Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Small Group Research
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bonney, W. C.
Right arrow Articles by Cleveland, J. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

An Analysis of Client-Perceived Curative Factors in a Therapy Group of Former Incest Victims

Warren C. Bonney

University of Georgia

Donald A. Randall, Jr.

Family Counseling Service of Athens, Inc.

J. Dianne Cleveland

Family Counseling Service of Athens, Inc.

This study examines factors regarded as most and least therapeutic by members of a therapy group of women who experienced childhood incest. Client and therapist perceptions are accessed through the administration of individual Q-sorts (Block, 1961), which utilize statements developed by Yalom (1975). Client Q-sorts are correlated with each other and with the sorts of the therapists and are compared with the sorts of other group studies. The differences obtained among these sets are analyzed and the implications discussed. The results suggest that the relative importance of therapeutic factors, and therefore treatment strategies, may differ radically dependent on the composition of the group and the nature of the presenting problems.

Small Group Research, Vol. 17, No. 3, 303-321 (1986)
DOI: 10.1177/104649648601700303


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?