678 7t .- HE : ; CT ...D¥.'0F A N .‘1‘ IT . 3 x A 5. SE M UN NN EMPHA NN om Limo L31] ' WITH NJUN’C‘ co IAN {mafiwéfi . . 9 fififit 26 WE ? \ w FRED EDWARD \ A isufiEfl N GA ,5 10m A . .122} .2: , . 35.64.21,}; y. t A . .. . “memfifixyf 7 :9 .9, 50% H 9 :3 .. at»: . .u... . . fur, , . WWWuvawm... . kmmauwpwm Inflfrr v . _.,‘ {oi-L238 .‘A 0; .' v ”m. ,Mméwwfirufi w _ . w .l mama». gnaw.» i ., . wfidéfia . . ”cl...r.hr....rfyr J runawafuxuwhwnad 33:313. u u ...c A.v|,..., . t .. in}. ......t. . I n T . n'tfovun J.T'I)mv.a....t.‘ I. .. ETTA? 0-169 Date This is to certify that the thesis entitled A Study of the Effects of Two Types of Emphasis in Counselor Training Used in Conjunction with Simulation and Videotaping presented by Alfred E. Grzegorek has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for __Ph+1L_degree in guidance and Counseling flea W Major profeséf February 1971 LIBRARY Mich 321;: State Uh versity .‘~ ABSTRACT A STUDY OF THE EFFECTS OF TWO TYPES OF EMPHASIS IN COUNSELOR TRAINING USED IN CONJUNCTION WITH SIMULATION AND VIDEOTAPING BY Alfred Edward Grzegorek The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of two approaches to counselor training on the subsequent counseling behaviors of prison counselors. One approach, designated eXperiential-accepting, emphasized counselor personal growth. A second approach, called cognitive-intellectual, emphasized cognitive learning of client dynamics and counseling technique. Both approaches were used in conjunction with stimulated recall and simulation, procedures developed by Kagan et al. (1967) as part of the Interpersonal Process Recall technique (IPR) . In this study, two quite similar treatments were compared. The focus of training was different for the two eXperimental treatments and the tasks were used in different ways by the groups. The emphasis of training in the cognitive-intellectual (CI) groups was on client dynamics and counseling techniques. [The CI group supervisors used the tasks to help the trainees increase their awareness of clients feelings and reactions, and Alfred Edward Grzegorek to help the trainees develop more effective ways of dealing with clients. The emphasis of training in the eXperiential-accepting (EA) groups was on counselor self— ( y l“\. .\/ awareness. Although the EA group supervisors used the ,\n L tasks to help the trainees develop a greater awareness.of"J client dynamics and counseling techniques, the primary E 'H fin“ ‘Wfiar—aum ”w .._ .n~-*‘~~ Hm l.-.” .1.---~"' purpose of task involvement was the develoPment of trainee self-awareness and an understanding of self- dynamics in interpersonal interactions. It is important to point out that these two treatments were compared not only because they encompass two competing points of View but because the EA approach is normally thought of as more difficult to implement. It requires more supervisor skill to face (with a trainee) the trainee's own feelings than it does to talk about client dynamics and counselor techniques. Is the EA emphasis worth the effort? The eXperimental treatments of study consisted of four basic tasks. The first series of tasks included a lecture presentation of the dimensions of facilitative counseling as defined in the work of Truax and Carkhuff and the Counselor Verbal Response Scale (Kagan, Krathwohl et al., 1967), videotaped models of "expert" counseling, and exercises in rating counseling behavior. These tasks were designed to help the counselor- trainees gain an understanding of the elements of effective communication--a foundation from which they could work in deve10ping their counseling skills. A Alfred Edward Grzegorek second series of tasks was called simulated confrontation recall. The trainees were asked to watch a film which simulated a variety of stressful interpersonal encounters. After watching the film, the trainees were asked to examine and discuss their reactions to the film. It was eXpected that this task would sharpen the counselor- trainee's ability to be sensitive to his own feelings as well as client feelings. It was also eXpected that the task would help the trainee become more capable of dealing with stressful emotional situations in an effective manner. A third series of tasks was called Interpersonal Process Recall (IPR). In this task a trainee and his client were videotaped while in coun- seling. When the interview was completed, the videotape was replayed for the participants. They were encouraged by an interrogator to explore the underlying dynamics of their interactions. Client recalls, counselor recalls, and mutual recalls were conducted through the course of the training sequence. In addition to helping the trainee become more sensitive to his own feelings and to client feelings, the IPR task was designed to aid the trainee gain a better understanding of the bilateral nature of the counseling relationship. A final series of tasks included group review of individual client contact. On each day of the program a different trainee was videotaped while conducting a counseling session with his client. The videotape of the session Alfred Edward Grzegorek was replayed in a group setting. The purpose of the task was to initiate discussion among the trainees and to provide models of various approaches and techniques in counseling. It was also exPected that contact with "real" clients would help the counselor—trainees see the association between classroom and laboratory theory and actual clinical practice. The trainees in this study were forty-four counselors in the Michigan Department of Corrections. Two counselor supervisors were used in the study to conduct the treatments. One was an eXperienced Ph.D. in counseling and the other was a doctoral student in counseling. Both had training and eXperience with the IPR techniques as well as with traditional counseling methods. The experimental procedures were carried out twice. Half of the counselors in the Michigan Department of Corrections were involved in each program. Each coun— selor was randomly assigned to one of the two programs and one of the two eXperimental procedures. A pre-post design was used to test the research hypotheses. Each of the counselors completed the Affect Sensitivity Scale pre and %ppst-treatme j‘In fiaddition, .\\U i) 0" J «m 33min Um (‘Wiiw audio tapes of initialv con acts with prison 1m te clients were collected éE‘EH; beginning and at the end of treat- ment for each counselor. Finally, the trainees in the first program were asked to audio record an initial \‘ Alfred Edward Grzegorek counseling interview four weeks after the completion of training. The latter tapes were to be used for delayed post-treatment comparisons of the groups. All of the tapes were rated by two independent judges (advanced doctoral students in counseling psychology) on the Affect-Cognitive, Understanding-Nonunderstanding, Specific-Nonspecific, and EXploratory-NoneXploratory dimensions of the CVRS, and on the Empathic Understanding In Interpersonal Processes Scale. The analysis of pre to post change within groups was done by means of an analysis of variance. The results of the analysis indicated significant differences (.05 level) pre to post treatment on all measures taken as a total for the experiential-accepting training groups, but not for the cognitive-intellectual training group. Significant differences (.05 level) were found between the groups on empathic understanding and on the understanding, specific, and exploratory dimensions of the CVRS. The EA training groups made significantly greater gains than did the CI training groups on the EUIPS and on the understanding, specific, and exPloratory dimensions of the CVRS. Significant differences between groups were not found on the Affect Sensitivity Scale and on the affect dimension of the CVRS. Alfred Edward Grzegorek _ H' An analysis of variance of post to delayed post- treatment change and pre to delayed post-treatment change indicated that no significant differences (.05 level) j"‘ o 0 f I existed between groups over time and treatment. It was j x”,« noted that this analysis was based on groups of six subjects each. The small subject numbers suggested that the results of the analysis be interpreted very cautiously. An examination of the raw data indicated that, when the total pre-treatment to delayed post- treatment interval was considered, the EA training groups maintained numerically higher scores than did the CI training groups on all measures. Comparisons of between group differences on individual measures were not appropriate. In essence, the eXperiential-accepting treatment had a significant overall effect on counselor performance in training. Although the two treatments did not appear to differ when the ability to perceive client feelings and reactions (as defined and measured by the Affect Sensitivity Scale) was considered, the treatments did appear to differ when counselor performance (as defined and measured by the EUIPS and the CVRS) was considered. Trainees in the eXperiential-accepting groups made significant gains pre to post treatment on all of the criteria taken as a total. The members of the experiential-accepting training groups made significantly Alfred Edward Grzegorek greater gains in empathic understanding and on the number of understanding, specific, and eXploratory responses made to clients. A STUDY OF THE EFFECTS OF TWO TYPES OF EMPHASIS IN COUNSELOR TRAINING USED IN CONJUNCTION WITH SIMULATION AND VIDEOTAPING BY Alfred Edward Grzegorek A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY College of Education 1971 DEDICATION To my wife, JoAnne. "More...' ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to eXpress my appreciation to: Norman Kagan, who encouraged and supported, listened and advised, and thought enough to be a friend and teacher. Bill Kell, who reaches out to give. Cecil Williams and James Costar, who showed encouragement, understanding, and the truSt to let me go my own way. Paul Schauble, Kathleen Scharf, Mary Heiseman, Robert Dendy, James Spivack, Robert VanNoord, Karen Rowe, Daniel Munoz, and James Archer, who gave generously and unselfishly of their time and themselves. Peter Jones, William Kime, Gary Wells, and Bernie Tolan, who did their upmost to make certain that the complex organization and detail of this study was handled smoothly and efficiently, and Director Gus Harrison, who gave freely of his time and experience. Mom and dad, who were always there. Jimmy and Melisa. JoAnne, my wife, who shares the laughter and the tears, the hOpes and the disappointments; and who cares enough to understand. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page LIST OF TABLES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Vi LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii LIST OF APPENDICES. . . . . . . . . . . . . ix I THE PROBLEM O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 1 Purpose 0 O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O 0 O 4 Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Basic Hypotheses. . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Theoretical Framework . . . . . . . . . . 10 The Training Program. . . . . . . . . . . 15 Overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE. . . . . . . . . . 22 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Counselor Development . . . . . . . . . . 22 The Counselor as a Social Reinforcer. . 23 The Counselor as a Facilitator of . Client Self-Exploration . . . . . . . 25 The Role of Self-Understanding and Cognitive Learning in the Training Process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Cognitive Learning as a Training Goal . 28 Self-Understanding as a Training Goal . 31 Stimulated Recall in Counselor Education. 36 Simulation as a Training Device . . . . . 42 Role Playing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Group Procedures in Training. . . . . . . 47 Conclusion and Implications of the Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 III DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY. . . . . . . . . . . 53 Description of the EXperimental Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Sample. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 Supervisors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 Raters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 Trainees. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 iv Chapter Instrumentation . . . . . . . . . . . . The Affect Sensitivity Scal . . . . . The Counselor Verbal Response Scale . The Empathic Understanding in Inter- personal Processes Scale. . . . . . Reliability of Tape Ratings . . . . . Analysis of the Data. . . . . . . . . . Hypotheses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV ANALYSIS OF THE DATA. . . . . . . . . . . Pre-treatment to Post-treatment Changes Within Groups. . . . . . . . . . . . . Pre-treatment to Post-treatment Changes Between Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . Affect Sensitivity Scale. . . . . . . Empathic Understanding in Inter- personal Processes Scale. . . . . . Counselor Verbal Response Scale . . . Post-treatment to Delayed Post- treatment and Pre-treatment to Delayed Post-treatment Changes Between Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V SUMMARY, DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS. . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Discussion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Implications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Clinical Observations . . . . . . . . Implications for Counselor Education and Supervision . . . . . . . . . . Implication for Future Research . . . REFERENCES. 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O APPENDICES O O O O O O O O O I O O O C . O Page 78 79 80 84 86 87 89 9O 92 93 100 101 103 104 109 116 120 120 130 137 138 148 154 157 165 Table 1.1 3.1 3.3 3.4 3.6 LIST OF TABLES The relationship between the training program exercises and the counselor developmental tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . Schematic representation of the eXperi— mental design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A summary of the eXperimental procedures. . Comparison of training groups according to mean age, mean years of education, mean number of credits in counseling courses, mean number of credits in counseling practicum courses, and mean number of years eXperience as counselors. . . . . . . . . . Kuder-Richardson formula 20 reliability coefficients for several sample groups. . . Intraclass correlation reliability estimates of individual and average ratings calculated for judges' ratings across tapes on each dimension of the CVRS . . . . . . . Reliabilities of rating scales for accurate empathy using patient-therapist-patient, therapist-patient-therapist, and time units of analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Interjudge reliabilities of ratings on the counselor verbal response scale and the empathic understanding in interpersonal processes scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Analysis of variance of pre-treatment to post-treatment change within groups summed across the A.S.S., the EUIPS, and the CVRS. Tukey's HSD test of pre-treatment to post— treatment change in scores within experi— mental groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi Page 21 54 71 78 81 83 85 87 94 97 Table Page 4.3 Analysis of variance of pre-treatment to post-treatment change between groups in scores on the A.S.S., the EUIPS, and the CVRS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 4.4 D—tests of pre-treatment to post—treatment change in scores on affect sensitivity between eXperimental groups . . . . . . . . . 102 4.5 D-tests of pre-treatment to post-treatment changes in scores in empathic understanding between experimental groups . . . . . . . . . 104 4.6 D-tests of pre-treatment to post-treatment changes in scores in affect reSponses bet- ween eXperimental groups. . . . . . . . . . . 106 4.7 D-tests of pre-treatment to post-treatment changes in scores in understanding, specific, and exPloratory responses between eXperi- mental groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 4.8 Analysis of variance of post-treatment to delayed post-treatment and pre-treatment to delayed post-treatment changes between samples on the EUIPS and on each dimension of the CVRS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112 4.9 Post-treatment to delayed post-treatment losses of the experimental groups on the EUIPS and on each dimension of the CVRS . . . 114 4.10 Pre-treatment to delayed post-treatment gains of the eXperimental groups on the EUIPS and on each dimension of the CVRS . . . 116 vii Figure 3.1A 3.18 3.2 4.2A 4.2B 4.4 LIST OF FIGURES A diagramatic representation of the role-played counseling interaction. . . . . A diagramatic representation of the interrogation training sessions . . . . . . Diagram of the training facility. . . . . . Combined scores of trainee performance over time for the eXperiential-accepting training groups and the cognitive- intellectual training groups. . . . . . . . Scores on the affect sensitivity scale over time for the eXperiential-accepting training groups and the cognitive- intellectual training groups. . . . . . . . Scores on the EUIPS and on each dimension of the CVRS over time for the eXperiential- accepting training groups and the cogni- tive-intellectual training groups . . . . . Change in scores on the EUIPS and on each dimension of the CVRS over the post- treatment to delayed post-treatment interval for the experiential-accepting training groups and the cognitive- intellectual training groups. . . . . . . . Change in scores on the EUIPS and on each dimension of the CVRS over the total pre- treatment to delayed post-treatment interval for the eXperiential-accepting training groups and the cognitive- intellectual training groups. . . . . . . . viii Page 65 65 75 96 98 99 113 115 Appendix I II III IV VI VII LIST OF APPENDICES Lecture material presented to the trainees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A description of the interrogator role The informational questionnaire. . . . Program schedules for Group 1 (Cogni- tive-Intellectual) and Group 2 (EXperiential-Accepting) . . . . . . . The affect sensitivity scale . . . . . The CVRS rating‘. 0 O C O C C 0 O O O O A description of the EUIPS . . . . . . ix Page 165 176 182 186 191 209 212 CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM This study will compare the effectiveness of two approaches to counselor training. No distinction will be made in this study between counseling and psycho- therapy and counselor and therapist. This is based on the work of Patterson (1966, p. 3) who has concluded: "...There are no essential differences between counseling and psychotherapy in the nature of the relationships, in the process, in the methods or techniques, in goals or outcomes (broadly conceived), or even in the kinds of clients involved." The effectiveness of counseling and therapy has been seriously questioned in the past two decades. After reviewing and evaluating the research literature dealing with the treatment of adult neurotics, Eysenc (1952, p. 323) concluded: "The figures fail to support the hypothesis that psychotherapy facilitates recoveryfifrom neurotic disorder." Later evaluations led Eysench (1961; 1965) to similar conclusions. Levitt (1957; 1963) studied the effects of psychotherapy with neurotic children. He too concluded that treatment was ineffective. Shlien (1966, p. 125) summarized the situation by saying: "Continued subscription to psychotherapy is based upon personal conviction, investment, and observation rather than upon general evidence." Attempts to eXplain why some research has failed to demonstrate the efficacy of counseling have been made. A number of researchers (Paul, 1967; Hoch and Zubin, 1964; Edwards and Cronbach, 1952) have pointed out the inadequacies of research methodology and statistical procedure. They argue that it is unfair to judge the effectiveness of counseling services on the basis of research that was incorrectly done. Although there is a great deal of agreement that methodology and statistical procedures in counseling research must be improved, an ever increasing amount of evidence is being presented to demonstrate that the ineffectiveness of counseling ser- vices is the result of inadequacies in clinical and counseling training programs (Carkhuff, 1966; Berenson and Carkhuff, 1967; Truax, Carkhuff and Douds, 1964; Krumboltz, 1966; Krasner, 1962). Evidence has been produced to support the hypothesis that training programs have generally failed to develop professionals who can be beneficial to clients, and that such programs may even be developing practitioners who are harmful to clients. Carkhuff summarizes (1966; p. 360): "It is clear that traditional counseling and clinical training programs of all kinds have simply not established their efficacy in terms of client benefits." If effective training procedures were developed it is possible that such training could be given to people other than doctoral students in counseling programs. Carkhuff points out: "Nevertheless, the overwhelming preponderance of systematic evidence available today indi- cates that the primary conditions of effec- tive treatment are conditions which minimally trained non-professional personnel can provide. The conditions are not the monopoly of doctoral training, and there is strong reason to believe that they are often not achieved in doctoral training. In some cases graduate training may even retard or contribute to the deterioration of the trainee's ability to offer these conditions." (1966, p. 364) Other researchers (Appleby, 1963; Harvey, 1964; Mendel and Rapport, 1963) have also pointed out that lay counselors demonstrate counseling outcomes that are at least as constructive to clients as their supervisors or professional practitioners in general. Recent research (Goldberg, 1966; Kagan, 1967) supports the observations that a videotaping technique called Interpersonal Process Recall (IPR) can intensify and accelerate counselor training. IPR involves two basic procedures. One procedure uses the video playback of a counseling session in order to stimulate recall of the dynamics of the client-counselor interaction. A second procedure involves recall of simulated interpersonal confrontations. Both procedures have been found to be effective in helping trainees develop more facilitative behaviors for working with clients in therapy. One result of the IPR research was the formulation of a theory of counselor develOpmental tasks. This theory resulted in the construction of a paradigm for counselor education and supervision. The IPR model is used in this study as the framework within which the two approaches in counselor training are compared. There have been relatively few well designed, controlled, and implemented studies assessing the efficacy of clinical or counseling training programs (Carkhuff, 1966; Payne and Gralinski, 1968). Effective assessment is necessary in order to make certain that trainees are not receiving inadequate training and consequently pro— viding inadequate services to clients. Pur se One way in which training programs in counseling and psychotherapy can be categorized is to consider these programs as emphasizing either cognitive-intellectual or eXperiential-accepting (Truax, Carkhuff and Douds, 1964; Rogers, 1957) approaches. Recent research has indicated (Kagan et al., 1963; Kagan et al., 1967; Walz and Johnston, 1963) that both types of learning can be achieved by the use of videotaping in the training situation. The purpose of this study is to determine the effects of each of the two approaches to counselor training, each used in conjunction with innovative training techniques, on the subsequent counseling behaviors of prison counselors. The following question will constitute the focus of this study: Is training that emphasizes cognitive learning (cognitive-intellectual) more effec- tive in training counselors than training that emphasizes counselor personal growth (eXperiential-accepting). Definition of Terms In this study Special terms are defined as follows: (1) Counseling - in this study counseling is the relation- ship between a person who asks for help with a psychological problem or concern (the client or patient) and a person who is trained to provide that help (the counselor or therapist). The concern can be educational-vocational or personal-social in nature. 1 (2) Cognitive-Intellectual Training- an approach to counselor training. Typically emphasizes a shaping of therapist behaviors according to principles of general psychology and human interaction. That is, trainees are didactically and cognitively taught / (3) (4) (5) (6) techniques of intervention calculated to achieve specific outcomes (Truax, Carkhuff and Douds, 1964). This type of training does not suggest that the counselor's role is didactic or cognitive, only that his training for that role is of this nature. Experiential-Accepting Training - an approach to counselor training. Typically includes some shaping of counselor behavior but emphasizes therapist personal growth (Rogers, 1957). The trainee is required to himself eXperience and achieve the growth (usually affective) which he is trained to help client eXperience and achieve. Training Program - a structured series of contacts between a counselor trainee and a supervisor (an eXperienced counselor) designed to help the trainee become an effective professional. Counselor Behavior - the quantitatively measurable communications of the counselor during an interview situation. Interpersonal Process Recall - a series of tasks developed to intensify and accelerate counselor training. IPR uses video playback of a counseling session in order to stimulate recall of the dynamics underlying a client-counselor interaction. (7) Stimulated Recall Session - a phase of the IPR pro- cedure where the videotape of a counseling session is played back and an interrogator stimulates participant examination of the underlying dynamics of the interaction. (8) Interrogator - the third person in the client-coun- selor relationship. The interrogator conducts the videotaped recall session for either or both of the participants. The interrogator's function is to facilitate examination of underlying dynamics, and not to establish another relationship like the one being reviewed. (9) Stimulus Films - a series of vignettes depicting various kinds and degrees of emotional situations. A videotaped playback of the trainee's reactions to the vignettes is used in order to stimulate recall in the trainee of his reactions to and means of dealing with the emotional situations. The films contain four emotions varying in degree from mild to very intense. The emotions are hostility, affection, fear of hostility, and fear of affection. Basic Hypotheses The hypotheses to be tested are:1 (1) There will be significant growth in the counseling behavior of counselors exposed to an eXperiential— lHypotheses will be formally stated in testable null form in Chapter IV. (2) (3) (4) (5) accepting emphasis in training when that behavior is rated by eXpert judges on the dimensions of facili- tative communication. There will be no significant growth in the counseling behavior of counselors eXposed to cognitive- intellectual emphasis in training when that behavior is rated by eXpert judges on the dimensions of facilitative communications. Counselors eXposed to training emphasizing experiential-accepting learning will respond to clients with significantly more empathic understanding than do counselors eXposed to training emphasizing cognitive-intellectual learning when such under— standing is rated by eXpert judges on the dimensions of empathic understanding in interpersonal relation- ships. There will be significantly more growth in the counseling behavior of counselors eXposed to the eXperiential-accepting emphasis in training than in the behavior of counselors eXposed to the cognitive- intellectual emphasis in training when such behavior is rated by eXpert judges on the dimensions of facilitative communications. There will be no significant difference in sensitivity to client affect as measured by the Affect Sensitivity Scale between counselors eXposed to an eXperiential- accepting emphasis in training and counselors exposed to a cognitive-intellectual training emphasis. (6) Counselors eXposed to training which emphasizes eXperiential-accepting learning will maintain signifi- cantly higher levels of empathic understanding and facilitative counseling behaviors than will counselors exposed to training which emphasizes cognitive- intellectual learning when such behaviors are rated by eXpert judges. Assumptions The basic assumptions of this research are: (1) Behavior can be measured and changes in behavior determined. u' .. fl .' 1r (2) Judgments about counselor performance can be validly 2;?