Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Interpersonal trust and group psychotherapy : an outcome study Tognazzini, Paula Mary 1983

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1983_A5_7 T64.pdf [ 2.92MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0095657.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0095657-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0095657-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0095657-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0095657-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0095657-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0095657-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0095657-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0095657.ris

Full Text

INTERPERSONAL TRUST AND GROUP PSYCHOTHERAPY:  AN OUTCOME STUDY  by  PAULA MARY TOGNAZZINI B.Sc.N., U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1977  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF ' THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN NURSING  in THE  FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (The School of Nursing)  We accept t h i s to  THE  t h e s i s as conforming  the r e q u i r e d s t a n d a r d  UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA A p r i l 1983  ©  P a u l a Mary T o g n a z z i n i , 1983  In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of requirements f o r an advanced degree a t the  the  University  o f B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree t h a t the L i b r a r y s h a l l make it  freely  a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and  study.  I  further  agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e copying of t h i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may  be  department o r by h i s or her  granted by  the head o f  representatives.  understood t h a t copying or p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s for f i n a n c i a l  gain  s h a l l not  be  Department of  l\URSi/\J 6>  The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 Date  DE-6  (3/81)  Columbia  my  It i s thesis  allowed without my  permission.  thesis  written  ii  ABSTRACT  T h i s study examined the e f f e c t s of an i n t e n s i v e group psychotherapy program on s e l e c t e d p a t i e n t s ' i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t as measured by personal sonal  Trust Scale.  t r u s t was  developed and  the  A r e v i e w of the l i t e r a t u r e i n d i c a t e d t h a t i n t e r p e r -  a m u l t i f a r i o u s c o n s t r u c t which needed to be  further  understood.  T h i s study used a q u a s i - e x p e r i m e n t a l c o n t r o l group d e s i g n . obtained  from twenty p a t i e n t s who  psychotherapy program. assigned  given  Ten  had  Data were  been r e f e r r e d to an i n t e n s i v e group  p a t i e n t s who  to the e x p e r i m e n t a l group and  program were a s s i g n e d was  Inter-  completed t h i s program were ten p a t i e n t s who  to the c o n t r o l group.  The  d i d not  Interpersonal  to a l l the p a t i e n t s a t the time of assessment and  enter Trust  the Scale  s i x to  eight  The  results  weeks l a t e r . The indicated  d a t a were analyzed  u s i n g non-parametric s t a t i s t i c s .  t h a t the group psychotherapy program had  no  statistically  signi-  f i c a n t e f f e c t on s e l e c t e d p a t i e n t s ' i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t as measured by Interpersonal  Trust  Scale.  A d i s c u s s i o n of the f i n d i n g s and were  included.  recommendations f o r f u r t h e r study  the  iii  TABLE OF CONTENTS  Page CHAPTER I .  INTRODUCTION  1  Statement o f the Problem  3  D e f i n i t i o n o f Terms  3  Purpose o f the Study  3  Relevance o f the Study  4  L i m i t a t i o n s o f the Study  4  Assumptions of the Study  5  CHAPTER I I .  LITERATURE REVIEW  6  Part I  6  E a r l y Research on I n t e r p e r s o n a l T r u s t  6  Studies  i n Communication Research  7  Studies  i n Therapeutic  Settings  10  Part I I  13  C o n c e p t u a l Framework:  S o c i a l Learning  Summary CHAPTER I I I .  Theory  13 19  THE DAY HOUSE PROGRAM  22  Referrals  23  Day House Rules  23  The Groups  24  Summary  28  iv  . Page CHAPTER IV.  METHODOLOGY .  30  Research Design . . . . . . . . .  30  Sample S e l e c t i o n  31  Procedure f o r Data C o l l e c t i o n  31  Instrument:  32  the I n t e r p e r s o n a l T r u s t S c a l e  Summary CHAPTER V.  34 DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS  35  Data A n a l y s i s  35  D i s c u s s i o n o f the F i n d i n g s  41  Summary  42  CHAPTER V I .  SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER.STUDY  43  Summary  43  Conclusions  44  Recommendations f o r F u r t h e r  Study  BIBLIOGRAPHY  45 46  APPENDIX A.  INTERPERSONAL TRUST SCALE  50  APPENDIX B.  INFORMATION AND CONSENT FORM  55  V  LIST OF TABLES  Table  Page 1.  P r e t e s t and P o s t t e s t Scores f o r the E x p e r i m e n t a l Group  2.  Mean and Standard D e v i a t i o n  3..  P r e t e s t and P o s t t e s t Scores f o r the C o n t r o l Group  38  4.  Mean and Standard D e v i a t i o n  38  5.  P r e t e s t and P o s t t e s t Scores o f the E x p e r i m e n t a l Group on the F a c t o r s o f P o l i t i c a l T r u s t , P a r e n t a l T r u s t and T r u s t o f S t r a n g e r s  39  The R e s u l t s o f the Wilcoxon s i g n e d - r a n k t e s t on the F a c t o r s o f P a r e n t a l T r u s t , P o l i t i c a l T r u s t and T r u s t o f S t r a n g e r s f o r the E x p e r i m e n t a l Group  39  P r e t e s t and P o s t t e s t Scores o f the C o n t r o l Group on the F a c t o r s o f P o l i t i c a l T r u s t , P a r e n t a l T r u s t and T r u s t o f S t r a n g e r s  40  The R e s u l t s o f the Wilcoxon signed-rank t e s t on the F a c t o r s o f P a r e n t a l T r u s t , P o l i t i c a l T r u s t and T r u s t o f S t r a n g e r s f o r the C o n t r o l Group  40  6.  7.  8.  f o r E x p e r i m e n t a l Group  f o r C o n t r o l Group  . . .  36 36  vi  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  I wish t o express my s i n c e r e  thanks t o t h e members o f my t h e s i s  m i t t e e f o r t h e i r guidance, support and w i l l i n g n e s s time:  to Dr. Joan Anderson,  to give of t h e i r  comfree  C h a i r p e r s o n , and t o H e l e n E l f e r t and D a r l e n e  Steele. I a l s o wish t o g r a t e f u l l y acknowledge t h e c o - o p e r a t i o n of t h e Day House s t a f f . In p a r t i c u l a r , I wish to thank a l l the p a t i e n t s participate  who v o l u n t e e r e d t o  i n t h i s study.  To my husband, Hugh P a r f i t t , I express v e r y s p e c i a l thanks f o r h i s c o n s t a n t encouragement and support which helped me g e t through t h e d i f f i cult  times.  tolerated  A s p e c i a l thanks a l s o  goes to my daughter Robin who c h e e r f u l l y  h e r mother's d i s t r a c t i o n s .  I would a l s o  l i k e to express my thanks t o my f r i e n d s who cheered me on  throughout t h i s study.  1  CHAPTER I  INTRODUCTION  For of  t h r e e decades, h e a l t h p r o f e s s i o n a l s  t r u s t as an e s s e n t i a l  have regarded the c o n s t r u c t  component of s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n .  to r e a c h an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f human r e l a t i o n s h i p s ogists  and s o c i o l o g i s t s  tings.  However, l i t t l e  and group p r o c e s s , p s y c h o l -  have s t u d i e d i n t e r p e r s o n a l attention  I n t h e i r attempts  trust i n various  set-  has been g i v e n to the study of i n t e r p e r -  s o n a l t r u s t i n i n d i v i d u a l and group psychotherapy. The  layman's meaning o f t r u s t encompasses a v a r i e t y phenomena.  of  and  intrapersonal  are  c o n f i d e n c e , b e l i e f , r e l i a b i l i t y , dependence, and f a i t h .  Synonyms f o r t r u s t common i n everyday language  have been used to d e s c r i b e t r u s t i n i n d i v i d u a l s , d e i t i e s , a n i m a l s , and inanimate o b j e c t s . belief the  i n a friend's  groups, o r g a n i z a t i o n s ,  F o r example, t r u s t can r e f e r  T r u s t can a l s o  G i f f i n and P a t t o n  t o a r r i v e a t an agreed d e f i n i t i o n . (1971) observed t h a t  " t r u s t has t r a d i t i o n a l l y been  viewed as a somewhat m y s t i c a l and u n t a n g i b l e f a c t o r (p. 376). Other r e s e a r c h e r s  precise  imply s e l f c o n f i d e n c e  The numerous meanings g i v e n to the c o n s t r u c t o f t r u s t  have made i t d i f f i c u l t  the  to a  c o n f i d e n c e i n the j u d i c i a l system or t h e c r e d i b i l -  i t y o f a v e r b a l o r w r i t t e n statement.  tion"  These concepts  promise, f a i t h i n the a b i l i t y of a mechanic to a d j u s t  brakes o f one's c a r ,  or s e l f - r e l i a n c e .  interpersonal  defying careful d e f i n i -  (Kee & Knox, 1970) have p o i n t e d out that  meaning of t r u s t i s n o t i d e n t i c a l from one s i t u a t i o n t o another.  Deutsch (1958) s t r e s s e d  the importance o f a d e f i n i t i o n o f t r u s t which  i n c l u d e s both everyday c o n n o t a t i o n s o f t h e language and a l s o  scientific  2 terms. and  T h i s has  been a c h a l l e n g i n g task because concepts such as., c o n f i d e n c e  dependence are d i f f i c u l t S o c i a l exchange theory,  to o p e r a t i o n a l i z e . a t t r i b u t i o n theory,  and  social learning  have been used as t h e o r e t i c a l frameworks f o r u n d e r s t a n d i n g and trust.  Each theory has  i t s advantages and  of the complex c o n s t r u c t of The  Thorslund  defining explanation  trust.  l i t e r a t u r e on t r u s t r e s e a r c h  unexplainable.  l i m i t a t i o n s f o r the  theory  leaves  (1976) p o i n t s out  some a s p e c t s  of  trust  t h a t the c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n s  t r u s t are incomplete not o n l y because t r u s t i s d i f f i c u l t  to d e f i n e but  of also  because the d e f i n i t i o n s e s t a b l i s h e d are o n l y s u i t a b l e f o r p a r t i c u l a r s t u d i e s in particular situations. from these s t u d i e s . sonal trust  Nevertheless,  the g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s t h a t can be made  research  on the c o n s t r u c t of i n t e r p e r -  continues.  Interpersonal i n the l i t e r a t u r e . of t h i s  This l i m i t s  t r u s t i n the n u r s e - p a t i e n t However, t h e r e has  r e l a t i o n s h i p i s emphasized  been l i t t l e  empirical investigation  construct.  Interpersonal  t r u s t i s i d e n t i f i e d as a c o n s t r u c t because i t i s an  " a t t i t u d e toward another p e r s o n [ t h a t ] may observable  a c t i o n s " ( G i f f i n & Patton,  not always be r e f l e c t e d by  1971,  p. 376).  one's  Thus, the a t t i t u d e of  t r u s t i s the " i n t r o s p e c t i v e o r i e n t a t i o n which i s a p o t e n t i a l f o r a c t i o n " (p. 376).  T h i s p o t e n t i a l f o r a c t i o n can be  but  the behavior  i s not  i n f e r r e d from observed  behavior  itself.  In t h i s study, the c o n s t r u c t of t r u s t i s viewed as an a t t i t u d e or g e n e r a l i z e d expectancy t h a t the "word, promise, v e r b a l or w r i t t e n statement o f an i n d i v i d u a l or group can be r e l i e d upon " ( R o t t e r , 1967, T h i s d e f i n i t i o n of t r u s t i s d e r i v e d from R o t t e r ' s which i s used as a framework f o r t h i s  study.  p.  social learning  651). theory,  3 "Many p s y c h o t h e r a p i s t s  b e l i e v e i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t i s a major  minant i n the success of psychotherapy.  ...  I t seems e v i d e n t  deter-  that  an  adequate measure of i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t would of g r e a t v a l u e personal  to r e s e a r c h "  ( R o t t e r , 1967,  pp.  651-652).  Rotter's  be  Inter-  T r u s t S c a l e , used i n t h i s study, attempts to measure these  indi-  vidual differences. T h i s r e s e a r c h hopes to c o n t r i b u t e s t r u c t of i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t and, i n f l u e n c e d by  to f u r t h e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the  i n p a r t i c u l a r , the extent  con-  to which i t i s  group psychotherapy.  Statement of the Problem What are the e f f e c t s of an i n t e n s i v e group psychotherapy program on s e l e c t e d p a t i e n t s ' i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t as measured by Trust  the  Interpersonal  Scale?  D e f i n i t i o n of Terms Interpersonal  Trust.  "The  expectancy t h a t the word, promise, v e r b a l ,  or w r i t t e n statement of another i n d i v i d u a l or group can be r e l i e d ( R o t t e r , 1967,  p.  651).  Group Psychotherapy Program. psychotherapy program c a l l e d Day U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h  An  i n t e n s i v e six-week i n t e g r a t e d  House l o c a t e d on  the campus of  group  The  Columbia.  Purpose of the  Study  T h i s study w i l l examine the e f f e c t s of the Day  House program  s e l e c t e d p a t i e n t s ' i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t as measured by R o t t e r ' s Trust  upon"  on  Interpersonal  Scale. The  p a t i e n t s w i l l be  i n two  groups, an e x p e r i m e n t a l group (those  who  complete the Day House program) and a c o n t r o l group  ( p a t i e n t s who  do not  enter the program). The s p e c i f i c o b j e c t i v e s o f the study a r e : 1.  To measure the i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t s c o r e s of the e x p e r i m e n t a l  group w i t h i n t h r e e days of e n t e r i n g the program  and w i t h i n two weeks of  completing i t . 2.  To measure the i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t s c o r e s of the c o n t r o l group  the day of t h e i r assessment by the s t a f f of the program  on  and s i x to e i g h t  weeks l a t e r . 3.  To compare the i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t s c o r e s o b t a i n e d from the  two  groups.  Relevance of the Study I t i s hoped t h a t the i n f o r m a t i o n gathered from t h i s study w i l l group  assist  t h e r a p i s t s i n f u r t h e r i n g t h e i r u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the concept of t r u s t  and i t s s i g n i f i c a n c e i n group psychotherapy. I t i s a l s o hoped t h a t t h i s study w i l l encourage other h e a l t h p r o f e s s i o n a l s to do f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h on'.interpersonal t r u s t p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the a r e a of psychotherapy.  