UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

A task analysis of conflict resolution Taylor, Lin 1980

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
UBC_1980_A8 T39.pdf [ 3.6MB ]
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
Metadata
JSON: 1.0054337.json
JSON-LD: 1.0054337+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0054337.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0054337+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0054337+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0054337+rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 1.0054337 +original-record.json
Full Text
1.0054337.txt
Citation
1.0054337.ris

Full Text

A TASK ANALYSIS OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION  B.Ed., University of V i c t o r i a , 1974  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES* (Department of Counselling Psychology)  We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard  UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA October, 1980 (T)  Lin Taylor, 1980  In  presenting  this  an a d v a n c e d  degree  the  shall  I  Library  f u r t h e r agree  for  scholarly  by h i s of  this  written  thesis at  the U n i v e r s i t y  make  that  permission  purposes  for  freely  may  is  financial  of  British  available  for  for extensive  be g r a n t e d  It  fulfilment of  by  shall  that  not  of  The U n i v e r s i t y  C of  fiUlt*  SELL  British  2075 Wesbrook P l a c e V a n c o u v e r , Canada V6T 1W5  io/So  (ft)  Columbia  fc  requirements  Columbia,  I  agree  r e f e r e n c e and copying  t h e Head o f  understood  gain  the  of  copying  or  this  V  that  thesis or  publication  be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t  IfvLOfr  for  study.  my D e p a r t m e n t  permission.  Department  Date  it  representatives. thesis  in p a r t i a l  my  (i)  ABSTRACT Twenty four in therapy client performances were analysed in order to describe patterns related to conflict resolution.  Twelve Gestalt  events in which resolution was achieved were compared with twelve nonresolution events.  Both groups, resolved and unresolved, were  analyzed using three measures,-- 1)  Experiencing scale; 2) Structural  Analysis of Social Behavior, and 3) Vocal Quality Scale.  Using these  measures, the groups were divided into the three phases of conflict resolution--opposition, merging and resolution.  In Gestalt, therapy,  the client engages in a dialogue with himself to explore the two sides of the c o n f l i c t .  He usualy moves from one chair to another, these  chairs are known as the "experiencing" and "other" chair.  In this  study each chair was analyzed independently. The main hypothesis, that resolution events exhibit specific phase related behaviors that are not evident in non-resolution events, was tested using a number of comparisons.  These comparisons between groups,  between phases and between the two chairs indicate that the two groups are different and that there are three identifiable phases in a resolution event.  The pattern of resolution begins with the two chairs in  the opposition phase rejecting each other.  This is indicated by a  difference in level of Experiencing and uncooperative interaction as measured by S.A.S.B.  The merging phase is when the two chairs begin  to engage in productive dialogue.  The other chair "softens" toward the  experiencing chair, as indicated by a change in the vocal quality at the merging point.  Also during this phase, the level of experiencing  of the other chair increases to the level of the experiencing chair. The resolution ph-ase is identified by the lack of difference between the two chairs; they apparently come together and function as one.  (ii) TABLE OF CONTENTS  List of Tabies Acknowledgement Chapter I  INTRODUCTION Definition of the Problem Definition of Terms  II  LITERATURE REVIEW Task Analysis Research on the Two Chair Operation and Conflict Resolution Rationale for Hypothesis Hypotheses  III  METHODOLOGY Measuring Instruments 1.  The Experiencing Scale  2.  Structural Analysis of Social Behavior S.A.S.B..  Client Vocal Quality Scale Target Complaints Discomfort Box Scale (Appendix D) Conflict Resolution Box Scale (Appendix Shift in Awareness Design Subject Selection Therapists  (iii)  Table of Contents (cont'd.) Page Raters  36  Data Collection  37  Scoring Procedure  37  Procedure of Analysis  38  Tables IV  39 (a) to 39 (k)  RESULTS Results of Between Group Comparisons  40  Results of Phase Hypotheses in the  V  Resolution Group  42  DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS  45  Discussion  45  Experiencing Scale Patterns  45  Vocal Quality Patterns  46  Structural Analysis of Social Behavior Patterns  47  Conclusions  48  Recommendations  50  Implications  51  Bibliography  52  Appendices  55  (iv)  LIST OF TABLES  Table  .. Page  I  Phasing the non-resolution events  39 (a)  II  Example of Tabulation of Raw Data for Each Event  39 (b)  Mean Scores for each Chair in Each Phase of the Resolution Group on the Experiencing Scale  39 (c)  Mean Scores for each Chair in Each Phase of the Non-Resolution Group on the Experiencing Scale  39 (d)  Proportion of Statements in each Quadrant of the Structural Analysis of Social Behavior Scale for the Resolution Group  39 (e)  Proportion of Statements in each Quadrant of the Structural Analysis of Social Behavior Scale for the Non-Resolution Group  39 (f)  III  IV  V  VI  VII  Proportion of Statements in each Vocal Category for the Resolution Group 39 (g)  VIII  Proportion of Statements in each Vocal Category for the Non-Resolution Group  39 (h)  IX  Example of Data Tabulation for each Hypothesis  39 (i)  X  Frequency of A f f i l i a t i o n at the Merging Phase for the Two Groups Frequency of Focus Voice at the Merging for Resolution and Non-Resolution Events  39 (j)  XI  39 (k)  (v)  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS  Preparation and completion of this thesis would not have been possible without the support and guidance of Leslie Greenberg.  I am especially grateful to him for his encourage-  ment during the completion of this thesis.  I would l i k e to  extend a special thanks to Steve Foster for his help in the research design and s t a t i s t i c a l analysis of this project. I appreciate that Norm Amundsen was s t i l l available after two years to be on my committee.  - 1 -  CHAPTER I  INTRODUCTION  Resolution of a s p l i t by means of the two chair operation in Gestalt Therapy seems to be an important therapeutic process.  This project  is designed to study in detail the sequence of events that lead to resolution.  In building on this information, an attempt w i l l be made to verify  a proposed model of s p l i t resolution developed by Greenberg (1975) and Johnson (1979). If we as counsellors and therapists can learn the process of resolving a s p l i t or affective task, we w i l l be more effective in helping a client resolve conflicts and experience the resulting, hopefully benef i c i a l , change.  This understanding of human behavior w i l l assist us in  helping people to experience l i f e more f u l l y .  Thus, i t is important to  examine intensively how s p l i t s are resolved rather than be content with evaluation of the final result.  The purpose of this project is to focus  on the moment to moment process in the solving of s p l i t s . The goal of this study is to specify components of successfully resolved intrapsychic c o n f l i c t s , then, examine a number of successful performances for occurrence of these components.  The final step is to  compare the components in successfully resolved conflicts with those that are not resolved.  It is hypothesized that in unsuccessful performances  one or more of the identified components w i l l not be evident.  Such a  study is termed a task analysis and is defined by Schwartz and Gottman (1976) as follows,  - 2 -  "Such a study begins by specifying the l i k e l y components of a competent response and then testing the extent to which performance on the components discriminates between competent and incompetent populations." (p. 18).  Definition of the Problem The premise upon which this study is based is that therapeutic change, s p e c i f i c a l l y , resolution of a s p l i t using the two chair technique, follows specific identifiable patterns. We can discover these patterns of behavior which occur across clients, by systematically analysing and specifying the components of successful performances in the process of psychotherapy.  In fact,  using this method, Greenberg (1975) and Johnson (1979) developed a theoretical model identifying the necessary behaviors or conditions a client w i l l experience as they approach resolution of a conflict s p l i t . The purpose of this project is to verify aspects of the model by applying i t to actual therapeutic tasks.  More s p e c i f i c a l l y , success-  ful or resolved tasks w i l l be compared with unresolved tasks to test the model.  If the process of the resolved s p l i t follows the sequence of  events identified by the model, this w i l l be evidence in support of the assumption of v a l i d i t y of the model. With more precise information on the process of change in therapy, the therapist w i l l be better able to create optimal conditions for conflict resolution.  Exploring the problem from a task analytic  approach w i l l result in a more concrete educational model for affective problem solving. This project is part of an ongoing research program applying a task analysis to the study of conflict resolution in psychotherapeutic events.  It focuses on steps six and seven in the following steps  - 3 -  of a task analysis as defined by Greenberg (1975). 1.  The researcher has an intuitive theory of how people function.  Perls (1951) defines the Gestalt outlook as  follows: "The average person, having been raised in an atmosphere f u l l of s p l i t s , has lost his Wholeness, his Integrity. To come together again he has to heal the dualism of his person, of his thinking, and of his language. He is accustomed to thinking of contrasts— of infantile and mature, of body and mind, organism and environment, self and r e a l i t y , as i f they were opposing e n t i t i e s . The unitary outlook which can dissolve such a dualistic approach i s buried but not destroyed and, can be regained with wholesome advantage." (p. 45). 2.  Based on this theory, a task is selected and an observer's description of the task is made.  In this case  resolution of the conflict s p l i t is the task. Greenberg (1975) defines the s p l i t as " . . . the person is torn between alternatives. There i s an experience of two parts, of the self s p l i t into partial selves in opposition, rather than the experience of single integrated s e l f in process The s p l i t can be identified by i t s verbal markers... "I should do this but I "I want to stop but I...", etc. The technique used to reintegrate the two opposing parts is the two chair operation, defined by Greenberg as follows: " . . . the person plays the role of both sides of the c o n f l i c t , usually locating each side in a separate chair, and proceeds to have an encounter between them." (p. 8). 3.  The existence of the event as potent and recurring is empirically v e r i f i e d .  Greenberg (1975) found that use  of the two chair technique lead to greater depth of experiencing and change in awareness when compared with the client-centered technique.  - 4 -  4.  Given the general mode and the task, a description of a subject's possible performances is made. - A "thought experiment" or the idealized case.  This step in the task analytic approach is the topic of a thesis by Johnson (1979) in which she "attempts to create and check models which i l l u s t r a t e , in specific d e t a i l , what actually occurs during a psychotherapeutic event."  More s p e c i f i c a l l y , "resolution of a s p l i t  by means of the two chair operation of Gestalt Therapy." 5.  The subject's actual performance of the task is observed and described.  Greenberg (in press) explored  this phase by objective observation of events and analysis assisted by the clients using the two chair operation.  He concluded,  "Intensive research of this nature allowed a detailed elaboration of some of the subtleties of therapeutic process and by so doing has opened new avenues for research and for c l i n i c a l practise." (p.2). Building on the previous five stages of the task analytic approach, the following two stages are the focus of this research. 6.  A specific model is developed satisfying the general model and the task description.  This is accomplished  by comparing the idealized and actual performances of the task.  Using the work of Johnson and Greenberg (1975)  a refined, more specific model w i l l be presented.  This  is the postdictive step in this approach. 7.  Based on this model, the final step of the task analysis is performed.  The researcher hypothesizes the behavior  of the subject in the task. in this approach.  This is the predictive phase  - 5 -  Actual therapeutic tasks w i l l be analysed for elements specified in the previous model.  The predicted outcome being that the sub-  ject responds as defined by the model.  If the hypothesized and observed  behaviors are equivalent in relevant ways to the predicted behaviors, c r e d i b i l i t y is added to the specific model, the task description and to the general model. The overall prediction for this study is that clients progress through three sequential stages as they work toward resolution of a personal c o n f l i c t .  These stages and related behaviors can be measured  and identified with the use of scales designed to measure in-process data. The f i r s t stage is the opposition phase.  