your feelings."

B. Nonunderstanding responses--Nonunderstanding
responses are those in which the counselor fails to under-

stand the client's basic communication or makes no attempt

to obtain appropriate information from the client. In

 

essence, nonunderstanding implies misunderstanding. Such
responses:

(a) Communicate misunderstanding of the client's basic

concern.
Example: CL: "When he said that, I just turned red
and clenched my fists."
CO: "Some peOple don't say nice things."

(b) Seek information which may be irrelevant to the
client's communication.

Example: CL: "I seem to have a hard time getting
along with my brothers."
CO: "Do all your brothers live at home

with you?"

167

(c) Squelch client understanding or move the focus to
another irrelevant area.
Example: CL: "I guess I'm really afraid that other
peOple will laugh at me."
CO: "We're the butt of other peOple's jokes
sometimes."
Example: CL: "Sometimes I really hate my aunt."
CO: "Will things be better when you go to
college?"
III. Specific-nonspecific dimension
The Specific—nonspecific dimension indicates
whether the counselor's response delineates the client's
problems and is central to the client's communication or
whether the response does not specify the client's con—
cern. In essence, it describes whether the counselor deals
with the client's communication in a general, vague, or
peripheral manner, or "zeros in" on the core of the client's
communication. NB: A response judged to be nonunderstand-
ing must also be nonspecific since it would, by definition,
misunderstand the client's communication and not help the
client to delineate his concerns. Responses judged under-
standing might be either specific (core) or nonSpecific
(peripheral) i.e., they would be peripheral if the counse-
lor conveys only a vague idea that a problem exists or
"flirts" with the idea rather than helping the client

delineate some of the dimensions of his concerns.

A. Specific responses--Specific responses focus

 

on the core concerns being presented either explicitly or
implicitly, verbally or nonverbally, by the client. Such

responses:

(a)

(b)

(c)

168

Delineate more closely the client's basic concerns.
Example: "This vague feeling you have when you get
in tense situations-—is it anger or fear?"

Encourage the client to discriminate among stimuli

affecting him.

Example: "Do you feel in all your classes or
only in some classrooms?"

Reward the client for being specific.

Example: CL: "I guess I feel this way most often
with someone who reminds me of my
father."

CO: "So as you put what others say in
perspective, the whole world doesn't
seem so bad, it's only when someone
you value, like Father, doesn't pay
any attention that you feel hurt."

B. Nonspecific responses--Nonspecific responses

 

indicate that the counselor is not focusing on the basic

concerns of the client or is not yet able to help the

client differentiate among various stimuli. Such responses

either miss the problem area completely (such responses are

also nonunderstanding) or occur when the counselor is seek-

ing to understand the client's communication and has been

presented with only vague bits of information about the

client's concerns. Thus such responses:

(a)

(b)

Fail to delineate the client's concern and cannot

bring them into sharper focus.

Example: "It seems your problem isn't very clear--
can you tell me more about it?"

Completely miss the basic concerns being presented by
the client even though the counselor may ask for
specific details.
Example: CL: "I've gotten all A's this year and I
still feel lousy."
CO: "What were your grades before then?"

169

(c) Discourage the client from bringing his concerns into
sharper focus.
Example: "You and your sister argue all the time.
What do other peOple think of your sister?"
IV. Exploratory—Nonexploratory dimension
The eXploratory-nonexploratory dimension indicates
whether a counselor's response permits or encourages the
client to eXplore his cognitive or affective concerns, or
whether the response limits a client's exploration of these

concerns .

A. Exploratorygresponses--Exploratory responses

 

encourage and permit the client latitude and involvement in
his response. They may focus on relevant aspects of the
client's affective or cognitive concerns but clearly attempt
to encourage further exploration by the client. Such re—
sponses are often open-ended and/or are delivered in a
manner permitting the client freedom and flexibility in
response. These responses:

(a) Encourage the client to explore his own concerns.
Example: Cognitive--"You're not sure what you want
to major in, is that it?"
Affective-~"Maybe some of these times you're
getting mad at yourself, what do
you think?"

(b) Assist the client to explore by providing him with
possible alternatives designed to increase his range
of responses.

Example: Cognitive--"What are some of the other
alternatives that you have to
history as a major?"

Affective-—"In these situations do you feel
angry, mad, helpless, or what?"

170

(c) Reward the client for exploratory behavior.
Example: Cognitive--"It seems that you've considered
a number of alternatives for a
major, that's good."
Affective--"So you're beginning to wonder if
you always want to be treated
like a man."

B. Nonexploratory responses——NoneXploratory re—

 

sponses either indicate no understanding of the client's
basic communication, or so structure and limit the client's
responses that they inhibit the exploratory process. These
responses give the client little opportunity to explore,
eXpand, or express himself freely. Such responses:

Discourage further exploration on the part of the

client.

Example: Cognitive-—"You want to change your major

to history."

Affective--"You really resent your parents
treating you like a child."

171

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

when
Imuonxm
Icoz

 

anon
IMHonxm

 

onuflommm

 

mcflocmum
lumps:
Icoz

 

mcflbcmum
lumps:

m>Huflcmou

 

 

m>fluomuu¢

 

mmmcommwm

 

 

"mama

 

"pomnnsm

 

Mdflom UZHBfim mmzommmm Aflmmm> MOAWmZDOU mmH

“wmpsn

APPENDIX C

HELPEE SELF-EXPLORATION IN INTERPERSONAL

PROCESSES SCALE

APPENDIX C

HELPEE SELF-EXPLORATION IN INTERPERSONAL

PROCESSES SCALE

Helpee Self-Exploration in Interpersonal
Processes, II

A Scale for Measurement1
Level 1

The second person does not discuss personally relevant
material, either because he has had no opportunity to do
such or because he is actively evading the discussion even
when it is introduced by the first person.