- made from audio tapes of random samples of behavior leffif taken from avégtal interview session. (3) The random selection of twenty responses from the middle third segment of the total interview con- VD stitutes a representative sample of the quality and productivity of the total interview. (4) Judgments on counselor affect sensitivity can be vhw validly made through objective standardized testing. (5) Other elements, i.e., motivation to learn counseling, problem presented by client, education and eXperiences ///// of trainee, ability to benefit from group training 10 eXperience, will tend to distribute their effects randomly throughout the treatment groups, if the group members are randomly assigned. (6) The counselors used in this study are similar to prison counselors in other parts of the country. Theoretical Framework The theoretical framework for the training procedures to be used in this study is a synthesis of concepts in counseling theory and functionalism in learning theory. The concepts apply to BEER approaches. The operational difference between the methods is a matter of emphasis. That is, the cognitive-intellectual training model follows the paradigm and tasks outlined below but emphasizes the need to understand client feelings and problems and de-emphasizes the need for a counselor to account for his own feelings and needs in the counseling interaction. The eXperiential-accepting approach follows the paradigm but emphasizes the necessity for the counselor to be aware of his own needs and feelings as well as the needs and feelings of the client in counseling. At least four major develOpmental tasks have been identified in the counselor training process. The counselor must accomplish these tasks if he is to become effective in his interpersonal communications (Kagan, / Krathwohl et aZ., 1967). The tasks are defined as: / (l) (2) 11 Achieving an awareness of the elements of effective counseling (communication). The trainee must recog- nize the implementation of theory into practice and understand the elements of an effective interpersonal communication. This is the basis of the counselor's Operational definition of counseling. Without such a definition the counselor flounders, not knowing how or when he can most effectively use his responses. All of the factors that determine a facilitative interpersonal eXperience have not as of yet been completely delineated or Operationalized. Researchers (Rogers, 1951, 1957; Carkhuff, 1966, 1967) have identified several conditions, however, that are necessary (though perhaps not sufficient) for a facilitative client-counselor encounter. Gottesman (1962), Fleming (1953), Fleming and Hamburg (1958), Adams (1964), and Truax, Carkhuff and Douds (1964) emphasize the need for counselor trainees to have a model of therapy rated high in therapist-offered conditions. The model would serve as a framework within which the counselor could evaluate his own therapy during and after practicum. Achieving an awareness and sensitivity to all relevant aspects of client communication. The critical importance of counselor sensitivity to client verbalization is basic to counseling but sensitivity 12 to all of the dimensions of client communication has become increasingly apparent in recent years. The counselor has become aware of the necessity to develop a "third ear" in counseling as well as a "third eye." The meaning of client postures and gestures has become data as relevant to the counseling process as the verbal symbols presented to the counselor (Hamlin, 1966). The training practicum must sensitize the counselor to perceive and understand the total presentation of the client. Kagan, Krathwohl et al., (1967) summarize by saying: "...Both clinical eXperience and eXperimental investigations into kinesics and linguistics have led to the recognition that more occurs during a counseling session than an inter- personal interchange based solely on the lexical meaning of verbal communication. Although it is obvious that the counselor must be aware of the cognitive aSpects of the client's problems he must also be cognizant of the connotive implications and affective themes permeating such client behaviors as body movements, posture, hand gestures, eye movements, tone of voice, and rate of speech. In essence, the counselor must be trained to hear with a third ear. Indeed, all the counselor's training in human behavior and dynamics goes for naught if he lacks such critical perceptive ability." (p. 39) (3) Achieving an awareness of and sensitivity to one's own feelings. The counselor must be aware of his own feelings for two reasons. First, the counselor must be cognizant of the subtle ways in which he communicates his feelings to the client. Second, the (4) l3 therapist is better able to understand client feelings and problems if he is sensitive to and aware of his own affect. One way of achieving sensitivity to self occurs through involvement in counseling as a client. Dewey (1916, p. 390) stated that all learning "is an active personally conducted affair." A person learns by involving himself as an individual in the process of understanding. In counseling, the theory is functionalized when the trainee learns about counseling by being actively involved in the process of counseling itself (Betz, 1963). The counselor must have a depth of understanding about himself in order to make the best use of his cognitive learnings and personal eXperiences when dealing with clients (Carkhuff, 1967; Arbuckle, 1963). Arbuckle (1968, p. 434) states: "Any core of knowledge should be related to, and built around actual clinical practice, in which the major question is 'Who is me?‘ rather than 'Who is he?'" The counselor trainee might well first be a counselee, eXperiencing the same feelings and changes as a counselee, in order to be facilitative with clients. Achieving an awareness of the bilateral nature of the counseling interaction. The trainee must understand the importance of the here and now eXperience between himself and the client in order to help the client 14 learn about his typical behaviors and how the behaviors might be modified. This observation is maintained by theorists who otherwise differ in major ways in their thinking on counseling process, e.g., those who feel that the counselor is a shaper or reinforcer of desired behavior (Alexander, 1963; Shoben, 1949; Allen, 1967; Blocher, 1967; Krumboltz, 1966a, 1966b, 1967; Shaffer and Shoben, 1956; Whitely and Allen, 1968) and those who see the counselor as a person who provides an atmosphere for non-threatening eXploration of thoughts and feelings (Foreman, 1967; Rogers, 1957; Truax, Carkhuff and Douds, 1964; Kell and Mueller, 1966; Sullivan, 1953). All of these theorists point out that client and counselor have a reciprocal impact upon one another and that each is a stimulus to the other in eliciting the activities of ongoing counseling sessions. Kell and Mueller (1966) summarize the point: "The course of a developing counseling relationship is one in which the counselor's stimulus value triggers reSponse patterns in the client, which, in turn, have an impact on the counselor. The reciprocal impact of these responses is effecting behavioral reSponses in the participants at a number of levels... As the client continues to relate to his counselor, his reSponses are increasingly governed by and Specifically related to this particular relationship... Consequences of the developing relationship also manifest themselves in the client." (p. 21). (1" 15 The client-counselor relationship may be typical of other relationships that the client has in the environment. The relevant dimensions of the coun— seling relationship may, then, serve as the laboratory sample from which the client's difficulties can be determined and evaluated and, modifications in behavior eXplored and tested out. The Training Program The training program develOped for this study con- sists of four series of tasks. Each exercise is designed to promote "learning" of one or more of the developmental sub-tasks in the counselor growth schema which serves as the basis of this research.2 The first series of tasks is designed to help counselors gain an understanding of the elements of effective communication. The tasks include a lecture presentation of the dimensions of facilitative counseling as defined in the work of Truax and Carkhuff and also the dimensions and concepts of the Counselor Verbal Response Scale (Kagan, Krathwohl at al., 1967)3, videotaped models of "eXpert" counseling, and exercises in rating counseling behavior. All of these tasks are didactically presented. 2The different ways in which the cognitive- intellectual and eXperiential-accepting groups will deal with the training exercises is described in Chapter III. 3A detailed description of the lecture material pre- sented to the trainees is found in Appendix I. 16 That is, a training supervisor presents the material to the trainees and points out the relevant aspects of the presentation that should be noted by each counselor. Although the trainees are allowed to raise questions or argue certain points of information, the supervisor presents the material as fact. The object of presenting these tasks in this manner is to provide the trainees with a stable foundation from which they can work in develOping their counseling skills. It is expected that these tasks will aid the counselors in: (a) Operationally defining facilitative counseling behavior, (b) determining how and when responses can be most effectively used in the counseling interaction, (c) developing a framework from which "good" and "bad" communications can be evaluated, and (d) establishing a guide which each therapist can use in judging his own behavior. A second series of tasks is simulated confrontation. The trainees are shown a film which simulates a variety of stressful interpersonal encounters. After watching the film, the counselors are asked to respond to what they saw. The trainees can be asked to reSpond in either a cognitive-intellectual or eXperiential-accepting manner to the film. If cognitive-intellectual "learning" is emphasized the trainee is asked to focus on what the filmed "client" was saying and feeling and on how a therapist might most effectively respond to the client. 17 It is eXpected that dealing with the task in this way will sharpen the counselor's ability to be sensitive to client feelings. The counselor also receives practice in dealing with difficult situations during the coun- seling interview. If eXperiential-accepting "learning" is to be emphasized the counselors are asked to recall their own thoughts, feelings, and reactions to the film. It is expected that the eXperiential-accepting focus will enable the trainees to more easily and accurately identify and deal with their own feelings and behaviors. The counselor receives reinforcement for access to feelings and Openness. He overcomes his fears of dealing with stressful emotional situations. Simulated confron- tation promotes such awareness because it provides the trainee with a chance to eXplore his reaction to inter- personal threat from a position of safety. The situation that the counselor is reacting to is simulated, not "real". The trainee can, therefore, have his emotions and eXplore those emotions without having to be responsible for the consequences of his reactions. In the process of eXploring his own feelings the counselor may also deal with client feelings and effective ways of responding to clients who present special difficulties in the counseling interaction. The third series of tasks is called Interpersonal Process Recall (IPR). In this task a client and counselor 18 are videotaped while conducting a counseling session. When the session is concluded a third person, called the interrogator4, conducts a recall of the interview. The interrogator's function is not to establish another relationship like the one being reviewed but to facilitate exploration of the underlying dynamics of the interaction. The interrogator may conduct client recall, counselor recall, or mutual recall. During client recall the counselor leaves the counseling area and watches the interrogator—client interaction. A client often cannot relate certain feelings that he was having during the interview to the counselor directly because the counselor may have been the object of those feelings. If the counselor conducts a recall of the session, the client may still avoid the feelings he was having toward the counselor. The interrogator can by-pass this difficulty by reviewing the videotape without the counselor in the room, by not establishing another client-counselor relationship, by focusing the client on the videotape, and by limiting discussion to what had gone on during the counseling session. By functioning in this manner the interrogator moves the client to a greater understanding of his "here and now" behavior with another person. By watching the recall the counselor can gain a greater 4A detailed description of the interrogator role is found in Appendix II. l9 awareness of relevant client communications and how a client might eXpress his feelings. During counselor recall the client is asked to leave the counseling room and the interrogator replays the videotape of the inter- view with the counselor. The usual IPR procedure is to focus the counselor on his own thoughts, feelings, and reactions during the session, e.g., provide an eXperiential session for the trainee. It is eXpected that the counselor will achieve a greater awareness of what is happening "here and now" between himself and the client, and that he will gain a greater understanding of his own dynamics as a person. In the mutual recall procedure the video replay is conducted with both client and counselor. Initially the counselor is asked to take a passive role during recall. As the client begins to identify affectual material, the interrogator begins to involve the counselor by asking him to comment on what he had felt or thought during the videotaped counseling session. As the client and counselor begin to communicate and explore their feelings and reactions during the videotaped session, the interrogator takes a less active role. When client and trainee begin to discuss the "here and now" of the recall session instead of the "there and then" of the videotaped session the videotape is stopped, the monitor turned off, and the interrogator withdraws completely from the session. This task helps the therapist recognize the bilateral 20 nature of the counseling relationship. Both counselor recall and mutual recall can be presented to the trainee as cognitive tasks (as Opposed to eXperiential, self- understanding tasks). With both types of recall the interrogator can focus solely on client feelings, disregarding counselor feelings. This orientation to the tasks would help the counselors gain a greater awareness Of client feelings and reactions. Counselor self- understanding would, however, be minimized. A final series of tasks in this study include group review of counseling and individual client contact. Each trainee will be assigned a client for counseling for one hour a day for the duration of the training program. Each counselor will have at least one Of these sessions videotaped and reviewed in a group setting (in addition tO the IPR procedure outlined above). The group review will allow each therapist to receive a variety of feed- back On his counseling behavior, the Opportunity to hear how others might deal with the problems he is facing, and the Opportunity to compare his counseling behavior with the counseling of the other trainees. Contact with "real" counseling clients is expected to provide trainees with a chance to try out new counseling approaches and to identify problems that still prevent them from being effective communicators. 21 Table 1.1. The relationship between the training program exercises and the counselor developmental tasks. Counselor DevelOpmental Task Training Exercise Relevant to Task Development Achieving an awareness Of the elements Of effective communication Lecture presentation; "expert" counseling models; rating exercises; group review; individual client contact. Achieving an awareness and sensitivity to all relevant aspects of client communication. Simulated interpersonal confrontation; client recall; group review. Achieving an awareness Of and sensitivity to one's own feelings. Counselor recall; simulated interpersonal confron- tation; mutual recall. Achieving an awareness Of the bilateral nature of the counseling interaction. Mutual recall; simulated interpersonal confrontation; counselor recall; "eXpert" counseling models. Overview A review Of the literature pertinent to counselor training is found in Chapter two. Chapter three contains the procedures and design to be used in this study, and the statistical procedures to be used in the analysis of the Obtained data. are presented in Chapter four. Results of the statistical analysis Conclusions, summary, and implications are discussed in Chapter five. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Introduction The theoretical background for this study was presented in Chapter I. Chapter II contains a review of the literature of the following areas relevant to the study: (1) counselor develOpment; (2) the role Of self- understanding and cognitive learning in the training If I ‘ / v process; (3) stimulated recall in counselor education;\// I . (4) simulation as a training device; (5) role playing; and (6) the use of group procedures in training. Counselor Development Before the relative effectiveness Of counselor training procedures can be investigated, it is necessary to determine whether the training of counselors is in fact possible. The question has not been entirely resolved in the research literature. Studies citing both positive and negative results can be found, although the majority Of recent work seems to suggest that the results of counselor training have, for the most part, been negative. Two Obstacles seem to prevent a satisfactory evaluation Of training programs: (1) the disagreement of various schools Of counseling on the goals and purposes Of 22 23 counseling and (2) the inability to Operationalize the definitions that do exist in such a way as to effectively measure whether the goals have been attained (Whitely, 1967; Truax, 1967). The counselor has been defined as having one Of two functions, i.e., as a social reinforcer (or agent Of behavioral change), or as a facilitator of client self- understanding. The Counselor as a Social Reinforcer Proponents Of this position (Krumboltz, 1967; Krasner, 1962; Shoben, 1949) believe that the primary purpose Of counseling is to help the client deal more effectively with his environment. They feel that the goals of counseling can be formulated in terms of observable behavioral changes, and that training should focus on helping counselors develOp a variety Of methods for effecting behavioral change in clients. Blocker (1967) indicates that the "historical" or "insight" approach in therapy has limited the behaviors and consequently the influence that a counselor can exert on his client. Calia (1966) states that it is not necessarily true that talk is the primary vehicle of the client and counselor's work; or that self-eXploration is the sine qua non Of therapy. They suggest that the counselor's work should include (a) helping a client' 24 define the problems that he is eXperiencing, (b) deter- mine the behaviors that the client must engage in if the problems are to be solved, and (c) encourage the client tO engage in those problem solving behaviors. Allen (1967) indicates that positive client gains occur most dramatically when the counselor, working from the framework Of an S-O-R theory, incorporates techniques of persuasion, conditioning, reinforcement, and motivation. Attempts to demonstrate the efficacy of this treatment approach have generally met with little success. A study conducted by Winkler et al. (1965) appears to be representative of the research in this area. Winkler et a1. randomly assigned 121 fourth graders, classified as underachievers, to five treatments: (1) individual client- centered counseling; (2) client-centered group counseling; (3) a reading instruction group; (4) a Hawthorne control group; and (5) a no treatment control group. Change in grade point average was the criterion of success in the study. It was hypothesized that the reading instruction group would be the only group to show a significant increase on the criterion measure. Pre-post program comparisons revealed no significant differences between the treatment groups. The only group to show improvement was the no treatment control group. One question raised is whether the lack Of difference between treatments is 25 the result of the treatments, the criterion used, or a combination Of both factors. A number of researchers (Zax and Klein, 1960; Krum- boltz, 1966) have noted that research using behavior change as a measurement criterion has encountered one major difficulty, i.e., finding a unit of behavior that is meaningful and representative Of a wide range Of functioning, yet circumscribed enough to be reliably measured. Krumboltz (1967) has noted that studies that have used behavior change as a measurement criteria have used behavioral units that are either (1) too gross and dependent upon a large number of factors beyond the control Of treatment procedures, or (2) tOO Specific and inapplicable for a wider evaluation Of the treatment processes. It appears that the methodological difficulties in measurement prevent an adequate evaluation Of the counselor in this role. The Counselor as a Facilitator of Client Self-Exploration Those who advocate this counselor function (Truax and Carkhuff, 1964; Blau, 1953; Seeman, 1949) believe that the primary purpose Of counseling is to provide the client with the Opportunity to explore his own feelings, attitudes, and thoughts. They indicate that more successful clients tend to increase explorations of their feelings, thoughts, and problems, while less successful clients tend to 26 decrease the level of their self-eXplorations. Truax and Carkhuff (1967) make the point: "In successful therapy, both individual and group, the client Spends much of his time in self-eXploration - attempting to under- stand and define his own beliefs, values, motives, and actions, while the therapist, by reason of his training and knowledge, is attempting to facilitate this process." (p. 189) Rogers (1954) conducted a study in which ten subjects were eXposed to an average of 19 client-centered individual therapy sessions. Two control groups were used: (1) the subject group during a waiting period prior to the beginning of therapy, and (2) a group of individuals not involved in therapy. At the end of therapy, ratings were obtained on each client from two friends, from the client himself, and from the client's counselor. These ratings were compared with self and friend ratings obtained on each person in the two control groups. Rogers reported that, where therapy was judged to be successful, an observable change toward more mature behavior was seen in the client by his friends, by himself, and by his counselor. When therapy was not judged to be successful, deterioration in the maturity of client behavior was noted. This type of research has been criticized on the grounds that results have been derived from a Single therapeutic approach (client-centered), and measurements have been Obtained by researchers diSposed toward the 27 client-centered theory. Researchers less dedicated to the client-centered precepts have generally been unable to find support for the relationship between client self- exPloration and success in therapy. For example, Vargus (1954) measured the increases in self awareness in ten subjects exposed to individual client-centered therapy. Each subject was seen for at least nine but no more than 41 sessions. At the end of therapy, every client was rated on five criteria instruments: (1) counselor ratings; (2) TAT ratings based on the Freudian theory of psychosexual develOpment; (3) a Q-sort adjustment score; (4) TAT ratings based on a mental health scale (Dymond, 1954); and (5) a client self-awareness scale. The TAT (psychosexual develOpment) ratings were done by psychoanalytically-oriented clinicians; the Q-sort adjust- ment ratings were done by non-client-centered eclectic clinicians; and the TAT (mental health) ratings were done by client—oriented therapists. Each client evaluated himself on the client self-awareness scale. Vargus reported that the ratings done by the client-centered therapists indicated a positive correlation between success in counseling and increasing self-awareness, that the ratings done by the non-client-centered eclectic counselors indicated no correlation between success in therapy and self-awareness, and that ratings done by the psychoanalytically-oriented therapists resulted in a 28 negative correlation between level of self-awareness and success in counseling. A question arises as to whether the results indicate basic weaknesses in the criteria measures or rater bias. The research literature provides no answers to the problem. It appears that methodological difficulties prevent. an adequate evaluation of the counselor as a facilitator of client self-eXploration. The Role of Self-Understanding and Cognitive Learning in the Training Process Differences in conceptualizing the role of the counselor has led to differences in defining the goals of training. Those who view the counselor as a social reinforcer emphasize training that promotes the develOp- ment of cognitively taught communication and information skills (Shoben, 1949; Wolberg, 1954; Ivey et al., 1967). Other researchers, who perceive the function of the therapist as that of a catalyst for client self-eXploration, advocate training in which the emphasis is on the develOpment of counselor self-understanding (Rogers, 1957; Foreman, 1967; Arbuckle, 1963, 1968; Fiedler, 1950). Cognitive Learning as a Training Goal The cognitive learning approach to training assumes: (1) that effective counseling behavior is characterized by communication and information Skills that can be 29 cognitively taught, and (2) that those Skills can be applied in the context of a counseling relationship in such a way as to either produce new learnings in the client, or reinforce those existing client behaviors, which promote resolution of the difficulties being eXperienced by the client (Foley and Adams, 1970; Krumboltz, 1966). The goal of this training is the develOpment of "behavioral engineers" whose job it is to "arrange the rearrange the environment in order to bring about desired changes in behavior (Bijou, 1966). A number of studies have been conducted which support the hypothesis that trainees eXposed to a cognitive training program can deve10p communication and information Skills considered important in therapy. A series of studies conducted by Ivey, Normington, Miller, Morril and Hause (1968) appear to be representative of this research. Ivey et a1. (1968) attempted to evaluate the develOpment and effect of three skills taught according to a microcounseling model. The Skills were: (a) attending behavior - included eye contact, counselor posture, and counselor movements and gestures; (b) reflec- tion of feelings; and (c) summarization of feelings. The subjects of the study were dormitory counselors and beginning counselors in guidance at a Western college. The subjects were broken down into three groups, each group concentrating on one of the three skills. Six basic 30 exercises were used in the program: (1) five minute videotaped interviews with clients; (2) readings and discussions of the skills; (3) viewing video models of the skills; (4) supervision of the counselors using the videotapes of the client-counselor interviews; (5) role- playing exercises which were videotaped and discussed; and (6) supervision of the counselors using the video tapes of the role-playing exercises. Three evaluation procedures were used: (1) the counselors' videotaped interviews were rated for the apprOpriate skills by two independent judges; (2) at the conclusion of the five minute interviews, each client rated his counselor on a semantic differential scale, a counselor effectiveness scale, and on a relationship scale; and (3) at the end of the five minute interviews, each counselor in the reflection of feeling program and the summarization of feeling program completed a semantic differential scale, a self-concept scale, and an accurate reflection of feelings scale. Test results indicated that, for those in the attending behaviors program, client-counselor eye contact increased significantly. No differences were observed in counselor postural positions or body movements and gestures. Client ratings of the counselors in the reflection of feelings program and the summarization of feelings program indicated that the trainees' ability to establish and maintain relationships increased 31 Significantly over the course of the programs. The judges' ratings of the counselors in these programs indicated significant increases in the reflection and summarization Skills. It appears that beginning counselors can be cog- nitively taught communication and information skills. It is unclear, however, if the acquisition of these skills is related to effectively helping a client resolve the problems he is eXperiencing. No evidence has been found in the literature to Show that a counselor taught attending behaviors, reflection of feelings, or any other specific Skill is better able to help his client deal with the concerns that bring him to a counselor. The lack of such evidence makes it difficult to assess the role or value of the cognitive approach to counselor training. Self-Understanding as a Traininngoal The major assumption underlying the self—understanding approach to training is that effective counseling depends on the nature of the helper's attitudes and his ways of perceiving himself, his client, and the goals that he has as a counselor (Rogers, 1957; Patterson, 1964). The use of a Specific technique or the adherence to a particular theory of counseling is considered unimportant since the counselor's effectiveness is believed to rest on his 32 ability to understand and evaluate his own attitudes and experiences. The goal of training is seen as providing the trainee with the Opportunity to develOp the Openness and honesty to understand and evaluate his attitudes and experiences. Rogers (1957) states: "The student should develOp his own orientation to psychotherapy out of his experiences. In my estimation every effective therapist has built his own orientation to therapy within himself and out of his own eXperiences with his own clients or patients. It is quite true that this orientation as finally developed may be such that it closely resembles that of others, or closely resembles the orientation to which he was eXposed. Nevertheless, the response made by the effective therapist in his own interviews are not made in a certain way because that is the psychoanalytic way, or the client-centered way, or the Adlerian way. They are made because the therapist has found that type of reSponse effective in his own eXperience. Likewise, he does not put on certain attitudes because they are the attitudes expected of an analyst or client- centered therapist or an Adlerian. He discovers and uses certain attitudes in himself which have develOped because they have been rewarded by the effective out- come of earlier experiences in carrying on therapy. Thus the aim of a training program in therapy should be to turn out individuals who have an independent and Open attitude toward their own eXperience in working with clients. If this is achieved, then they can continually formulate and reformulate and revise their own approach to the individuals with whom they are working in such a way that their approach results in more constructive and effective help." (p. 87) 33 Although most of the literature has been theoretical and descriptive in nature, a number of eXperimental studies have been conducted (Boehm, 1961; Towles, 1962; Wessel, 1961; Patterson, 1964) which generally support the hypothesis that training in which self—understanding is emphasized can lead to positive change in counselors' attitudes toward self and others. As an example, Hurst and Jensen (1968) exposed three groups of subjects to three types of eXperiences. The subjects of the study were "house counselors" at a residential school for eighth grade boys. None of the subjects had ever been involved in counselor education courses. The first group, designated the "theory methodology" group, participated in an eleven week program consisting of selected readings in the theory and methods of counseling. A weekly seminar was also conducted for the group. The sessions consisted of didactic reviews of counseling theory, role playing exercises, and listening to tapes of counseling conducted by "expert" counselors of various counseling orientations. At the same time, the second group of subjects, referred to as the "personal growth" group, was involved in a Relationship Improvement Program develOped to promote better understanding of self and others, a greater appreciation of self and others, an appreciation of one's potential, and an ability to apply the new learnings and abilities to real life situations. The program was ten 34 weeks long. The group participated in weekly T-group sessions designed to enhance the learnings of the Relationship Improvement Program. A third group, desig- nated as a no-treatment control group, received no training at all. The members of the control group functioned in a routine way, carrying out staff duties and student contact responsibilities. Three self- report inventories were administered to the subjects in a pre-post design. The inventories were: (1) the Berger Scales of EXpressed Acceptance of Self and Others; (2) the Attitude Toward Self (AS) and Attitude Toward Others (AO) scales of the MMPI, and (3) the Self Acceptance and Other Acceptance Scales (Butler and Haigh, 1954). Clients seen by the trainees were pre and post tested on measures of intellectual achievement, personal and social adjustment, and self- acceptance. Test results indicated that the trainees in the personal growth group showed significant increases in self acceptance and acceptance of others. No significant increases on these dimensions were noted in the theory methodology and control groups. None of the clients seen by the trainees made any changes in intellectual achievement, personal and social growth, or self-acceptance. It has been noted that research in this area has demonstrated little or no support for the assumed 35 relationship between counselor self-understanding and successful counseling outcomes, however measured (Krumboltz, 1967). While the research demonstrates that counselor attitudes toward self and others can be changed in a positive direction, there has been little evidence that attitudinal changes in the counselor result in more effective counselor performance. The difficulty is similar to that noted with the research on training which empha- sizes cognitive learning. As in that case, the lack of such information makes it difficult to assess the role or value of this approach to counselor education. A number of researchers (Carkhuff, Truax and Douds, 1964; Demos and Zuwaylif, 1963; Hansen and Barker, 1964; Jones, 1963; Berensen and Carkhuff, 1967) have suggested that neither self understanding or cognitive learning of communication and information skills alone are sufficient ingredients in the training process. They suggest that an integrated training curriculum should be established. The integrated program would provide for the develOpment of counselor self-understanding through the supervisOry process and the development of communication and informa- tion skill learning through modeling, rating, etc. A number of studies (Truax, 1963; Truax and Carkhuff, 1964a, 1964b, 1965a, 1965b) have indicated that both self-understanding and a knowledge of communication and information skills are important in the counseling 36 Situation. For example, four characteristics in the counselor have been measured and demonstrated to be related to the outcomes of counseling (Patterson, 1967). These conditions are: (l) empathy, or the ability to understand accurately the clients' inner experiences; (2) unconditional positive regard, or nonpossessive warmth and acceptance of the client; (3) self-congruence, or genuineness in the counseling relationship; and (4) concreteness, or specificity of expression. It appears that the nature of these conditions might demand both self-understanding and communication and information skills. The literature indicates that a program of counselor self-understanding can modify attitudes of the counselor in the direction of greater acceptance of self and others. A trainee exposed to such an experience might be better able to relate to a client in a self—congruent, warm, and accepting way. The teaching of communication and information skills might help the counselor reSpond to clients in an empathic and concrete manner. Although studies such as those cited above support the efficacy of an integrated training curriculum, no research was found that Operationalized and evaluated an integrated training approach. Stimulated Recall in Counselor Education A variety of videotaping techniques have been used in the supervision and training of counselors and psychotherapists. 