You are on page 1of 10

INTERPERSONAL INTERACTION AND PERSONALITY

CHANGE IN GROUP PSYCHOTHERAPY*

W. H . COONS, Ph.D. and E . P.


1
PEACOCK, M.A.*

In recent years many of the traditional can be the change agents, the range of
assumptions about the nature of psycho­ potential therapists is greatly extended. In
therapy have been subjected to new and view of the arguments by Albee (1), Scho­
critical scrutiny. One of the challenged as­ field (18) and others about the hopelessness
sumptions is concerned with insight as of ever meeting the social need with pro­
a crucial condition for personality change. fessional therapists, the extension of the
For example, Collier (3), and Mendelsohn, therapeutic role to untrained personnel has
Yates and Peterson (14) have contended great practical significance.
that strong positive affect is more important The present research is an extension of
than insight. Mellinger (13) has stressed that reported by Coons (5), who compared
trust. Coons (5, 4) has claimed that inter­ the effects on mental hospital patients of
personal interaction in a warm accepting two types of group psychotherapy conduct­
environment is the dynamic of change. ed by professional therapists. In one type
Strupp (20) has noted that therapist warmth (Interaction Therapy), the technique stressed
toward patients is accompanied by more interaction among members of the group
favourable diagnostic and prognostic expect­ without reference to personal difficulties
ations and greater communication of em­ of individual patients. In the other condition
pathy. And Snyder's (19) term 'relationship' (Insight Therapy), the technique stressed
seems to refer to much the same phe­ cognitive understanding of personal difficul­
nomenon. ties. It was found that patients in the Inter­
Concurrent with the challenge to the action Therapy condition showed signifi­
traditional explanations of the nature of cantly greater improvement in Wechsler-
psychotherapy has been an increasing con­ Bellevue and Rorschach performance than
cern about who can be therapists. Albee (1) did those patients in the Insight Therapy
and Schofield (18) have stressed the impor­ condition. Patients receiving Insight Ther­
tance of finding alternatives to psycho­ apy did not differ significantly from those
therapy given by professionals. Rioch and in control groups who had received no
her colleagues (16), and Carkhuff and Truax planned therapy at all.
(2) have adduced evidence that, with training, These results led to the general hypo­
nonprofessionals can be effective thera­ thesis that the systematic promotion of
pists, while Poser (15) has made the same interpersonal interaction in small stable
claim for therapists with no training or groups as part of the patient's everyday ex­
special knowledge. perience could be a significant factor in
These developments have important im­ helping him toward improved adjustment.
plications for the practice of psychotherapy
Research design
and for the organization of hospital therapy
The design was a simple 2 x 2 x 2 fac­
programs. If positive affect or trust or
torial randomized groups design (6). Four
interpersonal interaction can produce per­
male and four female groups of seven pa­
sonality change, and if untrained therapists
tients each were assigned at random to one
"The data for this study were collected while both of four treatment combinations, each of
authors were at the Ontario Hospital, Hamilton. The
research was supported by Federal Mental Health Grant which lasted for six weeks: Formal Group
No. 605-5-292 and Ontario Mental Health Foundation
Grant No. 78. Psychotherapy plus Random Ward Inter­
Manuscript received April, 1969.
'Professor of Psychology, York University and Psy­ action, Formal Group Psychotherapy plus
chological Consultant, Whitby Psychiatric Hospital. Organized Ward Interaction, Random Ward
2
Staff Psychologist, Whitby Psychiatric Hospital.
Canad. Psychiat. Ass. 3. Vol. 15 (1970) Interaction only (with no Formal Group

