Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T20:06:51.679Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Pattern of Friendliness and Dominance in a Therapeutic Group

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2018

F. Kräupl Taylor
F. Kräupl Taylor*
Affiliation:
The Maudsley Hospital, London
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The complex interpersonal relationships which establish themselves when people meet and interact reveal a number of bipolar aspects or trends, such as liking—dislike, competition—co-operation, dominance—subordination, identification—counter-identification, and others. Of these the relationships of friendliness and dominance have been selected for study, not because they are considered of greater intrinsic importance for the dynamics or therapeutic efficacy of groups than other interpersonal trends, but because they are accessible to a fair degree of measurement and numerical handling. They can thus render impressions which have been gained through group observation more definite and reliable; they may even correct them or point to aspects which had escaped notice.

Type
Part I.—Original Articles
Information
Journal of Mental Science , Volume 96 , Issue 403 , April 1950 , pp. 407 - 425
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 1950 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1945), “The Measurement of Sociometric Status, Structure and Development,” Sociometry Monographs, No. 6. New York: Beacon House.Google Scholar
Edwards, D. St. (1948), “The Constant Frame of Reference Problem in Sociometry,” Sociometry, 11, 372.Google Scholar
Festinger, L. (1949), “The Analysis of Sociograms Using Matrix Algebra,” Human Relations, 2, 153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forsyth, E., and Katz, L. (1946), “A Matrix Approach to the Analysis of Sociometric Data,” Sociometry, 9, 340.Google Scholar
Foulkes, S. H. (1948), Introduction to Group-Analytic Psychotherapy. London: William Heinemann Medical Books.Google Scholar
Jaspers, Karl (1948), Allgemeine Psychopathologie. 5th edit. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
Katz, L. (1947), “On the Matrix Analysis of Sociometric Data,” Sociometry, 10, 233.Google Scholar
Kräupl, F. (1947), “Emotional Interplay and Dominant Personalities in Therapeutic Groups: Observations on Combined Schizophrenic-Neurotic Groups,” J. Ment. Sci., 93, 613.Google Scholar
Lazarsfeld, P. (1945), quoted by Moreno, J. L. and Jennings, H. H., “Sociometric Measurement of Social Configurations,” Sociometry Monographs, No. 3. New York: Beacon House.Google Scholar
Luce, R. D., and Perry, A. D. (1949), “A Method of Matrix Analysis of Group Structure,” Psychometrika, 14, 95.Google Scholar
Maslow, A. H. (1936), “The Role of Dominance in Social and Sexual Behaviour of Infra-human Primates. IV. The Determination of Hierarchy in Pairs and in a Group,” J. Genet. Psychol., 49, 161.Google Scholar
Masserman, J. H. (1943), Behaviour and Neurosis. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Moreno, J. L. (1934), Who Shall Survive? Washington: Nerv. and Ment. Dis. Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Moreno, J. L. (1946), “Sociogram and Sociomatrix,” Sociometry, 9, 348.Google Scholar
Taylor, F. Kräupl (1949), “Experimental Investigation of Collective Social and Libidinal Motivations in Therapeutic Groups.” Paper read at a Meeting of the British Psychological Society, London, 27 April. To be published in the Brit. J. Med. Psychol. Google Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.