37 The use of the technique provides at least three ad- vantages: (l) enhancement of the supervisory process - Gruenberg, Liston and Wayne (1969) point out that videotaping helps the supervisor become a more effective consultant to the trainee. The more specific, first- hand knowledge that the supervisor can have about the client who has been videotaped the more likely is the supervisor to be a co-therapist in the treatment. The trainee benefits since the supervisor is better able to help him arrive at a "therapeutic result." The client benefits since the supervisor protects him from the therapist-trainee's non-facilitative behaviors; (2) ppdgp- standing interview dynamics - Schiff and Revich (1964) and Suess (1966) state that videotaping helps the trainee get a more clear understanding of the multitude of dynamics that can occur in the therapy situation. They point out the special value of this technique with non- verbal communication occurring in the counselor and client. This area is available to the trainee for study in a way that was not formerly possible with audiotaping or note taking; (3) development of insight - Waltz and Johnson (1963) and Landsman and Lane (1963) conducted separate studies which indicated that trainees who viewed videotapes of their counseling interviews gained new understanding into their own dynamics and behaviors. Although there was no indication of what the new 38 understandings meant in terms of later counseling behavior, it was assumed that such learnings might be beneficial in the training process. The stimulated recall technique used in this study is part of the Interpersonal Process Recall (IPR) method develOped by Kagan et a1. (1967). The method has its origins in the work of Bloom (1954), who used stimulated recall to examine the thought processes of students, and Nielsen (1962), who studied perceptual change as a func- tion of self-confrontation. The uniqueness of the IPR method is that it provides the counselor with immediate feedback on his therapy behavior as well as role structures for counselor self- discovery. It is this approach to video feedback which serves as the stimulus for the counselor's investigation of the underlying dynamics of his behavior with the client. In the original research done by Kagan in counselor education, the following procedure was used: a counselor and client were videotaped in a counseling session. Immediately after the interview, the counselor left the room and a third person, called the interrogator, entered the room. The playback of the interview was started. The videotape could be stopped or started at any point by either the interrogator or the client, by means of a remote control switch. The purpose of the playback was to help the client eXplore the underlying dynamics of the 39 counseling interaction. After the recall session was completed, the counselor listened to an audio tape of the recall and then watched the videotape of the interview. This procedure was compared with (1) traditional super- vision (supervisor and trainee review an audio tape of an interview), and (2) traditional supervision after the interview was videotaped. No differences were found between treatments. Later investigations indicated that a crucial element in an effective training procedure was not just feedback for the counselor—trainee but a sequence of experiences each designed to help a trainee learn a specific but dynamic counselor attitude or skill. Kagan et al. also found that if trainees observed and participated in the interrogation sessions, statisti- cally Significant gains could be derived from the use of videotaping in training. Observation and participation in the recall procedure made it possible for a trainee to get a greater understanding of the client and the rele- vant aspects of his presenting problem. The trainee could also learn directly about the fears and aSpirationS that the client had about him. In this way the trainee began to understand the client's actions in the interpersonal encounter, and the trainee began to realize some of his own reactions and feelings toward the client. A question arises as to what effect videotaping has on the client-counselor interactions. Moore et a2. (1965) 40 have noted that anxiety levels increased in hospitalized psychiatric patients who viewed themselves on videotape, but they also report that the use of videotaping in therapy promoted significant client gains. Poling (1968) examined the effects of videotaping in three different environments and found that anxiety levels increased in both counselors and clients during videotaping. He noted that counselor anxiety levels were higher than those of clients, and that clients saw videotaping as less threatening and more conducive to counseling than did counselors. Poling concluded that, although video- taping increased participants' anxiety, the physical environment had little effect on the success of the counseling interview, if counseling was conducted in a progressional manner. Kagan et al. (1967) have observed no differences in the anxieties of clients and counselors when they are videotaped or when they are not being videotaped. Goldberg (1967) evaluated the concept that "counselor developmental" tasks can be effectively implemented by the use of television in counselor supervision. In Goldberg's study, 18 trainees received six supervisory sessions structured in the traditional manner, while 18 trainees received six supervisory sessions structured using IPR methods. Once a week each trainee interviewed ’a client for 30 minutes. The members of the traditionally 41 supervised group audio recorded their counseling sessions, and immediately after the interview, Spent 60 minutes with their supervisors reviewing the audio tapes of the sessions. The members of the IPR group had their coun- seling interviews videotaped. Immediately after the sessions were completed, recalls were conducted. During the first two supervisory sessions a 15 minute client recall was conducted by the supervisor while the trainees watched through a one-way mirror. This was followed by a 45 minute counselor recall led by the supervisor. During the third and fourth supervisory sessions the counselors paired up and conducted client recall sessions for one another. During the fifth and sixth supervisory sessions the counseling interviews were followed by a 60 minute client recall session, with supervisor and trainee participating in the session. Pre and post audio tapes of initial counseling sessions were obtained for subjects in both groups. Those subjects in the IPR group were found to have significantly improved in counselor per- formance when compared to the traditionally supervised trainees. Members of both groups were rated as more affective, understanding, specific, eXploratory, and effective, but the IPR group change was significantly greater than the control group change. In summary, it appears as if videotaping can be an effective tool for counselor education if playback and 42 recall are structured in such a way as to implement a counselor education theory, provide immediate feedback to the trainee, and maximize the opportunity for eXplora- tion of underlying dynamics. Simulation as a Traininngevice Simulation has been used for many years in military and industrial training (Kersh, 1965). In addition to protecting human lives and valuable equipment, e.g., astronaut training (Kersh, 1963) simulation can reduce training time as well as broaden the SCOpe of learning (Greenlaw, Huron and Rawdon, 1962). Simulation reduces training time by allowing trainees to increase their involvement in the decision making process. After making a decision in a simulated Situation, the trainee can receive immediate feedback on the results of his decision. The positive and negative aspects of the decision can be immediately examined. Learning is more quickly accom- plished since the trainee does not have to wait for the results of his decision to evolve, as is the usual case in the "real world." Simulation also broadens the SCOpe of learning by allowing participants to make a greater variety of responses or decisions about a problem. Green- law et al. indicate that every decision or response made. by an individual leads to some ramifications in the environ- ment. For example, a person who makes a good decision may 43 reap positive benefits from his response, while a poor decision might mean a financial set back, loss of a pro- motion, marital discord, etc. Part of the difficulty in the decision making process is the fear of the ramifications of a decision for the present or the future. Those who deal with others often fear the consequences of their decisions on the lives or careers of the peOple who they are trying to help. A decision made in a simulated Situation does not usually present the decision maker with the possibility that his response will lead to negative consequences. The simulated situation offers the participant the Opportunity to make and examine a number of decisions free from much of the fear of negative con- sequences. Most of the work done on the development of simulation techniques for training has been on teacher education. Simulation has been used to: evaluate the impact of individual or innovative approaches in the teaching process (Fattu, 1965); develop methods of assessing pupil functioning levels (Utsey, Wallen and Beldin, 1966); develOp categories for the classification of different behaviors (Wallen, 1966); and prepare student teachers to handle different classroom behaviors (Gustafson, 1969). Delaney (1969) believes that such goals are meaningful to counselor education. He has concluded that: 1. Simulation is effective as an instructional technique; 44 2. The use of a television monitor for stimulus presenta- tion is apprOpriate; 3. Realism is not a primary requirement for the transfer of learning; 4. Simulation positively affects actual performance; 5. Simulation provides economy of time and reduces long- term eXpense; 6. The application of stimulation techniques to counselor education has shown to be feasible and effective (p. 185). Despite such "testimonials", there has been little research into the development of a simulation technique for counselor education. Of the work that has been done, most involves the use of Simulation in the therapy pro- cess. Kagan et al. (1967) have develOped a series of video vignettes which portray emotional Situations which typically concerned the client in the counseling relation- ship.1 These concerns are: (a) that the counselor might hurt or reject him, (b) that the counselor might make an affectionate, dependent, or seductive approach toward him, (c) that the client's own hostile impulses toward the counselor might emerge, and (d) that the client's own affectionate, dependent, or seductive impulses tOward the counselor might be expressed or acted out. Each concern 1The films were develOped as part of the ongoing Interpersonal Process Recall Project at MSU. 45 was depicted across a number of intensity levels ranging from mild to extreme. The films were tested on a number of subjects, and observations were made to determine the extent of subject involvement (Kagan and Schauble, 1969). The authors report that there is little difficulty in involving a subject with such simulation material. They also indicate that subjects involved in simulation followed by recall appears to gain rapid insight into what was probably their typical reactive behaviors in situations such as those depicted through the Simulation materials. Danish and Kagan (1969) report additional benefits of the Simulation films. These include "focusing on particular problem areas, (2) eXploring alternate ways of dealing with feelings, and (3) helping the counselor better under- stand his client's mode of reacting to the "generalized other" depicted in the vignettes. One wonders what applications a structured simulation eXperience might have in counselor education. Kagan et a1. (1967) suggest that beginning counselors experience con- flicting feelings parallel to those of their clients. If this is the case, trainees may be able to derive the same benefits from simulated interpersonal encounters as do clients in therapy; and such benefits might translate into effective counselor performance. The implications are intriguing but they await research for validation. 46 Role Playing A number of researchers have supported the use of role playing in counselor education. Sperle (1933), Wrenn (1962), Rogers (1951), and HOppock (1957) suggest that role playing is effective in helping students solve and analyze problems, develOp attitudes and feelings for the counseling relationship, and develop interviewing skills. Thompson and Bradway (1950) indicate that role playing is esPecially valuable in helping trainees develop an increased awareness and understanding of non-verbal behaviors. Kay and Schick (1945) and Bridgwater and Crookston (1952) advocate the use of role playing as an introduction to the counseling eXperience. They believe that the technique allows prospective counselors to develOp skills that would normally be gained only through extensive trial and error. Role playing is seen as a process which gives trainees a common frame of reference from which discussion is stimulated. It was believed that the technique helped trainees make an easier entrance into the actual counseling situation by giving them some confidence and practice in simulation situations. Lippett and Hubbell (1955) reviewed the research literature on role playing as a training technique for personnel and guidance workers. They concluded that although role playing is widely accepted in theory and 47 practice, there is very little experimental evidence to substantiate its validity as a training technique. Studies that do report eXperimental results have generally used self-report evaluation procedures in their analyses. Self-report technique have a great many limitations which make the results of analyses difficult to evaluate. For example, Musselman (1961) involved a group of secondary school counselors in an in—service training program which emphasized role-playing. At the end of the program, each counselor evaluated the training on a rating scale devised for the program. Musselman reported that 97 percent of the participants felt that they benefited from the role-playing exercises. One wonders whether the results reflect a "halo effect" or some other factor which was not accounted for by the author. There are many unanswered questions about the value of role playing in training. In general, it appears as if those who make use of the technique believe that they benefit from it. Group Procedures in Training Group counseling has been widely used in training. Those who support the technique believe that it benefits the trainee in a number of ways. Gazda and Ohlsen (1961) report the following trainee-benefits to be derived from a group eXperience. 48 (1) To discover that others like themselves have problems, that they can be helped by counseling; and that by solving these problems, they can live more richly; (2) To extend their knowledge of human behavior and to apply this understanding to their peers; (3) To observe, while obtaining help themselves, how qualified counselors assist various clients; and (4) To apply their knowledge of counseling techniques by assuming the co-therapist role in attempting to help others. Only a few well controlled studies have been done evaluating the impact of group procedures on trainees. Those that are available tend to cast some doubt on the efficacy of this procedure as a tool for develOping effective counseling behaviors. Parker and Kelly (1965) studied the effects of group counseling on counselor awareness of feelings. Seegers and McDonald (1963) examined the effects of group on counselor emotional growth and self-awareness. They separately concluded that group counseling can aid counselors gain insight into their own thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. Betz (1963) examined the effects of two types of group counseling on the subsequent counseling performance of NDEA counselor candidates. Fifteen counselors were eXposed to affective group counseling (defined as counseling that focused on the expression of feeling by treatment group members) while 49 fifteen counselors eXperienced cognitive group counseling (defined as counseling in which the focus was on the con— tent rather than on the feelings eXpressed or implied by the group members). Both groups received fourteen hours of counseling. Pre-post ratings on the subjects indicated that the affective counseling group significantly modified counseling behavior. The group significantly increased affective responses to clients as compared to pre-treatment behavior. No pre-post differences were found in the cognitive counseling group. Betz reported no significant differences between groups in degree of lead or variability of technique. He concluded that the focus of group counseling does effect subsequent counselor behavior with clients. From the research reviews, it appears that group counseling is desirable in counselor training if counselor self-awareness and reSponse to affect are seen as goals of the training process. Little evidence is available to demonstrate that such gains are translated into effective counselor performance. Conclusions and Implications of the Literature DeSpite the lack of controlled research in many of the areas related to counselor education, a number of implications can be drawn from the literature. There does not appear to be a satisfactory answer to the question of counselor function or role. A number 50 of attempts have been made to demonstrate the efficacy of the counselor as a social reinforcer, but Criteria pro- blems have prevented a satisfactory evaluation Of the counselor in this role. In a similar manner, attempts have been made to support the counselor's function as that of a catalyst for client self-exploration. The research in this area has failed to withstand the test of replication. For example, researchers who are not client centered in orientation have generally been unable to find support for the notion that successful counseling clients increase their levels of self-eXploration. The difference in conceptualizing the role of the therapist has led to differences in conceptualizing the goals of counselor training. Those who see the counselor as a social reinforcer espouse training that emphasizes coqnitiviely taught communication and information skills. Those who hold the counselor to be a facilitator of self— exploration advocate counselor self—understanding as a primary goal of training. Research was cited which supported the notion that a number of communication and information skills can be cognitively taught to trainees. Studies were also found which indicated that counselor attitudes toward self and others could be changed in a positive direction though training in which counselor self—understanding was emphasized. No support was found for the assumption that the development of either self- 51 understanding or communication and information skills led to more effective counselor behavior. The most promising approach to counselor training appears to be the "integrative approach" advocated by Truax, Carkhuff and Douds (1964). Truax et a1. indicate that the effec- tive counselor possesses self-understanding 32d communication and information skills. They have conducted a number of studies which indicate that effective coun- selors characteristically behave in ways that reflect both types of development. A number of techniques have been used in an attempt to improve the quality of counselor training. Group counseling for trainees has been widely used, but there is little evidence that a group eXperience helps the counselor increase his counseling skills with clients. Role playing appears to have limited value in training. Although it has proved beneficial for introductory and illustrative purposes, Black (1953), Landy (1953), and Kirk (1955) indicate that it is less beneficial to trainees than is actual client contact. Videotaping and Simulation appear to have a great deal of potential for counselor education. The use of stimulated recall of videotaped interviews in counselor education has been extensively researched with the IPR process (Kagan et al., 1967; Kagan and Schauble, 1969; Goldberg, 1967). The technique formulates an approach which provides 52 immediate feedback to the trainee and maximizes the Opportunity to eXplore the underlying dynamics of an interpersonal encounter. The simulation materials develOped by Kagan et al. have been primarily used in therapy. There are indications, however, that the simulated interpersonal encounters could be fruitfully used with counselors-in-training. In conclusion, the IPR procedure, which maximizes feedback to the counselOr, provides the Opportunity for a trainee to obtain a better understanding of himself, his client, and the obstacles which prevent effective communication between them in the counseling interview. Combined with the simulation exercises, which provide a variety of difficult situations and emotions for the counselor to deal with, and with didactic eXperiences, the IPR procedure appears to have a great deal of potential for enhancing the counselor in training process and incorporating many elements advocated or eXperimented with by researchers who represent a variety of different theoretical positions. CHAPTER III DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY In order to test the hypotheses stated in Chapter I, a research design was formulated that would permit com- parisons of affect sensitivity and counseling behavior within eXperimental groups over time and treatment, and between eXperimental groups after treatment. The two types of counselor training procedures, cognitive- intellectual and eXperiential-accepting, constitute the independent variable of this study. Counselor performance is the dependent variable. There are two reasons for using a pre-post design as the basis for answering the research questions. First, the counselors participating in this study had a varying amount of education and experience as therapists. It is necessary to have an initial measure of their performance in order to assess the effectiveness of either type of training. The initial measures of affect sensitivity and counseling behavior provide a base-line from which change in performance can be determined for each experi- mental group. Second, a pre-measure allows for a comparison of the relative effectiveness of each type of training program. It is necessary to determine the amount 53 54 of growth in counselors eXposed to a cognitive- intellectual training program in order to measure the relative effectiveness of eXperiential-accepting training. Table 3.1. Schematic representation of the eXperimental design. Groups Treatment Analysis EXperiential-Accepting 01 developing 01-02=D1 treatment (N=22) cognitive 02 skills and personal growth Analysis between treatments Cognitive-Intellectual 01 developing l treatment (N=22) cognitive 02 skills I Analysis over I time and treatment Description of the Experimental Procedures The treatment procedures were carried out twice, i.e., two separate training programs were conducted. The subjects of this study were prison counselors in the Michigan prison system. The nature of the counselors)work demanded that at least one-half of the counseling staff of each institution in the system maintain normal work routines at all times. Since training required counselor participation for ten, eight hour days, only half of the counselors in the system 55 , 3 could be involved at any one program. Each institution chose half of its counseling staff for inclusion into the first training program. The remaining counselors at each institution were designated as second program participants. Two critical issues had to be dealt with in the research. First it was necessary to verify that the two eXperimental Operational definitions of counselor training were actually enacted. Three individuals were primarily reSponsible for the execution of the program. One was designated supervisor of the cognitive-intellectual group, the second as the supervisor of the eXperiential-accepting group, and the third as the program coordinator. To make certain that each person understood the differences in the eXperimental definitions, each group supervisor was separately involved in a pre-program planning session with the coordinator to clarify role eXpectations of cognitive-intellectual and experiential-accepting counselor training. The cognitive-intellectual group leader was instructed to focus on the content of issues and questions raised by group members but to emphasize counselor techniques and client dynamics. The supervisor was to ignore or de—emphasize feelings expressed or implied by group members (Kagan, 1962). Affective con- cerns would not be totally ignored. If eXpressed, such concerns were accepted; but they were not probed, reflected, 56 or interpreted by the group supervisor. Emphasis was to be placed on the cognitive content of issues and questions and on the implications of the issues for the counseling process. The eXperiential-accepting group supervisor was asked to focus on the content of issues raised by the group members, but he was also requested to encourage the eXpression of feelings by group members. Affective concerns were to be enhanced, probed, reflected, and/or interpreted. The cognitive 32d affective content of issues and questions was to be emphasized and the impli- cations for the counseling process discussed. As a check on the actual existence of different training procedures, the work of the groups' supervisors -was observed during training by the program coordinator. Every training day the coordinator sat in on at least one session conducted by each supervisor. The observer viewed a different session each day. His function was to determine whether the supervisors were acting in accordance with the framework established above. "Outside" observers were also asked to monitor the supervisors' work at certain points during training. All agreed that the two Operational definitions of counselor training were being enacted. Finally, the supervisors participated in "briefing" and "de—briefing" sessions at the beginning and end of each day. In the "briefing" session the supervisors verbally reviewed what and how they would involve their 57 groups during the day. During "de-briefing" each super- visor recounted what had transpired in his group during that day. These sessions provided another means of assuring that the supervisors were functioning in the way prescribed by the Operational definitions of the research. The system of checks described above also aided in the solution of a second problem that had to be dealt with in the research. The problem was to verify that the counselors who participated in the second training program received training that was the same as that received by the counselors who participated in the first program. The plan of the study was to compare the differences between training in which the emphasis was cognitive- intellectual or eXperiential-accepting in the pOpulation of counselors of the Michigan Department of Corrections. In order to analyze the results of training across both programs it was necessary to make certain that counselors in the first and Second programs who were assigned cognitive—intellectual training faced the same tasks, presented in the same sequence, and presented in a like manner by the group supervisor. To control for supervisor effects in this research, the supervisor who led the cognitive—intellectual group during the first training program was assigned the experiential-accepting group during the second program, and the supervisor who led the 58 experiential—accepting group during the first program was assigned the cognitive-intellectual group during the second program. The coordinator's observations and the information obtained from the "briefing" and "de-briefing" sessions of the first program provided information from which a written description of the tasks that the groups had been involved with, the sequence of presentation, and the manner in which the tasks had been presented could be obtained. Part of the "briefing" sessions of the second program were devoted to the description of the activities in the first program. If questions arose, the supervisors could confer with one another and/or the coordinator to obtain clarification. During the "de- briefing" sessions, the supervisors' verbal reports of what had transpired during the day was compared with the description of the first program's events. Finally, the coordinator and "outside" observers again monitored the supervisors' work during the second program to determine whether the supervisors were functioning in the prescribed manner. Each training program involved 22 counselors and a total of 80 hours (10 consecutive days) of counselor involvement. In each program eleven counselors were randomly chosen for participation in cognitive-intellectual training and eleven randomly assigned eXperiential- accepting training. The two eXperimental groups participated 59 in the training tasks independently of one another although they were in the same training facility. A summary of the eXperimental procedures within the framework of the over— all design is presented in Table 3.2. Day 1 The first day's activities were the same for both the cognitive—intellectual and experiential-accepting groups. In the morning session the counselors (trainees) were told that the purpose of the training program was to help them Sharpen their skills as counselors. Questions about the program were answered; supervisors were introduced; general information questionnaires1 were completed by the trainees; and trainees were assigned to their specific groups. Each trainee remained in his assigned group for the remainder of the program. Each group then met separately with its supervisor. During this time the supervisors gave their men a schedule of activities for the next ten days. The supervisors reviewed the schedules2 and answered any questions that arose. Finally the supervisors showed the trainees how to use the audo tape recorders with which they were to audio tape their individual counseling sessions with inmate clients. 