Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Outcomes of inpatient group psychotherapy associated with dispositional and situational affiliativeness

  • Published:
Group

Abstract

Before and after participating in an intensive three-week program of group psychotherapy, 33 recently rehospitalized male veterans (mean age=42) completed the Symptom Check List-90R and the Profile of Mood States. Prior to this program they also completed a trait affiliativeness measure and later rated their subsequent group therapy sessions for situational affiliativeness. The outcome measures indicated medium to large effect size benefits, which consistently associated positively with both separate and joint measures of trait and situational affiliativeness. The results encourage greater clinical attention to affiliativeness, a construct central to interpersonal theories of personality.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bednar, R. L., & Kaul, T. J. (1978). Experimental group research: Current perspectives. In S. L. Garfield & A. E. Bergin (Eds.),Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior changes (pp. 769–812). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bednar, R. L., & Lawlis, G. F. (1971). Empirical research in group psychotherapy: Current perspectives. In S. L. Garfield & A. E. Bergin (Eds.),Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change: An empirical analysis (pp. 815–838). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloch, S., Crouch, E., & Reibstein, J. (1981). Therapeutic factors in group psychotherapy.Archives of General Psychiatry, 38, 519–526.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Braaten, L. J. (1989). Predicting positive goal attainment and symptom reduction from early group climate dimensions.International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 39, 37–387.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brophy, C. J., Norvell, N. K., & Kiluk, D. J. (1988). An examination of the factor structure and convergent and discriminant validity of the SCL-90R in an outpatient clinic population.Journal of Personality Assessment, 52, 334–340.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Budman, S. H., Demby, A., Feldstein, M., Redondo, J., Scherz, B., Bennett, M. J., Koppenaal, G., Daley, B. S., Hunter, M. & Ellis, J. (1987). Preliminary findings on a new instrument to measure cohesion in group psychotherapy.International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 37, 75–95.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, T., & Fuhriman, A. (1986). Professional psychologists as group treatment providers: Utilization, training, and trends.Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 17, 273–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carson, R. C. (1969).Interaction concepts of personality. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cattell, R. B., Ebner, H. W., & Tatsuoka, M. H. (1970).Handbook for the Sixteen Personality Factor questionnaire (16PF). Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1977).Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J., & Furby, L. (1970). How should we measure “change”—or should we?Psychological Bulletin, 74, 68–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cyr, J. J., McKenna-Foley, J. M., & Peacock, E. (1985). Factor structure of the SCL-90R: Is there one?Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 571–578.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Derogatis, L. R. (1983).SCL-90-R: Administration, scoring, and procedures manual-II. Towson, MD: Clinical Psychometric Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Sandvick, E., Pavot, W., & Fujita, F. (1992). Extraversion and subjective well-being in a US national probability sample.Journal of Research in Personality, 26, 205–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dies, R. R. (1992). The future of group therapy.Psychotherapy, 29, 56–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dinning, W. G., & Evans, R. G. (1977). Discriminant and convergent validity of the SCL-90R in psychiatric patients.Journal of Personality Assessment, 41, 304–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, A. L. (1957).Manual for the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule. New York: Psychological Corp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, A. L., Abbott, R. D., & Klockars, A. J. (1972). A factor analysis of the EPPS and PRF personality inventories.Educational and Psychological Measurement, 32, 23–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Endler, N. S., & Magnusson, D. (1976). Toward an interactional psychology of personality.Psychological Bulletin, 83, 956–974.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, D. W., Hunt, H. F., Luborsky, L., Orne, M. T., Parloff, M. B., Reiser, M. F., & Tuma, A. H. (1970). Planning of research on effectiveness of psychotherapy.American Psychologist, 25, 727–737.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Frank, J. D. (1957). Some determinants, manifestations, and effects of cohesiveness in therapy groups.International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 7, 53–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, B. L., Gleser, G. C., Stone, W. N., & Seifert, R. (1975). Relationships among diverse measures of psychotherapy outcome.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 43, 689–699.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann, N. G., & Overall, P. B. (1978). Factor structure of the SCL-90R in a psychiatric population.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46, 1187–1191.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hurley, J. R. (1989). Affiliativeness and outcome in interpersonal groups: Member and leader perspectives.Psychotherapy, 37, 520–523.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurley, J. R. (1992). Diverse measures of outcome in 111 personal growth groups and interpersonal theory. Unpublished manuscript.

