Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

2 results

  • Chapter 17 - Group Schema Therapy

  • from Part IV - Application of Schema Therapy in Different Populations and in Different Settings
  • Robert N. Brockman, Australian Catholic University, Susan Simpson, NHS Forth Valley and University of South Australia, Christopher Hayes, Schema Therapy Institute Australia, Remco van der Wijngaart, International Society of Schema Therapy, Matthew Smout, University of South Australia
  • Book:
    Cambridge Guide to Schema Therapy
    Published online:
    27 July 2023
    Print publication:
    29 June 2023, pp 302-313

  • Summary

    Group schema therapy is well established as an effective format for the provision of schema-mode work. The group format appears to catalyse the effects of schema therapy through the context of a group ‘family’. This microcosm of the outside world provides a foundational healing environment that imparts a sense of belonging and opportunities for vicarious learning. Participants learn to develop ways of getting their own needs met by internalising reparenting messages from the group and eventually through the evolution of their own Healthy Adult selves. Schema healing takes place through limited reparenting of all participants’ Vulnerable Child selves. This is provided within the context of a range of experiential techniques,- including chairwork dialogues, Imagery rescripting, empathic confrontation, and historical roleplay/psychodrama, in which all participants play a role. Schema challenging is particularly potent within group context, through the collective strength of the emerging group Healthy Adult, which can challenge out-of-date schema messages and provide the compassion, warmth, and connectivity that is needed for healing to take place.

  • The Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Group Schema Therapy Rating Scale – Revised

  • Emily Bastick, Suili Bot, Simone J. W. Verhagen, Gerhard Zarbock, Joan Farrell, Odette Brand-de Wilde, Arnoud Arntz, Christopher William Lee
  • Journal:
    Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy / Volume 46 / Issue 5 / September 2018
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    26 January 2018, pp. 601-618
    Print publication:
    September 2018

  • Background: Recent research has supported the efficacy of schema therapy as a treatment for personality disorders. A group format has been developed (group schema therapy; GST), which has been suggested to improve both the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the treatment. Aims: Efficacy studies of GST need to assess treatment fidelity. The aims of the present study were to improve, describe and evaluate a fidelity measure for GST, the Group Schema Therapy Rating Scale – Revised (GSTRS-R). Method: Following a pilot study on an initial version of the scale (GSTRS), items were revised and guidelines were modified in order to improve the reliability of the scale. Students highly experienced with the scale rated recorded GST therapy sessions using the GSTRS-R in addition to a group cohesion measure, the Harvard Community Health Plan Group Cohesiveness Scale – II (GCS-II). The scores were used to assess internal consistency and inter-rater reliability. Discriminant validity was assessed by comparing the scores on the GSTRS-R with the GCS-II. Results: The GSTRS-R displayed substantial internal consistency and inter-rater reliability, and adequate discriminate validity, evidenced by a weak positive correlation with the GCS-II. Conclusions: Overall, the GSTRS-R is a reliable tool that may be useful for evaluating therapist fidelity to GST model, and assisting GST training and supervision. Initial validity was supported by a weak association with GCS-II, indicating that although associated with cohesiveness, the instrument also assesses factors specific to GST. Limitations are discussed.