Blau, Benami - An Investigation of The Process of Client Centered Therapy in Terms of Extinction and Reinforcement

The Pennsylvania State College
The Graduate School

Department of Psychology
A N INVESTIGATION OF THE PROCESS OF CLIENT CENTERED TH ERAPY
IN TERMS OF EXTINCTION AND REINFORCEMENT
A Dissertation
BenAmi Blau
Submitted in partial fulfillment

of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
August, 1951
APPROVED: / ^ Date
C r . a L ,
Associate Professor of Psaycl
ychology
Head, Department of Psychology

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The writer wishes to express appreciation to Dr.
William U. Snyder and the other members of his committee for
their assistance in the formulation and design of this study.
Special acknowledgment is made to the members of the
"Core 3-roup1', without whose joint efforts this investigation
could not have been completed.

ii
T ABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Page
I Summary of S t u d y ................................... 1
II Introduction and R e v i e w of Literature ......... 22
III Statement of P r ob l em and Hypotheses ............ 31
IV P r o c e d u r e .......................................... 37
V F i n d i n g s ............................................ 45
VI Di s c u s s i o n of Findings .......................... 67
VII C o n c l u s i o n s ........................................ 80
VIII Recom mendations ............................ 84
B i b l i o g r a p h y ............................................... 86
Appendices
A. Counselor and Client Coding Categories . . . . 89
B. Multiple Criteria Measures ................. 97
C. R a t i n g S c a l e s ..................................... 103
I ii
LIST OF TABLES
Table Pa.ê
I The nuiiDor of judges in exact agreement in the

coding of 165 reliability items for content . . . 9
II Total and mean number of responses per case in

the more improved group (LI) and. the less
improved group (L) 11
III F ratios b et w ee n groups, deciles, and the

in teraction groups b y deciles for client
re sponses . . . . 12
IV Source of referral for selected po p ul a ti o n as

compared with core p o p u l a t i o n .................... 39
V The number of judges in exact agreement in the

coding of 165 relia bi l it y Items for content . . . 41
VI Differe nce b e t w e e n mean criteria scores for

improvement in therapy be tv/eon groups and L . . 45
VJ.I Total arid mean number of responses per case

in groups h and L .................................. 46
VIII F rat ios b e tw e en groups, deciles, and the inter

action groups b y deciles for client responses . . 56
IX Leans of YSPs responses In per cent for groups,

d e c ’les, and the interaction groups b y deciles. . 58
X Leans of YSPe responses In per cent for groups,

deciles, and the interaction groups b y deciles. . 59
XI Leans of YSPh responses in per cent for groups,

deciles, ana the interaction groups b y deciles. . 60
XII Leans of YSPa responses in per cent for groups,

deciles, and the Interaction groups by deciles. . 61
XIII Means of YSPp responses in per cent for groups,

deciles , and the interaction groups by deciles. . 62
XIV Means of YTJI responses in per cent for groups,

iv
LIST OF TABLES— Continued
Table Page
XV Means of YDP responses in per cent for groups,

XVI Means of sum of YSPp + YUI + YDP responses in

per cent for groups, deciles, and the
Interaction groups b y deciles ..................... 65
XVII Means of sum of YSPp + YDP responses in

per cent for groups, deciles, and the
interaction groups b y deciles . . . 66
XVIII Criteria d a t a ......................................... 98

V
LIST OF FIC-UR5S
Figure Page
1. Mean per cent of occurrence of YSPs responses

by deciles for groups M and L ..................... 48
2. Mean per cent of occurrence of YSPe responses

5. Mean per cent of occurrence of YSPh responses

by deciles for groups L' and L ..................... 49
4. wean per cant of occurrence of YSPa responses

by deciles for groups IT and L . . . . 51
5. Mean per cent of occurrence of YSPp responses

6. Mean per cent of occurrence of YUI responses

by deciles for groups Ivl and L ........ ..... 53
7. Mean per cent of occurrence of YDP resoonses

by deciles for grotips M and L ..................... 53
8. Mean per cent of occurrence of YSPp + YTTI + YDP

responses b y deciles for grouns LI and L .......... 55
9. Mean per cent of occurrence of YSPp + YDP

responses by dociles for groups Ivl and L .......... 55
AN INVESTIGATION OF THE PROCESS OF CLIENT CENTERED THERAPY
IN TERNS OF EXTINCTION AND REINFORCEMENT
CHAPTER I
SUMMARY OF STUDY
Introduction
The pr oblem of accounting for behavioral functions in
terms of the various laws of learning has b e e n of interest
to investigators for many years. Although ma n y have h y p o
thesized the role of learning in psychotherapy, a rev i ew of
the literature has failed to reveal any experimental study
using clinical data which would serve to substantiate or
refute any of the theories set forth. However, there is
much experimental evidence of a non-clinical nature which
seems to indicate that learning is an integral part of
psychotherapy, but the association of these two concepts
remains on an empirical level.
This investigation is one of a group of studies based

on a common core of data. The author wishes to express his
grateful appreciation to John M. Rakusin, John F. Gillespie,
John E . Tucker, James J. Gallagher, Man uel Aronson, and
Horace A. Page, all members of the group research project
under the leadership of William u. Snyder. Without the
combined effort of the group, this study could not have
been accomplished.
2
Hu ll (9) and Thorndike (31) emphasize the role of
reinforcement in learning. Quoting from Hull:
Learning, whether it he the formation of new asso

ciations or the differential strengthening of already
existent associations, is a continuous process of
reinforcement.
Experimental evidence found hy Spence and Lippitt (11) tend
to support F u l l ’s reinforcement theory.
Shoben (25) proposes that psychotherapy occurs under
three interrelated processes:
(1) The lifting of repression and development of

insight through symbolic reinstating of the stimuli
for anxiety; (2) the diminution of anxiety b y coun
ter conditioning through the attachment of the stimuli
for anxiety to the comfort reaction made to the thera
peutic relationship; (3) the process of reeducation
through the t h e r a p i s t ’s helping the patient to for
mulate rational goals and be havioral methods for
att aining them.
Shoben further suggests that:
If neurotic anxiety . . . is produced by the repres

sion of some unextinguished response . . . (it) can
be dispelled either through eliciting self-initiated
behavior and failing; to reinforce it until extinction
occurs, or through forming a bond between the tenden
cies of self-initiated behavior and some nonanxious
vixceral reacti'-n which will supplant the connection
b etween anxiety and repressed behavior.
Shaw (22) takes a somewhat different approach in hypo
thesizing the role of learning in the therapy process. He
emphasizes the effect of reward in psychotherapy, and sug
gests that the therapist provides reward by making; the

3
punishing consequences of neurotic behavior more available
to the client. howrer and Ullman (14) stated that "the
common denominator in all forms of non-integrative behavior
seems to be the inability to use symbols appropriately as a
means of bringing remote as well as immediate consequences
into the present . .
It may be noted at this point that the theoretical con
structs binding psychotherapy to learning theory have not
been subjected to experimental verification. Although the
process of non-directive psychotherapy has been analysed, no
attempt has been made to systematize experimentally the
process. Porter (17) developed a method of coding responses
in theraputic interviews which enabled a quantitative evalua
tion of the process. Snyder (27), followed by Kuench (15)
and desman (21), quantitatively and qualitatively investi
gated the process of non-cireotive psychotherapy. In another
study, Snyder (28) compared one unsuccessful with four suc
cessful non-directively counseled cases, found differences
in the insight and discussion of plans categories, but not
between the statement of problem category.
In summary, there is a need for the attempt to test the
applications of learning theory to psychotherapy, and to
investigate further the process of non-directive psychotherapy
using adequate sample populations.

4
The purpose of this in vestigation is two-fold in nature,
iirst, an attempt will be made to relate the process of n o n
directive ps ychotherapy to a process of learning; ana secona,
an investigation of client behavior in the therapeutic p r o
cess will be made.
Development of the P r o b l e m
It is postulated that the process of non-directive
psyc hotherapy is a process of extinction and re inforcement
of verbal responses which are symbolic of overt behavioral
responses. To test the hypothesis that the process of p s y
chotherapy is a learning process, certain assumptions con
cerning the dynamics of the client and the therapy will have
to be made. first, it will be assumed that the client
entering the therapeutic environment is aware of maladjus-
tive behavior on his part. Secondly, it will be assumed
that a drive or drives exist wh ich were r ew a r d e d or satiated
originally b y responding to certain cues, and that the
response is now inhibited. Since the drive remains, but the
original response to It has been inhibited, the drive now
evokes a substitute response which Is symptomatic of the
maladjustment. 7/hen this ne w response does not adequately
reduce the drive, fc-e individual becomes aware of his inade
quate adjustment. It is at this point that the client would
seek therapeutic aid.

5
Statement of the Problem
It is postulated that the process of non-directive
psychotherapy occurs in the following manner:
1. The maladjusted client has a drive to make an
adequate adjustment to his environment. This Is
evidenced b y the fact that he enters the thera
peutic situation for aid in achieving this adjust
ment .
2. Once in the therapy situation, the client ver
balizes the symbolic representations of his diffi
culty. In other words, he reports symbolically
examples of his overt behavior. Since his adjust
ment at this point is not satisfactory, it can be
inferred that he is unable to make new, adjustive
responses, but acts In a more or less stereotyped
manner. These malaojustive responses, although not
entirely rewarding, have certain elements of satia
tion in that ttay avoic an earlier response which
has become-; inhibited, a n d are reinforced and remain
in the repertoire of the client.
3. Since the maladjustive responses are being r e i n
forced, there tends to be an inhibition of new and
varied responses. Therefore, the maladjustive
responses must be extinguished in the therapeutic
situation. e therapist, by accepting all

responses made b y the client without condoning or
criticizing, teaches that his maladjustive behavior
can be verbalized in the therapy situation without
being followed by anxiety as when the same response
is given overtly in a real situation. If these
responses evoke no effective counter-response In
the therapeutic environment, they become no n reward
ing and nonpunishing, and with repetition, become
e x t i n g ui s he d .
4. As the maladjustive responses become extinguished,
the client can begin to make new and varied re s p o n
ses. Certain of these will serve to reduce the
c l i e n t ’s drive towards adjustment, and will be
reinforced by the nature of their rewarding e l e
ments and retained. Other responses will serve no
function in achieving adjustment and will become
extinguished through disuse.
Hypotheses
^t is therefore hypothesized:
1, that the process of non-directive psychot herapy can
be accounted for in terms of the extinction of
maladaptive responses and the reinforcement of new
responses which lead to adjustment.
2. that at the onset of the therapeutic process, the res
ponses made b y the client will be of a stereotyped
nature.
7
3. that as therapy progresses, the extinction of the
stereotyped responses will be evidenced b y an
Increase In variability of response.
4. that as new responses b y the client are made, those
leading to understanding and adjustment will be
reinforced and retained.
5. that quantitative dif’ferences between a group of
therapy cases judged to be more improved and a
group of therapy cases judged to be less Improved
will be evidenced within the therapeutic process.
In order to test the above hypotheses, an Investigation
of certain client responses as they occur during process of
non-directive psychotherapy will be made.
Procedure
A. Selection of Population
Forty-three therapy cases counseled at the Psychol ogi
cal Clinic of The Pennsylvania State College were selected
randomly to servo as a central core of data for a group of
Investigations in psychotherapy. Each case met the follow
ing criteria: (1) the case was counseled by the n on
directive method; (2) each case completed a minimum of three
hour-long interviews; and (3) at least fifty per cent of all
interviews, Including the first and last, were transcribable.
All cases were students enrolled at The Pennsylvania State

8
College. The mean age of the cases was 21.5 years, with a
range from 18 to 31 years. The sample was representative of
the total population of the college in regard to 3 e x distri-
oution, but showed a higher ratio of students in non-technical
curricula than did the total college population. There were
338 hour-long therapeutic interviews for the 43 cases, with
a m e a n of 7.86 interviews per case.
The selection of the population for this investigation
consisted of the 12 cases showing the most improvement and
the 12 cases showing the least improvement after therapy.
The criteria were the multiple criteria scores derived by
Tucker (33). The age range for these 24 cases was from 18
to 2S years, with a mean age of 22.37 years. There were 18
males and 6 females in the two groups. The total number of
interviews wa3 207 with a mean of 3.62 interviews per case.
B. Collection of fata
All interviews wore electrically recorded. All first
and last interviews plus odd and even intervening interviews
in randomly selected cases were transcribed. Cases contain
ing three interviews were transcribed in their entirety.
The transcribed interviews were then coded, using a modified
system based on the coding classifications of Cnyder (27).
Seven members of the research group participated in the cod
ing of the interviews. A reliability sample of three inter
views was coded independently by the seven coders, and the
amount of agreement between the coders calculated.

9
Table I
The Number of Judges In Exact Agreement in the

Coding of 165 Reliability Items for Content
No. of Coders Number Percentage Accumulative

in exact of of Percentage
Agreement Items Items of Items
7 48 29 29
6 40 24 53
5 32 19 72
4 29 18 90
3 14 9 99
2 2 1 100
1 0 0 100
Table I presents the number of coders who were in exact
agreement in coding the 165 Items from three r ellability
interviews. It Is noted that five or more of the coders
agreed in the classification of 72 per cent of the items.
C. Selection of Data
Seven client response categories were chosen for inves
tigation. These were response categories of the Statement
of Problem type and of understanding and Insight and Discus
sion of Plans. A definition for each category follows:
1. YSPs - statements which deal with complaints or
symptoms of maladjustment.
2. YSPe - statements which report the situations or
incidents relating to the problem. These are
expanded and explanatory statements.