L i m i t a t i o n s of the Study The i n t e r n a l v a l i d i t y of t h i s study i s l i m i t e d because were not randomly  a s s i g n e d to the two  groups.  The sample used f o r t h i s study was s p e c i f i c group psychotherapy program.  the s u b j e c t s  limited  to people r e f e r r e d to a  The r e s u l t s are not g e n e r a l i z a b l e  to c l i e n t s i n o t h e r programs or to o t h e r p o p u l a t i o n s .  5 Assumptions  o f the Study  1.  Trust i s a learned experience.  2.  People expect t h a t the word, promise, v e r b a l or w r i t t e n  statement  of another i n d i v i d u a l or group w i l l come to f r u i t i o n . 3. Trust  People w i l l  t r u t h f u l l y express t h e i r o p i n i o n s on the I n t e r p e r s o n a l  Scale. 4.  People a r e capable o f changing t h e i r b e l i e f s , v a l u e s and  5.  People v a l u e the c o n s t r u c t o f  6.  T r u s t i s an important v a r i a b l e i n i n t e r p e r s o n a l  7.  Group psychotherapy can p r o v i d e a c o r r e c t i v e e x p e r i e n c e through  trust. relationships.  which i n d i v i d u a l s can l e a r n to change b e h a v i o r s , b e l i e f s and 8. be  ideas.  attitudes.  The p a t i e n t s i n the e x p e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l groups are assumed to  comparable.  6  CHAPTER I I  LITERATURE REVIEW  T r u s t has been s t u d i e d i n v a r i o u s of view.  s e t t i n g s and from d i f f e r e n t  Thus, a l a r g e body of r e s e a r c h has accumulated.  points  I t i s beyond the  scope of t h i s study t o i n c l u d e a l l t h e r e s e a r c h p e r t a i n i n g t o t r u s t . l i t e r a t u r e r e v i e w has focused I n doing  on s t u d i e s d e a l i n g w i t h  s o , P a r t I o f the d i s c u s s i o n w i l l  This  the t r u s t of o t h e r s .  cover the e a r l y r e s e a r c h on  i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t f o l l o w e d by the s t u d i e s i n communication r e s e a r c h and in therapeutic settings. various research ing  The aim o f the d i s c u s s i o n i s t o i l l u s t r a t e the  approaches undertaken i n o r d e r  t o i n c r e a s e the u n d e r s t a n d -  of t h i s m u l t i f a r i o u s construct. P a r t I I of the l i t e r a t u r e review w i l l  i n c l u d e an e x a m i n a t i o n o f the  c o n s t r u c t o f t r u s t u s i n g s o c i a l l e a r n i n g theory  as a framework.  Given t h a t  group psychotherapy i s t h e dependent v a r i a b l e i n t h i s study, p a r t i c u l a r a t t e n t i o n w i l l be g i v e n  to i t s s i g n i f i c a n c e i n s o c i a l l e a r n i n g  theory.  Part I E a r l y Research on I n t e r p e r s o n a l  Trust  Morton Deutsch (1958) was one o f the f i r s t p e o p l e t o r e s e a r c h s t r u c t of i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t .  He and h i s c o l l e a g u e s  laboratory settings using modified s t u d i e s , Deutsch concluded  the con-  studied trust i n  p r i s o n e r ' s dilemma games.  From these  that:  an i n d i v i d u a l may be s a i d t o have t r u s t i n the o c c u r r e n c e o f an event i f he expects i t s o c c u r r e n c e and h i s e x p e c t a t i o n l e a d s t o behavior which he p e r c e i v e s t o have g r e a t e r n e g a t i v e m o t i v a t i o n a l consequences i f the e x p e c t a t i o n i s n o t confirmed than p o s i t i v e m o t i v a t i o n a l consequences i f i t i s confirmed. (p. 266)  7 This implies  t h a t an  i n d i v i d u a l weighs the p o s i t i v e and  quences of h i s or her d e c i s i o n b e f o r e v i d u a l then makes a c h o i c e expected outcome.  Since  negative  conse-  t r u s t i n g another person.  to t r u s t or not  to t r u s t a c c o r d i n g  the outcome i s u n c e r t a i n ,  The to  indi-  the  an element of r i s k i s  involved. Deutsch (1958) a l s o found t h a t p e o p l e were more ready to t r u s t i f they believed  t h a t they had  t i o n , or i f i t was gain i n betraying  some power over the outcome of the t r u s t i n g s i t u a -  apparent t h a t the p e r s o n b e i n g  the communication o f c o o p e r a t i v e  ponses (Solomon, 1960). of r i s k i n v o l v e d G i f f i n and  to  the degree of i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t i n c l u d e  the a b i l i t y t o communicate an e x p e c t a t i o n and  nothing  the t r u s t .  V a r i a b l e s which i n c r e a s e  1959)  t r u s t e d had  o f r e c i p r o c a l t r u s t (Loomis, r a t h e r than c o m p e t i t i v e  These v a r i a b l e s p r o v i d e  res-  feedback about the amount  i n a d e c i s i o n to t r u s t another i n d i v i d u a l . P a t t o n (1971) suggest t h a t a person w i l l be more l i k e l y  to  take the r i s k of t r u s t i n g another person i f that i s the o n l y way  to accom-  p l i s h a c e r t a i n goal.  the  greater  The  greater  the v a l u e  placed  the l i k e l i h o o d t h a t the r i s k w i l l be  taken.  on  the g o a l ,  These s t u d i e s l e d to f u r t h e r examination of the c o n s t r u c t sonal  t r u s t w i t h i n the context  Studies  research.  i n Communication Research  Communication r e s e a r c h t r u s t by  of communication  of i n t e r p e r -  has  increased  the u n d e r s t a n d i n g of  interpersonal  examining v a r i a b l e s which a f f e c t i n t e r p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s .  Hovland and  his associates  l i s t e n e r ' s perception activeness,  personal  (1953) found t h a t " t r u s t i s based upon a  of a speaker's e x p e r t n e s s , r e l i a b i l i t y , a t t r a c t i v e n e s s and  listener's associates"  (p. 104).  the m a j o r i t y  G i f f i n and  intentions,  o p i n i o n of  the  P a t t o n (1971) supported  this  8 f i n d i n g , concluding  t h a t the " g e n e r a l  c r e d i b i l i t y of group  opinion  expressed" (p. 387)  i n f l u e n c e d the degree of t r u s t w o r t h i n e s s  of an  indi-  vidual. G i f fin,(1967a) showed t h a t e x p e r t n e s s , r e l i a b i l i t y and  dynamism were  three-major c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s which determined whether a p e r s o n would trusted. passive  Dynamism was  defined  as."behavior perceived  i n g and  t r u s t , defensive  t i o n of n o n - t r u s t w o r t h i n e s s and, Gibb  (1) non-judgmental;  neutral;  b e h a v i o r communicates the  as t r u s t w o r t h y .  increased  These were control  than s t r a t e g i c ; (4) empathic r a t h e r  (5) on an e q u a l b a s i s r a t h e r  p r o v i s i o n a l or t e n t a t i v e r a t h e r  inten-  rather  (2) problem o r i e n t e d r a t h e r than s o c i a l  (3) spontaneous r a t h e r  Gibb's  When e n t e r i n g  a number of i n t e n t i o n s which  perceived  listen-  v e r b a l cues which r a i s e  t h e r e f o r e , encourages s u s p i c i o n  (1961) i d e n t i f i e d  the l i k e l i h o o d o f a p e r s o n b e i n g  oriented;  104).  l e v e l of the o r i g i n a l communicator" (p. 141).  a s i t u a t i o n that involves  than t r u s t .  (p.  b e h a v i o r "engenders d e f e n s i v e  t h i s i n t u r n produces p o s t u r a l , f a c i a l and  the d e f e n s i v e  being:  as more a c t i v e than  and more open or f r a n k than c l o s e d or r e s e r v e d "  Gibb (1961) found t h a t d e f e n s i v e  be  than on an unequal b a s i s ; and  than c e r t a i n (pp.  (1961) f i n d i n g s l e d G i f f i n and  Patton  than (6)  141-148). (1971) to conclude t h a t  i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t i s a " f u n c t i o n of perceived  acceptance by  others"  communicated v e r b a l l y or  (p. 381).  non-verbally, al.,  t r u s t i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p i s l i k e l y to break down (Bennis et  1964). Mellinger  cation. dict  the  I f t h i s acceptance cannot be  valued  He  (1956) looked  a t i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t as a f a c t o r i n communi-  found t h a t a person who  t r u s t e d another p e r s o n was  t h a t person's a t t i t u d e s more a c c u r a t e l y .  subjects  to judge o t h e r s  on  A questionnaire  a b l e to  pre-  which asked  the b a s i s of t h e i r s i n c e r i t y , m o t i v e s  and  9 d e p e n d a b i l i t y o f communication was found t o measure t r u s t . n a i r e was a p r e c u r s o r discussed  of Rotter's  question-  I n t e r p e r s o n a l T r u s t S c a l e which w i l l be  i n Chapter IV.  Schlenker,-Helm:and:-Tedeschi and  This  (1973) s t u d i e d t h e e f f e c t s o f p e r s o n a l i t y  s i t u a t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s on b e h a v i o r a l t r u s t .  They found t h a t when h i g h l y  c r e d i b l e promises were made and kept, s u b j e c t s t r u s t e d more than when low c r e d i b i l i t y promises were made. Rotter's  A s e r i e s o f p r i s o n e r ' s dilemma games and  I n t e r p e r s o n a l T r u s t S c a l e were used i n these s t u d i e s .  In N o r t h American s o c i e t y , a p o s i t i v e s e l f - c o n c e p t i s regarded as a s i g n of mental h e a l t h .  G i f f i n and P a t t o n  (1971) argue t h a t s e l f - c o n c e p t i s  "based i n p a r t upon communication w i t h o t h e r p e o p l e " (p. 381). One study showed t h a t c h i l d r e n , whose p a r e n t s c a t e , developed poor s e l f - c o n c e p t s  suppressed t h e i r attempts t o communi( H e i d e r , 1968).  C h i l d r e n , whose  parents  encouraged t h e i r attempts t o communicate, developed p o s i t i v e s e l f - c o n c e p t s . In a t r u s t s i t u a t i o n , the a p p r o v a l  o f the person who i s to be t r u s t e d w i l l  i n c r e a s e the l i k e l i h o o d o f t r u s t i n g b e h a v i o r . Studies  i n communication r e s e a r c h have i n f l u e n c e d the u n d e r s t a n d i n g of  i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t by examining the e f f e c t s o f communication upon tudes and b e h a v i o r s  i n human r e l a t i o n s h i p s .  atti-  I n summary, the r e s e a r c h has  pointed  out t h a t when t r u s t e x i s t s between two p e o p l e , p r e d i c t i o n o f each  other's  a t t i t u d e s can occur.  T r u s t was a l s o i n c r e a s e d when h i g h l y c r e d i b l e  promises were made and kept between two i n d i v i d u a l s .  A t t i t u d e s and behav-  i o r s which f o s t e r t r u s t i n r e l a t i o n s h i p s have been i d e n t i f i e d  as a c c e p t a n c e ,  c a r i n g , e q u a l i t y , empathy, and f l e x i b i l i t y . The  l i t e r a t u r e i n communication r e s e a r c h has a l s o i n d i c a t e d t h a t the  s e l f - c o n c e p t o f the i n d i v i d u a l i s i n f l u e n c e d by responses from people.  Interpersonal  valued  t r u s t a f f e c t s communication i n r e l a t i o n s h i p s among  i n d i v i d u a l s and, thus, i n d i r e c t l y a f f e c t s one's s e l f - c o n c e p t . s t r u c t o f i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t i s complex and d i f f i c u l t because i t v a r i e s w i t h each i n d i v i d u a l i n t e r a c t i o n .  The con-  to o p e r a t i o n a l i z e  The v a r i a b l e s  1:  d i s c u s s e d i n communication r e s e a r c h p r o v i d e a p o r t i o n of a framework i n which to understand t h i s  construct.  A branch o f communication r e s e a r c h i s s t u d i e s i n t h e r a p e u t i c s e t t i n g s . These s t u d i e s have c o n t r i b u t e d t o f u r t h e r i n s i g h t i n t o i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t . Studies  i n Therapeutic  Settings  T r u s t i s an important 1970).  component o f psychotherapy  An element o f t r u s t i s i m p l i c i t  i n the a c t o f seeking h e l p and i s  r e q u i r e d f o r the d i s c l o s u r e o f p e r s o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n 1970). i n order  (Rogers, 1961; Yalom,  ( J o u r a r d & Friedman,  T h e r a p i s t s must be a b l e t o convey t h e i r t r u s t w o r t h i n e s s to b u i l d a climate of t r u s t  (Witherspoon, 1981).  to c l i e n t s  C a r l Rogers  (1961) observed t h a t the t r u s t which the p a t i e n t has f o r the t h e r a p i s t i s a major f a c t o r a c c o u n t i n g  f o r the changes experienced  by the p a t i e n t d u r i n g  therapy. Before relationship  t r u s t can develop, (Swinth,  1967).  both p a r t i c i p a n t s must g i v e something to the Swinth (1967) a s s e r t e d t h a t t r u s t between two  p e o p l e i s e s t a b l i s h e d when one o f them exposes h i m s e l f or h e r s e l f to the r i s k of personal  loss.  When t h i s s e l f exposure i s r e p e a t e d l y met w i t h  a c c e p t a n c e , each p e r s o n then gains i n t e n t i o n a l l y h u r t by the o t h e r J o u r a r d and Friedman  confidence  t h a t he or she w i l l not be  (Bennis, S c h e i n , Berlew, & S t e e l e , 1964).  (1970) i n v e s t i g a t e d t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between  s e l f - d i s c l o s u r e and e x p e r i m e n t e r - s u b j e c t  "distance."  They found t h a t when  an experimenter i s l i k e d and t r u s t e d by the s u b j e c t , d i s t a n c e between them was d e c r e a s e d .  The s u b j e c t ' s d i s c l o s u r e time i n c r e a s e d as the d i s t a n c e  between the s u b j e c t and experimenter decreased  (p.  282).  11 The  e f f e c t o f the c o u n s e l l i n g approach on t r u s t b e h a v i o r was s t u d i e d  by E l l i s o n and F i r e s t o n e and  (1974).  T r u s t was equated w i t h s e l f - d i s c l o s u r e  measured by J o u r a r d ' s S e l f - D i s c l o s u r e Q u e s t i o n n a i r e .  d i f f e r e n c e between d i r e c t i v e and n o n - d i r e c t i v e this  There was no  c o u n s e l l i n g approaches i n  study. Witherspoon (1981) r e l a t e d t h e r a p i s t e f f e c t i v e n e s s t o the t r u s t w o r t h i -  ness o f the t h e r a p i s t as p e r c e i v e d  by the p a t i e n t s .  He found t h a t  t h e r a p i s t s a r e seen as n o n t r u s t w o r t h y , l e a d i n g to d e f e n s i v e by  arrogant  communication  the p a t i e n t which g r e a t l y reduces the e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f the therapy. Studies  of t h e r a p e u t i c  groups have r e v e a l e d  aspects a f f e c t i n g i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t . four b a s i c goals  i n common d u r i n g  t r a i n i n g groups (T-groups).  