One side of the  conflict is dominant and the dialogue indicates that this part tries to get i t s own way by aggressing and intimidating the submissive side.  The  second or merging phase is characterized by each side of the conflict stating their position.  And f i n a l l y in the resolution phase there is  mutual l i s t e n i n g , understanding and acceptance of each other.  Definition of Terms Gestalt Two Chair Operation Greenberg (1975) defines the two chair operation as follows: "(The) Operation is a series of suggestions and observations made by the therapist or f a c i l i t a t o r to clearly separate two aspects or partial tendencies of the self process and to f a c i l i t a t e direct communication between these. The purpose of the experiment is to maintain a process of demarcation and contact between these parts. The following underlying principles are presented in an attempt to convey the structure of the operation—the nature of what can be done to achieve the process goal. These principles serve as guides to the therapist's behavior. The five principles are:  - 6 1) 2) 3) 4) 5)  Maintenance of a contact boundary: Maintaining clear separation and contact between the partial aspect of the s e l f . Responsibility: Directing the person to use their a b i l i t i e s to respond in accordance with the true nature of their experience. Attending: Directing the person's attention to particular aspects of his present functioning. Heightening: Highlighting aspects of experience by increasing the level of arousal. Expressing: Making actual and specific that which is intellectual or abstract. Particularizing experience by moving from theory to praxis." (p. 10).  Greenberg (1976) separates and identifies the characteristic behaviors of the two chairs.  The "Experiencing chair" is the experien-  cing part of the person, and in-process dialogue moves from whining and excusing to inner exploration and deeper levels of experiencing. Technically, the client in this chair dialogues at deeper levels of experiencing than in the "other" chair when measured on the Experiencing Scale.  (Klein, et a l . 1969).  It also uses more focused and expressive  voice as measured by Rice's (1967) voice quality system. The "other chair" is f i l l e d with other parts of the personality, other people and things.  Typically, the person in this chair engages  in low levels of experiencing and uses a lecturing voice. Split Greenberg (1979) discusses the s p l i t as follows: "Instead of a single clear preference a r i s i n g , the person is torn between alternatives. There is an experience of two parts, of the self s p l i t into partial selves in opposition, rather than the experience of a single integrated self in process. Clearly identifying this s p l i t and sensing the opposed forces within, becoming aware of the conflict between the two parts, represent the fundamental task for the client in the experiment." (p. 5). Although this project is concerned with only one type of s p l i t (Conflict), a brief definition of the other two types w i l l be given since  - 7 -  they sometimes are transformed into Conflict s p l i t s . 1)  Conflict:  Two partial aspects of the self are in opposi-  tion to each other.  For example would be, "I want the  security of marriage but I also want the freedom to do whatever I want." 2)  Subject-Object:  One partial aspect of the self (the  subject, I) does something which the other aspect (the object, self) is the recipient or observer.  Example:  "I judge myself." 3)  Attribution:  A feeling that is actually a tendency or  part of the self is attributed to an outside object or person.  Example:  "My father says I should finish the  four years, but I keep trying to t e l l him I'm not learning anything." Conflict Resolution Perls (1970) defines resolution as: "the reconciliation of opposites so that they no longer waste the energy in useless struggle with each other but can join in productive combination and interplay." (p. 6 7 ) . More s p e c i f i c a l l y , Greenberg discovered that resolution is typified by " . . . a shift at some point in the dialogue in the "other chair" to higher levels of experience and more focused, expressive voice, much as though the person in the "other chair" becomes less c r i t i c a l , softer and more understanding or accepting of the self."(1979, p. 321). Resolution Phase In keeping with the preceding definition of conflict resolution, for the purpose of this research, the resolution phase for any individual  - 8 -  is defined as that portion of the Gestalt event beginning with a level six score on the experiencing scale in either the other or the experiencing chair. Merging Phase The merging phase occurs when the other chair begins to a f f i l i a t e with the experiencing chair.  As defined by the S.A.S.B. scale  scores, merging occurs when the other chair responds with more than two responses from quadrants one and/or four and continues with a higher proportion of quadrant one and four responses.  The merging phase ends when  the resolution phase begins. Opposition Phase The opposition phase is the portion of the Gestalt event which precedes the merging phase.  Typically, i t has lower levels of experien-  cing, more external voice and more responses from quadrants two and three of the S.A.S.B. scale in both the other and experiencing chairs. Experiencing Klein, et a l . (1969) refer to experiencing as the quality of a person's experiencing.  It is the extent to which a person is aware of  and can communicate about "their bodily f e l t flow of experiencing and the extent to which this is integrated with the person's action, and thought."  Low level experiencing is typified by a lack of description  of feelings and by impersonal, superficial dialogue.  At an intermediate  level of experiencing, the clients may describe and talk about their feelings.  The greatest depth of experiencing is when the clients explore  their immediate feelings in the here and now with the result of increased awareness and resolution of a problem situation.  - 9 Voice Quality The four categories for assessing voice are: A.  Focused  B.  Externalized  C.  Limited  D.  Emotional  These four categories include the following six features in varying quantities (Rice and Wagstaff 1975). 1)  Energy  2)  Primary stress  3)  Regularity of stress  4)  Pace  5)  Timbre  6)  Contours  Greenberg and Rice (1979) describe voice quality as a measure of involvement and processing levels in the moment.  They suggest that we  can expect more focused voice in a good hour of therapy.  (See Appendix A).  Task Analysis Greenberg (1975) describes task analysis as " . . . a n evolving technique for describing and analyzing human behavior in problem solving tasks. Task analysis is a method of analyzing a specific performance situation, in light of a general model of a psychological system, in order to construct a specific model which could generate the particular performance." (p. 12). A f u l l e r explanation of task analysis and i t s relevance to research in the f i e l d of psychotherapy, follows in the literature review.  - 10 -  Structural Analysis of Social Behavior (S.A.S.B.) Benjamin (1977) has developed a model which appears to be effective in analysis and description of pathological and constructive social process.  Using this system as a measure of social interaction,  in this project, w i l l hopefully reveal that as a person works towards a resolution, the interaction between the two chairs changes. The S.A.S.B. model is an extension of Leary's c l a s s i f i c a t i o n system for the study of interpersonal transactions in a c l i n i c a l setting. Benjamin (1977) describes the model as " . . . a mathematically defined, empirically substantiated extension of the work by Leary (1957), Schaeffer (1965) and many othersi (p. 3). 11  This model is s u f f i c i e n t l y complex so as to encompass c l i n i c a l concepts in most therapies - psychoanalysis, family therapies, Gestalt, etc.  It is not restricted to a particular theoretical approach and can  be used in many contexts such as t h e r a p i s t - c l i e n t , parent-child or i n t r a psychically, experiencing self-other s e l f . Benjamin describes the purpose of such a system, " . . . t o organize the c l i n i c a l and folk wisdom in a way which w i l l make this knowledge more amenable to s c i e n t i f i c procedures." (p. 18).  Benjamin  (1977) demonstrated the use of the S.A.B.C. "in setting psycho-social treatment goals and in using before, during and after self ratings to establish efficacy of the therapy." (p. 22). The main question to be studied is whether the two groups can be discriminated according to measures of vocal quality, experiencing and structural analyses of social behavior.  When this has been determined the  resolution group w i l l be further investigated to see more s p e c i f i c a l l y how  - 11 -  i t differs from the non resolution event. Considering this study focuses on behavioral events rather than individuals there is l i t t l e known about the effect of individual differences on conflict resolution.  Further investigation needs to be done to deter-  mine i f individual differences are a factor.  Although i t seems unlikely  that an individual difference variable can explain the pattern given that the pattern was consistent across a l l the clients in a previous study. (Greenberg 1 975).  - 12 CHAPTER II  LITERATURE REVIEW  There are three sources of information that form the basis of this research project.  The theory and basic premises come from the theory  and practise of Gestalt therapy.  More s p e c i f i c a l l y , for this project the  writings of Perls (1951), Polster (1973), Zinker (1977), Grinder and Bandler (1975), Baumgardner (1975) and Greenberg (1977) on conflict s p l i t s and resolution,,form the foundation. Concerning the new approach of applying a task analysis to research on psychotherapy, the literature is limited.  The recent works  of Greenberg (1979), Rice, Pascual-Leone and Gottman (1975), but a few a r t i c l e s , are the total body of knowledge on the subject. Even more limited is the third area of interest to this research, that being studies on the Gestalt two chair technique in psychotherapy.  This information comes mainly from Bohart, Greenberg and U.B.C.  students presently exploring and researching the process of psychotherapy. Particularly, the process of Gestalt Therapy using the two chair approach. Perls' apt description of the nature of modern man gives some of the background for Gestalt theory. "Modern man lives in a state of low-grade v i t a l i t y . Though generally he does not suffer deeply, he also knows l i t t l e of true creative l i v i n g . Instead of i t , he has become an anxious automaton He does not approach the adventure of l i f e with either excitement or zest. He seems to feel that the time for fun, for pleasure, for growing and learning, is childhood and youth, and he abdicates l i f e i t s e l f when he reaches maturity." He seems to have lost a l l spontaneity,  - 13 -  a l l capacity to feel and express directly and creatively He spends endless time trying either to recapture the past or to mold the future. His present a c t i v i t i e s are merely bothersome chores he has to get out of the way. At times he is not even aware of his actions at the moment. (Perls 1973,p. 27). Perls assumed that this blockage of energy is the result of being "fractionalized people".  Every individual consists of innumerable  unresolved c o n f l i c t s , s p l i t s or polarities that when l e f t unidentified and unfinished, leave the individual immobilized in a state of unproductive confusion.  "As long as the client experiences only the extremes  of any continuum, he has no centre, no experiencing of a s e l f which gives and takes on i t s own terms with the world." (Baumgardner 1973, p..67). Perls (1951) refers to this impasse as the top dog and under dog being at war and reaching a stalemate.  Only when the client gives up  the struggle for control of their parts and begins to l i s t e n to both sides or accept their polarities are they free to act or grow. In any s p l i t , both roles usually emerge.  The top dog is t y p i -  cally controlling, bullying, lecturing, threatening, omnipotent and moralistic.  On the contrary, the underdog controls passively.  Underdog  is helpless, passive, vindictive, confused, apologetic, uncommited and procrastinating.  Both roles attempt to manipulate to get what they want.  Although the top dog appears to be more powerful, the underdog controls by being passive and avoiding, leaving the top dog frustrated. result of this struggle is that nobody gets anything r e a l .  The  There is no  integration or communication, only the struggle for control remains. The dialogue, using the two chair technique might go something 1 ike t h i s :  - 14 -  Top dog: Underdog: Top dog:  You should stand up for yourself. I can't. I feel helpless. I can't change the way I deal with people. I don't know how to stand up for myself. It's just pointless. What a cop'outl You make me sick. You complain about being pushed around but you don't do anything about i t . I think you l i k e i t .  There must be an integration of the two characteristics for the client to be able to move.  Polster emphasizes the need for integration rather  than control of one of the sides by saying, "The effort devoted to keeping the squelched characteristic servile or silent is a doomed e f f o r t — i t w i l l pop up in inconvenient ways to assert whatever v a l i d i t y i t can muster, l i k e a l l resistance forces which have been compelled to go underground'.'