10
3. YSPh - statements which report the pre-college
etiology of present symptoms.
4. Y3Pa - statements in which the client indicates
consideration of his problem in terms of the
future.
5. YSPp - statements which indicate relief or reduc
tion of the c l i e n t ’s symptoms or complaints,
including statements of pleasure or satisfaction.
6. YUI - statements b y the client in which he ver
balizes the causes of his behavior or clearly r e
lates one characteristic of his behavior to another.
7. YDP - statements revealing the client's decisions
regarding future actions or intentions to change
his attitudes as solutions to his problems.
The categories YSPp + YUI + YDP and YSPp + YDP were combined
in addition to investigating each one individually. These
were combined on the rationale that the categories involved
may be considered as positive goals in the therapeutic p r o
cess, and that combining them may further aid in differen
tially separating the more improved from the less improved
cases.
In order to equate the cases, each case was divided
into deciles on the basis of the total number of client
responses coded in each case. The frequency of occurrence
of each client response category was tabulated for each
decile of the case, and the frequency count converted into

11
a ratio score "by the following formula:
number of responses in decile

of a given category
ratio score = --------------------- ------------ x 100
total number of client
responses in decile
Results
Table II Indicates the total and mean number of res
ponses in the more Improved group (Ivl) and the less Improved
group (L ) .
Table II
Total and Me an Number of Response s per Case

in the More Improved Group (Ivl) and the Less Improved Group (L)
___________ Group M____________ Croup L___________
Number Number of Number Number of

of Client Interviews of Client Interviews
Case Responses Case Responses
1 412 6 13 110 3
2 833 14 14 208 7
3 700 15 15 322 3
4 356 4 16 324 8
5 443 6 17 426 4
6 360 8 18 557 7
7 326 4 19 223 3
t8 193 3 20 287 5
9 393 9 21 1401 25
10 986 27 22 132 5 9
11 328 5 23 146 3
12 727 16 24 546 13
Total 6062 5875

Mean 505.17 4 8 9 . 5S
Cr 233.40 413.24
(pn 70.30 124.45
4
12
The critical ratio be tween the differences of the means of
the two groups, using 22 degrees of freedom, was found to be
.11, indicating that the difference may be attributed to
ch a n c e .
The data were analysed b y an analysis of variance tech
nique with a simple interaction. Table III presents the F
ratios between the most and least improved groups, between
the deciles of the therapeutic process, and between the
interaction of groups b y deciles.
Table III
F Ratios between I1.'oat Improved (Id) and Least Improved (L)

G r o u p s , between Dec lie s of the Therapeutic Process,
and between the Interaction of Groups by Declies
for~*Client Responses
F Ratios
Client Between Between Between
Responses Groups h and L Dec lie s Groups b y Deciles
Y3Ps 0.497 5.647** 1.896

YSPe 0.358 2.247* 1.264
YSPh 0.218 2.232* 0.742
YSPa 0.453 1.252 1.216
YSPp 14.389** 1.639 2.858**
YUI 0.816 1.042 0.434
YDP 10.292** 5.233** 1.682
£ Y S P p + YUI + YDP 11.176** 4.206** 2.618**
2-YSPp + YDP 23.842** 4.391** 3•504**
F required for significance:

.05 level 4.30 1.94 1.94
.01 level 7.94 2.53 2.53
Degrees of Freedom 1 x 22 9 x 193 9 x 198
^Significance at .05 level

**Signlficance at .01 level
I
13
to
■•I.Dma
tnf of occu
•far- «jroup*. |A# antf 1.
I
14
I
■*
2j
ri
it
M
jj
u
s
*
4GA t tn\ + *d9A x % “m i daA+«c/sxj%
!■■
Xi
'*
J S
J
t■ > ■*
!•!
1
:J-
Vfi4
15
Figures 1 to 9 indicate graphically the mean per cents
of occurrence for the most improved and least improved groups
Discussion of Results
The critical ratio between the means of the client
responses for both groups as shown in Table IT is not sta
tistically significant. This may be interpreted as indica
ting that there were no differences beyond those to be
expected by chance between the total number of responses
made b y the two groups. The conclusion can be drawn then,
that the total number of responses made by these subjects
bears no relationship to the outcome of therapy.
Table III summarizes the results of the analysis of
variance calculated for all of the client response cate
gories being investigated. A significant F ratio between
groups indicates a statistically significant difference
between the most improved and least improved groups in
regard to the relative frequency of use of a client response
of a particular category. It can be seen that there are no
statistically significant differences between the groups In
the use of Statemert of Problem categories, with the excep
tion of YSPp. This category shows a differential response
between the groups which is significant beyond the .01 level.
The client response category YIP also shows a significant
differential in response between the two groups that is
significant beyond the .01 level of confidence, as are the
comb insd categories YSPp + YUI + YIP and YSPp + YIP. The
16
category YUI shows no significant differences in its use
between groups. One would normally expect a group of therapy
cases showing more improvement to respond with more insight
ful statements than does a group that show significantly less
improvement. It Is felt, however, that this finding for the
client response category YUI is not valid because of the
inability of coders to recognize YUI responses accurately as
defined earlier. In another study, hakusin (13) reports an
average intercorrelation between coders of .24 In ability to
recognize YUI responses, which shows no significance beyond
that of chance. It can be noted In 'igures 5, 7, 3, and 9
that In those categories In which the mean per cent of occur
rence differs significantly between the two groups, the more
improved group shows a higher frequency of occurrence of those
responses than does the less improved group. Thus, the
analysis of variance between groups may be summarized by
stating that there are no significant differences between
the groups in the symptomatic or statement of problem type
of responses, but that group II responds v.Ith a significantly
greater number of statements which are Indicative of improve
ment In adjustment.
In the analysis of variance between deciles, it can be
seen in Table III that there are significant differences
between deciles for both groups combined in the mean per
cent of occurrences of the client response categories YSPs,
Y S F e , Y S P h , YDP, and In the combined categories YSPp + YUI +

17
YDP and YSPp + YDP. Figures 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, and, 9 show that
the greatest changes noted for these categories occur after
the sixth decile in the therapeutic process. It should also
be noted that the changes between deciles noted are the
decrease in the occurrence of the Statement of Problem cat e
gories, while the response categories indicative of improve
ment show an increase in occurrence of response. This
finding tends to bear out the hypothesis that the new r e s
ponses indicative of improvement do not begin to increase in
frequency of occurrence until the symptomatic type of state
ments begins to decrease in frequency of occurrence. The
conclusion can be drawn that the symptomatic responses are
being extinguished, their disuse being evidenced b y the
decrease in their frequency, while new responses, indicative
of insight, discussion of plans, and reduction of symptoms,
are being reinforced and retained. the latter is evidenced
by the significant increases b y deciles in the frequency of
response for these categories.
The interaction groups b y deciles, which is a measure
of the significance of differential responses made by both
groups for a given category between deciles, show statisti
cally significant findings for the client response category
YSPp and the combined categories YSPp + YUI + YDP and YSPp
+ YDP. By referring to Figures 5, 3, and 9, it can be seen
that after the sixth decile, the more improved group tends to
respond with more of the response categories which are

18
indicative of improvement than does the less improved group,
fy computing the least significant differences betw een the
means of the groups, it was found that for the category YSFp
there were significant interactions between the differences
of means at decile 10 and decile 1. Significance be tw een
the differences of means at deciles 8, 9, and 10 with decile
2 were also found. For the combined categories YSFp + YUI +
YDP the difference means of the groups at decile 9 is signi
ficant ly eater than the difference between means at deciles
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. the Interaction for decile 10 is
significantly different from that of deciles 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,
o, and 8. In the combined categories YSPp + YDP there are
significant differential responses between the difference in
in means for decile 9 and those of deciles 1, 2, 5, and 6,
and between the difference of means for decile 10 and those
of deciles 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 8. From these findings it
can be concluded that there are no significant differential
responses made between the two groups in regard to the State
ment of Froblem categories, but that there are significant
differential responses between groups in the response cate
gories that may be considered as being indicative of
i mprovement•
Conclusions
In terms of the population here studied, the following
conclusions seem warranted:

19
1. The total number of client responses made in the thera
peutic situation bore no relationship to outcome of
therapy. A similar finding in re marc' to length of
therapy was roported in a study by Tucker (33).
2. There were no significant differences between the most
improved and least improved, groups in the production of
YSPs, YSFe , YSPa, or YSPh responses, although the more
Improved group shows a tendency to use less of these
responses as therapy progresses.
3. There were significant differences between the most and
least improved groups in the production of YSPp and YDP
responses, which are indicative of improvement in
therapy.
4. Conclusions 2 and 3 support similar findings reported
by Snyder (28) in an investigation of one unsuccessful
non-directively counseled case as compared with four
successfully counseled cases.
5. Significant differences were not found between the most
and. least improved groups in respondin'; with the cate
gory YUI, possibly because of the inability of coders to
recognize YUI responses as set forth by a stated
definit ion.
6. There were significant group by decile interactions
between deciles early In therapy and those at the end

of tlierapy for the categories YSPp and the sums of the
categories YSPp + YUI + YDP and YSPp + Y D P , with the
most improved group making a greater number of these
responses as therapy progresses while the least improved
group tends to show only minor increases.
7. There were significant differences between the mean per
cents of occurrences of YSPs, YSPe , and YSPh responses
in the statement of problem c at e go r i e s , and between the
me an per cents of occurrences of Y D P , sum of YSPp + YUI
+ YDP, and the sum of YSPp + YDP responses in the
improvement categories for both groups combined, b e tween
the deciles of the therapeutic process.
3. The data seem to support the hypotheses that at the on
set of the therapeutic process, the responses w ill be
of a stereotyped nature. This is evidenced by the
findings that significant differences in responses
between the deciles of therapy do not occur until the
latter phases of the therapy process.
9. The results of this study are interpretable as sup
porting an extinction-rainforcement explanation of n o n
directive psychotherapy as a learning process. This is
evidenced by the statistically significant shifts b y
deciles of certain of the client category responses as
the therapeutic process moves forward. It was found
that during the first six deciles of the therapy

21
p r o c e s s , no significant differential responses -were
made either by tre group showin tne most improvement nor
by the group 3ho\vinp the least i mp r ov o mo n t. ii.gnif i-
cant c-ian ..os in the .nean per cents of the occurrences
of certain o' the client response categories were found
to occur within the last four deciles of the therapy
process. It was found that, for both groups combined,
statement of the problem responses showed significant
decreases in occurrence after the sixth decile of
therapy, while the responses indicative of improvement
showed significant Increases in occurrence after the
sixth decile of therapy. hhe data thus support the
hypothesis that the stereotyped responses are extin
guished before new and adjustive responses are made.
10. Significant increases in the client response cate
gories Indicative of improvement In therapy in the
latter portions of therapy indicate that these are new
responses, and that their Increase In frequency of
occurrence supports the hypothesis that they are r e in
forced and retained.
11. It is judged that the method of coding client responses
used in this study should be revised to Include a tech
nique for the differentiation between concepts formed
within a category. This would enable a better measure
of the variability of verbal behavior than has been
used previously.
22
CHAPTER II
INTRODUCTION
Setting of the Study
In the spring of 1949 a group of graduate students in
clinical psychology at rphe Pennsylvania State College formed,
’
u nder the leadership of William TJ. Snyder, the nucleus of an
integrated research project for the purpose of investigating
non-directive psychotherapy with college students. It was
felt that "by working as a group, a more adequate sample of
case material could he collected than that obtainable b y a
single investigator. Using this material as a central core
of data would enable various aspects of non-directive p s y
chotherapy to be Investigated from the same base, and the
results could be integrated into a more meaningful analysis
of non-directive psychotherapy than has heretofore been
made. This would be possible because of the fact that all
studies utilizing this core of data 3tem from the same data
and are based on the same criterion measures, thus making
for a more meaningful comparison of the Individual investi-
g atIons•
As the project grew, it became evident that the majority
of the studies were to be of a nature designed to investigate

23
the predictive aspects of certain of the criteria or of
material gleaned, from the initial phase of the therapeutic
process. The writer, however, felt that the process of n o n
directive psychotherapy should be further investigated, and
undertook the present study in an attempt to do so.
Purpose of Study and Review of Literature
The purpose of the present study is two-fold in nature.
First, an attempt was made to relate the process of n o n
directive psycbotherapy to a process of learning; and second
an investigation of client behavior in the therapeutic p r o
cess itself was made.
The problem of accounting for behavioral functions in
terms of the various laws of learning has been of interest
to investigators for some years. Although many have hypothe
sized the role of learning in psychotherapy, a review of the
literature by the writer failed to reveal any experimental
study using clinical data which would serve to substantiate
or refute any of the theories to be discussed. however,
there is much experimental evidence which seems to indicate
that learning is an integral part of psychotherapy, but the
association of these two concepts remains on an empirical
level.
Pavlov (16), on the basis of an investigation of phys
iological activity of the cerebral cortex in conditioning

reflexes postulated that:
24
. . . . the process of syuthesis--that is of associa-

tion--may take place in a state of inhibition on account
of the existence at the moment of a predominant focus
of strong excitation. Although the actual synthe
sising activity may not enter our field of conscious
ness, the synthesis may nevertheless take place, and
under favorable conditions it may enter the field ot
consciousness as a link already formed, seaming to
originate spontaneously.
Kubie (11) pointed out that this statement summarizes
an experimental demonstration of one of Freur and F r e u d ’s
earliest psychoanalytic observations that a focus of strong
excitation can give rise to a generalized inhibition, and
that under such circumstances unconscious chains of associa
tive connections can be set up in the inhibited field. It
is also to be noted that the previous statement quoted from
the writings of Pavlov may be broadly interpreted as a defin
ition of therapeutic insight.-*- It is also descriptive, in
general terms, of ihoben’s (24) explanation of the gaining
of insight in therapy,
Leeper (12), Tolman (32), and Guthrie (6 ) set forth the
hypothesis that learning could occur by sequence in experi
ence or association b y contiguity, and denied the necessity
of assuming that goal-attainmant or reinforcement is r e s
ponsible for bringing about changes within the organism that
are assumed to underlie the changes or learned behavior.
Hull (9) and Thorndike (31) take the opposite view and
Statements by a client in which he verbalizes the

causes of his behavior or clearly relates one character
istic of his behavior to another.
25
emphasize the role of reinforcement in learning. Quoting
from full:
Learning, whether it he the formation of new asso

ciations or the differential strengthening of
already existant associations, is a continuous
process of reinforcement. ..'.einf or cement occurs in
two w a y s :
1. When a stlmulus-response conjunction is closely

followed in time b y a diminution of a drive,
there will result an increment in the tendency
for the stimulus to evoke that response.
2. When a st imulus-re sponse conjunct! ii is closely

followed in time with a stimulus situation
which has been closely and consistently asso
ciated with a need diminution, there will
result an increment to the tendency for that
stimulus to evoke that response on subsequent
o cc a s i o n s .
Experimental evidence found by Spence and Lippitt (29) did
not substantiate the Leeper-Tolman-Suthrie contiguity
thesis, but seemed to favor the reinforcement theory.
In a discussion of Pavlovian learning theory as applied
to psychoanalysis, b e n c h (4) stated that repressed tenden
cies while barred from obtaining direct motor expression,
give evidence in Indirect ways that they still exist in the
unconscious. The psychoanalytic evidence to support the
theory that repressed tendencies have not b ee n destroyed
lies in the fact that such tendencies are continually find
ing outlets in symptoms and substitute gratifications*
French goes on to point out that this thesis tends to be
born out experimentally b y P a v l o v ’s concepts of internal and
external inhibition, which, in summary, state that a

26
conditioned reflex that has been experiments n y ext inguished
is not perm anently destroyed, but will, after a time, r e
cover spontaneously. Pavlov pointed out, French continues,
that the learning process is a urocess first of conditioning,
then of differentiation of the generalized conditioned
reflexes. By the acquisition of conditioned reflexes,
responses to cues which have previously be en associated with
reward or satisfaction are learned. however, not all stimuli
that are first treated as cues lead to rewards and satisfac
tion. The second step in the learning nrocess according to
Pavlov, French explains, must therefore consist of the inter
nal inhibition of the responses to stimuli that are not
habitually followed by satisfaction— a process of di fferen
tiation.
Homey (3), Lollard and Miller (l), and Shobon (25)
stress the importance of anxiety or conflict in maladjust
ment, which Bhoben defines as behavior which serves to
reduce anxiety directly without altering the conditions
which produce the anxiety. He proposes (24) that p sycho
therapy occurs under three interrelated processes:
(1) The lifting of repression and development of

insight through symbolic reinstating of the stimuli
for anxiety; (2 ) the diminution of anxiety b y
counterconditioning through the attachment of the
stimuli for anxiety to the comfort reaction made to
the therapeutic relationship; (3) the process of
reeducation through the t h e r a p i s t ’s helping the
patient to formulate rational goals and behavioral
methods for attaining them.
27
dhoben further su-gests that:
If neurotic anxiety, which is common in all clini

cal cases, is produced by the repress ion of some
unextinguished response, it should follow that the
anxiety can be dissipated in one of two ways—
either b y elicitation of unreinforced occurences of
the response, thus leading to extinction, or b y the
connecting of a cl ferent affect to response tenden
cies which have undergone repression. An xiety can
be dispelled either through eliciting self-initiated
behavior and failing to reinforce it until extinc
tion occurs, or through forming a bond between the
tendencies to self-initiated behavior and some
nonanxious visceral reaction which will supplant
the connection between anxiety and repressed
behavior.
Shaw (22) takes a somewhat different approach In
hypothesizing the role of learning in the therapy process.
He emphasizes the effect of reward in psychotherapy, and
suggests that the therapist provides reward b y making the
punishing consequences of neurotic behavior more available
to the client. P.ewards become available to the client, Shaw
continues, when, under the protection and ;uidance of the
therapist, the patient begins to establish more rewarding
Interpersonal relationships outside of the therapeutic
situation. Commenting on a statement b y howrer and Ullman
(14) to the effect that ,?the common denominator in all • . •
forms of non-integrative behavior seems to be the inability
to use symbols appropriately as a means of bringing remote
as well as immediate consequences into the present In such a
manner that they ma y exert an influence proportional to
their objective importance’1, Shaw draws the implication that
non-integrative (neurotic) behavior may be eliminated through