several interesting  Gibb (1962) found t h a t p e o p l e had  s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n s i n human r e l a t i o n s  These were acceptance, i n f o r m a t i o n ,  goal-  achievement, and s o c i a l c o n t r o l (p. 281). Acceptance i s r e l a t e d t o i n t e r personal  and i n t r a p e r s o n a l t r u s t .  tance among group members Kessel  Trust Scale.  i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t i n T-groups u s i n g  that the k i n d o f t r u s t measured by R o t t e r ' s  as the i n t r a g r o u p Piper tivity  Kessel  con-  s c a l e was n o t the same  t r u s t t h a t the study had attempted t o measure.  (1972) conducted a study which e v a l u a t e d  t r a i n i n g on group c o m p o s i t i o n a c c o r d i n g  (measured by R o t t e r ' s  scale).  s e n s i t i v i t y group i n c r e a s e d sonal behaviors.  Rotter's  The r e s u l t s o f t h i s study showed no r e l a t i o n -  s h i p between t r u s t , s e l f - d i s c l o s u r e , and group c o h e s i v e n e s s . cluded  as accep-  increased.  (1971) s t u d i e d  Interpersonal  Group c o h e s i v e n e s s i n c r e a s e d  Subjects  ability  b e h a v i o r was found i n low t r u s t groups.  to i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t  who p a r t i c i p a t e d i n a h i g h - t r u s t  their ability  No i n c r e a s e d  the e f f e c t s o f s e n s i -  to r o l e play p o s i t i v e i n t e r p e r -  to r o l e play p o s i t i v e i n t e r p e r s o n a l  12 One  study showed t h a t aceombination of n o n - v e r b a l a c t i v i t i e s  and  group d i s c u s s i o n were as e f f e c t i v e i n b u i l d i n g i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t i n s m a l l groups as group d i s c u s s i o n  ( C l a r k e , 1971).  Further  v a r i a b l e s a f f e c t i n g i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t need to be increase The was  the u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h i s complex  b u i l d or d e s t r o y perception  (1972).  He  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s were e x p e r t n e s s , r e l i a b i l i t y , and  The  s t y l e of the  therapeutic 1971).  leadership s t y l e  found t h a t group l e a d e r s  of t h e i r p e r s o n a l i t y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s by  Patton  to  group members. dynamism, as  t h e r a p i s t i n group c o u n s e l l i n g can  When a group i s l e a d e r - c e n t e r e d , High-trust  could the These  identified  (1971).  i n t e r a c t i o n of e i t h e r h i g h or low  sons i s f a c i l i t a t e d .  to  construct.  the c l i m a t e of t r u s t i n t h e i r groups a c c o r d i n g  p r e v i o u s l y by G i f f i n and  the  conducted i n order  r e l a t i o n s h i p between i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t and  i n v e s t i g a t e d by R o e g i e r s  s t u d i e s on  facilitate  t r u s t i n g people  the  (Chatwin,  the i n t e r a c t i o n of l o w - t r u s t  per-  p e o p l e i n t e r a c t more f r e e l y when l e a d e r -  s h i p i s group-centered. Studies  i n therapeutic  the c o n s t r u c t and  of t r u s t by  s e t t i n g s have i n c r e a s e d  the u n d e r s t a n d i n g of  examining the r e l a t i o n s h i p between s e l f - d i s c l o s u r e  i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t , t r u s t b e h a v i o r , c o u n s e l l i n g approaches,  s t y l e , and  c l i m a t e of t r u s t i n s m a l l groups.  cerned w i t h t h e r a p i s t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and t h e r a p i s t which d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d to the The vided  review of the r e l e v a n t r e s e a r c h  leadership  These s t u d i e s were a l s o con-  perceived  trustworthiness  e f f e c t i v e n e s s of  of  the  therapy.  on i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t has  pro-  some u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t r u s t b e h a v i o r as w e l l as a t t i t u d e s about  communication of t r u s t i n human i n t e r a c t i o n s . The  next p a r t w i l l examine i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t as a s o c i a l a t t i t u d e or  generalized  expectancy viewed w i t h i n the framework of s o c i a l l e a r n i n g  theory.  Part I I Conceptual  Framework:  S o c i a l L e a r n i n g Theory  I n t h i s study, the c o n s t r u c t of t r u s t i s d e r i v e d from s o c i a l theory. behavior.  S o c i a l l e a r n i n g theory i s a model f o r the u n d e r s t a n d i n g  learning of human  The t h e o r y i s w e l l s y s t e m a t i z e d and c o n s i s t s o f b a s i c assump-  t i o n s and c o n s t r u c t s which l e a d t o the u n d e r s t a n d i n g human a c t i o n s .  Reinforcement  and p r e d i c t i o n o f  theory, c o g n i t i v e o r f i e l d  t h e o r y , and l e a r n -  i n g theory a r e combined i n order t o e x p l a i n complex human b e h a v i o r . The  s o c i a l l e a r n i n g theory of p e r s o n a l i t y uses an expectancy  and an e m p i r i c a l law o f e f f e c t  ( R o t t e r , Chance & Phares,  construct  1972, p. 95).  T h i s law d e f i n e s r e i n f o r c e m e n t as "any a c t i o n , c o n d i t i o n or event which a f f e c t s t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s movement towards a g o a l " (p. 95). Emphasis i s p l a c e d both on i n t e r n a l and s i t u a t i o n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i n the p r e d i c t i o n of b e h a v i o r .  The i n d i v i d u a l ' s p a s t e x p e r i e n c e s p l a y an important  the u n d e r s t a n d i n g  of present behavior.  i n p e r s o n a l i t y or b e h a v i o r .  role i n  New e x p e r i e n c e s may l e a d t o changes  These changes may or may n o t occur w i t h i n the  context o f psychotherapy. Assumptions o f S o c i a l L e a r n i n g Theory S o c i a l l e a r n i n g theory has t h r e e b a s i c assumptions.  The f i r s t  i s that  the u n i t of i n v e s t i g a t i o n f o r the study of p e r s o n a l i t y i s t h e i n t e r a c t i o n of the i n d i v i d u a l w i t h h i s o r h e r m e a n i n g f u l  environment ( R o t t e r , 1975,  p. 94). The p r e d i c t i o n o f b e h a v i o r i s based  on the immediate s i t u a t i o n as  w e l l as on past The it  second  experience. assumption  can be m o d i f i e d through  i s that while p e r s o n a l i t y i s g e n e r a l l y s t a b l e experience  (p. 95). T h i s assumption  a l s o empha-  s i z e s the i n t e r a c t i o n o f the i n d i v i d u a l w i t h h i s or h e r environment. The  t h i r d assumption  i s that behavior i s goal d i r e c t e d  (p.  96).  14 These assumptions l e a d t o the development o f the f o u r major c o n s t r u c t s of s o c i a l l e a r n i n g  theory.  C o n s t r u c t s i n S o c i a l L e a r n i n g Theory The f o u r major c o n s t r u c t s r e l a t e d (1) b e h a v i o r p o t e n t i a l ment); 1975,  (need p o t e n t i a l ) ;  (3) r e i n f o r c e m e n t v a l u e p. 113).  to the p r e d i c t i o n o f b e h a v i o r a r e (2) expectancy  (freedom  (need v a l u e ) ; and (4) s i t u a t i o n ( R o t t e r ,  These c o n s t r u c t s a r e f l e x i b l e and a r e used  l e v e l of g e n e r a l i t y that i s necessary They a r e l i n k e d c l o s e l y  on "whatever  f o r a p a r t i c u l a r purpose"  (p. 113).  together.  A c c o r d i n g to s o c i a l l e a r n i n g  theory, b e h a v i o r i s b r o a d l y d e f i n e d as  " a c t u a l motor a c t s , c o g n i t i o n s , v e r b a l and n o n v e r b a l behavior', r e a c t i o n s , e t c . " (p.  of move-  emotional  96).  Behavior p o t e n t i a l i s " t h e p o t e n t i a l f o r any g i v e n b e h a v i o r to occur i n a p a r t i c u l a r s i t u a t i o n or s i t u a t i o n s as c a l c u l a t e d i n r e l a t i o n to any s i n g l e r e i n f o r c e m e n t o r s e t of r e i n f o r c e m e n t s " (p. 96). An example i n the group psychotherapy d i s c l o s i n g behavior.  s e t t i n g would be the s y s t e m a t i c r e i n f o r c e m e n t o f s e l f An i n d i v i d u a l i n the group might engage i n any number  of b e h a v i o r s which demonstrate s e l f - d i s c l o s u r e .  Each b e h a v i o r has a c e r -  t a i n p o t e n t i a l f o r t h a t i n d i v i d u a l and i s more or l e s s l i k e l y  to occur  other b e h a v i o r s depending on the i n d i v i d u a l ' s d i f f e r e n c e s , past and needs, a t t h a t p a r t i c u l a r moment i n time. from one group member to another,  Although  than  experiences,  the behaviors vary  the d i r e c t i o n i s the same:  self-disclosure  l e a d s to i n c r e a s e d t r u s t i n o t h e r s . Expectancy  i s d e f i n e d as " t h e p r o b a b i l i t y h e l d by the i n d i v i d u a l t h a t  a p a r t i c u l a r r e i n f o r c e m e n t w i l l occur as a f u n c t i o n o f a s p e c i f i c on h i s or her p a r t i n a s p e c i f i c s i t u a t i o n o r s i t u a t i o n s " son's expectancy  i s based  on p r e v i o u s  experience.  behavior  (p. 96).  A per-  15 For example, i n a group psychotherapy both wish to p l e a s e the t h e r a p i s t . i n c l u d e d an i n a b i l i t y does n o t expect best e f f o r t s .  s i t u a t i o n , two group members may  One member's past e x p e r i e n c e may have  to please a u t h o r i t y f i g u r e s .  t o succeed  T h i s i s r e f e r r e d t o as low freedom o f movement.  tancy t o p l e a s e the t h e r a p i s t w i l l be h i g h . Although  person  i n p l e a s i n g the t h e r a p i s t i n s p i t e of h i s or her  member's p a s t e x p e r i e n c e may have been the r e v e r s e .  of movement.  Therefore, t h i s  The o t h e r  The person's  expec-  T h i s person has h i g h freedom  the g o a l s of the two group members a r e i d e n t i c a l ,  t h e i r e x p e c t a t i o n s d i f f e r and t h e i r b e h a v i o r w i l l a l s o be l i k e l y to d i f f e r . E x p e c t a n c i e s , a l t h o u g h they v a r y w i t h each person, may be s p e c i f i c o r general.  An example o f a s p e c i f i c expectancy  would be the c e s s a t i o n of  s t u t t e r i n g f o l l o w i n g i n t e n s i v e group psychotherapy.  A g e n e r a l i z e d expec-  tancy i s one which i s h e l d by the i n d i v i d u a l i n a v a r i e t y of s i t u a t i o n s (p. 97). I n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t i s such a g e n e r a l i z e d expectancy. ber o f a psychotherapy  group has the g e n e r a l i z e d expectancy  members o f the group cannot be^trusted, h i s or h e r b e h a v i o r be a f f e c t e d .  I f a mem-  t h a t the other towards them w i l l  R e l a t i o n s h i p s o u t s i d e the group may a l s o be i m p a i r e d .  c o n s t r u c t o f expectancy  The  i n c o r p o r a t e s p a s t and p r e s e n t e x p e r i e n c e s i n a  v a r i e t y of s i t u a t i o n s . The  t h i r d c o n s t r u c t i n s o c i a l l e a r n i n g theory i s r e i n f o r c e m e n t v a l u e .  T h i s i s d e f i n e d as " t h e degree o f p r e f e r e n c e f o r any r e i n f o r c e m e n t to occur if  the p o s s i b i l i t i e s o f t h e i r o c c u r r i n g were a l l e q u a l " (p. 97).  According  to R o t t e r (1975) , r e i n f o r c e m e n t s u s u a l l y do n o t occur i n d e p e n d e n t l y o f each other.  I n f a c t , one r e i n f o r c e m e n t may e l i c i t b e h a v i o r which l e a d s to f u r -  ther reinforcements.  For example, a person who r e c e i v e s p o s i t i v e  feedback  from other members o f a therapy group whenever he o r she behaves a s s e r t i v e l y may become more a s s e r t i v e a t work or i n other p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s .  This  16 may l e a d to a h i g h e r  standard  of l i v i n g ,  i n c r e a s e d work s a t i s f a c t i o n or  o t h e r e f f e c t s which r e i n f o r c e the b e h a v i o r . The  f o u r t h construct i s the p s y c h o l o g i c a l s i t u a t i o n .  This  construct  i n c o r p o r a t e s the assumptions t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s l e a r n through e x p e r i e n c e and t h a t they p e r c e i v e s i t u a t i o n s i n t h e i r own c h a r a c t e r i s t i c r : w a y s . assumed t h a t b e h a v i o r  Itis  i s l e a r n e d and not g e n e t i c a l l y a c q u i r e d o r due to  i n t e r n a l s t a t e s such as the i d , ego, and superego r e f e r r e d to i n F r e u d i a n theory.  I n a psychotherapy group, a p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r a c t i o n w i l l have d i f -  f e r e n t meanings f o r each person  present.  These f o u r b a s i c c o n s t r u c t s c o n t r i b u t e to the understanding d i c t i o n of b e h a v i o r  i n r e l a t i o n to s p e c i f i c r e i n f o r c e m e n t s .  and p r e -  Each has been  e m p i r i c a l l y t e s t e d i n c o n t r o l l e d l a b o r a t o r y experiments ( R o t t e r e t a l . , 1972). I n summary, s o c i a l l e a r n i n g theory personality.  Emotions and f e e l i n g s , although  c o n c e p t u a l i z e d as " b e h a v i o r s  the theory  theory of  The b a s i c assumptions and c o n s t r u c t s a r e l i n k e d t o g e t h e r and  can be t e s t e d .  situations"  i s a w e l l systematized  having  not d i r e c t l y addressed, a r e  a p o t e n t i a l or o c c u r r e n c e  ( R o t t e r e t a l . , 1972, p. 112). can a c t u a l l y p r e d i c t b e h a v i o r  i n various  The q u e s t i o n remains whether  as w e l l as such c o n s t r u c t s as the  emotions o f a n x i e t y and f e a r , i n t e r n a l s t a t e s r e f e r r e d to by o t h e r  theor-  ists. In t h i s study,  i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t i s viewed as a g e n e r a l i z e d expec-  tancy or s o c i a l a t t i t u d e .  The next s e c t i o n w i l l  a t t i t u d e s a r e formed and how they Generalized Expectancies S o c i a l l e a r n i n g theory  f u r t h e r e x p l o r e how  these  can change.  f o r Interpersonal Trust  allows  f o r the p r e d i c t i o n o f s p e c i f i c  R o t t e r e t a l . (1972) s t a t e s t h a t " t h e p r o c e s s  behaviors.  