Example: The second person avoids any self-descriptions
or self-exploration or direct expression of feel-
ings that would lead him to reveal himself to the
first person.

In summary, for a variety of possible reasons, the second
person does not give any evidence of self—exploration.

 

1The present scale "Self-exploration in inter-
personal processes" has been derived in part from "The
measurement of depth of intrapersonal exploration" (Truax,
1963) which has been validated in extensive process and
outcome research on counseling and psychotherapy (Carkhuff
& Truax, 1965, 1965a, 1965b; Rogers, 1962; Truax, 1963;
Truax & Carkhuff, 1963, 1964, 1965). In addition, similar
measures of similar constructs have received extensive sup-
port in the literature of counseling and therapy (Blau,
1953; Braaten, 1958; Peres, 1947; Seeman, 1949; Steele,
1948; Wolfson, 1949).

The present scale represents a systematic attempt
to reduce the ambiguity and increase the reliability of the
scale. In the process many important delineations and

172

173

Level 2

The second person responds with discussion to the intro-
duction of personally relevant material by the first per-
son but does so in a mechanical manner and without the
demonstration of emotional feeling.

Example: The second person simply discusses the material
without exploring the significance or meaning of
the material or attempting further exploration of
that feeling in our effort to uncover related
feelings or material.

In summary, the second person responds mechanically and
remotely to the introduction of personally relevant material
by the first person.

Level 3

The second person voluntarily introduces discussions of
personally relevant material but does so in a mechanical
manner and without the demonstration of emotional feeling.

Example: The emotional remoteness and mechanical manner
of the discussion give the discussion a quality
of being rehearsed.

In summary, the second person introduces personally rele-

vant material but does so without spontaneity or emotional
proximity and without an inward probing to newly discover

feelings and experiences.

Level 4

The second person voluntarily introduces discussions of
personally relevant material with both spontaneity and
emotional proximity.

Example: The voice quality and other characteristics of
the second person are very much "with" the feel-
ings and other personal materials which are being
verbalized.

 

additions have been made. For comparative purposes, Level
1 of the present scale is approximately equal to Stage 1
of the earlier scale. The remaining levels are approxi-
mately correspondent: Level 2 and Stages 2 and 3; Level 3
and Stages 4 and 5; Level 4 and Stage 6; Level 5 and
Stages 7, 8, and 9.

174

In summary, the second person introduces personally rele-
vant discussions with spontaneity and emotional proximity
but without a distinct tendency toward inward probing to

newly discover feelings and experiences.

Level 5

The second person actively and spontaneously engages in an
inward probing to newly discover feelings and experiences
about himself and his world.

Example: The second person is searching to discover new
feelings concerning himself and his world even
though at the moment he may be doing so, perhaps,
fearfully and tentatively.

In summary, the second person is fully and actively focusing
upon himself and exploring himself and his world.

APPENDIX D

ROLE AND FUNCTION OF THE INQUIRER

APPENDIX D

ROLE AND FUNCTION OF THE INQUIRER

Ideally, the recaller should remain as neutral as
possible, and avoids forming a new relationship with the
person being interrogated. His function is to help the
person discover for himself some of his feelings and
thoughts which interfered with effective communication.
Often the recaller will gain insight before the person
being interrogated but the recaller should lead the person
to discover for himself what was happening. In effect, the
recaller should avoid telling the person what was happening.
He should avoid making judgments and interpreting for the
other person. He should gently probe and push for more
material with a direct line of questioning with only
occasional use of reflective statements. It takes time
for the person to gain insight so the recaller should be
wary of a need to get the job done quickly.

The recaller should focus on the feelings of the
person being interrogated--i.e., the feelings the person
was having about himself and the other person during the
videotaped interaction.

A suggested line of questioning might be the
following:

 

1. What do you think he was trying to say?

2. What do you think he was feeling at this point?

3. Can you pick up any clues from his nonverbal
behavior?

4. What was running through your mind when he
said that?

5. Can you recall some of the feelings you were
having then?

6. Was there anything that prevented you from
sharing some of your feelings and concerns
about the person?

7. If you had another chance would you like to
have said something different?

8. What kind of a risk would there have been if
you said what you really wanted to say?

175

176

9. What kind of a person do you want him to see
you as?
10. What do you think his perceptions are of you?

The recaller should encourage the person being
interrogated to stop the machine as often as he wants. He
should also reinforce the person as much as possible--i.e.,
just before starting the machine again, say, "you're doing
good--stop the machine whenever you recall some of the
feelings you were having."

Suggested Rotation for the 3 Roles

Speaker Helper Recaller

Trainee

O‘U‘IDWNI-J
i—‘ChUW-bOJN
UJNI—‘ChU'lb

Each videotaped interaction, recall session, and
group discussion will take approximately 30 min. In a
3-hour period everyone will have one turn at each of the
3 roles.

APPENDIX E

TRAINER'S MANUAL--ITM-I

TRAINING PROCEDURES

APPENDIX E

TRAINER'S MANUAL--ITM-I
TRAINING PROCEDURES
Kathy Scharf
Tom Spierling
Bob Dendy
Trainer's Manual--Facilitative
Conditions and IPR

Day l--Monday, September 14, 1970
Time: l-2:30 P.M.

I. Discrimination of Client (Speaker)
Self-Exploration in Interpersonal Processes—~11 (Ex)

Purpose: Introduce basic concepts of the Ex scale and
discrimination of the five levels of Ex.