28
symbols becoming available. One basis of the non-avail ability
of symbols is that of repression. Treud (5) speaks of "the
pleasure-poin principle being brought into pl ay and carrying
through the repression of the dangerous impulse.1’ However,
the drive and impulse still exist. Clinical evidence has
consisted of the disappearance of symptoms when the client
gains insight into their underlying motivation. Estes (3)
has helped to clarify this evidence experimentally b y showing
that while punishment may depress a response, the extinction
of a response which has be en positively reinforced cannot be
accelerated b y punishment. The repression of the dangerous
impulse may be interpreted as the inhibition of the act to
which the Impulse would have led; this is inhibition result
ing from punishment rather than removal resulting from
extinction. If the act is only inhibited, this would indi
cate that the impulse to act still exists.
Magaret (13) hypothesizes that in therapy the patient
"learns to learn problems of interpersonal relationships,"
and as a result of this, old situations take on new meanings.
The "learning to learn problems" is accomplished through the
acquisition of a learning set which determines, according to
Harlow (7), in large part the nature and direction of stimu
lus organization. On the basis of this theory, a conditioned
response generalizes in a selective way, depending upon the
learning set.
29
It m a y be noted at this point that the theoretical con
structs b i nding psychotherapy to a system of learning have
bee n based upon either empirical evidence of psychoana lytical
origin or upon experimental evidence taken from the learning
theories. Although the process of psycho therapy has b e e n
analysed, no attempt has been made to systematise the p r o
cess experimentally. Porter (17), in an effort to evaluate
therapeutic interviews quantitatively, developed a method of
cooing responses in the bherany interview. foyer (2 0 ) con
structed scoring devices for both client and counselor
responses. ’sing three recorded non-directively counseled
interviews, she attempted to describe the characteristics of
non-directive counseling. Snyder (27), using forty-eight
interviews from six non-directively counseled cases, devised
a system of classification of client and counselor responses
so that he differentiated various categories of content and
of expressed feeling. he found that there were definite
trends in the types of responses given b y the client as the
therapy process progressed. Tie found in his six cases that
a c l i e n t ’s statement of the pr oblem constitutes approximately
one-third of his total number of r e s p o n s e s , ranging from
about fifty per cent at the beginning of the therapy to
about eighteen per cent at the end of the treatment. he
also reports Insight on the part of the client to comprise
twelve per cent of his responses at the beginning of treat
ment, twenty-eight per cent In the middle, followed by a

30
slight drop, and thirty per cent at the and of treatment.
Snyder found that the clients made no responses that could
have been labeled discussion of plans at the beginning of
therapy, but that this category constituted approximately
twelve per cent of the total number of client responses at
the end of therap 3r. 3eeman (2 1 ) and ''eunch (15), following
the work of Snyder, reported results similar to his insofar
as trends within the therapeutic process were concerned.
Differences in the degree of non-directiveness of the coun
selors differed significantly between Snyder's and S e e m a n ’s
studies.
Snyder (23), in comparing one unsuccessful with four
successful non-directively counseled cases, found signifi
cant differences between the dichotomized cases in the
understanding and insight and discussion of plans categories,
but no differences between the statement of problem category.
In the differences mentioned above, the frequency of response
was lower in the unsuccessful than in the successful cases.
In summary, there have been few studies which investi
gated the process of non-directive psychotherapy using a
sufficiently large population, and there has b e e n no experi
mental evidence based upon clinical interview material either
to substantiate or refute the various theses that attempt to
explain the process of psychotherapy on a learning theory
basis.
31
CHAPTER III
STAT OP PR03LEI.:
Development of Problem
It m a y be said that the major objective of psychotherapy
is the attainment of the understanding of his own behavior
on the part of the client. This understanding of a client's
own behavior and the motivations involved are commonly
termed insight. It has been shown by Snyder (27) and
Seeman (21) that as the therapeutic process progresses te m
porally, the number of insightful and future planning r e s
ponses made b y the client increases. Stock (30) and Sheerer
(23) found, as did Snyder (27) and as hypothesized by
Rogers (19), that a change in attitude on the part of the
client was evidenced b y an increase in positive feelings and
a decrease in negative feelings as the process of therapy
progressed. This change might be accounted for on the basis
of learning within the therapeutic situation.
To test experimentally the hypothesis that the process
of ps ychotherapy is a learning process, certain assumptions
concerning the dynamics of the client and the therapy will
have to be made. first, it will be assumed that the client
entering; the therapeutic environment is aware of malad jv.stive

32
behavior on his part. Secondly, it will be assumed that a
drive or drives exist which were rewarded or satiated orig
inally b y responding to certain cues, and that this response
is now inhibited. Since the drive still remains but the
original response to it has been inhibited, the drive now
evokes a substitute response which is the symptom of the
maladjustment, ..hen the :ew, or symptomatic response, does
not reduce the original drive, the individual becomes aware
of his inadequate adjustment. It is at this point that the
client would theoretically seek therapeutic aid.
It is postulated that the process of non-oirective
psychotherapy is a process of extinction and reinforcement
of verbal responses which are symbolic of overt behavioral
response.
Ilogers (19) points out three characteristics of a
client-centered therapy which distinguish it from older
approaches:
(1) The process relies basically upon individual

drive for adjustment, (2 ) this therapy places
stress upon emotional elements of the situation
rather than the intellectual aspects, upholding the
theory that most maladjustments are not failures in
knowing, but that knowledge is ineffective because
it is blocked b y the emotional satisfactions which
the individual achieves through present maladjus-
tive behavior, and (3) this therapy places greater
stress upon the immediate situation rather than
upon the past.
35
Rogers goes on to state that this type of therapy Is not a
preparation for change, but is change* Thus the inference
can be made that this change is learned.
On the basis of empirical observation, the process of
non-directive psychotherapy may generally be described in
the following manner:
1. At the onset of the therapeutic process, the client
is aware of his maladjustive behavior, but can only
verbalize It on a restricted, symptomatic level.
His responses In the therapy situation will be
restrictive In the sense that the symbollzation of
his problems will be on a superficial, grossly
symptomatic level.
2. As the therapeutic process advances temporally, the
client makes new responses and exhibits variability
in the manner in which he expresses himself.
3. Finally, the client gains an understanding Into the
nature of his problems and discusses future methods
of adjustment.
Translated in terms of extinction and r e i n f or c em e nt , the
process of non-directive psychotherapy may bo explained as
follows:
1. The maladjusted client has a drive to make an
adequate adjustment to his environment. This Is

34
evidenced "by the fact that he enters the therapeutic
situation for the purpose of receiving aid in
solving a problem or problems which hinder h i m in
achieving an adjustment which is satisfactory to
his values.
2. Once in the therapy situation, the client verba
lizes the symbolic representations of his d iffi
culty. In other words, be renorts symbol ically
examples of his overt behavior. lince his overt
behavior is malad just :ive , his verbal responses will
be symbolic of his maladjustment. oince the client
is not achieving a satisfactory adjustment, it can
be Inferred that he is unable to make new, adjustive
responses, but acts in a more orless stereotyped
manner. These maladjustive responses, although not
entirely rewarding, are enou ■;!: so t" at they avoid
an earlier response which has become inhibited, and
are reinforced and remain in the repertoire of the
client.
3. Since the maladjustive responses are being r ei n
forced, there tends to be an ini: lb it ion of new and.
varied responses. Therefore, these maladjustive
responses must be extinguished in the therapeutic
situation. The therapist, by accepting the client's
maladjustive responses without condoning or criti
cizing them, teaches the client that his

35
maladjustIve behavior can be verbalized in the
therapy situation without being hollowed b y anxiety
as when the same response is îven overtly in a
real situation. If these responses evoke no eff ec
tive counter-response in the therapeutic environ
ment, they are non-rewarding and nonpunishing, and
with repetition, become extinguished.
4. As these maladaptive responses become extinguished,
the client can begin to make new and varied r es
ponses. Certain of these new responses will serve
to reduce the client's drive towards adjustment,
and these will be reinforced, b y the nature of their
rewarding elements, and retained. Other responses
will serve no function in achieving adjustment and
will become extinguished through disuse.
Statement of Problem
The following two problems are proposed:
1. To test the hypothesis that the process of no n
directive osychotherapy can be accounted for in
terms of the extinction of maladaptive responses
and the reinforcement of new responses which lead
to adjustment.
(1) hypothesis: At the onset of the therapeutic
process, the responses made by the client
will be of a stereotyped nature, as quanti-

36
tatively measured by the content category
codings. (Appendix A.)
(2) Hypothesis: As therapy progresses, the
extinction of the stereotyped responses will
be evidenced by an increase in variability of
response as measured b y the content coding
c at e go r i e s .
(3) Hypothesis: As new responses b y the client
are made, those leading to understanding and
adjustment will be reinforced and retained.
(4) Hypothesis: From the above hypotheses, It
follows that quantitative differences b etween
a group of therapy cases judged to be more
successful and a group of therapy cases
judged to be less successful will be evidenced
within the therapeutic process.
2. In order to test the above hypotheses, an investi
gation of certain client responses as they occur
during the process of non-directive psychotherapy
will be made.
37
CHAPTER IV
PROCEDURE
Selection of Population
The Psychological Clinic of The Pennsylvania State
College offers a personal counseling service to students of
the college. The cases selected as the central core of data
were randomly selected cases that came into the Psychological
Clinic for personal adjustment counseling. All of the cases
in the core population were counseled by one or more of
fourteen graduate students in clinical psychology trained in
the techniques of non-directive psychotherapy. The cases
were assigned randomly to the fourteen counselors, but not
all counselors counseled an equal number of cases. All
cases were electrically recorded.
For selection into the core population, each case had
to meet the following requirements: (1 ) the case must have
been counseled b y the non-directive method, (2 ) the case
must have completed a minimum of three hour-long therapeutic
interviews, and (3) at least fifty per cent of all interviews,
including the first and last, had to be trsnscr i ba b le . Of
over a hundred cases counseled, only forty-three met the above
stated criteria and were included in the population.

38
It was founcl b y Tucker (33) that the mean age of the
group was 21.5 years, \v:lth ages r anging from 13 to 31 years,
and tnat on comparison with the total student po p ul a t i o n of
The Pennsylvania State College, this group was found to be a
little ovorsampled In regard to curricula by having a greater
proportion of students in no n -technical curricula, and was
representative of the distribution of the sexes In the total
population. In the same study, Tucker also reports that the
counseling of the therapy cases under investigation were as
non-directive as those cases studied and reported by Cnyder
(27) and Seeman (21). There were 333 hour-long therapeutic
Interviews for the forty-three cases, with a mean of 7.36
interviews per case. Tucker reports a correlation of +.092
b et w ee n length of treatment and criteria of improvement,
indicating that length of therapy was not significantly
related to Improvement in 'tiierapy.
The selection of the population for this investigation
was chosen from the forty-three cases in the core. Tin order
to make a comparison between those cases judged as b e i n g the
most Improved In therapy as against those judged as being
the least improved, the extremes of the population were
selected on the basis of Kelley's (10) finding t :at the
upper and lower twenty-seven per cent of a population will
exhibit the greatest spread of differences. On the basis of
this selection, the twelve cases receiving the highest m u l
tiple criteria scores and t e twelve cases receiving the

59
lowest multiple criteria scores as reported by Tucker (33)
were chosen. A discussion of the derivation of the multiple
criteria scores can be found in Appendix B. the age range
of the sample chosen was from 13 to 26 years, with a mean
age of 22.37 years. There ware eighteen males and six females.
The total number of interviews fox* the sample population was
207, with a mean of 8.62 interviews per case. vhe number of
interviews ranged from 3 to 27.
Table IV
Source of ',eferral for Selected Population

as Compared' with Core Pop ulation
Source of Core Population Sele cted Population

Referral ‘umber Percentage Mumber Percentage
Self 22 52 14 56
Instructor 7 16 5 21
Acquaintance 4 9 2 a
Psychiatric 4 9 1 4
Re ading Clinic 2 5 0 0
Division of
Interned late
Regis tratIon 2 5 2 8
Speech Clinic 1 2 0 0
Health Service 1 2 0 0
Table IV presents a breakdown o"’ the core population and the
sample population used in this study In terms of referral to
the Psychological C l i n i c .
40
Collection of Data
All therapeutic interviews selected 'or the core p o p u
lation were electrically recorded. It was decided that all
tie first and last interviews plus odd and even intervening
interviews in randomly selected cases would he transcribed.
Cases c ont a in in 3 three interviews were transcribed in their
entirety. In cases where transcription was made impractical
because of mechanical difficultios in recordin', adjacent
iatcrviev /3 were selected, for verbatim transcription. Thus,
the range of interviews transcribed was from 100 per cent in
three-interview cases to 50 per cent in the longest cases.
Approximately 60 per cent of the total number o f .Interviews
in the entire core population wore transcribed.
V/hen the recorded material had be e n transcribed , the
interviews were coded by seven coders (members of the r e
search group). A coding system similar to that used by
Snyder (27) but modified b y subh i v 5o *n;t the Statement of
Problem and Clarification of Pee ling categories (Appendix A)
was used. The coders were trained for approxim.ately forty
hours by h o lding group discussions concerning the d efini
tions of the various client and counselor categories. The
definitions were revised until the entire group of coders
were in agreement as to a particular definition. The coders
then practiced coding sample non-directive Interviews inde
pendently of each other. 1-roup discussions were then held,
and points of difference between individual coders were

41
discussed and discrepancies corrected. When it was felt that
further training in coding would result in negligible improve
rr'ont, each coder was assigned ap proximately twenty-eight
interviews to code.
A reliability sample of three interviews was coded
independently by the seven coders and the amount of agree
ment be t ween the coders calculated.
Table V
The number of J’udges in Exact Agreement in the

Coding of 165 Reliability Items for Consent
» ... - ------- ------ - ■ j-

No. of Coders Number Percentage Accumulat ive
in exact of of Percentage
Agreement Items Items of Items
7 43 29 29
6 40 24 53
5 32 19 72
4 29 18 90
3 14 9 99
2 2 1 100
1 0 0 100
Table V presents the number of coder 3 who were In exact
agreement in coding the 165 it ems from three reliability
i nt e rv i ew s . It is noted that five or more of the coders
agreed exactly in the classification of 72 per cent of the
items•
42
The agreement among coders may he expressed as the
average percentage of coders In agreement. The calculation
of this Index involves the division of the summation of
agreements b y the product of the number of Items and the
number of coders.
~ * . agreements
Average Percentage of Agreement = ---------- “----------------
Items x dumber of Coders
The average percentage of agreement for the reliability
sample was 78 per cent, which indicates that the mean agree
ment Involved 5.44 coders. Seeman (21) reports 87 per cent
agreement for similar content categories. The difference
between the percentage agreement might be accounted for by
the fact tnat several more easily Identifiable content
categories were included In his study.
Selection of Data
Since the writer was primarily interested in the study
of client behavior in the non-directive therany situation,
only client category responses were chosen to be Investiga
ted. It was felt that the most Important of the client
responses were the statement of problem and uiiderstanding
and planning categories, since by definition (Appendix A)
they re3.ate an expression of his difficulty and the manner
in which he plans to handle it. The following client cate
gories were chosen for investigation in. this study.