347
348 CANADIAN P S Y C H I A T R I C ASSOCIATION J O U R N A L Vol. 15, No. 4

Psychotherapy), and Organized Ward Inter­ necessary to offer some special form of
action only (with no Formal Group Psycho­ treatment. The design of the experiment
therapy). required that this treatment be unrelated to
the interpersonal interaction variables being
Organized Ward Interaction was defined
studied and common to all subjects. Con­
operationally as the interaction which oc­
sequently, the program for all subjects, ex­
curred as a function of membership in an
perimental and control, included viewing a
identifiable group to which seven patients
series of six mental health films. This treat­
were assigned on a hospital ward. The group
ment was designated Audio-Visual Therapy.
identity was maintained for most of the
None of the subjects was receiving (or
group's daily hospital activities. The mem­
had recently received) electroconvulsive
bers of the group ate at the same table,
therapy during the experimental period.
slept in the same dormitory and had their
recreational, occupational and industrial Whether or not a subject received psycho­
therapy as a distinct group under the full- tropic medication during the course of the
time direction of a group leader who was experiment was determined by his physician
a ward nursing assistant of the same sex as on the basis of his ward behaviour and
the members of the group. The goal of the without reference to his status as a subject
group activities was the development of high in the study. AH patients were free of psy­
group cohesiveness. A psychologist met chotropic medication for at least 48 hours
with the group leaders at regular weekly prior to the pre- or post-assessments and
meetings and was available for emergency throughout the assessment periods.
consultations.
Criterion Measures
Random Ward Interaction referred to the The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale
uncontrolled socialization which is typical (WAIS), the Hospital Adjustment Scale
of most mental hospital wards. Under this (HAS) and the Rorschach were employed
condition each patient was free to engage as the criterion measures. The WAIS and
selectively in interpersonal interaction with the Rorschach assessments were carried out
<anyone on the ward according to his own by the same examiner. He was not informed
inclination, or as he was required to become of which patients were in which group and
involved by the ward staff. His recreational, he deliberately tried to avoid conversations
industrial and occupational therapy were which might reveal this information. During
arranged individually without reference to the post-therapy assessment he occasionally
his membership in the research group. suspected which treatment condition a pa­
Random Ward Interaction was a control tient had undergone. For scoring purposes
condition which was designed to provide a all protocols were coded so that the exam­
baseline for the evaluation of the treatment
iner did not know whether the protocols
procedures.
came from the pre- or post-assessment.

Formal Group Psychotherapy referred to The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale


30 hours of formal group psychotherapy (21) was used to measure pre- and post-
over a period of six weeks. The therapy was treatment intellectual efficiency. Improved
designed to foster intra-group interaction in intellectual efficiency is assumed to indicate
a warm, accepting and permissive atmos­ improvement since it reflects a freeing of
phere. The technique was .basically non- intellectual resources with a consequent in­
directive (17, 8). The same professional crease in. the- individual's ability to cope
psychotherapist conducted all the Formal intellectually with problem situations. Dif­
Group Psychotherapy groups. ferent but' approximately equivalent forms
To justify the retention of the control of this test were employed by Coons (5),
subjects (Random Ward Interaction) in hps-; and the• results significantly discriminated
pital. for the experimental period it, was between his experimental groups.
August 1970 GROUP PSYCHOTHERAPY 349