1See Appendix III for a COpy of the questionnaire used. 2See Appendix IV for a COpy of the program schedules for group 1 (cognitive—intellectual) and group 2 (eXper- iential-accepting). - 60 During the first part of the afternoon session the Empathy Scale was administered to the twenty-two trainees as a group. The test results were used as a pre-measure on the groups. Upon completion of this scale the members of the cognitive-intellectual group saw an inmate client for approximately 50 minutes. The audio tapes of that first session were collected and used for rating on the Counselor Verbal Response Scale (CVRS) as a pre-program sample of counseling behavior. While the members of the cognitive- intellectual group were seeing inmate clients, the members of the eXperiential-accepting group were introduced to the videotape equipment used in training. Group members were individually shown how to Operate and care for the machinery. When the members of the cognitive-intellectual (CI) group completed their counseling interviews, they were shown how to Operate and care for the video equipment. While the members of the CI group were involved in this task, the members of the eXperiential-accepting (EA) group saw inmate clients in individual counseling for approximately 50 minutes. The audio tapes of those sessions were collected for CVRS rating as a pre-program sample of the counseling behavior of the EA group. At the conclusion of the EA group's counseling interviews the day's program ended. 61 Day 2 Three activities were scheduled for day 2. They were: 1) Lecture Presentation - Both groups heard a lecture on the elements of facilitative communication. The dimensions of a facilitative personal interaction as defined by Truax and Carkhuff were reviewed as well as the relation- ship between the Truax and Carkhuff dimensions and the factors of effective communication as defined on the Counselor Verbal Response Scale. The presentation to the CI group emphasized client feelings and effective counselor reSponses. Counselor feelings and the signifi- cance of those feelings for the counseling interaction was not discussed. The presentation to the EA group included a discussion of client feelings and effective counselor responses but the emphasis of the lecture to this group was counselor feelings and the significance of those feelings to the counseling interaction. 2) Description of Program — Both groups were given an overview of the total training program. Each task in the program was described and the purposes of the tasks dis- cussed. The supervisor of the CI group pointed out how the various exercises promoted the development of skills in understanding the elements of effective counseling, understanding client communications, and developing counseling behaviors that promoted growth in clients. 62 The supervisor of the EA group provided the same infor- mation to his group but he emphasized that the training tasks would also help the trainees gain an awareness of their own feelings. The EA group was told that an understanding of one's own feelings helped a counselor make better use of any other skills develOped in training. Discussion was encouraged in both groups. 3) Individual Client Contact - Members of both groups counseled clients for approximately 50 minutes. Each trainee saw the same client that he worked with on the first day of the program. All sessions were audio recorded. If any problems arose during the interview, the trainee was free to bring the audio tape of his session to his supervisor for individual guidance, but this practice was not encouraged and very few had individual appointments. Approximately equal numbers from each group had such appointments. Day 3 Four tasks were scheduled for day 3. They were: 1) Training in the Interrogator Role - Each group heard a lecture on the role and function of the Interrogator from its supervisor. Questions were answered and discussion encouraged. When all questions and issues were dealt with, the group was divided into two smaller units of five and six trainees. The two small groups then worked separately in rooms that were equipped for video recording 63 and playback. One person in each group was asked to role- play a client. That person was requested to present a problem that he himself was concerned with, a problem that he might have had and solved, or a problem that someone that he knew very well was eXperiencing. The remaining members of the group became counselors for the role-playing individual. Each person counseled with the role-playing trainee for approximately five minutes with the other trainees looking on. The session was video recorded. When each of the group members had an oppor- tunity to interact with the "client," the video recorder was stOpped and the tape readied for playback. The first counselor to work with the role-playing client again took his position as counselor. The trainee who acted as the second counselor in the series took on the interrogator role and conducted a recall session for the first coun- selor. After approximately ten minutes of recall, the first counselor relinquished his position. The trainee who acted as the interrogator for the first counselor took the position as counselor. The videotape was moved to the point where the second counselor started to interact with the "client." The trainee who acted as the third counselor in the series became the interro- gator and he conducted a recall session for the second counselor (see Figures 3.1A and B). This procedure was repeated until all of the group members had an 64 Opportunity to participate in a recall session as a counselor and as an interrogator. The group supervisor divided his time between the groups. His function was to observe, critique, and offer suggestions to the trainee acting as interrogator about the trainee's enactment of the interrogator role. The focus of interrogation was counselor recall. In the CI group the interrogators questioned the counselors about client thoughts and feelings. Often the trainee who acted as a client would clarify what he was saying or feeling at any particular point in the interaction, but the emphasis was on the counselor's perceptions of what was going on in the client and with the quality (effectiveness) of the counselor's responses and behaviors. In the EA group the interrogators were encouraged to help the counselors eXplore their own thoughts and feelings during the counseling interaction as well as the client's thoughts and feelings; but the main emphasis of the counselor recall was counselor feelings and the relation- ship Of those feelings to the client-counselor interaction. Figure 3.1A. 65 A diagramatic representation of the role- played counseling interactions. A a c: ---; A Clim‘r Count/08 Cla’am‘ Contest/ea —-> C. B chums». 065 Ryan. a c C HEN Count: 94 A Obthda’R Figure 3.18. A diagramatic representation of the interrogation training sessions. A --—- c. c: B C I fur I» remnanha Ch'cu‘r _ 13¢ funoaam B Coward/a4 6-: 36104 B ---- A C I [001' mknoao'm‘ C Cleanse/ea 2. Expert Tape - Both groups watched a videotaped coun- seling session and the recall of that session conducted by eXperienced Ph.D. counselors. The tape served as an example of "expert" counseling. In both the CI and EA groups the supervisors used the tape to give their trainees a chance to interpret client feelings, observe the range of counselor responses and behaviors, rate counselor reSponses on dimensions of facilitative communication, and 66 observe a counselor model Operationalizing the concepts presented to the groups in the previous day's lectures. The emphasis in the CI group was client feelings and the quality of counselor responses. In the EA group the supervisor emphasized counselor feelings and behaviors and the relation of those feelings and behaviors to the client-counselor interaction. 3) Individual Client Contact - Members of both groups counseled with the same inmates they had seen since the beginning of the program. Two trainees from each group saw their clients in the rooms equipped for video recording and playback. Those trainees (two different trainees each day) saw the clients for approximately 30 minutes. The sessions were videotaped. At the end of the 30 minutes, each client-counselor pair was joined by another trainee who conducted a client recall session. The counselor remained in the room during recall, but he did not participate in the client-interrogator interaction. After approximately 30 minutes the client recall session was terminated. The videotape was set aside for use in the Review Sessions. The trainees not involved in the video procedures audio taped their individual counseling sessions. 4) Review Sessions — The counseling sessions previously videotaped by the trainees were reviewed in a group setting during this task. The supervisor of the CI group used the 67 tapes to give the group the Opportunity to increase their skills in discriminating client feelings. The task also provided the videotaped counselors with feedback from the group on the quality of their counseling. The Operation of any of the concepts presented in the previous day's lecture were pointed out in the videotapes of the counseling sessions. In addition to the tasks outlined above for the CI group, the members of the EA group eXplored their own feelings during the client contacts. The relationship between counselor feelings and the course of counseling was often discussed with the EA group. Day 4 The following tasks were scheduled: 1) Training in the Interrogator Role - The same procedure was followed on Day 4 as was followed on Day 3. 2) Individual Client Contact - The same procedure was followed on Day 4 as was followed on Day 3. 3) Review Session - The same procedure was followed on Day 4 as was followed on Day 3. 4) Stimulus Films — The film was presented, one vignette at a time, to each total group. Before the presentation of a vignette, the following instructions were given: "Pretend that the person on the screen is a person you have been talking with. You are alone with him. He is speaking to you and you alone. Try to forget that this is a film. Try to pretend that you are in a real life situation. After the film is completed you will be asked to recall some of the 68 feelings that you were having during the encounter." ~ Videotaping was not uSed during this exercise. The supervisor of the CI group focused the trainees on the feelings of the filmed "other" and on effective responses. The counselors were asked to eXplore what the "client" was saying and why he might be reacting in the way depicted on the film. They were then asked to respond to what the "client" was saying. The various responses offered by the trainees were discussed in relation to the dimensions of facilitative communication. In the EA group the emphasis of the exercise was the counselor's feelings and thoughts during the encounter with the filmed "client." Both groups explored the feelings underlying the "client's" behaviors, the possible reasons for those behaviors, and the responses that might be offered to the "other." Days 5-9 The groups were involved in the same tasks - training in the interrogator role, individual client contacts, review sessions, and stimulus films--on Days 5-9 as on Day 4. Several variations, however, were incorporated into the interrogator role and stimulus film exercises. The variations were: 1) Training in the Interrogator Role - The basic procedures described above were followed on all days. The focus of the recall sessions changed however. On Day 5 the 69 interrogators practiced conducting client recall instead of counselor recall. On Days 6-9 the interrogators practiced conducting mutual recall. 2) Stimulus Films - On days 7-8-9 the stimulus films were used for half of the session. During the time remaining in the session, the trainees recreated their own stimulus material (on videotape) of encounters that were eSpecially difficult for them to deal with in their work situation. These tapes were then dealt with in the same way as the vignettes of the stimulus films. The procedures followed in each group were the same as those described above. The CI group concentrated on client affect and counselor technique while the EA group concentrated on their own reactions to the vignettes. Day 10 Two basic tasks were scheduled: 1) Testing with the Empathy Scale - The affect sensitivity scale was administered to both groups. The results of the testing were used as a post-measure on the groups' affect. sensitivity. 2) Individual Client Contact - All members of each group interviewed inmate clients for approximately 50 minutes. Clients not previously known to any person in the groups were seen by each trainee. Each counseling session was audiotaped. The tapes were collected and used for rating on the CVRS as a post-program same of trainee counseling behavior. 70 At the end of Day 10 supervisors met with individual trainees to answer any questions that the trainees had about their own counseling or the training program. Delayed Post Tapes An attempt was made to Obtain some estimate of the amount of learning lost after the completing of training. On Day 10 of the first training program each trainee was given a new audio tape. The trainees were asked to keep the tapes for four weeks and then tape record a routine counseling session of their choice. The counselors were I ‘1‘: l I “ ' I instructed to return the tape to the investigator upon completion of the task. These audio tapes were rated on the same scales and at the same time as the pre- and post-tapes obtained during the regular programs. There were some questions as to whether or not the delayed post tapes could be obtained. Several of the institutions had strict security rules and the use of audio recording equipment was prohibited. Other institutions (prison camp programs) had no accessxto audio tape recorders. A complete return of this sameflwas not, therefore, possible. Nevertheless, it was felt that even a partial return of the data could provide some preliminary types of information concerning any extinction of training skills. 71 Table 3.2. A summary of the eXperimental procedures. Didactic-Intellectual Experiential-Accepting Group Group Day 1 10:00 a.m. General group meetings. Questionnaires answered, trainees divided into eXperimental groups, supervisors introduced, and general purpose of the program discussed. 11:00 a.m. First group meeting First group meeting with supervisor. with supervisor. Schedules reviewed Schedules reviewed and and use of audio use of audio recorders recorders demon- demonstrated. strated. 11:45 a.m. Lunch Break 1:00 p.m. Empathy Scale (A.S.S.) administered to all trainees as a group. 2:30 p.m. Individual client Introduction to video contact. tape equipment. 3:30 p.m. Introduction to Individual client video tape equipment. contact. 4:30 p.m. Sessions End Day 2 8:00 a.m. Lecture presentation. Description of program. 10:30 a.m. Lecture presentation. Individual client contact. 11:30 a.m. Lunch Break 1:00 p.m. Description of Lecture presentation. program. 3:30 p.m. Individual client Lecture presentation. contact. 4:30 p.m. Sessions End 72 Table 3.2 (cont'd). Didactic-Intellectual EXperiential-Accepting Group Group Day 3 8:00 a.m. Training in interro- EXpert tape presenta- gator role. tion. 10:30 a.m. Individual client Review session. contact. 11:30 a.m. Lunch Break 1:00 p.m. Review session. Individual client contact. 2:00 p.m. EXpert tape Training in interro- presentation. gator role. Sessions End Days 4-9 8:00 a.m. Training in the Stimulus films. interrogator role. 10:30 a.m. Individual client Review session. contact. 11:30 a.m. Lunch Break 1:00 p.m. Review session. Individual client contact. 2:00 p.m. Stimulus films Training in the interrogator role. 4:30 p.m. Sessions End Day 10 8:30 a.m. Individual client Empathy Scale contact. administered. 10:00 a.m. Empathy Scale Individual client administered. contact. 11:30 a.m. Lunch Break 1:00 p.m. Supervisors available to all trainees. Program ends. 73 Setting The counselors were trained in a facility especially constructed by the Michigan Department of Corrections for training purposes (see Figure 3.2). Included in the facility were: (1) Two large meeting_rooms - equipped with tables and chairs, the rooms were used for lecture purposes. (2) Two small rooms - each room was equipped with a video- . tape recorder, a television camera, a video monitor, two chairs, and a small table upon which a micrOphone was placed. The rooms were used for video recording and playback during the interrogator training sessions and the individual counseling sessions. (3) Twelve sleeping rooms - two chairs and an audio tape recorder were placed in each room. The rooms were used for the individual client contacts that were not videotaped. (4) Large basement meeting room - the review sessions and stimulus film sessions were conducted in this room. Equipment was available for film pro- jection and video recording and playback. (5) A central office - the administrative aspects of the program were coordinated from this location. 74 (6) Kitchen-recreation area - the inmate-clients could make use of the area while waiting to be seen by their counselors. The training facility was located away from any other prison installation. The counselors participating in training were, therefore, separated from this distraction and pressures of their routine duties. SAMPLE Supervisors All training in the study was conducted by two counselors. One counselor was an eXperienced counselor educator and held a Ph.D. and the other was an advanced doctoral student in counseling. Both counselors were schooled in the "traditional" form of counseling and had additional training and eXperience in using the IPR procedures in counseling and counselor training. Crossing counselors and training procedures across the treatment programs provided a method of controlling the differences in the counselors' backgrounds, Skills, and eXperience. Both counselors were familiar with the research hypotheses and, because of the differences in experimental procedures, knew the treatments to which the trainees were assigned. Strict adherence to the established description of the eXperimental procedures and. a reliance on the professional attitudes of the counselors 75 seemed more advisable, however, than using counselors inexperienced in the IPR theory and methodology. Figure 3.2. Diagram of the training facility. a: a: 7 E s 5 y S 3 6 ‘2' S I 5’ .‘L / ’Of' Vial... fir». L 1’ BMW" 3 \ nun any 3.... *1 J L %Efifi Tee-cam n'o .1 2 Villa Tfifmb fl #- STonneE Room Room R can a 0 \ 0 .fl? Class Room Id: 2 j Cthstuwn ‘# I \ f OFFICE Raters Two advanced doctoral candidates in counseling were used as judges for rating outcomes. Both judges were experienced in the use of the CVRS and the EUIPS. Immediately before rating the tapes of this study, the judges completed over 80 hours of rating with the CVRS and the EUIPS in another study. Their ratings were known to J' ‘. 76 correlate very highly with one another. Training sessions were not, therefore, conducted by this investigator. Neither rater was familiar with the research hypothesis, the group assignments, or the trainee-supervisor assign- ments. Trainees The trainees who participated in the study functioned in one of three capacities in the Michigan prison system: (a) associate counselor - less than one year's eXperience as a counselor in the prison system; (b) counselor - more than one year's eXperience as a counselor in the prison system; and (c) director of counseling - a minimum of three years of eXperience in counseling and/or social work in the prison system. All of the counselors were required to participate in the study by the central office of the Department of Corrections. The subject group could not, therefore, be characterized as volunteer. It should be noted, however, that while the use of a non—volunteer sample might limit the generalizability of results, none of the counselors demonstrated a lack of motivation, enthusiasm, or interest in the program. Out of a total of 46 counselors in the prison system, only two men did not participate in this study. Family difficulties prevented each from participating in the complete training sequence. One person reported to the training facility 77 3 days after the program had started and the second individual reported on the 5th day of the program. Of the remaining 44 subjects attendance was near perfect. As an additional indication of the subjects' attitude toward training it should be noted that almost all of the trainees wanted to Spend more than the allotted amount of time in the various training tasks, all requested reading materials from the staff, and many used the equipment during the evening hours. The CI and EA training groups were randomly assigned to eXperimental treatments and then compared on variables which might have influenced the outcome of training. The variables were: (1) age, (2) years of education, (3) number of credits in counseling courses, (4) number of credits in counseling practicum courses, and (5) number of years of eXperience as counselors. Table 3.3 summarizes this data. The groups appear reasonably comparable. 78 Table 3.3. Comparison of training groups according to mean age, mean years of education, mean number of credits in counseling courses, mean number of credits in counseling practicum courses, and mean number of years experience as counselors. CI Training Group EA Training Group Mean Age 37.6 32.9 Mean Years of Education 16'1 15°9 Mean Number of Credits in Coun- 7.1 6.1 seling Courses Mean Number of Credits in Coun— seling Practicum Courses Mean Number of Years EXperience 5.7 3.8 as Counselors* f *In the prison system. Instrumentation Three measures were used as criteria in this study: (1) The Affect Sensitivity Scale (A.S.S., Kagan, Krathwohl et al., 1967), (2) The Counselor Verbal Response Scale (CVRS, Kagan, Krathwohl et al., 1967), and (3) The Empathic Understanding in Interpersonal Processes Scale (EUIPS, Truax and Carkhuff, 1967). 79 The Affect Sensitivity Scale The Affect Sensitivity Scale3 purports to measure a subject's ability to perceive the feelings of another. The subjects being tested with the A.S.S. view a videotaped segment of a client-counselor interaction. At the end of each vignette the testee answers two items about the interaction. The test contains 67 multiple- choice items, each item consisting of one correct answer and two distractors. There are two items for each vignette; one of the items refers to the client's feelings about himself and the other refers to the client's feelings about the counselor with whom he was working. The testee's score is determined by the number of correct responses made. Kagan, Krathwohl et al. (1967, pp. 173-175) conducted a number of investigations into the reliability of form B of the A.S.S. Table 3.4 summarizes the data obtained. Seven sample groups were selected: two NDEA groups (J and K in table) tested pre and post their institute programs; one group of university undergraduates tested one week apart (P in Table 3.4); three groups in NDEA institutes tested once (groups I, L. M in Table 3.4); and one group of practicing school counselors (N in Table 3.4) tested once. Reliability coefficients range 3See Appendix V for a copy of the Affect Sensitivity Scale. 80 from .53 to .76, indicating, according to Kagan, Krathwohl et a1. sufficient reliability for further use. Form C of the A.S.S. (described earlier in this chapter) was used for this study. This form combines Form B's value as a measure of affect sensitivity with the benefit of reducing testing time. The Counselor Verbal Response Scale The CVRS consists of five separate dimensions which are purported to characterize productive counselor behavior in counseling.4 The dimensions are: (l) Affective- Cognitive; (2) Understanding-Non-understanding; (3) Specific—Non-specific; (4) EXploratory—Non-exploratory; and (5) Effective-Non-effective. The Effective-Non- effective dimension was not used in the CVRS ratings done for this study. The Empathic Understanding in Interpersonal Processes Scale was used instead. The CVRS is rated on the basis of a series of individual client-counselor verbal units (client statement and counselor reSponse) during the course of a counseling interview. The usual procedure is to rate twenty client- counselor units from the middle third segment of an interview. A judge is required to describe every counselor response to a client verbalization on each of the dimensions 4See Appendix VI for a c0py of the CVRS rating scale. 81 On. mm.m «N 2 up. mm.m em 2 on. mm.m mm A Hm. mm.m hm H mm. mu. wo.m No.m mm om m mm. mm. nm.m nm.m am am M on. No. mm.h an.m hm vm b ummuumom umoumum ammupmom ammumnm ummuumom ammumum msouu mOOHumamHHOO chHumw>mO pumpcmum .muommndm mo Hmnfisz mamemm .mmoouo mHmEmm co>mm How mucOAOAMMOOO wuflaflnmflamm om maneuom SOmpHm20fimIHOOsx .¢.m OHQMB 82 described. After twenty counselor responses are rated, the totals on each dimension are obtained. A maximum score of 20 and a minimum score of 0 is possible for each dimension. The dimensions are defined as: Affective-Cognitive Responses. An affective counselor response is one which refers to any affective component (emotion, feeling, fear, etc.) of a client's communication. Cognitive counselor reSponses deal with the cognitive (information oriented) elements of a client's verbalizations. Understanding-Nonunderstanding. Understanding is characterized by the counselor's ability to convey to the client his awareness of and sensitivity to the client's feelings and concerns. The counselor acts in a non- understanding way when he fails to be aware Of and sensitive to what the client is saying. Specific- nonspecific. A Specific counselor response is one which deals with the core of the client's concerns. A non- specific response is one which peripherally deals with the client concerns or a reSponse that completely disregards the client's concerns. Specific reSponses deal with the verbal and non-verbal aspects of the client's explicit or implicit communications. Exploratory-Non— eXploratory. An eXploratory counselor response encourages the client to explore the critical dimensions of his concerns. A nonexploratory response limits or prohibits eXploration by the client. 83 The CVRS has been used in previous research to measure the change in counselor behavior within and between various approaches to training. In a study conducted by Goldberg (1967), two groups of counselor trainees were exposed to different methods of supervision (this study is described in detail in Chapter II). Pre and post audio tapes of initial counseling sessions were Obtained for both groups. Nine advanced doctoral candidates were used to rate the tapes on the CVRS. The judges were divided into three groups and reliability measures for each group were obtained through the use of Ebel's intraclass correlation technique. The results are reported in Table 3.5. Reliabilities reported are sufficiently high to indicate that usein future analysis is warranted. Table 3.5. Intraclass correlation reliability estimates of individual and average ratins calculated for judges' ratings across tapes on each dimension of the CVRS. Aff Und Spec Exp Eff N Cog N Und N Spec N EXp N Eff. I Average 16 .93 .96 .90 .81 .95 Individual 16 .82 .90 .76 .59 .86 II Average 28 .93 .96 .93 .96 .96 Individual 28 .81 .87 .80 .87 .89 III Average 28 .93 .94 .92 .92 .93 Individual 28 .83 .83 .80 .79 .82 84 The Empathic Understanding in Interpersonal Processes Scale The facilitative counselor is defined as one who reSponds to a client with complete and accurate empathic understanding of the client's innermost thoughts, feelings, and concerns. Effective counselor responses (behaviors) are defined as those behaviors which can be characterized by accurate empathic understanding of client communications (Carkhuff, 1967). The most recent form of the EUIPSS is a five point scale, where a rating of one is the lowest possible score and a rating of five the highest possible score. At Level 1 the counselor's reSponses do not attend to or significantly detract from the verbal and behavioral expressions of the client. At Level 2 the counselor responds in such a way that affect is noticeably sub- tracted from client communications. At Level 3 the counselor responds to the client with affect and meaning that is essentially the same as that expressed by the client. The counselor neither adds nor subtracts from the feelings communicated by the client, but the counselor does not accurately describe how the client feels beneath the surface feelings. This is the minimal level of facilitative interpersonal functioning. At Level 4 the counselor expresses client meaning and affect at a deeper 5See Appendix VII for a COpy of the scale description. 