43
1. YSPs - statements which deal with complaints,
symptoms of' maladjustment, or dissatisfactions of
concern to the client.
2. YSPe - statements which report the situations,
incidents, ov facts relating to the problem. these
are expanded and explanatory statements.
5. YSPh - statements which clearly report the pre-
college etiology, historical background, or develop
nent of present dissatisfactions, complaints, or
s ymp t o m s .
4. YSPa - statements in which the client states his
problem in anticipatory terras; the client indicates
consideration of his problem in terms of the future
5. YSPp - statements which indicate relief or r e d u c
tion of the c l i e n t ’s problems, complaints, symptoms
or dissatisfactions, including statements of
pleasure or satisfaction.
6 . YTJI - statements by the client in which he verbali
zes the causes of his behavior or clearly relates
one characteristic of his behavior to another.
7. YDP - statements revealing the client's decisions
regarding future actions or intentions to change
his attitudes as solutions to his problems.
Rakusin (IS) reports a maximum average agreement between
coders of 79.93 per cent for the above mentioned client
categories.
44
In addition to the seven client categories already
.nent i o n e d , the combined categories of YSPp + YU I + YDP and
of YSPp + YDP will be investigated. ,pbese were combined on
tbe rationale that the three categories involved may be
considered as positive goals in toe therapeutic process, and
that combining them may aid furt'-er in differentially sepa
rating the more improved from the less improved cases.
In order to equate the cases chosen for this study,
each case was divided into tenths on the basis of the total
number of client responses coded in each case. The frequency
of occurrence for each of the seven client categories to be
investigated was then tabulated for each tenth of each case.
The frequency count for each case was converted into a ratio
3Core b y dividing the actual frequency of occurrence of any
particular client category within a particular decile of a
case b y the total number of client responses for that decile
and multiplying the result b y 100 .
number of responses in decile

_ of a given category n
ratio score = ----------- J---------- 1J-- u------ x 100
total number of client
responses in entire decile
The data were then analysed using an analysis of variance
technique with a first order interaction as described in
Tdwards (2 ).
45
CHAPTER V
THE F I E E I ^ S
Difference between more improved and less improved
therapy cases on the basis of mean criteria s cores.-- In
order to test statistically whether or not the two groups of
cases be in;; irve 3 1 ige t ed were ai-nif ’creitly different In
terms of improvement In therapy, the differonce between the
mean criteria scores for Improvement between the most improved
group (hereafter designated as group Id) and the least improved
group (hereafter designated as group L) was tested.
Table VI
Difference between dean Criteria Scores

for Improvement in Therapy botween Groups h and L
G-roup ].' fro up L
Mean Criteria
Score 39.54 25.42
< T 4 .15 2.10
(f^ 1.25 .63
The means, standard deviations, and standard deviations of
the means are shown in Table VI. The critical ratio between
the two groups was calculated to be 11.51. Jsing 22 degrees

46
of freedom, the means of the two groups are s:' ^nil'icmtly
different beyond the .01 level ol' confi dence.
Oilferonces betwegn me an number of client cate ~or y
res ponses in and L r;ro u ps .— In Table VII can be noted the
means, standard d e v i n t 'o r e , and s tenderb deviation of the
means of the total number of client responses in groups h
arid I.. The critical ratio between the differences of the
means ol' the tv;o groups, using 22 degrees of freedom, was
found tc be .1 1 .
Table VII
Total and "e an lumber of He spouse s per Case

in Groups N and L
Group -- Group L
Number Number of Number Number of

of HIlent Interviews of Client Interviews
Case Responses Case Responses
1 412 6 13 110 3
2 833 14 14 208 7
3 700 15 15 322 3
4 356 4 16 324 8
5 443 6 17 426 4
6 360 8 IS 557 7
7 326 4 19 223 3
S 193 3 20 287 5
9 398 9 21 1401 25
10 936 27 22 132 5 9
11 32 3 5 23 146 3
12 727 16 24 546 13
Total 6062 5875

Me an 505.17 489.58
<r
(frr.
233.40
70.30
413.24
124.45
47
In order to present a clearer picture of the manner in
vvii'cl: toe client response oate 'orles occurred throughout the
therapeutic process, the mean per cent of occurrence of each
of the categories be ir.o investigated are showij graphically
in co:!:]:>aricon between groups I and L.
B’igure 1 shows the mean per cent of occurrence of Y3Ps
responses b y deciles for groups i: and L. It can be seen in
' ip.'.re 1 :at there are no greatly apparent differences
between the two .groups in the use of the category Y3Fs •
h o w e v e r , there are differences in its frequency of occurrence
b y deciles. The significance of these differences will be
discussed further on. There is, however, a noticeable dif
ference in the trends of the two curves. 1-roup If shows a
slightly higher occurrence of YSPs responses in the first
decile of the therapeutic orocess, tier ’1uctvates with a
rising trend until t- e sixth decile, anc t'-en the frequency
of tire response crops to its lowest point in the tenth
decile. Group L shows a slight increase In the second
decile, and then exhibits slight fluctuations, the greatest
boir.g in the decrease from the seventh to the eighth deciles,
then rising in the ninth and dropping slightly in the tenth
dec i l e .
Figure 2 shows the mean per cant of occurrence of Y3Fe
responses for both groups. It is interesting to note that
group L, with t'-e exception of the fourth decile, shows a
slightly higher frequency of occurrence of the YtPe category

Fi&L Means yoerce/i/ o f occu rren ce o f YSPa reôn**&
» Ay cfec/'/ea qraupa:A# a/rf £.
O— timm
44km* M r t M w i* or 9*u<rv«ne« <
Ay dhuiw i W frau/M j M w w L.
474. A M m a pmr-4m**+ mf o c t « r r » « c * of YS/*h •m o/fonioo

: 4 y «loo/f»« ^ r o w p o A/ « « W Z.. J
50
than does .
31*0 up i-I• It will be shov/n later that the c ifferen-
tial use of this response by h e two groups is not s ignifi
cant, but that there are significant occurrences of this
response in both groups combined betw een the deciles.
figure 3 reports .graphically the mean per cent of
occurrenco of YSPh responses for r-roups L and Ti b y deciles.
ere it can be seen that there are differences be tween the
groups, but it will later be shown that these differences
are not statistically significant. It may be noted, however,
that here, as in the Y3Pe category, group L tends to show a
slightly higher mean frequency of occurrence of the YSPh
category than does group if. This trend Is consistent in
both groups from the fifth decile to the end of the therapy
process.
Figure 4 shows the mean per cent of occurrence of YrSPa
responses by deciles for both groups. fere again differ
ences b e tw e en groups are slight. It is of Interest to note,
however, that for the first five deciles group h shows a
slightly higher frequencj1, of occurrence for this response
category, and then from decile six to the end of therapy,
the trend reverses Itself. It must be born in mind, however,
that these trends between the two groups, as will be shown
later are not statistically significant.
Figure 5 reports the mean per cent of occurrence of
Y3Pp responses b y deciles for groups f and L. In this

U m a n l Y S P ? ---- Mman % YSPc
O Qi fc $ fc
^ ---- «----- '--- '--- r
as *
M
S •
n
! Dmcjfmm
/Vftoa/i pmramn+ occurr«/w«
by f w ^rowyaf Martrf
20
I A/i
! Omciimm
:... ; • •• -t ■' , i
ItfKS.3l M i * * i «f #cqurr«rt«« of! YVS^*
|Ay far qraupm A # # W L
52
rraohic
0 4 v qp
L r 0 3 « n ba t x on c ifforences bet weep, the "roups and
dec!lea are readily apparent• From the third decile to the
end of the therapy process group II shows a higher frequency
of 73Pp responses t: an does group L. !•or group L, there is
little fluctuation between deciles ''or this response. Group
;‘ shows an i'itial rise from the secoaO to third deciles,
and then a sharp increase beginning at the sixth decile, and
reaching the highest peak at the tenth decile.
Figure 6 indicates graphically the mean per cent of
occurrence of YU'I responses by deciles Cor groups h and L.
It is surprising to note that the two groups do not differ
greatly in the occurrence of this category, which Is indica
tive of understanding and insight by the client. Although
groiip M exhibits a slightly higher frequency of occurrence
of this cate ory than does group L, the differences were not
found to be statistically significant.
Figure 7 shows the mean ner cent of occurrence of YDP
responses by deciles for both groups. Fere It can be 3oen
that both groups exhibit similar curves for the therapeutic
process, group V. showing a slightly higher frequency of
occurrence for this response, doth groups show an initial
ris3 between the third and fourth deciles, followed by a
slight fall, and then by another rise, which Is quite sharp
for group h. The point of departure for the large increases
begins at tho sixth decile for both groups.

*5
hi
■ rr^ ri/ ofl aecui -n *no r •f Y£// ra t^tanw

Am f a r Lraupii M a id L,
*.w h rtr*•*:♦;* i»
.1333!
41* A?
■•:■ii;;i•■tkm'tmm •
M amr i. mn / a f ocwk »>r« r* m> of Y D P »map*** m i
A i r * 9 * a « ^ # A / a m r; X
. .
54
Figure 3 and :/igure 9 shov; the moan per cents of occur
rence of the sn::: of the responses YSPp + YJI + YDP and Y3Pp
+ YD? respectively by deciles. In each case, group i- shows
an initial decline from the first to the second decile, fol
lowed by a rise to the fourth decile, then dropping ahain
until the sixth decile where they ascend sharply, reaching
their peaks at the tenth decile. “he curves for group L
differ somewhat, showing more sharp fluctuations for the sum
of YSPp -r Yu I + YDP than for the sum of YSPp + Y D ? , but in
both cases, the range of fluctuation tends to be much
narrower than that of group LI.
Results of analysis of v a r i a n c e .-- Table VIII reports
the F values resultant from an analysis of variance of the
client response categories investigated in respect to d i f
ferences between the most and least improved groups,
between the deciles of the therapeutic process, and be tw een
the interaction of groups b y deciles.
The F value for the category YJI shows no significant
differences between groups h and L beyond that of chance.
This would seem to indicate that there is no differentiation
between the two groups in regard to the occurrence of
Insightful responses.
The calculation of the variance be tween deciles shows
cnange in the frequency of occurrence of a response category
from decile to decile as therapy progresses. Table VIII

* 1 YSPP + YUI * Y D P
55
25
M
20
to
to
fi® . A M w n p«rc«nf o f occurr*nc* o f £ Y S P p f V I// + Y D P

r > y e n 4 « « by Jmailmm - f o r y r w t p m M m nJ L .
30
25
M
+ YDP
20-
Mmmm \ lYSPp
*5
#0
/O
f / ® ft M n h p T caw/ o f occ ur’r c n c * of StYSPp f YDP

rw+portmmm by Jmmitmm A w q r o u p m Ajf e r a 6 .
,
56
3 hows that thei*3 are signif leant F ratios among deciles at
tee .05 level for responses ~r3Pe and YSPh • ihe F ratios
among deciles for responses YSPs, YDP, YSPp + T T + YDP,
end Y3Pp + FTP are signi -"icant boy one" the .01 level.
Table VIII
Z Fat 1 os be tween ""oat Jnpr oved (h ) and Least Improved (L)

Or oups , between Decile s of ire The.:1ape ut 1c Process ,
and between the Interaction of Groups by .Deciles
for Client responses
F Batios
Client Be tween >e tween cs t we e1*1
Responses Groups h and L Deciles C-roups by Decile:
YSPs 0.497 5.S47** 1.396

YSPe 0.553 2.247* 1.264
YSPh 0.213 2.232* 0.742
YSP a 0.453 1.2 52 1.216
YSPp 14.339** 1.639 2.358**
TJI 0.316 1.042 0.434
'YDP 10.292** 5.233** 1.632
2^YSP o + YUI -r YDP 11.176** 4.206** 2.613**
2:YSPp + YDP 25 • 342** 4.391** 3.504**
F required for sip ni.f icance :

.05 level 4.30 1.94 1.94
.01 level 7.94 2.53 2 .53
Decrees of Freedom 1 x 22 9 x 13 3 9 x 19 3
■^Significance at .05 level

**Si gn if ic an c e at .01 level
It will oe se en in Table VIII that certain of the F
values for the interaction groups by deciles are statisti
cally significant. This would indicate differe1

n tial
57
responses, and It may be assumed that for client response
YSPp, YSPp + YUI + YDP, and YSPp + YDP the groups do not
respond in the same manner for all deciles.
Least significant differences for the client response
categories. The analysis of variances indicates the
presence or absence of significant differences b e tween and
among variables. In order to determine where these d if
ferences occur, the least significant difference b et w e e n
means was computed at the .05 and .01 levels of confidence
b y the formula mentioned b y onedecor (26):
y EMS x 2 ~
L.S.D. b e tween groups = t
W El S x~2
L.S.D. b e t w e e n deciles = t
L.S.D. between groups x deciles = t
L.S.D. = least significant difference
t = value in table of t ’s at .05 and .01 level of
confidence for t'~>e degrees of freedom in the
error term of the analysis of variance
K.M.3. = error me an square
N = number of observations
58
Table IX shows the m a n s of the YSPs responses for
groups, deciles, and the interaction groups by deciles.
Table IX
I.iean Percentages of Y3Pa Re sponses for Groups, D e c i l e s ,

and the Interaction Groups b y Deciles
Gr oups
De c iles t «■
JVi L Lie an-**-*
1 36.1 32.9 34.5

2 31.9 35.1 33.5
3 34.0 32.8 33.4
4 31.8 36.2 34.0
5 33.4 34.6 34.0
6 36.5 33 .2 34.8
7 30.1 35.1 32.6
8 27.0 27.0 27.0
9 27.6 32.4 30.0
10 17.4 28.7 23.0
T!ean->s- 30.59 32 .82
•M-Ii•S ,D . Groups : .05 level = 6 . 5 7 ; .01 level = 8.94

**L.S.D . Deciles: .05 level = 4 . 5 3 ; .01 level = 5.96
L.S.D . Interaction G x D: 05 level
• = 9.86;
01 level
• = 12.98
59
Tab le X shows the mean pe rcentages of the YSPe
response s for groups, deciles, and the interaction groups
b y deciles •
Table X
lie an Pe rcentages of YSFe Responses for Groups, Deciles,

and the Interaction Groups by Deciles
Groups
Deciles I,: L Liean-JS-H-
1 6.6 10.9 8,8

2 11.3 11.5 11.4
3 8.6 10.8 9.4
4 9.5 5.0 7.2
5 6.8 7.6 7.2
6 8.6 9.6 9.1
7 7.2 12.0 9.6
8 5.8 9.1 7.4
9 6.5 9.2 7.8
10 4.4 6.0 5.2
liean# 7.56 9.10
•h-L.S.D. Groups: .05 le ve 1 = 5.35; .01 level = 7.27