A. Trainees will work in groups of six with a trainer

B. Trainees practice discriminating client (speaker)
self—exploration by rating speaker statements from
an audio-taped protocol (Part I). Rate each
client (speaker) statement at one of the five
levels of speaker self-exploration.

Refer to: "Client Self-Exploration in Interpersonal
Processes--II"--Carkhuff (Appendix I of this
manual)

Time: 3-5:00 P.M.

II. Discrimination of Counselor (Listener)
Empathetic Understanding in Interpersonal Processes—-II

(E)

177

178

Purpose: Introduce basic concepts of the E scale and
discrimination of the five levels of E.

A. Trainees will work in groups of six with a
trainer.

B. Trainees rate audiotaped responses to client state-
ments (Part II of the audiotaped protocol). Dis-
cuss each rating focusing on the elements of the
response that make it a level 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5
response. (The audiotaped protocol includes a
client statement with four (4) counselor responses
to that statement).

Refer to: "Empathic Understanding in Interpersonal
Processes--II"—-Carkhuff (Appendix II in
this manual)

Day 2-—Tuesday, September 15, 1970

Time: 9-10 A.M.

III.

Empathy training

Purpose: Teach trainees to formulate their own
responses in terms of speaker feeling and
content of speaker statement.

A. Trainees will work in groups of six with a
trainer.

B. Trainees practice responding to audiotaped client
statements with empathic understanding. Avoid
asking questions such as, "Well, how does that
make you feel?" or "You're pretty upset, aren't
you?"

As a minimum, try to repeat or reflect what the
other person said using positive statements.

1. First statement on audiotaped protocol
(Part III): Write a response. Try to make
the response a positive, reflective statement
rather than a question. Trainer will give an
average group rating rather than individual
ratings. Group discusses the responses.

 

If necessary, rewrite responses in an effort
to move closer to level 3, 4, and 5. (Play
back speaker if necessary.)

179

2. Second and Third Statements:
Write response--same procedure as #1

3. Fourth statement: Respond verbally without
writing first.

Time: 10:30-Noon
V. Mini-Practicum--Part I

Purpose: To model exercises which will be included in
the practicum.

A. Model training exercise

1. Two trainee volunteers needed--one the speaker,
one the listener.

2. Trainees interact and videotape the inter-
action (ten minutes). Instructions to the
trainee-listener (counselor)--"Relate to the
person you will be seeing as you would ordi-
narily do in order to be helpful to him."
Instructions to the trainee-speaker (client)--
"All of us either in the present or during the
past year have had a number of experiences
which have been very difficult for us. If you
feel the person whom you will be seeing is
helpful, please feel free to discuss these
experiences."

 

 

B. Inquirer training--trainer models the inquirer
role--interrogate the listener (20 minutes).

 

Role of the Recaller—Inquirer

 

The recaller should be as neutral as possible.
He is to help the person discover for himself some of
the feelings and thoughts which may have interfered
with effective communication. The recaller should
avoid forming a new relationship with the person being
interrogated and instead focus upon the videotaped
interaction. Often the recaller will gain insight
before the person being interrogated but the recaller
should lead the person to discover for himself what
was happening. That is, the recaller should avoid
making judgments and interpreting to the other person.
He should avoid telling the other person what (in his
perception) was happening. He, instead, should gently
probe and push for more material with a direct line of
questioning with only an occasional use of reflective
statements. The recaller should let the person being
interrogated take the time he needs to gain insight.

 

180

The recaller should focus on the feelings of the
person being interrogated--i.e., the feelings the per—
son was having about himself and the other person dur-
ing the videotaped interaction.

 

A suggested line of questioning might be the
following:

A. What do you think he was trying to say?

B. What do you think he was feeling at this
point?

C. Can you pick up any clues from his non-
verbal behavior?

D. What was running through your mind when he
said that?

E. Can you recall the feelings you were having
then?

F. Was there anything that prevented you from
sharing some of your feelings and concerns
about the person?

G. If you had another chance would you like to
have said something different?

H. What kind of a risk would there have been if
you said what you really wanted to say?

I. What kind of a person do you want him to
see you as?

J. What do you think his perceptions are of you?

The recaller should encourage the person being
interrogated to stop the machine as often as he wants.
He should also reinforce the person as much as possi-
ble--i.e., just before starting the machine again, say,
"You're doing good—-stop the machine whenever you
recall some of the feelings you were having."

Time: l-3 P.M.

V.

Mini-Practicum——Part II

Purpose: To provide trainees with experience as a
helper and with feedback about their own
facilitative behaviors.

A. Trainees divide into groups of three (l-the
listener, l-the speaker, 1-the inquirer).

B. Interaction exercise

1. First speaker and listener interact for 10
minutes. (Instructions to speaker and listener
the same as outlined previously). Videotape
the interaction. Rest of the group observe.

C.

Time:

V.

3.

181

Trainee-inquirer conduct the recall session
with the listener (20-30 minutes). (Trainer
supervise that the role of the interrogator
stays neutral.) Review inquirer role if neces-
sary.

 

Trainer and trainees discuss complete session
with the Speaker, listener, and interrogator.

Repeat B#l-3 for second group of three trainees.

3:30-5:00 P.M.

Mini-Practicum (cont.)

A.

C.

Trainees divide into new groups of three (new roles
and new pairs, i.e., speakers choose either listener
or interrogator role; listeners choose either
interrogator or speaker role, etc.)

Interaction exercise

1.

2.

3.

Speaker and listener interact for 10 minutes.
Videotape the interaction.

