Leaders' behavior and group members' interpersonal gains

Interpersonal theory and measures of outcome and emotional climate in 111 personal development groups.

“…The self-acceptance measures had parallel correlations of .61 and .58 with how warm these leaders were rated. In 2-day American Group Psychotherapy Asso* ciation (AGPA) groups for mental health professionals, members' ratings of the warmth of solo leaders had similar associations (rs of .38 to .67) with Hour 14 ratings of groups for self-acceptance, other-acceptance, and the related gains between Hours 3 and 14 (Hurley, 1986). Consistent with research findings across cultures (Rohner, 1975), from family life and individual psychotherapy (Raush & Bordin, 1957), the perceived warmth of their group leader or leaders appears strongly associated with members' sense of psychological wellbeing.…”

Interpersonal Correlates of Individuals' Discrepant Ratings by Self and Peers

“…Irregularly staggered for favorability to reduce the influence of response sets, each pair of anchors was separated by 10 markers yielding scores with a range from 0 to 36 on each series. The resulting other-acceptance and self-acceptance measures have demonstrated both convergent and divergent validity (Gerstenhaber, 1975;Hurley, 1986b) with the two central substantive dimensions derived from such prototypical interpersonal inventories as LaForge and Suczek's (1955) Interpersonal Checklist and Lorr and McNair's (1%5) Interpersonal Behavior Inventory. Often denoted dfiliation and dominance by personality theorists (Wiggins, 1982), these central interpersonal dimensions have been associated with other-acceptance and self-acceptance, respectively, by Foa (1%1), Adams (1964), and Hurley (1976), among others.…”

“…This instrument was administered to all group participants twice-after 23 and after 45 hours of interaction (for more detail, see Hurley, 1976Hurley, , 1986b. Preceded by an independent like-dislike scale positioned first to facilitate catharsis, HIRS yields composite ratings of acceptance versus rejection of others (warm-cold, helps others-harms others, gentle-harsh, and accepts others-rejects others) and acceptance versus rejection of self (shows feelings-hides feelings, expressive-guarded, active-passive, and dominant-submissive).…”

Group Questionnaire: A New Measure of the Group Relationship

“…As mentioned earlier, until Johnson et al (2005), only the relationship between alliance and cohesion had been studied. There are many other group relationship constructs that have been found to be linked to outcome, such as mutual understanding (Roback & Smith, 1987), therapists' like or dislike of clients (Roback & Smith, 1987;Sexton, 1993), therapists' friendliness (Hurley, 1986), understanding and trust in groups (Roarck & Sharah, 1989), feelings of being accepted by the group (MacKenzie, 1998;Rugel & Berry, 1990), and emotional relatedness to other group members (Tuchuschke & Dies, 1994). These could be aspects of cohesion, alliance, empathy, and group climate; however, with the inconsistency of the labeling, it is difficult to piece these together.…”