.  (Polster  & Polster,  1973,  p.  87).  To be more s p e c i f i c , Greenberg views identification of the s p l i t , sensing the opposed forces within and becoming aware of the two inner forces as the basic therapeutic task to be completed by the c l i e n t . (Greenberg, 1975).  It is at this specific point in process, when the  client senses the s p l i t that the client is most receptive to change. Recognition by the therapist of this particularly salient state may be the beginning of very productive work by the c l i e n t . A s p l i t can usually be identified by i t s verbal markers. Greenberg (1979) states, "The s p l i t is a verbal performance pattern manifested by one person (client) in interaction with another (.counsellor). The s p l i t is characterized by a division of the self process into two partial aspects of the s e l f .  These tendencies or partial aspects of  the s e l f , are related to each other in different ways and the d i f f e r ent relationships between the tendencies define different types of splits",  ( p . 317).  A conflict s p l i t typically is marked by the  - 15 -  statement, "I want to but I can't."  The person presents two obviously  opposing sides of themselves that are in c o n f l i c t .  It is at this point  when the two sides make contact with each other, there is potential for resolution. The work of Bandler and Grinder (1976) is even more extensive on the topic of s p l i t s or incongruences.  More than a verbal  performance pattern, the s p l i t is demonstrated in many "output channels" (body posture, movements, voice tempo, voice tonality and words).  Bateson's comment..."the phenomenon familiar among humans where the friendliness of man's words may be contradicted by the.tension or aggressiveness of.his voice or posture. The man i s engaging in a sort of d e c e i t . . . " (Bateson, 1976 - p. 136).  implies that " . . . t h e nonverbal or analogical message is the one which f a i t h f u l l y reflects the true nature of the person's feelings and intentions."  On the contrary, Bandler and Grinder (1976) believe  these numerous messages, termed paramessages, are a l l "true" and can generally be divided into two opposing or incongruent parts.  At this  point the therapist assists the client in experiencing the polarity by encouraging the client to be congruent in a l l their output channels on both sides of the s p l i t .  This is accomplished by acute awareness  on the part of the therapist, and his bringing any inconsistencies to the attention of the c l i e n t .  The client moves from one space or chair  to another until the client f u l l y experiences in a l l the output channels; feelings, gestures, voice quality, and postures of the two opposing parts. This method of treatment of a s p l i t is growing in popularity. It is a potent tool in helping the client acknowledge both sides and  - 16 -  begin the process of integration.  "By identifying the c l i e n t ' s p o l a r i -  ties and then providing for the dialogue which can bring forth these two hostile roles, we create a place where the client grows more w i l l i n g to relinquish his struggle for control, at least for a moment, now and then, and to put some energy into listening and hearing." (Baumgardner 1973 - p. 74). Although the very nature of the Gestalt approach defies definition and structure and depends on the creative intuition of the therapist, there are some basic principles used in the two chair technique to assist the client toward the process goal-resolution or integration of two polar aspects of their characters.  (Greenberg 1976).  The therapist uses five basic techniques in Gestalt two chair work-restoring contact, client responsibility, attending, heightening, and expressing. The i n i t i a l and basic task is for the client to restore contact between the opposing forces. himself as both sides of  The client/in dialogue with  h i s . c o n f l i c t , begin to experience the d i f -  ference and the v a l i d i t y of each side.  Polster (1973) notes, "Almost  invariably, when contact is restored, the individual discovers that these disowned parts have many redeeming features and his l i f e expands when these are recovered."  (p. 93).  The second task is the client taking responsibility for the conflict.  The therapist may intervene when the client is not taking  responsibility by avoiding, blocking awareness or ignoring feelings or experience.  S p e c i f i c a l l y , the client is expected to "own" his  experience by talking in the f i r s t person. honestly the true nature of both roles.  He is encouraged to express  He is asked also to identify  - 17 -  with a l l parts of his experience—the knot in his stomach, the tears or the high-pitched voice. Attending is another important principle used in the two chair approach.  The therapist encourages increased awareness of a l l  the c l i e n t ' s experience.  The therapist may ask the client to stay with  a particular feeling, or draw his attention to some other behavior. The therapist might, for example, ask:  "What are you doing with your  foot?, or "Do you know what your voice is like?" Another principle used is called heightening.  The therapist  increases the impact of the experience by increasing arousal.  This can  be accomplished by encouraging the client to exaggerate or repeat a statement.  Or he might be asked to act out one aspect of his s p l i t .  The therapist may also evoke a strong response by making e x p l i c i t some implicit message in the dialogue. Expressing is the technique of illuminating aspects of the experience by doing.  The impact of an actual experience is often  greater than the discussion about i t .  This can be accomplished by  having the client expose the specific content of the inner dialogue. Have the client express how he defeats himself in concrete terms. Greenberg (1977) found that when the previous "principles were applied to the two chair operation, there is an increase in scores on the Depth of Experiencing Scale; an index of productive psychotherapy, and leads to resolutions with populations seeking counselling and with student volunteers."  (Greenberg and Clarke, 1979).  Gestalt therapists (Perls, Latner, Baumgartner, Polster, et al)) describe resolution, or a shift in awareness, or integration of the two warring parts in a kind of poetic way as i f i t were some mystical  - 18 -  happening.  The polar aspects contact each other through dialogue and  gradually integrate in a kind of synthesis, the result of the union being greater than the sum of the two parts.  Perls (1970) described  the process of resolution as "the reconciliation of opposites so that they no longer waste energy in useless struggle with each other but can join in productive combination and interplay."  (P-  7 2  )  The new trend is for Gestalt Therapy research "to move in the direction of finer discrimination of therapist interventions and more objective, illuminating measurement of client process." 1977 (p. 8 ) .  Clark,  The result of this s h i f t in focus is Greenberg's (1979)  more technical description of resolution of a conflict s p l i t in terms of scores on the Experiencing Scale (Klein, et a l . 1969) and on the Vocal Quality Scale (Rice and Wagstaff, 1967).  "Resolution performances  appear to be characterized by a shift at some point in the dialogue in the "other" chair to higher levels of experience and more focusedexpressive voice, much as though the person in the "other" chair becomes less c r i t i c a l , softer and more understanding or accepting of the s e l f . " (p. 1 3 ) . Task Analysis Applying the task analytic approach to the study of process in psychotherapy is a sign of the move away from simple outcome studies in therapy.  Rice, Greenberg and Pascual-Leone (1977) stress "the really  interesting questions in psychotherapy research concern the step by step transactions between person and task situation.  We need to shift'our  focus to study what takes place and how i t does so." What is task analysis?  Gagne' (1974), the learning theorist,  defined i t in terms of instruction, " . . . a procedure having the purpose  - 19 -  of identifying different kinds of performances which are outcomes of learning, in order to make possible the specification of optimal instructional conditions for each kind of outcome  a method of 'working back-  wards' from intended learning outcome to the instructional s i t u a t i o n . " (p. 8).  When applied to Gestalt therapy, the outcome is conflict reso-  lution or a freeing up of the c l i e n t ' s a b i l i t y to act or make a decision, and the instructional situation is the therapist intervention.  As we  can see with some refinements and modifications, task analysis can become an appropriate approach to the study of psychotherapy.  Gottman and  Swartz (1976) discuss the method of using task analysis in research as one in which one specifies the l i k e l y components of a successful response and then tests the extent to which performance on the components discriminates between successful and unsuccessful populations. Even more refined and specific to research in psychotherapy, Greenberg (1975) states the f i r s t step as breaking down the complex performance of a single therapy session into a series of events or tasks. For the purpose of this study, the conflict s p l i t is the task under scrutiny.  It is these performance events, not the individual clients  involved, that are the focus.  It is at this point that task analysis  research differs from outcome research.  (Rice and Greenberg, 1974).  In this research, "the s p l i t " is a subtask in the Gestalt event to be studied.  The s p l i t in this case is a kind of affective task,  a problematic aspect of experience that c a l l s for some kind of closure. This study examined twelve events that appear to have reached some kind of closure or resolution and compared them with twelve unresolved events.  - 20 -  Research on the Two Chair Operation and Conflict Resolution Rice stresses the importance of expanding the concept of the c l i n i c i a n - s c i e n t i s t at a time when the trend is to research the effectiveness of various psychotherapeutic alternatives.  They suggest  the task analysis approach to research i s appropriate to the study of psychotherapy because the client in process "is actively working toward one or more goals".  (Rice, et a l , 1978).  Also, the steps of the task  analytic approach can be adapted readily to the study of psychotherapy (as discussed previously in this paper). More s p e c i f i c a l l y , Rice and Greenberg define the different strategy used in a task analytic approach to ensure that the behavior studied is homogenous.  They claim that, "First we should ensure homo-  geneity of behavior in the small groups selected for study and comparison."  "Secondly, and this is the crucial point, instead of selecting  groups of c l i e n t s , we should select for study homogenous groups of events in therapy.  It is events not clients which we propose as the  unit for study, events which can be recognized as having certain specifiable behavioral characteristics in common." (p. 2).  This method i s  employed in this project. The studies in the area of Gestalt two chair work and resolution are limited.  Bohart (1976) found that in counselling analogue  sessions, (established to study a particular effect using subjects) designed to resolve personal anger c o n f l i c t s , using a two chair role play was the only significant intervention.  He states "role playing  can be effective in modifying feelings, attitudes, and behaviors associated with interpersonal conflict . . . t h e greater effectiveness of role play is in accord with the position that insight and emotion must  - 21 -  go hand in hand for change to occur." (p. 11).  He also noted that role  play seemed to be more effective because the client began to become more accepting of the reasons for the provocateurs behavior when they were in role playing dialogue with themselves.  In defense of the ana-  logue procedure, Bohart argued that although the study was significantly different from actual counselling, this type of study--in which procedures are isolated—allows one to see the specific effects of that procedure. In another more convincing analogue study, Greenberg and Clarke (1979) found that "the 'two chair  1  operation is more effective  than empathic reflection in deepening experiencing and bringing about changes in awareness when the client is working on a s p l i t . " (p. 18). Depth of experiencing has been repeatedly shown to correlate with varied measures of successful outcome (Orlinsky and Howard, in press). Therefore, i f the therapist can f a c i l i t a t e high level experiencing, they are instigating change.  In addition, Greenberg and Higgins (1980)  found that the two chair operation when applied to a s p l i t , produced levels of experiencing significantly higher than the focusing intervention. in f u r t h e r s t u d i e s , Greenberg .(1975 and .1980) treated the two chairs as independent systems and found a consistent pattern of experiencing in nine events. chair  1  In the preresolution phase, the 'experiencing  functions at consistently higher level of experiencing (level four  or above) than the 'other c h a i r ' .  Then at 'the merging point the 1  'other chair' increases to levels similar to the 'experiencing c h a i r ' . In the resolution phase both chairs reach levels higher than four.  - 22 -  Greenberg (1980) claims that "this attainment of the 'merging point' by the 'other chair  1  can therefore be regarded as a sufficient con-  dition of a resolution and a signal of the resolution phase."  