Trainee interrogator conduct recall session
of the speaker. Rest of group observes.

Trainer and trainees discuss the complete
session with the speaker, listener and
interrogator.

If time allows, repeat for pair 2.

Day 3--Wednesday, September 17, 1970

Same schedule as Tuesday.

Day 4--Thursday, September 18, 1970

Time:

V.

Purpose:

A.

9-10:30 ll-Noon

Mini-Practicum--Part III

To provide trainees with experience similar
to their future job experience and feedback
about their own facilitative behaviors

Interviews with a coached client

1.

Trainees divide into groups of two (one the
listener, one the inquirer).

182

2. Trainee A conducts a lO-minute interview with
a coached client. Interview is videotaped.
(Instructions to the speaker and listener are
the same as previously outlined.) Group
observes.

3. Trainee B conducts recall session with both
the speaker and the listener simultaneously
(IPR Mutual Recall)--20 minutes.

 

4. Trainer and observer discuss the complete
session with the speaker, listener, and
inquirer.

B. Repeat A#l—4 for trainees 3 and 4.
C. Repeat A #1-4 for trainees 5 and 6.
Time: l-2:3O P.M. 3—4:3O P.M.

Mini—Practicum (cont.)

D. l. Trainees form new pairs (reverse roles, i.e.,
inquirer becomes speaker, speaker is inquirer).

2. Repeat A#2-4 for new trainee pair 1.
3. Repeat A#2-4 for all trainee pairs.
Day 5--Friday, September 18, 1970

Same procedure as Thursday.

APPENDIX F

TRAINER'S MANUAL ITM-II

TRAINING PROCEDURES

APPENDIX F
TRAINER'S MANUAL ITM-II
TRAINING PROCEDURES
Kathy Scharf

Tom Spierling
Robert Dendy

Trainer's Manual--Facilitative Conditions

Day 1--Monday, September 14, 1970
Time: l-2:30 P.M.

I. Discrimination of Client (Speaker) Self-Exploration
in Interpersonal Processes-II (Ex)

Purpose: Introduce basic concepts of the Ex scale and
discrimination of the five levels of Ex.

A. Trainees will work in groups of six with a trainer.

B. Trainees practice discriminating client (speaker)
self-exploration by rating speaker statements from
audio-taped protocol (Part I). Rate each client
(speaker) statement at one of the five levels of
speaker self-exploration.

Refer to: "Client Self—Exploration in Inter-
personal Processes—-II"--Carkhuff
(Appendix I of this manual).
Time: 3-5:OO P.M.

II. Discrimination of Counselor (Listener) Empathic Under-
standing in Interpersonal Processes--II (E)

Purpose: Introduce basic concepts of the E scale and
discrimination of the five levels of E.

183

184

Trainees will work in groups of six with a
trainer.

Trainees rate audiotaped responses to client
statements (Part II of audiotaped protocol).
Discuss each rating focusing on the elements of
the response that make it a level 1, 2, 3, 4, or

5 response. (The audiotaped protocol includes a
client statement with four (4) counselor responses
to that statement.)

Refer to: "Empathic Understanding in Interpersonal
Processes--II"-—Carkhuff (Appendix II
in this manual)

Day 2, Tuesday, September 15, 1970

Time:

III .

9-10:00 A.M.

Empathy training

Purpose: Teach trainees to formulate their own

responses in terms of speaker feeling and
content of speaker statement.

Trainees will work in groups of six with a trainer.

Trainees practice responding to audiotaped client
statements with empathic understanding. Avoid
asking questions such as "Well, how does that make
you feel?" or "You're pretty upset, aren't you?"
As a minimum, try to repeat or reflect what the
other person said using positive statements.

1. First statement: Write a response. Try to
make the response a pgstive, reflective state-
ment rather than a questIEn. Trainee will give
an average group rating rather than individual
ratings. Group discusses the responses.

 

If necessary, rewrite responses in an effort
to move closer to level 3, 4, and 5. (Play
back speaker if necessary.)

2. Second and Third Statement: Write response--
same procedures #1.

3. Fourth + statements: Respond verbally without
writing first.

Time:

IV.

185

10:30-Noon

Introduction to Mini—Practicum

Purpose:

A.

B.

Time:

V.

Model training exercises which will be in-
cluded in the practicum.

Two trainee volunteers are needed--one the speaker
and the other the listener.

1.

Trainees interact and audiotape the lO-minute
interaction. (Counselor)—-"Re1ate to the
person you will be seeing as you would ordi-
narily do in order to be helpful to him."

 

Instructions to the trainee—speaker (client)--
"All of us either in the present or during the
past year have had a number of experiences which
have been very difficult for us. If you feel
the person whom you will be seeing is helpful,
please feel free to discuss these experiences."

Model feedback session

1. Trainee group (observers, speaker listener)
rate audiotaped interaction. Listen to three
three-minute interactions and rate each segment.
Use E scale to rate speaker behavior.
2. Trainer and trainees discuss ratings with the
speaker and listener.
l-3:00 P.M.

Mini-Practicum (cont.)

Purpose:

To provide trainees with experience in
facilitative conditions. To provide trainees
with feedback about their own facilitative
behaviors.

Trainees divide into groups of two (l-the speaker,
l-the listener)

Pair l--Interaction

1.

First speaker-listener pair interact for 10
minutes. (Instructions to the speaker and the
listener are the same as Tuesday A.M.) Audio-
record the interaction. The rest of the group
observe.

3.

186

Trainee group (speaker, listener, and ob-
servers) rate the audiotaped interactions
(three three-minute segments using the E
scale for the listener and the Ex scale for
the speaker).

