Table Of ContentThe Pennsylvania State College
The Graduate School
Department of Psychology
A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN CERTAIN COUNSELOR AND
CLIENT CHARACTERISTICS IN CLIENT-CENTERED THERAPY
A DISSERTATION
by
Manuel Aronson
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
August, l?5l
y 1
Approved: Qu- u 3 f / v .
/ " Associate Professor of Psychology
^ A7, *f*/
Approved
r/ ■ ^ Head of the Department
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I wish to express my deep and sincere appreciation to Dr. William
U. Snyder who not only made many constructive suggestions concerning
this investigation, but also contributed much to my development in the
field of clinical psychology.
I am similarly indebted to the members of my committee, Dr. Bruce V.
Moore, Dr. Robert G. Bernreuter, Dr. Kinsley R. Smith and Professor Mary
Jane Y/yland for their many helpful observations.
Drs. C. C. Peters, Philip Ash and Dean Clyde have been most kind in
offering a number of suggestions related to the statistical procedures in
this investigation.
I also appreciate the kindness of Dr. E. Lowell Kelly of the Univer
sity of Michigan for his prompt and courteous cooperation concerning my
request for permission to use the Rating Scale developed by his staff.
Certainly without the cooperation of the members of the Psychology
Research Group, the execution of the many details of this investigation
would have been impossible. I am especially grateful to Mr. John Rakusin
for his many excellent suggestions related to the organization and develop
ment of tills study.
I am also indebted to the four therapists who willingly volunteered
themselves as the counselor subjects for this investigation. I realize
and appreciate the fact that there are few people so intimately associated
with each other who would willingly subject themselves to such close scrutiny
Finally, I wish to thank my wife, Ruth Aronson, for her help on many
of the editorial details related to the preparation of this manuscript.
PREFACE
Were it not for the combined efforts of a group of individuals,
this study, as •well as a number of other independent investigations in
psychotherapy would have been extremely difficult, if not impossible, to
complete.
In the Spring of 191+9 Dr. 'William U. Snyder and a group of interested
graduate students met for the purpose of considering the initiation of a
large scale research project in psychotherapy. During the ensuing year
plans vfere formulated, scales constructed, and a testing battery selected.
Shortly thereafter psychotherapy was begun with clients who were to become
the subjects of this research project. The collection of the basic data
was well on its way, although the tremendous tasks of transcribing recorded
material, coding the interviews and judging the cases were yet to be com
pleted. In the early months of 19f>l these tasks were finished, and the
members of the group were prepared to pursue their individual investigations.
A number of studies are in process or have been completed. In
addition to the present investigation, one was concerned with the develop
ment of counseling criteria, and another with the study of factors which
differentiate clients who remained in therapy from those who dropped
therapy. Tliree additional investigations were concerned with the process
of psychotherapy, and another three studies were designed to test hypothoses
relating to prediction which rounded out the efforts of the group.
Through the cooperative efforts of the Psychotherapy Research Group,
the Psychology Department, and the Psychological Clinic of The Pennsylvania
State College, an extremely valuable pool of basic data has been collected.