These  same data were analysed for voice quality and found that the 'other chair  1  uses more of a combination of an energetic, out directed voice  (external: X) and an energyless, restricted voice (limited: L), whereas the 'experiencing chair* uses more of a combination of a high energy emotionally expressive voice (emotional: E and focused: F). From the voice data, i t can be concluded that the 'other chair  1  is  less involved and makes poor contact with i t s e l f and the 'experiencing c h a i r ' , although the proportion of this voice in the 'other chair  1  decreases in the resolution phase, significant at the .05 l e v e l .  This  change appears to occur around the merging point, although there is sometimes focused voice before and, more often, after. cludes:  Greenberg con-  "Change to focused voice does, however, appear to be a neces-  sary condition for resolution.  This change of voice by the other chair  i s , therefore, an important therapeutic cue.  When this voice change  in the 'other chair' is accompanied by an increase in experiencing to the level of the 'experiencing c h a i r , the demarcation event has 1  entered the. resolution phase."  (p. 14).  The findings of this study seem to support the concept of "a reconciliation of two parts by integration.  In the resolution  phase, the 'other chair' appears to soften, i t becomes similar in style to the experiencing chair, is more involved and subjective and describes i t s own feelings more personally." experiencing  i n t h e two..chairs  begin  (p.  27).  The  to integrate.  levels  i n the depth of  The v o i c e d a t a  represent  - 23 -  the change from a person lecturing at_ themselves to one who is in productive dialogue with themselves.  Greenberg's (1975 and 1980) work is  the beginning of the model building phase in a task analysis. Another study, presently in progress, breaks down the process of resolution to even more minute components.  (Johnson, 1980). T h e  model is developed in a concrete way such that each step along the way is i d e n t i f i e d , isolated, and l i k e a task, needs to be completed before moving on to the next.  There are thirteen steps in the model of con-  f l i c t resolution developed by Johnson to be tested later by applying i t to a number of single cases. The following three stages have been abstracted from her more complex thirteen step process, including the major structures underlying resolution performance. win-lose opposition.  The f i r s t stage is characterized by  The top dog intimidates or threatens to get i t s  way and the underdog passively resists with helplessness and avoidance. During the second or merging phase, both sides of the conflict are stated with feeling and empathy for the other, and f i n a l l y in the resolution phase there is mutual l i s t e n i n g , understanding and acceptance of each other.  A kind of acknowledgement of the value of integrating both  characteristics, which were once in deadlock c o n f l i c t , in preparation for some concrete action or movement beyond the stalemate. Conclusively, considering the studies designed to employ the two chair technique, i t appears that i t may be a potent therapeutic tool in conflict resolution. Rationale for Hypotheses Previous and ongoing research suggests that in successful  - 24 -  conflict resolution, a client moves through three identifiable phases. The premise of this study is that with better understanding of the process of therapy, the therapist w i l l be able to recreate the most optimal conditions for affective problem solving and the resulting change. The experiencing and voice quality scales used to extract the patterns and nuances of the process of therapy have been related to positive outcome in affective problem solving. (Rice and Wagstaff, 1967).  (Klein, et a l . 1969)  Also, the'very specific nature of the analy-  sis of the S.A.S.B. and i t s wide application make i t a useful tool in understanding and identifying the therapeutic process.  (Benjamin 1979).  Findings for or against the hypotheses comparing the resolution and non-resolution groups, gives evidence concerning the v a l i d i t y of the concept of the three phase process in conflict resolution. Another aspect of the rationale is the present trend toward process and single case research rather than simple outcome studies. The adaptation and creation of analysis, which provide useful information for c l i n i c a l practice, are of growing importance for psychotherapy, research.  (Bergin et a l . , 1978).  Hypotheses Comparison Hypotheses The f i r s t set of hypotheses and questions compare the two groups, resolution and non-resolution. Hypotheses 1(a)  The other chair of the resolution group w i l l achieve a f f i l i a t i o n significantly more often than w i l l the non-resolution group.  - 25 -  Hypothesis 1(b)  The other chair of the resolution group w i l l have a higher proportion of quadrant one and four behaviors of the S.A.S.B. after the merging point (as defined by hypothesis l a ) .  Assuming that there are two distinct groups, as suggested by hypothesis 1(a) and 1(b), the following hypotheses are addressed. Hypothesis 2(a)  In the resolution phase of the two groups, the resolution group w i l l have a significantly different proportion of F plus E voice in the other chair.  Hypothesis 2(b)  In the resolution phase of the two groups, the resolution group w i l l have a significantly d i f ferent proportion of F plus E voice in the experiencing chair.  Hypothesis 3(a)  In the merging phase of the two groups, the resolution group w i l l have a significantly different proportion of F plus E voice in the experiencing chair.  Hypothesis 3(b)  In the merging phase of the two groups, the resolution group w i l l have a s i g n i f i c a n t l y different proportion of F plus E voice in the other chair.  Hypothesis 4  The other chair changes from external to focused at the beginning of the merging phase (three statements before and/or after) in the resolution group but not in the non-resolution group.  As well as testing the previous hypotheses, the data were gathered and inspected in an effort to answer the following questions.  - 26 -  In further considering the relationship between the groups, i t is expected that 1.  In the opposition phase of the two groups there w i l l be no significant difference in the proportion of F plus E voice in the other chair, and  2.  In the opposition phase of the two groups there w i l l be no significant difference in the proportion of F plus E voice in the experiencing chair.  Phase Hypotheses The second set of hypotheses and questions establish s p e c i f i cally the difference in the phases in conflict resolution performances. The hypotheses are stated in terms of expected scores, changes in scores and comparison of scores between phases using the three main measuring instruments ....experiencing scale, vocal quality scale, and structural analysis of social behavior, S.A.S.B. Hypotheses about Experiencing Hypothesis 5  In the opposition phase the experiencing chair scores at a significantly different level of experiencing than the other chair on the experiencing scale.  Hypothesis 6  In the merging phase the other chair scores at a significantly different level of experiencing than in the opposition phase on the experiencing scale.  As well as testing the previous hypotheses, the data were s c r u t i nized to consider a further question.  Considering the expected change  - 27 -  in level of experiencing in the other chair, i t is expected that 1.  In the merging phase the level of experiencing of the other chair is not significantly different than that of the experiencing chair.  Hypotheses about Vocal Quality Hypothesis 7  The experiencing chair uses a s i g n i f i c a n t l y different proportion of F plus E voice than the other chair in the opposition phase.  Hypothesis 8(a)  The other chair uses a significantly different proportion of F plus E voice in the merging phase than in the opposition phase.  Hypothesis 8(b)  The other chair uses a significantly different proportion of F plus E voice in the resolution phase than in the opposition phase.  The data were also scrutinized to consider the following question. 1.  It is expected that in the non-resolution group there w i l l be no significant difference in the proportion of F plus E voice between the opposition and merging phases.  Hypotheses about S.A.S.B. Hypothesis 9(a)  The experiencing chair in the opposition phase w i l l have a significantly different proportion of quadrant 2 and 3 behaviors than in the resolution phase.  Hypothesis 9(b)  The experiencing chair in the opposition phase w i l l have a significantly different proportion of quadrant 2 and 3 behaviors than in the merging phase.  - 28 -  Hypothesis 10  The experiencing chair during the resolution phase w i l l have a significantly different proportion of quadrant 1 behaviors than from any other quadrant.  - 29 CHAPTER  III  METHODOLOGY Measuring Instruments 1.  The Experiencing Scale The Experiencing Scale (Klein et a l . , 1969) (see Appendix A)  w i l l be used to measure and compare the in-process level of experiencing in the two chairs.  The scale was developed to evaluate the quality of  patient involvement or "experiencing" in psychotherapy. "Experiencing refers to the quality of an individual's experiencing of himself, the extent to which his ongoing, bodily, f e l t flow of experiencing is the basic datum of his awareness and communication about himself, and the extent to which this inner datum is integral to action and thought". (Klein et a l . , 1969, p.l) This seven point scale rating device is particularly useful in psychotherapy research because of i t s s e n s i t i v i t y to changes in client involvement within a single therapy hour.  This is particularly  useful for minute by minute process studies such as t h i s .  The low  levels on this scale are characterized by impersonal or superficial references to the s e l f .  "Moving up the scale, there is a progression  from simple, limited or externalized self references to inwardly elaborated descriptions of feelings" (p. 1).  At the highest levels of  experiencing, exploration of feelings and new awareness, lead to problem solving and greater self understanding. When the experiencing scale was applied to various settings, the overall trend was consistently related to therapeutic outcome, affirming the v a l i d i t y of the scale and the concept of experiencing. On seven studies the rating r e l i a b i l i t i e s were s i g n i f i c a n t , ranging  - 30 -  from rk .76 - .91 modes and .75 - .92 peaks using the Ebel Inter-class R e l i a b i l i t y method which yields an estimate of the r e l i a b i l i t y of the average of the judges ratings. 2.  Structural Analysis of Social Behavior S.A.S.B. The S.A.S.B. scale is used in this paper to measure the  quality of the dialogue in the two chairs.  It is expected that as  the therapy hour progresses, the quality of interaction between the two chairs changes.  The S.A.S.B. scale is particularly useful in this  instance because of i t s s p e c i f i c i t y .  The dialogue can be analyzed  statement by statement and each identified as one of 36 characteri s t i c s on one of three grids, thus allowing the identification of patterns and subtle changes in interaction between the two chairs. The S.A.S.B. is an extension of the Leary c l a s s i f i c a t i o n system.  This model is divided into three two dimensional grids.  The f i r s t grid measures behaviors focusing on others, i . e . , "118 encourage separate identity".  For analyzing Gestalt, two chair  process, the behaviors or dialogue of both chairs w i l l be rated on this f i r s t g r i d , when the focus of the statement is on the other part in the dialogue.  The second grid measures behaviors which focus on  " s e l f " , in the two chair dialogue the behaviors of the experiencing chair and the other chair w i l l be rated on this grid when the comments are about themselves. 218 "own identity standards".  The corresponding behavior to 118 is The third set of behaviors is i n t r a -  psychic or introject of other to self - 318 "let nature unfold." third grid w i l l not. be used for the purpose of this study. demonstrated, the three grids correspond and are interlated.  This  As i s The f i r s t  number of the three digit behavior code refers to the g r i d , 1 for  - 31 -  "focus on other" 2 for "focus on s e l f " , 3 for "intrapsychic". second number refers to the particular position on the grid. number identifies each specific behavior.  The The third  (See Appendix B).  Each of the quadrants is two dimensional.  The horizontal  axis runs from d i s a f f i l i a t i o n to a f f i l i a t i o n and the vertical axis from maximal dependence to maximal independence.  "Each of the points  within the quadrants is made up of mathematically defined proportions of the behaviors described by the axis.  For example, chart point  118, encourage separate identity appears in the f i r s t (upper right hand) quadrant of the focus on other surface, i t consists of 1 unit of a f f i l i a t i o n and 8 units of endorsing of freedom (+1, +8) . . . "The 36 pairs of complements described by the f i r s t two surfaces allow d e f i nition of complementarity in relationship and have clear and specific implications for the relevance of the patients' significant others to interpersonal diagnosis and treatment".  (Benjamin, 1977, p. 7).  S t a t i s t i c a l l y , the S.A.S.B. has been found to be a sound measuring device.  "Validity has been established by factor analysis,  circumplex analysis, auto correlation techniques and dimensional ratings."  (Benjamin, 1977, p. 5).  