o f g e n e r a l i z a t i o n accounts f o r  the c o n s i s t e n c y and s t a b i l i t y o f b e h a v i o r a c r o s s s i t u a t i o n s " Generalized expectancies are related the r e i n f o r c e m e n t s In psychology,  t o i n d i v i d u a l s ' p a s t e x p e r i e n c e s and  ( n e g a t i v e o r p o s i t i v e ) connected  w i t h these  experiences.  g e n e r a l i z e d e x p e c t a n c i e s have t r a d i t i o n a l l y been known as  social attitudes.  Thus, g e n e r a l i z e d e x p e c t a n c i e s a r e s o c i a l  functionally related objects  (p. 445).  attitudes  to b e l i e f s about a c l a s s o f animate o r inanimate  ( R o t t e r et a l . , 1972).  G e n e r a l i z e d e x p e c t a n c i e s a r e l e a r n e d i n c h i l d h o o d and c o n t i n u e t o develop w i t h e x p e r i e n c e i n v a r y i n g s i t u a t i o n s .  A child  experiences a  v a r i e t y o f s t i m u l i which he o r she l e a r n s t o r e c o g n i z e and p l a c e i n c a t e gories.  For example, a c h i l d l e a r n s t h a t a c e r t a i n s t i m u l u s  a f f e c t i o n and another  indicates rejection.  can e v e n t u a l l y be d e s c r i b e d by words.  The c h i l d  indicates  l e a r n s concepts which  R o t t e r et a l . (1972) c l a i m s t h a t  "when a s e r i e s o f o b j e c t s o r events has been s i m i l a r l y l a b e l l e d , new  exper-  i e n c e s w i t h one o f these w i l l g e n e r a l i z e t o o t h e r s so t h a t g r a d u a l l y a c o l l e c t i o n o f g e n e r a l i z e d e x p e c t a n c i e s i s b u i l t up" (p. 337). S o c i a l  atti-  tudes can a l s o be l e a r n e d i n d i r e c t l y by o b s e r v i n g t h e e x p e r i e n c e s o f o t h e r s . The  i n d i v i d u a l ' s a t t i t u d e s and b e l i e f s may change o r remain s t a b l e depend-  i n g on the p e r c e p t i o n o f the ^ s i t u a t i o n and t h e r e i n f o r c e m e n t s a t t a c h e d t o the  situation. I t has a l r e a d y been s t a t e d t h a t i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t i s viewed as a  g e n e r a l i z e d expectancy. i n t e r a c t i o n with others  Each i n d i v i d u a l develops  t h i s expectancy  (e.g. p a r e n t s , t e a c h e r s , p r i e s t s ) and through  exposure t o mass media such as t e l e v i s i o n and newspapers. d u a l b e l i e v e s t h a t the word, promise, another has  through  When an i n d i v i -  v e r b a l o r w r i t t e n statement o f  i n d i v i d u a l o r group can be r e l i e d on, i t i s assumed t h a t he o r she  r e c e i v e d p o s i t i v e r e i n f o r c e m e n t f o r these b e l i e f s i n p a s t  situations.  18 The  i n d i v i d u a l i s then s a i d  assumed t o be t r u e .  to have t r u s t i n o t h e r s .  The converse i s  These g e n e r a l i z e d e x p e c t a n c i e s a r e measured by R o t t e r ' s  Interpersonal Trust Scale. In  summary, g e n e r a l i z e d e x p e c t a n c i e s determine  b e h a v i o r s because "as  a r e s u l t o f r e p e a t e d experience, i n t h e same or s i m i l a r s i t u a t i o n s , the i n d i v i d u a l b u i l d s up r e i n f o r c e m e n t which extends  across s i t u a t i o n s "  (Hamsher,  G e l l e r , & R o t t e r , 1968, p. 211). Thus, i f enough new e x p e r i e n c e s a r e p r o v i d e d with, p o w e r f u l r e i n f o r c e m e n t s a t t a c h e d to them, the i n d i v i d u a l can change h i s or h e r a t t i t u d e s . apy  I t was assumed i n t h i s study t h a t  psychother-  i s one a r e a i n which an i n d i v i d u a l can change; these: g e n e r a l i z e d expec-  tancies.  The next s e c t i o n w i l l b r i e f l y d i s c u s s how t h i s change may o c c u r .  S o c i a l L e a r n i n g Theory and Psychotherapy A c c o r d i n g t o R o t t e r , (1975) , s o c i a l l e a r n i n g psychotherapy  theory p r o v i d e s a framework f o r  i n which o l d b e h a v i o r s can be understood  and new b e h a v i o r s  a c q u i r e d so t h a t s p e c i f i c t h e r a p e u t i c g o a l s can be a c h i e v e d . and  the p a t i e n t must both p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h i s p r o c e s s .  forcement The ment.  The t h e r a p i s t  Appropriate  rein-  p r o v i d e s i n c e n t i v e f o r l e a r n i n g new b e h a v i o r s . t h e r a p i s t ' s o b j e c t i v e i s to i n c r e a s e the p a t i e n t ' s freedom o f move-  Adopting  the r o l e of t e a c h e r , the t h e r a p i s t may a c t i v e l y  suggest  a l t e r n a t i v e b e h a v i o r s as w e l l as h e l p i n g the p a t i e n t to understand b e h a v i o r s were u n s u c c e s s f u l .  why past  The t h e r a p i s t a l s o h e l p s the p a t i e n t to s e t  a c h i e v a b l e g o a l s , thus e n s u r i n g t h a t p o s i t i v e r e i n f o r c e m e n t s a r e o b t a i n e d . If  the p a t i e n t ' s g e n e r a l i z e d e x p e c t a n c i e s a r e changed, changes i n b e h a v i o r  may o c c u r which a f f e c t many areas o f h i s o r her everyday Rotter  life.  (1975) emphasizes t h a t no s i n g l e t h e r a p e u t i c technique i s  a p p l i c a b l e to a l l p a t i e n t s .  I n Chapter  I I I , i t w i l l be demonstrated t h a t  the Day House program i n c o r p o r a t e s v a r i o u s t h e r a p i e s i n o r d e r to t e a c h  19 p a t i e n t s new b e h a v i o r s  which may l e a d to g r e a t e r l i f e  s a t i s f a c t i o n and g o a l  achievement.  Summary P a r t I o f t h i s chapter s o n a l t r u s t i n order  has reviewed the r e l e v a n t r e s e a r c h  on i n t e r p e r -  t o i n c r e a s e the u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h i s complex con-  struct. The  e a r l y s t u d i e s by Deutsch (1958) r e v e a l e d  t h a t r i s k t a k i n g and p e r -  c e p t i o n o f the outcome o f a s i t u a t i o n were important v a r i a b l e s o f i n t e r p e r sonal t r u s t .  Loomis (1959) and Solomon (1960) added t h a t the communication  o f an e x p e c t a t i o n  of t r u s t and c o o p e r a t i v e  variables i n a trust situation.  responses were a l s o e s s e n t i a l  These s t u d i e s l e d to f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n  o f i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t i n the a r e a s o f communication r e s e a r c h and t h e r a peutic settings.. S-taudi.es i n communication r e s e a r c h attempted to p r o v i d e what makes p e o p l e t r u s t one another.  answers as to  S t u d i e s by Gibb (1961) r e v e a l e d  that  b e i n g non-judgmental, problem o r i e n t e d , spontaneous, empathic, p r o v i s i o n a l , and  on an equal b a s i s w i t h another person i n c r e a s e d  ship.  G i f f i n and P a t t o n  (1971) were able  trust i n a relation-  to conclude that  expertness,  r e l i a b i l i t y , and dynamism were t h r e e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s which determined whether a p e r s o n c o u l d be t r u s t e d . Other r e s e a r c h e r s  found t h a t p r e d i c t i o n o f o t h e r s ' a t t i t u d e s i n c r e a s e d  or decreased t r u s t i n r e l a t i o n s h i p s ( M e l l i n g e r , 1956).  T r u s t was a l s o  i n c r e a s e d when h i g h l y c r e d i b l e promises were made and kept between two individuals  (Schlenker  e t a l . , 1973).  One branch o f communication r e s e a r c h tings.  was  studies i n therapeutic  set-  These s t u d i e s attempted to f u r t h e r i n c r e a s e the u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f  20 the v a r i a b l e s a f f e c t i n g i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t . disclosure  (Jourard  The  r e s u l t s provided  i a b l e s that e f f e c t was  ( C l a r k e , 1971)  self-  ( K e s s e l , 1971),  were a l l s t u d i e d i n group  c o n f l i c t i n g p o i n t s of view as to the  interpersonal trust.  Further  research  var-  i n these areas  h i g h l y recommended. However, t h e r e was  peutic settings.  consensus as to what f a c i l i t a t e s  Roegiers  l e a d e r can b u i l d or d e s t r o y  trust i n thera-  (1972) found that e x p e r t n e s s ,  dynamism ( p r e v i o u s l y i d e n t i f i e d by  G i f f i n and  Patton,  reliability,  1971)  leadership f a c i l i t a t e d  t r u s t p e o p l e i n group s e t t i n g s .  n o n - t r u s t w o r t h y by t h e i r p a t i e n t s  and  of the group  the c l i m a t e of t r u s t i n s m a l l groups.  (1971) showed t h a t group centered high  such as  & Friedman, 1970), group cohesiveness  v e r b a l and n o n - v e r b a l a c t i v i t i e s settings.  Factors  Chatwin  i n t e r a c t i o n of  A r r o g a n t t h e r a p i s t s were viewed  (Witherspoon, 1981)  as  which n e g a t i v e l y  a f f e c t e d the c l i m a t e of t r u s t i n t h e r a p e u t i c r e l a t i o n s h i p s . There are many q u e s t i o n s The  l e f t unanswered as to why  s t u d i e s reviewed i l l u s t r a t e d  and  how  people  some of the r e s e a r c h approaches to  trust.  this  complex a r e a . P a r t I I of the l i t e r a t u r e review d i s c u s s e d s o c i a l l e a r n i n g theory  as a framework.  v i d u a l ' s learned behavior, theories  T h i s theory was  based on the  an expectancy c o n s t r u c t , and  ( R o t t e r et a l . , 1972).  defined according  the c o n s t r u c t of t r u s t  reinforcement  v i d u a l or group can be r e l i e d on"  theory  i n group psychotherapy.  was  as an "expectancy h e l d by an i n d i v i d u a l or  group t h a t the word, promise, v e r b a l or w r i t t e n statement of another  P a r t i c u l a r a t t e n t i o n was  indi-  I n t h i s study, the c o n s t r u c t of t r u s t  to t h i s theory  using  ( R o t t e r , 1967,  given The  p.  indi-  444).  to the a p p l i c a t i o n of s o c i a l l e a r n i n g aim of t h i s study was  u n d e r s t a n d i n g of i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t i n t h i s s e t t i n g .  to i n c r e a s e  the  The next chapter w i l l d e s c r i b e the i n t e n s i v e six-week group psycho therapy program c a l l e d Day House.  22  CHAPTER I I I  THE  Treatment  DAY HOUSE PROGRAM  a t the Day House c o n s i s t s o f an i n t e n s i v e six-week  group  psychotherapy program developed and d i r e c t e d by Dr. F. Knobloch. gram i s s t r u c t u r e d i n o r d e r to i n c o r p o r a t e  The p r o -  the p h i l o s o p h y o f i n t e g r a t e d  psychotherapy developed by F e r d i n a n d and J i r i n a Knobloch and documented i n t h e i r book I n t e g r a t e d Integrated  Psychotherapy  (1979).  psychotherapy encompasses a v a r i e t y o f t e c h n i q u e s i n c l u d i n g  psychodrama, psychomime, d i a r i e s , a u t o b i o g r a p h i e s , G e s t a l t , f a n t a s y abreaction,  and i n t r o s p e c t i o n .  These  games,  t e c h n i q u e s a r e employed i n groups  which range i n s i z e from s i x or e i g h t people to the e n t i r e community o f e i g h t e e n to twenty-two p a t i e n t s . these groups w i l l resemble  I t i s assumed t h a t the b e h a v i o r seen i n  t h a t d i s p l a y e d by the p a t i e n t s i n t h e everyday  world. The two major concepts used i n i n t e g r a t e d psychotherapy a r e group schemas and rewards  and c o s t s .  These  concepts w i l l be d e s c r i b e d  later i n  the c h a p t e r . D u r i n g t h e i r s i x weeks a t the Day House, p a t i e n t s a t t e n d Monday t o F r i d a y from 9:00. a.m. to 5:00 p.m.  A l l p a t i e n t s a r e expected  pate i n t h e groups, s p o r t s , work, music  to p a r t i c i -  t h e r a p y , and o t h e r a c t i v i t i e s  which  make up the program. Psychotherapy Neuroses  i n the Day House i s viewed  as a l e a r n i n g p r o c e s s .  and s i m i l a r d i s o r d e r s a r e assumed to be l e a r n e d b e h a v i o r s which  can be changed through the p r o c e s s of r e - l e a r n i n g i n psychotherapy  (Knobloch  & Knobloch, 1979,  p.  328).  With the assumption t h a t p e o p l e learn:.in  d i v e r s e ways, i n t e g r a t e d psychotherapy employs a v a r i e t y of which f a c i l i t a t e  the l e a r n i n g of new  achievement and  self-understanding.  techniques  b e h a v i o r s more conducive to  goal  Referrals P a t i e n t s are r e f e r r e d to the Day  House program by  family p r a c t i t i o n e r s , p s y c h i a t r i s t s , psychologists, P a t i e n t s may  to manage s t r e s s , d e p r e s s i o n ,  t i o n with t h e i r l i f e s t y l e . not a c c e p t e d i n t o the Day  P a t i e n t s who  A l l p a t i e n t s are assessed by Day p r i a t e f o r the program and  or g e n e r a l  from a l c o h o l and  are thought to be p s y c h o t i c  House range from ages twenty to House s t a f f  to ensure t h a t they are  drugs and The  appro-  partici-  These  include  the avoidance of s u i c i d a l b e h a v i o r therapeutic  community  (the e n t i r e  p a t i e n t group) p l a y s an a c t i v e p a r t i n the acceptance of new mitments are made v e r b a l l y to the community b e f o r e  Day  are  sixty.  p o t e n t i a l l y m o t i v a t e d to become a c t i v e  the d u r a t i o n of the program.  P a t i e n t s must a l s o agree to a t t e n d  or f o l l o w - u p  eating  dissatisfac-  P a t i e n t s must be w i l l i n g to make c e r t a i n commitments.  abstention  program.  sources.  House program.  P a t i e n t s r e f e r r e d to the Day  for  or o t h e r  agencies,  have e x p e r i e n c e d m a r i t a l problems, s e x u a l d i f f i c u l t i e s ,  disorders, i n a b i l i t y  pants.  community  three  members:  the p a t i e n t e n t e r s sessions  i n an  the  aftercare  group.  House Rules 1.  Speak openly and f r a n k l y about e v e r y t h i n g whole community.  i n meetings of  2.  Take care not to do a n y t h i n g which would make i t d i f f i c u l t e i t h e r f o r y o u r s e l f or o t h e r s to speak openly.  3.  Use not  every o p p o r t u n i t y to be w i t h the whole community. isolate yourself.  com-  Do  the  24 4.  Do n o t form subgroups. Do n o t form any s e x u a l attachments. Meeting group members o u t s i d e i s almost always harmful t o therapy. Use f r e e time f o r meeting o t h e r people.  5.  Help o t h e r s t o become members o f the community as q u i c k l y as p o s s i b l e .  6.  L i s t e n t o the o p i n i o n s and recommendations o f o t h e r s , but take r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r your own d e c i s i o n s .  7.  You may not l e a v e the program u n l e s s you f i r s t d i s c u s s i t w i t h the group. You a r e p a r t of the program and your s e p a r a t i o n a f f e c t s everybody.  8.  