Font Size: a A A

CLIENT PERCEPTION OF THREE COUNSELING TECHNIQUES BASED ON DOMINANT THINKING STYLE

Posted on:1985-12-22Degree:Ph.DType:Dissertation
University:The University of AkronCandidate:FATUR, JOYCE MARYFull Text:PDF
GTID:1475390017461150Subject:Education
Abstract/Summary:
If one accepts the matching model of counseling, then it is possible that matching specific counseling technique to the thinking style of the client may enhance the client's initial perception of the counseling process. Thinking style (left, right, integrative, and mixed) was determined for each of the 162 college females who volunteered to participate in this research study. A 40-item self-report instrument, Your Style of Learning and Thinking, was administered to determine thinking style.; Twenty-four video-taped counseling vignettes, depicting a student describing one of eight typical student problems to a counselor, was designed by the investigator. The counselor role-player responded to the client in one of three ways: restatement of content, reflection of feelings, or response to meaning (feeling and content). Both male and female role-players were used to eliminate sex bias.; The subjects were asked to view the vignettes and respond to each in two ways. First, the subjects were asked to respond according to approach (wanting to talk more), attack (wanting to disagree), or withdrawal (wanting to quit talking). The second response that the subjects were asked to make to each vignette was a rating response indicating the degree of perceived helpfulness the counselor displayed.; The data were examined statistically by means of multiple linear regression techniques. An .05 level of significance was established for a two-tailed test. Results indicated that thinking style was statistically significant for rating response but not for the criterion of approach, attack, and/or withdrawal. Counseling technique was statistically significant for both criterion. The attack response was eliminated from the statistical interpretation due to its infrequent selection. Effect size was measured for the significant hypotheses. Effect size ranged from .002 to .007, indicating that so little of the variance can be accounted for that no practical significance can be attributed to the results. Neither thinking style nor counseling technique warrant special consideration for the counseling practitioner. Additional research is warranted to support or rule out these variables.
Keywords/Search Tags:Counseling, Thinking, Subjects were asked, Client
Related items