The Hospital Adjustment Scale (12) con­ ton. Each was selected on the basis of suit­
sists of 90 statements descriptive of the ability for group psychotherapy. The criteria
behaviour of hospitalized psychiatric pa­ used were:
tients, and purports to provide an estimate
1) Ability to maintain at least passive
of hospital adjustment of adult patients of
attention;
either sex. The scale is designed to be com­
pleted by any of the ward staff who are 2) Sufficient contact with reality to be
familiar with the day-to-day behaviour of minimally disruptive to the group;
the patient. Each of the 90 statements com­ 3) Grade V I I I education or a pre-treat­
prising the scale is marked as 'True', 'Not ment I.Q. of at least 90;
True', or, in some cases, 'Does not Apply'. 4) No known organic impairment.
The inter-rater reliability is reported to be
The therapist for the group psychother­
.84. McReynolds and Ferguson (12) refer
apy selected all the patients. Psychiatric
to unpublished studies of the validity of the
nosology was ignored in the selection pro­
HAS which indicate that it is effective in
cedure but the majority (N = 38) were
differentiating between patients approaching
diagnosed as schizophrenic.
discharge from hospital and patients judged
Successive groups (four male groups and
to be extremely disturbed.
four female groups) of seven patients each
In the current study the 90-item scale were selected. After a group had been
was completed on all 5s before and after picked the treatment was chosen randomly.
the experimental period. The ward super­
The therapist had no knowledge of which
visor was made responsible for the ratings
experimental treatment the group would
which were the consensus of those ward
receive until after his selection of the mem­
staff who best knew the patient concerned.
bers of the group had been completed.
The Rorschach (9, 10) pre- and post-
Fifty-six 5s were selected,tt ranging in
treatment protocols were analyzed 'blind'
age from 15 to 51 with a mean age of 28.6
by three experienced Rorschach judges,?
years. Female 5s were slightly older than
operating independently. Each judge knew
the males (Female mean age — 31.9, S.D.
only that each pair of protocols was from
— 9.9; Male mean age — 25.9, S.D. —
the same subject (identified by a code num­
6.9). The total duration of all hospitaliza­
ber, age, sex, education, occupation and
tions ranged from one to 169 weeks, with
marital status) and that one of the protocols
a mean total hospitalization of 45.4 weeks.
was pre-treatment and the other post-treat­
Male 5s had been hospitalized for somewhat
ment. He did not know which was pre- and
longer periods of time than female 5s (Male
which was post-treatment, or the nature of
mean duration of hospitalization — 60.0,
the treatment the patient received.
S.D. — 47.2. Female mean duration of
Each judge was instructed to determine
hospitalization — 31.2, S.D. — 26.3). In
which of each pair of protocols indicated
the total sample the range of years of
the better level of adjustment, or that there
schooling was from 8 to 16 years, with a
was 'no difference' in adjustment indicated
mean of 10.2 years. There was no signifi­
by the two protocols. When the protocol
cant difference in the mean number of years
which two of the three judges rated 'better'
of schooling for males and females. Never­
was the post-treatment record, that 5 Was
theless the mean pre-treatment WAIS Full-
considered to have shown improved adjust­
Scale I.Q. of the male 5s was significantly
ment during the therapy period. Otherwise,
5 was considered to have 'not improved'. greater than that of the females (Male
mean I.Q. — 100.0, S.D. — 11.6; Female
Subjects mean I.Q. — 88.9, S.D. — 11.6, p<.005X
The subjects used in this research were
ttDuring the experiment, one subject was lost from
all patients at the Ontario Hospital, Hamil- each of the following groups: Male Formal Group
Psychotherapy plus Random Ward Interaction; Male
tProfessor F . W. Burd, Dr. H . N. Blackwell and Dr. Random Ward Interaction; Female Random Ward
K. G. Ferguson. Interaction.
350 CANADIAN P S Y C H I A T R I C ASSOCIATION J O U R N A L V o l . 15, N o . 4

TABLE I

M E A N S AND STANDARD D E V I A T I O N S F O R F U L L - S C A L E I . Q.
C H A N G E S FROM P R E - TO P O S T - T R E A T M E N T ASSESSMENTS

Male Female

FGP FGP OWI RWI FGP FGP OWI RWI


plus plus (No (No plus plus (No (No
OWI RWI FGP) FGP) OWI RWI FGP) FGP)

