Ruptures and Repairs in Group Psychotherapy: From Theory to Practice

Marmarosh, Cheri L.

doi:10.1080/00207284.2020.1855893

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although we have focused on many of the different types of ruptures in groups (member to member, member to leaders, and member to group), Marmarosh (in press) argued that it is also important to include the relationship between coleaders. Often, two leaders share responsibility for the group (Kivlighan et al, 2012).…”

Section: Implications For Clinical Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ruptures and repairs in group psychotherapy: Introduction to the special issue.

Marmarosh¹

2021

Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: All relationships experience tensions and ruptures, but not all ruptures are acknowledged and repaired. Individual therapy researchers have shown that repairing ruptures in the therapy relationship is associated with an increased alliance, decreased dropout, and positive treatment outcome. Until recently, there has been less attention paid to ruptures in group psychotherapy. The current special issue is devoted to theory, assessment, research, and practice regarding ruptures and repairs in group treatment. Methods: Group researchers applied self-report and observational assessment methods to identify and study ruptures in group psychotherapy and group supervision. Designs of the studies included longitudinal analysis, case studies, meta-analysis, and a practice review. Results: Studies in this special issue identified that the alliance is related to outcomes and that different types of alliance ruptures, including microaggressions, occur in group therapy. Alliance ruptures manifest themselves at different levels of group interactions (member to member, member to leader, and member to group), which reflects the complex nature of this multiperson therapeutic context. Conclusions: The implications for practice are addressed as well as a call for future research to examine different types of ruptures in group therapy. Group member and leader factors influence the nature of the ruptures. The complexity of the group context suggests that repair processes that take into account levels of interactions in groups. Findings from these studies lay the foundation for future research needed to understand the impact of ruptures in groups. Highlights and Implications• Ruptures and repairs in group therapy can be measured using self-report assessments and through observer coding of group therapy sessions.• Ruptures in group therapy are more complex than in individual therapy given the multiple relationships within a group. Ruptures can occur between leaders and members, between members and members, and between members and the group-as-a-whole. They can also occur between coleaders.• Research is needed to understand the group, member, and leader factors that influence the process of rupture and repair. The type of group, stage of development, level of cohesion, and climate are group factors that will likely influence rupture repairs.• The level of experience, empathy, personality, and attachment style of the leader will likely influence the leader's capacity to identify ruptures and strategies for repair.

show abstract

Section: Implications For Clinical Workmentioning

confidence: 99%