**L.S,D. Deciles: .05 level = 3.21; .01 level = 4.23
L.S.D. Interaction G x D: .05 level = 7.06
.01 level = 9.29
60
Table XI reports the means of the YSPh responses for
groups, deciles, and the Interaction groups b y deciles.
Table XI
Ye an Percentage s of YSPh Responses for G r o u p s , D e c i l e s ,

and the Interaction Groups b y Deciles
Groups
Deciles h L I'e an^t-is-
1 3.4 1.6 2.5

2 3.5 2.7 3.1
3 2.3 5.2 4.2
4 2.5 1.5 2.0
5 1.2 1.3 1.5
6 2.2 3.0 2.6
7 1.4 1.6 1.5
3 0.5 0.3 0.6
9 0.5 1.2 0.9
10 0.3 1.6 1.2
Mean# 1.86 2 .14
*L.3.D . 3-roups: .05 level = 1.20; .01 level = 1.63

•>H5-L.S .D . Deciles: .05 level = 2.02; .01 level = 2 .66
L.S.D . Interaction G x D: .05 level = 4.43
.01 level = 5.83
61
Table XII shows the mean percentages of the YSPa r e s
ponses for groups, deciles, and the interaction groups b y
deciles.
Table XII
lie an Percentage s of YSPa Re sporses for Groups , D e c i l e s ,

and the Interact!on "Groups b y X>ec 1 le s
Groups
Decile s If L Me an**
1 2.9 0.8 1.8

2 2.6 0.9 1.7
3 2.2 1.4 1.8
4 4.1 0.6 ^ 2.3
5 3.2 2.0 2.6
6 2.3 3.0 2.6
7 2.3 2.6 2.4
8 3.5 5.3 4.4
g 3.3 0.3 3.3
10 2.7 3.6 3.2
cu
to
Me an* 2.91
•
*L.S,D. Groups; .05 level = 1.74; ,01 level = 2.36

* * L . S .!•. Deciles; .05 level = 2.02; .01 level = 2.66
L.S.D. Interaction G- x D; .05 level = 2.86
.01 level = 3.77
62
Table XIII reports the mean percentages of the YSPp
responses for groups, deciles, and the interaction groups
b y deciles.
Table XIII
K e a n Percentages of YSFjd Responses for G r o u p s , Deciles,

and the Interaction Groups by Decile s
Groups
Deciles M L Me a n «
1 3.7 2.2 2.9

2 3.1 3.4 3.2
3 6.0 2.2 4.2
4 5.7 1.4 3.7
5 4.7 3.4 4.0
6 4.0 2.2 3.1
7 6.9 2.1 4.5
8 10.5 2.0 4.0
9 9.5 2.5 6.0
10 11.4 1.3 6.3
Me an-::- 6.09 2.27
•ss-L.S.D. Groups: .05 le ve 1 = 2. 07; .01 level — 2.82

•5H5-L.S.D. Deciles: .05 level = 2. 51; .01 level = 3.30
.01 level = 7.22
63
Table XIV shows the mean percentages of YUI responses
for groups, deciles, and the interaction groups by deciles
Table XIV
He an Percentages of YUI Responses for Gr o u p s , D e c i l e s ,

and the Interaction Iroups by Deciles
Groups
Deciles Id L hean**
1 2.9 2.5 2.7

2 3.2 4.0 3.6
3 4.2 3.2 3.7
4 4.4 1.7 3.0
5 4.4 2.3 3.4
6 4.8 3.2 4.0
7 3.8 1.9 2.8
8 5.2 5.4 5.3
9 4.6 2.4 3.5
10 5.6 5.0 5.3
Mean* 4.31 0.15
*L.S.D. Groups: .05 level = 2.55; .01 level = 3.61

**L.S.D. Deciles: .05 level = 2.49; .01 level = 3.28
L.S.D. Interaction G x D; .05 level = 5.45
.01 level = 7.17
64
Table XV shows the mean percentages of YDP responses
for "roups, deciles, and the interaction groups by deciles.
Table XV
he an Percentages of YDP Response s for Or ou ps. D eciles,

and, the Interaction Groups by Deciles
Groups
Deciles ¥ L he an**
1 1.1 0.6 0.8

2 1.1 0.5 0.8
3 1.2 0.5 0.8
4 2.6 1.1 1.9
5 2.3 1.6 1.9
6 1.8 0.7 1.2
7 2.9 1.9 2.4
8 4 .9 2.5 3.7
9 7.2 1.9 4.5
10 6.7 2.4 4.6
liean* 3. IS 1.35
*L.S.D. Groups: .05 level = 1.13; .01 level = 1.61

**L.S.D. Deciles: .05 level — 1.80; .01 level = 2.37
L.S.D. Interaction G x D: ,05 level = 3.94
.01 level = 5.19
65
Table XVI reports the mean percentages of the sum of
YSPp + YUI + YDP responses for groups, deciles, and trie
interaction proups by deciles.
Table XVI
Yean Percentages of Sum of YSPp + YUI + YDP Responses

for G r o u p s , D e c i l e s , and Interaction Groups' b y Deciles
Groups
Dec lies i: L rieanw
1 7.8 5.3 6.5

2 7.6 7.9 7.2
3 11.3 6.0 8.6
4 12.8 4.2 0.5
5 11.4 7.4 9.4
6 10.8 6.0 8.4
V 11.9 5.8 9.5
3 15.0 10.0 12. 0
9 21.3 6.8 14 .0
10 25.6 8.7 16.2
lean* 13. 53 6. 30
■M-L. S .D. G r o u p s : .05 le ve 1 - 4. 17; .01 level — 5.67

tt-K-L.3 .D . D e c i l e s : .05 le ve 1 = 4. 08; .01 level = 5.37
L.S.D. Interaction G x D: .05 levol = 9.15
.01 level — 12 .05
66
Table XVII shows the mean percentages of the sum of
YSPp + YDP responses for groups, deciles, and the interac
tion groups bj" deciles.
Table XVII
Me an Percentages of YSPp + YDP Responses

for Groups, Deciles, and Interaction Groups b y Deciles
Groups
Deciles 1.: L Lie a n «
1 4.8 2.8 3.8

2 4.1 3.9 4.0
3 7.1 2.8 4.9
4 8.4 2.8 5.4
5 7.0 5.0 6.0
6 5.3 2.9 4.3
7 9.9 4.0 6.9
8 10.8 4.5 7.7
9 16.7 4.4 10.5
10 18.1 3.6 10.9
He an-::- 9.26 3.63
■M-L.S.D. Groups: .05 level = 2.38; .01 level = 5.24

*~teL.3.D. Deciles: .05 level = 3.39; .01 level = 4.46
.01 level = 9.75
67
CHAPTER VI
d i s c i t s s i o :: o f nvDrns
Basic Differences be tween Groups
The critical ratio between the mean criteria scores for
improvement in therapy listed, in Table VI indicates that
groups h and L differ significantly beyond chance expectancy
in regard to improvement shown in therapy. " o w e v e r , Table
VII shows that the total number of client responses made in
each group does not differ beyond chance. The implication
can therefore be drawn that the total number of responses
made by subjects in this sample does not appear to bear any
relationship to the amount of improvement gained from the
therapy. It can also be noticed in Table VII that the
standard deviations of the mean number of client responses
for 9 ach group are unusually large. This may be accounted
for as being a function of the differences in length of
therapy for individual cases. The cases in the sample
population range in length from 3 to 27 interviews, and the
range of the number of client statements per case was from
110 to 1401.
68
lie3 alts of A na l ys 1s of "for 1 once
1. Be twe en gr oup 3 .- - Tab le VIII s unmar Izes the results
of the analysis of variance calculabed for all of the client
response categories bein-;; 1uvcstigated . A si piia.’leant I
ralio between, groups would be indicative ol’ a statistically
sijnlficar.it difference between the most improved and least
improved groups in regard to the relative frequency of use
of a client response of a particular category. It can be
seen in Table VIII that there Is no variation beyo d that of
chance in the manner with which pro ups V. and L responded in
regard to the Statement of Problem categories, with the
excepti m of the category YSPp, in which case the differen
tial response b y the two '-roups was s tat5 stically significant
beyond the .01 level. Although it would not be unusual to
find that a group of clients jud-’cci to show more improvement
in therapy than another group would exh 1 V.t more responses
Indicative of symptom redr.c t ion an" satisfaction, it is sur
prising to note h a t no significant differences are found
between the two groups in the other problem categories.
■Empirically, one might expect to find a group of clients who
were judged to show' the least improvement in therapy making
more nTo ss avmotomatic statements a n d lass exnlanatory
responses t’-an would a group of clients who show signifi
cantly greater improvement as a result of psychotherapy.
The explanation for this may be found: by a further inspection
of Table VIII. It will be noted that the categories YDP,
YSPp + YTI + YDP, and YSPp -r YDP all show differential

69
responses between tbe groups that are statistically signifi
cant beyone the .01 level of confidence. Looking at V ipures
1 to 9, it can bo seen that graphically tnore appear to be
no great differences be tween groups 8 and L in the me an oc
currence of the cate juries Y 3 P s , Y 3 P © , Y.iPa, or ’"SPh, but
that differences are apparent between the groups in the r.iean
percentage of occurrence of all other categories with the
exception of the cate jury YYI. It should also bo noted,
that in the improvement categories (Y3Pp, Y T77 , and Y p p ) an<i
in combinations t! ore of, group '* shows a higher frequency of
response • There ."'ore, it would appear tha t there arc no
statis t ically signif :icant diffe ences between the more
improved and less imoroved groups in the frequency of use of
•Statement of Problem cate jury responses, -with the exception
of the Y3Pp category, but that the improved group makes more
responses
x t’ .ot are inc icative of svrootcm
<J \ r ed u c t i o n 9, under-
3tar.c!in'; of problems, and planning for future &e jus t m o n t ,
especially in the latter half of the therapeutic process.
This is evidenced by 'figures 5, 7, 8, and 9, w h i c h show sharp
rises in the mean percentage of frequency of occurrence for
those improvement categories.
The analysis of variance between groups for the client
category response YU I (understanding and insight) resulted
in an F ratio that was not statistically significant. This
was somevdiat surprising, since iu would oe assumed that a
group showing more improvement in therapy would make more

70
ir s ightful responses than a ^roup not s h ow i n- as r.uch im
provement. This finding may he accounted for hy the fact
that insight and under s t anc..irg was not coded accurately f r,orr.
the content of the transcribed interviews. The average
intercorrelatIon between coders tor tr.e Ybl category was
reported by hak s i n (IT) to be .24, which is not statisti
cally s i g n i f i c a n t . Therefore, the fault apparently lies
either in t e deficit Ion of under sta d in.; arc in.si h t as set
fort]?, by the criteria, or in the inability of the coders to
apply the definition in th e cod j.my of the client responses.
2. Between d e c i l e s .-- Still referring to Table VIII,
it Is found that four of the seven client category responses
and the two combined category groups show statistically
significant differences between deciles. The client cate
gory YSPs show3 significant <35ff erer.ee s between deciles
greater than the .01 level of confidence. "he graphic r e p
resentation of the occurrence b y deciles of this category in
Figure 1 shows that there is a decrease in tr.e appearance of
this category as therapy o r o g r e s s e s , with group Y exhibiting
the greatest decrease.

o
It is also noted in figure 1 that
*—
the sharp dips in the curve representin'" group M begins at
the sixth decile. Group L also exhibits a sharp decline
beginning at the seventh decile. It would seem the , that
in respect to the client category YSPs, both group Y and
group L respond with a similar frequency, but that the use
of this category differs in its occurrence from decile to

71
decile, the greater d ifferences bein': in the second naif of
the therapeutic proces3.
Client response cate ories Y3Pe and YSFh both show
sty 1 1stically signify cant :■ i>: i.'.os at the .05 level between
deciles. Inspection of fables X and XI will show that there
is a decrease in the mean par cent occurrence of these cate
gories b y deciles as the therapeutic orocess occurs, the
greatest decreases occurring in t'-e latter portion of the
therapeutic process. Although differences be tween proup II
and L in the frequency of occurrence oh these two responses
are not statistically .significant, Figures 2 and 3 show that
Group LI tends to make fewer YSPe and Y3Ph responses t -an
does group L throughout the second half of the therapy
process.
As in the analysis of variance between groups, the cate
gory Ye I shows no significant differences between deciles.
Client response categories YDP, YSPp + YU I + Y D P , and
YSPp + YDP all were calculated to have i ratios which were
significant beyond the .Cl level. I'hus it can be seen that
not onlv are there si"nifI cant differences between groups M
and L In the occurrence of these responses, but there are
also significant differences between the deciles of t'-e
therapeutic process in re~ard to tneir frequency of occurrence.
An inspection of Figures 7, 3 , and 9 will show that group II
tends to give more YDP, YSPp + YU! + YDP, and YSPp + YLP
72
responses than does group L, and that the occurrence of
these responses increased in frequency as therapy progressed.
Group L does show as much variation in the production of 'hi
or Y3?p + YDP responsec , the level being aoproximately the
same t1-r o-gghout the therapeutic process. ‘

'.''here are sporadic
fluctuations in the YSPp + 7"rI + YDP curve for group L, but
this may be accounted .for by the nnrel'- ability in coding YJI
responses mentioned p r e v 'o-'sly, 'heon further examination of
i ros 7, d, and 9, it can be seen that the greatest in
creases made b y grour in t1no cate-ories represented tend
to occur in tle latter 1 alf of therapy.
5. Interaction gijoups by d e c i l e s .-- Table 7111 reports
interactions of the groups by deciles to have I’ values sig
nificant beyond the .01 level for the client response cate
gories Y SP p , Y3Pv> -r Yifl + Y D P , and YSPp + YDP . rfhi3
interaction is indicative of a response d i "fere ntial being
made between the tv;o groups for a particular category. '-'or
example, in ordor to test the significance of the interaction
groups by deciles between decile 1 and decile 10 for the
response YSPp, refer to Table XTII. The difference between
the mean per cents of the occurrence of tin is response between
groups If and L in the first decile is 3.7 - 2.2 = 1.5. In
the tenth decile the difference Is 11.4 - 1.3 — 10.1. The
difference between the differences, or tie interaction, is
0.3. ' y referring to the least si'T.if leant difference at
the .01 and .05 levels for t e interaction listed at the

73
bottom of Table XIII, it is found that the interaction groups
by deciles between the first and tenth and between the fifth
and tenth deciles of therapy for t' e client category res
ponse YSPp is statistically significant to a decree greater
than the .01 level of c'uv" id ence . There are also signifi
cant response differentials betv/een the ’êaris of groups V.
and L at deciles 6, 9, and 10 from that at decile 2. for
the combined categories YSPp + Y TJI + YDP the difference
between the means of the groups at decile 9 is significantly
greater than the differences between means at deciles 1, 2,
3, 4, 5, and 6. The Interaction for decile 10 is signifi
cantly different from that of deciles 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and
3. In the combined cats -ories YSPp + YDP there are signifi
cant differential responses between the difference in the
icean s for decile 9 and those of deciles 1, 2, 5, and 6, and
b et w ee n the difference of the means for decile 10 and those
of deciles 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 3.
By referring to 'figures 5, 8, and 9, it can be seen
graphically that as the therapeutic process progresses, the
differences In the frequency of occurrence of the response
categories represented increases between the groups, with
group h exhibiting a greater production of these respor s e a ,
thus supporting the hypothesis tinat there are quantitative
differences between the group showing the most irrmrovement
and the group showing the least improvement as tiierony p ro
gresses. Since this finding is true only for the improvement