Mean 8.7 6.9 2.7 2.3 4.9 5.4 4.4 3.6


S.D. 5.2 3.0 3.9 5.2 . 2.5 3.2 3.7 4.4

F G P — Formal Group Psychotherapy


OWI — Organized Ward Interaction
R W I — Random Ward Interaction

Hypotheses tion would more than match the greater


Basic to the research is the assumption time spent by the nonprofessional group
that interpersonal interaction is an impor­ leaders of the Organized Ward Interaction
tant component of the therapeutic process. condition.
Since interaction is systematically fostered Thus it was hypothesized that on all three
by both the Formal Group Psychotherapy criterion measures the amount of improve­
and the Organized Ward Interaction treat­ ment would be greatest for the combined
ment conditions, subjects in those groups Formal Group Psychotherapy — Organized
should show greater improvement on all Ward Interaction groups, followed by the
three criterion measures than do the sub­ Formal Group Psychotherapy — Random
jects in the Random Ward Interaction con­ Ward Interaction groups, followed by the
dition. Organized Ward Interaction groups, with
The relative effectiveness of the Formal the Random Ward Interaction groups show­
Group Psychotherapy and the Organized ing least improvement. No differences in
Ward Interaction conditions hinges on the improvement were expected between male
frequency and quality of the interaction. and female subjects.
These two conditions differ on several
Results
dimensions which include: a) the skill of
the staff member attending the group (pro­ Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale*
fessional therapist or nurse-aide) in pro­ A summary of the pre- to post-treatment
viding a consistently warm and accepting changes in Full-Scale I.Q. scores is present­
social environment and in reinforcing inter­ ed in Tables I and I I . The effect of Formal
action among the group members; b) the Group Psychotherapy was significant beyond
potency as a reinforcer of the staff member; the 1% level (Table II). For 5s receiving
and c) the time units in which the inter­ Formal Group Psychotherapy, the mean
action takes place (one hour a day for the change in Full-Scale I.Q. was 6.4 (S.D. —
Formal Group Psychotherapy condition 4.0); for 5s not receiving Formal Group
compared to eight hours a day for the Psychotherapy, the mean change in Full-
Organized Ward Interaction subjects). Be­ Scale I.Q. was 3.3 (S.D. — 4.6).
cause of the importance traditionally attach­ A similar three-way analysis of variance
ed to the skill of the therapist in his role of pre- to post-treatment changes in WAIS
as a social reinforcement machine program­ Verbal I.Q. revealed no significant interac­
med by prior training and experience (11), tions or main effects; analysis of WAIS
it was expected that the professional skill JBartlett's tests supported the assumption of homo­
of the Formal Group Psychotherapy condi­ geneity of variances of the Full-Scale, Verbal-Scale and
Performance-Scale data.
August 1970 GROUP PSYCHOTHERAPY 351

TABLE II

SUMMARY T A B L E O F R E S U L T S O F 3-WAY A N A L Y S I S O F V A R I A N C E O F W A I S
F U L L - S C A L E I . Q. C H A N G E S F R O M P R E - TO P O S T - T R E A T M E N T ASSESSMENTS

Source df SS MS F P

Formal Group
Psychotherapy (A) 1 144.643 144.643 7.32 <.01
W a r d Interaction
Program (B) 1 5.785 5.785
Sex (C) 1 4.571 4.571
A X B 1 0.000 0.000
A X C 1 60.071 60.071 3.04 <.10(n.s.)
B X C 1 3.501 3.501
A X B X C 1 7.143 7.143
Error 45 889.143 19.759

Performance I.Q. indicated that the main The 2 x 2 x 2 analysis of variance per­
effect of Formal Group Psychotherapy was formed on the pre- to post-treatment HAS
significant at below the 5% level of con­ change scores is presented in Table III. The
fidence. The mean change in Performance main effects of sex and ward program were
I.Q. of 5s receiving Formal Group Psycho­ significant (<.05) indicating that female pa­
therapy was 8.0 (S.D. — 5.8); that of 5s tients showed significantly more improve­
not receiving Formal Group Psychotherapy ment in hospital adjustment than males and
was 3.9 (S.D. — 6.5). that patients receiving Organized Ward In­
teraction improved more than those in the
Hospital Adjustment Scale Random Ward Interaction condition. The
A three-way analysis of variance on the interaction between Formal Group Psycho­
pre-treatment HAS scores for all 5s reveal­ therapy and Ward Interaction Program was
ed no significant effects. It was therefore also significant « . 0 5 ) . Using Scheffe's mul­
concluded that there were no initial differ­ tiple comparison procedure (6), it was found
ences in ward adjustment between male that Formal Group Psychotherapy plus
and female groups or between patients sub­ Organized Ward Interaction resulted in
sequently assigned to the various combina­ significantly greater improvement in hospital
tions of Formal Group Psychotherapy and adjustment than Formal Group Psychother­
Ward Interaction Programs. apy plus Random Ward Interaction (F =

TABLE III

SUMMARY T A B L E OF 2 X 2 X 2 A N A L Y S I S O F V A R I A N C E O F P R E - TO P O S T - T R E A T M E N T CHANGE
SCORES ON T H E H O S P I T A L A D J U S T M E N T SCALE