85 level than the client was himself able to express. At Level 5 the counselor's responses add significantly to the feelings expressed by the client. At this level the counselor accurately expresses feelings at a level deeper than the client himself is able to express, or in ongoing and deep self-eXploration, the counselor is fully sharing with the client, even in the client's deepest thoughts and feelings. A number of studies have been done testing the reliability of the EUIPS (Truax and Carkhuff, 1967). Truax (1966) examined the reliability of ratings on accurate empathy using Patient-Therapist-Patient, Therapist- Patient—Therapist, and Time units of analysis. Table 3.6 contains the results of the reliability estimates. The reliabilities reported ranges from .84 to .92, indicating that the ratings are sufficiently reliable to be used in further analysis. Table 3.6. Reliabilities of rating scales for accurate empathy using patient-therapist-patient, therapist-patient-therapist, and time units of analysis. Unit N samples N patients N therapists Correlation TPT 283 63 8 .84 PTP 305 65 8 .89 Time 384 80 8 .92 86 Reliability of Tape Ratings All of the audio tapes from the study were coded by the investigator in order to prevent the judges from making a pre or post-study identification. The same procedure was followed for each tape rated: a five minute excerpt from the first third of the interview was presented to the judges in order to familiarize them with the client voice, counselor voice, and presenting problem; the tape was moved to the middle third segment of the interview and the judges independently rated 20 consecutive counselor responses on the four dimensions of the CVRS (described earlier in this chapter) and 20 responses on the EUIPS; the totals for each dimension were calculated. The average of the judges' ratings on each dimension were calculated and used as the unit of analysis. For the purposes of this investigation, Ebel's intra- class correlation technique was used. The technique provides a reliability estimate of each judge's rating as well as the average ratings for judges across tapes and individual segments or reSponses. Since the average of the two judges' ratings on each dimension for each tape was used as the unit of analysis for evaluating counselor growth, the interview (across- tape) reliability rather than the reliability of individual responses was calculated. The sample used to obtain the reliability estimates consisted of the ratings of the 87 88 pre and post and the delayed post interview tapes for the 44 trainees in this study. The results of the reliability test are presented in Table 3.7. Table 3.7. Interjudge reliabilities of ratings on the counselor verbal response scale and the empathic understanding in interpersonal processes scale. Scales Rater Intercorrelations Delayed Pre-tapes Post—tapes Post-tapes EUIPS .98 .98 .78 Affect .93 .99 .99 Understanding .96 .98 .97 CVRS Specific .96 .98 .98 EXploratory .96 .98 .98 Total .96 .99 .98 Table 3.7 indicates that the interjudge reliabilities for the CVRS and the EUIPS ranged between .78 and .99 (average of ratings). These figures show that there was a high degree of stability between judges' ratings. Analysis of Data The following statistical analysis were performed on the data of this study: 1) The Affective Sensitivity Scale In order to test the differences between groups in affect sensitivity, a 2 x 2 analysis of variance (with equal cell frequency) of change scores (pre to post measures) was performed. 2) 3) 4) 5) 88 The Counselor Verbal Response Scale The same procedure was used for the CVRS as that described for the Affect Sensitivity Scale. The Empathic Understanding in Interpersonal Relationships ice-112 The same procedure was used for the EUIPS as that described for the Affect Sensitivity Scale. In order to test differences within groups across all measures, a 2 x 2 analysis of variance (with equal cell frequency) of change scores (pre to post measures) was performed for each group. Postfipost Tape Ratings on the CVRS and EUIPS In order to test the differences within and between groups over treatment and time (training time and no- training time), an analysis of variance (pre to post to delayed post) was performed. A descriptive analysis of the within group change scores was also attempted. The analysis of variance was the most powerful statistic that could be used on this data (Hays, 1963). No evidence was found to indicate that the assumptions of the statistical model were violated. The hypothesis related to analysis #1 is non-directional and a two- tailed test for significance at the .05 level was used. The hypothesis related to analyses #2, 3, and 4 are directional. In these analyses, a one-tailed test for significance at the .05 level was used. 89 Hypotheses The specific hypotheses of this study are presented in research form. H1 No significant difference in scores on affect sensitivity (as measured by the Affective Sensitivity Scale) will be found between counselors eXposed to an eXperiential- accepting emphasis in training and counselors eXposed to training emphasizes cognitive-intellectual learning. H2 Counselors eXposed to an experiential-accepting emphasis in training will score Significantly higher on empathic understanding (as measured by the Empathic Understanding in Interpersonal Processes Scale) than will counselors exposed to a jpgnitive-intellectual emphasis. H3 Counselors eXposed to an experiential-accepting emphasis in training will score significantly higher on each dimension of facilitative counseling (as measured by the Counselor Verbal Response Scale) than will coun- selors exposed to training which emphasizes cognitive- intellectual learning. H4 A Significant difference in scores on all measures taken as a total (as indicated by the sum of the A.S.S., the EUIPS, and the CVRS) will be found (pre to post treatment) in counselors exposed to an eXperiential- accepting emphasis in training. H5 No significant difference in scores on all measures taken as a total (as indicated by the sum of the A.S.S., 90 the EUIPS, and the CVRS) will be found (pre to post treatment) in counselors exposed to a cognitive- intellectual emphasis in training. H Counselors eXposed to training which emphasizes experiential-accepting learning will maintain signifi- cantly higher scores in empathic understanding (as measured by the Empathic Understanding in Interpersonal Processes Scale) than will counselors eXposed to training which emphasizes cognitive-intellectual learning. H Counselors exposed to training which emphasizes eXperiential-accepting learning will maintain signifi- cantly higher scores on each dimension of the CVRS than will counselors exposed to training which emphasizes cognitive-intellectual learning. Summary Forty-four counselors were randomly assigned to two treatments: (1) training emphasizing eXperiential- accepting develOpment through trainee self—examination and (2) training emphasizing cognitive-intellectual develOpment through trainee examination of client dynamics and counselor techniques. A randomized block design incorporating change scores pre to post treatment was used to measure the differences in change within and between groups on: (1) The Affective Sensitivity Scale 91 (A.S.S.), (2) The Counselor Verbal Response Scale (CVRS) and, (3) The Empathic Understanding in Interpersonal Processes Scale (EUIPS). Each trainee completed the A.S.S. pre and post training. Audio tapes of initial counseling interviews were obtained from each trainee pre and post eXperimental treatment. Two independent judges completed the CVRS and EUIPS ratings for all of the audio tapes collected from the trainees. AnalysiS were done on the mean change score differ— ences pre to post treatment for both groups on all criteria. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF THE DATA An analysis of the data is presented in Chapter IV. This analysis is based on the statistical procedures described in Chapter III. The results of the analysis are presented in the following sequence: (1) (2) (a) (b) (a) (b) An analysis of variance of pre-treatment to post- treatment change in scores across all measures is presented for the CI (cognitive-intellectual) training groups and the EA (eXperiential- accepting) training groups to determine within group differences of each treatment on the outcome criteria. Graphic representations of trainee performance on each of the criterion measures employed (the A.S.S., the EUIPS, and the CVRS) are presented to indicate differences in patterns of change within the treatment groups. An analysis of variance of pre—treatment to post- treatment gains across all measures is presented to determine change differences between groups. D-tests of pre-treatment to post-treatment gain on each criterion measure are presented for the 92 (3) (a) (b) 93 CI training groups and the EA training groups to determine change differences between treatments on each measure of counselor performance. An analysis of variance of post-treatment to delayed post—treatment change in ratings and pre- treatment to delayed post-treatment change in ratings on the EUIPS and on each dimension of the CVRS is presented to determine change differences between treatments over time and treatment. A descriptive analysis of post-treatment to delayed post-treatment change in ratings and pre-treatment to delayed post-treatment change in ratings on the EUIPS and on each dimension of the CVRS is pre- sented to indicate differences in patterns of change between treatments over time and treatment. Pre-treatment to Post-treatment Change Within Groups The null hypotheses tested for within group differ- ences were: HO HO 1. No difference in pre-treatment to post-treatment change scores (summed across all measures) will be found in counselors exposed to an eXperiential- accepting emphasis in training. No different in pre-treatment to post-treatment change scores (summed across all measures) will be 94 found in counselors exposed to a cognitive-intellectual emphasis in training. The hypotheses were tested by means of an analysis of variance. An F—value of 4.08 for a one-tailed test of significance with l and 42 degrees of freedom is necessary before chance differences of mean change can be rejected at the .05 level of confidence. Table 4.1 contains the results of the analysis of variance. The results indicate that a significant inter- action exists between groups and times (pre-treatment to post-treatment) and that a non-significant interaction exists between groups, times, and measures. Table 4.1. Analysis of variance of pre-treatment to post-treatment change within groups summed across the A.S.S., the EUIPS, and the CVRS. Source Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Time 1384.74 1 1384.74 85.837* Groups * Times 81.68 1 81.68 5.063* Error 677.55 42 16.13 - — - - Times * Measures 488.81 3 162.94 16.7l9* * ' * Gr°“ps Tlmes 92.58 3 17.53 1.798 Measures Error 1227.96 126 9.75 - - - — *Significant at .05 level. The significant F-value for the groups and times interaction indicates that it is statistically apprOpriate to use post—hoe comparisons to determine the nature of the differences in the groups across time. Such comparisons 95 were done by means of Tukey's Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) test of comparisons.1 An HSD value of 3.24 must be equaled or excelled before chance differ- ences in mean change can be rejected at the .05 level of confidence. Figure 4.1 and Table 4.2 contain the results of the comparisons. Figure 4.1 indicates that the ex- periential-accepting groups started at a point lower (in terms of numerical, not statistical, values) than did the cognitive—intellectual groups in pre-treatment testing and finished at a point higher than the cognitive- intellectual groups in post-treatment testing. Table 4.2 indicates that the change in mean score observed in the eXperiential-accepting groups is statistically signifi- cant, while the change in mean score observed in the cognitive-intellectual groups is not significant. Because significant differences were noted in the experiential- accepting group pre to post treatment, null hypotheses #1 can be rejected. Because no significant differences were noted between pre-treatment and post-treatment scores in the cognitive-intellectual groups, null hypothesis #2 cannot be rejected. lSee Hays (1963). Figure 4.1. Ibo + /5’:0“"’ I40 - ISoO "' ConéiNE Cl l blo— 1 SCORE-S ”,0— Ice -— g,o G?- 7.0 ~— \¥ 9‘0 d)— LEGEND: 96 Combined scores of trainee performance over time for the eXperiential-accepting training groups and the cognitive- intellectual training groups. «N- — PRE P05 7' 77m 5’ 2 mesa/MT!“ - flCcEPT/NG Tan/MING GRouPs _ Coeu,'7,'yg_IA/7-ELLECTc/19L rfim’dz'ué- GRau F’s 97 Table 4.2. Tukey's HSD test of pre-treatment to post- treatment change in scores within eXperi- mental groups. Group N Pre—mean Post—mean HSD Difference EXperiential-accepting 22 9.791 14.722 3.24 4.931* Cognitive—intellectual 22 10.860 13.864 3.24 3.004 *Significant at .05 level. Because of non-significant F-value was obtained for the groups, time, and measures interaction, it was inapprOpriate to use post-hoc statistical comparisons to determine pre to post differences with each group on the individual criterion measures. Graphic representations of trainee performance on each of the criterion measures can be employed, however, to indicate patterns within the treatment groups. Figures 4.2a and 4.2b represent treatment group changes over time on the A.S.S., the EUIPS, and on each dimension of the CVRS. The figures indicate that both the experiential-accepting groups and the cognitive-intellectual groups made gains pre- treatment to post-treatment on each of the criterion instruments employed in this study. The graphs also demonstrate that, although the experiential-accepting groups scored lower in pre-treatment testing, the eXperiential-accepting groups post-treatment testing scores were higher than those of the cognitive-intellectual 98 Figure 4.2a. Scores on the affect sensitivity scale over time for the eXperiential-accepting training groups and the cognitive- intellectual training groups. 42-0 ‘t 40.0 c—Ibh T .SCORES .mp— ON 330 — A, 5.5. 374% T I 390*- I 3&0- 34.0“- 330-— I 330‘ P \ Short Lo-P PR E POST TTLnE’ LEGEND: ~ _ EXPERIENTlfiL-n ficcs’p-rins wen/mus GRquS ------- : oogm'rjuz - 1:» TerischfiL TIM/MING GROHPS 99 Figure 4.2b. Scores on the EUIPS and on each dimension of the CVRS over time for the experiential- accepting training groups and the cognitive- intellectual training groups. f 00" A T- g e 4 P057 Scones l ”'0“ )oo«~ SCORES 93+ OVER 77m 5" 7'0 ‘- r——--——--o—-—---¢ FRE SCORES : as: PR5 ScoRES /.o~- 0 o 0 § 4“ g f i l l EuIPs cvaS cvRs CVRS eves flFFe cr unbiasrnubius SPECIFIC. EAPLonAroR y NflEflquE LEGEND! 9 : sxpgaisurifiL—geezer/MG Tflm'm'ue GRouRS ------------- -_-_ C°&~[r[¢/E—INTEALECTUI9L TRAIN/MG GROUPS 100 groups on all measures except the A.S.S. Between group differences are more fully discussed in the following section. Pre-treatment to Post-treatment. Changes Between Groups An analysis of variance was done to compare pre- treatment to post—treatment gains between the experimental groups. An F-value of 2.68 for a one-tailed test of significance with 3 and 126 degrees of freedom is necessary before chance differences in gains can be rejected at the .05 level of confidence. Table 4.3 contains the results of the analysis of variance. The analysis indicates that the measures- programs and the measures-programs-treatment interactions are significant at the .05 level of confidence. Post hoc comparisons of factors within significant inter- actions are statistically appropriate, and such comparisons were made by means of D-tests of pre-treatment to post- treatment gains between groups on each criterion measure. The null hypotheses and the comparisons used to test the hypotheses are individually presented for each scale (the A.S.S., the EUIPS, and the CVRS) used in this study. 101 Table 4.3. Analysis of variance of pre-treatment to post-treatment change between groups in scores on the A.S.S., CVRS. the EUIPS, and the Source Sum of - Squares df Mean Square F Treatments * Programs 18.324 1 18.324 0.52 Error 1404.863 40 35.122 - - Measures * Treatments 69.533 3 23.178 1.31 Programs * Treatments 175.248 3 58.416 3.29* Measures * Programs * Treatments 173.515 3 57.383 3.26 Error 2130.250 120 17.752 *Significant at .05 level. Affect Sensitivity Scale (A.S.S.) The null hypothesis tested for between group differ- ences in affect sensitivity was: H03: No difference in pre-treatment to post-treatment gain in scores on the Affect Sensitivity Scale will be found between counselors exposed to an eXper- iential-accepting emphasis in training and counselors eXposed to a cognitive-intellectual emphasis in training. A 5 value of 2.02 for a two-tailed test of signifi- cance with 42 degrees of freedom is necessary before chance differences in gains can be rejected at the .05 level of confidence. 102 Table 4.4 contains the results of the D-test com- parisons. The results indicate that no statistically significant difference exists between the EA training groups and the CI training groups in sensitivity to client affect. Because no significant differences were noted between the training groups, null hypotheses #3 cannot be rejected. Table 4.4. D-tests of pre-treatment to post-treatment changes in scores on affect sensitivity between experimental groups. CI EA _ P Program Group Mean Group Mean Error df D less than 1 & 2 5.955 6.902 1.93 42 0.49 0.50 1 2.818 5.909 2.52 20 1.22 0.20 2 9.091 7.909 2.72 20 0.43 0.50 The performance of the EA and CI training groups was also compared for each program. In individual program comparisons, a D-value of 2.08 for a two-tailed test of significance with 20 degrees of freedom is necessary before chance gains can be rejected at the .05 level of confidence. As indicated in Table 4.4, no significant differences were found between eXperimental groups in affect sensitivity in either program 1 or program 2 on this measure. 103 Empathic Understanding in Interpersonal Processes Scale (EUIPS) The null hypothesis tested for between group differences in empathic understanding was: H04: No difference in pre-treatment to post-treatment gain in scores on the Empathic Understanding in Interpersonal Processes Scale will be found between counselors eXposed to an experiential-accepting emphasis in training and counselors eXposed to a cognitive-intellectual emphasis in training. A D-value of 1.68 for a one—tailed test of signifi- cance with 42 degrees of freedom is necessary before chance differences in gains can be rejected at the .05 level of confidence. Table 4.5 contains the results of the D-test com- parisons. The results indicate that a significant difference exists between the EA training groups and the CI training groups in empathic understanding. Since significant differences were noted between the eXperimental groups, null hypothesis #4 can be rejected. 104 Table 4.5. D—tests of pre-treatment to post-treatment changes in scores in empathic understanding between eXperimental groups. CI EA Program Group Mean Group Mean Error df D P less than 1 & 2 0.130 0.544 0.140 42 2.96* .005 1 0.117 0.414 0.204 20 1.46 .09 2 0.132 0.674 0.221 20 2.45* .025 *Significant at .05 level. EXperimental group gains were also compared for each program. A D-value of 1.72 for a one-tailed test of significance with 20 degrees of freedom is necessary before chance gains in individual programs can be rejected at the .05 level of confidence. The D values in Table 4.5 indicate that in program 1 the EA training group gained more from pre to post-treatment than did the CI training group. The difference in gain is not significant, but it is in the hypothesized direction at p<.09. In program 2, a significant difference exists between the eXperi- mental groups in empathic understanding. Counselor Verbal Response Scale (CVRS) The null hypotheses tested for between group differences on each dimension of the CVRS were: H05: No difference in pre-treatment to post-treatment gain in the number of affective responses rated on HO HO H0 105 the CVRS will be found between counselors exposed to an experiential-accepting emphasis training and counselors exposed to a cognitive-intellectual emphasis in training. No difference in pre-treatment to post-treatment gain in the number of understanding responses rated on the CVRS will be found between counselors exposed to an experiential-accepting emphasis in training and counselors eXposed to a cognitive-intellectual emphasis in training. No difference in pre-treatment to post-treatment gain in the number of specific responses rated on the CVRS will be found between counselors eXposed to an eXperiential-accepting emphasis in training and counselors eXposed to a cognitive-intellectual emphasis in training. A No difference in pre-treatment to post-treatment gain in the number of exploratory responses rated on the CVRS will be found between counselors eXposed to an eXperiential-accepting emphasis in training and counselors exposed to a cognitive-intellectual emphasis in training. A D-value of 1.68 for a one-tailed test of signifi- cance with 42 degrees of freedom is necessary before chance differences in gains can be rejected at the .05 level of confidence. 106 Table 4.6 contains the results of the D-test com- parisons for the affect dimension of the CVRS. The results indicate that no significant difference exists between the EA training groups and the CI training groups on the affect dimension of the CVRS. Because no signifi- cant differences were found between groups, null hypotheses #5 cannot be rejected. Table 4.6. D—tests of pre-treatment to post—treatment changes in scores in affect responses bet- ween eXperimental groups. CI EA Program Group Mean Group Mean Error df D P less than 1 & 2 2.459 3.991 0.988 42 1.56 0.090 1 3.000 3.300 1.510 20 0.19 0.500 2 1.918 4.682 1.290 20 2.14* 0.025 *Significant at .05 level. The eXperimental groups performance on the affect dimension of the CVRS was also compared for each program. A D-value of 1.72 for a one-tailed test of significance with 20 degrees of freedom is necessary before chance gains in individual programs can be rejected at the .05 level of confidence. The values in Table 4.6 indicate that significant differences on the affect dimension of the CVRS do not exist between groups in program 1, but that significant differences between the EA and the CI training groups on the affect dimension of the CVRS do 107 exist in program 2. In each case, the EA training groups were in the direction of greater gains on the affect dimension than were the CI training groups. Table 4.7 contains the D-test comparisons for the Understanding, Specific and Exploratory dimensions of the CVRS. The values in the table indicate that a significant difference exists between the eXperimental groups on the Understanding, Specific and EXploratory dimensions of the CVRS. Since significant differences were found between groups, null hypotheses #6, 7 and 8 can be rejected. Table 4.7. D-tests of pre-treatment to post-treatment changes in scores in understanding, Specific, and eXploratory reSponses between eXperi- mental groups. CI EA Program Group Mean Group Mean Error df D P less than 1 & 2 3.432 7.155 1.94 42 1.93* 0.050 1 5.709 6.064 2.57 20 0.13 0.500 2 1.155 8.245 2.95 20 2.40* 0.025 *Significant at .05 level. During the analysis of this data, it was found that no difference existed between ratings on the Understanding, Specific, and ExPloratory dimensions of the CVRS. That is, if the judges rated a counselor's interview reSponse as understanding, they also rated the reSponse as Specific and eXploratory; and, if a response was rated 108 non-understanding, it was also rated as non-specific and non-eXploratory. The lack of difference in these ratings indicated that the judges might have develOped a "set" in rating the audio tapes in this study. Two procedures were used to examine the possibility of the existance of a rater "set." First, the judges used in this study were asked to rate five audio tapes obtained from another study on the CVRS. Differences were found in those ratings between the Understanding, Specific, and Exploratory dimensions. As a second check, two different judges, eXperienced in the use of the CVRS, rated five audio tapes randomly selected from all of the tapes collected for this study. The ratings obtained from the new pair of judges corresponded to the ratings of the judges used in this study. On the basis of these observations, it was assumed that the ratings on these dimensions of the CVRS were independent and not the result of rater bias or error. Comparisons were also made of the eXperimental groups' performance in each program. The values found in Table 4.7 indicate that, although the EA training group made greater gains on the Understanding, Specific, and Exploratory dimensions of the CVRS than did the CI group, no significant between grOUp difference was found on these dimensions in program 1. It is noted, however, that the difference between the groups is in the hypo- thesized direction at a P<.50. In program 2, the EA 109 training group made significantly greater gains in Understanding, Specific and EXploratory responses than did the CI training group. As stated in Chapter III, it was important to verify that the counselors who participated in the second training program received training that was the same as that received by the counselors who participated in the first program. To check on the consistency of each treatment over the course of the two programs, the treat— ment-program interaction was examined through the analysis of variance done between group differences. The results of the treatment-program analysis is found in Table 4.3. The results of the analysis indicate that there was no significant difference between the treatments over the two programs. That is, there is no difference between the cognitive-intellectual treatment in program 1, and the cognitive-intellectual treatment in program 2, and the eXperiential-accepting treatment in program 1 did not differ from the experiential-accepting treatment in program 2. Post-treatment to Delayed Post-treatment and Pre-treatment to Delayed Post-treatment Changes Between Groups A number of difficulties were encountered in collecting the delayed post-treatment audio tapes. One maximum security institution did not allow its counselors 110 to use tape recorders. Several other institutions did not have access to audio recorders. As a result of these difficulties, only sixteen audio tapes were collected. Of this number, four were inaudible and could not be rated by the judges. The remaining twelve tapes (six from the EA training group and six from the CI training group) comprise the sample from which the delayed post-treatment data was obtained. The results of analyses based on groups of small subject number must be cautiously interpreted.2 The reliability of statistics computed on eXperimental groups of six subjects each is questionable. The analysis described below was done more as a basis for generating future hypotheses than as a test of true differences between groups. The null hypotheses tested for post-treatment to delayed post—treatment and pre-treatment to delayed post- treatment changes between groups were: Hog: No difference in post-treatment to delayed post- treatment gain in scores on the EUIPS and on each dimension of the CVRS will be found between coun- selors exposed to an eXperiential-accepting emphasis in training and counselors exposed to a cognitive-intellectual emphasis in training. 2See Hays (1963). 111 H010: No difference in pre-treatment to delayed post- treatment gains in scores on the EUIPS and on each dimension of the CVRS will be found between counselors exposed to an eXperiential-accepting emphasis in training and counselors eXposed to a cognitive-intellectual emphasis in training. The hypotheses were tested by means of an analysis of variance. An F-value of 4.96 for a one-tailed test of significance with l and 10 degrees of freedom is necessary before change differences in gains can be rejected at the .05 level of confidence. Table 4.8 contains the results of the analysis of variance. The results indicate that no significant factors or interactions were found between groups for either the post—treatment to delayed post—treatment interval or the pre-treatment to delayed post-treatment interval when scores were summed for the EUIPS and each dimension of the CVRS. Null hypotheses #9 and 10 cannot be rejected. 112 Table 4.8. Analysis of variance of post-treatment to delayed post-treatment and pre-treatment to delayed post-treatment changes between samples on the EUIPS and on each dimension of the CVRS. Source Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Intervals 19.740 1 19.740 0.74 Groups * Intervals 28.956 1 28.956 1.09 Error 264.982 10 26.498 - - Measures * Intervals 10.564 2 5.282 0.49 * GrOUPS measures 12.321 2 6.160 0.57 Intervals Error 215.355 20 10.768 - - Because non-significant F-values were obtained in the analysis, it was inapprOpriate to use post-hoc statistical comparisons to examine between group differences on the individual criterion measures in each interval under consideration. Graphic representations of trainee performance on each criterion measure in each interval can be used, however, to indicate the direction of change bet- ween the treatment groups. Table 4.9 contains the post-treatment to delayed post-treatment losses of the experiential-accepting training group and the cognitive-intellectual training group on the EUIPS and on each dimension of the CVRS. Figure 4.3 is the graphic representation of the Table 4.9 values. Figure 4.3. 3.o~ aa- 43‘- 11.» dl-p RJ‘P 3.4-.. C MING: 3'3 " .IN a“* 14¢ , 1 b 171 SCOAES 10‘ 0 via [.9. ’77naE' '4- L75; lob ~- Lid» L4~r L34» :q—- L|-~ b0<~ GQfiP OJdP 01-- O-b-- Out-d}- 64‘» 03.. ma~~ O" '1'- LEGEND: -—.