Essential theory, processes, and procedures for successful group psychotherapy: Group cohesion as exemplar
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
With few exceptions or at the very least cautions (cf. Burlingame, MacKenzie & Strauss, 2003) group psychotherapy has proven to be an effective and efficient treatment for a number of psychological disorders (Burlingame, Kapetanovic, & Ross, 2005). This article will briefly describe a theory that underlies successful group therapies. In addition, certain group processes—those elements that occur during the group itself that appear to be necessary conditions for improved patient outcomes—will also be addressed, although unfortunately, the sufficient conditions tying moment-to-moment process to actual outcome (improved patient functioning by the end of therapy, and at 6-month follow-up, for instance) are not quite as easily delineated. A closer study of the group therapeutic factor cohesion will be utilized as an example of these practice and research dilemmas. Finally, suggestions for future directions, which might more clearly uncover important connections between process and outcome, are addressed.
- Barlow, S., Burlingame, G., & Fuhriman, A. (2005). The History of group practice: A century of knowledge. In S. Wheelan (Ed.),Handbook of group research and practice (pp. 39–64). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
- Barlow, S.H., Fuhriman, A.J., & Burlingame, G.M. (2004). The history of group counseling and psychotherapy. In J. De Lucia-Waack, D. Gerrity, C. Kalodner, & M. Riva (Eds.),Handbook of group counseling and psychotherapy (pp. 3–22). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
- Beck, A.P., & Lewis, C.M. (Eds.). (2000).The process of group psychotherapy: Systems for analyzing change. Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
- Bednar, R., Melnick, J., & Kaul, T. (1974). Risk, responsibility, and structure: Ingredients for a conceptual framework for initiating group therapy.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 21, 31–37. CrossRef
- Benjamin, L.S. (2000). Use of Structural Analysis of Social Behavior for interpersonal diagnosis and treatment in group therapy. In A. Beck & C. Lewis (Eds.),The process of group psychotherapy: Systems for analyzing change. Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
- Brown, G., Burlingame, G., Lambert, M., Jones, E., & Vaccaro, J. (2001). Pushing the quality envelope: A new outcomes management system.Psychiatric Services, 52, 925–934. CrossRef
- Burlingame, G., Kapetanovic, S., & Ross, S. (2005). Group Psychotherapy. In S. Wheelan (Ed.),Handbook of group research and practice (pp. 387–406). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
- Burlingame, G., Fuhriman, A., & Johnson, J. (2004). Process and outcome in group counseling and psychotherapy: A Perspective. In J. De Lucia-Waack, D. Gerrity, C. Kalodner, & M. Riva (Eds.),Handbook of group counseling and psychotherapy (pp. 49–61). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
- Burlingame, G., MacKenzie, K. R., & Strauss, B. (2003). Small-group treatment: Evidence for effectiveness and mechanisms of change. In M. Lambert (Ed.),The bergin and garfield handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change, (5th ed.) (pp. 647–696). New York: Wiley.
- Burlingame, G.M., Fuhriman, A.J., & Mosier, J. (2003). The differential effectiveness of group psychotherapy: A meta-analytic perspective.Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 7(1), 1–3. CrossRef
- Burlingame, G., Fuhriman, A., & Johnson, J. (2002). Cohesion in group psychotherapy. In J. Norcross (Ed.),Psychotherapy relationships that work (pp. 71–87). New York: Oxford University Press.
- Davies, D.R., Burlingame, G.M., & Layne, C.M. (in press). Integrating small-group process principles into trauma-focused group psychotherapy: What should a group trauma therapist know? In L. A. Schein, H. I. Spitz, G. M. Burlingame, & P.R. Muskin (Eds.),Group approaches for psychological effects of catastrophic disaster and terrorist threats: Principles and methods. New York: Hayworth Press.
- Duvall, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000a). A non-parametric method of accounting for publication bias in meta-analysis.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 95, 89–98. CrossRef
- Duvall, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000b). Trim and fill: A simple funnel plot-based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in met-analysis.Biometrics, 56, 455–463. CrossRef
- Forsyth, D. (Ed.) (2000). Special issue: 100 years of research.Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 4(1), 3–134.
- Fuhriman, A., & Burlingame, G. (Eds.) (1994).Handbook of group psychotherapy: An empirical and clinical synthesis. New York: Wiley.
- Fuhriman, A., & Barlow, S.H. (1983). Cohesion: Relationship in group therapy. In M. J. Lambert (Ed.),Psychotherapy and patient relationships (pp. 263–289). Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.
- Kivlighan, D.M., & Lilly, R.L. (1997). Developmental changes in group climate as they relate to therapeutic gain.Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 1(3), 208–221. CrossRef
- Kivlighan, D.M., & Shaughnessy, P. (2000). Patterns of working alliance development: A typology of working alliance ratings.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47, 362–371. CrossRef
- Lambert, M.J., & Bergin, A.E. (1994). Effectiveness of psychotherapy. In A. Bergin & S.G. Garfield (Eds.),Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (pp. 143–189). New York: Wiley.
- Lambert, M.J. (Ed.) (2003).The Bergin and Garfield handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change, (5th ed.) (pp. 647–696). New York: Wiley.
- McRoberts, C., Burlingame, G. M., & Hoag, M. J. (1998). Comparative effectiveness of individual and group psychotherapy: A meta-analytic perspective.Group Dynamics, 2(2), 101–117. CrossRef
- Moran, D.K., Stockton, R., & Teed, C. (1998). Facilitating feedback exchange in groups: Leader interventions.Journal for Specialists in Group Work, 23, 257–268. CrossRef
- Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D.B. (1979). Comparing significance levels of independent studies.Psychology Bulletin, 86, 1165–1168. CrossRef
- Rychlak, J.F. (1981).Introduction to personality and psychotherapy, (2nd ed.) Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
- Steering Committee (2002). Empirically supported therapy relationships: Conclusions and recommendations of the Division 29 Task Force. In J. Norcross (Ed.),Psychotherapy relationships that work (pp. 441–443). New York: Oxford University Press.
- Stockton, R., & Moran, D.K. (1981). Feedback exchange in personal growth groups: Receiver acceptance as a function of valence, session, and order of delivery.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28, 490–497. CrossRef
- Wampold, B. (2001).The great psychotherapy debate: Models, methods & findings. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
- Yalom, I.D. (1995).The theory and practice of group psychotherapy (4th ed.). New York: Basic Books. (Original work published 1970).
- Essential theory, processes, and procedures for successful group psychotherapy: Group cohesion as exemplar
Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy
Volume 36, Issue 3 , pp 107-112
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer US
- Additional Links
- Group psychotherapy
- Group process and outcome research