L'any studies in psychotherapy will be completed before the utility of this
material has been exhausted.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Page
I. Summary of the Investigation 1
Statement of the Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
The Subjects •• ..................... . . . . . 2
The Variables 3
The Basic Statistical Procedures . . . . . . . . 10
Results • ........ . . . . . . . . . ......... 11
Discussion of the Results . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Conclusions • • . • • . . • • • • .. 21
II. Introduction 23
III. Statement of the Problem . . • • . • • • • ............ 30
IV. The Procedures.............................. 33
The Subjects ....................... 33
The Collection of the Data • • • • • • • • • • . 38
Analysis of the Controls: Client Age, Length
of Treatment and Estimate of Maladjustment • . I4O
The Counselor Characteristics . . • « bh
The Client Characteristics 63
The Primary Statistical Procedures.......... . 76
V. Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Results of the Analysis of the Variables . . . . 78
The Grouping of Certain Variables • • • • • • • 83
The Relationship Between Counselor Use of
Nondirective Techniques in Therapy and
Counselor Personality • • • • • • • • » • • • 86
VI. Discussion of Results and Conclusions • • • . . . • . 87
Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
VII. Suggestions for Further Research • • • • • • • • • • 93
Bibliography .............. . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
Appendix A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
Appendix B 110
INDEX CF TABLES
Table Page
I. F Ratios Obtained From Analysis of Variance of the Controls:
Age, Length of Treatment, and Estimate of Client Maladjust
ment at the Beginning of Therapy . . .................... 11
II. F Ratios Obtained From. Analysis of Variance of the Client
Characteristics: Verbal Behavior in Thera]);-, Self
Ratings following Therapy, and Outcome of Therapy . . . . . 12
IIIA. F Ratios Obtained From Analysis of Variance of 23
Therapist Personality Characteristics 13
HID. F Ratios Obtained From Analysis of Variance of
Counselor Characteristics: Counselor Techniques in
Therapy, Counselor Understanding of Client, Counselor
Understanding of Self ............ li;
IV. Product Moment Correlations Between the Corrected Non-
directive Score and Counselor Personality 10
V. Distribution of Client Subjects by Sex . . . . . . . . . . 33
VI. Distribution of Client Subjects by Age 3I4
VII. Distribution of Client Subjects by Semester Standing . . . 3l|
VIII. Distribution of the 30 Cases Among the Four Counselors • . 37
IX. Distribution of the 23 Cases Among the Four Counselors • . 37
X. Distribution by Age of the 30 Clients Among the
Four Counselors Ip.
XI. Distribution by Number of Treatment Interviews of the
- 30 Clients Among the Four Counselors . . . . . . . . . . . U.2
XII. Intercorrelations of Four Judges on the hunroe
Inspection Technique Applied to 20 Rorschach Protocols . • 1*3
XIII. Munroe Check List Score of Each Client for Each of the
Four Counselors Uh
XIV. Mean Rating Given to Each of the Four Counselors by the
Ten Raters on Each of the 28 Variables on the Therapist
Personality Rating Scale 1*7
XV. Estimate of the Reliability of the Ratings of Ten Raters
on Four Counselors on Each of 28 Variables, With Con
fidence Intervals at the Lower and Upper Five Per Cent
Levels on Each of the 28 Reliability Estimates . . . . . . h9
XVI, Hearts and Standard Deviations of Seven Coders on the
deliability Study of Nondirective Coding . . . ..........
m i . Correction Formula for Each of the Sever; Coders Based
on the Reliability Study Tor Nondirective Coding . . . . .
XVIII. The Nondirective Score Tor Each Case Tor Each of the
Four Counselors Following the Correction for Coder
Differences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
XIX. beans and Standard Deviations of Seven Coders on the
Reliability Study of Directive Coding . . . . . . . . . . .
XX. Correction Formula for Each of Seven Coders Based on
the Reliability Study for Directive Coding . . . . . . . .
XXI. The Directive Score for Each Case of the Four Counselors
Following the Correction for Coder Differences ..........
XXII. Scores of Each of the Four Counselors for Each of his
Clients on the Variable Counselor Understanding of
Client ........ .................. ..
XXIII. Scores of Each of the Four Counselors on the 2o
Variable Test of Counselor Understanding of Self . • • • •
XXIV. Means and Standard Deviations of Seven Coders on the
Reliability Study of the Coding of Client Positive
Verbal Behavior ••
XXV. Correction Formula for Each of Seven Coders Based on
the Reliability Study of the Coding of Client Positive
Verbal Behavior ........ . . . . . . . . . . .
XXVI. The Client Positive Verbal Behavior Score for Each Case
for Each of the Four Counselors Following the Correction
for Coder Differences.............................