The S.A.S.B. was used to set psycho-  social treatment goals and in "before during and after" self ratings proved to be effective as a measure of the effectiveness of the therapy. When applied s p e c i f i c a l l y to analysing Gestalt dialogue, r e l i a b i l i t y of interjudge agreement was tested using Cohens Kappa, and found to be .911. Benjamin concludes, "These high Kappas between independent judges establish that despite the complexity, the rules for applying the S.A.S.B. model to therapy transactions are communicable  - 32 -  and can yield consistent judgements among careful independent observers."  (p. 20).  Client Vocal Quality Scale The C.V.Q. has four voice patterns - - focused, externalized, limited, and emotional, each identified in terms of six features. 1) energy, 2) primary stresses, 3) regularity of stresses, 4) pace, 5) timbre and 6) contours.  (See Appendix C).  Greenberg (1979) describes vocal quality as a measure of involvement and processing level in the moment, and, "in a good hour of therapy we expect more focused voice."  For the purpose of this  study i t was hypothesized that the quality of voice is different in each of the three phases.  Most important, more focused voice is  expected at the merging point where the other chair softens and in the resolution phase when the two chairs usually begin to encounter each other in productive dialogue. R e l i a b i l i t y for the C.V.Q. was tested in several ways. Rank order correlations between judges was found to be between .70 and .79 on the four categories. (Rice and Wagstaff, 1967).  Percentage  agreement was .70 and Cohens Kappa, a much more stringent measure, was .49 for the same study. Target Complaints Discomfort Box Scale (Appendix D) The T.C.D.B.S. is a thirteen point scale rating the amount of discomfort the client is experiencing in relation to their present conflict.  For the purpose of this study, i t was administered before  and after the sessions to identify any movement towards resolution.  - 33 -  One of the criterion used to identify resolution events was at least a five point difference between the pre-test and post-test scores.  In  a previous study, Greenberg and Dompierre (1980) found that the T..C.D.B.S. was shown to discriminate between more and less effective psychotherapy sessions. Conflict Resolution Box Scale (Appendix E) The C.R.B.S. was created by Dompierre (1979) for use in her study comparing empathy versus the two chair operation at the s p l i t . The client indicates the degree to which they feel resolved regarding the conflict they have identified and explored in the session.  This  seven point scale ranges from "not at a l l resolved (in the f i r s t box, at the bottom) to "somewhat resolved" (fourth box), to t o t a l l y resolved in the seventh box.  This scale was used as one of the criterion for  closing resolution events in this study.  The client had to score at  least 5 on the scale to be considered a resolution event. Shift in Awareness (Greenberg and Dompierre, 1980) The S.I.A. scale consists of two questions to be answered on a five point scale.  The f i r s t question required the client to identify  i f any shift in awareness occurred, the second, whether the c l i e n t ' s awareness of themselves increased as a result of the session.  The  S.I.A. was administered directly after the session and used in this study as one of the criterion in selecting the resolution events. Design Two groups of twelve Gestalt events were collected for comparison.  The Resolution Group, hypothesized to have a s p e c i f i c ,  - 34 -  identifiable pattern of behavior was selected according to four criteria  (discussed in Subject Selection).  Any events which did not  meet these c r i t e r i a - were considered to be non-resolution. These two groups of events - resolution and non-resolution, were then divided into three phases—opposition, merging and resolution and into two chair—"experiencing" and "other".  Each of these phases  and chairs were rated on the three process scales - - experiencing, S.A.S.B. and voice quality. The research design consisted of a set of comparisons between groups, between chairs and between phases using the scores of the three rating scales.  I n i t i a l l y , the twelve resolution events were compared  with the twelve non-resolution events to test i f in fact the two groups were different.  Then, the other hypotheses were tested, using appropri-  ate non parametric s t a t i s t i c s , to.test the pattern of conflict resolution in the resolution group. Subject Selection The Gestalt events collected for analysis were from actual sessions of clients involved in affective problem solving of real issues.  A l l clients were basically well functioning people exploring  basic problems in l i v i n g .  They were a sample of volunteers seeking  therapy and pursuing their own growth.  The clients were a l l in an  ongoing relationship with the therapists, either in private practice or trainees, in a Gestalt awareness training group experience. The actual incidents chosen were selected on a specified c r i t e r i a of resolution or non-resolution.  To be considered a resolu-  t i o n , both therapist and client had to say the client had resolved  - 35 -  and report a significant s h i f t in awareness leading to a desire to change some behavior.  More s p e c i f i c a l l y , the client and therapist  had to report after the session a score of 5 or more on a 7 point scale ranging from completely resolved to unresolved on the C.R.B.S. Scale.  A second level criterion was that the level of experiencing  during the event must reach level 6--"Feelings v i v i d l y expressed, integrate, conclusive or affirmative".  The third criterion was the  target complaints box scale, measuring how bothered the client was by the issue.  There had to be at least a 5 point difference on the 13  point scale on a pre-test, a post-test session report.  The fourth c r i -  terion was that the therapist must report that, in his view, the client resolved the specific conflict that was worked on in the session by a process of integration.  A non-resolution event was anyone that the  client and therapist said did not resolve and that did not reach level six on the experiencing scale.  Our definition of resolution states  that both client and therapist must acknowledge that the client has resolved, and an objective rater verifies the resolution by rating i t at level six on the experiencing scale. Therapists Five therapists contributed events for this study.  Two were  professors in Counselling Psychology, one was a doctoral student and the other two were practising counsellors with masters degrees in counselling psychology.  A l l the therapists have extensive training  and practise in Gestalt therapy and the two chair technique.  Each of  the five therapists produced at least one resolution event for this : study.  - 36 -  Raters The six raters, two for each of the three measuring instru-  <  ments, were a l l students in counselling psychology at the masters l e v e l . The raters for the experiencing scale were trained for t h i r t y five hours according to "The Experiencing Scale, Training Manual, (Klein et a l . , 1969).  They were then given specific instruction and  rules governing the rating of two chair dialogue.  After sixteen hours  of practise, the raters were checked for inter-rater r e l i a b i l i t y .  The  Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficient produced an.: r of .89 on segments, which provided more information than the statement unit of measure.  On the actual data, which was rated statement by statement,  the raters .overlapped on one-third of the data and had a correlation of r = .77 on randomly selected scores. Training for the S.A.S.B. was done in accordance with the Coding Manual for Using SASB to Rate Typescripts, (Estfoff and Benjamin, 1979).  The raters had twenty-five hours of instruction and fifteen  hours of practise.  The final sessions were group sessions of raters  and trainers working together to create discussion helpful in understanding the S.A.S.B.  The raters were checked for r e l i a b i l i t y before  being given the actual data and checked again on the data.  The post-  training correlation was r = .96, and on selected statements of onethird of the data, the correlation was r = .87. The voice quality raters.were .trained according to Manual For Client Vocal Quality, Volume II, 1979).  Instructions for Raters (Rice et a l . ,  The training was about twenty-five hours of instruction followed  by a r e l i a b i l i t y check.  Voice quality is rated from both a tape recording  - 37 -  and a typescript.  The percentage of agreement on randomly selected  statements was 75. The Cohen's Kappa was .54. The actual data were rated so there was a one-third overlap which was rated by both raters.  In the event that the two raters were  discrepant on any segments, the trainers were called in to re-rate that portion of data for any of the three scales. Data Collection The Gestalt events were collected from the five therapists based on the criterion of resolution or non-resolution.  These sessions  were then transcribed from the point that the client stated an affective problem or conflict and proceeded to engage in the two chair dialogue. Then each client statement was identified and numbered as a unit of measure.  The events range from 42 to 132 segments.  The average length  of the resolution events was 96 statements and 81 statements for the non-resolution events. Scoring Procedure The twenty-four events collected, twelve resolution and twelve non-resolution, were identified by the therapists and researcher according to the c r i t e r i a previously stated.  The typescripts and tapes were  then coded so raters could not identify the group to which they belonged. For Experiencing Scale rating the typescripts were broken into two-page segments.  The raters randomly rated these segments, giving each client  statement a mode score. The Vocal Quality rating and the S.A.S.B. ratings were also done statement by statement, but each typescript was complete.  Each of  the six raters rated two-thirds of the data to provide a r e l i a b i l i t y  - 38 -  check.  When the data were discrepant, the third rater's score was taken. The next step after the rating was complete was to identify  the phases in the resolution group.  According to the d e f i n i t i o n ,  merging begins with two or more quadrant 1 or 4 responses in the other chair on S . A . S . B . , and resolution begins with six on the experiencing scale in either chair.  The same pattern did not occur in the non-  resolution group, so in order to compare the two groups, this group was phased by taking the mean proportion of statements of the three phases in the resolution group and transposing i t on the non-resolution group. The resulting proportions were opposition phase .59, merging .31 and resolution .10.  (See Table 1).  At this point a l l the data were charted on graphs according to chair, phase, and rating on the three scales. lated according to proportions.  Then the data were tabu-  This compensated for the differing  lengths of transcripts, phases and the varying number of scores for each chair or phase or scale. the following information:  A chart was then made for each event containing 1.  Mean experiencing score for both c h a i r s -  experiencing and other, in each phase-opposition, merging and resolution. 2.  The proportion of S.A.S.B. scores for  each quadrant in each phase for both chairs; and 3.  The proportion of responses in each  category of the Voice Quality scale for each phase in both chairs.  (See Table 2).  Procedure of Analysis Due to the non-randomness, small sample size and the dependance of some of the data, the hypotheses were tested by appropriate non-  - 39 -  parametric tests.  The hypothesis stating that the two groups were  different, in that merging occured in the resolution group and not in the non-resolution group, was tested using Fishers Exact test (Hays, 1963) for independent random samples with a small n.  The hypotheses  comparing the two independent groups were tested using the Mann Whitney U test.  This test was chosen because the samples were independent, had  a small n and proportions are ordinal measurement.  The Wilcoxin Rank  Sign test was used to test the hypotheses about the relationships between phases and chairs within the groups for the S.A.S.B. and vocal quality comparisons. small related samples.  This test was used because of i t s application to The matched pairs t ^ test (Marascuilo & McSweeney,  1977) was used to analyse the data of the experiencing scale.  This test  was applicable because of the interval scale of the experiencing rating. To simplify the analysis of the many hypotheses and questions, the data were tabulated onto graphs and charts for each event. Table 2 for example).  (See  The data were then compiled onto tables for each  process scale (see Tables 3,4,5,6,7,8) and f i n a l l y , a table was made for each hypothesis.'  (See Table 9 for example).  The charts and data tables follow in this chapter, the results are presented in Chapter IV and a discussion in Chapter V.  