Search

Introduction Certain physiological reaction patterns have been shown to be closely related to characteristics of personality. According to Davis 1 numerous authors have shown that the intensity of autonomic discharge increases with frustration. Lacey and Lacey 2 found that impulsive persons even at rest display rhythmic bouts of palmar sweat secretion and rhythmic increases in heart rate while in other persons little change occurs. Roessler et al 3 demonstrated a relationship between ego strength as defined by scores on the ES scale of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory and certain physiological responses in subjects who were stimulated with various intensities of sound. A recent investigation dealing with physiological responses in psychotherapeutic relationships 4 raised the question as to whether or not certain physiological response patterns obtained from patients prior to any psychotherapy would differ among those patients who eventually improved or did

The majority of the patients with whom this paper deals are convicts, serving their prison term and being simultaneously treated on Terminal Island in the harbor of Los Angeles. It was Freud who first described the processes of transferences in pyschotherapy. While the degree of transference depends on the patient's ego strength, its importance is interlinked with the therapist. As S. R. Slavson states, "Expression of hostility toward the therapist in the transference relation is a primary requirement in psychotherapy."' This requirement includes group psychotherapy. Fenichel recognized the importance of this aid nearly two decades ago; he restated the importance of the transference reaction in groups in these words: "The examples of the others with whom the patient can identify himself, and the general tendency to undo instinctual derivatives and mental differentiations when in a group, may help to overcome resistances."2 Until very recently, it seems, the knowledge of group sessions with more than one therapist, and the literature were rather scarce. It seems to this writer that the actual types of multi-therapist are three: the cotherapist, the observer, and the "visitor." Of the first two, the cotherapist appears to be the type best known. Only recently Solomon, Loeffler, and Frank described their experience in this field adequately.3 The observer's role is less clearly defined. While the co-therapist has to structure his methodology according to the group, without necessarily "diluting" the process of transference, as Slavson thinks will happen, the observer may not have any role at all other than just "observing;" otherwise, his role may hardly serve any definite purpose. For instance, the editors of Group Psychotherapy are positive that the observer's primary interest "in research is an outstanding requirement."4 Another role, that of the supervisor, was discussed in a recent paper, which threw light on the many difficulties hindering effective

The measurement of anxiety by means of psychometric instruments has tended to yield reliable and replicable measures which are disappointingly unrelated to clinical problems. Taylor (1953) recognized that her MAS scale assessed manifest anxiety. Cattell (1956) and his associates have consistently found a second-order anxiety factor composed of five scales from the 16 PF. Welsh (1956) factored the scored items on the MMPI and found that the largest factor (A) could be identified with expressed anxiety. Barton's Ego Strength (BES) and Byrne's (1961) Repression-Sensitization (R-S) scales have also been recognized to be specialized anxiety scales. In efforts to resolve this problem, Sweney (1962) developed the Fear-Anxiety Profile (FAP) which utilizes behavioral operations for measuring the security drive. Measurements of dread, repression, familiarity, and word association are related to 12 areas of basic chreat. Sweney (1961 ) , summarizing previous motivational research, suggested that the measures of dread and repression seemed to reflect unanchored anxiety and those of familiarity and word association measured fear or possibly manifest anxiety. In this study all of the instruments listed were administered to 116 psychometrically naive college students. The scores were correlated and from the matrix 19 centroid factors were extracted. These were rotated by means of a normalized varirnax to an optimal orthogonal solution. The first two centroids supported the hypothesis that manifest anxiety and unanchored anxiety are independent. The 12 dread, 12 repression, and 12 familiarity variables from FAP loaded the unanchored factor. The manifest factor was loaded by the MAS, R-S, BES, and Cattell's C-, 0, L, Q3-, and Q4 but also by the 12 dread variables and by 12 negative repression or vigilance variables. It can be seen that in unanchored anxiety dread is accompanied by repression and in manifest anxiety it is associated with vigilance.

Ninety-nine couples either engaged or "going steady' received the MAfPI and six months later received a follow-up questionnaire inquiring whether the couples had progressed in their courtship. Variables investigated included anxiety, ego strength, neurotic triad, repression, and a global assessment of the MMPI by a clinician. Results showed as predicted that (a) couples showed a significant correlation in mental health, (b) couples similar in mental health progressed further in courtship than dissimilar couples, and (c) the mental health of the man but not hat of the woman was related to courtship progress.