XXVII. Means and Standard Deviations of Nine Judges on the
Reliability Study of the Coding of Client Negative
Verbal Behavior
XXVIII. Correction Formula for Each of Nine Judges Based on
the Reliability Study of the Coding of Client Negative
Verbal Behavior
XXIX. The Client Negative Verbal Behavior Score for Each Case
for Each of the Four Counselors Following the Correction
for Judge Differences ................ . .................
XXX. Scores of Each of the Clients for Each of the Counselors
on the Client Variable Self Estimate of Personal
Adjustment ........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Table Page
XXXI. Scores of Each of the Clients for Each of the
Counselors on the Client Variable Estimate of the
Counseling Process •• . . . . . . . . . . 73
XXXII. The Multiple Criterion Score for Each Client for
Each of the Four Counselors............ 76
XXXIII. F Ratios Obtained Prom Analysis of Variance of the
Controls: Age, Length of Treatment, and Estimate
of Client Maladjustment at the Beginning of Therapy . . . . 79
XXXIV. F. Ratios Obtained From Analysis of Variance of the
Client Characteristics: Verbal Behavior in Therapy,
Self Ratings Following Therapy, and Outcome in Therapy . • 80
XXXV. F Ratios Obtained From Analysis of Variance of 28
Therapist Personality Characteristics Showing F
Ratio of Differences Between Raters and F Ratio of
Differences Between Therapists . . . . • • • . • • • • • • 81
XXXVI. F Ratios Obtained From Analysis of Variance of
Counselor Characteristics: Counselor Techniques in
Therapy, Counselor Understanding of Client, Counselor
Understanding of Self 82
XXXVII. Product Moment Correlations Between the Corrected
Nondirective Score and Counselor Personality 86
INDEX OF CHARTS
Chart
I. The Six Personality Groups and the Items Within
Each Group
II. The Six Personality Groups and the Items Within
Each Group ........ .................... .
CHAPTER I
summary of the investigation
Students of psychotherapy have long been aware of the importance of
the therapist’s personality in the counseling relationship, but a survey
of the literature reveals few studies of an experimental nature. A
fairly adequate sampling of opinions is reflected in the writings of
such people as Berman (1), Wyatt (31) j Rogers (20), Bois (2), and Szurek
(23), but the paucity of actual studies is impressive.
Statement of the Problem
The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationships
between certain personality characteristics and clinical techniques of
counselors to the outcome of counseling and the behavior of clients
undergoing client-centered therapy.
Specifically, the questions to be answered are:
1. Do counselors differ significantly among themselves on certain
counselor variables?
2. Do clients counseled by different counselors differ significantly
among themselves on certain client variables?
3. If the clients counseled by the different counselors differ
significantly among themselves on any of the client variables, can these
differences be related to counselor personality and behavior, or can they
be accounted for by other factors which should be controlled?
1
2
a. Can they be accounted for by differences in maladjustment
of clients at the beginning of therapy?
b. Can they be accounted for by differences in number of
interviews for clients during therapy?
c. Can they be accounted for by differences in age of
clients at the beginning of therapy?
The Subjects
The subjects for this study fall into two categories: client and
counselor.
The client subjects were 28^ college students who came to the
Psychological Clinic of The Pennsylvania State College for personal
counseling# They ranged in age from 18 to 26 years. The number of treat
ment interviews per client ranged from three to 27 interviews. Cases with
fewer than three interviews were dropped from the study on the assumption
that a treatment process could not properly have been considered to have
occurred.
The four counselor subjects were advanced graduate students in
clinical psychology at the Pennsylvania State College. The counselors
were all male, ranged in age from 2$ to 30 years, and were in the Veterans
Administration Training Program in Clinical Psychology. Each counselor
had received his Master of Science degree from The Pennsylvania State
College prior to the collection of the basic data. All counselors had
•^-Twenty-eight client subjects were employed for the majority of the
investigations. A total of 30 were originally available, but two cases
were lost because certain criteria were missing. On a few of the investi
gations, however, it was possible to use the 30 subjects. The investiga
tor was interested in using the maximum number wherever possible.