TABLE I PHASING THE NON-RESOLUTION GROUP Non-resolution events were divided into the three phases using the mean proportion of statements in each phase of the resolution group and applying i t to the non-resolution group PROPORTION OF SEGMENTS IN EACH PHASE Resolution Group  Opposition  Merge  Resolution  NUMBER OF SEGMENTS IN EACH PHASE Non-ResT Group  Total number  Opposition  Merge  Resolution  1 A  .72  .15  .12  1B  119  70  37  12  2A  .71  .20  .09  2B  71  42  22  7  3A  .39  .57  .04  3B  46  27  14  5  4A  .39  .33  .28  4B  105  61  33  11  5A  .59  .32  .08  5B  44  26  14  4  6A  .78  .18  .03  6B  76  44  24  8  7A  .31  .66  .02  7B  61  36  19  6  8A  .38  .48  .14  8B  51  30  16  5  9A  .59  .25  .16  9B  42  25  13  4  10A  .71  .17  .12  10B  131  77  41  13  11A  .70  .24  .06  11B  145  85  45  15  12A  .81  .16  .02  12B  82  53  21  8  X .59  X .31  X .10  39 (b)  TABLE II EXAMPLE OF TABULATION OF RAW DATA FOR EACH EVENT the two chairs are separated, the three phases are separated. graph of each chair according to level of experiencing score, £\/&)6T—| C  AJo*> Rfc*oi_u.TnCr9  --4  TABLE  III  MEAN SCORES FOR EACH CHAIR IN EACH PHASE OF RESOLUTION GROUP ON THE EXPERIENCING SCALE INCLUDING NUMBER OF SEGMENTS IN EACH PHASE  Client  Chair 2 3.25  98  71  2  132  94  3.58  3  109  43  2.89  4  46  18  2.92  5  118  70  3.35  98  3.23  125  .  OPPOSITION,,  '1  :  _  Number rofcal • . . i n -lumber-. phase  7  83 .  26  3.00  8  69  26  3.20  9  95  56  3.32  10  09  77  3.58  11  71  50  2.92  12  97  79  3.66  Chair 1 -  2.36 2.31 2.24 2.00 2.86 2.86 • 2.11 • 2.56 2.70 2.68 2.00 3.00  No. o f .  Number in phase  segs.  MERGE Chair 2 . 3.28  15 26 62  4.00  15  4.00  0  38  4.13  23  3.75  55  2.83  33  3.56  24  4.00  19  4.86  17  4.25  16  4.10  m phase.  Chair 1 3.67 4.52 3.86 4.07 3.77 4.29 3.54 4.79 4.53 3.60 4.00 4.67  12 12  RESOLUTION Chair 2 4.83 5.71  4  Chair 1  6.00 6.00  13  5.53  10  5.67  4  5.60  2  6.00  10  5.50  15  5.78  13  5.46  4  6.00  2  6.00  6.00  5.00 4.50  6.00  TABLE IV MEAN SCORES FOR EACH CHAIR IN EACH PHASE OF NON-RESOLUTION GROUP ON THE EXPERIENCING SCALE INCLUDING NUMBER OF SEGMENTS IN EACH PHASE  Client  PHASE Segments  OPPOSITION Chair 2 Chair 1  T n r a l Tn pha<=  1  119  70  Segments In  3.24  2  71  42  2.71  3  46  27  3.00  4  105  61  2.57  5  44  26  2.95  6  76  44  2.38  7  61  36  2.78  8  51  30  2.84  9  42  25  2.50  10  131  77  2.71  11  145  85  3.54  12  82  46  2.84  2.36 2.56 2.14 2.57 2.30 2.08 2.45 2.44 2.21 2.95 2.44  In  phase  37 2.80  MERGING Chair 2 Chair 1 Segments 2.73  22  3.10  14  3.00  33  2.36  14  3.50  24  2.53  19  2.41  16  2.62  13  2.83  41  3.77  45  3.62  25  2.95  2.40 2.67 2.70 2.20 2.40 2.20 3.00 2.67 2,57 2.47 3.10 2.58  RESOLUTION Chair 2 Chair 1  phase  12  2.44  7  2.50  5  2.75  11  3.00  4  3.75  8  2.50  6  2.75  5  2.67  4  2.25  13  2.40  15  3.75  11  2.80  2.00 2.60 3.00  2.00 2.00 2.00  2.13 3.00 2.34  TABLE V PROPORION OF STATEMENTS IN EACH QUADRANT OF THE STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL BEHAVIOR SCALE FOR RESOLUTION GROUP  Quadrant A 1 Ch.2 2  Ch. 1  1  OPPOSITION PHASE 2 3  .56 .63  .15 .17  .09 .06  3  .46  4  .67  5  .58  6  .65  7  .35  8  .50  9  .86  10  .79  11  .57  .03  12  .15  .19  .17 .08 .06 .10  .04 .08  .08  .06  .20 .23 .27 .25  .08  .27  .05  .31  .24  .44  .35  .08 .27 .09  .05  .07 .05  .15  .26  .14 .10 .30 .53  .73 .83 .94 .67 .81 .50 .80 .85 .63 .76  1 .00 .63  4 .15 .08  .04  .23  .06  .06 .50  .07  MERGING 2 3  1 .29  .11  .96  .10 .08 .03  1 .00 .63 .47 .40 .47 .83 .93  .19  .50  .14  .83  .05  .71  .38  .76 .17  4  .03  .50  .32  .67  .13  .64 1 .00 .62  .04 .03  .60 .45  .83  .37 .16  .08 .13  .37 .05 .20 .37 .17 .07  .80 .90  .08  .47  .04  .21  .50 .08  .08  1 .63 .04 .18 .20 .28  .23 .27 .55 .20 .10 .17  RESOLUTION 2 3  4  1 .00 .86  .69 .87 1 .00  .14  1 .00 1 .00  .75  .31 .13  .13  .13  1 .00 .44 .92 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00  .50 .40  1 .00  .11 .08  .44  .50 .60  TABLE V I  PROPORTION OF STATEMENTS IN EACH QUADRANT OF THE STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS 'OF SOCIAL BEHAVIOR SCALE IN THE NON-RESOLUTION EVENTS PHASE •  OPPOSITION  Event  Quadran t 1  B1  Chair 2 .45 "  2  i.  3 4 5  "  6 7 8  "  9 10 11 12  "• "  .67  1 2 .67 1 2 .44 1 2 ; .76 1 2 .65 1 2 .57 1 2 1.00 1 2 .50 1 2 .37 1 2 .33 1 2 .58 1  3  4  .45 .27  1 2  2  .15  .09  .13 .10  .23  .75  .10  .75  .63  .29  .30,  .50 .04  .09  .31  .06 .13  .10 .06 .13  .04 .08  .15  .07 .50  .22 .20  .13 .14  .54  .04 .07  .50  .04  1 .00  .60 .40  1 .00  .75 .05  .40  .25  .20  .39 1 .00 .15 1 .00 .08 ••.77 .33 .33 .33 .50 .33 .17 .50 .29 .71 .59 .41 .80 .89 .11 .09 .48 .15 .27 .30 , .23 .46 .08 .23 .12 .25 .75 .63 .12 .13 .50 .25 .50  .88  .33  .60  1 .00  1 .00  .75  .13  .17  .25  .55  .13  .39  .40  .80  .82  .18  ;33 1 .00  1 .00 .06  .92'  4  .33  • 33'  .20 .18  .80 .30  3  1 .00  .17  .80  .20  -  2  .91  .85 .05  .20  .19  .67  1  .10 .09  .11  4  .80  .07  .90  .31 .Oa  .08  3 .55  .13  .50 .22  .02  2  .45  .18 .50  .25  1  .67  .07  RESOLUTION  MERGING  .11  .11  1 .00 .25  .50  .25 1 .00  :  1 .00 .50 .20 1 .00 .10  .60 1 .00 .25 1 .00  TABLE VII PROPORTION OF STATEMENTS IN EACH VOCAL CATEGORY FOR RESOLUTION GROUP PHASE Cateqory A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  OPPOSITION F .63 .59 .38 .25 .21 .49 .41 .60 .26 .51 .50 .28  E .45 .06 .35 .27 .17 .17  X .37 .55 .33 .90 .27 .65 .08 .50 .791 .00 .44 .51 .56 .711 .00 .31 .30 .62 .15 .74 .85 .32 .47 .56 .07 .06 .42 .93 .14 .18 .14 .54 .71  L  F .71  .07 .03 .08 .74 .50 .33 1.00 .53 1.00 .38 .10 .06 .78 .20 .02 .12 .64 .03 .63 .40  MERGING RESOLUTION E L E X F X .7b .29 .2b 1 .OU .63 .37 1 .00 .40 .57 .21 .21 .21 .06 .75 .36 .14 .36 .14 .85 .32 .47 .68 .67 .80 .33 1 .00 1 .00 .30 .59 .69 .03 1 .00 .67 .22 .33 .88 .50 .13 .47 .20 .60 .53 .90 .50 .10 .80 .36 .20 .15 .85 .78 .38 .22 1 .00 1 .00 .50 .30 .33 . JO .17  Categories  F E X L  -  Focused Emotional External Limited  L .60 .25 .20 .50 .50  .15  TABLE VIII PROPORTION OF STATEMENTS IN EACH VOCAL CATEGORY FOR NON-RESOLUTION GROUP OPPOSITION PHASE MERGING Category Chair  2  B 1  .38  2  .14  3  .5  4  .23  5  .26  6  .65  7  .78  8  .1  9  .13  10  .35  11  .30  12  .64  F  1  2  E  1  2 .62  .61  .86 .5  .2  .74  .07  .74 .26  .20  .17  .85  .9 .87  .24 .125 .4  .65 .04  .66 .36  X  1  2  .33  L  1 06  1.0 .8 .93 1.00 .80 .08 1 .0 1.00 .76 .875 .6  2 .46 .3  F  1 .5  E 2 1  2 .54 .7 1.0  .02  .04 .50  .09  .84  .04  .77  08  .20  .80  .96 .50 .16  .61  .43  .57  .28 .48  .14 .09 .29  1  .67 .69 .52  2  L  1  .5  1.0 1 .0 .80 1.00 .15  .20 1 .00  1.0  F  1 .67  .8  .06  .91  .03  E 2 1  2 .6 .5  .25  .75  .09  .91  .25  .25  1 .00 .33  .17 .50  .25  1 .0  .71  2 .4  .5  .08  .39  .33  X  RESOLUTION  .3 .37 .6  1.00  .67 .75  .24  .2  .7 .63 .4  X  1  2  .33 1.0 1 .0 .50 .83 .50 1.0  .86 1.0 .8  L  1  39 (1)  TABLE IX EXAMPLE OF DATA TABULATION FOR EACH HYPOTHESES HYPOTHESIS 1 b OTHER CHAIR MERGING PHASE Resolution Group  Non-Resolution Group  1  1 .00  .13  2  1 .00  .09  3  .68  .30  4  .87  .00  5  .92  .20  6  1 .00  .00  7  .85  .00  8  .87  .33  9  1 .00  .29  10  1 .00  .11  11  1 .00  .46  12  1 .00  .37  Event p R 0 P 0 R T I 0 N 0 F A F F I L I A T I 0 N  39  (j)  TABLE X  FREQUENCY OF AFFILIATION AT THE MERGING PHASE FOR THE TWO GROUPS HYPOTHESIS 1 a OTHER CHAIR Resolution Group  Non-Resolution Group  A  1  Yes  No  F  2  Yes  No  F  3  Yes  No  I  4  Yes  No  L  5  Yes  No  I  6  Yes  No  A  7  Yes  No  T  8  Yes  No  I  9  Yes  No  0  10  Yes  No  N  11  Yes  No  12  Yes  No  39 (k)  TABLE XI  FREQUENCY OF FOCUS VOICE AT MERGING FOR RESOLUTION AND NON-RESOLUTION EVENTS HYPOTHESIS 4 OTHER CHAIR MERGE PHASE Resolution  Non-Resol  F  1  Yes  No  0  2  Yes  No  C  3  Yes  No  U  4  Yes  No  S  5  Yes  No  6  Yes  Yes  V  7  No.  No  0  8  Yes  No  I  9  Yes  No  c  10  Yes  No  E  11  Yes  No  12  Yes  No  'i  - 40 -  CHAPTER IV RESULTS This chapter presents a l l the s t a t i s t i c a l analyses performed on the data.  The tests for each of the hypotheses and questions are  discussed individually in this chapter and summarized in Chapter V, to show the pattern of resolution events.  The main research question  is whether events identified as resolved are associated with different phase related behaviors, and whether the non-resolution events do not show this pattern. Results of Between Group Comparisons Hypothesis 1(a)  The other chair of the resolution group w i l l achieve a f f i l i a t i o n significantly more often than w i l l the non-resolution group.  It was found using Fishers Exact Test (Hays 1963) (Table 10) p <.001 with d.f. =11.  It appears that the resolution group in this  sample a f f i l i a t e d significantly more often than the non-resolution group. Hypotheses 1(b)  The other chair of the resolution group w i l l have a higher proportion of quadrant one and four behaviors of the S.A.S.B. after the merging point (as defined by hypothesis 1(a)).  Using the Mann Whitney U Test (Marascuilo and McSweeney, 1977), i t was found U = 0, p < .01 and d.f. = 11. (Table 5 and 6). This significantly greater proportion of a f f i l i a t i v e behavior in the resolution group supports the f i r s t hypothesis that in fact the two groups were different.  Since the two groups were different, i t was  appropriate to consider the hypotheses based on that assumption.  - 41 -  Hypothesis 2(a)  In the resolution phase of the two groups the resolution group w i l l have a s i g n i ficantly different proportion of F plus E voice in the other chair.  The Mann Whitney U Test produced U = 21, p <.01, d.f. = 10 (Table 7 and 8), indicating that there was more focused voice in the resolution events than the non-resolution events in the other chair. Hypothesis 2(b)  In the resolution phase of the two groups the resolution group w i l l have a s i g n i ficantly different proportion of F plus E voice in the experiencing chair.  The Mann Whitney U Test produced U = 5, p<".01 with d.f. = 5, indicating that the experiencing chair in the resolution phase uses more F plus E voice in the resolution group than in the non-resolution group. Hypothesis 3(a)  In the merging phase of the two groups, the resolution group w i l l have a significantly different proportion of F plus voice in the experiencing chair.  It was found U = 34, p <.05, and d.f. = 10.  (Table 7 and 8).  This indicates that in the resolution group the experiencing chair uses more F plus E voice in the merging phase. Hypothesis 3(b)  In the merging phase of the two groups, the resolution group w i l l have a s i g n i f i c a n t l y different proportion of F plus E voice in the other chair.  The test produced U = 15, p<\01, with d.f. = 10,  (Table 7 &  indicating that the other chair in the resolution group also uses more F plus E voice. Hypothesis 4  The other chair changes from external to focused at the beginning of the merging phase (three statements before and/or after) in the resolution group but not in the nonresolution group.  - 42 -  Fishers Exact Test was used and produced p <.001 with d.f. = 11 (Table 11), indicating that the resolution group became focused at the merging point significantly more often than did the non-resolution group. Question 1 In the opposition phase of the two groups there w i l l be no significant difference in the proportion of F plus E voice in the other chair, or 2 in the experiencing chair. The Mann Whitney U test produced U = 56.5, p ^ . 0 5 , with d.f. = 11.  (Table 7 & 8).  There was no significant difference in the  proportion of F plus E voice in the other chair.  The same test for  question 2 was found to give U = 62, p N.05, with d.f. = 11, also, not s t a t i s t i c a l l y significant difference between the two groups in the amount of F plus E voice in the experiencing chair. Results of Phase Hypotheses in the Resolution Group Hypothesis 5  In the opposition phase the experiencing chair scores at a significantly different level of experiencing than the other chair on the experiencing scale.  The Matched Pairs t Test produced t = 10.98, p ^ . 0 0 1 , with d.f. = 11.  (Table 3 and 4).  This result suggests hypothesis 5, the  experiencing chair scores higher on the experiencing scale than the other chair. Hypothesis 6  In the merging phase the other chair scores at a significantly different level of experiencing than in the opposition phase, on the experiencing scale.  With t = 8.32, p ^ . 0 0 1 , and d.f. = 11 (Table 3 and 4), i t appears that the level of experiencing in the other.chair during merging is higher than in the opposition phase.  - 43 -  Question 1 In the merging phase the level of experiencing of the other chair is not significantly different than that of the experiencing chair. The t test produced t = - . 3 6 , p ^ . 0 5 , with d.f. = 11. (Table 3 and 4).  There was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y significant difference  between the two chairs in the merging phase. Hypothesis 7  The experiencing chair uses a significantly different proportion of F plus E voice than the other chair in the opposition phase.  The Wilcoxam Matched Pairs Signed Ranks Test was applied to the data.  It was found that T = 0, p<.01, with d.f. = 11.  (Table  7 and 8).  This score indicates that the experiencing chair uses a  significantly higher proportion of F plus E voice than does the other chair. Hypothesis 8(a)  The other chair uses a significantly different proportion of F plus E voice in the merging phase than in the opposition phase.  With T = 0, p<.01, with d.f. = 11 (Table 7 and 8), i t appears that the other chair uses higher proportion of F plus E voice in the merging phase. Hypothesis 8(b)  The other chair uses a significantly d i f f e r ent proportion of F plus E voice in the resolution phase than in the opposition phase.  The test produced T = 0, p= .05, with d.f. = 5. 7 and 8).  (Table  This test was not significant at the .05 level because i t  was performed with n = 6, the result of fewer instances of statements in the resolution phase for the other chair.  Often during this phase  one of the two chairs were not present, thus creating empty c e l l s in the analysis.  - 44 -  Question 1 It is expected that in the non-resolution group there w i l l be no significant d i f f e r ence in the proportion of F plus E voice bectween the opposition and merging phases. It was found that T = 25, p^.0'5 and d.f. = 11. 7 and 8 ) .  (Table  There appears to be no significant difference in the pro-  portion of F plus E voice between the merging and opposition phase of the non-resolution group. Hypothesis 9(a)  The experiencing chair in the opposition phase w i l l have a significantly different proportion of quadrant two and three behaviors than in the resolution phase.  It was found when the Wilcoxin test was applied that T = 2, p ^ . 0 1 , with d.f. = 8.  (Table 5 and 6).  This indicates that the  experiencing chair uses more F plus E voice in the resolution phase than in the opposition phase. Hypothesis 9(b)  The experiencing chair in the opposition phase w i l l have significantly different proportion of quadrant 2 and 3 behaviors than in the merging phase.  With T = 1, p<.01, with d.f. = 11, (Table 5 and 6) i t is apparent that the experiencing chair changes from quadrant 2 and 3 behaviors (unfriendly and controlling) in the merging phase. Hypothesis 10  The experiencing chair during the resolution phase w i l l have a significantly d i f ferent proportion of quadrant behaviors than any other quadrant. The Wilcoxin test produced T = 1, p < . 0 1 , with d.f. = 10. (Table 5 and 6).  This indicates a significantly higher proportion of  quadrant 1 responses ( a f f i l i a t i v e and independent) in the resolution phase in the experiencing chair.  CHAPTER V DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS  Discussion This chapter describes the data in terms of the expected patterns of behavior in successful resolution events as compared to nonresolution events.  The client behavior patterns, as measured by each  of the process measures, are discussed for the resolution events.  The  underlying premise of this study is that increased awareness of the process of resolution w i l l help therapists f a c i l i t a t e their clients in solving affective problems.  The patterns of behavior w i l l be described  in terms of each process measure. Experiencing Scale Patterns The resolution events were chosen because they were rated on this scale at level 6, (synthesis of readily accessible feelings and experiences to resolve personally significant issues).  Then i t was  found, as expected, that the beginning of a therapy session is characterized by conflict between two opposing parts of the person.  During  this phase, the level of experiencing of the other chair is about level 2 (behavioral or intellectual self-description), while the experiencing chair is at about level 4 (description of feelings and personal experiences).  The "softening" or beginning of negotiation between the two  chairs, apparently necessary for resolution to occur, is indicated by • the change in the level of experiencing of the other chair.  During the  merging phase, there is no s t a t i s t i c a l l y significant difference between  - 46 -  the two chairs; in level of experiencing measured by the Experiencing Scale, they both function at level 4 and 5 (problems or propositions about feelings and personal experiences).  It is interesting that in  the resolution phase the two chairs are often d i f f i c u l t to discriminate. In fact, in half of the resolution events, the final phase is dominated by responses from the other chair but are not significantly different in level of experiencing than those containing only responses from the experiencing chair.  This leads support to the concept of resolution  being the result of integration of the two parts in a c o n f l i c t . Although there was no apparent pattern in the non-resolution events, i t was interesting to note that as well as l i t t l e difference between the level of experiencing of the two chairs, there were fewer responses from the other chair.  Perhaps the reluctance of the client  to acknowledge and articulate their disowned feelings and thoughts, in the other chair, or to engage in the two chair dialogue also hinders them from seeing and experiencing their strengths and thus, integration does not occur.  Another observation about the experiencing data was  that in the resolution group, even in the opposition phase, there seemed to be a higher level of experiencing in the experiencing chair. Perhaps clients that resolve conflicts are more bothered by their conflict and/or more ready to be open with their feelings, which seems to aid resolution, Vocal Quality Patterns This scale seemed to be the most sensitive in picking up the "softening" necessary for productive dialogue at the merging.  The  raters consistently agreed on statements rated focused at the beginning of  - 47 _ the merging phase, and the data indicated that focused voice is an essential part of a true merging. had focused voice at merging.  Eleven of the twelve resolution events  As well as focused voice appearing at c r i t i -  cal points in the resolution events, the pattern seems to,show an increase in the proportion of focused plus emotional voice quality.  The propor-  tion of F plus E increases from the opposition to merging to resolution phase for both chairs.  Similar to the experiencing pattern, the soften-  ing of the other chair is indicated by the frequency of F plus E voice at merging occurring significantly more often in resolution events. There was also a significant increase in the proportion of F plus E voice in the merging phase as compared to the opposition phase in the resolution group. As expected, the non-resolution group does not show significant difference in F plus E voice between the three phases.  Contrary to the  pattern of experiencing, both groups appear to start the sessions at similar levels in voice quality. Structural Analysis of Social Behavior Patterns The S.A.S.B. scale was found to be a most useful instrument in process analysis.  Although not previously used to analyze Gestalt two  chair dialogue, i t was found to help in defining the merging point and identifying a measurable pattern of client responses.  For the purpose  of this study, only two categories of the system were used.  Quadrant  2 and 3 responses (unfriendly and controlling) were combined, as were quadrant 1 and 4 responses ( a f f i l i a t i v e and independent).  As expected,  the c o n f l i c t between the two chairs in opposition was demonstrated by both chairs responding with more controlling, unfriendly statements. Further scrutiny suggests that the other chair was more controlling  - 48, . (quadrant 3), while the experiencing chair was more whining or excusing (quadrant 2).  Although the experiencing chair had a higher proportion  of 1 and 4 behaviors in opposition i t was similar to the other chair in merging, suggesting more productive dialogue is necessary for resolution to occur.  Then in the resolution phase, almost a l l the responses were  from quadrant 1 (most a f f i l i a t i v e and most independent).  It appears as  though both chairs become one and do not respond with c r i t i c i s m or manipulation. In the non-resolution group, there was no significant d i f ference in the proportion of a f f i l i a t i v e behavior in either chair in any of the phases.  Compared to the resolution group, both chairs had s i g n i f i -  cantly more quadrant 2 and 3 behaviors in a l l the phases. In summary, the proposed model of c o n f l i c t resolution using the Gestalt two chair approach was supported by results of this study. Low level experiencing, h o s t i l e , controlling response and external voice in the other chair in the opposition phase changes to greater openness, more focused voice and greater a f f i l i a t i o n in the merging phase.  This  trend culminates in even higher levels of these characteristics.  The  idea of integration of the two opposing sides i s supported by the apparent cooperation in the merging phase and that difference in the two chairs in the resolution phase is often not discernible.  This distinct i d e n t i -  fiable pattern also adds support to the fact that there are significant differences between resolved and unresolved events. Conclusions Inspection of the raw data and the results of the s t a t i s t i c a l analysis suggest that identification of s p l i t s or affective problems and the subsequent application of the Gestalt two chair technique is a  powerful tool in psychotherapy.  There actually appears to be two separate  systems working in opposition that when integrated, lead to better functioning. The task analysis approach applied to the study of psychotherapy, appears to be successful.  The idealized model of conflict reso-  lution was presented and then tested.  Developing a theoretical system  and then applying i t to actual events deepens the exploration and knowledge of the numerous underlying influences in a therapy session.  In  this study, the data appeared to confirm the idealized model of conflict resolution.  When there is a clearer understanding of the characteristics  of successful resolution events, the therapist can work to create optimum therapeutic interventions. The data of this study also supports the literature which suggests integration as a mechanism of conflict resolution (Perls et a l . , 1951) and confirms the model i n i t i a l l y proposed by Greenberg (1980). The concept of a three-phase process in resolving a s p l i t has added support.  It seems necessary that the person in conflict experience and  articulate both sides of the c o n f l i c t . to and acknowledge each other.  Then the two parts need to l i s t e n  At this point, the side that is usually  controlling, threatening and demanding must soften and allow the apparently more passive side to be heard.  When the passive part asserts  i t s e l f , and the aggressive side softens, productive dialogue or negotiation begins.  This is characterized by both sides stating their feelings  and needs with mutual respect, and often results in the client appreciating a l l parts of himself.  This new awareness helps the client resolve  the present conflict and hopefully, w i l l be followed by positive behavioral change.  - 5G> -  Considering the relative infancy of in-process research, i t is important to note that attempting to explore and expose the underlying performance patterns from vast amounts of data appears to be successful.  There seems to be potential for this type of research to  develop to the point of practical application so i t can enhance c l i n i c a l practise in the area of therapeutic intervention and change, and i l l u minate phenomenon previously thought to be intangible and too complex to understand. Recommendations A logical follow-up to the findings of this study would be to follow c l i e n t s , who, according to the three process measures, have resolved real l i f e conflicts in therapy, and determine the actual effect of this resolution on their behavior.  Another interesting and practical  study would be to ask clients to identify the most potent therapist interventions in a therapy session. Now that some of the components of successful conflict resolution have been i d e n t i f i e d , i t would be helpful to develop appropriate therapist interventions that could expedite the resolution process.  It  would also be interesting to compare therapist behavior between resolved and unresolved events. Considering the wide application of the S.A.S.B. scale, i t could probably be used to i t s f u l l capacity, using a l l three surfaces and nine tracks, to give an even more in-depth understanding of in-process behavior.  As well as analysing resolution events, i t would be helpful  to destructure non-resolution events for characteristics which seem to inhibit resolution or components associated with productive process that are missing.  Implications The results of this study have implications for c l i n i c a l pract i s e , therapist training and in-process research. For the c l i n i c i a n , knowledge of the essential components in successful resolution events would help them understand the process, and work toward appropriate interventions to promote the optimum problem solving climate.  With the use of these process measures, the c l i n i c i a n  w i l l be able to measure progress and change in c l i e n t s .  Perhaps these  measures could be the basis of a therapist evaluation system. The implications for therapist training are that the i d e n t i fication of a s p l i t and the two chair intervention have been found again to be a potent therapeutic t o o l .  Training programs need to teach students  measures such as the Experiencing Scale, S.A.S.B. and Vocal Q u a l i t y , - associated with productive therapy.  The model of c o n f l i c t resolution  defined by specific measures, i s a framework within which the student can experiment and learn. This study lends support to the present trend to intensive in-process research.  The outcome of examining in detail large amounts  of data for a single therapeutic event seems to provide an insight into the l i t t l e known realm of human behavior.  It appears as though the  development of a theoretical framework, in this case of conflict resolut i o n , and the subsequent testing of this theory,is a viable approach to exploring these new frontiers.  The final implication being, that i n -  process research must continue to be refined to meet the needs of the researcher and the c l i n i c i a n striving for more effective therapeutic techniques.  - 52 BIBLIOGRAPHY  Baker, E.  The differential effects of two psychotherapeutic approaches on c l i e n t perception. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 1960, ]_, 46-50.  