  • Hurley, J. R., & Brooks, L. A. (1987). Group climate's principal dimension: Affiliation.International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 37, 440–448.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurley, J. R., & Brooks, L. A. (1989). Primacy of affiliativeness in ratings of group climate.Psychological Reports, 62, 123–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, D. N. (1974).Personality Research Form manual. Goshen, NY: Research Psychologists Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lieberman, M. A., Yalom, I. D., & Miles, M. (1973).Encounter groups: First facts. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie, K. R. (1981). Measurement of group climate.International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 31, 287–295.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McNair, D. M., Lorr, M., & Droppleman, L. F. (1981).Profile of Mood States manual. San Diego, CA: Education & Industrial Testing Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Menlo, A., & Johnson, M. C. (1971). The use of percentage gain as a means toward the assessment of individual achievement.California Journal of Educational Research, 22, 193–201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michel, W. (1977).Personality and assessment. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintz, J., Luborsky, L., & Cristoph, P. (1979). Measuring the outcomes of psychotherapy: Findings of the Penn psychotherapy project.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 47, 319–334.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mudrack, P. E. (1989). Defining group cohesiveness: A legacy of confusion?Small Group Behavior, 20, 37–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nerviano, V. J. (1976). Common personality patterns among alcoholic males: A multivariate study.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 44, 104–110.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Norcross, J. C., Guadagnoli, E., & Prochaska, J. O. (1984). Factor structure of the Profile of Mood States (POMS): Two partial replications.Journal of Clinical Psychology, 40, 1270–1277.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Overall, J. E., & Woodward, J. A. (1975). Unreliability of difference scores: A paradox for measurement of change.Psychological Bulletin, 82, 85–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, R. A., & Headen, S. W. (1984). Profile of Mood States. In D. J. Keyer & R. C. Sweetland (Eds.),Test critiques (Vol. 1, pp. 522–529). Kansas City, MO: Test Corporation of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reddon, J. R., Marceau, R., & Holden, R. R. (1985). A confirmatory evaluation of the Profile of Mood States: Convergent and discriminant item validity.Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 7, 243–259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogosa, D. R., & Willett, J. B. (1983). Demonstrating the reliability of the difference score in the measurement of change.Journal of Educational Measurement, 20, 242–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosnow, R. L., & Rosenthal, R. (1988). Focused tests of significance and effect size estimations in counseling psychology.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 35, 203–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silbergeld, S., Koenig, G. R., Manderscheid, R. W., Meeker, B. F., & Hornung, C. A. (1975). Assessment of environment-therapy systems: The Group Atmosphere Scale.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 43, 460–469.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stiles, W. B., Shapiro, D. A., & Elliott, R. (1986). Are all psychotherapies equivalent?American Psychologist, 41, 165–180.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Strupp, H. H., & Hadley, S. W. (1977). A tripartite model of mental health and therapeutic outcomes: With special reference to negative effects in psychotherapy.American Psychologist, 32, 187–196.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, H. S. (1953).The interpersonal theory of psychiatry. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thorndike, R. C. (1949).Personnel selection: Tests and measurement techniques. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiggins, J. S. (1982). Circumplex models of interpersonal behavior in clinical psychology. In D. C. Kendal & J. W. Butcher (Eds.),Handbook of research methods in clinical psychology (pp. 183–221). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yalom, I. D. (1983).Inpatient group psychotherapy. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yalom, I. D. (1985).The theory and practice of group psychotherapy (3rd ed.). New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychiatry, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, USA

    Rosemarie Ratto Ph.D. (Research Fellow)

  2. Department of Psychology, Michigan State University, USA

    John R. Hurley Ph.D. (Professor)

Authors
  1. Rosemarie Ratto Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John R. Hurley Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

This article is based upon a dissertation submitted to the Department of Psychology, Michigan State University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Ph.D. by the senior author.

The authors express appreciation for the interest and cooperation of Drs. Bruce Vreeland, Larry Schwartz, Robert Munley, and Hope Conte and the patients of the Veterans Administration Medical Center, Battle Creek, Michigan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ratto, R., Hurley, J.R. Outcomes of inpatient group psychotherapy associated with dispositional and situational affiliativeness. Group 19, 163–172 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01458300

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01458300

Keywords

Search

Navigation