Search

There is a lack of research examining how the proportion of women and men in a group effects both the group member’s perception of group climate and the aggregated perceptions of group climate for the other group members. We adapted the group actor–partner interdependence model (GAPIM; Kenny & Garcia, 2012) to examine how the perception of the group’s climate by a group member and by the other group members are related to the group member’s sex and the sex of the other group members. In addition, we examined how similar the group member’s sex was to the sex of the other group members by analyzing the interaction between the two sex variables. A total of 110 Italian graduate students (96 women, 87%; 14 men, 13%) were studied in six 10-session training groups. Group members filled out the Group Climate Questionnaire–Short Form after the fifth group session. Contrary to hypotheses derived from Kanter’s (Kanter, 2006) theory about the experience of tokens in groups, male group members did not perceive a more therapeutic group climate (i.e., higher engagement and lower conflict) as the proportion of women in a group decreased. There were, however, consistent and large effects for the sex composition of the other group members. Specifically, as the proportion of women in the group increased, both the group member and the other group members perceived the group climate as more engaging and as having less conflict. In addition, a group member’s perception of group climate was positively related to the aggregated climate perceptions of the other group members. Additionally, group size was related to less engagement and more conflict, as rated by the other group members, and less engagement, as rated by the group member. The findings suggest that the GAPIM is a useful approach for examining group composition.

There is a lack of research examining patients' and other group members' agreement about their therapeutic alliance. In the present study, the person-group (P-G) fit model was adopted to predict that the group member symptom reduction will be greater when the group member's and the other group members' perceptions of their alliance to the group-as-a-whole fit and are high. In addition, the effect of disagreement between the group member and the other group members in their perceptions of the group alliance on the individual's outcome was investigated by using response surface analysis. Thirty-two patients from 5 long-term (> 1 year) psychodynamic group treatments were studied. Participants filled out the California Psychotherapy Alliance Scale-Group (CALPAS-G; Gaston & Marmar, 1993) and the Outcome Questionnaire-45 (OQ-45; Lambert et al., 1996) monthly over the course of group treatment until termination. As hypothesized, patient's symptom reduction was greater when there was agreement between the group member and the other group members that their alliance to the group as a whole was strong. Contrary to the authors' hypothesis, a lack agreement on alliance to the group as a whole between the patient and the other group members was not related to less symptom reduction, as lack of fit increased, symptom reduction decreased. Also contrary to the authors' hypothesis, when other group members saw their alliance to the group as a whole as stronger than did the patient, there was increased symptom reduction. The findings suggest that the P-G fit model may be a useful strategy to examine group process variables in the psychotherapy context.

There is a lack of research examining group members’ attachment styles and group climate perceptions in the context of the attachment styles and group climate perceptions of the other group members. In the current study, the actor–partner interdependence model (APIM) was used to examine the relationships among (a) a group member’s attachment pattern, (b) the aggregated attachment patterns of the other group members, (c) a group member’s perceptions of the group’s climate, and (d) the aggregated group climate perceptions of the other group members. One hundred ten Italian graduate students in six 10-session interpersonal growth groups were studied. Group members filled out the Attachment Style Questionnaire prior to group participation and the Group Climate Questionnaire after the 3rd group session. Contrary to the hypotheses, a group member’s attachment pattern (anxiety and avoidance) was unrelated to her or his perceptions of group climate, and only group member attachment anxiety was positively related to the other group members’ perceptions of conflict in the group’s climate. There was, however, strong support for the hypotheses involving the aggregate attachment of the other group members and group climate perceptions. As hypothesized, aggregated perceptions of attachment anxiety and avoidance were positively related to a member’s perception of group conflict and aggregated perceptions of attachment anxiety and avoidance were negatively related to a member’s perception of group engagement. Both aggregated attachment anxiety and avoidance were related in the expected directions to aggregated perception of group climate. Finally, as hypothesized, a group member’s perception of group climate was positively related to the aggregated climate perceptions of the other group members. The findings suggest that the APIM is a useful approach for examining group process variables in the group counseling context.