-d----—-- 113 Change in scores on the EUIPS and on each dimension on the CVRS over the post-treatment to delayed post-treatment interval for the eXperiential-accepting training groups and the cognitive-intellectual training groups. I J 1 r V T T r 5141?: c. Ms c ms e M5 c M5 ’9??ch awards bide sPacin'c. 2 Wagon R1 1 1 1 1 MEHSHRE : expsnieurin- mean/ac. Tan/Nine GRouPs z coanfirivi— INTFLLEcTunL. vsnimwe GRoqu 114 Table 4.9. Post-treatment to delayed post—treatment losses of the experimental groups on the EUIPS and on each dimension of the CVRS. CVRS Group N EUIPS Affect Under- Specific EXplora- standing tory ExPerlenFlal’ -o.13 -1.60 -2.30 -2.30 -2.30 Accepting Cognitive- 6 -0.02 -1.55 -1.53 -1.53 -l.53 Intellectual An examination of Table 4.9 and Figure 4.3 indicates that the six EA trainees had greater losses in scores on the EUIPS and on each dimension of the CVRS than did the six CI trainees in the post-treatment to delayed post- treatment interval. I Table 4.10 is a description of the pre—treatment to delayed post-treatment gains of the eXperiential- accepting training group and the cognitive-intellectual training group on the EUIPS and on each dimension of the CVRS. Figure 4.4 is the graphic representation of the Table 4.10 values. An examination of Table 4.10 and Figure 4.4 indicates that when the pre-treatment to delayed post-treatment interval is considered, the six EA trainees made greater gains on the EUIPS and on each dimension of the CVRS than did the six CI trainees. 115 Figure 4.4. Change in scores on the EUIPS and on each dimension of the CVRS over the total pre- treatment to delayed post—treatment interval for the eXperiential-accepting training groups and the cognitive-intellectual training groups. 50-- J ¢o—— C home: Scents OVER 3.0—1— To 17! I 1sz‘ 40—— IOO‘F : J. : : : . Eurps guns cvns cvns cvgs HFr'eer uuunmuoim snake. Ex ?l.oRd'ToA / Mansunz' LEGEND: : sxPemzurin-flccn‘nwc TRAIN/MG GRou‘Ps ----—-—----- -_—. c05~;r,'uE-INTJLLECTufiL TRm'N/NG» GRquS 116 Table 4.10. Pre-treatment to delayed post-treatment gains of the eXperimental groups on the EUIPS and on each dimension of the CVRS. CVRS Group N EUIPS Affect Under- Specific Explora- standing tory EXperiential- 6 1.52 2.21 4.88 4.88 4.88 Accepting Cognitive- 6 1.46 .91 2.36 2.36 2.36 Intellectual Combining the data in Table 4.9 and 4.10 and Figures 4.3 and 4.4, it appears that the six EA trainees incurred greater losses on the EUIPS and on each dimension of the CVRS in the post-treatment to delayed post-treatment interval than did the six CI trainees; but, when the total pre-treatment to delayed post-treatment interval is considered, the six EA trainees made greater gains on the EUIPS and on each dimension of the CVRS than did the six CI trainees. Statistical comparisons of between group differences are inappropriate. Summary The hypotheses for pre-treatment to post-treatment differences within the experimental groups were tested by means of an analysis of variance. The eXperiential- accepting training groups made significant gains pre to post-treatment in scores summed across the Affect Sensitivity Scale, the Empathic Understanding in Interpersonal Processes 117 Scale, and on each dimension of the Counselor Verbal Response Scale. Significant pre-treatment to post- treatment changes in scores were not found for the cognitive-intellectual training groups. Post-hoc statistical analyses of changes within groups on individual measures were not possible. A graphic comparison of group performance on each of the criterion measures was pre- sented. Both eXperimental groups made positive gains pre to post-treatment on all of the criterion instruments used in the study. It was also noted that the eXperiential- accepting training groups scored numerically lower than did the cognitive-intellectual training groups in pre- treatment testing, but scored higher (numerically) than the cognitive-intellectual training groups on all scales except the A.S.S. in post-treatment testing. A second set of hypotheses related to pre—treatment to post-treatment changes between groups. An analysis of variance was done, and the results of the analysis indicated a significant measures-programs-treatments interaction. Post-hoc comparisons were done by means of fi-tests. The eXperiential-accepting training groups were found to have made significantly greater gains than did the cognitive-intellectual training groups on the Empathic Understanding in Interpersonal Processes Scale and on the Understanding, Specific and EXploratory dimensions of the Counselor Verbal Response Scale. 118 Differences in pre-treatment to post-treatment gains between the eXperimental groups on the Affect Sensitivity Scale and on the Affective dimension of the Counselor Verbal Response Scale were not found to be significantly different. No overall treatment-program interaction was observed, but the experimental groups in the first training program tended to behave somewhat differently on individual scales than did the eXperimental groups in the second training program. A final series of hypotheses related to the post- treatment to delayed post-treatment and pre-treatment to delayed post-treatment changes between groups. The null hypotheses were tested by means of an analyses of variance. No significant differences between six subjects from the eXperiential-accepting training group and six subjects from the cognitive-intellectual training group were found for either the post-treatment to delayed post- treatment interval or the pre-treatment to delayed post- treatment interval. A descriptive analysis was presented in order to indicate patterns of change between the treatment groups. It was observed that the trainees from the eXperiential-accepting treatment showed greater losses than did the trainees from the cognitive-intellectual treatment on the EUIPS and on each dimension of the CVRS in the post-treatment to delayed post-treatment interval. In the total pre-treatment to delayed post-treatment 119 interval, however, the trainees from the eXperiential- accepting treatment appear to have made greater gains on the EUIPS and on each dimension of the CVRS than did the trainees from the cognitive-intellectual treatment. Statistical analysis of the differences between the eXperimental groups was not possible. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, AND IMPLICATIONS Summary The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of two approaches to counselor education on the subsequent counseling behaviors of prison counselors. One approach, designated experiential-accepting, emphasized counselor personal growth. A second approach, called cognitive- intellectual, emphasized cognitive learning of client dynamics and counseling technique. Both approaches were used in conjunction with stimulated recall and simulation, procedures developed by Kagan et al. (1967) as part of the Interpersonal Process Recall technique (IPR). Few well designed and controlled studies have been done assessing the efficacy of clinical or counseling training programs (Carkhuff, 1966). In those done, two different approaches to training seem to be delineated. In one approach the counselor's role is conceptualized as that of a social reinforcer, while in the second approach the counselor is assumed to be a catalyst for client self-eXploration. Each approach has been demon- strated to be effective for educating counselors to function either as a social reinforcer or as a catalyst 120 121 for client self-exploration. Neither approach, however, has been demonstrated to be effective in terms of actual counseling outcomes. Truax and Carkhuff (1967) have suggested that effective counselor training must promote the development of a counselor-trainee's personal growth as well as an understanding of client dynamics and counseling tech- niques. In a study of counseling behavior, Truax (1967) found that effective counselors behave in a manner that demands self—understanding and an understanding of client dynamics and counseling techniques. Recent research (Goldberg, 1966; Kagan, 1967) indi- cates that a videotaping technique called Interpersonal Process Recall (IPR) can intensify and accelerate counselor training. IPR involves two basic procedures. One procedure uses the video playback of a counseling session in order to stimulate recall of the dynamics of the client-counselor interaction. A videotape of a counseling session is replayed to a counselor-trainee, who, with the aid of a clinically trained "interrogator," examines the underlying dynamics of his interaction with a client. The trainee can use the procedure to examine his own dynamics, the client's dynamics, and the coun- seling techniques he employed during the interview. A second procedure involves recall of simulated interpersonal confrontations. The trainee is confronted with a film 122 that simulates difficult interpersonal encounters. After watching the film, the counselor-trainee is encouraged to examine his reactions to the film. As with the stimulated recall procedure, the simulation films can be used to help the trainee to focus upon his own dynamics, the dynamics of the filmed "client," or on techniques dealing with the situation. Both procedures have been found to be effective in helping trainees develOp more facilitative behaviors for working with clients in therapy. In this study two quite similar treatments were compared. The focus of training was different for the two eXperimental treatments and the tasks (described below) were used in different ways by the groups. The emphasis of training in the cognitive-intellectual (CI) groups was on client dynamics and counseling techniques. The CI group supervisors used the tasks to help the train- ees increase their awareness of clients feelings and reactions, and to help the trainees develop more effective ways of dealing with clients. The emphasis of training in the experiential-accepting (EA) groups was counselor self-awareness. Although the EA group supervisors used the tasks to help the trainees develop a greater awareness of client dynamics and counseling techniques, the primary purpose of task involvement was the develOpment of trainee self-awareness and an understanding of self-dynamics in 123 interpersonal interactions. It is important to point out that these two treatments were compared not only because they encompass two existant and competing points of View, but because the EA approach is usually thought of as more difficult to implement. It requires more supervisor Skill to face (with a trainee) the trainee's own feelings than it does to talk about client dynamics and counselor techniques. Is the EA emphasis worth the effort? The experimental treatments of this study consisted of four basic series of tasks. The first series of tasks included a lecture presentation of the dimensions of facilitative counseling as defined in the work of Truax and Carkhuff and in the Counselor Verbal Response Scale (Kagan, Krathwohl et aZ., 1967), videotaped models of "eXpert" counseling, as well as exercises in rating counseling behavior. These tasks were designed to help the counselor-trainees gain an understanding of elements of effective communication--a foundation from which they could work in develOping their counseling skills. A second series of tasks was called simulated confrontation recall. The trainees were asked to watch a film which simulated a variety of stressfull interpersonal encounters. After watching the film, the trainees were asked to examine and discuss their reactions to the film. It was eXpected that this task would sharpen the counselor- trainee's ability to be sensitive to his own feelings as 124 well as client feelings. It was also eXpected that the task would help the trainee become more capable of dealing with stressful emotional situations in an effective manner. A third series of tasks was called Interpersonal Process Recall (IPR). In this task a trainee and his client were videotaped while in counseling. When the interview was completed, the videotape was replayed for the participants. They were encouraged by an interrogator to eXplore the underlying dynamics of their interactions. Client recalls, counselor recalls, and mutual recalls were conducted through the course of the training sequence. In addition to helping the trainee become more sensitive to his own feelings and to client feelings, the IPR task was designed to aid the trainee gain a better understanding of the bilateral nature of the counseling relationship. A final series of tasks included group review of individual client contact. On each day of the program a different trainee was videotaped while conducting a counseling session with his client. The videotape of the session was replayed in a group setting. The purpose of the task was to initiate discussion among the trainees and to pro- vide models of various approaches and techniques in counseling. It was also eXpected that contact with "real" clients would help the counselor-trainees see the association between classroom and laboratory theory and actual clinical practice. 125 The trainees in this study were forty-four counselors in the Michigan Department of Corrections. Only three had taken academic courses in counseling. None of the subjects had even been involved in a counseling practicum. Two counselor supervisors were used in the study to conduct the treatments. One was an eXperienced Ph.D. in counseling and the other was a doctoral student in counseling. Both had training and eXperience with the IPR techniques as well as with traditional_counseling methods. In order to control for the difference in eXperience between the supervisors, each supervisor trained both an EA training group and a CI training group during the treatment or the replication. The eXperimental procedures were carried out twice. Half of the counselors in the Michigan Department of Corrections were involved in each program. Each counselor was randomly assigned to one of the two programs and one of the two eXperimental procedures. A pre-post design was used to test the research hypotheses. Each of the counselors completed the Affect Sensitivity Scale pre and post-treatment. In addition, audio tapes of initial contacts with prison inmate clients were collected at the beginning and at the end of treat- ment for each counselor. Finally, the trainees in the first program were asked to audio record an intial coun- seling interview four weeks after the completion of 126 training. The latter tapes were to be used for delayed post-treatment comparisons of the groups. All of the tapes were rated by two independent judges (advanced doctoral students in counseling psychology) on the Affect- Cognitive, Understanding-Nonunderstanding, Specific- Nonspecific, and EXploratory-NoneXploratory dimensions of the CVRS, and on the Empathic Understanding In Interpersonal Processes Scale. The basic hypotheses of this study were: Hypothesis I: There will be significant growth in the counseling behavior of counselors eXposed to an experiential-accepting emphasis in training when that behavior is rated by eXpert judges on the dimensions of facilitative communication. Hypothesis II: There will be no significant growth in the counseling behavior of counselors exposed to a cognitive-intellectual emphasis in training when that behavior is rated by eXpert judges on the dimen- sions of facilitative communication. Hypothesis III: Counselors exposed to training emphasizing experient—accepting learning will respond to clients with significantly more empathic understanding than will coun- selors exposed to training emphasizing Hypothesis IV: Hypothesis V: Hypothesis VI: 127 cognitive-intellectual learning when such understanding is rated by eXpert judges on the dimensions of empathic understanding in interpersonal relation— ships. There will be significantly more growth in the counseling behavior of counselors exposed to the eXperiential-accepting emphasis in training than in the behavior of counselors eXposed to the cognitive- intellectual emphasis in training which such behavior is rated by expert judges on the dimensions of facilitative communication. There will be no significant difference in sensitivity to client affect as measured by the Affect Sensitivity Scale between counselors eXposed to an experiential-accepting emphasis in training and counselors exposed to a cognitive-intellectual training emphasis. Counselors exposed to training emphasizing experiential-accepting learning will maintain significantly higher levels of empathic understanding and facilitative counseling behaviors than will counselors 128 exposed to training emphasizing cognitive- intellectual learning which such behaviors are rated on the dimensions of empathic understanding in interpersonal relationships and on the dimensions of facilitative communication. The analysis of pre to post change within groups was done by means of an analysis of variance. The results of the analysis indicated significant differences (.05 level) pre to post treatment on all measures taken as a total for the eXperiential-accepting training groups, but not for the cognitive—intellectual training group. That is, after treatment the trainees in the EA training groups were significantly higher on the Affect Sensitivity Scale and on the CVRS and EUIPS ratings, taken as a total. The scores of the trainees in the CI training groups showed no differences pre to post treatment. The analysis of pre to post change between groups was done by means of an analysis of variance. Statistical post-hoc comparisons were done by means of Tukey's Honestly Significant Difference Test and D-tests of gain score differences. The results of the analysis indicated that significant differences (.05 level) existed between groups on empathic understanding and on the understanding, specific, and eXploratory dimensions of the CVRS. That is, the EA training groups made significantly greater gains than did the CI training groups on the EUIPS and on 129 the understanding, Specific, and exploratory dimensions of the CVRS. Significant differences between groups were not found on the Affect Sensitivity Scale and on the affect dimension of the CVRS. That is, the EA training groups did not make significantly greater gains than did the CI training groups on the Affect Sensitivity Scale and on the affect dimension of the CVRS. An analysis of variance of post to delayed post- treatment change and pre to delayed post-treatment change indicated that no significant differences (.05 level) existed between groups over delayed time and treatment. In other words, the EA training groups did not maintain significantly greater gains than did the CI training groups over time. Unfortunately this analysis was based on groups of six subjects each (most of the subjects could not get tape recorders or permission to use them in their field settings). The small subject numbers suggested that the results of the delayed post analysis be interpreted very cautiously. An examination of the raw data indicated that, when the total pre—treatment to delayed post-treatment interval was considered, the EA training groups maintained numerically higher scores than did the CI training groups on all measures. Comparisons of between group differences on individual measures were clearly not apprOpriate. 130 In essence, the eXperiential-accepting treatment had a significant overall effect on counselor performance in training. Although the two treatments did not appear to differ when the ability to perceive client feelings and reactions (as defined and measured by the Affect Sensitivity Scale) was considered, the treatments did appear to differ when counselor performance (as defined and measured by the EUIPS and the CVRS), was considered. Trainees in the eXperiential-accepting groups made signifi- cant gains pre to post treatment on all of the criteria taken as a total. The members of the eXperiential— accepting training groups made significantly greater gains than did the members of the CI groups in empathic understanding and on the number of understanding, specific, and eXploratory responses made to clients. Discussion Before conclusions and implications can be drawn from the data, several questions must be answered about the research design and methodology. One question con- cerns the extent to which possible supervisor bias influenced the results of this study. Both supervisors knew the research hypotheses and the treatment groups to which their trainees were assigned. It was possible that the supervisors could have exerted some control over the outcomes. 131 Although the possibility of supervisor bias cannot be completely discounted, there are several factors which limit the likelihood of such supervisor control. First, the briefing, de-briefing, and monitoring checks built into the design were develOped in order to assure the existance and Operation of the eXperimental conditions. Any significant deviation from the established procedures would have been noted, eSpecially in the de-briefing and monitoring activities. No irregularities in procedure were observed by the training staff. External checks were also employed. The activities at the training facility were Open for inspection to the officials of the Department of Corrections and to the faculty of Michigan State University. A large number of visitors from both agencies observed the training procedures at various stages in each program. All of the visitors indicated that they observed the enactment of the defined eXperi- mental conditions. If the possibility of supervisor bias is accepted, one would also have to assume that the supervisors exerted enough control over the trainees to accomplish a degree of change with the CI training groups, but significantly more with the EA training groups on some but not all criteria. In View of our current state of knowledge about counselor education, it appears unlikely that the supervisors could exert this degree of control over their trainees, even if they wished to do so. 132 A second question concerns the possibility that the supervisors preference for the eXperiential-accepting treatment was conveyed to the counselors, affecting the counselors' interest or motivation in training. Clinical observations of the trainees' behaviors does not indicate that differences in motivation or interest existed bet- ween groups. Members of both groups requested the use of the videotape equipment for study in the evenings and on weekends. Attendance was near perfect for all trainees, and requests for applications to graduate school were received from members of both groups. Finally, a number of letters were received up to three months after the completion of training from participants in both groups. The comments indicated that (regardless of treatment) counselors saw their training as positive and beneficial, not only professionally but also personally. Although reports such as these are subject to a halo effect, they tend to indicate that the supervisors acted in ways which reflected interest and concern, irrespective of the type of training being offered. Another consideration relating to trainee interest and motivation is the characteristic of the subject sample and the environment in which it functioned. Clinical observations indicated that the trainees were extremely suspicious, at first. They were ordered to report for training by their work supervisors, and had many questions 133 about the purpose of the programs and the ways in which the results of the training would be used. Although the trainees were labeled as "counselors" in the prison system, they were seen, by the prison officials and by themselves, as "paper Shufflers" and "report writers." The effective counselor was defined by the number of reports he had completed, and not by the number of individual or group counseling contacts he had made. The concept of rehabilitation was often defined in terms of retrobution. That is, the inmate who acted out or had difficulties in adjusting to prison life was often locked up or denied privileges. Few attempts were made to listen, understand, and communicate with the prisoner. Finally, those counselors who did attempt to reSpond to inmates in a facilitative manner were often scorned and mocked for their attempts by both staff and inmates alike. The concepts, attitudes, values, and beliefs presented in the training programs were largely alien to the work situation from which the trainees had come and to which they would return at the completion of the programs, at least for a period of time until current efforts by the Department of Corrections to improve treatment conditions take hold on a prison system. While counselor attitude would not affect the observed differences between the experimental groups, it suggests that this particular group of counselor-trainees was less receptive, initially at least, 134 to either type of training program. In view of the observed differences in behavior for both groups pre to post treatment, it does not appear that the situation described above caused no change to occur for either group. Instead it seems more likely that the situation may have affected the motivation and interest of the trainees as reflected in the amount of change rather than the fact of change. In other words, it may be possible that greater changes in behavior would be observed with other groups of counselor-trainees. Thus while cautions must be taken in generalizing from a sample of prison counselors to the general pOpulation of counselors everywhere and prison counselors elsewhere, conclusions about the differences between treatments probably can be generalized. A number of questions can be raised about the evaluation procedures used to measure pre to post treatment differences. One question concerns the adequacy of using judges' ratings of one interview, and only a small part of that interview, to make determinations on differences in counselors' behaviors. In this study twenty counselor responses comprised the unit of evaluation for each trainee on the CVRS and on the EUIPS. Twenty responses represent a fifteen to twenty minute segment of a counseling interview. Validity studies done on the CVRS (Kagan et al., 1967) indicate that differences in 135 interview behavior can be observed in segments of time shorter than that used in this study. There are some indications (Goldberg, 1967) that a four minute segment is as effective as a ten or fifteen minute segment of interview behavior for determining changes in counselor performance. Another difficulty concerns using counselor responses as the sole basis for rating progress in counseling. There are some indications (Schauble, 1969; Truax and Carkhuff, 1967) that the course of counseling is at least in part dependent upon the client's level of self- exploration and motivation to participate in counseling. The same counselor might receive high ratings on the dimensions of facilitative communication when working with a highly motivated client and low ratings when working with a less motivated client. Truax and Carkhuff (1967) suggest that the Therapist-Patient- Therapist unit is a more acceptable basis for rating counselor performance. The possibility of this type of error cannot be discounted in the interpretation of the results of this study. The random assignment of clients to counselors, however, reduces the likelihood that this client-variable significantly affected the outcomes of the study. Another question concerns the validity of using the same instruments in training and in evaluation. The 136 dimensions of facilitative communication as defined on the EUIPS and CVRS were presented to all of the trainees in a lecture session. While it would be difficult to determine what (if any) part of the observed pre to post treatment change in both treatment groups was the result of the lecture presentation, there is little evidence to indicate that the lecture session contributed any more than the other tasks in the study to the observed outcomes. The lecture itself represented only 3 l/2 out of the eighty hours of training received by the counselors. Training for both treatment groups was broad in scope, covering subjects which ranged from addiction to black militancy. It seems unlikely that the observed pre to post-treatment changes for both eXperimental groups on the CVRS and the EUIPS was due to the presentation of these dimensions during the course of training. If so, pre to post differences but certainly not between group differences would be the only ones affected. A final question concerns the gains made by the counselors in this study on the EUIPS. Although the gains made by both treatment groups were in the right direction, the gains (significant for the EA groups) were small. Neither group reached the 3.0 (minimally facilitative) level described by Truax and Carkhuff (1967). Do these results indicate that the treatments used in this study were ineffective in teaching empathic 137 understanding? Although this possibility cannot be com- pletely discounted, there is little evidence to support this position at this time. The subject sample used in this study was an unselected sample. If a training group with higher initial scores on the EUIPS were selected for treatment, post-program scores might have been higher, possibly reaching or surpassing the 3.0 level. In summary, then, the differences observed in the behaviors of counselors in the eXperiential—accepting training groups, and the differences between the two treatment groups on the EUIPS and on the CVRS strongly suggest that an experiential-accepting emphasis in training when used in conjunction with the IPR tasks employed in this study, is an effective means of training counselors. Implications Before discussing the implications of the results of this study, it is appropriate to discuss some of the observations made during the course of training and during the evaluation of the audio tapes. The observations may be of some benefit in determining why the experiential- accepting approach (used in conjunction with the IPR methodology) was more effective than the cognitive- intellectual approach (used in conjunction with the IPR techniques) in changing counselor behavior. 