Reappraisal of the A-B therapist "type" distinction in terms of the Personality Research Form.

Abstract

The A-B therapist "type" distinction, usually made on the basis of a small set of interest items, has proven predictive of therapist-patient compatibility in several clinical and analogue studies. To assess the personality dimensions involved in the A-B distinction among undergraduate males (# = 223), their A-B scale scores were related to the 22 variables of Jackson's Personality Research Form. Multiple discriminant analyses and factor analyses strongly supported the hypothesis that A-B status is explicable in personality terms: so-called A-type Ss (predicted to be compatible with schizoid patients) were characterized by cautious self-expression, social ineptness, and a restricted cognitive scope; B-type Ss (presumably compatible with neurotic patients) appeared socially ascendant and "open" to complex experiences. These results were supported by a cross-validation study of professional 5s (N = SO). As in prior research, the variables differentiating A-B statuses appeared to involve a prominent "masculinity-femininity" component.The distinction between "A" and "B" therapists originated in a series of clinical studies by Betz and Whitehorn (reviewed by Betz, 1967). These investigators found that a small set of items from the Strong Vocational Interest Blank reliably differentiated therapists who achieved high success rates in treating hospitalized schizophrenics ("A" therapists) from other ("B") therapists who performed less adequately with such patients. In treating neurotic outpatients, however, the B-type therapists outperformed the A-type therapists (McNair, Callahan, & Lorr, 1962). The Therapist X Patient interaction effect suggested by these studies has not received further examination in clinical settings; rather, a substantial number of analogue studies have been conducted which, in whole or in part, support the proposition that A-type Ss (generally, male undergraduates) interact more compatibly with schizoid, dis-1 Requests for reprints should be sent to Juris I.

Content analysis of the natural language of A and B males in a dyadic interaction.

“…As, on the other hand, talked about themselves (self-tag), were less defensive (in the social desirability sense), and had more feminine interests. These differences concur rather well with descriptions of A and B males as noted by Johnson et al (1973), Berzins et al (1971), andDublin et al (1969).…”

“…Their findings suggest that As were more introspective and less defensive (in a socially desirable sense) than Bs. Berzins, Barnes, Cohen, and Ross (1971) also found Bs to be more concerned with presenting themselves in a positive light, using the Jackson Personality Research Form. Dublin, Elton, and Berzins (1969), using the Omnibus Personality Inventory, found the dimension of masculinity-femininity to be the best linear predictor of A-B status.…”

A new measure of psychological androgyny based on the Personality Research Form.

“…Finally, it is apparent that apart from loworder correlations suggesting a positive relation of Masculinity scores to beliefs in internal control, significant among men and for the BSRI among women, little variance is shared between these sex role measures and beliefs in internal-external control. As noted elsewhere (Berzins, Note 6), the best predictor of locus of control is the FRF Desirability scale, probably because it contains an appreciable self-esteem component (see Table 2) and has in fact been construed as a measure of self-esteem in a prior study (Berzins, Barnes, Cohen, & Ross, 1971).…”

A and B undergraduate interviews of schizophrenic and neurotic inpatients: A test of the interaction hypothesis.

“…Several explanatory formulations of the A-B interaction effects (e.g., the "complementarity" hypothesis, perceptual-cognitive style compatibility) have been proposed. One such formulation can be called the personological hypothesis, which evolved from a study by Berzins, Barnes, Cohen, and Ross (1971), who showed that A-B differences can be explained in personality terms. Using the Personality Research Form (PRF, Jackson, 1967), they found that A-type persons were characterized by cautious self-expression, social ineptness, and a restricted cognitive scope, whereas B subjects appeared socially ascendant and "open" to complex experiences.…”

“…The single most differentiating personality dimension was "harmavoidance" (As>Bs), denoting cautious avoidance of risk taking. Berzins, Dove, and Ross (1972) cross-validated the Berzins et al (1971) study with very large samples of college males and females, male therapists, and male college clinic patients. In spite of striking intergroup differences in PRF scale scores, A and B persons, across samples, showed distinctive personality profiles.…”