Trainer and trainees discuss ratings with the
speaker and listener.

C. Repeat B#l-3 for pair 2.

D. Repeat B#l-3 for pair 3.

Time: 3:30-5:00 P.M.

V. Mini-Practicum (con't.)

Purpose:

To provide trainees with experience in
facilitative conditions and to provide
trainees with feedback about their own
facilitative behaviors.

A. Trainees divide into new groups of two (new roles
and new pairs, i.e., speakers take listeners'
role; listeners take speakers' role; new pairing
of speaker and listener).

B. Pair 1

1.

2.

3.

Speaker and listener interact for 10 minutes.
Audiorecord the interaction.

Group rates the interaction (three three—
minute segments) using the E scale for the
listener and the Ex scale for the speaker.

Group discusses the ratings with the speaker
and listener.

Day 3, Wednesday, September 16, 1970

V. Mini-Practicum

Same schedule as Tuesday

Day 4, Thursday, September 17, 1970

Time: 9-10:30, 11:00-Noon

V. Mini-Practicum--Part III

 

 

 

Purpose:

B.

C.

Time:

V.

Day

187

To provide trainees with experiences somewhat
similar to their future job experience. To
provide feedback about trainee facilitative
behaviors.

Interviews with a coached client.

1.

3.

Trainee 1 conducts a lS—minute interview with
a coached client. Interview is audiotaped.
(Instructions to speaker and listener the same
as outlined on Tuesday.) Trainee Group ob-
serves.

Observers, listener, speaker rate five three-
minute segments of the interview using the E
scale for the listener and the Ex scale for
the speaker.

Trainer and trainees discuss the ratings with
the speaker and the listener.

Repeat A#1-3 for trainee 2.

Repeat A#l-3 for trainee 3.

1-2:30 3-4:30 P.M.

Mini-Practicum (con't.)

D.

E.

F.

Repeat A#l-3 for trainee 4.

Repeat A#l—3 for trainee 5.

Repeat A#l-3 for trainee 6.

5, Friday, September 18, 1970

Mini—Practicum

Same schedule as Thursday.

APPENDIX G

MEMO TO PROFESSIONAL COUNSELORS

APPENDIX G

MEMO TO PROFESSIONAL COUNSELORS

November 30, 1970

TO: All Senior Staff and Interns
FROM: Kathy Scharf and Bob Dendy

RE: Dissertation.Desiderata and Data

We need volunteers to:

a. Conduct 2 half-hour interviews with a student provided
by us. One interview will take place during the week
of Dec. 7-11 (finals week) and the other during the
week of Jan. 4-8.

b. Take the Kagan Affective Sensitivity Scale during the
same weeks. The scale takes approximately 1 hour.

Please return this form to either of our mail boxes by
Friday, December 4th if you would like to help us out.

1. Available for interview

M T W TH F
Time 1
Time 2
Time 3

2. Available for test

M T W TH F
Time 1
Time 2
Time 3
Name

 

188

APPENDIX H

RELIABILITY RAW DATA

 

nmm.a mmm.mv momma mmouom
umumu mom M

Nam.a vvm.mm HHH.N mmm.mm mmm.H nam.mm
cmmz pcmuw

189

 

 

 

 

 

mvv.a ooo.om mm.a oo.mH mm.H oo.aa hw.a oo.vm ma
mmm.H ooo.Hm om.m oo.mm 5H.H oo.om mm.H oo.ov Ha
omm.a www.mm na.m oo.mm om.H oo.om oo.m oo.mv 0H
nmm.m www.5v nm.m oo.mm hm.a oo.~m nm.m oo.mm m
noa.m ooo.mm oo.m oo.mm oo.m oo.om om.N oo.om m
hvv.m ooo.om 5H.m oo.mm oo.m oo.Hm SH.N oo.om n
mmo.m mmm.mm mm.m oo.mm mm.a oo.mm oo.m oo.mm m
mmm.H www.ma om.a oo.HH oo.H oo.m om.H oo.Nm m
noo.a oo.mm mm.a oo.nH no.a oo.om oo.~ oo.hm v
nmm.a mmm.mm om.H oo.mm hm.a oo.vm om.H oo.om m
mmm.mm mm.me om.m oo.vv oo.N oo.mm hH.N oo.am m
nmm.a mmm.mm mm.m oo.Hm mm.H oo.mm mm.H oo.mv H
Dm mm>U Dm mm>U Dm mm>U Dm mm>U
Hmnfisz
mama new m m umumm N Hmumm H umumm mama

 

mumo 3mm wuHHAQMHHmm

H.m OHQMB

APPENDIX I

THE AFFECTIVE SENSITIVITY SCALE

APPENDIX I

THE AFFECTIVE SENSITIVITY SCALE

Instructions

You will be viewing short scenes of actual counseling
sessions. You are to identify what feelings the clients
have toward themselves and toward the counselors they are
working with.

Although in any one scene a client may exhibit a variety
of feelings, for the purpose of this instrument you are
to concentrate on identifying his last feelings in the
scene.

 

On the following pages are multiple choice items consist—
ing of three responses each. Most scenes have two items,
but a few have one or three items. After you view each
scene, you are to read the items and ask yourself the
following question:

If the client were to View this same scene, and if he

were completely epen and honest with himself (i.e.,

if he could Identify his real feelings) which of these
three responses would he use to describe his feelings?

 

After you decide which response accurately describes what
the client is actually feeling either about himself or the
counselor he is with, indicate your choice on the answer
sheet.

