You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
The basic proposition to be explored in this paper is that psychotherapists currently make inadequate use of social psychology's knowledge of the principles of group dynamics and the ‘groupy’ aspects of behaviour, both in understanding an individual's behaviour and problems, and in applying that knowledge to their clinical practice. We are thus hoping to continue the debate opened by Brehm (1976), Feldman and Orford (1980), Weary and Mirels (1982) and others, all of whom suggest that this form of cross-fertilisation could enrich a number of applied disciplines, particularly those which practise psychotherapy. Coupled with this we also recognise the fact that social psychology itself is limited in its appreciation of group phenomena, having become more and more interested in the individual within a group rather than the group per se (see Steiner 1974, for a discussion of the decline of the group in social psychology). This is however outside the scope of the current paper, in which we will simply focus upon the theories and practices of psychotherapists.
The most obvious use of a ‘group’-type analysis is of course group therapy. The level of analysis most often used is that of the individual; an individual who just happens to exist for the moment in a group setting. Thus such an analysis focuses on either the intrapersonal or the inter-personal aspects of that individual's behaviour. In recent years there has been an upsurge in the interest shown by health care professionals in the use of group methods (for instance, Friedman 1979, Scheidlinger 1984a). Parallel with this interest is an awareness of the stresses and difficulties involved in operating within groups. This possibly reflects a respect for the power of group phenomena: a power which can be used and experienced as both negative and positive. Yet possibly because of this awareness of the power and riskiness of operating on a group level, and also because of the absence of adequate theories which are immediate