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
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
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 Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hornsey, M. J.
Right arrow Articles by Oei, T. P. S.
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?

Beyond Cohesiveness

Reconceptualizing the Link Between Group Processes and Outcomes in Group Psychotherapy

Matthew J. Hornsey

University of Queensland, m.hornsey{at}psy.uq.edu.au

Lynndall Dwyer

University of Queensland

Tian P. S. Oei

University of Queensland

Despite a general consensus that cohesiveness promotes positive outcomes in group psychotherapy, the empirical evidence for this notion is limited. In this article the literature on group cohesiveness and its relation to clinical outcomes is reviewed. Three interrelated problems with this literature are highlighted: A lack of consensus as to how to conceptualize cohesiveness, inconsistent measurements of cohesiveness, and lack of attention to possible mediators of the cohesiveness-outcome relationship. The authors argue that the term cohesiveness is too vague and amorphous to be useful as a unitary construct and that the field could benefit by identifying more specific group processes that facilitate—or impede—clinical outcomes. They review social psychological research on group processes, and discuss how three constructs— group identification, independence, and homogeneity—might be applied to the clinical literature. Furthermore, in an attempt to stimulate a closer examination of mediational paths in the literature on group psychotherapy, they discuss possible mechanisms through which group processes affect clinical outcomes.

Key Words: group therapy • cohesiveness • group processes

Small Group Research, Vol. 38, No. 5, 567-592 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/1046496407304336
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?