1. Prepared by: Nathaniel N. Ivers, Wake Forest University
Chapter 15
Transactional Analysis, Reality Therapy, Adlerian, and Person-Centered Groups
Prepared by: Nathaniel N. Ivers, Wake Forest University

2. Roadmap Transactional Groups Reality Therapy Groups Adlerian Groups
Person-Centered Groups

3. Transactional Analysis (TA) Groups
Founded by Eric Berne
Oriented toward groups since its inception
Emphasis placed on understanding intrapersonal and interpersonal dynamics
Learning occurs through participating in interactions in sessions and through homework assignments
Groups are main choice of treatment for redecision school of TA (Goulding, 1987)

4. Premises of Transactional Analysis Groups
Development and interaction of an ego state
Three basic ego states exist and operate within every individual
Parent
Adult
Child
Ego states can be observed in the dynamic interactions with individuals

5. Premises of Transactional Analysis
Parent Ego State: Dualistic – both nurturing and critical
Adult Ego State: Functions like a computer – it receives and processes information from the parent, child, and environment
Child Ego State: Divided into two parts – The Adapted Child (conforms to rules and parental wishes) and Free Child (natural child; reacts more spontaneously)

6. Premises of Transactional Analysis
Four basic ways to identify an individual’s current ego state:
Behavioral
Social
Historical
Phenomenological
(Woollams et al., 1977)

7. Premises of Transactional Analysis
Knowledge of ego states empowers individuals and those working with them to assess which types of transactions they are most likely to have and to take corrective measures, if needed (Hargaden & Sills, 2002)
This knowledge helps people avoid playing games
People who play games operate from three distinct positions: victim, persecutor, rescuer

8. Premises of Transactional Analysis
Strokes
Physical or psychological recognition
Six major ways in which people structure their time to obtain strokes
Withdrawal
Ritual
Pastimes
Work
Games
Intimacy
(Berne, 1972)

9. Premises of Transactional Analysis
People develop scripts
Habitual patterns of behavior
Influence how people spend their time, for example, as losers, nonwinners, and winners (Berne, 1972; Capers, 1975)
Include transactions, or social actions between two or more people

10. Premises of Transactional Analysis
Types of transactions
Complementary
Crossed
Ulterior

11. Practice of TA in a Group
Preferably used in groups that serve as a setting in which people can become more aware of
Themselves
The structure of their individual personality
The transactions they have with others
The games they play
The scripts they act out

12. Practice of TA in Groups
Objective in group settings: “fight the past in the present in order to assure the future” (Berne, 1966, p. 250)
TA groups are based on participants’ ability and willingness to make and work on therapeutic contracts (Stewart, 2014)
Specific, measurable, concrete statements of what participants intend to accomplish during group

13. Practice of TA in Groups
Classical Contracts
Carried out with an emphasis on one or more of the following:
Structural analysis
Transactional analysis
Game Analysis
Life script analysis
Redecision Contracts

14. Role of TA Group Leader More than just group members
They stand apart as “primarily listeners, observers, diagnosticians, and analysts – and, secondarily, process facilitators (Donigian & Hulse-Killacky, 1999, p. 115)
Group leader – group member transactions are considered major
Group leader – group member transactions are considered minor

15. Role of TA Group Leader Four specific roles within the TA group:
Protection
Permission
Potency
Operations
(Corey, 2012)

16. Desired Outcomes of TA Groups
Self-awareness
Changes in feelings, thoughts, and behaviors
Freedom from Parent messages (injunctions)
Freedom from early, self-defeating scripts

17. Desired Outcomes of TA Groups
Seven steps that lead to positive outcome
Trust in the other
Trust in self
Moving into group
Work
Redecision
Integration
Termination
(Woollams & Brown, 1978)

18. Strengths of TA
Cognitive clarity of the language used to explain TA concepts (Grimes, 1988; Yalom & Leszcz, 2005)
Simplicity
Efficiency – group members make progress quickly
Flexible – can be sued in task/work, psychoeducational, counseling, and psychotherapy settings

19. Limitations of TA with Groups
Restrictive interpretation of the complexities of human nature by categorizing them into a limited number of games, ego states, and scripts (Yalom & Leszcz, 2005)
Strong emphasis on understanding
Neglect of emphasizing group process (Yalom & Leszcz, 2005)
Lack of empirical evidence to support its effectiveness