Bandler, R. & Grinder, J . The Structure of Magic. Vol. 1 1 . , Palo Alto Science and Behavior Books, 1975. Battle, C.C., Imber, S . D . , Hoehn-Saric, R., Stone, A.R., Nash, E.H. & Frank, J.D. Target Complaints as c r i t e r i a of improvement. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 1966, 2fJ: 184-192. Baumgardner, P. Legacy from F r i t z : Gifts from Lake Cowichan. Palo Alto C a l i f : Science and Behavior Books, 1975. Benjamin, L.S. A biological model for understanding the behavior of individuals. Tn~: J . Westman (Ed.). Individual ~ differences in children. New York: Wiley, 1973. Benjamin, L.S. Structural analysis of social behavior. logical Review 1974, 81, 392-425.  Psycho-  Benjamin, L.S. Structural analysis of a family in therapy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1 977, 45, 391 -406. Benjamin, L.S. Structural analysis of differentiation f a i l u r e . Psychiatry, 1 979, 42_, 1-23. Bergin, A. & Lambert, M. Evaluation of Therapeutic Outcomes, Handbook of Psychotherapy and Behavior Change, Garfield, F., Bergin, A. New York: Wiley, 1978. Bohart, A.C. Role-playing and interpersonal c o n f l i c t reduction. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 1977, 30, 311-318. Fagan, J . & Shepherd, I. (Eds.). Gestalt Therapy Now. Science and Behavior, 1970.  Palo A l t o :  Gottman, J . & Swartz Toward a Task Analysis of Assertive Behavior, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1976, 89-117. Greenberg, L.S. A task therapeutic approach to the study of psychotherapeutic events. Unpublished doctoral dissertation: York University, 1975.  - 53 -  Greenberg, L.S., & Clarke, K. The differential effects of the two-chair experiment and empathic reflections at a conflict marker. Journal of Counselling Psychology, . 1 979. (a), 26s 1-8. Greenberg, L.S., & Dompierre, L. Differential effects of Gestalt two-chair dialogue and empathic reflection at a s p l i t in therapy. (Unpublished paper 1979). Greenberg, L.S. Resolving s p l i t s : The two-chair technique. Psychotherapy, Theory, Research and Practice, 1979, 1_6, 310-318. Greenberg, L.S. An intensive analysis of recurring events from the practice of Gestalt therapy. Psychotherapy, Theory, Research and Practice, in press, 1980. Greenberg, L.S. & Rice, L. The specific effects of Gestalt intervention. Psychotherapy, Theory, Research and Practice. In press. Greenberg, L.S. Advances in c l i n i c a l intervention research: A decade review. Submitted to the Canadian Psychologist, 1980. Hatcher, C. & Himelstein, P. (Eds.). The Handbook of Gestalt Therapy New York: Jason Saranson Inc. 1976. Hays, W.L.  Statistics For Psychologists. , Winston Inc. 1963.  New York:  Holt, Rinehart &  Hersen, M. & Barlow, D. Single case experimental designs: Strategies for studying behavior change. New York: Pergamon Press, 1976. Johnson, N.  Model building and intensive analysis of Gestalt events. Unpublished Masters thesis 1980, U.B.C.  Klein, M., Mathieu, P., Keisler, D. & Gendlin, E. scale. Wiseman Psychiatric Institute: Latner, J .  The Gestalt therapy book. 1 973.  New York:  The experiencing Madison Wise. 1969. The Julian Press,  Marascuilo, L. & McSweeney, M. Non Parametric S t a t i s t i c s and Distribution Free Methods for the Social Sciences. California: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co., 1 977. Orlinsky, D. & Howard, K. The relation of process to outcome in psychotherapy. In S.L. Garfield & A.E. Bergin (Eds.) Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (2nd Ed.). New York: Wiley, 1978.  - 54 -  Perls, F.. Hefferline, R., and Goodman, P., New York: Delta, 1951. Perls, F.,  Gestalt Therapy.  Four lectures in J . Fagan and I. Shepherd (Eds.) Gestalt therapy now. Palo Alto^Science & Behavior, 1970.  Polster, E., & Polster, M. Gestalt therapy integrated. New York: Brunner/Mazel, 1973. Rice, L., Koke, C , Greenberg, L., & Wagstaff, A.. Manual for client voice qua!ity. Toronto: York University Counselling and Development Centre, 1979. Rice, L., & Wagstaff, A. Client voice quality and expressive style as indexes of productive psychotherapy. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1 967, 31_, 557-563. Rice, L., & Greenberg, L., & Pascual-Leone, J . , The c l i n i c i a n s c i e n t i s t : Redirecting a needed resource (submitted for publication, 1978). Wexler, D.A. Self Actualization and Cognitive Processes Journal of Consulting and CIinical.Psychology. 1974, 42, 47-53. Zinker, J .  Creative process in Gestalt therapy. Brunner/Mazel, 1977.  New York:  - 55 APPENDIX A  Short Form of EXP Scale  Stage  Content  Treatment  External events; refusal to participate.  Impersonal, detached.  External events; behavioral or intellectual self-description.  Interested, personal self-participation.  Personal reactions to external events; limited self-descriptions; behavioral descriptions of feelings.  Reactive, emotiona l l y involved.  4  Descriptions of feelings and personal experiences.  Self-descriptive; associative.  5  Problems or propositions about feelings and personal experiences.  Exploratory, elaborative, hypothetical.  Synthesis of readily accessible feelings and experiences to resolve personally significant issues.  Feelings v i v i d l y expressed, integrative, conclusive or a f f i r mative .  F u l l , easy presentation of experiencing; a l l elements confidently integrated.  Expansive, i l l u m i nating, confident, buoyant.  1  7  - 56 APPENDIX B Structural Analysis of Social Behavior (SASB) 120 Endorse freedom  INTERPERSONAL  OTHER  Uncaringly let go 128 Forget 127 Ignore, pretend not there 126 Neglect interests, needs 125 Illogical Initiation 124 Abandon, leave in lurch 123 Starve, cut out 122 Angry dismiss, reiect 121 jAnnihilating attack 130 Approach menacingiy 131 Rip off, orain 132 Punish, take revenge 133 Delude, divert, mislead 134 Accuse, blame 135 Put down, act superior 136 Intrude, block, restrict 137 Enforce conformity 138  118 Encourage separate identiry 117 You can do it fine 116 Carefully, fairly consider 115 Friendly listen 114 Show empathic understanding 113 Confirm as OK as is 112 Stroke, soothe, C2lm 111 Warmly welcome  110 Tender sexuality 141 Friendly invite 142 Provide for. nurture 143 Protect, back up -I 144 Sensible analysis 145 Constructive stimulate 146 Pamper, overindulge 147 Benevolent monitor, remind 148 Specify what's best  Manage, control 140 220 Freely come and go  SELF  Go own separate way 228 Defy, do opposite 227 Wall-off, nondisclose 226 Busy with own thing 225 Noncontingent reaction 224 Detach, weep alone 223 Refuse assistance, care 222 Flee, escape, withdraw 221 r—  Desperate protest 230 —j—  218 Own identity, standards 217 Assert on own 216 "Put cards on the table" 215 Openly disclose, reveal 214 Clearly express —1 213 Enthusiastic showing -*—< 212 Relax, flow, enjoy 211 Joyful approach  I  I I  Wary, fearful 231 I Sacrifice greatly 232 Appease, scurry 233 Uncomprehending agree 234 Whine, defend, justify 235 Sulk, act put upon 236 Apathetic compliance 237 Follow rules, proper 238  —  210 Ecstatic response  241 Follow, maintain contact 242 Accept caretaking 243 Ask, trust, count on 244 Accept reason 245 Take in, learn from 246 Cling, depend 247 Defer, overconform 248 Submerge into role  Yield, submit, give in 240 320 Happy-go-lucky  INTRAPSYCHIC  Introject of OTHER TO SELF  Drift with the moment 328 Neglect options 327 Fantasy, dream 325 Neglect own potential 325 Undefined, unknown self 324 Reckless 323 Ignore own basic needs 322 Rejec:. dismiss self 321  Torture, annihilate self 330 "  r  Menace to self 331 " Drain, overburden self 332 Venqeful self punish 333 Deceive, divert self 334 Guilt, blame, bad self 335 Doubt, put sell down 336 Restrain, hold back self 3^7 Force propriety 338  318 Let nature unfold 317 Let self do it. confident 316 Balanced self acceptance •t 315 Explore, listen to inner self J—» 314 Integrated, solid core 313 Pleased with self 312 Stroke, soothe self 311 Entertain, enjoy self • 310 Love, cherish self 341 Seek best for self 2 Nurture, restore self 343 Protect self 344 Examine, analyze self 345 Practice, oecome accomplished 346 Self pamper, indulge 347 Benevolent eye on self 34S Force ideal identiry  Control, manage self 340  - 56a-  APPENDI.X C  VOCAL QUALITY RATING SCALE The characteristics of the four different patterns are as follows: A.  Focused 1.  Energy The energy is f a i r l y high.  Pitch is moderate to low, with  appropriate loudness. 2.  Primary Stresses Primary stresses are achieved more by an increase in loudness than by a rise in pitch. than 1.  Loudness/pitch is greater  The stress may also be achieved by lengthening the  stressed syllable (drawl). 3.  Regularity of Stresses The stress pattern is irregular for English, and stresses sometimes occur in unexpected places.  For instance, adjoining  syllables sometimes receive almost equal stress. 4.  Pace The pace is irregular.  It is usually slowed, but there may  be patches that are speeded up. 5.  Timbre The voice is f u l l , and resting firmly on the platform.  6.  Contours These may be unexpected in direction, but the effect is ragged rather than mellifluous.  - 57 -  B.  Externalizing 1.  Energy The energy is f a i r l y high.  The pitch is moderate to high,  but the volume is adequate. 2.  Primary stresses These are achieved with pitch rise as well as some increase in loudness.  3.  Loudness/pitch is equal to or less than 1.  Regularity of stresses The stress pattern is markedly regular for English.  The  melodic line may sound sing-song at lower energy levels and resounding at higher levels. 4.  Pace The pace is f a i r l y even, though i t may be s l i g h t l y speeded as i t approaches a stress point,  5.  Timbre The voice is f a i r l y f u l l , and resting on the platform.  6.  Contours These may go up, down, or remain level at times when this would not be quite the expected pattern, although meaning is not usually distorted.  The effect is oratorical rather than  ragged. C.  Limited 1.  Energy The energy is low.  2.  The volume is not adequate for the pitch.  Primary stresses The primary stresses are not very strong, and are achieved by  - 58 -  normal balance of pitch to loudness. 3.  Regularity of stresses The stress pattern has about the normal irregularity of English.  4.  Pace The pace i s somewhat slowed, but tends to be quite regular.  5.  Timbre This is one of the clearest distinguishing characteristics. The voice is thinned from below, and the effect is that of a voice that is "not resting on i t s platform."  6.  Contours Nothing notable here.  D.  Emotional Overflow Eo This subcategory is d i f f i c u l t to describe using the six features, because a variety of different emotions are put in the same class.  The primary characteristic is a disruption  of ordinary speech patterns. rise to a shriek, etc.  The voice may break, tremble,  However, the mere presence of emotion  does not put i t in this class, without disruption of speech patterns.  For instance, laughter is often found in conjunc-  tion with Externalizing, and would not push the response into Emotional unless i t really disrupts speech.  This is not a  very satisfactory class as i t now stands, but is not too d i f f i c u l t to recognize. Expressive Ee 1.  Energy  - 59 -  Very high.  Pitch is generally higher and loudness greater  than any of the other categories. Primary stresses These are generally achieved by substantial increases in both pitch and loudness--although one may have a larger relative increase than the other.  Also, there is often a  clipped sense to stressed s y l l a b l e s , and a slight pause after each one.  Expressive vs. external--aside from regu-  l a r i t y of stresses distinguishing expressive from external (see below), there is greater pitch and loudness rise with expressive voice than with external.  If X is generally at  modal pitch and one step above, E varies between modal and two or three steps above, (or even higher). Expressive vs. Focused—similarly, focused generally stays on_ modal pitch and occasionally goes down, or there may be a pitch rise without loudness increasing to any marked degree. Regularity of stresses The most distinguishing feature of this category is stressed, adjoining s y l l a b l e s , with higher pitch and greater loudness than found in focused, e . g . , the stressed adjoining syllables in the sentence below are 'I hate . 1  I hate you There may be a pitch rise on the second of the stressed syllables, but there is a clear sense of adjoining stressed syllables as shown in the sentence below. I don't care about you.  - 60 -  Pace Regular over stressed syllables, but not regular in general. Often a stacatto quality to stressed syllables (relates to the slight pauses after stressed s y l l a b l e s ) . Timbre Generally a very f u l l voice.  - 61 -  APPENDIX D  TARGET COMPLAINTS DISCOMFORT BOX SCALE  We are interested in how much discomfort your decisional conflict is causing you right now.  Please indicate with an (X)  your present position.  Couldn't be worse  Very much  Pretty much  A little  None at a l l  - 62 -  APPENDIX E  CONFLICT RESOLUTION SCALE  We are interested in how resolved you feel right now about your decisional c o n f l i c t .  Please indicate with an (X) your  present position.  Totally resolved  Somewhat resolved  Not at a l l resolved  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
United States 19 1
Japan 8 0
China 3 9
Poland 3 2
United Kingdom 1 0
Canada 1 0
France 1 0
Russia 1 0
City Views Downloads
Unknown 9 2
Ashburn 8 0
Tokyo 7 0
Seattle 2 0
Beijing 2 0
Milwaukee 1 0
Redmond 1 1
Lafayette 1 0
Shenzhen 1 9
Sacramento 1 0
Surrey 1 0
Houston 1 0
Kansas City 1 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}
Download Stats

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0054337/manifest

Comment

Related Items