Source df SS MS F P

F o r m a l Group
Psychotherapy (A) 1 462 88 462.88 1.75 n.s.
W a r d Interaction
Program (B) 1 1370 16 1370.16 5.18 <.05
Sex (C) 1 1390 02 1390.02 5.25 <.05
A X B 1 1197 87 1197.87 4.53 <.05
A X C 1 24 44 24.44
B X C 1 355 02 355.02 1.34 n.s.
A X B X C 1 80 16 80.16
Error, 45 11904 29 264.54
352 CANADIAN P S Y C H I A T R I C ASSOCIATION JOURNAL Vol. 15, No. 4

TABLE I V

SUMMARY OF 2 X 2 CONTINGENCY T A B L E S SHOWING T H E F R E Q U E N C Y OF " I M P R O V E D " AND " N O T


IMPROVED" RORSCHACH PROTOCOLS WITH THEIR ASSOCIATED X 2
V A L U E FOR E A C H PAIR OF T R E A T ­
MENT CONDITIONS

Treatment Condition Direction of Rorschach Protocol Change X 2

Improved Not Improved

F G P plus R W I 10 3 4.52 <.05


F G P plus O W I 4 10

F G P plus R W I 10 3 <1 n.s.


RWI 8 4

F G P plus O W I 4 10 2.39 n.s.


RWI 8 4

F G P plus O W I 4 10 0 n.s.
OWI 5 9

F G P plus R W I 10 3 4.49 <.05


OWI 5 9

RWI 8 4 2.10 n.s.


OWI 9
5

F G P — Formal Group Psychotherapy


O W I — Organized W a r d Interaction
R W I — RandomjWard Interaction

9.14; p<.05). Patients in Formal Group 4.52; p<.05) and Organized Ward Interac­
Psychotherapy plus Random Ward Inter­ tion alone (x = 4.49; p<.05).
2

action showed significantly poorer hospital


adjustment than patients in the other treat­ Discussion
ment conditions (F = 10.30; p<.05). On all three criterion measures, Formal
Group Psychotherapy emerges as a signifi­
Rorschach cant agent of change. Analysis of Wechsler
A 2 x 4 Chi square test for independent Adult Intelligence Scale scores shows that
samples revealed that the proportion of pa­ Formal Group Psychotherapy was signi­
tients rated 'improved' and 'not improved' ficantly more efficacious in producing
varied significantly among the four treat­ change than was any other treatment or
ment conditions (x = 8.76; p<.05). Fur­
2
combination of treatments. These results
ther two-way comparisons between treat­ confirm our earlier finding (5) that Formal
ment pairs were made. These data are pre­ Group Psychotherapy produces a significant
sented in the 2 x 2 contingency tables of improvement in intellectual functioning.
Table IV; as can be seen from this Table, The '• inference is that this type of treatment
Formal Group Psychotherapy plus Random results in a freeing of intellectual resources
Ward Interaction resulted in a significantly, so that patients are better able to cope
greater proportion of improved Rorschach intellectually, at least with structured prob­
protocols than Formal Group Psychother­ lem situations of the sort sampled by the
apy plus Organized Ward Interaction (x = 2
WAIS. ,
August 1970 GROUP P S Y C H O T H E R A P Y 353

