| Group presentations of psychotherapy cases have long been used in training mental health professionals as a way to foster critical thinking about the conceptualization and treatment of clients. In graduate level psychology programs, as in professional clinical environments, the specifics of a psychotherapy case are conveyed to colleagues through a case presentation followed by a group discussion constructed to offer professional consultation and peer supervision. As case presentations take place in group settings of various sizes, group dynamics occur among participants that may enhance or detract from the learning experience. An alternative format common in business settings uses computer software, categorically as Group Support Systems (GSS), to facilitate work-group tasks.;The purpose of this research was to determine which discussion format was more beneficial from a training perspective. Specifically, this study was designed to assess differences between the participation and contribution dynamics for the two case presentation formats.;This dissertation was conducted as a field experiment using a single-factor repeated-measures design. The independent variable was the format of the case presentation discussion (traditional vs. GSS-facilitated). The dependent variables were the quality and quantity of participation; the satisfaction level, perceived learning, and contribution levels of the group participants; the satisfaction level and perceived effectiveness of the idea generation process for the case presenter; the impact of the group feedback on the treatment of the therapy case; and, any carry-over effect of the GSS format upon return to the traditional format.;The results of this research elucidated the strengths and weaknesses of the each case presentation format. The GSS-facilitated discussions allowed participants greater opportunity to contribute and to offer more proposed solutions to the presenter about the therapy case. Traditional discussion method facilitated greater participant and presenter satisfaction, higher perceived quality of interaction, and superior learning. Implications for peer-group supervision and future use of the technology are discussed. |