Here is a sample item:

CLIENT I
Scene 1

Item 1

1. This eXploring of my feelings is good. It makes
me feel good.

190

191

2. I feel very sad and unhappy.
3. I'm groping and confused; I can't bring it all
together.

After you had viewed Scene 1 for CLIENT I, you would read
these three statements (Item 1) and would then decide which
one best states what the client would say about his own
feelings after viewing the same scene. For example, if you
decide number two best states what the client is feeling,
you would then find the number 1 on your answer sheet and
darken in the space for number two.

1. l ==== 2 -— 3 ===== 4 :==: 5 ===:-_

We will only make use of the first three answer spaces
following each item on your answer sheet.

Remember you are to concentrate on the latter part of each
scene in determining the most accurate description of the
client's feelings.

 

After you view the apprOpriate scenes, you will have 39
seconds to answer each of the first twelve items. For
each of the remaining items, you will be allowed 29 seconds.

CAUTION: The item numbers on your answer sheet go across
the page, not down the page as you would usually
expect!

AFFECTIVE SENSITIVITY SCALE REVISED FORM B

CLIENT I
Scene 1

Item 1

l. I feel sorry for my husband and the relationship
we have.

2. I don't really understand what I feel. Yet, I do
feel guilty about creating pain in others which
returns to me.

3. I feel pleased at seeing a possible relationship
between my feelings of anger and pain.

Item 2

1. He (counselor) doesn't have to like me. I just
want him to agree with me and tell me I'm right.

2. I'm trying to please you. Do you like me?

3. He's really understanding me now.

192

CLIENT I
Scene 2

Item 3

1. I feel calm and collected. I just want to think
for a while.

2. Yes, that is when I get angry. I see it all
clearly now.

3. I feel anxious and stimulated.

Item 4

1. I'll pretend I'm agreeing with him (counselor),
but I don't see the connection at all.

2. I like what he's doing. I don't feel as un-
comfortable now.

3. I wish he would stop pushing me in this direction.

CLIENT II
Scene 1

Item 5

1. I'm leased, happy; I feel good all over!

2. It was brought right back, that amazes me, but it
hits quite bad too. It hurts!

3. I'm not bothered by this. I can handle it. I'm
confident.

Item 6

1. He's (counselor) caught me; careful, I'm not sure
I want that.

2. I like him. He's trying to make the situation a
little lighter and made me feel better about it.

3. I don't feel he understands. He's sarcastic. I
don't like that.

CLIENT II
Scene 2

Item 7

l. I feel a little uneasy and self-conscious, but
not much.

2. This scares me. I feel frightened!

3. I feel flirtatious. I like this!

Item 8

l. I feel a little bit embarrassed, but that's all
right as long as I can keep my composure.

2. I have a feeling of sadness.

3. I feel flustered and embarrassed.

193

Item 9

l.

2.

He's asking for some touchy material, but that's
all right. It's about time he knew.

He's being very frank and open! I'm not sure I
want that.

3. I want him to leave me alone-—I want out of here.
I don't like this.
CLIENT II
Scene 3
Item 10
1. I'm getting so much attention. I really enjoy
this. It makes me feel good.
2. I'm scared by what I'm feeling. I feel embarrassed
and threatened.
3. I have the feeling that what I wanted was wrong,
and I'm a little ashamed of myself.
Item 11
1. This is good. We're really moving into my feelings.
2. He's too perceptive; he's looking right through me.
3. He's getting a little sticky; I'm not sure I like

that.

CLIENT III

Scene 1
Item 12
l. I feel protective and defensive of what people may

think about my family.

2. All this seems so pointless! I'm puzzled and
bored.

3. We're having a nice conversation. Some of these
things really make me think.

Item 13

1. This guy (counselor) embarrasses me with the
questions he asks.

2. The questions he asks really make me think.
I'm not sure I like that.

3. I can't follow this guy's line of thought.

What's he trying to do?

194

CLIENT IV
Scene 1

Item 14
1. I'm concerned about my physical condition. I'm
worried about it.

2. I want pity. I want her to think "Oh, you poor

boy."

3. I feel good-—nothing's bothering me, but I enjoy
talking.

Item 15

1. She's too young to be counseling, and she's a girl.
I'm not sure I like this.

2. She likes me; I know she does.

3. I'd like her to think I'm great.

CLIENT IV
Scene 2

Item 16

1. I'm a little annoyed with my family's ambitions
for me.

2. That's a hell of a lot to ask! It makes me mad!

3. I feel sorry for myself, and I want others to
feel the same.

Item 17

1. She (counselor) really understands me! She's
with me now.

2. I don't feel much either way towards the counselor;
she's not important to me.

3. I wonder if she appreciates the pressure that's put
on me?

CLIENT IV
Scene 3

Item 18

1. This whole thing just makes me feel sad and
unhappy.

2. It kind of angers me that they don't appreciate me
when I feel I did my best. I wish I could tell
them off.

3. No matter how well I do, I'm always criticized.

It doesn't bother me too much though because I
know that I did my best.

195

Item 19

l. I can tell she understands what I'm saying. She's
really with me.

2. I wish I could get out of here; I don't like her.

3. Understand what I'm saying; I want her to know
how I feel.

CLIENT IV
Scene 4

Item 20

1. I really want to be successful, and somehow I know
that I can be.

2. That makes me feel kind of sad, unhappy. I don't
want to believe that it's true--I want to be good.

3. I don't know what I feel here. It's all very
confusing.

Item 21

l. I feel neutral towards her here. I'm not paying
any attention to her.

2. Please feel sorry for me and try to help me. I
wish she would praise me.

3. I like talking to her. She can be trusted even
to the point of telling her how I really feel
about myself.

CLIENT V
Scene 1

Item 22

l. I feel rejected and empty inside. Am I unloveable?

