Use of referential language in short-term group psychotherapy for complicated grief.

Hernandez, Carlos A. Sierra; Piper, William E.; Ogrodniczuk, John S.; Joyce, Anthony S.; Weideman, Rene

doi:10.1037/gdn0000038

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, group process research poses several problems about the interdependence of data obtained in groups (Gullo et al, 2010): on the one hand, this relates to the group's transformative potential; on the other hand, it creates many difficulties from both a methodological and data analysis level (Burlingame, Whitcomb & Woodland, 2014). Furthermore, some research (e.g., Sierra Hernandez et al, 2015) has found that a positive outcome is linked not only to group members' engagement in constructing their own narrative experience, but also to their investment and commitment in co-constructing the narrative experience of other group members or the group as a whole. In fact, to understand mechanisms underlying change, it is important to detect and analyse different levels of group therapeutic experience (individual, interpersonal, and group) and how they relate to the interventions' outcome (Beck & Lewis, 2000;Burlingame, Fuhriman & Johnson, 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tracking change in group interventions: a further adaptation of the Innovative Moments Coding System for Groups

Esposito

Cutolo

Passeggia

et al. 2022

RES PSYCHOTHER-PSYCH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction. In group psychotherapy research, there are few reliable measures for tracking members’ change. This study proposes a further adaptation of the Innovative Moment Coding System for Groups (IMCS-G), a reliable method previously developed in one format of group intervention for detecting innovative moments (IMs). IMs are exceptions to the clients’ problematic narratives, organized in different levels of complexity in terms of meaning elaboration (Level 1, 2, and 3). IMCS-G consists of 7 categories (Self-Directed, Other-Directed, Explicit Mirroring, Interaction 1, Interaction 2, Collective, Voice of Group) organized in two macro-categories: Individual (e.g., change was narrated by a single participant) and Group IMs (e.g., change was co-constructed by more than one participant). Methods. Two reliable coders applied the IMCS-G to analyze the transcripts of nine sessions of a counseling group addressed to underachieving university students (N=10) and eight sessions of a brief group psychotherapy targeted to substance abusers (N=8). Agreement and reliability for IMCS-G categories and their Levels were calculated. Results. Consistently with previous studies, a strong agreement and reliability for IMCS-G categories and Levels were found in both group interventions. Furthermore, despite some differences in the frequency of IMCS-G categories and Levels, in both interventions, there was a higher frequency of Self-Directed IMs, a lower frequency of the Explicit Mirroring IMs, and a higher frequency of Level 3 Group IMs. Discussion. This study confirmed the reliability of IMCS-G in different group formats, but it also suggested rooms of improvement for some IMCS-G categories.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tracking change in group interventions: a further adaptation of the Innovative Moments Coding System for Groups

Esposito

Cutolo

Passeggia

et al. 2022

RES PSYCHOTHER-PSYCH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast, collective identity language use (i.e. our group, us) was instrumental to group attachment [16]; with greater uses of references to the group as a whole and to other members predicting reduced symptoms of grief [12]. Aside from content analysis, such as Psychodynamic Work, Object Rating System [17], many studies adopted computerized textual analysis systems such as dtSearch [18], Linguistic Inquiry, and Word Count (LIWC) to track levels of cohesion through text [19][20][21][22].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…The current study successfully trained a machine-learning system to detect cohesive statements in contrast to qualitative content analysis, which tends to be onerous and prone to human errors when dealing with large amounts of data [12]. Emerging computer programs such as Discourse Attributes Analysis Program (DAAP) [36] and LIWC [35,37] offer an iterative psycholinguistic approach to coding transcripts of psychotherapy for therapeutic moments [19,22].…”

Section: Comparison With Prior Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Artificial Intelligence–Based Co-Facilitator (AICF) for Detecting and Monitoring Group Cohesion Outcomes in Web-Based Cancer Support Groups: Single-Arm Trial Study

Leung,

Wouterloot,

Adikari

et al. 2024

JMIR Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Commonly offered as supportive care, therapist-led online support groups (OSGs) are a cost-effective way to provide support to individuals affected by cancer. One important indicator of a successful OSG session is group cohesion; however, monitoring group cohesion can be challenging due to the lack of non-verbal cues and in-person interactions in textbased OSGs. The Artificial Intelligence-based Co-Facilitator (AICF) was designed to contextually identify therapeutic outcomes from conversations and produce real-time analytics. Objective:The aim of this study was to develop a method to train and evaluate AICF's capacity to monitor group cohesion.Methods: Human scorers used a confusion matrix to evaluate the performance of AICF. AICF performance was also compared against the natural language processing software Linguistic Inquiry Word Count (LIWC).Results: AICF was trained on 80,000 messages obtained from Cancer Chat Canada. We tested AICF on 34,048 messages. Human experts scored 6,797 (20%) of the messages to evaluate the ability of AICF to classify group cohesion. Results showed that machine-learning algorithms combined with human input can detect group cohesion, a clinically meaningful indicator of effective OSGs. After re-training with human input, AICF reached a F1-score of 0.82. AICF performed slightly better at identifying group cohesion compared to LIWC.Conclusions: AICF has the potential to assist therapists by detecting discord in the group amenable to real-time intervention. Overall, AICF presents a unique opportunity to strengthen patient-centered care in virtual settings by attending to individual needs.

show abstract

“…However, there is also a risk that it may become embedded in the group culture and hamper a healing mentalizing process ( Fonagy et al, 2017 ). The emergence of strong affective content could foster a defensive stance in which the members remain focused only on the surface and neglect the possibility that the group and the other members could serve as sources of growth and change ( Sierra Hernandez et al, 2015 ). Such a failure in the integration of affects into experiences is also highlighted in other theoretical models.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pseudomentalization as a Challenge for Therapists of Group Psychotherapy With Drug Addicted Patients

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the main challenges in group therapy with drug-addicted patients is collective pseudomentalization, i.e., a group discourse consisting of words and clichés that are decoupled from any inner emotional life and are poorly related to external reality. In this study, we aimed to explore the phenomenology of pseudomentalization and how it was addressed by the therapist in an outpatient group for drug-addicted patients. The group was composed of seven members, and the transcripts of eight audio-recorded sessions (one per month) were rated and studied. The interventions of the therapist were measured with the mentalization-based group therapy (MBT-G) adherence and quality scale by independent raters. Two sessions, one with the highest and one with the lowest adherence, were selected, and the clinical sequences of pseudomentalization were analyzed in a comparative way. The findings revealed that pseudomentalization does occur as a collective phenomenon, akin to “basic assumptions” of Wilfred Bion, which we reconceptualized in this study. Any pseudomentalization seemed to be reinforced by the therapist when she was presenting frequent and long interventions, when abstaining from the management of group boundaries, when providing questions focused more on content than on the mental states of the group members, and when not focusing on emotions. However, the ultimate source of collective pseudomentalization seemed to be the fear of the group members of being overwhelmed by painful emotions, mental confusion, and a loss of identity. The findings also indicated that the principles of MBT-G may be a good antidote to pseudomentalization.

show abstract

Use of referential language in short-term group psychotherapy for complicated grief.

Cited by 4 publications

References 27 publications

Tracking change in group interventions: a further adaptation of the Innovative Moments Coding System for Groups

Tracking change in group interventions: a further adaptation of the Innovative Moments Coding System for Groups

Artificial Intelligence–Based Co-Facilitator (AICF) for Detecting and Monitoring Group Cohesion Outcomes in Web-Based Cancer Support Groups: Single-Arm Trial Study

Pseudomentalization as a Challenge for Therapists of Group Psychotherapy With Drug Addicted Patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About