138 Clinical Observations The training program presented many of the trainees with a difficult problem. For the most part, the trainees had little understanding of what a counselor did and what was eXpected of them in the course of training. In the initial training sessions all of the trainees were given a lecture on the dimensions of client-counselor communi- cation. In addition, the counselors were shown a video taped counseling session conducted by an "eXpert" counselor and were then involved in rating exercises. These latter tasks were designed to help the trainees see the concepts, theoretically presented in the lecture, put into operation. It appeared that the tasks gave the counselors a direction to follow. The concepts seemed to provide a foundation on which the counselors could begin to develOp their skills and a reference that they could use in evaluating their counseling behaviors. At the end of training some of the counselors indicated that not enough time was devoted to the discussion of the dimensions of inter- personal communication. They seemed to feel that with a better understanding of the foundations of client- counselor communication, they would be better prepared to attempt a real counseling interaction. A closer examina- tion of the counselors' comments indicated that they did not feel that too little information was presented but that the information was presented over too short a period 139 of time. It appears as if the wealth of information concentrated into 3 1/2 hours of training made assimi- lation of the information very difficult. If, as the counselor's comments indicate, these tasks were helpful in providing a framework for understanding the dynamics of interpersonal communication, it may be that the initial tasks served not only an introductory purpose but that they also served to bring the counselors to a point of readiness for other training eXperiences. The trainees indicated that the simulation films eXposed them to some of their worst nightmares--the homosexual inmate, the aggressive inmate, and the inmate who accuses the counselor of acting in a homosexual or aggressive way towards him. For the members of the EA training groups the films served as an introduction to the emphasis of training. Each trainee was asked to examine his own reactions in an interpersonal encounter. Since the films represented a simulated or "unreal" situation, a trainee could explore his emotional reactions free from the fear of having to be responsible for the consequences of his reactions on a client. While the films did offer the trainees a chance to "safely" eXplore their own emotional reactions, a great deal of anxiety was still observed in the trainees reactions. One trainee sat very quietly and impassively through the first several vignettes in the seduction sequence (male actor). As the 140 actor's message became more clear, the trainee seemed to become more uncomfortable in his seat. When an overt homosexual advance was finally portrayed, the trainee became flushed and said: "Wow! I knew he was leading up to that but I didn't want to say it. I was afraid that I was the only one who saw it. He (the actor) finally did it." The trainee was aware of the actor's feelings long before those feelings were overtly expressed. The trainee's own fears, however, prevented him from dealing with the situation. As the members of the EA training groups began to identify and deal with their feelings and behaviors, the feelings became less threaten— ing and less a source of anxiety for the counselors when working with actual clients. For the CI groups, the simulation task was also an invaluable aid in helping the counselors become more aware and understanding of client dynamics. The uncomfortableness in dealing with the simulation materials did not seem to ease as much with the CI groups as it did with the EA groups. The CI groups used the films to focus on client dynamics and counseling technique. Comments made by the CI group trainees during training indicated that dealing with client dynamics (and de- emphasizing counselor feelings) was often not satisfactory for the counselor. For example, one CI group trainee, after watching a simulated aggression vignette, remarked: 141 "I know what's going on with him (the actor) and maybe I can make some guesses why he's acting that way. I know what I should say to him but I've got some feelings too. Maybe I'd just send the guy to the hole (isolation)." Similar comments made by other CI group trainees seemed to indicate that, as a group, these trainees were less able to identify and deal with their feelings and behaviors. The EA training groups used the IPR (interrogator training) sessions to bridge the gap between listening and responding. It was observed that the members of both treatment groups seemed equally capable of perceiving what clients, whether simulated or real, were saying and feeling. This observation was supported through the results of testing on the A.S.S. (Table 4.4.). It was observed, however, that the trainees in the EA training groups seemed to be responding to clients (as observed in the group review and interrogator training sessions) more facilitatively than did the trainees in the CI training groups despite the emphasis on counselor response in the CI treatment. This observation was supported through statistical analysis which indicated that significant differences existed between eXperimental groups in empathic understanding and on the understanding, specific, and exploratory dimensions of the CVRS (Tables 4.5 and 4.7). Why did differences in responding occur between the groups? 142 Perhaps it is not too far fetched to suggest that the difference in emphasis between the eXperimental groups had its greatest effect in the interrogator training sessions. The CI training groups used the interrogator training sessions to focus on client dynamics and coun- seling techniques. The EA training groups used the interrogator training sessions to focus not only on client dynamics and counseling techniques but primarily on counselor reactions in the interview session. Counselor feelings were, in fact, emphasized in the EA groups' interrogator training sessions. The effects of this emphasis were most easily seen in the mutual recall sessions. The members of the EA training groups were helped in the interrogator training sessions to identify and deal with those feelings and fears within themselves which were preventing communication with clients. An excerpt from a mutual recall session illustrates the potential of the eXperiential-accepting emphasis, when structured according to the IPR model, for establishing effective client-counselor communications. Interrogator: "What are thinking here?" Client: "I'm wondering whether he (the counselor) is even paying any attention to what I'm saying." Counselor: "I'm thinking about what I can say to him." 143 Interrogator: "Say?" Counselor: "Yea...well...I'm kind of confused right now." Interrogator: "Confused." Counselor: "Yea...Well it's like this. He keeps on saying that white men don't really respect him...that they don't listen to him, just tell him that he's dumb and doesn't know the score. Oh, I don't know." Interrogator: "What is he feeling?" Counselor: "He's feeling that I'm like the other white men he's met. I didn't want him to think that. I wanted to be careful in what I said. But it came across wrong. Guess I should have said something...let him know what I was feeling...or find out if he feels that all white men are like that." Client: "I didnt know you were thinking that. I guess I felt, well there's another one tuning me out." Counselor: "I guess I should have said something." Client: "Or maybe I should have asked." 144 Counselor: "Do you ever really find out what peoPle are thinking about you?" Client: “You know, I really don't." The interrogation session helped the counselor identify some of the feelings and fears that he was eXperi- encing during his interaction with the client. Knowing those feelings, the counselor was able to use the client's comments to see how the communication between them was being blocked. At the end of the excerpt, the counselor and client were dealing more openly and honestly with one another. The interrogator had drOpped out of the conver- sation, and the counselor and client were sharing the goal of becoming more aware of feelings and behaviors. In the CI training groups counselor feelings were dealt with only incidently. As a result, the CI group counselors did not have the opportunity to make the same realizations as did the EA group counselors. One can only Speculate that this difference in emphasis in the interrogator training sessions led to the differences observed between the groups on the EUIPS and on the CVRS. Observations made in the group review sessions, however, indicated that unresolved personal concerns created more difficulties in responding to clients for the CI training groups than for the EA training groups. For example, a trainee in the CI group was asked (during a group review session) why he had completely disregarded some obviously 145 strong feelings being eXpressed by his client. The trainee said: "Well, here he's talking about his friend getting killed in the Detroit riots. I know he's really hurt. My daughter was killed in the riots. Well...it's not good to keep on thinking about those things...He really got me to re-live those times. I didn't want to tell him about it...it couln't have helped him. Anyway, I thought we could start dealing with his problems by going another route." The trainee's own feelings were obviously preventing him from responding to the client in an empathic, understanding, specific and eXploratory way. The EA emphasis in the interrogator training sessions may have helped the coun— selor deal in a more Open and honest way with the client. As it was, the counselor and client had reached an impasse in their communication. During the group review sessions the trainees had the opportunity to discuss the particular difficulties they were eXperiencing with "real" clients. The task simulated a great deal of discussion as the trainees began to discover common problems and concerns in dealing with their clients. Typically, however, the review sessions gave each man the Opportunity to closely examine his own interactions with an actual client. It often turned out that the trainee would get a number of different prospec- tives of his client after his videOtaped interview was seen by the group. The trainees, through their comments and behaviors, appeared to seek for such aid from the group. 146 Although the task was structured so that each trainee would have two videotape counseling sessions reviewed by the group, trainees for both treatments requested additional time with Specific counseling problems they were experiencing. Although difficult to interpret, the clinical observa- tions seem to suggest some possible factors which contributed to the greater success of the eXperiential- accepting treatment in this study. It seems possible that the IPR techniques intensified and accelerated the benefits which could be derived from the eXperiential- accepting approach. The IPR methodology specifically focuses upon the three types of awareness required of the trainee in the eXperiential—accepting treatment: (1) an awareness of client dynamics; (2) an awareness of self- dynamics; and (3) an awareness of counseling technique. In addition, IPR increases the amount and the immediacy of feedback to the trainee. The feedback that the trainee receives is increased, first of all, by the use of videotape. Where once the trainee could only listen to a recording of his counseling behavior, the use of video now allows him to listen and watch his interactions with a client. The trainee can observe his reactions to the client, and the client's reactions to him. The trainee can note changes in the client's behavior and the behaviors in himself that may have caused the client 147 reactions. The amount of feedback to the trainee is also increased by the recall sessions. Where once the trainee received feedback on his behavior only from his supervisor, the client recall procedure allows the coun— selor to receive feedback on his behaviors directly from the counselee. When the trainee attempts new behaviors, he receives immediate feedback on the behavior from the video, from his supervisor, and from the client. As the trainee moves through client recall and counselor recall to mutual recall, he begins to see the bilateral nature of an interpersonal interaction. The trainee becomes more aware of the client's feelings and what reactions are aroused in him in response to those feelings. Finally, the counselor becomes more aware of the client's reactions to him as a person. He becomes aware of those feelings and behaviors in him which act on the client to either prevent or encourage Open and honest communications. The simulation material confronts the trainee with extremely difficult interpersonal situations. The advan- tage of the films is that emotional reactions can be eXplored in the "safety" of a simulated or "unreal" situation. A counselor can eXplore his reactions to the simulated encounter without fearing the consequences of his emotional reactions on others. As the counselor begins to identify and deal with the intense feelings evoked in him through the films, he learns that he can 148 manage his feelings and use them in a constructive way. He begins to have less anxiety about his own feelings and reactions in counseling, and he begins to feel more comfortable in the counseling relationship. It is difficult to say how long it would take a trainee in traditional training to achieve these ends. It is thus assumed that the simulation films accelerate the process. by focusing the trainee directly upon situations which evoke intense emotional reactions. In essence, clinical observations and interpre- tations tend to support the data that an eXperiential- accepting emphasis in training, used in conjunction with the IPR methodology, has a positive effect on counselor performance. The experiential-accepting emphasis helps the trainee gain an awareness of counseling techniques, client dynamics, and the personal dynamics which act on counselor-client communications. The IPR techniques provide the structure in which trainee develOpment can be intensified and accelerated. Implications for Counselor Education and Supervision In view of the changes in the counseling behavior of counselors eXposed to an eXperiential-accepting emphasis in training and the differences between these changes and the changes in the counseling behavior of counselors exposed to a cognitive-intellectual emphasis in training, it is assumed that an eXperiential-accepting emphasis in 149 training, used in conjunction with the IPR procedures, is a potentially effective means of attaining the goals of counselor education and particularly as a potent in- service training process for prison counselors. The data presented in Chapter IV indicate that the changes are significant. Even in the light of the limitations discussed in Chapter I, the fact that significant differences were found in subjects such as those in this study after only fifty-two hours of actual training time is meaningful. A basic implication of the study is that the EA treatment be used as a part of a regular program in counselor education (the detailed program is presented in Chapter III, p. 71—2). A number of basic dimensions of the counselor-client interaction have been defined. There is general agreement among theoreticians that a counselor who refers to client affect, communicates an understanding of the client's concerns, helps the client delineate the specifics of his concerns, and promotes client self-eXploration is acting in a facilitative way twoard the client. Although trainees are usually familiar with theories of counseling, few have actually seen the behavioral correlates of theory. That is, trainees often have not been exposed to a concrete model of client- counselor communication. The comments of the trainees in this study support the recommendations of Truax and 150 Carkhuff (1967), that it is important for the trainee to have a model of the client-counselor interaction before attempting such an interaction himself. In a sense, having such a model frees the counselor from the anxiety of not knowing what to do. He has a direction or goal to follow. The trainee is brought to a stage of "readiness" to eXplore how he can implement the counselor role and why he may be having difficulties in doing so. A pre-practicum program based on the EA treatment would include lecture presentations, videotapes of coun— seling sessions conducted by "eXpert" practitioners, and rating exercises. The lecture presentations would serve to key the trainees to the important dimensions of counseling behavior and the factors that should be identi- fied on the videotapes. Videotapes of counselors of different theoretical orientations could be presented not only to demonstrate variations between approaches but to also illustrate the existance of the dimensions across theoretical persuasions. Initially the trainees' tasks would be to identify the dimensions of facilitative communication. Next counselors could begin to rate the responses of the videotaped counselors. Trainees might then videotape their own roled-played interviews and use those tapes for rating purposes. While it is important for the trainee to know what he should be doing as a counselor, it is also important 151 for the counselor to know how to implement the role. The present study and the works of others (Truax, 1967; Berenson and Carkhuff, 1967; Kagan et aZ., 1967) suggests that the trainee needs an understanding of client dynamics and self-dynamics in order to effectively implement the role. A possible way of providing such awareness to the trainee would be to incorporate the simulation and IPR procedures in a practicum eXperience. In some ways it is more logical to involve trainees in Simulation exercises before proceeding to the IPR tasks with real clients. First, the simulation exercises provide an introduction to the emphasis of training--the exploration of underlying dynamics of an interpersonal encounter. Second, the simulation materials represent a situation which is one- step removed from reality in the sense that the person being reacted to exists only on film. The anxiety associated with this type of interpersonal encounter is less than would be expected if the trainee were forced to interact with a real individual. The lowered level of anxiety helps the trainee to explore his emotional reactions. Once the trainee learns to identify and deal with some of his more intense emotions, he becomes more comfortable and confident that he need not fear his emotional reactions in other less intense interpersonal encounters. The counselor is then ready to deal with the real client in a more Open and honest way and at least not 152 hampered by his own interpersonal fears. Client recall helps the counselor trainee become more aware of all of the feelings that the client is having, including the feelings that the client has toward the therapist. Counselor recall gives the trainee the Opportunity to eXplore his own reactions and feelings toward the client. The counselor becomes more aware of all of his behaviors, verbal and non—verbal, and the dynamics which underlie the behaviors. Finally, mutual recall helps the coun- selor become more aware of the bilateral nature of the counseling interaction. The counselor sees all of the elements put together in the here-and-now eXperience of the relationship itself. The training program implemented in this study did not include individual supervisory eXperiences. If self- understanding is a goal of counselor education, it seems possible that this goal could be attained through individual supervisor contact. Supervision has tradition- ally focused on client dynamics and counselor response techniques. Kell and Mueller (1965) suggest that the supervisory experience should be structured to allow the trainee to gain a better understanding of how he relates with others. The video confrontations (the recall procedures) and the group interactions can serve as resources and motivators for the trainee to gain greater insights about himself and be ready to use the individualized 153 supervisor—trainee relationship to advantage. The supervisory relationship would serve as a source for checking perceptions about self obtained through recall and group participation. Traditionally, counselor educators have assumed that a trainee needs an understanding of counseling theories before the practicum eXperiences. The subjects of this study had little if any contact with counseling theory before training. The significant changes observed in the counseling performance of the EA group trainees suggest that theory, if properly placed within the frame- work of a structured program of counselor training, does not have to be a pre-requisite to a practicum eXperience. The possibility exists that counseling practicum could well be taught in conjunction with the teaching of counseling theories. In addition to the implications for professional training, this study has obvious implications for educating paraprofessioals, e.g., university residence hall advisors, prison inmates, uniformed personnel, etc. The results of the study indicate that a group of relatively naive subjects can be trained to establish more facilitative interpersonal relationships. If lay individuals could be involved in training programs such as the program described in this study, the professional counselor would benefit by having the skills of a trained 154 aide to help in carrying out his duties. The general community would benefit by having access to a greater number of understanding and empathic individuals. Implications for Future Research While the results of this study indicate that the experiential-accepting emphasis used with IPR techniques is an effective method of training counselors, a number of questions were raised which could be considered in future research. 1. A replication of this study should be done using another sample of subjects. The subjects in this study were largely naive with regard to counseling theories, the role of the counselor, and an orientation to rehabilitation. Using a sample such as graduate students in counseling, an initially motivated group, or a carefully selected lay group would answer the question of whether the cognitive- intellectual approach would be somewhat effective. 2. The very small N’in the delayed post-treatment sample made interpreting the effects of the two treatments over time a highly speculative procedure. A longitudinal study should be done to determine the permanence of behavior change over time. 3. Audio recall procedures were not used in this study. As a result, it is difficult to assess whether changes noted through the recall sessions were due to the video 155 confrontations or to the recall procedures themselves. A study might be done in which training with audio IPR procedures is compared to training with video IPR procedures. This research could provide information on the unique contributions of video in counselor education. Other criteria of behavior change could be Operational- ized and used as dependent variables in future research. One such study might focus on changes in counselor behavior in non-counseling relationships. That is, are changes noted in counselors' behavior with friends or family? The ordering of the tasks used in this study was based on clinical observations and intuition. Other investi- gations might examine the Significance of different ordering of tasks in training. It was observed that each task presented the trainee with a different experience and focus with regard to the interpersonal relationship. Subsequent research might look at the contribution of each task to the observed outcome. Research on this question would provide information as to whether tasks have to be added, deleted, or modified in future counselor training programs. It was observed that the counselors in the experiential- accepting groups significantly increased on the 156 dimensions of facilitative communication and empathic understanding pre to post treatment. In other words, the trainees appeared to become more effective coun- selors. Another study might go a step further and attempt to determine whether the same counselors could then train others using the same tools and methods with which they were trained. REFERENCES REFERENCES Adams, W. R., Ham, T. H., Mawardi, Betty H., Scali, H. A. and Weisman, R. A. A naturalistic study of teaching in clinical clerkship. Journal of Medical Education, 1964, 39, 164-74. Alexander, F. The dynamics of psychotherapy in the light of learning theory. American Journal of Psychiatry, 1963, 201, 440-48. Allen, T. W. Discussion: What can counseling offer clients? In Whiteley, J. M. (Ed.), Research in Counseling. Columbus: Charles E. Merrill, 1967. gm, Appleby, L. Evaluation of treatment methods for chronic schiZOphrenics. Archives of General Psychiatry, 1963, 8, 8-21. Arbuckle, D. S. The learning of counseling: Process not product. Journal of Counseling Psychiatry, 1963, 10, 163-68. Arbuckle, D. S. Counseling effectiveness and related issues. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1968, 15, 430-35. Betz, R. L. A study of the effects of two types of group counseling on the counseling performance of counselor candidates. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1963. Bijou, S. W. Implications of behavioral science for counseling and guidance. In Krumboltz, J. D. (Ed.), Revolution in Counseling. Boston, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1966. Black, F. A. Counseling laboratory eXperience. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1953, 32, 36-38. Blocker, D. What can counseling offer clients? Implications for selection. In Whiteley, J. W. (Ed.), Research in Counseling. Columbus: Charles E. Merrill, 1967. 157 158 Bloom, B. S. The thought process of students in dis- cussion. In French, S. J. (Ed.), Accent on Teaching; Experiments in General Education. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1954. Boehm, W. Social work: Science and art. Social Service Review, 1961, 35, 144-51. Bridgwater, R. B. and Crookston, B. B. An eXperiment in counselor training on the Masters level. School and Society, 1952, 72, 24—26. Calia, V. The culturally deprived client: A reformulation of the counselor's role. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1966, 13, 100-5. Carkhuff, R. R. Training in the counseling and therapeutic practices: Requiem or reveille. Journal of Coun- selinngsychology, 1966, 13, 360-67. Carkhuff, R. R. An integration of practice and training. In Berenson, B. G. and Carkhuff, R. R. (Eds.), Sources of Gain in Counseling and Psychotherapy. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1967. Carkhuff, R. R. A personalized approach to counseling and psychotherapy. In Berenson, B. G. and Carkhuff, R. R. (Eds.), Sources of Gain in Counseling and Psycho- therapy. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., Danish, S. J. and Kagan, N. Emotional simulation in counseling and psychotherapy. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, Fall 1969, 6(4), 261-63. Demos, G. D. and Zuwaylif, F. H. Counselor movement as a result of an intensive six week training program in counseling. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1963, 42, 125-28. Dewey, J. Democracy and Education. New York: The Mac Millan Company, 1916. Edwards, A..L. and Cronbach, L. J. ExPerimental design for research in psychotherapy. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1952, 8, 51-59. Eysenck, H. J. The effects of psychotherapy: An evaluation. Journal of Consultinngsychology, 1952, 16, 319-24. Eysenck, H. J. The effects of psychotherapy. International Journal of Psychiatry, 1965, 1, 99—144. 159 Eysenck, H. J. The effects of psychotherapy. In Eysenck, H. J. (Ed.), Handbook of Abnormal Psychology. New York: Basic BOOkS, 1961. Feldman, M. J. and Carkhuff, R. R. Role conflicts of beginning therapists. Buffalo, New York: Psychological Educational Tapes, 1963. Fleming, Joan. The role of supervision in psychiatric training. Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic, 1953, 17, 157-59. Fleming, Joan and Hamburg, D. A. An analysis of methods of teaching psychotherapy with a description of a new approach. AMA Arch. Neural Psychiat., 1958, 79, 179-200. Foreman, M. T—Groups — Their implications for counselor supervision and preparation. Counselor Education and Supervision, Fall 1967, 7, 48453. 11. Gazda, G. and Ohlsen, M. The effects of short-term group counseling on prospective counselors. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1961, 39, 634-38. Goldberg, A. D. A sequential program for supervising counselors using the Interpersonal Process Recall technique. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1967. Gottsman, L. E. The relationship of cognitive variables to therapeutic ability and training of client- centered therapists. Journal of Consulting Psycho- logy, 1962, 26, 119-26. Gruenberg, P. B., Liston, E. H. and Wayne, G. H. Inten- sive supervision of psychotherapy with videotape recording. American Journal of Psychotherapy, XXIII, 1, 1969. Hamlin, W. Fission and fusion. In Jones, R. M. (Ed.), Contemporar Educational Psychology. New York: Harper an Row, 1966. Hansen, J. C. and Barker, E. N. EXperiencing and the supervisory relationship. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1964, 11, 107-11. Harvey, L. V. The use of non-professional auxiliary counselors in staffing a counseling service. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1964, 11, 348-57. 160 Hays, W. L. Statistics. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1963. Hoch, P. H. and Zubin, J. (Eds.) The Evaluation of Psychiatric Treatment. New York: Gune and Stratton, 1964. Hoppock, R. Two methods of training counselors for group guidance. Occupations, 1949, 27, 523-26. Ivey, A. E., Normington, C. J., Miller, C. D., Morrill, W. H. and Hoase, R. F. Microcounseling and attending behavior: An approach to prepracticum counselor training. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1968, 15(5), Monograph supplement. Jones, V. Attitude changes in an NDEA Institute. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1963, 42, 387-89. Kagan, N., Krathwohl, D. R. and Miller, R. Stimulated recall in therapy using videotape--a case study. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1963, 10, 237-43. Kagan, N., Krathwohl, D. R., Goldberg, A. D., Campbell, R. J., Schauble, P. G., Greenberg, B. 8., Danish, S. J., Resnikoff, A., Bowes, J. and Bondy, S. B. Studies in human interaction: Interpersonal Process Recall stimulated by videotape. Educational ./ Publication Services, Michigan State University, December 1967. ~ 'r /' Kagan, N. and Schauble, P. G. Affect simulation in inter- personal process recall. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1969, 16(4), 309—13. Kagan, N., Schauble, P., Resnikoff, A., Danish, S. J. and Krathwohl, D. R. Interpersonal Process Recall. .--~““ Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 1969, 148(4), Kay, L. and Schick, J. Role practice in training for depth interviews. Sociometry, 1945, 8, 82-85. Kell, B. L. and Mueller, W. J. Impact and Change: A Study of Counseling Relationships. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1966. Kirk, B. A. Techniques of in-service training. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1955, 34, 204-207. 161 Krasner, L. The therapist as a social reinforcement machine. In Strupp, H. H. and Luborsky, L. (Eds.), Research in Psychotherapy, Vol. 2. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association, 1962. Krumboltz, J. D. Behavioral goals for counseling. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1966, 13, 153—59. (a) Krumboltz, J. D. (Ed.) Revolution in Counseling: Implications of Behavioral Science. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1966. (b) Krumboltz, J. D. Changing the behavor of behavior changers. Counselor Education and Supervision, 1967, 6, 222—29. Landsman, T. and Lane, D. AV media yes, depersonalization, no. Audio Visual Instruction, 1963, 8, 24-28. Landy, E. Counselor training through practice. