Stages of successful time-limited counseling: An interactional examination.

Abstract

This study focused on the interactional stage differences between successful and unsuccessful time-limited counseling. Six dyads (the three most successful and the three least successful, as rated by client and counselor) were selected for intensive study from a sample pool of 15 dyads representative of timelimited counseling. It was hypothesized that .-successful counseling dyads would have three fairly distinct stages-of high, low, and again high levels of complementarity-and that unsuccessful counseling dyads would not demonstrate this pattern. The sequence of topic-following/topic-initiation responses was used as an index of complementarity and was analyzed using a Markov chain model to test for differences in the sequence of topic responses over time. Moderate support was found for the hypothesized general stage model of high-low-high complementarity. The three successful dyads loosely fit the general pattern, but each showed individual variation in the length of each stage and the abruptness of stage changes. All three unsuccessful dyads had constant levels of complementarity over the course of counseling and thus did not fit the hypothesized model. Implications of this study for counseling theory and research are discussed.

Sex differences in the use of demand and withdraw behavior in marriage: Examining the social structure hypothesis.

“…For example, a statement coded as an assertion (structure) and an order (pragmatic function) was determined to be a domineering behavior, according to a system of rules developed by the coding system's authors. The FRCCCS has reported interrater reliability (kappa ranging from .75 to .95; Heatherington & Friedlander, 1987) and is moderately related to other relational control schemes (Tracey & Ray, 1984). Criterion validity of the FRCCCS has been established in that family therapists who were not trained on this coding system were able to match the FRCCCS codes (z test of Cohen's ϭ .56, p Ͻ .001; Gaul, Simon, Friedlander, Culter, & Heatherington, 1991).…”

Social influence research in counseling: A review and critique.

“…For example, only a few studies have used Strong and Matross (1973) conceptualizations of social power and still fewer have explored aspects of the Strong and Matross model (e.g., Dixon & Claiborn, 1981;Kerr et al, 1983;Ruppel & Kaul, 1982), despite the clinical richness and relevance of such concepts as need, resistance, and the legitimacy of the counselor's role. Interactional approaches to influence, as set forth by Strong and Claiborn (1982), have yet to be explored at all, though preliminary efforts to develop interactional methodologies have been made (e.g., Friedlander & Phillips, 1984;Lichtenberg & Heck, 1986;Tracey & Ray, 1984).…”

Assessing the social context in initial conjoint behavioral consultation interviews: An exploratory analysis investigating processes and outcomes.

“…If consultants are dominant, if they successfully determine topics of conversation, or if they demonstrate control by eliciting information, they are "not collaborative" (i.e., they are acting in a noncollaborative way). Gutkin (1999) has questioned whether processes such as topic determination, making bids (Tracey & Ray, 1984), and dominance (Rogers & Farace, 1975) are indeed contraindications of collaboration. Specifi cally, there appears to be no evidence that the existence of communicative behaviors such as dominance, topic determination, or control in consultation settings necessarily precludes the possibility of collaboration (Gutkin, 1999).…”

“…Coding systems have been used in the absence of a direct theoretical link between the operational codes and an underlying conceptual defi nition of collaboration. The various coding systems used in previous studies (Folger & Puck, 1976;Rogers & Farace, 1975;Tracey & Ray, 1984) measure seemingly related constructs, but may actually contain little more than face validity for studying collaboration. Constructs such as "domineering," "dominant," and "submissive" exchanges (Folger & Puck, 1976;Rogers & Farace, 1975); "topic determination/topic continuation" patterns (Tracey & Ray, 1984) and "one-up" and "one-down" speech acts (Rogers & Farace, 1975) have been the focus of consultation-based relational communication studies.…”