The Rorschach results also indicate that groups for only an hour per day, five days
Formal Group Psychotherapy produces a week, produced greater improvement than
greater improvement than Organized Ward did our group leaders who were involved
Interaction, either alone or in combination for eight hours per day, five days a week?
with Formal Group Psychotherapy. Inspec­ After all, these group leaders were en­
tion of the Rorschach data presented in thusiastic and well-motivated persons who
Table I V further supports the finding that performed their functions with unusual
Organized Ward Interaction has a detrimen­ diligence.
tal effect on the impact of the Formal Group It is conceivable that the most obvious
Psychotherapy. The reason for this is not explanation holds: that the professional
entirely clear but it seems plausible to therapist's skill was the crucial factor in
assume that the professional group therapist bringing about the improvement. There is,
and the ward-staff group leaders work to­ however, another possibility which is re­
ward conflicting goals. The ward staff tend ceiving increasing attention among psycho­
to view 'good patients' as those who con­ therapists, that of the expectancies patients
form to the rules and regulations of the bring to the therapeutic situation. The
ward; professional therapists tend to define group leaders were lower-echelon hospital
improvement in terms of greater independ­ staff who were stereotyped by the patients
ence of action which may run counter to as having low status and minor professional
some of the restrictive demands of the ward competence. By contrast the professional
regime. The Hospital Adjustment Scale therapist was viewed as having high status
data appear to reflect this conflict. The main and substantial professional competence. It
effects of both sex and ward program were seems likely that the subjects in the Formal
significant as was the interaction between Group Psychotherapy treatment condition
Formal Group Psychotherapy and Organ­ entered therapy with a higher expectation
ized Ward Interaction. The criterion mea­ of favourable outcome than did those as­
sure here was completed by the ward staff signed to the Organized Ward Interaction
who were involved regularly with the pa­ groups. A consequence of this patient atti­
tients in the study and knew the nature tude might well have been that the profes­
of the treatment condition (unlike the sional therapist possessed greater reinforcing
Rorschach judges and the WAIS examiner). value than did the group leaders, and thus
The Hospital Adjustment Scale evaluations was able to shape more efficiently the be­
can be expected to reflect any bias in favour haviour of his subjects. (See Goldstein [7],
of conformity to rules imposed by the ward for an explication of the role of patient
staff and may well reflect a bias in favour expectancies in psychotherapy.)
of those groups participating in programs
in which the ward staff were heavily in­ Whatever the ultimate explanation, the
volved, that is those which included Organ­ results of the present study require that we
ized Ward Interaction in their treatment reserve judgement about Poser's (15) con­
condition. Thus, two sources of judge-bias tention that "traditional training in the
(positive evaluation of conformity behaviour mental health professions may be neither
and halo effect) may account for the diver­ optimal nor even necessary for the promo­
gent Hospital Adjustment Scale results. tion of therapeutic behaviour change in
Nevertheless, whatever the validity of this mental hospital patients (p. 289)." Before
speculation, it is clear that Formal Group we can conclude that professional training
Psychotherapy is the only treatment condi­ is irrelevant it is incumbent upon us to
tion which had a significant impact, alone clarify the complex interrelations of factors
or in combination with other treatment, on influencing the therapeutic process, factors
all three criterion measures. such as the interaction of age, sex and status
of patient and therapist and the expectancies
How are we to rationalize the finding which both therapist and patient bring to
that our professional therapist, who met his the therapeutic transaction.
354 CANADIAN P S Y C H I A T R I C ASSOCIATION J O U R N A L Vol. 15, No. 4