While i n the program, a l l m e d i c a l care and drugs a r e g i v e n by the s t a f f . Any o t h e r appointments and drug use should be d i s c u s s e d w i t h the s t a f f .  9.  Keep your c o n t r a c t , which i n c l u d e s : f u l l p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the program, i n v i t i n g r e l a t i v e s and a t t e n d i n g a t l e a s t t h r e e a f t e r c a r e meetings.  10..  All to  You do n o t have to b e l i e v e i n the therapy - j u s t s t i c k t o the r u l e s and see. (Day House, 1980) p a t i e n t s must a b i d e by these r u l e s .  l e a v e t h e program.  The  Groups  1.  Families When a p a t i e n t i s accepted  to  Those who do n o t may be asked  a "family".  i n t o the Day House, he or she i s a s s i g n e d  A " f a m i l y " may i n c l u d e s i x to t e n people.  than t h r e e such " f a m i l i e s " a t any one time. "family".  There a r e no more  A therapist i s assigned  to each  Each week one or two new members j o i n the " f a m i l y " as one o r two  o t h e r s complete the program and j o i n the a f t e r c a r e group. 2.  Open Group The  e n t i r e t h e r a p e u t i c community has a four-hour meeting once a week.  Those a t t e n d i n g i n c l u d e the " f a m i l i e s " , new members who have been  accepted  but have n o t a c t u a l l y begun the program, members who a r e s t a r t i n g t h a t day, and members who a r e i n a f t e r c a r e .  Nurses, m e d i c a l p r o f e s s i o n a l s , s t u d e n t s ,  and o t h e r guests may a l s o a t t e n d t h i s  group.  25 The  committee  (see below), p r e s e n t s  p o s i t i v e awards (rewards) and nega-  t i v e reminders ( c o s t s ) to the group members. about t h e i r p e r s o n a l  experiences  Patients i n aftercare talk  i n t h e program and make recommendations  to new members o f the community. 3.  The Committee Every week, each " f a m i l y " e l e c t s one r e p r e s e n t a t i v e t o the committee.  These p e o p l e a r e " r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the smooth running [are] deeply  involved  therapeutic process"  i n a l l p a r t s o f the community l i f e  and i n the whole  (Knobloch & Knobloch, 1979, p. 184). The d u t i e s o f the  committee a r e t o o r g a n i z e  a l l domestic r o u t i n e s , promote p u n c t u a l i t y , and  ensure t h a t work t a s k s a r e completed.  The major r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f t h e  committee i s t o f o s t e r "norms ( b a s i c and o t h e r s ) approval  o f t h e program and  by g e n e r a t i n g  the group's  and d i s a p p r o v a l and by r e g u l a r l y e v a l u a t i n g t h e p a t i e n t s ' t h e r a -  peutic progress"  (Knobloch & Knobloch, 1979, p. 184). T h i s i s accomplished  by means o f a system o f c o s t s and rewards. Every week, t h e committee e v a l u a t e s group. fully  each p a t i e n t ' s p r o g r e s s  i n the  Those who have been working on t h e i r problems and p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the program a r e g i v e n " p o s i t i v e awards" (rewards) d u r i n g  group meeting.  These awards v a r y  from hand made p o s t e r s  to other  which may be m e a n i n g f u l t o the person r e c e i v i n g the award.  the open symbols  "Negative  r e m i n d e r s " ( c o s t s ) a r e g i v e n t o p a t i e n t s who a r e n o t p a r t i c i p a t i n g f u l l y or who haye broken t h e r u l e s . given with ings with The  An e x p l a n a t i o n  the p r e s e n t a t i o n .  o f each award o r reminder i s  P a t i e n t s a r e encouraged t o share t h e i r  feel-  the whole community as they r e c e i v e these awards and reminders. committee meets w i t h the t h e r a p e u t i c community each day and r e c o r d s  the " n e g a t i v e  points"  (costs) acquired  a r r i v i n g l a t e , not completing  by p a t i e n t s .  autobiographies  B e h a v i o r s such as  or d i a r i e s , and b r e a k i n g  26  r u l e s are a s s i g n e d  points.  p o i n t s , he or she may pensate f o r them.  I f a p a t i e n t accumulates a c e r t a i n number o f  be put  The  on p r o b a t i o n  and  committee r u l e s s t a t e  assigned  extra tasks  to com-  that:  o n l y e a s i l y i d e n t i f i a b l e a c t s of b r e a k i n g the c o n t r a c t which the p a t i e n t made w i t h the community and on the b a s i s of which was admitted are i n c l u d e d . They a l l are d e s t r u c t i v e to the treatment of the i n d i v i d u a l and a t h r e a t to the morale and s u c c e s s f u l work of the group. Of c o u r s e , h a v i n g no n e g a t i v e p o i n t s does not i t s e l f guarantee s u c c e s s f u l treatment. (Knobloch & Knobloch, 1979, p. 191) As  can be  seen, the committee i s the d r i v i n g f o r c e behind the  p e u t i c community.  Through a p o w e r f u l system of c o s t s and  thera-  rewards,  the  p a t i e n t i s h e l p e d to abandon d e s t r u c t i v e b e h a v i o r s i n f a v o r of new which l e a d to the achievement of group and 4.  goals.  Group Schemas The  ing"  personal  behaviors  group schema i s a "model f o r r e h e a r s i n g ,  (Knobloch & Knobloch, 1979,  t i v e map sent) .  p. 57).  p a t i e n t then a s s i g n s  s i g n i f i c a n t people.  other  other  past  The  pr p r e s e n t  group schemas.  life  relationship.  a  ( e i t h e r past  cognior  p a t i e n t s to p l a y the r o l e s of  Through r o l e p l a y i n g , the p a t i e n t i s a b l e  c o n f l i c t s , anger, sadness, and  problem s o l v -  Each p a t i e n t c o n s t r u c t s  of the s i g n i f i c a n t p e o p l e i n h i s or her The  t r a i n i n g and  to  prethese  re-enact  emotions a s s o c i a t e d w i t h a p a r t i c u l a r  p a r e n t f i g u r e s are s i g n i f i c a n t  i n the  "Improvement i n the r e l a t i o n s h i p to the parent schema i s  u s u a l l y a byproduct of s u c c e s s f u l psychotherapy" (Knobloch & Knobloch, p. 58).  The  enactment of the group schemas i s done i n a meeting of  entire therapeutic 5.  the  community.  A u t o b i o g r a p h i e s and  Diaries  P a t i e n t s write t h e i r autobiographies during  1979,  the f i r s t week of the program.  and  present  Therapists  help  them to the  community  the p a t i e n t to  t i f y s i g n i f i c a n t events which can be r e e n a c t e d through r o l e p l a y i n g ,  iden-  psychomime, or psychodrama. i n d i a r y form each day. by other p a t i e n t s . 6.  Family One  others  and  P a t i e n t s r e c o r d t h e i r thoughts and f e e l i n g s  These d i a r i e s a r e read by  Secrecy  i s not encouraged at the Day  evening  to come as guests  of each p a t i e n t i n the Day  to each " f a m i l y " l e a d s these  significant  House.  Patients  i n the same " f a m i l y " and The  and  discuss  t h e r a p i s t assigned  groups.  Work Group The  " f a m i l i e s " j o i n together  the maintenance and  grounds.  c l e a n i n g i n the Day  House and  " F a m i l i e s " eat l u n c h t o g e t h e r  p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h i s meal and volunteer fically  f o r a work group each day. the  Patients  to t h i s  one  or  a r e r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the  the c l e a n up which f o l l o w s .  to s u p e r v i s e the work groups and  assigned  and  do  surrounding  Once a week t h e r e i s a c a r wash to r a i s e money f o r o u t i n g s  other f u n c t i o n s .  8.  seen  House.  a week i s s e t a s i d e f o r f a m i l y members or  v a r i o u s problems of s i g n i f i c a n c e to each p a t i e n t .  all  can be  F r i e n d s Group  t h e i r guests meet as a group w i t h o t h e r s  7.  s t a f f and  Group members  of the t h e r a p i s t s i s s p e c i -  activity.  Music Therapy Once a week the p a t i e n t s meet f o r an hour of music therapy.  group i n c l u d e s such a c t i v i t i e s as music a p p r e c i a t i o n , dancing,  This  s i n g i n g , and  body movements. 9.  Sports Swimming, b a s k e t b a l l , f l o o r hockey, and  organized 10.  two  other a t h l e t i c a c t i v i t i e s  are  each " f a m i l y " performs a s h o r t p l a y b e f o r e  the  to t h r e e times a week.  Plays Every  Friday afternoon  e n t i r e t h e r a p e u t i c community.  A p a t i e n t from each f a m i l y v o l u n t e e r s  to  be  28 the d i r e c t o r and the other members a s s i s t i n w r i t i n g the s c r i p t and a c t i n g the v a r i o u s r o l e s .  Summary The  Day Rouse i s an i n t e n s i v e six-week group psychotherapy program  which uses the framework o f i n t e g r a t e d psychotherapy i n o r d e r  to help  p a t i e n t s who a r e s u f f e r i n g from neuroses and s i m i l a r d i s o r d e r s . that a p a t i e n t f o l l o w s d u r i n g 1.  The steps  the course o f treatment a r e :  A d m i s s i o n i n t o the Day House (acceptance by p a t i e n t s and s t a f f ,  v e r b a l and w r i t t e n  commitments).  2.  Attendance a t the Open Group.  3.  Joining a "family".  4.  W r i t i n g and p r e s e n t i n g  5.  I n v i t i n g s i g n i f i c a n t people to Friends  6.  P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n s p o r t s , work groups, music t h e r a p y , and o t h e r  autobiography. and F a m i l y N i g h t .  activities. 7.  Keeping a d a i l y d i a r y o f thoughts and f e e l i n g s .  8.  Attendance a t the a f t e r c a r e group.  9.  J o i n i n g the F r i e n d s  o f Day House ( o p t i o n a l ) .  S o c i a l l e a r n i n g through r e i n f o r c e m e n t s  (rewards and c o s t s )  out by the Committee o f P a t i e n t s e l e c t e d by t h e t h e r a p e u t i c expectations  community.  The  o f the Day House program a r e c l e a r l y s t a t e d and p a t i e n t s a r e  expected t o make v e r b a l commitments t o the t h e r a p e u t i c they e n t e r  i s carried  the program.  before  P a t i e n t s a r e expected t o .be honest and t r u t h f u l  about t h e i r f e e l i n g s and t o r e s p e c t ber o f the group.  community  Interpersonal  personal  information  about another mem-  t r u s t i s h i g h l y regarded i n t h i s program.'  The  r o l e of the t h e r a p i s t i s t h a t of t e a c h e r .  This r o l e i s s i m i l a r  to t h a t emphasized by R o t t e r ' s s o c i a l l e a r n i n g theory. of i n t e g r a t e d psychotherapy v a r i o u s techniques p a t i e n t l e a r n new The next  Knobloch's  theory  i s a l s o i n agreement w i t h R o t t e r ' s b e l i e f  should be used i n psychotherapy  i n o r d e r to h e l p  that  the  b e h a v i o r s which l e a d to g o a l achievement.  c h a p t e r w i l l d e s c r i b e the methodology used i n t h i s  study.  30  CHAPTER I V METHODOLOGY  T h i s s t u d y was conducted  t o examine t h e e f f e c t s o f the Day House p r o -  gram on s e l e c t e d p a t i e n t s ' i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t as measured by R o t t e r ' s Interpersonal Trust Scale.  The independent v a r i a b l e i n t h e s t u d y was an  i n t e n s i v e s i x - w e e k group psychotherapy  program (Day House).  The dependent  v a r i a b l e was i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t . The s t u d y took p l a c e over a four-month p e r i o d between October 1982 and February  1983.  Twenty p a t i e n t s v o l u n t e e r e d t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e s t u d y .  Ten completed t h e six-week group psychotherapy and t e n d i d n o t a t t e n d t h e program ( c o n t r o l  program ( e x p e r i m e n t a l group)  group).  T h i s c h a p t e r d e s c r i b e s t h e r e s e a r c h d e s i g n , sample s e l e c t i o n ,  procedure  f o r d a t a c o l l e c t i o n , and t h e i n s t r u m e n t used t o c o l l e c t t h e d a t a . Research  Design  A q u a s i - e x p e r i m e n t a l non e q u i v a l e n t c o n t r o l group d e s i g n (Campbell & S t a n l e y , 1963, p. 47) was used.  The d e s i g n examined any change i n t h e  dependent v a r i a b l e ( i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t ) a f t e r t h e independent v a r i a b l e (Day House program) was i n t r o d u c e d .  T h i s t y p e o f d e s i g n c o n t r o l s such  extraneous v a r i a b l e s as h i s t o r y , m a t u r a t i o n , t e s t i n g , and i n s t r u m e n t a t i o n (Campbell  & S t a n l e y , 1963, p. 4 7 ) .  I n t e r n a l v a l i d i t y i s l i m i t e d i n t h i s d e s i g n because t h e s u b j e c t s have been s e l e c t e d i n s t e a d o f randomly a s s i g n e d t o t h e two groups.  Another  r e s t r i c t i o n i s t h a t t h e r e s u l t s o f t h i s s t u d y are n o t g e n e r a l i z a b l e t o p a t i e n t s o u t s i d e the Day House program.  31 Sample S e l e c t i o n A convenience sample (n = 20) was p a t i e n t s r e f e r r e d to the Day p a t i e n t s had  obtained  Hbuse program.  from the p o p u l a t i o n  I t was  been r e f e r r e d because they had  of  assumed that a l l twenty  a need to r e c e i v e group psycho-  therapy. P a t i e n t s are assessed to the program.  Acceptance i s based on mutual agreement between s t a f f  prospective patients.  be accepted  by  they a r r i v e f o r o r i e n t a t i o n  There are o p p o r t u n i t i e s to t a l k w i t h o t h e r p a t i e n t s as  w e l l as w i t h s t a f f . and  by s t a f f on the day  P e o p l e who  choose to a t t e n d the program must a l s o  the e n t i r e t h e r a p e u t i c community  ( t h i s takes p l a c e two  days  a f t e r the o r i e n t a t i o n ) . P e o p l e who d e c i s i o n with community.  choose not t o a t t e n d the program are a b l e to d i s c u s s  the s t a f f , but  they do not meet w i t h  Reasons f o r r e f u s i n g to a t t e n d v a r y  program might not be u s e f u l to the i n a b i l i t y  their  the e n t i r e t h e r a p e u t i c  from the b e l i e f  to make a f u l l - t i m e  that  the  commitment  f o r s i x weeks. Ten p a t i e n t s who experimental  group.  were accepted  i n t o the program were assigned  Ten o t h e r s who  chose not  p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h i s study, making up  to  to a t t e n d v o l u n t e e r e d  the  to  the c o n t r o l group.  