PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 5639465

A semantic differential scale for assessing group process changes.

Abstract

The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J A Hartley. 1968. A semantic differential scale for assessing group process changes.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/5639465/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

An integrated large- and small-group approach for conducting meetings that lead to social action.

Large meetings and small-group sessions each have advantages and deficiencies in dealing with social issues. The goals of conveying information, effectively changing attitudes, and encouraging action are often best achieved by integrating small-group sessions within the context of a large meeting. An approach involving three phases for a 2-hour meeting is described: (1) and initial plenary of all participants; (2) small-group sessions conducted by previously trained group facilitators drawn from the host organization; (3) a concluding plenary session centering around brief reports from the small groups. The application of some concepts of positive mental health, contracting, and empowerment to facilitate social action are discussed.

Group Processes

Development of a tool to measure therapeutic factors in group process.

A tool, the Therapeutic Group Interaction Factors Scale (TGIF), was developed for systematically and objectively measuring the extent to which therapeutic factors defined by Yalom are present or absent in group process. Preliminary findings suggest that the TGIF is relatively easy to learn and use by coders who are familiar with Yalom's work. Once this tool has been further developed and tested, it will permit nurses and other therapists who lead/facilitate therapeutic groups to study the relationship between Yalom's factors and therapeutic outcomes objectively, rather than by asking patients to evaluate the contribution of each factor subjectively.

Group Processes