Group Therapy Study SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDAT

All subjects were required to complete test instruments assessing their level of symptomology, their perceptions of group cohesiveness, and their perceptions of factors established in the existing literature as important to effective group therapy. The study tested the null hypotheses that perceptions of group cohesiveness and perceptions of selected therapeutic factors would not significantly differ as a function of difference sin either Amount of Time Spent in Group Therapy or Level of Illness.

Findings supported the null theses. In addition, it was found that the majority of subjects evidenced only Stage I symptoms, these being relatively normal body activity with only low-level and infrequent manifestations of symptoms of the disease. Also, sample subjects perceived their groups as highly cohesive. Further, subjects perceived their groups as strong in those factors which existing research had shown to be indicators of effective group therapy.

The first conclusion that can be formulated in the study

. . .
if different Amounts of Time Spent in Group Therapy had been examined. Also, it was pointed out that there were difficulties with the analysis of collected data because there were too few subjects ar certain levels of illness. In other words, the illness range was too narrow. Two recommendations can be made with respect to these areas of difficulty. First, it is recommended that future researchers interested in replicating this study examine different levels of the Amount of Time variable. Second, it is recommended that these researchers institute more stringent controls to make sure that their sample includes sufficient numbers of subjects at each of the four stages of illness assessed by the Karonofski Performance Status Scale. Another recommendation for future researchers concerns type of group therapy. In this study no attempt was made to determine whether there were difference sin the psychological orientation of the groups from which subjects were drawn. However, group therapy processes can and do differ in terms of their orientation. For example, groups can be based on the Humanistic school of psychological thought, the Behavioral school, the Psychodynamic school, and so forth. These differing orientations are a
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
ARC AIDS, Status Scale, AIDS PROJECT, Illness Findings, Spent Therapy, Six Year, Level Illness, Lavenu Beylot, Martin DJ, Psychological Orientation, aids project, future researchers, perceptions cohesiveness, recommended future researchers, receiving therapy, recommended future, spent therapy, local aids, arc aids, level illness, selected therapeutic factors, perceptions cohesiveness perceptions, local aids project, cohesiveness perceptions, psychotherapy private practice,
Approximate Word count = 1489
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page)