Procedure f o r Data C o l l e c t i o n The  r e s e a r c h e r was  therapists. provided order  The  introduced  researcher  to p a t i e n t s by one  then e x p l a i n e d  them w i t h an i n f o r m a t i o n and  the study  o f the Day  House  to each p a t i e n t  and  consent form (see Appendix B) i n  to ensure t h a t t h e i r r i g h t s were p r o t e c t e d . Ten p a t i e n t s (male and  female) who  had  been a s s i g n e d  to the e x p e r i -  mental group completed the I n t e r p e r s o n a l T r u s t S c a l e w i t h i n t h r e e days of  32 s t a r t i n g a t Day  House and  six-week program. trol  The  a g a i n w i t h i n two  ten p a t i e n t s  weeks a f t e r g r a d u a t i o n  (male and  female) a s s i g n e d  group completed the I n t e r p e r s o n a l T r u s t S c a l e on the day  assessment and  the I n t e r p e r s o n a l T r u s t  Interpersonal Trust Scale  s c a l e c o n s i s t i n g of f o r t y items. item.  to the of  the con-  their  a g a i n s i x to e i g h t weeks l a t e r .  Instrument: Rotter's  from  Scale  (see Appendix A)  i s an a d d i t i v e  A L i k e r t - t y p e format i s used f o r each  T w e n t y - f i v e items are t r u s t items and  f i f t e e n are f i l l e r  items used  to d i s g u i s e the purpose of the s c a l e .  P o s s i b l e s c o r e s range from a m i n i -  mum  hundred and  of t w e n t y - f i v e  consistences by  to a maximum of one  are reasonably  Internal  h i g h , based on s p l i t - h a l f r e l i a b i l i t y  the Spearman-Brown formula  reliability  twenty-five.  ( R o t t e r , 1967,  p. 655).  (time between t e s t s t h r e e months) has  corrected  The t e s t - r e t e s t  a c o r r e l a t i o n of  0.68  (p>0.01). T h i s s c a l e has I t has and  r e l a t i v e l y good c o n s t r u c t and  validity.  been v a l i d a t e d i n l a b o r a t o r y s e t t i n g s , s e l f - r e p o r t s , peer r a t i n g s ,  questionnaires The  explored  (Wright & Maggied, 1976,  d i m e n s i o n a l i t y of R o t t e r ' s by s e v e r a l r e s e a r c h e r s  1979b; Wright & T e d e s c h i , dimensionalized ing  discriminant  1975).  446).  I n t e r p e r s o n a l T r u s t S c a l e has  (Chun & Campbell, 1974; Walker and  Wright, and  Walker & Robinson,  Robinson suggested t h a t  Tedeschi  process  "the  f o r group c o u n s e l l i n g " (1979b,  (1975), u s i n g samples of u n i v e r s i t y  found t h r e e s t a b l e f a c t o r s i n the I n t e r p e r s o n a l P o l i t i c a l T r u s t , P a r e n t a l T r u s t , and f a c t o r a r e as  been  i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t c o n s t r u c t i s b e t t e r s u i t e d f o r examin-  the r o l e of t r u s t i n outcomes and  p. 424)..  p.  follows:  Trust Scale.  Trust of Strangers.  The  students,  These were items f o r each  33 P o l i t i c a l Trust 4.  T h i s c o u n t r y has a dark f u t u r e u n l e s s we people i n t o p o l i t i c s .  can a t t r a c t  better  16.  Most people would be h o r r i f i e d i f they knew how the p u b l i c hears and sees i s d i s t o r t e d .  much news  21.  Even though we have r e p o r t s i n newspapers, r a d i o and t e l e v i s i o n , i t i s hard to get o b j e c t i v e accounts of p u b l i c events.  29.  Many major n a t i o n a l s p o r t c o n t e s t s a r e f i x e d i n one way another.  or  Parental Trust 6.  P a r e n t s u s u a l l y can be r e l i e d upon to keep t h e i r  promises.  23.  Most e x p e r t s can be r e l i e d upon to t e l l the t r u t h the l i m i t s o f t h e i r knowledge.  24.  Most p a r e n t s can be r e l i e d upon to c a r r y out t h e i r t h r e a t s of punishment.  31.  Most i d e a l i s t s are s i n c e r e and u s u a l l y p r a c t i c e what they preach.  32.  Most salesmen  39.  Most p e o p l e answer p u b l i c o p i n i o n p o l l s h o n e s t l y .  are honest  about  i n describing t h e i r products.  Trust of Strangers 3.  In d e a l i n g w i t h s t r a n g e r s one i s b e t t e r o f f to be c a u t i o u s u n t i l they p r o v i d e evidence t h a t they are t r u s t w o r t h y .  8.  U s i n g the honour system of not h a v i n g a teacher p r e s e n t d u r i n g exams would p r o b a b l y r e s u l t i n i n c r e a s e d c h e a t i n g .  14.  I t I s s a f e to b e l i e v e t h a t i n s p i t e of what people say most people are p r i m a r i l y i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e i r own w e l f a r e .  26.  In these c o m p e t i t i v e times one has to be a l e r t or someone i s l i k e l y to take advantage of you.  The P a r e n t a l T r u s t f a c t o r i s " e s p e c i a l l y important  s i n c e i t has s i x  items whose content d e a l s e x p l i c i t l y w i t h b e l i e v i n g o t h e r s . f a c t o r which most c l o s e l y r e p r e s e n t s R o t t e r ' s d e f i n i t i o n of trust"  (Wright & T e d e s c h i , 1980,  p. 114).  Thus i t i s the interpersonal  These t h r e e f a c t o r s were  34 s e p a r a t e l y a n a l y z e d u s i n g the W i l c o x o n signed-rank any  t e s t i n o r d e r to examine  changes i n the p r e t e s t and p o s t t e s t s c o r e s of each group.  Summary A quasi-experimental i n t h i s study.  non e q u i v a l e n t c o n t r o l group d e s i g n was employed  A convenience sample (n = 20) o f p a t i e n t s r e f e r r e d to the  Day House program was used.  Ten p a t i e n t s who e n t e r e d the program were  assigned  group and t e n p a t i e n t s who d i d n o t were  t o the e x p e r i m e n t a l  a s s i g n e d to the c o n t r o l group.  R o t t e r ' s I n t e r p e r s o n a l T r u s t S c a l e was  completed by each p a t i e n t d u r i n g the p e r i o d o f assessment a t Day House ( p r e t e s t ) and a g a i n s i x to e i g h t weeks l a t e r  (posttest).  The Mann-Whitney U t e s t was used to compare the two groups on the p r e t e s t and p o s t t e s t s c o r e s .  U s i n g the Wilcoxon signed-rank  t e s t , the  t w e n t y - f i v e items on the I n t e r p e r s o n a l T r u s t S c a l e were a n a l y z e d d i f f e r e n c e s i n p a i r s o f s c o r e s w i t h i n each group. i n the next  chapter.  f o r the  The r e s u l t s a r e d i s c u s s e d  35  CHAPTER V  DATA ANALYSIS AND  DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS  What were the e f f e c t s of the Day  House Program on s e l e c t e d p a t i e n t s '  i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t as measured by R o t t e r ' s I n t e r p e r s o n a l T r u s t  Scale?  T h i s r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n i s answered i n the d i s c u s s i o n of the f i n d i n g s .  Data A n a l y s i s As d i s c u s s e d i n Chapter IV, d a t a were o b t a i n e d  through completion  of  R o t t e r ' s I n t e r p e r s o n a l T r u s t S c a l e at s i x to e i g h t week i n t e r v a l s ( p r e t e s t arid p o s t t e s t ) by both  the e x p e r i m e n t a l  s c o r e d on a f i v e - p o i n t  remaining  and  low The  s c o r e s i n d i c a t e low t r u s t  t o t a l scores ranging  group.  the p r e t e s t and  obtained  Table  agreement and  group ( f i v e males and  five  T a b l e 1 shows the t o t a l s c o r e s of  p o s t t e s t s c o r e s of t h i s  standard  the  deviation for  group.  ten p a t i e n t s i n the c o n t r o l group ( s i x females and  four males)  from 63 to 82 on the p r e t e s t and  from  so  trust  from 55 to 78 on the p r e t e s t and  2 shows the mean and  t o t a l scores ranging  The  ( R o t t e r , 1967).  t e n p a t i e n t s i n the e x p e r i m e n t a l  experimental  agreement.  In t h i s s c a l e , h i g h s c o r e s i n d i c a t e h i g h  from .49 to 84 on the p o s t t e s t .  The  i n d i c a t e d t r u s t i f t h e r e was  i n d i c a t e d m i s t r u s t i f t h e r e was  reversed.  females) o b t a i n e d  Items were  from 5 = s t r o n g l y agree to 1 = s t r o n g l y d i s a g r e e .  t h i r t e e n items  the s c o r i n g was  c o n t r o l groups.  s c a l e from s t r o n g l y agree to s t r o n g l y d i s a g r e e .  Twelve of the t w e n t y - f i v e items These were scored  and  61  36 Table 1 P r e t e s t and P o s t t e s t  Pretest  Ss  Scores f o r the E x p e r i m e n t a l Group  Posttest  Scores  Scores  Differences (y-x)  X  y  01  78  84  +6  02  55  49  -6  03  65  79  +14  04  61  57  -4  05  60  73  +13  0.6  66  71  +5  07  76  71  -5  Q8  62  67  +5  09  64  61  -3  10  67  83  +16  Table 2 Mean and Standard D e v i a t i o n  . N  .  Time  f o r E x p e r i m e n t a l Group  M  S.D.  10  Pretest  65.4  6.67  10  Posttest  69.5  10.74  37 to 89 on  the p o s t t e s t .  T a b l e 3. and  The  t o t a l scores  T a b l e 4 shows the mean and  p o s t t e s t scores The  d e v i a t i o n f o r the  pretest  by means of non-parametric s t a t i s t i c s  the p<.05 l e v e l of s i g n i f i c a n c e . compare the e x p e r i m e n t a l and On  standard  of the c o n t r o l group.  d a t a were analyzed  scores.  of t h i s group are shown i n  The  Mann-Whitney U Test was  used  c o n t r o l group on the p r e t e s t and  the p r e t e s t , the groups d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y  using to  posttest  (p<.05) i n d i -  c a t i n g t h a t the p a t i e n t s i n the c o n t r o l group were more t r u s t i n g than those i n the e x p e r i m e n t a l group.  No  s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e was  found  when the p o s t t e s t s c o r e s were compared. The W i l c o x o n signed-rank t e s t was the s c o r e s group had of 17.5 not  from p r e t e s t to p o s t t e s t i n each group. a T value  (p<.18).  of 13.5  The  (p<.087) and  House program had  no  The  p o s t t e s t scores  T r u s t , P o l i t i c a l T r u s t and  T a b l e s 7 and The  and  c o n c l u s i o n was  t h a t the  value did  Day  interpersonal  used to a n a l y z e the  of each group on  T r u s t of S t r a n g e r s .  differences  the f a c t o r s of T a b l e s 5 and  Parental  6 show the  l e v e l of s i g n i f i c a n c e f o r the e x p e r i m e n t a l group.  f a c t o r of P o l i t i c a l T r u s t i n c r e a s e d The  of P a r e n t a l T r u s t and significance..  a T  8 show these f i n d i n g s f o r the c o n t r o l group.  the c o n t r o l group.  changes.  the c o n t r o l group had  scale.  The Wilcoxon signed-rank t e s t was  T values,  experimental  s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t on the p a t i e n t s '  t r u s t as measured by R o t t e r ' s  i n p r e t e s t and  The  change i n the e x p e r i m e n t a l group approached but  reach s t a t i s t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e .  scores,  used to examine the changes i n  significantly  d i r e c t i o n of change was  T r u s t of S t r a n g e r s ,  (p<.0391) i n  s i m i l a r f o r the  but d i d not r e a c h  In the e x p e r i m e n t a l group there were no  factors  statistical  significant  38 Table 3 Pretest  Ss  and P o s t t e s t  .Pretest  Scores f o r the C o n t r o l  Scores  Posttest  Group  Scores  Differences  X  y  01  77  89  +12  02  78  72  -6  03  63°  74  +11  04  69  68  -1  05  78  85  +7  06  73  75  +2  07  82  80  -2  08  78  83  +5  09  66  61  -5  10  65  66  +1  (y-x)  Table 4  .N  Mean and Standard D e v i a t i o n  f o r Control  Time  M  Group  S.D.  10  Pretest  72.9  5.98  10  Posttest  75.3  8.48  39 Table 5 P r e t e s t and P o s t t e s t Scores o f the E x p e r i m e n t a l Group on the F a c t o r s o f P o l i t i c a l T r u s t , P a r e n t a l T r u s t and T r u s t o f S t r a n g e r s  Ss  POLITICAL TRUST Pretest  Posttest  TRUST OF STRANGERS  PARENTAL TRUST Pretest  Pretest  Posttest  Posttest  01  8  9  21  17  4  4  Q2  15  14  15  19  10  10  03  8  9  14  18  8  10  04  9  11  15  16  9  10  05  15  9  18  21  10  7  06  10  10  19  17  7  9  07  13  13  16  21  14  14  08  9  9  26  25  5  7  09  7  12  26  14  6  6  10  11  12  23  21  9  14  Table 6 The R e s u l t s o f the Wilcoxon s i g n e d - r a n k t e s t on the F a c t o r s o f P a r e n t a l T r u s t , P o l i t i c a l T r u s t and T r u s t o f S t r a n g e r s f o r the E x p e r i m e n t a l Group  FACTOR Parental Political  Trust Trust  Trust of Strangers  N o f ranked p a i r s  T  10  25.5  7  9.5  6  5  P .4229-.4609 .2344-.2891 .1563  40 Table 7 P r e t e s t and P o s t t e s t Scores o f the C o n t r o l Group on the F a c t o r s o f P o l i t i c a l T r u s t , P a r e n t a l T r u s t and T r u s t o f S t r a n g e r s  Pretest  •TRUST OF STRANGERS  - PARENTAL TRUST  POLITICAL TRUST  Ss  Posttest  Pretest  Posttest  Pretest  Posttest  01  14  16  18  19  8  12  02  9  9  19  20  13  10  03  7  12  19  22  10  11  04  9  10  22  17  9  10  05  10  15  19  21  12  14  06  !0  11  20  19  10  10  07  16  14  20  22  9  9  08  13  14  20  22  10  10  09  8  8  17  17  11  12  10  11  13  17  21  8  9  Table 8 The R e s u l t s o f the Wilcoxon signed-rank t e s t on the F a c t o r s of P a r e n t a l T r u s t , P o l i t i c a l T r u s t and T r u s t o f S t r a n g e r s f o r the C o n t r o l Group  FACTOR Parental Political  Trust Trust  T r u s t of S t r a n g e r s  N of ranked  pairs  T  P  9  11  .1016  8  5  .0391  7  6  .1094  41 Discussion There was  no  statistically  of the  s i g n i f i c a n t degree of change i n the  p a t i e n t s ' i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t scores Program. Surwillo  T h i s f i n d i n g may  be  Findings  a f t e r c o m p l e t i o n of the Day  a f u n c t i o n of a s m a l l  House  sample s i z e .  Also,  (1980) noted t h a t t e s t s f o r o r d i n a l d a t a such as the Wilcoxon  s i g n e d - r a n k s t e s t are l e s s p o w e r f u l because "the magnitude of the tance between s c o r e s One  i s discarded  speculative explanation  the p o s t t e s t s c o r e s measured by R o t t e r ' s which does not  i n the p r o c e s s of r a n k i n g  s c a l e , might be  a stable personality characteristic  period.  f o r the l a c k of change i n the e x p e r i m e n t a l group  r e l a t e s to the time when the second q u e s t i o n n a i r e stated p r e v i o u s l y , t h i s occurred  w i t h i n two  House program when p a t i e n t s were a t t e n d i n g the p r o c e s s of t e r m i n a t i o n .  sonal t r u s t score.  The  Day  As Day  p r o c e s s may  have caused  feel-  l o s s , ^ a d v e r s e l y a f f e c t i n g the i n d i v i d u a l ' s i n t e r p e r Proshansky and  Seidenberg  (1965) p o i n t out  been aroused, there may  Completion of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e  t h a t "even  be s i t u a t i o n a l  competing a t t i t u d e s or needs"  s e v e r a l weeks a f t e r  termination  House would have avoided t h i s p a r t i c u l a r source of e r r o r .  The on  administered.  the a f t e r c a r e group and were i n  f a c t o r s t h a t l e a d to the a r o u s a l of s t r o n g e r ,  at  was  weeks of c o m p l e t i n g the  termination  i n s i t u a t i o n s where an a t t i t u d e has  (p. 101).  