团体心理治疗中凝聚力的概念及测量研究述评

A Review of Research on Conception and Measurement of Cohesion in Group Psychotherapy

团体心理治疗中的凝聚力最初多被定义为人际信任、吸引和卷入,随着研究的深入,凝聚力的概念逐渐向多维的方向发展。对凝聚力的测量主要有MacKenzie的团体氛围量表、Lese等的治疗因素-凝聚力分量表及Piper的凝聚力量表等。目前团体心理治疗领域的研究对凝聚力的认识缺乏一致性。从凝聚力的概念建构着手,探索团体心理治疗过程,开发评估工具,构建系统的理论和模型,是值得国内研究者关注的方向。

Cohesion is the key cure factor in group psychotherapy research area, which is the counterpart of the therapy alliance in individual psychotherapy. At the beginning of group cohesion research, cohesion is defined as attraction - to - group and interpersonal at- traction, which is operationalized as interpersonal trust, attraction and involvement. With their understanding of cohesion broadened, researchers began to combine different aspects to explore cohesion in multidimen- sional perspectives. There were mainly three views. One was about the structure of cohesion, based on the analysis of the member - member, member- group, and member- leader relationships. Another was ＂bout the content of cohesion, such as Stokes＂ viewpoint. He thinks that cohesion in a therapy group includes the group attraction to the individual member, the instrumental value of the group, and risk - taking behaviors that occur in the group. Braaten proposed a 5 - iactor - model of group cohesion ： attraction and bonding, support and caring, listening and empathy, self - disclosure and feedback, and process performance and goal attainment. There was still a third view that explores cohesion from both the structure and content. For example, Johnson found a three - dimensional - struc- ture - model of cohesion, which included positive relationship, positive working relationship, and negative relationship, respectively. Hornsey puts forward that the social psychology theory can be integrated into group psychotherapy research. Based on social identity theory and other theories, he proposed that group identification, ingroup homogeneity , task interdependence and others can replace the conception of cohesion. But this construct still needs further empirical support. Social identity theory provides a good perspective to explore cognitive level of group cohesion, the traditional view of group attraction lays the foundation for emotional level of cohesion, and goal congruence is helpful for exploring motivational level. All of the above provide a new possibility for developing cohesion conception through the integration of these theories. There are many kinds of cohesion measurement tools developed by foreign researchers, but no consensus among them has been reached, which results in lacking comparability on cohesion studies. At present, the group climate questionnaire -short form （GCQ - S）, therapeutic factors inventory -cohesiveness scale （TFI）, and cohesion to the therapist scale （CTS） are the tools recommended by American Group Psychotherapy Association （AGPA） to evaluate the group process among those standardized measures to evaluate the clinical effect. However, there is no consensus on the definition of cohesion. And the systematic theory and models are also undeveloped. Domestic group psychotherapy research still remains in effect at the research stage. It is worthwhile for domestic researchers to pay more attention toareas of research such as group psychotherapy process, assessment tools, and systematic theory and models.