Experiential Growth Group in Counselor Education: A Review of Its Pedagogy, Research, and Ethical Dilemmas

Group Cohesion in Experiential Growth Groups: A Multilevel Growth Analysis

Group cohesion is considered a key group therapeutic factor; however, limited knowledge exists on the session-to-session development of group cohesion in the context of training groups or on the factors that may predict such developments. We utilized multilevel growth modeling to examine the longitudinal changes in 44 counselor trainees' ratings of group cohesion in seven experiential growth groups across four semesters. We found significant between-person variability in the growth trajectory of group cohesion and identified trainee self-disclosure and gender as significant predictors of group cohesion. The results indicated the complexity of within- and between-person changes in group cohesion in training groups and the need for further research to identify potential predictors of these changes. We also discussed ways for group facilitators to attend to self-disclosure as an important marker of group cohesion.

Group cohesion in group-based personal practice

BACKGROUND

Personal practice (PP) is an integral component of many psychotherapy training programmes. It aims to promote personal and professional growth and is often conducted in a group format (g-PP). Group cohesion is one of the most researched mechanisms in group psychotherapy, but has rarely been studied in the context of g-PP.

AIMS AND METHOD

This exploratory study examines the associations between cohesion, satisfaction with g-PP, its impact on personal and professional development, and theoretical orientation in a sample of n = 329 German psychotherapy trainees. Cohesion was assessed with the group questionnaire (GQ-D; Positive Bonding, Positive Working, Negative Relationship).

RESULTS

Overall, participants reported high levels of all outcome variables. Positive Bonding was the strongest predictor of satisfaction with g-PP (β = 0.46, p<.001). While trainees in cognitive behaviour therapy reported significantly better cohesion scores (d≥0.31), trainees in psychodynamic therapy reported significantly higher satisfaction with g-PP and its impact on their developments (d≥0.30).

CONCLUSIONS

Group cohesion appears to be an important factor in g-PP that should be actively promoted by group leaders. However, longitudinal study designs are needed to better understand the emergence of cohesion in g-PP as well as potential moderating factors.