51).  f o r the l a c k of s i g n i f i c a n t change i n  change over a s h o r t  and  them" (p.  of e i t h e r group i s t h a t i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t , as  Another e x p l a n a t i o n  i n g s of a n x i e t y  dis-  f i n d i n g t h a t the p a t i e n t s i n the c o n t r o l group were more t r u s t i n g  the p r e t e s t than those i n the e x p e r i m e n t a l group i n d i c a t e that the  groups d i f f e r e d .  T h i s f i n d i n g may  i n which the p a t i e n t s were not  be  a r e s u l t of the e x p e r i m e n t a l  randomly assigned  to the two  groups.  two  design  The s i g n i f i c a n t i n c r e a s e Trust  i n the s c o r e  f o r the f a c t o r o f P o l i t i c a l  i n the c o n t r o l group may be due to a s t a t i s t i c a l a b e r r a t i o n caused  by s m a l l sample s i z e .  T h i s sample s i z e was f u r t h e r reduced when s e v e r a l  of the s c o r e s were found to be equal.  Summary The r e s u l t s o f t h i s study l e d t o the c o n c l u s i o n t r u s t as measured by R o t t e r ' s by the Day House program.  Interpersonal  that  interpersonal  T r u s t S c a l e was not a f f e c t e d  P o s s i b l e explanations  f o r t h i s c o n c l u s i o n may  be t h a t i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t i s a s t a b l e p e r s o n a l i t y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c which may n o t change over a p e r i o d o f e i g h t weeks.  Other f a c t o r s  discussed  were s m a l l sample s i z e , decreased power o f non-parametric s t a t i s t i c s , and lack of randomization.  43  CHAPTER VI  SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY  Summary The  construct of Interpersonal  t r u s t has been regarded as an e s s e n t i a l  component o f a l l s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n .  D u r i n g the p a s t  twenty y e a r s , t h e  r e s e a r c h on t r u s t has shed some l i g h t on t h i s complex c o n s t r u c t . been l e f t unanswered as t o why and how people T h i s study has focused  trust.  on the e f f e c t s o f a group psychotherapy program  (Day House) upon i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t . i n g theory,  Much has  Within  a framework o f s o c i a l l e a r n -  t r u s t was d e f i n e d as an "expectancy h e l d by an i n d i v i d u a l or  group t h a t the word, promise, v e r b a l o r w r i t t e n statement o f another  indi-  v i d u a l or group can be r e l i e d on" ( R o t t e r , 1967, p. 444). T h i s expectancy was measured by R o t t e r ' s The  Interpersonal Trust  Day House program was d e s c r i b e d  Scale.  i n Chapter I I I .  chosen because o f i t s emphasis on s o c i a l l e a r n i n g theory system o f c o s t s and rewards, used as r e i n f o r c e m e n t s , p a t i e n t towards change.  T h i s program was through which a  would d i r e c t the  A l s o , the expectancy t h a t the i n d i v i d u a l ' s word,  promise, v e r b a l and w r i t t e n statement c o u l d be r e l i e d upon, was emphasized throughout t h i s program. T h i s study used a q u a s i - e x p e r i m e n t a l design any  (Campbell &.Stanley, 1963).  non-equivalent  More s p e c i f i c a l l y ,  c o n t r o l group t h i s study examined  change i n t h e dependent v a r i a b l e ( I n t e r p e r s o n a l T r u s t ) a f t e r the  independent v a r i a b l e (Day House program) was  introduced.  Twenty p a t i e n t s who assigned who  to two  attended and  not a t t e n d  The  completed the Day  T r u s t S c a l e was  to e i g h t week i n t e r v a l s .  u s i n g non-parametric  House program.  completed by The  of S t r a n g e r s .  Ten  patients  p a t i e n t s who  to the c o n t r o l group.  did  Rotter's  the p a t i e n t s i n both groups at  p r e t e s t and  p o s t t e s t s c o r e s were  analyzed  statistics.  Three f a c t o r s w i t h i n the I n t e r p e r s o n a l i n the l i t e r a t u r e .  House program were  e x p e r i m e n t a l group c o n s i s t e d of ten  t h i s program were a s s i g n e d  Interpersonal six  groups.  were r e f e r r e d to the Day  T r u s t S c a l e were i d e n t i f i e d  These were P a r e n t a l T r u s t , P o l i t i c a l T r u s t and  The W i l c o x o n signed-rank t e s t was  Trust  used to a n a l y z e the  scores  of these f a c t o r s i n both groups.  Conclusions The  r e s u l t s of t h i s study were:  1.  The  Day  House program had  no  statistically  upon i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t as measured by 2.  The  two  significant effect  the I n t e r p e r s o n a l  Trust  Scale.  groups d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y on the p r e t e s t s c o r e s .  The  p a t i e n t s i n the c o n t r o l group were more t r u s t i n g than the p a t i e n t s i n the e x p e r i m e n t a l group. design  T h i s d i f f e r e n c e may  i n which the p a t i e n t s were not  3.  The  randomly assigned  f a c t o r of P o l i t i c a l T r u s t was  i n the c o n t r o l group. were not  have been a r e s u l t of  found to be  The  to the two  found to change  f a c t o r s of P a r e n t a l T r u s t and  experimental groups.  significantly  T r u s t of  s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t i n e i t h e r group.  Strangers This  have been caused by s t a t i s t i c a l a b e r r a t i o n r e s u l t i n g from s m a l l sample  The were not  i n t e r n a l v a l i d i t y o f t h i s study was randomly a s s i g n e d  to the  l i m i t e d to the p a t i e n t s i n the Day  two  groups.  l i m i t e d because the  may size.  patients  A l s o , g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y was  House program.  45 Small sample s i z e and  the use  of non-parametric s t a t i s t i c s  a f f e c t e d the accuracy i n which the v a r i a b i l i t y i n p r e t e s t and scores  also  posttest  c o u l d be measured.  Rotter's a t t i t u d e s may  Interpersonal be  Trust  S c a l e measured t r u s t a t t i t u d e s .  r e l a t i v e l y s t a b l e p e r s o n a l i t y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s t h a t do  change over a s h o r t p e r i o d of time. behavior s p e c i f i c a l l y w i t h i n  The  researcher  the group s e t t i n g would have been more u s e f u l To  t h i s day,  Recommendations f o r F u r t h e r  t h i s and 2.  such s c a l e  t r u s t behavior.  Other recommendations f o r f u r t h e r study are l i s t e d  This research  no  recommends t h a t a study be done i n o r d e r to develop  a s c a l e which measures i n t e r p e r s o n a l  1.  not  A t r u s t s c a l e which focused on t r u s t  i n measuring outcomes of group psychotherapy. exists.  These  be  r e p l i c a t e d using  below.  Study  l a r g e r samples of p a t i e n t s  from  o t h e r group psychotherapy programs. A time study be  attending  the Day  have the p a t i e n t s  done w i t h a l a r g e sample of p a t i e n t s who  House program.  More s p e c i f i c a l l y ,  complete the I n t e r p e r s o n a l  Trust  have been  the r e s e a r c h e r  Scale before,  could  after  and  s e v e r a l months f o l l o w i n g completion of t h i s program. 3.  A study be done to compare the p a t i e n t s ' i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t w i t h  evaluation 4.  of t h e i r p r o g r e s s d u r i n g  A study be  psychotherapy and  the phases of group psychotherapy.  conducted i n o r d e r to compare the  e f f e c t s of  group  i n d i v i d u a l therapy on p a t i e n t s ' i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t .  46  BIBLIOGRAPHY  Baldwin, A. Behavior and development i n c h i l d h o o d . P r e s s , 1965.  New York:  Dryden  B e n n i s , W., S c h e i n , E., Berlew, D., & S t e e l e , F. I n t e r p e r s o n a l dynamics: E s s a y s and r e a d i n g s on human i n t e r a c t i o n . Homewood, 111.: Dorsey P r e s s , 1964. B r i d g e s , J . , & Schoeninger, D. I n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t b e h a v i o r as r e l a t e d t o s u b j e c t i v e c e r t a i n t y and outcome v a l u e . P s y c h o l o g i c a l Reports, February 1977, 41, 677-678. Campbell, D. T., & S t a n l e y , designs f o r research. Co., 1963.  J . C. E x p e r i m e n t a l and q u a s i - e x p e r i m e n t a l Chicago: Rand McNally C o l l e g e P u b l i s h i n g  Cash, T., Stack, J . , & Luna, G. Covergent and d i s c r i m i n a n t b e h a v i o r a l aspects of i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t . P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e p o r t s , 1975, 37. (3, P a r t I ) , 983-986. Chatwin, M. W. I n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t and l e a d e r s h i p s t y l e i n group counseling. D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 1971, _32 (11-A), 6120. Chun, K. T., & Campbell, J . B. D i m e n s i o n a l i t y of R o t t e r ' s I n t e r p e r s o n a l Trust Scale. P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e p o r t s , 1974, 35., 1059-1070. C l a r k e , W. F. Some e f f e c t s o f n o n - v e r b a l a c t i v i t i e s and group d i s c u s s i o n on i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t development i n s m a l l groups ( D o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , A r i z o n a S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , 1971). D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 1971, 52, 169A. C o r a z z i n i , C. T r u s t as a complex m u l t i - d i m e n s i o n a l P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e p o r t s , 1977, _40 ( 1 ) , 75-80. Deutsch, M. T r u s t and s u s p i c i o n . 2, 265-279.  construct.  J o u r n a l o f C o n f l i c t R e s o l u t i o n , 1958,  Deutsch, M. The e f f e c t o f m o t i v a t i o n a l o r i e n t a t i o n upon t r u s t and suspicion. Human R e l a t i o n s , I960, .13, 123-139. (a) Deutsch, M. T r u s t , t r u s t w o r t h i n e s s and the F - s c a l e . and S o c i a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1960, 61, 138-140. (b)  J o u r n a l o f Abnormal  D i s t e f a n o , M. K., P r y e r , M. W., & G a r r i s o n , J . L. C l i e n t s s a t i s f a c t i o n and i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t among h o s p i t a l i z e d p s y c h i a t r i c p a t i e n t s . P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e p o r t s , 1981, .49 ( 2 ) , 420-422.  47 E l l i s o n , C. W., & F i r e s t o n e , I . J . The development of i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t as a f u n c t i o n of s e l f - e s t e e m , t a r g e t s t a t u s and t a r g e t s t y l e . Journal of P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1974, 29_ 655-663. y  Gibb, J . D e f e n s i v e communication. 1961, JUL ( 3 ) , 141-148.  The  J o u r n a l of Communication, September  Gibb, J . Climate f o r t r u s t formation. In L. P. B r a d f o r d , J . Gibb, & K. D. Bennis ( E d . ) , T-group theory and l a b o r a t o r y method: I n n o v a t i o n i n r e education. New York: W i l e y Co., 1962. G i f f i n , K. The c o n t r i b u t i o n of s t u d i e s of source c r e d i b i l i t y to a theory of i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t i n the communication p r o c e s s . Psychological B u l l e t i n , 1967, 68, 104-120. (a) G i f f i n , K. I n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t i n s m a l l group communication. J o u r n a l of Speech, October 1967, 53, 224-234. (b) G i f f i n , K. I n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t i n the h e l p i n g p r o f e s s i o n s . J o u r n a l of N u r s i n g , 1969, 69 ( 7 ) , 1491-1492.  Quarterly  American  G i f f i n , K., & P a t t o n , B. P e r s o n a l t r u s t i n human i n t e r a c t i o n . B a s i c Readings i n I n t e r p e r s o n a l Communication. New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1971. G i f f i n , K., & P a t t o n , B. Fundamentals o f i n t e r p e r s o n a l New York: Harper & Row P u b l i s h e r s , 1976.  communication.  Hamsher, J . H., G e l l e r , J . D., & R o t t e r , J . B. Interpersonal t r u s t , i n t e r n a l - e x t e r n a l c o n t r o l and the Warren Commission Report. Journal o f P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1968, _9, 210-215. H e i d e r , M. An i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between speech a n x i e t y i n a d u l t s and t h e i r i n d i c a t i o n of p a r e n t a l communication s u p p r e s s i o n during childhood. Unpublished M.A. t h e s i s , The U n i v e r s i t y of Kansas, 1968. Hovland, C. I . , J a n i s , I . L., & K e l l e y , H. H. Communication and persuasion: P s y c h o l o g i c a l s t u d i e s of o p i n i o n change. New Haven, Conn.: Y a l e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1953. J o u r a r d , S. M., & Friedman, R. E x p e r i m e n t e r - s u b j e c t " d i s t a n c e " and s e l f disclosure. J o u r n a l of P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1970, 15, 278-282. K a p l a n , R. M. Components of t r u s t : Note on use P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e p o r t s , 1973, J33, 13-14. Kee,  of Rotter's  scale.  H. W., & Knox, R. E. Conceptual and m e t h o d o l o g i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . i n the study of t r u s t and s u s p i c i o n . J o u r n a l of C o n f l i c t R e s o l u t i o n , 1970, 14, 357-366.  48 K e s s e l , E. V. I n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t and a t t i t u d e toward the e x p r e s s i o n p o s i t i v e and n e g a t i v e a f f e c t w i t h i n the T-group. D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 1971, 32 (4-A), 1855-1856. Knobloch, F., & Knobloch, J . Aronson I n c . , 1979.  Integrated  psychotherapy .  New  York:  of  Jason  K r u g l a n s k i , A. W. A t t r i b u t i n g trustworthiness i n supervisor-worker relations. J o u r n a l o f E x p e r i m e n t a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1970, j ) , 214-232. Loomis, J . Communication, the development of t r u s t and behavior. Human R e l a t i o n s , 1959, _12, 305-315.  