74
categories, it can be coi eluded teat there are no signifi
cant differential responses mado between the two groups in
regard to tee 3tatemeub of Problem categories, but that
t: ere arc significant differential re arouses be twc-en the
groups in the response cote ories t at ray be e g ;Sidered as
being; indicative of improvement •
4. Di s cu s si on of Individual Client Category he spor.ses .- -
a) Y S P s .-- It lva3 already been noted in '.'able VIII
that the I: ratios be tw een groups and the Interaction groups
by deciles were not statistically significant beyond chance
occurrence. The b ratio between deciles, however, was sig
nificant beyond the .01 level. Looking at the mean per
cents of the YSPs responses for both groups combined In
Table IX, it can be noted that there are no significant
differences between, the first seven deciles, b ...t t: at the
mean per cent of decile S Is significantly lower than decile
7, the difference being significant at the .Of lovel, and
that the differences betv/een decile 3 end eacb of the
deciles from 1 to G are significant at the .01 level or
greater. Decile 9 differs significantly from decile 6 at
the .05 level, a no approaches a 3i ;n *f Icar.t difference from
decile 1 at the .05 level. fecile 10 shows differences
significant beyond the .01 level with all previous deciles
except decile 6 . The .findings f or the client response
category YSPs can be summarized by stating teat the last
three deciles of the therapeutic process tend to show a

75
decrease in tre use of thi3 response as compared with the
first seven deciles, wi tb gr cup I.' exhibit ir.2 the greatest
decreases in the last four deciles of therajjy.
b) YSPe •— The only significant i ratio for tv is
category found in fable VIII is a difference at t'-e .05
level of confidence between deciles. Table X shows t~ at
deciles 4, 5, and 3 are signifIcantiy lower In tie produc
tion of this response than decile 2 between the .05 and .01
level of confidence, and that decile 10 shows e difference
from decile 3 1, 3, and S sign if' icant at t-e .05 level, and a
difference from deciles 2 and 7 which Is significant at the
.01 level. here again, as in the response YSPs, the trend
is a lowering in occurrence as therapy progresses. This can
especially b© noticed in the last three deciles of group Y.
c) Y S P h .-- Tho cate ;ory YSPh sliowo a significant F
value in Table VIII at the .05 level between deciles. The
trend is towards the decrease of the occurrence of this
response, as Table XI will indicate, but fluctuations are
noted in figure 3. Decile 4 is significantly lower than
decile 3, as arc deciles 5, 7, 3, 9, and 10. Deciles 5 and
9 are significantly lower than decile 2. Although the dif
ferences between groups were not statistically significant,
group h shows a more consistent decline in the production of
YSPh responses as therapy progresses than does group L.

76
d) Y S P a .-- This category showed no significant F
ratios between groups, between deciles, or in trie interac
tion groups by deciles, cwevor, certain trends :nay be
noted in Table X I 1 and in injure 4, Group L tends to start
ho therapeutic nrocess wifeh less concern of f ugure problems
than co©3 group h, but as therapy pro presses, the frequency
of YSFa responses increases, the last three deciles showing
the greatest occurrence, froup h tends to maintain a fairly
level production of these responses throughout the thera
peutic process, doth groups combined show a 3 light but not
statistically significant increase in YSPa responses as
therapy progresses.
eJ_YSPE . - ..he client response category YSPp shows
differences significant beyond the .01 level between groups
and in the interaction groups by deciles, fable XIII shows
that group i. exhibits significantly more YSPp responses in
therapy than does group L, It can also be seen that deciles
8 and 9 show significant dlfferertial responses from deciles
1, 2, 5, and 6 , Decile 10 shows significant differential
responses in comparison with deciles 1 to 7 inclusive,
figure 5 indicates graphically that the greater differences
are shown between the groups in hue latter portions of the
therapy process, with group Id shewing an increase In the use
of YSPp responses while group L tends to remain at a more or
less static level. The greatest differences between tv:e
groups occur in t e last four deciles of therapy.

77
f) YUI • As previously d i s c u s s e d , to.ere are no statis
tically s ignifi cant r il'feronces between groups , deciles, or
ir. tie interaction groups by deciles for tie client response
cate jory h h k , Group h, as shown in 3 -ure 6, seems to show
a tendency to make more YUI resnonses than does group L, but
chance variation could account for this.
g) Y D P .-- Table VIII indicated that client category
response YDP showed significant variations at the .01 level
between groups and between deciles. Table XV shows t.:at
group II made more YDP responses than rid group L for the
entire therapy process, The mean per cent of YDP responses
for both groups combined Indicate that t-e last four deciles
in the therapeutic nrocess show significantly greater use of
YDP than do the first throe deciles. Deciles 9 and 10 are
significantly higher than deciles 1 through G inclusive,
figure o snows that group I' tended to r.:al-:e Its greatest
Increases in the utilization of this response after the
sixth decile.
h) IE YSPp + YU I + Y D P .-- Alien trie categories YdPp, YU I ,
and YDP are combined, variations significant beyond the .01
level between groups, deciles, and in the interaction groups
by deciles are found (Table VIII). Table XVI shows that
group T.T responds wit1' s 5 gr.i f leantly more of these responses
than does group L, and that there are more of these responses
made by both groups combined as therapy progresses, the last
three deciles being significantly higher in the occurrence

78
of these than arc- the first four deciles • Deciles 9 and 10
are s igr. ?f icant1 y higher than ceciles 1 to 7 inclusive. the
intorac I;ion groups by deciles shows a differential response
from the initial to final stages of therapy, the last two
deciles showing a greater differential between groups far;
the previo hi3 O .!. lit deciles. Iroup h, in figure 3 shows an
initial increase in the production of these responses at the
second and third deciles, with another, sharper increase
beginning at the sixth decile and continues to show an
increasing use of t’-ese responses until the end. of therapy.
Tt would appear t h e n , tr at although the groups judged to
show more improvement after a course of psychotherany makes
more responses indicative of irprover.ent than does a group
judged to show si gnifleantly less invaroveucnt, s i g n i f c a n t
dl'Terences do not occur between the v:roiips until the last
f o nr d e 0 i 1 e s o f th c t >nr -ap e u tic aroce a s .
l) 2E YSPp + Y D P .— In thus combination of client cate
gory
_> fc1 r e soov.ses
a. w’-’ch are indicative of i m1r o v e m o n t ,
* the
category Yhl was eliminated because f its lov; reliability
in cooing. fable VIII shows, however, that the su::. of th.e
cat eg,or ’es YSPp + YDP show differences between groups,
deciles, and In the interaction -roups '>y deciles that are
statisticrlly sign*ficant beyond the .01 level. Ar. inspec
tion of ..i~ure 3 3 anc. 9 will sh.ow tYet the curves indicating
the mean per cent of occurrence of the sum of YSPp + YYI +
YDP and the sum of YSPp + YDP are similar for group , but
79
when the Y U I category Is eliminated, group L exhibits a
smoother and more static curve than vnien Til is tabulated
with the other two responses. The elimination of the cate
gory Y rI from the tabulation of improvement responses also
tends to eliminate the slight increase in the occurrence of
improvement categories exh'b'tee by group L in the last three
deciles of the therapeutic process. It is interesting to
note in . iyure 9, that the curve of group h again, as in
figures 5, 7, and 8, shows its greatest rise after the sixth
decile of the therapy process.

80
CHAPTER VII
C 0 YC L'TS I OiTS
In terms of the data analyzed, the following conclu
sions are drawn:
1. The total number of client responses mace in the
therapeutic situation bore no relationship to
outcome of therapy. A similar finding in regard
to length of therapy was reported in a 3tucv by
Tucker (33).
2. There were no significant differences between the
most improved and loast improved groups in the
production of YSPs, YSPe, YSPa, or YSPh responses,
although the more improved group shows a tendency
to use less of these responses as therapy pro
gresses.
3. There were significant differences between the most
and least improved groups in the production of
YSPp and YDP responses, which are indicative of
improvement in therapy.
4. Conclusions 2 and 3 support similar findings
reported by Snyder (2m) in an investigation of one

61
mi successful non-6 irectively counso led case as
compared, with .fear success full;/ counseled cases.
6. Significant c"iffere-nee s were . at : o m o batv/eer the
most ar.c leas i; ir/r ovec g r m p s In rcsoouc.!r." with
the category Y'Jl, probably because of the inability
of' coder.:: to reco.yiise Ybl responses as set forth
ny a stated o efir.it ion*
G. there were si ;r.if icant group by decile interactions
between dec'las early in therapy anc those at the
end of therapy for the categories YSPp and the
sums of the categories YSPp + YYY + YDP and YSPp +
YT-P, with the most improved, group making a greater
number of these responses as therapy progresses
while the least improved, group tends to show only
minor increase s .
7. Ihe re were s ignif .1car. t differences between the
near, per cents of occurrences of YSPs, YSPe , and
YSPh responses in the stater: ent of problem cate
gories, and between the mean per cents of occur
rences of Y E P , sum of YSPp + YbTI + YDP, and sum of
YSPp -t* YDP responses in the improves ent cate/ories
for both groups co-bined, between th.e deciles of
the the rarer, tic nrocess.

Q2
b. The data <vere Interpretable as support Ir‘;; the
hypothesis t’* b at the onset of the ther rpout ic
pr ocess, the responses will be of a stereotyped
nature • fh 1 s is evidenced h y toe . 1 r.O .1ngs I;.:at
sign* f •cm!; d i *’fe”nnces in responses bo tween the
claches oh therapy To n:-t occur unb:l 1 the latter
phases of the therapy process.
9. The results of this study seen to support an
extinct ion-roinforcenant exnlar atio:: of non
directive psychotherapy as a learning process.
This is evidenced by the s bstist*cally s i ;nifleant
shifts "o~
ijT deciles of certain of the client cat a-
gory responses as the therapeutic process moves
forward. It was found that during th.e first six
deciles of the therapy process, no significant
differential responses were made either by too gro
showing; the most improvement nor by the group show
ing the least '.improvement. Significant changes in
the mean per cents of the occurrences of certain
of the client response categories were found to
occur within the last four deciles of t'r;e therapy
process. It was found that, for both groups com
bined, statement of the problem, responses showed
significant decreases in occurrence after the
sixth decile of therary, while the responses

83
indicative of improvement showed significant
increases in occurrence after the s i x t h decile of
therapy. The data thus support the hypothesis
that t? e stereotyped responses are extinguished
oaf ore new and a d j u 3 t i v e responses are made.
10. Significant increases in the client response cate
gories indicative of improvement in therapy in the
latter portions of therapy indicate that these are
new responses, and that their increase in frequency
of occurrence supports the hypothesis that they
are reinforced and retained.

0
84
CHAPTER VIII
R3Co:.;i,:-rrDATiD:!3 for frtitfp : 3T.tdy
It Is felt by the v/riter that a more meaningful inves
tigation could have been accomplished, if more specific
measurement of tlie content of client responses bad been
possible. In tabulating the various res pon ses , greater
differences between the most Improved and least improved
therapy cases mig1 t 'cave been found if a method for scoring
variations within a soecific client response category had
been available. Such a method v.oula enable a more accurate
tost of differences i- the variability of response categories
between tlio groups. It is suggested for future studies,
that specific responses be given weighted scores. I or
ex am p l e , responses of the statement of problem variety
which are repetitive or stereotyped in regard to content
ah oxiId receive a lower score t' ar responses o^‘ the s ame
category which, delve into areas not previously mentioned,
since new responses learned In toe thorapoutic interview
could be used as a measure of variability. It would also be
help ful if a .method were do vised foe* scoring insight and
planning client response categories for their relative values
as being realistic in regard to i n d i v i d u a l cases. A

85
possible technique .for this might be accomplished by rating
t ase ro sponses as they occur in the therapeutic process.
Such a technique would be on a highly subjective level, and
would probably require mucl: traininr; on the port of the
judges, who would, of necessity, need to be co' -potent clini-
cIans .
Such procedures as meritionod above would indeed be
laborious, but it is felt that the effort would aid greatly
in future research on die process of psychothorapy'.

86
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. DOLLAED, J. and MILLER , 7, E. Per sonallty and psycho

therapy . ‘ e vv Yor 1:: c;Vr aw-: 111 'Jo. , In c . , 10 50.
2 . E D vVAjIDS , A. L. Exper 1m enta 1 oesiyn In o a ycholo y 1c a1

research'. "e\v York: Rinehart and Jo., Inc., 1950.
'Z*
^ 23TE3, h . An experimental study of punishuent •
P s y c h o l . one,:. » 1944, 57, to. 3.
4. FRERO"7, I. ' Interrelations bo tween p3ychoanalys Is

and the experl.rental work of Pavlov. Am.er. J.
P s y ch I a t ., ‘ 1933 , 12, 1165-1203.
5. FREUD, S. Jew introductory lecture s on psychoanalys :>s .

Row Y o r k : '.V. .V. or t on ana Jo, , 1933.
6. GTTT'RTS, J. ■■:.The w s y Y o l o j y of l ear nin g. hew York:

harper, 1935.
7. hARLO'.V, 'I. E. The formation of learning sets. Psyc 11ol

R e v . , Ih:', _56, 51-65.
'• T-TORMEY, E . The nenrotlc personality of our tine . Mew

Y o r k : Vi. V.’. 'orton and J o 1937. ”
a*• HULL, J. L. Principles of bon ay l o r . ow “ork: D.
Apoleton-Century Oo. , Inc., 1^43.
10. i'ELLEY, f . L. Internr~tat ion of educa tional n e a sure-

rnents. ' ow York: World 'ook Jo. , 1927.
11 . KJ3IE, L. 3. Relation of the

psychoanalytic technique.
conditioned reflex to
A rc’s, neurol. Psyc>~ ’
<a t . ,
1934, 32., 1137-1142.
12. DEEPER, E. The role of motivation in learnirr; a study

of the phenomenon of differential m o v a v a h o a a i con
trol of the utilisation of habits. _J. go net .
P s y c h o l ., 1935, 46, 3-40.
13. Y A C A E E T , A. C-eneralization in successful psychotherapy

J. consult . P s y c h o l . , 19 50, 14 , 64-70.
37
14. M O W R E A , D. K, and ULLI A. , A. D. Time as a determinant

in integrative learni";’, Ps ych ol. R e v . , 1945, 52,
61-90•
15. i"UH C-. , 3. A. An eval ;atic:i of nondirective psycho

therapy. Applied, ps y c h o l . .onop. , 1947, 1 5 .
16. P A V L O V , I. P. Conditioned re floxes. i.-vos ui.jat Ion

of the physiological activity of the cerebral cortex,
translated by 3. V. A n r e p , new 'York: Oxford Jniver-
sity P r e s 3, 1927.
17. PORTER, E. M . Jr. The development and evaluation of a

measure of counseling interview procecures. Educ.
p3 yc h o l . e a s n t ., 1943, 5, 105-253.
13. RAKUSIR, J. h. The role of lorsehach variability in

the prediction of client behavior in psychotherapy.
Doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylvania .State
Colleys, 1951.
19. ROClv.h', J. R. Counsellor; and psyenotliorapy. ,ev; York:

i!our;1
.-1 on i.if f 1 in Co., 1942.
20. R O Y E R , A. C. An aualy c is c 1’ counselin y procec ures in a

nondirective approach . h a s t o r 1s thesis, Ohio State
University, 1942.
21. SE ERA R, J. The process of nondirective therapy. _J.