20. Reality Therapy Groups
Founded by William Glasser
Basis has evolved from control theory, a complete system for explaining how the brain works, to choice theory
Developed in educational systems
Emphasis placed on raising self-esteem and altering behaviors and attitudes
Has gained traction in task/work environments, such as with the total quality movement (TQM)

21. Premises of Reality Therapy Groups
Emphasizes that “all behavior is generated within ourselves for the purpose of satisfying one or more basic needs” (Glasser, 1984, p. 323)
Claims that human behavior is a reaction not to outside events but rather to internal needs

22. Premises of Reality Therapy Groups
Four human psychological needs:
Belonging
Power
Freedom
Fun

23. Premises of Reality Therapy Groups
Differs from other psychotherapeutic systems in the following ways:
Rejects the concept of mental illness
Emphasizes the present as the “cutting edge” of people’s lives, focusing on how individuals can effectively control the world they live in and choose behaviors that are best for them

24. Premises of Reality Therapy Groups
Differs from other psychotherapeutic system in the following ways:
Does not deal with transference but relates to clients’ perceptions
Does not consider the unconscious or dreams but rather concentrates on present awareness
Stresses that persons must judge their own behaviors in light of personal and societal values
Attempts to teach people a better way of fulfilling needs and taking responsibility for themselves
(Glasser, 1965, 1999, 2001, 2003)

25. Practice of Reality Therapy in Groups
Emphasizes observable behavior in a here-and-now setting (Glasser, 1992, 2000)
Focuses on helping clients take responsibility for their actions, find better ways to meet their needs, and change inappropriate or destructive ways of behaving (Glasser & Breggin, 2001)
Two main components involved in reality therapy groups: setting up the environment and applying proper procedures using the WDEP framework (Wubbolding, 2011)

26. Practice of Reality Therapy in a Group
Setting up the Environment
ABCDE dos and don’ts:
Always be courteous and determined as well as enthusiastic.
Don’t argue, belittle, criticize, demean, or get lost in excuses

27. Practice of Reality Therapy in a Group
Original Basic Steps of Reality Therapy
Make friends/establish a meaningful relationship
Emphasize present behaviors/Ask, “What are you doing now?”
Stress whether clients’ actions are getting them what they want.
Make a positive plan to do better

28. Practice of Reality Therapy in a Group
Original Basic Steps of Reality Therapy (cont.)
Get a commitment to follow the positive plan.
No excuses.
No punishment.
Never give up.

29. Practice of Reality Therapy in a Group
Four special techniques for reality therapy groups:
Skillful use of questioning
Self-help procedures
Use of humor
Use of paradox
(Wubbolding, 2011)

30. Role of the Reality Therapy Group Leader
Reality therapy group leaders:
Are active and involved
Strive to be warm
Confront group members

31. Role of the Reality Therapy Group Leader
Four criteria for effective reality therapy leaders
Responsible persons who are able to fulfill their own needs
Mentally strong and able to resist group members’ pleas for sympathy and excuses for nonproductive behaviors
Accepting of group members for who they are
Emotionally involved or supportive of group members

32. Desired Outcome of Reality Therapy Groups
Members move past self-defeating patterns of behavior
Members engage in new behaviors designed to help them achieve responsible, present-oriented goals
Members gain greater awareness of their values

33. Strengths of Reality Therapy Groups
Emphasizes accountability
Emphasizes action and thinking
Viable with people in society on who others have given up (Glasser & Breggin, 2001)
Emphasizes definable procedures for working with individuals in groups
Treatment continues only until participants are able to resolve difficulties

34. Limitations of Reality Therapy Groups
Its emphasis on the exchange of communication, either verbal or written (Glasser, 1984)
Its simplicity
Its extreme position on some issues, such as the etiology of mental illness
Its lack of proven effectiveness

35. Adlerian Theory Groups
Has always had a group focus
Concentrates on the inherent social interest of persons and emphasizes social development, cooperation, and education.

36. Premises of Adlerian Groups
People are motivated by social interest
Other major concerns that undergird Adlerian theory:
Purposefulness of all behavior
Subjective nature of perception
Holistic nature of people
Importance of developing a healthy style of life
Self-determinism of the individual to chart a future based on expected consequences of behavior (Corsini, 1988; Hawes, 1985)

37. Practice of Adlerian Theory in a Group
Primarily psychoeducational in nature, though some can be therapeutic as well
The idea is that people can learn from one another
Different types of Adlerian Groups
Adlerian parent education
C group
Systematic Training for Effective Parenting (S.T.E.P.)