2. I feel a little lonely. I want my boy friend to
pay a little more attention to me.

3. I really don't feel much here; I'm just kind of
talking to fill up space.

Item 23

1. Please say it isn't fair, Mr. Counselor.

2. He really understands me. I can tell him anything.

3. I'm not sure I care what he says. It's kind of
unimportant to me what he feels about me at this
time.

196

CLIENT V
Scene 2

Item 24

1. I'm afraid of marriage--insecure; it might not
work out, and I'd be lost.

2. I really can give him all the affection he needs,
I feel I'm a worthwhile person to be desired. He
wouldn't dare step out on me.

3. I'm really not too worried; it'd all work out in
the end even if we have to go to a marriage
counselor.

Item 25

l. I don't care if he (counselor) can help me or not.
I'm not sure I want his help.

2. He's so sympathetic. That makes me feel good.

3. Can you help me?

CLIENT V
Scene 3

Item 26

l. I feel I have some need to be liked, but it's not
real strong.

2. I'm not loveable; I don't really like myself.

3. I'm a good person; I'm loveable. Down deep I know
I am.

Item 27

l. I feel dejected, kind of insecure. I want to be
likeable!

2. My main concern is that it's hard for me to take
criticism. I usually think of myself as perfect.

3. I feel a little sad about all this; I do kind of
want people to like me.

Item 28

1. He thinks well of me; I know he does, I can tell.

2. I want the counselor to really like me, but I'm
not sure he does.

3. I like it when he asks questions like that. They
make me really think about deeper things.

197

CLIENT V
Scene 4

Item 29

l. I wouldn't want to be treated like he treats
Mother, but I don't mind him (stepfather) too much.

2. I feel very little emotion about anything at this
point.

3. I hate him (stepfather)!

Item 30

1. Boy, I'm happy that he (counselor) agrees with me.
He sympathizes with me. I feel completely
accepted.

2. I'm embarrassed to tell the counselor how strong
my feelings really are.

3. I'm not sure he'll be able to help me much after
all. I'll just have to work this out by myself.

CLIENT V
Scene 5

Item 31

1. I'm kind of feeling sorry for myself, but I'm not
really too worried.

2. I want to move out of the house as soon as
possible. I feel I would be better off on my own.

3. My own parents don't want me; I feel cut off and
hurt.

Item 32

l. I don't feel he's (counselor) helpful at all, and
if he can't help me and see my side, I'm not going
to like him either.

2. He's got me in a spot, but I feel I can still get
him to see me as a good girl who is persecuted.

3. I wish the counselor were my father. He's
listening; he understands how I feel.

CLIENT VI
Scene 1

Item 33

l. Disapprove! She'd kill me!

2. I feel jovial; this is real interesting.

3. I'm not sure how she would feel but the whole idea
of her finding out excites me.

198

Item 34

1. He (counselor) understands me completely. He
certainly is relaxed and comfortable.

2. I really don't care what he feels about me. I
just want someone to talk to--anyone will do.

3. I was wondering how he would feel about me and
what I'm saying.

CLIENT VI
Scene 2

Item 35

l. I think my brother is O.K. We have fun together.

2. I don't know what I'm saying here. I'm a little
mixed up and confused.

3. I'm saying something that's important to me. I
like Doug.

CLIENT VI
Scene 3

Item 36

1. This is very confusing for me. I'm not sure I
understand what is going on.

2. This is how I really feel, I'm kind of starting
to be myself.

3. I'm just talking to be talking here; this really
doesn't mean much to me.

Item 37

l. I guess he's (counselor) all right, but I'm still
not sure he understands me.

2. Let's get going. I'm impatient! I want to move
to more important matters.

3. I feel comfortable with him. He understands me.

CLIENT VI
Scene 4

Item 38

l. I love my brother, but not romantically. We just
have a good brother-sister relationship.

2. I don't know about feeling this way about Doug;
it feels so good, but it concerns me too.

3. I feel better about my relationship with Doug now.
It helps to get it out in the open. Now I feel
it's all right.

199

CLIENT VI
Scene 5

Item 39

1. I'm not feeling much of anything here. I'm just
kind of talking to be talking.

2. I'm mad at everyone at this point and don't know
which way to turn; I guess I'm mad at myself too.

3. Now I'm talking about things that are real. I'm

not on stage anymore. She is a louse!

Item 40

1. He (counselor) feels she's a bad person too. I
can tell; he agrees with me.

2. Don't you agree with me? I want to know what you
think.

3. He thinks this all sounds petty. He doesn't
understand.

CLIENT VII
Scene 1

Item 41

1. I felt angry with my mother, but this made me feel
guilty. I needed to make an excuse for her.

2. I'm really not angry with mother. It's not her
fault.

3. I'm in a very passive mood. I'm just relaxing
and talking about things that interest me.

Item 42
1. This counselor is all right. I feel I can confide
in him.

2. I feel uncomfortable. I'm not sure what this
counselor wants me to do.

3. I feel he wants me to talk about myself, but I
don't care. I'm going to talk about what I want
to talk about.

CLIENT VII
Scene 2

Item 43

1. I'm very sensitive; I'm very easily hurt.

2. I'm somewhat sensitive and easily hurt, but not
deeply so.

3. I'm not sensitive or easily hurt at all. I just

like to make people think I am.

