Research concerning the question, whether and to what extent cognitive-behavioral (CB) and psychodynamic (PD) therapy consist of differing process components under clinical representative conditions, is relevant especially for a valid interpretation of comparative outcome research, for identifying differential beneficial factors of psychotherapy and for a systematic indication for, respectively assignment of, patients to the two treatments. In this study it is investigated whether PD and CB differ concerning the realisation of factors of group experience, respectively of beneficial group elements (e. g. cohesion, catharsis, learning by feedback). For this purpose, in a naturalistic design, a stratified sample (N = 36) of 104 videotaped sessions (PD groups, interactional CB groups and indicative CB groups; N = 171 patients with a broad spectrum of F-diagnoses of ICD-10, especially F3/F4) were rated by observers using the Kieler-Gruppenpsychotherapie-Prozess-Skala (KGPPS). Analyses of variance and a priori Helmert-contrasts reveal differences between PD and CB with at least medium effect sizes in 12 of the 16 factors of group experience. However, differences also were found between the two CB group treatments (9 factors of group experience with differences with large effect sizes). The results suggest that the different treatment approaches foster different qualities and quantities of group experience and that the latter seems not to evolve from the group context "per se" (i. e. by the plurality of the group).
Research concerning the question, whether and to what extent cognitive-behavioral (CB) and psychodynamic (PD) therapy consist of differing process components under clinical representative conditions, is relevant especially for a valid interpretation of comparative outcome research, for identifying differential beneficial factors of psychotherapy and for a systematic indication for, respectively assignment of, patients to the two treatments. In this study it is investigated whether PD and CB differ concerning the realisation of factors of group experience, respectively of beneficial group elements (e. g. cohesion, catharsis, learning by feedback). For this purpose, in a naturalistic design, a stratified sample (N = 36) of 104 videotaped sessions (PD groups, interactional CB groups and indicative CB groups; N = 171 patients with a broad spectrum of F-diagnoses of ICD-10, especially F3/F4) were rated by observers using the Kieler-Gruppenpsychotherapie-Prozess-Skala (KGPPS). Analyses of variance and a priori Helmert-contrasts reveal differences between PD and CB with at least medium effect sizes in 12 of the 16 factors of group experience. However, differences also were found between the two CB group treatments (9 factors of group experience with differences with large effect sizes). The results suggest that the different treatment approaches foster different qualities and quantities of group experience and that the latter seems not to evolve from the group context "per se" (i. e. by the plurality of the group).