38. Practice of Adlerian Theory in a Group
Unifying factors that link Adlerian groups together:
Interpretation of a person’s early history
Practice of stressing individual, interpersonal, and group process goals during the duration of the group
Insight and reorientation phases

39. Role of the Adlerian Group Leader
Qualities of an effective group leader:
Well-balanced
Adaptable
Courageous
Humorous
Sincere
Accepting of others
Open in a way that promotes honest interchanges
Knowledgeable of members
Active in confronting faulty logic

40. Role of the Adlerian Group Leader
Focus on understanding present behavioral patterns of group members and challenging them to change
Use group dynamics to help groups help themselves
May encourage group members to confront one another

41. Role of the Adlerian Group Leader
With children, Adlerian group leaders use encouragement, natural consequences, and acting as if.
With adults, Adlerian group leaders may employ more systematic plans, including the three tasks mentioned above and task setting and push button.

42. Desired Outcomes of Adlerian Groups
Emphasize growth and actions of the individual within the group rather than the group itself.
Group members should be socially oriented, personally integrated, and goal directed by the end of the group.
Group members should have corrected faulty beliefs, eliminated competitive behavioral stances and become more in contact with family-of-origin issues

43. Desired Outcomes of Adlerian Groups
Children in Adlerian groups should recognize more clearly the logical consequences of their actions and who they can be
Adolescents are helped to deal better with their own and others’ perceptions of themselves and to realize they do not have to engage in competitive behaviors to be accepted
For families and adults, Adlerian groups are directed toward social adjustment

44. Strengths of Adlerian Groups
Nonthreatening
Methods associated with the approach are logical and based on common sense (Sweeney, 2009)
Holistic
Eclectic nature
Flexible

45. Limitations of Adlerian Groups
Leader’s Style
Narrowness of their scope
Lack of uniformity
Week empirical support

46. Person-Centered Groups
Founded by Carl Rogers
Adapted the T-group (training group) structure and combined it with his own clinical approach and positive humanistic views to create what he called basic encounter groups

47. Premises of Person-Centered Groups
Encounter groups built on several premises:
Trust in the inner resources of people
Trust in the group to help members develop their potential
Certain conditions must be created within the group for members to maximize their potential
A qualified person with special training and experience will facilitate them
(Rogers, 1970)

48. Premises of Person-Centered Groups
Core Conditions
Communication
Empathy
Genuineness (congruence)
Acceptance (unconditional positive regard)
Active Listening
Self-Disclosure
Authenticity
Immediacy
Confrontation

49. Practice of Person-Centered Theory in a Group
Unstructured group format
Feedback and communication are critical
Feedback – giving another person his or her perception of his or her behavior
Communication of thoughts and feelings – best conveyed when clearly understood language and gestures are used

50. Practice of Person-Centered Theory in a Group
Rogerian-oriented encounter group 15-stage process:
Milling around
Resistance
Revealing past feelings
Expression of negative feelings
Expression of personally meaningful material
Communication of immediate interpersonal feelings

51. Practice of Person-Centered Theory in a Group
Rogerian-oriented encounter group 15-stage process:
Development of a healing capacity in the group
Self-acceptance and the beginning of change
Cracking of facades
Feedback
Confrontation

52. Practice of Person-Centered Theory in a Group
Rogerian-oriented encounter group 15-stage process:
Helping relationships outside the group
The basic encounter
Expressions of closeness
Behavior changes

53. Role of the Person-Centered Group Leader
Derive their direction from the group
Model the conditions of openness, warmth, congruence, genuineness, and unconditional positive regard
Create a climate that promotes the development of relationships
Attempt to understand and accept each group member on a personal basis

54. Role of the Person-Centered Group Leader
Carry out five distinct functions:
Convey warmth and empathy
Attend to others
Understand meaning and content
Convey acceptance
Link
These functions expressed through basic counseling skills
(Posthuma, 2002)

55. Desired Outcome of Person-Centered Groups
Development of self-awareness and awareness of others and to grow
Self-actualization
Openness to experience
Behavioral changes

56. Strengths of Person-Centered Groups
Emphasis on assets
Focus on the group leader
Emphasis on improving personal communication skills
Development of research technology
Influence on educational models
Acceptability of group work for group members who are not seen as sick or mentally ill

57. Limitations of Person-Centered Groups
May be dangerous for participants who need therapy or structure (Lieberman et al., 1973)
Lack of rules around how members and leaders are chosen
May not lead anywhere
History of being a fad in the 1960s and 1970s
Research methods used to evaluate them