200

Item 44

1. That makes me mad, I can do it--I know I can, but
things just keep getting in my way.

2. It's really all his fault, if he just wouldn't
have been such a joker.

3. This makes me feel guilty; I need to blame someone
else instead of blaming myself.

Item 45

1. I'm neutral towards the counselor. I don't care
what he feels about me.

2. I'm afraid he doesn't like me and what I'm saying
about myself. I don't want him to be harsh with
me.

3. He's easy to talk to. He understands what I'm
like, and he still likes me. I can confide in
him.

CLIENT VIII
Scene 1

Item 46
1. Say, this is all right. I like this.
2. I'm not feeling anything deeply. I know what

I need!

3. It's embarrasing and difficult. I feel a little
annoyed.

Item 47

l. I feel I can rely on this guy, so I'll let him
talk and I'll just answer his questions.

2. I wonder what you think about this-~please
respond. Give me some help!

3. The counselor is a good guy. I like his questions;
they make it easier for me.

CLIENT VIII
Scene 2

Item 48

1. I feel very unhappy about what I may eventually
have to do.

2. I don't know what I feel; I'm confused about what
I feel.

3. I'm damned uncomfortable; it's so confusing. I
feel kind of 'blah' about it all.

201

Item 49

1. He's (counselor) missing the point. He bugs me.

2. I can't really tell about this guy. I don't know
how I feel about him.

3. He seems like a good guy. He asks nice questions.
I like him.

CLIENT IX
Scene 1

Item 50

1. I'm not sure how I feel about this counselor. I
don't feel one way or the other about him.

2. I like the counselor very much-~he makes me feel
good.

3. He understands me pretty well and is trying to
help. I guess I kind of like him.

CLIENT IX
Scene 2

Item 51

l. Goody, goody peeple don't really know any better,
so I can't be too disgusted with them, but it does
make me angry.

2. I don't really mind people feeling superior to me.
It just makes me a little angry.

3. It tears me up inside when peeple think they're
better than I am. I want people to be the same
as me.

Item 52

1. I'm every bit as good as they are. I really feel
I am. I know I am.

2. I kind of wished they liked me, but I can live
without being a member of their group.

3. Those smart kids make me feel stupid.

Item 53

l. I feel sorry for them; they just don't realize what
they're doing to people like me.

2. I feel I'm not as good as they are, and it really
hurts when people act that way.

3. It makes me a little angry. I'm every bit as good
as they are.

202

CLIENT IX
Scene 3

Item 54

l. I feel a little insignificant, and this makes me
a little unhappy.

2. I'm a nobody. I'm always left out.

3. I'm unhappy with school. That's what is really
bothering me.

Item 55

1. He (counselor) doesn't quite understand, but I
don't care. It doesn't matter.

2. I don't feel one way or the other towards this
counselor, we're just having a nice talk.

3. He (counselor) is really listening to me, and I
feel he understands what I'm feeling.

CLIENT X
Scene 1

Item 56

1. I'm feeling scared, concerned. Is this for me?

2. I just feel uncertain about what to talk about.
If I once get started, I'll be all right.

3. I feel very deeply depressed.

Item 57

1. He (counselor) seems to be listening—-can he
understand how I feel?

2. He's really with me. I can tell he understands
me.

3. He doesn't keep things moving enough. I don't
like that.

CLIENT X
Scene 2

Item 58

1. I'd like to think I could make it, but I'm not
sure. I feel inadequate.

2. I just have an I-don't-care feeling; that's my
real attitude towards all of this.

3. I'm confused here. I really don't have any
definite feelings.

Item 59

l. I want to impress the counselor. I want him to
believe I can do it.

2. He believes me; he thinks I can do it; I can tell.

3. I really don't care what the counselor thinks.
It's not important to me.

203

CLIENT X
Scene 3

Item 60

1. What's the use of looking ahead? I'm scared to
think about it.

2. I can accept my situation. Really, things aren't
so bad. Things may bother me a little, but really
not much.

3. I enjoy just living for today.

Item 61

1. He's (counselor) all right. He really under-
stands me.

2. Nobody can really understand this. I don't think
he will be any different.

3. I don't care what he thinks or feels; he's not
important to me anyway.

CLIENT X
Scene 4

Item 62

l. I feel somewhat unhappy. I don't like to feel
this way.

2. There's something about me; I just don't fit in,
and that makes me feel real inadequate.

3. In some instances, I'm unsure of myself. I'm
afraid I'll do the wrong thing, but I can handle
this just by avoiding these situations.

CLIENT XI
Scene 1

Item 63

1. I'm unhappy about all this, but I'm afraid to
make a change.

2. It's not that I don't like school, it's just
that I want to do the things I like most.

3. I'm not the student type. School bores me, but
it embarrasses me when I say it.

Item 64

l. The counselor is a nice guy. I like him, and
I think he likes me. .

2. I wonder what the counselor thinks of me. He'll
probably think less of me for saying this.

3. I don't care what he thinks of me. It doesn't
really matter to me.

204

CLIENT XI
Scene 2

Item 65

1. I've found some new dimensions. I like to feel
that I can have some excitement, but this kind
of scares me too.

2. This doesn't really mean much. I'm not feeling
much of anything.

3. This makes me feel very guilty; I'm very ashamed.

Item 66

l. I suppose he'll (counselor) tell me that's wrong,
too. I'm not sure he understands me very well.

2. He's O.K.; he's listening to what I have to say.
He really understands me and my feelings.

3. I don't care what he thinks or feels; it's not
important. I don't have any feelings towards
the counselor.

CLIENT XI
Scene 3

Item 67

1. He's really with me; he understands just how
I'm feeling.

2. I'm not concerned about what he feels or thinks
about me. It doesn't matter to me one way or
the other.

3. I'm afraid of what he'll think or feel about

what I'm saying.

 

"1111!!!!"11111111“