co-operative  M e l l i n g e r , G. D. I n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t as a f a c t o r i n communication. J o u r n a l of Abnormal and S o c i a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1956, 52, 304-309. Pasewark, R., F i t z g e r a l d , B., & Sawyer, R. V a l i d i t y of R o t t e r ' s Interpersonal Trust Scale: A study of p a r a n o i d s c h i z o p h r e n i c s . P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e p o r t s , 1973, 32 ( 3 ) , 982. P i p e r , W. E. E v a l u a t i o n of the e f f e c t s of s e n s i t i v i t y t r a i n i n g and the e f f e c t s of v a r y i n g group c o m p o s i t i o n a c c o r d i n g to i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t . D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , December 1972, _33 (6-B), 2819. Proshansky, H., & S e i d e n b e r g , B. Basic studies i n s o c i a l psychology. York: H o l t , R i n e h a r t & Winston, 1965.  New  R o e g i e r s , C. L. An e x p e r i m e n t a l study i n i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t and l e a d e r s h i p i n p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g s m a l l groups. D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 1972, 33 (6-B), 2827-2828. Rogers, C a r l .  On  becoming a p e r s o n .  New  York:  Houghton M i f f l i n Co.,  1961.  R o t t e r , J . B. A new s c a l e f o r the measurement of i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t . J o u r n a l of P e r s o n a l i t y , 1967, 3_5, 651-665. R o t t e r , J . B. Generalized expectancies P s y c h o l o g i s t , 1971, 26, 443-452.  for interpersonal trust.  R o t t e r , J . B.  S c o t t , Foresman & Co.,  Personality.  New  York:  American  1975.  R o t t e r , J . B., Chance, J . E., & P h a r e s , J . E. A p p l i c a t i o n s of s o c i a l l e a r n i n g theory of p e r s o n a l i t y . New York: H o l t , R i n e h a r t & Winston, 1972. Sawyer, R., Pasewark, R., D a v i s , F., & F i t z g e r a l d , B. R e l a t i o n s h i p of R o t t e r ' s I n t e r p e r s o n a l T r u s t S c a l e and s o c i a l c l a s s . Psychological R e p o r t s y 1973, 32 (3), 989-990. S c h l e n k e r , B. R., Helm, B., & T e d e s c h i , J . T. The e f f e c t s of p e r s o n a l i t y and s i t u a t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s on b e h a v i o r a l t r u s t . J o u r n a l of P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1973, 25, 419-427.  49 Solomon, L. The i n f l u e n c e o f some types o f power r e l a t i o n s h i p s and game s t r a t e g i e s upon the development of i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t . J o u r n a l of Abnormal and S o c i a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1960, &1, 223-230. S t r i c k l a n d , L. H. 26, 200-215.  S u r v e i l l a n c e and t r u s t .  J o u r n a l of P e r s o n a l i t y , 1958,  S u r w i l l o , Walter. Experimental design i n p s y c h i a t r y : Research methods f o r c l i n i c a l p r a c t i c e . New York: Grune and S t a t t o n I n c . , 1980. Swinth, R. L. The e s t a b l i s h m e n t of the t r u s t r e l a t i o n s h i p . C o n f l i c t R e s o l u t i o n , 1967, 11, 335-344.  J o u r n a l of  T e d e s c h i , R., & W r i g h t , T. C r o s s - v a l i d a t i o n of the W r i g h t - T e d e s c h i f a c t o r s of the i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t s c a l e . P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e p o r t s , 1980, 47, 111-114. T h o r s l u n d , C. concept.  I n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t : A r e v i e w and examination of the Goteborg P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e p o r t s , 1976, 6^ ( 6 ) , 1-28.  Walker, B., & Robinson, R. Dimensions of i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t and group v a r i a b l e s i n s h o r t - t e r m c o u n s e l l i n g . E d u c a t i o n Research Q u a r t e r l y , 1979, A 03), 58-68. (a) Walker, B., & Robinson, R. U t i l i z i n g dimensions of the R o t t e r I n t e r p e r s o n a l T r u s t S c a l e i n i n v e s t i g a t i o n of t r u s t : V a l i d a t i o n o f suggested methods. P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e p o r t s , 1979, 44 ( 2 ) , 423-429. (b) Witherspoon, K. D. I n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t i n psychotherapy: of t h e r a p i s t t r u s t w o r t h i n e s s . Dissertation Abstracts 1981, 41 (7-B), 2786.  The determinants International,  Wright, T. L., & Maggied, P. An u n o b t r u s i v e study o f i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t . J o u r n a l o f P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l P s y c h o l o g y, 1976, J32, 446. Wright, T. L., & T e d e s c h i , R. G. F a c t o r a n a l y s i s of the i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r u s t s c a l e . J o u r n a l o f C o n s u l t i n g and C l i n i c a l P s y c h o l o g y, 1975, 43 ( 4 ) , 470-477. Yalom, I . D. The theory and p r a c t i c e o f group psychotherapy. B a s i c Books I n c . , 1970.  New York:  APPENDIX A INTERPERSONAL TRUST SCALE  51 INTERPERSONAL TRUST SCALE  This different by g i v i n g read each column.  i s a q u e s t i o n n a i r e to determine t h e a t t i t u d e s and b e l i e f s o f people on a v a r i e t y o f statements. P l e a s e answer the statements as t r u e a p i c t u r e o f your own b e l i e f s as p o s s i b l e . Be sure to item c a r e f u l l y and show your b e l i e f s by checking the a p p r o p r i a t e  I f you s t r o n g l y agree w i t h an i t e m , put a check mark (/) i n : t h e f i r s t column. Put a check mark (/) i n the second column i f you m i l d l y agree w i t h the item. That i s , put a check mark (/) i n the second column i f you t h i n k the item i s g e n e r a l l y more t r u e than untrue a c c o r d i n g t o your b e l i e f s . Put a check mark (/) i n the t h i r d column i f you f e e l the i t e m i s about as e q u a l l y t r u e as untrue. Put a check mark (V) i n the f o u r t h column i f you m i l d l y d i s a g r e e w i t h the item. That i s , put a check mark (/) i n column f o u r i f you f e e l the i t e m i s more u n t r u e than t r u e . I f you s t r o n g l y d i s a g r e e w i t h an item, put a check mark (/) i n column f i v e .  CO  TJ  (3 ca  60  a O U  •u  Most p e o p l e would r a t h e r l i v e i n a c l i m a t e t h a t i s m i l d a l l year around than one i n which w i n t e r s are cold. 2.  H y p o c r i s y i s on the i n c r e a s e i n s o c i e t y .  3.  I n d e a l i n g w i t h s t r a n g e r s one i s b e t t e r o f f to be c a u t i o u s u n t i l they p r o v i d e evidence t h a t they are t r u s t w o r t h y .  4.  T h i s c o u n t r y has a dark f u t u r e u n l e s s we can a t t r a c t b e t t e r people i n t o p o l i t i c s .  5.  Fear o f s o c i a l d i s g r a c e or punishment r a t h e r than c o n s c i e n c e p r e v e n t s most p e o p l e from b r e a k i n g the law.  6.  P a r e n t s u s u a l l y can be r e l i e d upon to keep t h e i r promises.  7.  The a d v i c e o f e l d e r s i s o f t e n poor because the o l d e r p e r s o n doesn't r e c o g n i z e how times have changed.  8.  U s i n g t h e Honour System o f not h a v i n g a teacher p r e s e n t d u r i n g exams would p r o b a b l y r e s u l t i n increased cheating.  CL)  CU  •H  CD  CD  <D  CD CD  K  CD •a cu CD  60^ cd CO CO . . TH 60 *H  H.• H till U M| S <  en <!  §1 W  < o  52  cd  oi W C  cd  00  S  cu H O cu T3 rH 4-1 oil •H  CO  9.  The U n i t e d N a t i o n s w i l l never be an f o r c e i n k e e p i n g world peace.  effective  10.  P a r e n t s and t e a c h e r s are l i k e l y to say what they b e l i e v e themselves and not j u s t what they t h i n k i s good f o r the c h i l d to hear.  11.  Most p e o p l e can be counted on t o do what they say they w i l l do.  12.  As evidenced by r e c e n t books and movies, m o r a l i t y seems on the downgrade i n t h i s country.  13.  The J u d i c i a r y i s a p l a c e where we unbiased treatment.  14.  I t i s s a f e to b e l i e v e t h a t i n s p i t e o f what people say most people are p r i m a r i l y i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e i r own w e l f a r e .  15.  The f u t u r e seems v e r y p r o m i s i n g .  16.  Most people would be . h o r r i f i e d i f they knew how much news the p u b l i c hears and sees i s distorted.  17.  Seeking a d v i c e from s e v e r a l people i s more l i k e l y to confuse than i t i s to h e l p one.  18.  Most e l e c t e d p u b l i c o f f i c i a l s a r e r e a l l y i n t h e i r campaign promises.  19.  There i s no simple way t e l l i n g the t r u t h .  20.  T h i s country has p r o g r e s s e d to the p o i n t where we can reduce the amount of c o m p e t i t i v e n e s s encouraged by s c h o o l s and p a r e n t s .  21.  Even though we have r e p o r t s i n newspapers, r a d i o and t e l e v i s i o n , i t i s hard to get o b j e c t i v e accounts o f p u b l i c e v e n t s .  can a l l get  o f d e c i d i n g who  sincere  is  <tj  cu CU  <D CU  u. ^  (U CU  H. 60 C  0£| rH M| O cd T3 cd U C O i H CO 4-1 M| 00 - H •H i H CO < p S P  U  CU <u  U  CU 60 cd  CO P  53  ct) d  a cd  60  C  CD  O  CD  M 4-1  M 6t  co <;  22.  I t i s more important t h a t people a c h i e v e happiness than that they a c h i e v e g r e a t n e s s .  23.  Most e x p e r t s can be r e l i e d upon t o t e l l the t r u t h about the l i m i t s of t h e i r knowledge.  24.  Most p a r e n t s can be r e l i e d upon t o c a r r y out t h e i r t h r e a t s o f punishment.  25.  One s h o u l d not a t t a c k the p o l i t i c a l of o t h e r p e o p l e .  26.  I n these c o m p e t i t i v e times one has to be a l e r t or someone i s l i k e l y t o take advantage of you.  27.  C h i l d r e n need to be g i v e n more guidance by t e a c h e r s and p a r e n t s than they now t y p i c a l l y get.  28.  Most rumors u s u a l l y have a s t r o n g element o f truth.  29.  Many major n a t i o n a l s p o r t c o n t e s t s a r e f i x e d i n one way o r another.  30.  A good l e a d e r molds the o p i n i o n s o f the group he i s l e a d i n g r a t h e r than merely f o l l o w i n g the wishes o f the m a j o r i t y .  31.  Most i d e a l i s t s a r e s i n c e r e and u s u a l l y what they p r e a c h .  practice  32.  Most salesmen products.  their  33.  E d u c a t i o n i n t h i s country i s n o t r e a l l y i p r e p a r i n g young men and women to d e a l w i t h the problems o f the f u t u r e .  34.  Most s t u d e n t s i n s c h o o l would not cheat even i f they were sure o f g e t t i n g away w i t h i t .  a r e honest  beliefs  i n describing  H  •d H  H  CD  CD  CD  CD  u H. 6tJ  w CD CD  CD CD  &q  60 *H  U 4J  S  CD  60 U C 6£ O  cd co  < a  CD H  cd  CO TH  P c/> P  54  cfl  XI  tr w  ti  Q) >, 0) QJ H QJ 60 U >. U 60 i-H CL) CD 60| ti ,60 ti QJ TJ QJ CD ctjr H 60 O cd O CD r-H !-l U W U CD T3 cd 4-1 U U, -H 60 t H rH CO 4J 60|•H 60|<C c/3 O P CD ctj QJ  CO <i S <! 35.  The hordes o f s t u d e n t s now going to c o l l e g e a r e g o i n g to f i n d i t more d i f f i c u l t to f i n d good j o b s when they graduate than d i d the c o l l e g e graduates o f the p a s t .  36.  Most repairmen w i l l not overcharge even i f they t h i n k you a r e i g n o r a n t of t h e i r s p e c i a l t y .  37.  A l a r g e share of a c c i d e n t c l a i m s f i l e d a g a i n s t i n s u r a n c e companies a r e phony.  38.  One should not a t t a c k the r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f s o f other people.  39.  Most people answer p u b l i c o p i n i o n p o l l s honestly.  40.  I f we r e a l l y knew what was going on i n i n t e r n a t i o n a l p o l i t i c s , the p u b l i c would have more r e a s o n to be f r i g h t e n e d than they now seem to be.  •rl -H  a  o  APPENDIX B INFORMATION AND CONSENT FORM  56 INFORMATION AND CONSENT FORM U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia School of Nursing Vancouver, B r i t i s h Columbia Dear My name i s P a u l a T o g n a z z i n i . I am a graduate student i n n u r s i n g a t the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia. I am i n t e r e s t e d i n c o n d u c t i n g a r e s e a r c h study which i d e n t i f i e s g e n e r a l o p i n i o n s o f people who a r e r e f e r r e d to the Day House program. Your p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h i s study would i n v o l v e completing two q u e s t i o n naires. Each q u e s t i o n n a i r e r e q u i r e s a p p r o x i m a t e l y f i f t e e n minutes to complete. The f i r s t q u e s t i o n n a i r e w i l l be g i v e n t o you a t the Day House e i t h e r on t h e day o f your assessment i n t e r v i e w o r j u s t b e f o r e you b e g i n the Day House program. The second q u e s t i o n n a i r e w i l l be g i v e n to you s i x weeks f o l lowing the f i r s t q u e s t i o n n a i r e . For t h i s second q u e s t i o n n a i r e , I w i l l make arrangements w i t h you as to whether you would p r e f e r to be c o n t a c t e d by m a i l or by telephone. You do not have to a t t e n d the Day House program i n o r d e r t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h i s study. You would n o t be i d e n t i f i e d by name i n t h i s study. T h i s consent form w i l l be p l a c e d i n my f i l e and the data i n the q u e s t i o n n a i r e w i l l be coded, t h a t i s , w i l l not i n c l u d e your name. T h i s i s done i n o r d e r to ensure you confidentiality. A l l o r i g i n a l m a t e r i a l w i l l be d e s t r o y e d upon completion o f t h i s study. F i n d i n g s o f t h i s study may be p u b l i s h e d but your i d e n t i t y w i l l not be r e v e a l e d . Your p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h i s study i s v o l u n t a r y and w i l l i n no way e f f e c t your treatment a t the Day House. There w i l l be no payment o f f e r e d f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h i s study. You a r e f r e e t o withdraw from t h i s study a t any time w i t h o u t j e o p a r d i z i n g your therapy a t the Day House or a f t e r w a r d s . I f you have any f u r t h e r q u e s t i o n s about t h i s study, p l e a s e c o n t a c t me through the Day House, by phone, i n person o r i n w r i t i n g . The f i n d i n g s of t h i s r e s e a r c h study w i l l be a v a i l a b l e to you upon r e q u e s t . I f you wish to p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h i s study, p l e a s e s i g n your name a t the bottom o f t h i s form. S i n c e r e l y yours, Graduate Student Masters o f N u r s i n g Program U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia I u n d e r s t a n d the n a t u r e o f my p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h i s study and g i v e my consent to p a r t i c i p a t e .  Signature  Address  Phone no.  Date  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

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.831.1-0095657/manifest

Comment

Related Items