Site Map
RDB home
Bookmark [ Send Page # QR-Code # Guestbook]Wednesday, 16 January 2019

Neuro-Linguistic Programming
Research Data Base [ Macy C, 1987. | Id:110 ]


Macy C M: Counselor training and supervision: Neurolinguistic Programming as a factor in skills acquisition. Dissertation Abstracts International 48(10), 2543-A Purdue University (Order = DA8729767): 205, 1987.

Abstract: This study was conducted in order to assess the relationship between type of training/supervision received by 23 students enrolled in a university counseling practicum experience and their measured skills performance at the beginning, mid-point, and end of the practicum in the Summer and Fall semesters of 1983. Counselor subjects were rated by faculty on their level of functioning at the beginning of the practicum, using a laboratory rating form judged to be highly related to Gazda's Global Scale (1977). They were assigned randomly to the experimental or comparison groups, where in addition to standard supervision, they were provided either training in Neurolinguistic Programming or a placebo in use of Metaphor. Three judges rated audio-tapes of counseling sessions submitted after first, mid-point, and final counseling sessions. The judges used Gazda's Global Scale (1977) and the Counseling Strategies Checklist (Hackney and Nye, 1973) for their ratings. Three instruments were used to assess counselor-client relationships and client growth as a result of counseling. The Rational Behavior Inventory (Whitman and Shorkey, 1978) and the Q-Sort (Rogers and Dymond, 1954) were administered prior to the first session, and clients responded to the Counselor Evaluation Inventory II immediately following that session. Readministrations were performed following the mid-point and final sessions. Hypotheses were: (1) Type of supervision, initial level of functioning, and time have an interactive effect; (2) In the absence of interaction, there is a main effect of type of supervision. Effects were measured by the five instruments at the .05 level of significance. The hypotheses were not accepted at the .05 level. Further research ideas were suggested, given that a .25 level of significance was found.

 [ Back ]
This website was carefully updated on Friday, 27 April 12:23:17 CEST 2018.
Navigation Search Entries Authors Keywords Info State Admin Home Exit
   NLP Community * | Data privacy
© 1995, 2019 Franz-Josef Hücker. All Rights Reserved.
Send Page Print Page follow nlp_de XING ( NLP Foren ) RSS Feeds & Podcasts