Summary 8. Hobbs, N.: Group-centered psychother­


apy. In Rogers, C. R., Client-Centered
The study was concerned with comparing
Therapy. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 1951.
the efficacy of three forms of social inter­ 9. Klopfer, B. and Kelley, D.: The Rorschach
action in modifying the behaviour of mental Technique. New York: World Book Co.,
hospital patients. Eight groups of seven 1942.
patients each were assigned, in a simple 10. Klopfer, B., Ainsworth, Mary D., Klopfer,
W. I . , and Holt, R. R.: Developments in
randomized design, to combinations of
the Rorschach Technique. New York:
Formal Group Psychotherapy (conducted World Book Co., 1954.
by a professionally trained therapist), Or­ 11. Krasner, L.: The therapist as a social re­
ganized Ward Interaction (conducted by inforcement machine. In H. H. Strupp and
untrained group leaders), or Random Ward L. Luborsky (Eds.), Research in Psycho­
therapy, Vol. I I . Washington, D.C.:
Interaction (no planned therapy). Equal American Psychological Association,
numbers of male and female groups were 1962: 61-94.
involved. 12. McReynolds, P., and Ferguson, J. T.:
The dependent variables were: 1) The Clinical Manual for the Hospital Adjust­
ment Scale. Palo Alto, California: Leland
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale; 2) The Stanford University Press, 1953.
Hospital Adjustment Scale; 3) The Ror­ 13. Mellinger, G. D.: Interpersonal trust as a
schach Technique of Personality Diagnosis. factor in communication. Journal of Ab­
Formal Group Psychotherapy emerged as normal and Social Psychology, 1956, 52:
304-309.
the only treatment condition which had a
14. Mendelsohn, R. M., Yates, J. W., and
significant impact, alone or in combination Peterson, L . : The experiential aspect of
with other treatment, on all three criterion psychotherapy. American Journal of Psy­
measures. It was concluded that judgement chotherapy, 1957, 11: 254-261.
must be reserved on the contention of sev­ 15. Poser, E . G.: The effect of therapists'
training on group therapeutic outcome.
eral authors that traditional professional Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1966,
training in psychotherapy is unnecessary 30: 283-289.
for the promotion of therapeutic change. 16. Rioch, M. J., Elkes, C., Flint, A. A.,
Usdansky, B. S., Newman, R. G., and
Silber, E . : National Institute of Mental
References Health pilot study in training mental coun­
1. Albee, G. W.: Manpower needs for men­ selors. American Journal of Orthopsychi­
tal health and the role of psychology. atry, 1963, 33: 678-679.
Canadian Psychologist, 1965, 6a: 82-92. 17. Rogers, C. R.: Client-Centered Therapy.
2. Carkhuff, R. R. and Truax, C. B.: Lay Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 1951.
mental health counselling: the effects of 18. Schofield, W.: Psychotherapy: the Pur­
lay group counselling. Journal of Consul­ chase of Friendship. Englewood Cliffs,
ting Psychology, 1965, 29: 426-431. N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1964.
19. Snyder, W. U.: The Psychotherapy Rela­
3. Collier, R. M.: Consciousness as a regu­
tionship. New York: The Macmillan Co.,
latory field: a theory of psychotherapy.
1961.
Journal of Abnormal and Social Psycho­
20. Strupp, H. H.: The outcome problem in
logy, 1957, 55: 275-282.
psychotherapy revisited. Psychotherapy:
4. Coons, W. H.: The dynamics of change Research and Practice, 1963, 1: 1-13.
in psychotherapy. Canadian Psychiatric 21. Wechsler, D.: The Measurement and Ap­
Association Journal, 1967, 12: 239-245. praisal of Adult Intelligence. Baltimore:
5. Coons, W. H.: Interaction and insight in Williams and Wilkins, 1958.
group psychotherapy. Canadian Journal of
Psychology, 1957, 11: 1-8. Resume
6. Edwards, A. L . : Experimental Design in Dans cette etude, on compare l'effica-
Psychological Research, p. 175, p. 154, cite de trois formes d'interaction sociale qui
Toronto: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1964.
viennent modifier le comportement des
7. Goldstein, A. P.: Therapist-Patient Ex­
pectancies in Psychotherapy. New York: malades dans les hopitaux psychiatriques.
Macmillan Co., 1962. Huit groupes de sept malades chacun ont
August 1970 GROUP PSYCHOTHERAPY 355

ete assignes, selon un modele simple choisi a l'hopital; 3) la Technique Rorschach de


au hasard, a des combinaisons de psycho­ diagnostic de la personnalite.
therapie de groupe reconnue (dirigee par L a psychotherapie de groupe reconnue
un therapeute ayant recu une formation s'est revelee la seule condition de traitement
professionnelle), d'interaction organisee qui ait eu un impact significatif, seule ou
dans les salles (dirigee par des moniteurs combinee a un autre traitement, parmi les
n'ayant pas recu de formation) ou d'inter­ trois mesures de criteres. On en a conclu
action au hasard dans les salles (sans thera- qu'il faut accepter avec des reserves l'af-
pie organisee). Les groupes d'hommes et de firmation de plusieurs auteurs qui pre-
femmes y etaient en nombre egal. tendent que la formation professionnelle
Voici quelles etaient les variables de- conventionnelle en psychotherapie n'est pas
pendantes: 1) l'Echelle Wechsler d'intelli- necessaire pour provoquer une modification
gence des adultes; 2) l'Echelle d'adaptation therapeutique.

The meeting of two personalities is like the


contact of two chemical substances; if there
is any reaction, both are transformed.
Modern Man in Search of a Soul

Carl Gustav Jung


1875- 1961