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1953, 31, 310-14. Levitt, E. E. The results of psychotherapy with children. Journal of Consultinngsychology, 1957, 21, 189-96. Levitt, E. E. Psychotherapy with children: A further evaluation. Behavior Research and Theory, 1963, 1, 45-510 Lippitt, R. and Hubbell, A. Role playing for personnel and guidance workers: A review of the literature with suggestions for applications. Grouprsychotherapy, 1955, 9, 89-95. Mendel, W. M. and Rapport, S. Outpatient treatment for chronic schizophrenic patients: Therapeutic conse- quences of an existential view. Archives of General Psychiatry, 1963, 8, 190-96. Moore, F. J., Chervell, E. and West, M. J. Television as a therapeutic tool. Archives of General Psychiatry, 1965, 12, 217-20. Musselman, D. Role playing as an in-service training technique for secondary school counselors. 'Counselor Education and Supervisiony 1961, 1, 17-19. Nielsen, G. The method of self-confrontation. In White, R. W. (Ed.), The Study of Lives. New York: Atherton Press, 1963. 162 Nielsen, G. Studies in Self-Confrontation. C0penhagan: Munksgaard, 1964. Patterson, C. H. Supervising students in the counseling practicum. Journal of Counselinngsychology, 1964, 11, 47-53. Patterson, C. H. Theories of Counseling and Psychotherapy. New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1966. Paul, G. L. Strategy of outcome research in psychotherapy. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1967, 31(2), 109-18. Payne, P. A. and Gralinski, D. M. Effects of supervisor style and empathy upon counselor learning. Journal of CounselingpPsychology, 1968, 15(6), 517-2 . Poling, E. G. Videotape recordings in counseling practicum: I-—environmental considerations. Counselor Education and Supervision, 1968, 7(4), 348-56. n11 Poling, G. E. Videotape recordings in counseling practicum: II-—critique. Counselor Education and Supervision, 1968, 8(1), 33-38. Rogers, C. R. Client-Centered Therapy. Cambridge, Mass.: Riverside Press, 1951. Rogers, C. R. Training individuals to engage in the therapeutic process. In Strother, C. R. (Ed.) Psyghology and Mental Health. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association, 1957. Schiff, S. B. and Revich, R. Use of television as an aid to psychotherapy supervision. Archives of General Psychiatry, 1964, 10, 84-88. Seegars, J. and McDonald, R. L. The role of interaction groups in counselor education. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1963, 10, 156-62. Shaffer, L. F. and Shoben, E. J. (Eds.) Common aspects of psychotherapy. In The Psychology of Aggustment. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1956) 2-29. Shoben, E. J., Jr. Psychotherapy as a problem in learning theory. Psychological Bulletin, 1949, 46, 366-92. Sperle, H. The case method technique in professional training. Teachers College Recordy 1933, 35, 235-37. 163 Suess, J. F. Teaching clinical psychiatry with closed circuit television and videotape. Journal of Medical Education, 1966, 41, 483. Sullivan, H. S. The Interpersonal Theory of Psychiatry. New York: W. W. Norton and Company, Inc., 1953. Super, D. E. Transition: From vocational guidance to counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1955, 2, 309. Thompson, C. and Bradway, K. The teaching of psycho- therapy through control free interviews. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1950, 14, 321-23. Thorne, F. C. The Principles of Personality Counseling. Brandon, Vt.: Journal of Clinical Psychology Press, 1950. Towles, Charlotte. Role of the supervisor in the union of cause and function in social work. Social Ser- vices Review, 1962, 36, 396-407. Truax, C. B. Effective ingredients in psychotherapy: An approach to unraveling the patient-therapist inter- action. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1963, 10, Truax, C. B. Therapist empathy, warmth, and genuiness and patient personality change in group psycho- therapy: A comparison between interaction unit measures, times sample measures, and patient percep- tion measures. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1966, 22(2), 225-29. Truax, C. B. and Carkhuff, R. R. The old and the new: Theory and Research in counseling and psychotherapy. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1964, 42, 860-66. (a) Truax, C. B. and Carkhuff, R. R. Concreteness: A neg- lected variable in research in psychotherapy. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1964, 20, 264—67. (b) Truax, C. B. and Carkhuff, R. R. Client and therapist transparency in the psychotherapeutic encounter. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1965, 12, 3-9. (a) Truax, C. B. and Carkhuff, R. R. EXperimental manipulation of therapeutic conditions. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1965, 29, 119-24. (b) 164 Truax, C. B. and Carkhuff, R. R. Toward Effective Coun- seling and Psychotherapy. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company, 1967. Truax, C. B., Carkhuff, R. R. and Douds, J. Toward an integration of the didactic and experiential approaches to training in counseling and psychotherapy. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1964, 11, 240-47. Walz, G. R. and Johnston, J. A. Counselors look at themselves on videotape. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1963, 10, 232-36. Webb, A. P. and Harris, J. A semantic differential study of counselors in an NDEA Institute. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1963, 42, 260-63. Wessel, Rosa. Social work education and practice. Social Services Review, 1961, 35, 151-60. Whiteley, J. and Allen, T. W. Dimensions of Effective Counseling. Columbus: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company, 1968. Winkler, R. C., Teigand, J. J., Munger, P. F. and Kranzler, G. D. Counseling and underachievement: The effects of selected counseling and remedial techniques on underachieving elementary school students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1965, (12), 384-87. Wolberg, L. R. The Technique of Psychotherapy. New York: Grune and Stratton, 1954. Wrenn, C. The Counselor in a Changing World. Washington: American Personnel and Guidance Association, 1962. APPENDICES APPENDIX I: Lecture material presented to the trainees 165 IPR COUNSELOR VERBAL RESPONSE SCALE The scale was develOped as a part of the 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). 166 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 dimensions have been selected because they seem to represent aSpects of counselor behavior which seem to make theoretical sense and contribute to client progress. A fifth dimension--effective-noneffective--provides a global rating of the adequacy of each response which is made independently of the four descriptive ratings. The unit for analysis is the verbal interaction bet- ween counselor and client represented by a client state- ment and counselor response. A counselor response is rated on each of the five dimensions of the rating scale, with every client-counselor interaction being judged independently of preceding units. In judging an individual response the primary focus is on describing how the counselor responded to the verbal and nonverbal elements of the client's communication. 167 168 Description of Rating Dimensions I. Affect-cognitive dimension The affective-cognitive dimension indicates whether a counselor's response refers to any affective component of 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. Exam 1e: "If somebody treated me like that I'd proBEBIy 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" 169 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" is used in both these examples, these statements do ESE represent responses which would be judged "affective." B. Cognitive responses--Cognitive responses deal primarily with the cognitive element of a client's communication. Frequently such responses seek information of a factual nature. They generally maintain the inter- action 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 indicates whether a counselor's res onse communicates to the client P that the counselor understands or is seeking to under- E2223 the client's basic communication, thereby encouraging the client to continue to gain insight into the nature of his concerns. A. Understanding reSponses--Understanding responses communicate to the client that the counselor understands the client's communication--the counselor makes apprOpriate 170 reference to what the client is expressing or trying to eXpress both verbally and nonverbally--or the counselor is clearly seeking enough information of either a cognitive or affective nature to gain such understanding. 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 communication 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?" 171 (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 concern. In essence, it describes whether the counselor deals with the client's communication in a general, vague, or peri- pheral manner, or “zeros in" on the core of the client's communication. NB: A response judged to be nonunder- standing 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 understanding might be either specific (core) or nonspecific (peripheral) i.e., they would be peripheral if the counselor conveys only a vague idea that a problem exists or "flirts" with the ideal 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: 172 (a) Delineate more closely the client's basic concerns. Exam 1e: "This vague feeling you have when you get in tense situations--is it anger or fear?" (b) Encourage the client to discriminate among stimuli affecting him. Example: "Do you feel in all your classes or only in some classrooms?" (c) 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 per- spective, 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 seeking to understand the client's communication and has been presented only with vague bits of information about the client's concerns. Thus such responses: (a) Fail to delineate the client's concerns and cannot bring them into sharper focus. Example: "It seems your problem isn't very clear-- can you tell me more about it?" (b) 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?" (c) Discourage the client from bringing his concerns into sharper focus. Exam 1e: "You and your sister argue all the time. What do other peOple think of your sister?" 173 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. Exploratory responses--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 reSponses 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 your'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 have to history as a major?" Affective--"In these situations do you feel angry, mad, helpless, or what?" (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." 174 B. Nonexploratory responses--NonexPloratory responses 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 c 11d. V. Effective--noneffective dimension Ratings on the effective-noneffective dimension may be made independently of ratings on the other four dimen- sions of the scale. This rating is based solely upon the judge's professional impression of the appropriateness of the counselor's responses, that is how adequately does the counselor's response deal with the client's verbal and nonverbal communication. This rating is nct_dependent on whether the response has been judged affective-cogni- tive, etc. A rating of 4 indicates that the judge considers this response among the most appropriate possible in the given situation while a 3 indicates that the response is appro- priate but not among the best. A rating of 2 indicates a neutral response which neither measurably affects the client progress not inhibits it, while a rating of 1 175 indicates a response which not only lacks basic under- standing of the client's concerns but which in effect may be detrimental to the specified goals of client growth. APPENDIX I I : A description of the interrogator role 176 The interrogator role was developed as a part of a project supported by a grant from the U. 8. Depart- ment 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. 7-32-0410-270.) This description is taken from that project report. 177 Interrogation We believe that basic to obtaining significant data and learning from video recall is the introduction of a third person into the counselor-client relationship who conducts the videotape recall sessions for either or both of the participants. Role and Function The third person's function is to facilitate a self- analysis by the client of his underlying thoughts, feelings, images, eXpectations and his general pattern of interaction with the counselor--it is not to establish another relationship like the one being reviewed. The interrogator avoids establishing another counselor-client relationship. The interrogator tries to keep the client focused on the feelings or the content of the original relationship. He helps the client relive the original experience and talks only about what transpired then. He reminds the subject of the task to keep him from stray- ing and especially to keep him from focusing his attention on the interrogator. The subject needs to be encouraged to pay attention to the T.V. monitor as much as possible and to the third person as little as possible. The questions the interrogator asks are very brief to keep the client focused on the T.V. monitor. Although clinical skill is needed by the interrogator to help the client recognize his underlying feelings, the third person needs to struc- ture carefully his relationship and act more like a clinical interrogator than like a counselor or a therapist-- in fact, because this third person in the counseling dyad must delimit his clinical function to actively probing the immediate past, we chose to name "interrogator" to describe his role. Those interrogators who are most effective in assist- ing the client in recall and examination of feelings are usually competent clinicians able to identify and under- stand the client's cues and commentary. Although it appears that the effective interrogator must possess the same perceptive abilities and empathic qualities as the counselor, as more eXperience with the process was gained clearer differentiation was made between the roles of counselor and interrogator. First, the interrogator is not as concerned as the counselor with the total dynamics of the client but rather with teaching the client how to interrogate himself and how to gain insight through the "self-confronting" eXperience afforded by videotape. No attempt is made to relate the recalled thoughts and feelings to the client's 178 179 life in general. Only the relationship on videotape is studied, although major elements of the dynamics within that relationship are sought (thus the interrogator usually encourages—Ehe client to deal with basic recurring or persistent fears, aspirations, etc., rather than spend much of the interrogation session focusing in on one or two responses or gestures about which the client might choose to be extremely verbal). Second, whereas the counselor may allow the client more freedom to "set the pace" in the investigation of areas of client concern, the interrogator tends to actively "push" the client for greater clarity in describing and understanding specific behaviors. Since the interrogator has the videotaped behavior, he may choose to examine an client response by asking the client to stop the playback and to elaborate on the meaning of a piece of behavior the interrogator considers important. Interrogation can be a learning situation where the client comes to be intensely aware of his own behavior and personal idiosyncracies. The more he examines himself in interaction with the counselor, the more he may consciously choose to alter or redirect his behavior with the counselor and with others. It is the interrogator's function to create within the client this "intense aware- ness of his own behavior" in one relationship, and it is the counseling relationship within the IPR process that uses that ”awareness" to help the client enter a new relationship with the counselor and to promote client growth in his total life situation. AS experience with IPR interrogations was gained, it seemed to be helpful if clients were given an eXplana- tion which might help them understand the purpose of the process, especially since helping clients to become self- interrogating seemed the most productive way to help them toward self-eXploration and insight. At the beginning of each recall session, and repeated as necessary, the following assumptions are therefore made explicit to the client before recall is begun: "1. We know that the mind works faster than the voice. 2. As we talk with people, we think of things which are quite different from the things we are talking about. Everyone does this and there is no reason to feel embarrassed or to hesitate to 'own up to it' when it does occur. 180 3. We know that as we talk to peOple, there are times when we like what they say and there are times when we are annoyed with what they say. There are times when we think they really understand us and there are times when we feel they have missed the point of what we are saying or really don't understand what we were feeling or how strongly we were feeling something. 4. There are also times when we are concerned about what the other person is thinking about us. Sometimes we want the other person to think about us in ways which he may not be. 5. If we ask you at this moment just when you felt the counselor understood or didn't understand your feelings, or when you felt you were making a certain kind of impression on him, or when you were trying to say something and it came out quite differently from the way you wanted it to, it would probably be very difficult for you to remember. With this T.V. playback immediately after your interview, you will find it possible to recall these thoughts and feelings in detail. Stop and start the playback by means of the switch as often as you remember your thoughts and feelings. The recorder is on remote control so that you are not troubling anyone no matter how often you stOp and start the playback. As you remember thoughts and feelings, stop the tape and tell me what they were." Clients appear to differ widely in their abilities to engage in this process. While some become involved rather easily, others need to be prompted, for example, "I know that's what you said, but what were you feeling as you said it?" After the client has successfully recalled some of his feelings, the interrogator can broaden the Spectrum of areas for recall, e.g., "If ever any pictures came to your mind as you Spoke, please tell me what they were as you remember them." When the client has described a feeling state or pictures which came to mind, the interrogator may encourage the client to "trace" the movement of the feelings, e.g., "Are you still feeling the same thing? Has it changed? When did it begin to change?" The interrogator encourages the client to talk about what it is the client likes about his behavior with the coun- selor as well as the behaviors he dislikes. The image the client maintains or wants to maintain about himself often 181 is revealed during the interrogation session. The interrogator may gradually expand the field of recall into what may have been subtler dynamics, "What did you want the counselor to think or feel about you?" Generally, this last "mirror image eXpectation" seems quite a fruitful area for recall, although it is also a difficult area for some clients to deal with. Finally, the interrogator may also encourage the client to try to recall any fan— tasies he was having about the counselor, however momentary. Client involvement in the interrogation process, then, develops around: 1. The client's feelings: their origin and develOpment within the interview. 2. The client's thoughts: their origin and develOpment within the interview. 3. The way the client sees himself. The things he likes, dislikes and fears about himself. 4. The way the client would like the counselor to see him. 5. The way the client believes the counselor actually does see him. Thus the interaction between the interrogator and client is structured to enable the client to become aware of his behavior in relating to the counselor. APPENDIX III: The informational questionnaire 182 QUESTIONNAIRE Name Age Address Marital Status Phone Name of Institution at which you are employed Your position. How long have you worked at this position? mos. years Name of other positions held in the prison system: Position Time in Position Do you plan to remain in the Department of Corrections in you present capacity? Yes No. If no, what position within the system do you hOpe to obtain (name) EDUCATION: What is your last completed degree? From which institution did you receive it? Year degrees conferred Have you taken any additional college courses for credit after completing your last degree? Yes No. If yes, how many credits , at what institution , and in what course areas (e.g., psychology, counseling, 183 184 sociology, etc.) Are you planning to obtain another degree? Yes No. If yes, what degree , major area of study , institution from which you will receive the degree , year you eXpect to receive the degree . SPECIALIZED TRAINING: Have you ever taken practicum (supervised training) courses in the counseling area while in college? Yes No. If yes, how many credits of supervised practicum did you take , at what institution , in which department , and when (year) Briefly describe the supervision or Special training you received before assuming the duties of your present position. Briefly describe your present duties. 185 Briefly describe what you hope to get out of this training program: APPENDIX IV: Program schedules for: Group 1 (COgnitive-intellectual) and Group 2 (experiential-accepting) 186 SCHEDULE - GROUP I DAY 1 10:00 a.m. Meeting for all counselors Large meeting in the training program. room #1. 10:30 a.m. Group #1 meeting. Large meeting room #1. 11:30 a.m. Lunch SPSM 1:00 p.m. Testing session. Large meeting room #2. 2:30 p.m. Individual counseling with Individual clients. counseling rooms. 3:15 p.m. Terminate counseling session Large meeting Hand in audio tapes of room #1. session. 3:30 p.m. Become familiar with video Video tape rooms tape equipment. #1 and #2. 4:30 p.m. Sessions end. DAY 2 8:00 a.m. Presentation by Dr. Paul 'Basement meeting Schauble. room. 11:30 a.m. Lunch SPSM 1:00 p.m. Individual counseling with Individual clients. counseling rooms. 2:00 p.m. Work with video tape Video tape rooms equipment. #1 and #2. 4:30 p.m. Sessions end. 187 11:30 1:00 188 DAYS 3-9 Work with videotape equipment. Recall of counseling sessions videotaped on previous day. Lunch Individual counseling with clients. Work with simulation films. Sessions end. DAY 10 Individual counseling with clients. Terminate counseling sessions. Hand in audio tape of session. Work with videotape equip- ment. Lunch Testing session. Meeting for all counselors in training program. Sessions end. Video tape rooms #1 and #2. Basement meeting room. SPSM Individual counseling rooms. Basement meeting room. Individual counseling rooms. Large meeting room #1. Video tape rooms #1 and #2. SPSM Large meeting room #2. Large meeting room #2. 10:00 10:30 11:30 1:00 10:30 11:30 1:00 p.m. a.m. SCHEDULE - GROUP 2 DAY 1 Meeting for all counselors in the training program. Group #2 meeting. Lunch Testing session. Become familiar with video tape equipment. Individual counseling with clients. Terminate counseling sessions. Hand in audio tape of session. Sessions end. DAY 2 Work with videotape equipment. Individual counseling with clients. Lunch Presentation by Dr. Paul Schauble. Sessions end. 189 Large meeting room #1. Large meeting room #2. SPSM Large meeting room #2. Video tape rooms #1 and #2. Individual counseling rooms. Large meeting room #1. Video tape rooms #1 and #2. Individual counseling rooms. SPSM Basement meeting room. 10:00 11:30 1:00 10:15 10:30 11:30 1:00 190 DAYS 3-9 Work with simulation films. Individual counseling with clients. Lunch Recall of counseling sessions videotaped on previous day. Work with videotape equipment. Sessions end. DAY 10 Work with videotape equip— ment. Individual counseling with clients. Terminate counseling sessions. Hand in audio tape of session. Work with videotape equip- ment. Lunch Testing session. Meeting for all counselors in training program. Sessions end. Basement meeting room. Individual counseling rooms. SPSM Basement meeting room. Video tape rooms #1 and #2. Video tape rooms #1 and #2. Individual counseling rooms. Large meeting room #1. Video tape rooms #1 and #2. SPSM Large meeting room #2. Large meeting room #2. APPENDIX V: The Affect Sensitivity Scale 191 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 con- sisting 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 Open 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 I. This eXploring of my feelings is good. It makes me feel good. 2. I feel very sad and unhappy. 3. I'm groping and confused; I can't bring it all together. After you have 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 spacc foi_number two; 10 1"--- ---- -——- -——— —-—.. 192 193 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 lattercpart of each scene in determining the most accurate description of the client's feelings. After you view the apprOpriate scenes, you will have thirty seconds to answer each of the first twelve items. For each of the remaining items, you will be allowed twenty seconds. CAUTION: The item numbers on your answer sheet go across the page, not down the page as you would actually 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. CLIENT I Scene 2 CLIENT II Scene 1 194 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 connec- tion at all. 2. I like what he's doing. I don't feel as uncomfortable now. 3. I wish he would stop pushing me in this direction. Item 5 1. I'm please, 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. 195 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 1. 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. Item 9 1. He's asking for some touchy material, but that's all right. It's about time he knew. 2. 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 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. 196 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 I. 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? CLIENT IV Scene 1 Item 14 I. 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. 197 CLIENT IV Scene 2 Item 16 I. I'm a little annoyed with my family's ambitious 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. 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. 198 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 I. 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. 199 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 1. 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. 200 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 I. 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 out 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. 201 CLIENT VI Scene 1 Item 33 I. 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. 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 1.1 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 I. 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 CLIENT VI Scene 5 202 Item 38 I. 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 me to get it out in the - Open. Now I feel it's all right. 1 Item 39 I. I'm not feeling much of anything here. I'm just kind of talking to be talking. a1_ 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 any more. 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. 203 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 I. 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. 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 I. 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 understand what I'm like, and he still likes me, I can confide in him. 204 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 embarrassing 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 CLIENT IX Scene 1 Item 48 l. 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. 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. 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. 205 CLIENT IX Scene 2 Item 51 1. Good , goody people 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 peOple 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. 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. 206 CLIENT X Scene 1 Item 56 I. 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 under- stands 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 I. 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. CLIENT X Scene 3 CLIENT X Scene 4 CLIENT XI Scene 1 207 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 understands 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. 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. 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. 208 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 must 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. APPENDI X VI : The CVRS rating scale 209 Judge: 210 IPR COUNSELOR VERBAL sponses CVRS DIMENSIONS Affect Cognitive Under Non-under standing standing 211 RESPONSE RATING SCALE Subject: Date: CVRS DIMENSIONS EUIPS Evaluation pecific Non- Explora- Non- specific tory eXplora- tory APPENDIX VII : A description of the EUIPS 212 EMPATHIC UNDERSTANDING IN INTERPERSONAL PROCESSES II A Scale for Measurement1 Robert R. Carkhuff State University of New York at Buffalo 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, eXpressed surface feelings of the second person. The first person may be bored or disinterested or simply Operating from a preconceived frame of reference which totally excludes that of the other person(s). 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 aware- ness 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 congruent 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. 213 214 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. The summary, the first person is reSponding so as to neither subtract from nor add to the expressions of the second person; but he does not respond accurately to how that person really feels beneath the surface feelings. Level 3 constitutes the minimal level of facilitative interpersonal functioning. Level 4 The responses of the first person add noticeably to the expressions of the second person(sT’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 feeling and meaning of the eXpreSSIons of the second person(s) in such a way as to (l) accurately eXpress feelings levels below what 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 feelings. 215 1The present scale "Empathic Understanding in Interpersonal 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 and Carkhuff, 1967) and in part from an earlier version which has been validated in extensive process and outcome research on counseling and psycho- therapy (summarized in Carkhuff and 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 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 systematic focus upon the additive, subtractive or interchangeable aSpects of the levels of communication of understanding. 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 to 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 6 and 9. The levels of the present scale are approximately equal to the levels of the earlier version of this scale. HICHIGRN STQTE UNIV. LIBRQRIES ilHlNllllWlllHIM/llWIVIHWHIINIHUHIINIHII 31293101923120