Group Radical Openness: Participants' attributions of change

IF 1.2 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Violet Johnstone, Cian McDonough, Rachel Egan, Katie Browne, Amy Corbett
{"title":"Group Radical Openness: Participants' attributions of change","authors":"Violet Johnstone,&nbsp;Cian McDonough,&nbsp;Rachel Egan,&nbsp;Katie Browne,&nbsp;Amy Corbett","doi":"10.1002/capr.12750","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Group Radical Openness (GRO) has been shown to be a feasible and acceptable intervention for individuals who struggle with costly overcontrol. This paper explores participants' reports of attributions of change following the engagement in GRO.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Method</h3>\n \n <p>Fourteen participants took part in qualitative interviews. An adapted version of ‘The Revised Client Change Interview Schedule: Version 5’ was used to capture the experiences of change following the intervention (Elliott &amp; Rodgers, 2008). Research participants were outpatients of a psychiatric hospital who attended GRO. The sample consisted of 14 participants (6 females: 8 males); mean age 44.4 years; and age range 18–58. All participants attended 26, 3-h group sessions. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to identify the specific aspects of the group therapy to which clients attributed change.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The analysis identified three superordinate themes, each with two subthemes. These included Safety and Connection (Safety and Tribe; Open and Genuine Facilitation); Understanding Overcontrol (Awareness of Overcontrol; The GRO Approach); and Carrying GRO Forward (Increased Awareness and Capacity to Reflect; Internalising GRO).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Group Radical Openness was shown to be an acceptable group therapy treatment for people with an overcontrolled coping style. This paper further clarifies the participants' experiences of GRO and what aspects led to change from their perspective.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":46997,"journal":{"name":"Counselling & Psychotherapy Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Counselling & Psychotherapy Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/capr.12750","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Group Radical Openness (GRO) has been shown to be a feasible and acceptable intervention for individuals who struggle with costly overcontrol. This paper explores participants' reports of attributions of change following the engagement in GRO.

Method

Fourteen participants took part in qualitative interviews. An adapted version of ‘The Revised Client Change Interview Schedule: Version 5’ was used to capture the experiences of change following the intervention (Elliott & Rodgers, 2008). Research participants were outpatients of a psychiatric hospital who attended GRO. The sample consisted of 14 participants (6 females: 8 males); mean age 44.4 years; and age range 18–58. All participants attended 26, 3-h group sessions. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to identify the specific aspects of the group therapy to which clients attributed change.

Results

The analysis identified three superordinate themes, each with two subthemes. These included Safety and Connection (Safety and Tribe; Open and Genuine Facilitation); Understanding Overcontrol (Awareness of Overcontrol; The GRO Approach); and Carrying GRO Forward (Increased Awareness and Capacity to Reflect; Internalising GRO).

Conclusion

Group Radical Openness was shown to be an acceptable group therapy treatment for people with an overcontrolled coping style. This paper further clarifies the participants' experiences of GRO and what aspects led to change from their perspective.

团体激进开放性:参与者对变化的归因
小组激进开放疗法(GRO)已被证明是一种可行且可接受的干预方法,适用于因过度控制而付出代价的人。本文探讨了参与者对参与 GRO 后的变化归因的报告。14 名参与者参加了定性访谈。14 名参与者参加了定性访谈:14 名参与者参加了定性访谈,访谈使用了改编版的 "修订版客户变化访谈表:第 5 版",以记录干预后的变化经历(Elliott & Rodgers,2008 年)。研究参与者是一家精神病医院的门诊病人,他们都参加了 GRO。样本包括 14 名参与者(6 名女性:8 名男性);平均年龄为 44.4 岁;年龄范围为 18-58 岁。所有参与者均参加了 26 次、每次 3 小时的小组活动。我们采用了反思性主题分析法,以确定客户将变化归因于小组疗法的哪些具体方面。这些主题包括安全与联系(安全与部落;开放与真诚的促进);理解过度控制(对过度控制的认识;GRO 方法);以及将 GRO 发扬光大(增强反思的意识和能力;内化 GRO)。事实证明,激进开放团体疗法是一种可以接受的团体治疗方法,适用于具有过度控制应对方式的人。本文进一步阐明了参与者对 GRO 的体验,以及从他们的角度来看哪些方面导致了改变。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Counselling & Psychotherapy Research
Counselling & Psychotherapy Research PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
12.50%
发文量
80
期刊介绍: Counselling and Psychotherapy Research is an innovative international peer-reviewed journal dedicated to linking research with practice. Pluralist in orientation, the journal recognises the value of qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods strategies of inquiry and aims to promote high-quality, ethical research that informs and develops counselling and psychotherapy practice. CPR is a journal of the British Association of Counselling and Psychotherapy, promoting reflexive research strongly linked to practice. The journal has its own website: www.cprjournal.com. The aim of this site is to further develop links between counselling and psychotherapy research and practice by offering accessible information about both the specific contents of each issue of CPR, as well as wider developments in counselling and psychotherapy research. The aims are to ensure that research remains relevant to practice, and for practice to continue to inform research development.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信