consult. Psychol •, 1949, 1 3 , 157-102.
22. SI A3, . 1 . A stimulus response a.:al;, sis of repression

and ir.si h t in psychotherapy. P sy c h o l . Rev. , 1946,
5 5 , 36-42.
23. SH EE R E R , E. T. The relationship between acceptance of

self and acceptance of o there • _3. consult. Psy cho l. ,
1949, 13, 175-130.
24. SHORE", A. J . Jr . A learning theory interpretation of

psychotherany. harvard ecuc. Rev., 1943, 13,
129-14 5.
25. __________________ . Psychotherapy as a problem in learn-

iny theory. I syc bol. n i l ., 194: , 4 6 , 336-392.
26. S H3D j2COP, 7;. Statistical methods (4 th. ed . ) . Am os,

I o w a : 3 ta te Co1 leme press, 194 5.
27. 3YYD2.R, V.. U. An investigation, of t a nature of non

directive "syctot 'nerary. _v_. per:. P syc hol . , 1S45,
33, 193-244.
88
28. SI'TYDER, ii, ’J. A comparison of one unsuccessful with

four successfully non-directively counseled cases.
J. c o n s u l t . P s y c h o l . , 1947, 13., 38-42,
29. 3PE7CS, II. V/. and LIFPITT, P. An experimental test of

the sign-gestalt theory of trial and error learning.
J. e x p . P s y c h o l . , 1946, _30, 491-502.
30. S T O C K , P. The self concept and feelings towards others.

jT. consnlt . P s y c h o l . , 1919, _13, 176-190.
81. T7-IORTDIK9, 3. I:. The psycholo ^y of wants , interosts ,

and att itu des . Tew Y o r k : D. Appleton Century Co.,
Tnc 1935.
32. TOLHA'11, E. C. P u r p o sive behavior in animals and m e n .

hew fork: D, Apnleton Century Co., Inc., 1932.
33. T'TCKCE, J. 2. Investigation of criteria for evaluating

n o n - d i r e c t Tve psychotherapy with college students.
Doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylvania State
College, 1951.
APPENDIX A
COUNSELOR AND CLIENT CODING CATEGORIES

90
APPEYDIX A
G od inp; Oatsôriea for Client and Gounse lor Content Oateyor ie s
I. Client cate yoriea
.A. Pro o l e c a t e g o r i e s _
~T~. YSPs- stata'i’ .onta which deal with complaints,
symptoms of maladjustment, or diasatis-
factions of concern to the client. To
include tre case of t' -o client who
states, 111 don't know what to talk about
t o d aiy
y .u
2. YSPe- 3 tatem.ent s which report the situations,

incidents, or facts relating; to tne pr o
blem. These are descriptions of the
conditions under which the symptoms are
present. the so are expanded and explana
tory s C a t eme n i:s .
3. YSPh- statements which clearly report the nre-

eolleye etiolo ’-y, h Istorical background ,
or development of present symptoms,
complaints, or dissatisfactions.
4. YSPa- statements in which the client states

his problem in consideration of the
fu t u r e .
5. YSPp- statements which indicate relief or

reduction of the c l i e n t ’s problems,
complaints, or symptoms. To include
statements of nleasvre or satisfaction.
3. Understanding and actlon-takiny categories

1. YUI- statements by the client in which he ver
balizes the causes of his behavior or
clearly relates one characteristic of his
behavior to another.
91
Note: line utilization of this definition involves

the judgment of the coder1 as to whe ther the
causes expressed by the client could lead
to the behavior. ’he purpose is one of
d i f f e r e n t i a U m statements of explanation
which are nothing more than symptomatic
repetitions or redundant statements of the
problem, from clinically val'd causal rela
tionships. i-'y c 11: ically valid, we moan
coder jud grnent.
2. YDP- statements revealing th.e client's dec i

sions regarding the future or intentions
to change his attitudes. V/bcn the client
discusses some future actiooi in reference
to the resolution of his problem, score
YDP .
C. Simple response categories

1. YAI- Any questions of the client which request
a factual reply from the counselor.
These frequently include requests for
advice, information, or reassurance.
They are not concerned with ending the
co n t a c t .
2. YAQ- a reply to a direct statement by a coun

selor. Si'.pie acceptance of a counse
lor's clarification of feeling not
in cluded.
3. YAC- simple acceptance of a co uns elo r’s state

ment or clarification of feeling. Does
not include direct replies to questions
by the counselor.
4. YRS- any statement which clearly rejects or

disagrees with any statement by the coun
selor. This does not include negative
replies to direct questions.
D. minor response ca te -ories

1. YEG- any statement concerned with ending one
contact or aiming arrangements for future
co nta cts .
2. YES- any statement concerned with ending a

series of interviews or indications of
the client's desire to discontinue the
series of interviews.
92
3. YNH- statements which are not relates to the

cl? e n t 13 T>roblem. and do not involve
rapport yetting attempts.
4* YFD- friendly discussion which is unrelated, to

the client's problem and usually servos
only the ^'Tnose of establishing good
rapport • "sually ''nur.c at t'-e be'■'inning
or eiviru; -> a co. fact, a. ‘ eludes i- e
usual social amenities.
5. Yui.- any statement which cannot ho classified

in one of the preceding categories. This
includes statements which are incomplete
because of transcription d ifficult ies
(coded YUIIt) or changing record sides,
etc. Also if not enou ;h of the statcncrf
is available for accurate classification.
II. Client fee liny categories
All attitudes or feelings will be coded unless it is

clearly indicated that they are no longer held 'ey the
c 1 ie n t .
1. feyalive feelii i- c 1 i- .t statements which

clearly reveal currant feelinys or attitudes
wh.ich express dissatisfaction, dislike, dis
comfort, anxiety, fear, worry, hate, anger, or
derogation. The object of the feelings can be
self , tki of io c t: or situations
NAS- negative to self

NAG- negative to counselor or counseling
NAO- negative to others, things, or situations
2. Positive feelings- client statements which

clearly reveal the current nreser.ee of feelings
or attitudes which express satisfaction, plea
sure, enjoyment, comfort, freedom from worry
or anxiety, love, affection, w arm th, acceptance,
liking, or happiness. ..lie object of the
feelings can be self, others, things, objects,
or situations.
PAS- nositive to self

PAG- positive to counselor or counseling
PAO- positive to others, things
93
3. Ambivalent feelings- client statements which

clearly reveal the concurrent presence of
negative and positive feelings toward the 3ame
object, which nay be self, others, objects,
etc.
Ill, Counselor categories
A. Restatement of content category

1. XRC- a simple repeating of what the client has
said without any effort to organize,
clarify, interpret, or show in any way
that th.e counselor is appreciating the
feeling of the c lie nt’s statement by
understand in;; it. Emphasis here is on
statement of attitudes of others towards
the client; statements of fact; statements
of conditions of the environment. These
statements usually reflect the intellec
tual rather than the affective aspects
of the cl i e n t ’s response.
B. Clarification of feeling category

1. XCFa- a statement by the counselor which puts
the c l i e n t ’s fee liny or affective tone
in a clearer or more recognizable form;
or any effort to show t’-at the counselor
is accurately recognizing the feeliny of
the c l i e n t ’3 stater..ent by understanding
it.
2. XCPi- a statement by the counselor which

expresses attitudes and feelings of the
client different from those he has
expressed or Implied. A mistake or an
error has occurred in attempting to
clarify the cl ien t’s verbalized feelings
or attitudes.
These state- ents are characterized oy:
a. deflecting a minor feeling and
ignoring a major feeling when both
are present in the c l i e n t ’s state
ment .
b. Gross understatement of the c l i e n t ’s
feeling.
c. Real errors or mistakes as a result
of misunderstanding the client.
94
3. XOI u- a statement "by tiha counselor which

expresses unvernalized attitudes or
feelings of tr.e client. A recognition
or clarification of a feeling or atti
tude which the client has not verbalized
but which is clearly implied in the
client's previous statements. "Shrewd
guesses" of the client's attitudes which
are obtained iron tue counselor's know
ledge of the total situation are coded
in this category. feelings must be
clarified to use in this category.
G. Interpretation category
1. XIT- any counselor statement which indicates,
ever: vaguely, a causal relationship in
the client's behavior; points out a
characterization, explains, or informs
the client as to hb.s patterns or p erson
ality, provided that the client has not
mentioned any of these in a previous
st atement. those statements frequently
represent the counselor's attempt to
innose his diagnostic concepts.
D. Directive categories
1. XFf- attempts by counselor to redirect to the
client the responsibility for selecting a
topic :'or discussion; emphasis on discus
sing a specific topic; suggest ions that a
specific topic be developed.
2. XoA- any statement that irrplies Imat fee client

should take action of any kind. This
does not ireply a change of attitude.
3. XD4- questions by fê counselor to obtain

specific information from the client. It
does not include counselor statements
phrased ir: the form of a question that
really only clarifies or restates the
previous client statement.
4. XPS- any attempt to persuade the client to

accept an alternate point of view;
implieation that the client change his
attitude or frame of reference.
95
5. XRS- counselor statements which encourage the

client or which are Intended to reassure
the client’s self-esteem or self-assur
ance; statements which imply sympathy.
Emphasis v'ere is on items which tend to
alleviate anxiety by chan'5in" the client’s
evaluation of himself through a minimiza
tion of his problem.
6 . XAE- counselor statements which evaluate the

client or his ideals in terms of the
counselor’s own attitudes in such a man
ner as to provide emotional support.
This is an errmhatic acceptance or obvious
reward given by the counselor for acti
vity by the client.
7. XDC- any expression of disapproval or criti-

he client by the counselor.
hinor categories
1. XCS- statements which explain the counseling
procedure; state the expected outcome of
toe treatment process in general (not in
the client's specific ca3e); the limita
tions of tim.e; the responsibilities of the
client or counselor. these statements
emphasize the process of counseling.
2. X'iiD- counselor responses which are aimed at

e l i c i M n g from the client a further
statement of the problem once it has been
brought up by the client.
3. X3A- simple agreement by the counselor; state

ments which indicate understanding or
assent, out do not imply approval or
disapproval. This category is used if
the counselor statement is not in answer
to a stated question.
4. XP’D- any statement of friendly discussion with

the client that is unrelated to his prob
lems and is designed mainly to maintain
rapport.
5. X3C- any statement involving the ending of the

contact or the making of future appoint
ments .
96
6. XES- any statement involving the enc.inr; of a

series of interviews which arise from
statements hy uhe client.
7. XUC- any statement not classifiable into one

of the above categories.
8. XUCt- any statement not classifiable because

of missing oarts or transcription dif
ficulties .
APPENDIX B
MULTIPLE CRITERIA SCOR

Table XVITI
Criteria Data
P-Ii Diff. Counselor Jud-e Client Op;ht'd

Case Kav; .'/eiubtec haw uei.^hted haw Weiuhtec hav; Cei -hted Total
1* 36.33 11.21 60.00 .')

w •
:o^3; 74.71 13.4 5 100 10.50 44 .04
90.29 11.65 47.00 0.96 70.57 12.76 118 12.39 45.76
3*k 82.31 10.62 53.00 3.53 74.93 13.49 103 10.32 43.51
^ E P
4* 37.90 11.34 53.00 •J •U O 65.51 11,79 100 10.50 42.21
.--V ^*V
5* 63.33 Co# Oo 47.00 6.96 71.56 12.33 117 12.29 41.01
6v 60.03 7,74 47.00 6.96 77.02 15.36 114 11.97 40.53
7* 71.23 9.10 43.00 6.36 65.17 11.73 100 10.50 37.73
8* 87.33 11.27 33.00 u r-n 59.83 10.77 \jj 10.40 37.32
Q 63,02
ji
3.77 51.00 7.55 64.70 11.65 33 9.24 37.21
10# 57.66 7.44 55.00 3.14 69.93 12.59 76 7.98 36,15
11# 55.19 7.12 25.00 3.70 70.38 12.67 113 12.39 35,38
12* 72.33 0,33 3u.00 5.62 41.73 7.51 120 I'd .60 35,06
ry . n
13 49.59 6.40 55.00 8.14 42.55 !. -'O •
117 1
2-he
.v O ^>
34.49
14 57.19 7.38 40.30 5.92 49.30 8.37 116 12 .13 34.35
15 46.21 5.96 36,00 5.33 64 .13 11.54 102 10.71 33.54
16 42.90 5. 53 43.00 7.10 55.17 0 • JO 96 10.03 32.64
17 34 # u6 4.50 40.00 5.92 51.61 V *
oa 122 12.01 32.52
7; H *
13 64.09 3.27 34.00 5.03 43.51 w' • ( 96 10.08 32.11
19 48,11 6.21 56.00 3.29 43.96 7.91 79 3.30 30.71
20 54.20 6.99 28.00 4,14 61.96 11.15 80 -.40 30.68
21 36.53 4.97 21.00 3.11 53.03 10.45 115 12.00 30.61
22 41.59 5.37 40.00 5.92 49.50 b.81 97 10.19 30.39
Table XVIII— Continued
P-H Diff. Cour.selor Judge 01lent Wght’d
Case Raw Weighted Raw Weighted Raw We i ;hted Raw Weighted Total
23 31.54 4.07 40,00 5.92 67.73 12.20 74 7.77 89,96

24 46.52 6.00 17.00 2.52 56.23 10.12 106 11.13 29.77
25 54.02 6.97 22.00 3.26 45.77 3.24 107 11.24 29.71
26 39.94 5.15 26.00 3.35 43.27 7.79 122 12.81 29.60
27 30.00 3.87 27.00 4.00 65.90 11.50 05 3.93 28.30
20 23.30 3.65 37.00 5.48 52.98 9.54 90 9.4 5 28.12
29 36.04 4.64 41.00 6.07 36,61 6.59 100 10.50 27.80
30 44.91 5.79 22.00 3,26 40.13 7.23 105 11.03 27.31
31 36.60 4.72 31.00 4.59 46,65 3.40 32 8.61 26«32
32* 32.78 4.23 41.00 6.07 43.61 7,65 77 b »09 26.24
33* 35.66 4.60 13,00 2.66 42.37 7. 03 100 10.50 25.39
34* 24.96 3.22 20.00 2.96 46.99 3.46 98 10.29 24,93
35* 30.92 3.99 20.00 2.96 51.17 9.21 82 3.61 24.77
36* 55.65 7.18 18.00 2.66 40.27 7.27 71 7.46 24.57
37* 34.33 4.44 12.00 1.78 43.41 7.81 98 10.29 24.32
33* 34.16 4.41 14.00 2.07 42.56 7.66 90 9.45 23.59
39* 37.56 4.35 6.00 .39 40.51 7.29 96 10.00 23.11
40* 44.49 5.74 24.00 3.55 36.37 6.55 63 7.14 22.98
41* 35.31 4.62 8.00 1.13 33.53 6.04 93 10.29 22.13
42* 33.06 4.26 0.00 0.00 33.61 6.05 94 9.87 20.18
43* 32.49 4.19 3.00 1,13 26.01 4.68 34 3.32 18.87
* Oases used in this study

