Modeling cohesion change in group counseling: The role of client characteristics, group variables, and leader behaviors.

Abstract

Despite continued empirical support for a relationship between group cohesion and therapeutic gain, few studies have attempted to examine predictors of cohesion during the life of counseling groups. The present investigation explored the impact of client variables, group characteristics, and first-session leader behaviors on changes in cohesion across time. Participants were 128 volunteer clients and 14 group therapists participating in 23 separate 8-week-long counseling groups. Results of latent growth curve (LGC) analysis indicated that a piecewise, linear-quadratic model best fit the data at the individual level, while a simplified linear model best fit the data at the group level. Overall, individual differences accounted for 80 -97% of the total variance in cohesion intercept and slope terms, with the included covariates explaining 9 -39% of this variation. Significant individual-level covariates were gender and anxious and avoidant attachment. The only significant group-level predictor was an interaction effect between leadership behaviors in the first session. Specifically, when leaders performed a high number of structuring behaviors in the absence of facilitating emotional sharing, cohesion was lower at the end of the first session. Limitations, areas of future research, and implications for the theory and practice of brief group counseling are discussed. Public Significance StatementThe present study improves our understanding of how group members develop a sense of belonging in brief group counseling; examining the relative influence of client, group, and leader characteristics across time. Findings suggest that while client characteristics explain the vast majority of change in cohesion, group leaders who focus on structuring to the exclusion of fostering emotional belonging may inhibit the bonding of groups they lead.

The influence of members’ attachment style on group cohesion in substance use therapy groups

“…They were also more likely to experience a lack of trust, genuineness and understanding within group. This finding is consistent with existing research in non-SUD populations, where individuals stronger in attachment avoidance have reported lower group cohesion [ 26 , 36 ]. These individuals hold negative internal working models of others, which lead them to perceive others as threatening and feel discomfort towards intimacy and emotional connection [ 41 ].…”

“…Unexpectedly, attachment anxiety did not significant predict higher PB or PW. As described earlier, there are mixed findings in the existing literature, with empirical support for both a positive and negative relationship between attachment anxiety and cohesion [ 8 , 26 , 36 , 37 ]. The lack of relationship between attachment anxiety and both PB and PW in the current study may possibly be explained by methodological limitations.…”

“…This may have impacted the findings, particularly as the number of previously attended group sessions of the participants ranged from 2 to 70 + sessions, indicating the likelihood of participants at various stages of recovery. Group cohesion has been found to fluctuate over the course of a group, and the trajectory has been found to differ between those stronger in attachment avoidance and those stronger in attachment anxiety [ 21 , 24 , 26 , 58 ]. While it is possible that experiences of PB and PW for individuals with stronger attachment anxiety may be more sensitive to situational variables, such as other group members and length of time in group, it could be argued that likelihood of reporting lower NR may remain stable due to the individual’s internal working model of others as positive, which persists across time and situation.…”

“…Group cohesion is an important predictor of positive treatment outcomes and processes, thus a deeper understanding of how to cultivate it is vital. Tucker et al [ 26 ] examined predictors of group cohesion and found that individual client characteristics, such as gender and attachment style, accounted for 80–97% of change in cohesion. Attachment theory [ 27 , 28 ] refers to one’s tendency to seek proximity to significant others in times of need, shaped by their early experiences with caregivers.…”

“…The impact of attachment anxiety, however, is less clear as some research has found individuals with stronger attachment anxiety report better group cohesion and more positive group relationships [ 36 , 37 ], while other research has proposed these individuals assess group interactions as threatening and this reduces their ability to work effectively in a group [ 8 ]. Further research has found attachment anxiety is not significantly related to initial group cohesion, however predicts growth of cohesion in early stages of group [ 26 ]. The attachment style of one group member has also been found to impact other members’ perceptions of the rest of the group [ 36 , 38 ], and heterogeneity of attachment style within a group has also been associated with stronger PB and lower NR [ 40 ].…”