Test-retest stability of interaction patterns during interviews conducted one week apart.

Saslow, George; Matarazzo, Joseph D.; Phillips, Jeanne S.; Matarazzo, Ruth G.

doi:10.1037/h0039800

Cited by 17 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 5 publications

(22 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Third, the marked stability and modifiability of an individual's interaction patterns, found for our first sample of subjects (15), were cross-validated in a second sample (9). And fourth, the stability and modifiability were equally striking when only a single interviewer was used and the test-retest interval was extended to seven days (16), five weeks (17), and eight months (17), in contrast to the first two studies which employed a test-retest interval of a few minutes.…”

mentioning

confidence: 59%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Factor analysis of interview interaction behavior.

Matarazzo¹,

Saslow²,

Hare³

1958

Journal of Consulting Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our research program has utilized the Chapple Interaction Chronograph for recording the speech and silence behavior of interviewers and interviewees. This paper describes a new electronic interaction Recorder which is more efficient than the earlier recording device. The paper also demonstrates that data collected by these two devices are almost identical. Twenty interviews were recorded simultaneously, on both instruments, and twelve different measures were compared by means of correlation, and through inspection of the variance and means. Consequently, we have concluded that it is possible to compare data from present and future research studies with those obtained earlier with the Chapple Interaction Chronograph. REFERENCES PROBLEM Need characteristics of normals, anxiety neurotics, drug addicts, and paranoid schizophrenics were analyzed in this study. According to the need theory which suggested the research, the marked differences in behavior and adjustment of the above groups should relate to differences in ways in which the groups perceive, feel, and think about basic personality needs. 'The authors wish to express a preciation to Drs. for help in data collection for this study. Sex A1 Aggression A1 Nurturance Att Play J Autonomy J Abaaement A1 Exhibition J Nurturance A1 Exhibition A1 Counteraction J Counteraction Att Dominance J Affiliation A1 Dominance A1 Deference A1 Rejection Att Achievement Att Blame Avoid. J Aggression J Sum J Counteraction A1 Harm Avoid. J Achievement J Sex J Sentience AI Defendance Att Nurturance J Defendance J Poeitive Negative LOW

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 59%

“…By utilizing an interview standardized along certain minimal dimensions, it has been possible to investigate certain characteristics of the overt interaction patterns of different groups of subjects (8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17). Results to date suggest that interviewee interaction patterns have the following characteristics.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Factor analysis of interview interaction behavior.

Matarazzo¹,

Saslow²,

Hare³

1958

Journal of Consulting Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This verbal behavior of the participants was found to be highly self-consistent over a period of time (95) and the reliability of the observer was also great (83). This verbal behavior of the participants was found to be highly self-consistent over a period of time (95) and the reliability of the observer was also great (83).…”

mentioning

confidence: 78%

Psychotherapy

Lubrosky¹

1959

Annu. Rev. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Just before the writing of this review, a three-day conference, "Confer ence on Research in Psychotherapy," sponsored by the Division of Clinical Psychology of the American Psychological Association, took place. Thirty participants were present, representing approximately seventeen psycho therapy research projects. While the contents of this conference will not be covered (since a book-length summary of it will appear within the next year), it provided an excellent up-to-date overview of psychotherapy re search. Some of the ideas in the present review were derived from this conference.The main first impression one gets from the conference and from re viewing the literature and searching for trends is of bewildering variety: every one is going his merry way. The contributions during the year 1957-58 are a museum of method and philosophy of science. If we classify the types of research according to Helen Sargent's scheme [Wallerstein et al. (120) ], they range all the way from exploratory to rigidly experimental. Not only do they differ in method but in aim, in the segment of psychotherapy focussed upon, and even in whether they focus on psychotherapy aca demically as a facet of personality research, or whether they focus on it clinically with the aim of learning how to help patients get better.Not only does variety in research studies make trends difficult to see clearly but the fi eld itself is one in which not much change can be expected in a period as short as a year. One might be better able to d iscern definite trends in a five-or ten-year period. Finally, a summary of the work of the past year inevitably focuses our attention on what is novel, and it becomes too easy to mistake novelty for progress. Older contributions often have more to teach us than the newer ones. Without a doubt, most of what we know about psychotherapy was presented in the work of Freud, and we have yet to learn how best to use the fruit of his excellent observations.Despite the diversity, on close inspection trends are apparent. This year, as in recent years, the methods of research and the concepts applied to research have become more sophisticated and appropriate to the problems in the field. Better tools are available. A number of n ew syst The survey of the literature in this review was completed in May, 1958. It covers the period from April, 1957, to April, 1958. 2 I wish to express my indebtedness to Drs. Gardner Murphy and Robert Waller stein for their critical reading of the manuscript and to Dr. Helen Sargent for both her reading of the manuscript and discussion of ideas. Acknowledgement is made to Mrs. Ruth Paige for her conscientious culling of the literature, and to Miss Vesta Walker, Librarian, Menninger Foundation Library, for her assistance in the use of library facilities. 317 Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1959.10:317-344. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org Access provided by Western Michigan University on 02/03/15. For personal use only. Quick links to online content Further ANNUAL REVIEWS 318 LUBORSKY terns have been devel...

show abstract

“…6 The reliability of the various aspects of the standardized interview has been reported in earlier studies. These studies determined the observer,7 scorer,lO interviewer,8 and interviewee reliability.5, 9,10 The standardized interview involves complex behavior patterns on the part of the interviewer. The present study concerned itself with the simpler subperiod of the interview.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of psychopharmacologic agents on behavior, measured by the interaction chronograph

Tuason

Guze

1961

Clin Pharma and Therapeutics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study is concerned with the objective measurement of drug‐induced changes in interview behavior by means of the interaction chronograph, a device which allows an observer to record in time units with a high degree of precision the behavioral interaction of two individuals during a standardized interview in which the interviewer follows certain predetermined rules of interviewing. The background and details of the method are described. Sixty new patients, selected by chance from the Washington University Psychiatry Clinic, were given one of three possible drugs in a double blind procedure. They were subjected to a test‐retest interview, using a standardized interview as a research tool and the interaction chronograph as the measure of response. Analysis of the data revealed statistically significant difference in the chlorpromazine group and no significant difference in the phenobarbital and placebo groups. The limitations and possibilities of the method are discussed.

show abstract

Test-retest stability of interaction patterns during interviews conducted one week apart.

Cited by 17 publications

References 5 publications

Factor analysis of interview interaction behavior.

Factor analysis of interview interaction behavior.

Psychotherapy

The effect of psychopharmacologic agents on behavior, measured by the interaction chronograph

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About