CD
CD
100
Characteristics of the Criteria
reliabilities of o i.-.eivid ual criteria
1. The P-N ratio. 'his measure is the difference

between the ratio of negative feelings in the
first counseling interview and the last coun-
se 1 ir.g interv iew .
hethods Seven trained coders coded 233 client

statements from verbatim interview material.
This material was djvided into deciles, the nega
tive proportion c:omputeo fern* each coder for each
dec ’Is by ibe f onrula
X~-i. — •
:: + P
Average intercorrelation was computed on tie 10

samples by 7 judges (coders). This value was
+.730. The estimated reliability, Jpearman
or own , for this :i»'t or c orr e la ti o ■ was +.950.
2. Counselor check List , by couiu :lor3. A 29 item

check list completed by tre counselor at the end
of coinseling.
ethod: 15 counselors ro-ratcd their cases after

a period of time elapsed after tbe corrnle*tion of
counseling. A nroduct-moment correlation of
unese origiral and second ratings yields a test-
r o test ”eii ab3.1ity va 1 ■e o"" +. 7 T7 .
3. Counselor Check List, by judges.

t'ethod: Seven trained j vigns rated 12 cases in
common us in ■, to is rating scale. Average inter-
correlation of these ratings was +.5C0, and the
estimated reliability of this intereorrolation
w a s , Spearman-d r o w n , +.900.
4. Client ha tin” Tcelc. A fourteen-item, 5-point

rating scale, completed by the client at the end
of coue.se l i n g . An odd-oven product rao'-.ent cor
relation, stepped-up by 2 for the ...pearinan-
irown correction, yields a relia' ility value of
+.734.
101
Weighting and reliability of the total criterion score.
'Weighting
1. Tethod; The reliability of the summed raw scores

for all persorjs yields only a reliability,
Spearman-Mr own, of +.743. A w e ' .t ing method
was used which raised the roliaîli ty of the
total score, ano yielded a distribution of scores
characterized by maximum dispersion. The weights
were derived from the sum of the intercorrela-
tions of all measures and their standard devia-
t ions•
Counselor Judge Client P-T ratio
Counselor 1.000 + .623 + .127 + .571
Judge + .62.3 1.000 + .194 + .534
Client + .127 + .194 1.000 + .211
P-T ratio + .571 + .534 + .211 1.000
Sum of r *s +2.321 +2.351 +1.532 +2.316
Sigmas 15.73 13.06 14.64 17.90
Weights .143 .130 .105 .129
Sum/Sigma
The formula for computing the total summed weighted

score for each person in the group would be
Total Score = .148 Counselor + .180 Judge + .105

Client + .129 P-N ratio
where Counselor, Judge, Client, and P-.d ratio are

the raw scores that the norson obtains on those
m e asures.
2. liethod: Two other corrections were made in the
data.
A. The P-N ratio and the Judges data found in
the average intercorrolation matrixes made it
possible to correct those two measures for
tr.e tendency for some judges and coders to
102
judge consistently hi'h or low on a series of

samples. asec on. the r o l a ’,ility data, a
correction figure was found for each judge
and coder so that the mean of their judgments
was standardized to a mean of 50 and a stan
dard deviation of 10. These corrections were
applied to the judgments made on the expori-
r.icn t a 1 s arrp1 e .
T. The P-N ratio was further corrected to remove

the influence of initial scores on final
scores, since this is a change measure from
first to last interview. The correlation
between first interview P-;
. measures and last
interview F-N measures was +.18. A new set
of scores, final, was predicted from this
correlation by means of the regression
formula,
Y' = .39x + 10.5o
and this distribution was subtracted from the

obtained final interview P-N data. This new
distribution of differences was independent
of initial scoros, correlating .006. The
distrib ition of differences obtained by this
method represents the true differences in P-N
due to experimental variables, allowing some
error for unreliability of the measure.
Reliability of the total criterion score
1. The reliability of the total weighted criterion

score was computed by averaging together, for
each person, his P-N and judge score, and his
counselor and client scale scores. This provided
two scores for each person, each an average of
two of the measures. A product-mon^nt correla
tion yielded a value of .501 between these two
distributions of average scores. -his value was
stepped up by 2 for the Spearman— rown formula,
and the estimated reliability of the total
criterion is +.743. This value allows for a
maximum correlation with some perfectly reliable
predictor test of +.862.
APPENDIX C
CLIENT AND COUNSELOR RATING SCALES

104
. Date
£-1 g&Ufig frapAg

Instructions: You are asked to answer the following statements con
cerning your experiences at the Psychological Clinic, so that we may be
able to improve our services and be of more help to students in the
future.
Please be as objective and straight-forward as possible in rating

yourself, and the results of your experience since coming to the Psycho
logical Clinic. This information is considered confidential, and your
answers will be protected from unauthorised persons.
Check the place along the graph that most clearly indicates the
way you
1. When I think about myself

1 i i t i
I am I have few I am some I am always I am
content misgivings what con faced with ashamed
with what cerned with my weaknesses
I find my short and inade
comings quacies
In regard to interests
i » i » »
I am quite I feel some I am not I enjoy a I derive
worried concern worried few inter much en
about my over my about my ests joyment
interests interests interests from my
interests
My attitude toward problems which may occur in the future

i 1 1 i T
I feel very I feel I feel that I have some I have no
adequate in fairly ade I will be misgivings confidence
my ability quate in my able to about facing in my
to handle ability to work out my future ability to
problems handle problems problems handle
problems someway problems
which might
come up
Copyright, 1950
Psychotherapy Research Group
Pennsylvania State College, Pa.
105
4-. My relationship with my immediate family
I am I am not I am some I am con I am very

thoroughly entirely what less cerned over unhappy
satisfied satisfied satisfied my relation about my
with the with my ad than the ships relation
relation justment average ships
ships toward some person is
of my
relatives
5. The problem(s) which brought me to the clinic

1 t t t i
Is worse Bothers me Still Exists but No longer
as much as bothers me does not exists
ever some bother me
now
Would you like to continue counseling?

i t i i
I feel a I feel that I am un I feel that I feel I
definite I need certain I need no need no
need for counsel - whether I more more
more but not as should have coianseling counseling
counseling much as stopped but would
before counseling like to come
back if the
need arose
In my attitudes toward others1 shortcomings

t t t i i
I can ac I usually I am some I am annoyed I can’t
cept people accept times an by their stand their
for what people for noyed by shortcomings shortcomings
they are what they their and faults
regardless are shortcomings
of their
shortcomings
Do you think the counselor was important in working through your

problem?
i i i i »
My My My My My
counselor counselor counselor counselor counselor
was of no was of very was of some was quite was of
value little value valuable great value
value
106
9. Considering my ability to concentrate, I feel that:
i i i i I
I am dis- I am a Most of the I am satis I am
turbed be- little con- time fied with my pleased
cause of cerned over problems in ability to with my
difficulties problems in concentra concentrate ability
in concen- concen tion don’t to concen
trating trating bother me trate
10. With regard to my present sexual adjustment

t t i i i
I am very I am some ly sex life I am fairly I am very
distressed what dis affords me satisfied satisfied
about my satisfied some satis with my sex with my
sex life with my faction life sex life
sex life
11. My contacts with other people

t i i ! t
Are com- Are rather Might leave Are unsatis- Are very
pletely satis something factory unsatis
satis factory to be de factory
factory sired
12. If I were to judge my change since coming to the clinic, I would

say that
t
I’ve gotten I’ve gotten I haven't There has There has
much worse worse changed been a slight been more
improvement than slight
improvement
13. In considering my problems, I feel that

i i i
I ‘ve I am taking There seem There seems I can’t do
handled my steps to to be ways to be little anything
problems handle my lean Icando about them
successfully difficulties handle them
14. When faced with decisions, I feel that:

I r f i
I am very I am satis- I am not I become I become
satisfied fied with my bothered concerned very dis
with my ability to much about over the tressed over
ability to make de- making de- making of the making
make de cisions cisions decisions of de
cisions cisions
►
107
I, What degree of severity does this case exhibit?
A. Incapacity (resulting from discomfort or inefficiency)

1. Minimal (he functions adequately in all situations)
2. Mild .
3. Moderate
L. Severe (he functions inadequately in most situations)
B. Duration of the Problem?

1. Chronic (from 12 years of age or before)
2.______(13 to 17years)
J3» (18 to recent)
A . Acute-(immediately preceding therapy)
C. Stress (Environmental Pressures)

1. Minimal (almost no environmental factors)
2. Mild
3. Moderate
L . Severe (many environmental factors contribute)
II. To what extent was this case a success?

1. Unsuccessful (srme or worse)
2. Slightly successful (slight improvement - some relief)
3. Moderately successful (shown improvement)
A. Successful (client handles problem as well as average
person or better)
III. How did you feel about the treatment interviews with this
client?
1. It was an unpleasant situation for me.
2. I neither dreaded nor enjoyed it.
3. I enjoyed the treatment interview.
108
Client:
Counselor: ___________
Date of Last Interview:
Present Date:
Number of Interviews:
Read these instructions before making the ratings
NOTE: BEFORE BEGINNING YOUR RATINGS REV IEV/ ALL THE THERAPY NOTES AND
ANY TRANSCRIPTIONS WHICH HAVE BEEN MADE. WHEN YOU HAVE COM
PLETED THE RATINGS, CLIP THEM TOGETHER AGAIN AND PLACE THEM IN
THE ENVELOPE IN THE CASE FOLDER.
1. COUNSELOR POST-THERAPY CHECK LIST: Consider the client's behavior

throughout the course of therapy. Place a check opposite those
items which most nearly describe the behavior of the client. The
term problem used here does not necessarily imply a specific
problem.
2. SUPPLEMENTARY COUNSEIOR SCALE; These items are self-explanatory.
Each item should be checked only once.
Copyright, 19 50
Psychotherapy Research Group
Pennsylvania State College, Pa.
109
Client: ________________________ Date:
Counselor:
CGUNLELOR POST THERAPY CHECK LIST
I. How much awareness does the client reveal with respect to those
(motives, frustrations, conflicts, etc.) contributing to his
difficulty?
_ 1. The client states the problem in more than symptomatic terms.
2. The client states the problem in terms of deeper needs and

conflicts.
B . The client sees the problem as manifested in more than one area
of his behavior.
1. The client suspects the problem is related to his past ex

perience.
2. The client clearly relates the problem to his past experience.
B. The client perceives the problem as a function of his own be

havior.
II. How much feeling does the client demonstrate with respect to his
awareness of his problem?
1. The client appears less tense in the interview situation

following the discussion of his problem.
2 . The client states that he has experienced positive emotional

changes as a result of discussing his problem in therapy.
B. The client accepts the counselor’s deeper clarifications of

feeling concerning his problem.
III. Has the client made any plans?
1. The client expresses a desire to change.
2. The client accepts responsibility for making his own plans.
3. He states that he is planning to experiment with new ways of

handling his problems.
L . The client makes plans in therapy.
5. The client has made a definite choice on the way he will handle
his problems.
(over)
110
B. The client’s plans are realistic and within the scope of his
abilities.
IV. Has the client carried out any such plans?
1. The clienthas carried out a new plan.
2. The clientindicates that he has carried out a new plan and

found it rewarding.
3. The client has maintained rewarding patterns of behavior.
B. Observers report that the client manifests new behavior.
V. Has the client shown a decrease in symptoms?
1. The clientappears less tense in the interview situation.
2. The clientreports that he is less tense.
1. The client has experienced some relief from his symptoms.
2. The client indicates that his symptoms still exist but do not
bother him as much.
3. The client indicates that his symptoms no longer exist.
B . The client reports that friends have noticed an improvement

in his behavior.
VI. To what extent is the client accepting of himself?
B . The client expresses fewer negative self-attitudes.
B . The client expresses more positive self-attitudes.
B. The client can make non-intrapunitive self-critical statements

without being defensive.
B. The client’s attitudes towards others are more positive.

Blau, Benami - An Investigation of The Process of Client Centered Therapy in Terms of Extinction and Reinforcement

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Blau, Benami - An Investigation of The Process of Client Centered Therapy in Terms of Extinction and Reinforcement

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Pennsylvania State College

The Graduate School

A N INVESTIGATION OF THE PROCESS OF CLIENT CENTERED TH ERAPY

IN TERMS OF EXTINCTION AND REINFORCEMENT

Submitted in partial fulfillment

Head, Department of Psychology

The writer wishes to express appreciation to Dr.

William U. Snyder and the other members of his committee for

their assistance in the formulation and design of this study.

Special acknowledgment is made to the members of the

"Core 3-roup1', without whose joint efforts this investigation

could not have been completed.

II Introduction and R e v i e w of Literature ......... 22

III Statement of P r ob l em and Hypotheses ............ 31

VIII Recom mendations ............................ 84

B. Multiple Criteria Measures ................. 97

I The nuiiDor of judges in exact agreement in the

II Total and mean number of responses per case in

III F ratios b et w ee n groups, deciles, and the

IV Source of referral for selected po p ul a ti o n as

V The number of judges in exact agreement in the

VI Differe nce b e t w e e n mean criteria scores for

VJ.I Total arid mean number of responses per case

VIII F rat ios b e tw e en groups, deciles, and the inter­

IX Leans of YSPs responses In per cent for groups,

X Leans of YSPe responses In per cent for groups,

XI Leans of YSPh responses in per cent for groups,

XII Leans of YSPa responses in per cent for groups,

XIII Means of YSPp responses in per cent for groups,

XIV Means of YTJI responses in per cent for groups,

LIST OF TABLES— Continued

XV Means of YDP responses in per cent for groups,

XVI Means of sum of YSPp + YUI + YDP responses in

XVII Means of sum of YSPp + YDP responses in

XVIII Criteria d a t a ......................................... 98

1. Mean per cent of occurrence of YSPs responses

2. Mean per cent of occurrence of YSPe responses

5. Mean per cent of occurrence of YSPh responses

4. wean per cant of occurrence of YSPa responses

5. Mean per cent of occurrence of YSPp responses

6. Mean per cent of occurrence of YUI responses

7. Mean per cent of occurrence of YDP resoonses

8. Mean per cent of occurrence of YSPp + YTTI + YDP

9. Mean per cent of occurrence of YSPp + YDP

IN TERNS OF EXTINCTION AND REINFORCEMENT

The pr oblem of accounting for behavioral functions in

terms of the various laws of learning has b e e n of interest

to investigators for many years. Although ma n y have h y p o ­

thesized the role of learning in psychotherapy, a rev i ew of

the literature has failed to reveal any experimental study

using clinical data which would serve to substantiate or

refute any of the theories set forth. However, there is

much experimental evidence of a non-clinical nature which

seems to indicate that learning is an integral part of

psychotherapy, but the association of these two concepts

remains on an empirical level.

This investigation is one of a group of studies based

Hu ll (9) and Thorndike (31) emphasize the role of

reinforcement in learning. Quoting from Hull:

Learning, whether it he the formation of new asso­

Experimental evidence found hy Spence and Lippitt (11) tend

to support F u l l ’s reinforcement theory.

VIII F rat ios b e tw e en groups, deciles, and the inter

to investigators for many years. Although ma n y have h y p o

Learning, whether it he the formation of new asso

If neurotic anxiety . . . is produced by the repres

emphasizes the effect of reward in psychotherapy, and sug

It may be noted at this point that the theoretical con

in theraputic interviews which enabled a quantitative evalua

and desman (21), quantitatively and qualitatively investi

study, Snyder (28) compared one unsuccessful with four suc

iirst, an attempt will be made to relate the process of n o n

an investigation of client behavior in the therapeutic p r o

responses. To test the hypothesis that the process of p s y

chotherapy is a learning process, certain assumptions con

reduce the drive, fc-e individual becomes aware of his inade

evidenced b y the fact that he enters the thera

peutic situation for aid in achieving this adjust

2. Once in the therapy situation, the client ver

balizes the symbolic representations of his diffi

examples of his overt behavior. Since his adjust