团体咨询成员的相互共情及其与效果的关系——社会关系模型在团体咨询研究中的应用

Mutual Empathy of Group Members and Its Relations with Group Outcome:The Application of Social Relations Model in Group Counseling Research

研究旨在探讨团体成员的相互共情及其与团体效果的关系。共收集10个团体,53名成员的数据,运用社会关系模型分析。结果发现:1、成员自评相互共情得分较高,但互评相关不显著;2、共情水平与会谈效果正相关,与团体反治疗性因素负相关;3、被共情水平与不信任负相关;4、共情准确性与团体治疗性因素正相关。结论:成员自评相互共情水平较高,但互评不匹配。成员自评共情水平越高,会谈效果越好,受团体反治疗性因素阻碍更少。越被准确评估情绪效价的成员,从治疗性因素中获益更多。

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether group members could empathize with each other and the relationship between mutual empathy and group outcome, using the Social Relations Model, which can analyze data across various levels in a group. Mutual empathy in this study includes three aspects. First is empathic level, to the extent a group member can understand other members＇ thoughts and share their emotions. Second is the level of being empathized, to the extent a group member felt being understood. Third is empathic accuracy, the congruence of emotion valence between self-rating and other-rating. Fifty-three members of ten groups completed self-ratings of their own emotional status, Session Evaluation Scale, Group Therapeutic Scale and Group Anti-therapeutic Scale, and also rated other members＇ emotions and how they empathize and being empathized by other group members after a group session. The data was analyzed by Triple R, a new developed software package for social relations model. The social relations model analysis on group members＇ mutual empathy showed that group members＇ self reports on empathic level and the level of being empathized were rather high. But there were no match between empathizing and being empathized in dyads, which suggest that group members may not empathize with each other. The correlation between significant perceiver/target effects and group outcome scales showed （1） The more one thought he or she could empathize with others, the better outcome he or she reported, and less impeded by anti-therapeutic factors （negative emotions, absence and distrust）; （2）The more one felt being empathized, the less impeded by anti-therapeutic factor（distrust）;（3）The more accurate others could estimate one＇s emotion valence, the more he or she could benefit from therapeutic factors. The results suggest group members＇ perceptions of their empathic level were important for group effectiveness, which was a unique therapeutic factor in group counseling. However, different from individual counseling, the feeling of being empathized didn＇t result in better outcome and more benefits. Besides, if one＇s emotion valence could be more correctly perceived by other members, he or she could also benefit more from the group. The limitations of this study were （1） The measurements of mutual empathy in this study were number-limited due to the difficulty of round-robin design, which may not reflect the variable comprehensively and further research may focus on more specific variables. （2） The group stages and group style were important variables in group counseling, but only controlled statistically in this study, future research could restrict particular group stage and style to reduce the effects of these two variables. The strengths of this study were that （1） Focusing on group members＇ mutual empathy, an important but ignorant factor comparing to group leaders＇ empathy. （2） One of the few studies using the Social Relations Model in group counseling research.