No abstract

The differential effectiveness of group psychotherapy was estimated in a meta-analysis of 111 experimental and quasi-experimental studies published over the past 20 years. A number of client, therapist, group, and methodological variables were examined in an attempt to determine specific as well as generic effectiveness. Three different effect sizes were computed: active versus wait list, active versus alternative treatment, and pre-to posttreatment improvement rates. The active versus wait list overall effect size (0.58) indicated that the average recipient of group treatment is better off than 72% of untreated controls. Improvement was related to group composition, setting, and diagnosis. Findings are discussed within the context of what the authors have learned about group treatment, meta-analytic studies of the extant group literature, and what remains for future research.

This study examined the relationship between hostility and depression in depressed and nondepressed subjects as well as the reliability and validity of several measures of anger, hostility and depression. Sixty-nine subjects were evaluated for depression using the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD; Hamilton, 1960). These subjects were then administered the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI; Beck, Ward, Mendelson, Mock, & Ergaugh, 1961), Buss-Durkee Hostility Inventory (BDHI; Buss & Durkee, 1957), Hostility and Direction of Hostility Questionnaire (HDHQ; Foulds, Caine, & Creasy, 1960) and the State-Trait Anger Scale (STAS; Spielberger, Jacobs, Russell, & Crane, 1983). Results showed the BDI, STAS-TRAIT, HDHQ, and BDHI to have good temporal stability. Support was found for the convergent validity of all measures of depression, hostility, and anger. Limited discriminant validity was found between measures of anger and hostility and measures of depression. This latter finding was interpreted as lending support for the relationship between hostility and depression rather than as an indication of limited construct validity for the measures. Intercorrelations among hostility, anger, and depression scales offer some support for the hypothesis that depression is linked most strongly with attitudinal versus motoric forms of hostility. However, normative data suggests that both forms of hostility increase with severity of depression. Clinical implications and directions for further research are discussed.

longer accurate to define therapy as something that happens in only inpatient or clinical settings. It now covers a much wider range of applications than first occurred when Dr. Pratt treated tuberculosis patients in a group or class format in 1905. A more complete review of this history can be found in Fuhriman and Burlingame (1994). Generally, group therapy is used to treat existing problems from psychopathology (e.g., depression) to problems in living (e.g., parents dealing with teenagers), ranges in duration from very brief to long term, and occurs in a variety of settings, from hospitals to college counseling centers. In this article we review the history, theoretical developments, and effectiveness of group psychotherapy as a change agent.The nonlinear, less-than-uniried complexity of group psychotherapy is understandable given the varied disciplines that have contributed to its application and theory, from theater to medicine. Anthony (1971) described its history as "conglomerate, complex, confabulatory, and conflictual." However, a number of contributors (e.g.,

186This article presents a rationale for and the implementation of a factor analytic study of a revised curative factor instrument. Valuing of the three factors of catharsis, cohesion, and insight by 161 group members in four settings (community mental health [CMH], Veterans Administration [VA], university counseling center [UCC], and group behavior class [GBC] are reported. Results show CMH group members valuing these factors more than group members from VA, UCC, and GBC. Across all settings, cohesion and catharsis are consistently valued higher than insight. Possible explanations of the findings are given.Nested within individual and group research on the therapeutic process is a cluster of studies focusing on the concept of curativeness. Regarding group therapy, the curative concept is most often associated with Irvin Yalom (1970, 1975), who described a 12-factor construct derived from research and clinical experience. His 12 curative factors are defined as catharsis, cohesiveness, self-understanding, universality, altruism, interpersonal learning (input), interpersonal learning (output), installation of hope, identification, recapitulation of the primary family, guidance, and existential factor.