For the comparison on differences of affective transition across the group process, the z-score values of early group stage (session 2 to 6) and late group stage (session 7 to 11) were summarized, and the differences were noted as its value or N/A if not significant shown in the process. The comparison of z-score was shown as Table 6.
Table 6
Comparison between early group stage and late group stage.
Early group stage (Session
*1: Specific transition of affective behavior in early group stage
*2-1: Specific transition of affective behavior in late group stage
*2-2: Specific transition of affective behavior in late group stage which in the positive dimension
*2-3: Specific transition of affective behavior in late group stage which in the negative dimension
*2-4: Specific transition of affective behavior in late group stage which from negative dimension transited to positive dimension
*3: Specific transition of affective behavior across the early and late stage
Table 6 showed the comparison between early group stage and late group stage, as
50
the left column with the z-score of early group stage, the middle column with the z-score of late group stage and the last column showed the differences in z-score which was the deduction of late group stage z-score on early group stage z-score.
Based on the comparison between early group stage and late group stage, we discovered the changes in the transition of emotion within and between stages related to Yalom’s group of therapeutic factors. As Yalom mentioned there were eleven therapeutic factors for group therapy which are instillation of hope, universality, imparting of information, altruism, corrective recapitulation of primary family group, development of socializing techniques, imitative behavior, interpersonal learning, group cohesiveness, catharsis and existential factors (Yalom & Leszcz, 2015).
As label 1 showed the transition of N7 to P2, it described the development of members’ emotion in the early group stage. As the members share about their own experience, they felt the sadness and disappointments for their life difficulties and leaded to the understanding on what was their expectation on parents to care for them.
Label 2-1 referred as the transition of P1 to P1, it indicated the members’ show interested and curiosity toward others, this had driven them to ask more question and have more interaction with group members. Unlike early stages, members were participated as a stranger in group, because of unfamiliar with each other, people will behaved in more polite and courteous. When the members’ get more familiar and closer with each other,
51
group cohesiveness will be formed that gives members a sense of belonging in this group (Yalom & Leszcz, 2015). Member will feel acceptance and being valued by group, this provided them a nurturing and empowering experience. Under this circumstances, group cohesiveness provided a safety environment for the members that allowed them to feel secure within oneself and in the relationship with other (Yalom & Leszcz, 2015). This is an important therapeutic factors for group members that encouraged them to takes risk of self-disclosure and changes.
Other than that, we discovered that members would imitate leaders’ behavior in group such as asking open questions, being empathy to others or even managed the conversation. Imitative of behavior allowed members to observe other’s behavior in group for learning more effective ways in dealing with their problem and interpersonal relationship (Yalom & Leszcz, 2015). Through the observation within the group, members will disrupted their old and dysfunctional pattern of behavior and replaced with new and appropriate methods or technique that suitable for them.
As the transition of P1 to P1 denoted members’ continuously showed care and support to others, it could be related to the therapeutic factor of altruism. When members recognized they provided valuable help to other members, they experienced with a sense of worthiness by leading hand to other and gain in self-esteem and confidence (Yalom &
Leszcz, 2015). Also, in late stages indicated the feeling of joy presence continuously in
52
the group process. As conversation become deeper, members gained inspirations and insights from others on how others viewed and reacted in similar life situation. Hence, inspirations gained from group empowered members to learn socializing techniques that encourage and enhance in practice new social skill such as boundaries, tolerance, and conflict resolution (Yalom & Leszcz, 2015). Newly learned skilled not only helped members to reduce isolation, but also promoted healthier connection with other, this even allowed them internalized the behavior and utilized it in theirs life outside of the group.
In addition, label 2-2 showed the presence of the transition from P3 to P4 as the feeling of satisfaction directed to the feeling of joy. In the late group stage, members were familiar with others compared with early stage, sense of belonging generated from group cohesiveness provided a safety group space, it allowed members to communicate freely and open to share on their thought (Yalom & Leszcz, 2015). In this case, members received support and respectful feedback in return from the practices of interpersonal relationship. Also, it also indicated members gained inspirations from others on developing new socialized skills and allowed members utilized the socialized skills into interpersonal learning in the group. Interpersonal learning was one of the group therapeutic factors that allowed members to have chances to learn and practice about relationship and intimacy, this would beneficial for members in develop supportive, and authentic interpersonal relationship (Yalom & Leszcz, 2015).
53
Label 2-3 showed series of transition which were N5→N7, N7→N5, N7→N6, and N8→N6. As previously mentioned in the late group stage, the transition of the affective behavior indicated member’s expression of negative emotions and interpersonal style.
Since late group stage provided a safety environment, catharsis would happened to help members express their long-suppressed negative emotions related with their past life experience. Through the process of catharsis, it helped members to gain a sense of relief and allowed them to be aware on their emotion that could effected on significant shifts in member’s internal framework (Yalom & Leszcz, 2015). Surprisingly, this linked with Bowlby’s internal working model that explained through acknowledgement on the products generated from the past experience, clients would have clearer picture on his behavioral patterns and cognitive mind-map (Bowlby, 1982). This allowed therapists to assist client in reworking on his internal framework as forming new relationship to create new experience for his adjustment.
For label 2-4, it showed the transition of N9 to P2, and it was the only transition from negative affective behavior to positive behavior in late stage. As explained earlier, the feeling of guilty defined as a sense of regret or responsibility that related to actions taken whereby people feel guilty on the things they did wrongly and believe it was their fault (Holloway, 2005). However, guilty not only brought bad effect on an individual, but also could contributed in provide inspiration for the change of an individual’s behavior
54
(Holloway, 2005). In this case, members did felt guilty on the things that had done to their parents, such as refused to interact with their parents and neglect them. On the other hand, openly discuss and share with their feeling and thought helped members to recognize on their feeling of thought, this was beneficial to members in create self-awareness and inspired members to take responsibilities on make change in their behavior (Holloway, 2005). As the result, members realized they hoped for the care and love from parents, but also aware of standstill and do nothing would not get what they wished for. Finally, they decided to take action and begun to communicate and interact with their parent.
Next, label 3 stated the differences in z-score between early stage and late stage, results showed the increased in transition of P3 to P3, N8 to N8 and N9 to N9, and the decreased in transition of N5 to N5 and N7 to N7. The increased in transition of P3 to P3 indicated the members felt relax and satisfaction when group cohesiveness formed. Other than that, along with the group conversation getting deeper, members would share their personal stories regarding the problem faced in their life, and they found out those issues were not only happened on themselves but also occurred for everyone. For instance, when member shared about the conflicts between himself and his mother, this evoked resonance among members and they shared a certain of connection with each and other. Universality described as individual feel as in-group and know that they are not alone when share similar experience that is universal for everyone (Yalom & Leszcz, 2015). Besides, we
55
discovered when getting nearer to the end of session, members told us that they worried that whether they took too much time in sharing their stories, and ignored others’ right to speak out. Also, the increased in transition of N8 to N8 indicated members also felt anxious and stress on sharing their stories since they might be the first time to told people about their life difficulties. Moreover, as mentioned previously, the transition of N9 to N9 indicated the exploration on the guilty as guidance for their changes in life and helped them to gain power over their own life decision (Holloway, 2005). With the sense of control, members able to take action on their changes in developed healthier relationship with their significant one. In general, the transition for the same categories such as transition of P3 to P3, N8 to N8 and N9 to N9 indicated that as members shared and confessed their stories throughout the group sessions, they would generated stronger and stronger emotion as they disclosed their hidden thoughts and experiences that not often shared with others.
Lastly, the decreased in transition of N5 to N5 and N7 to N7 showed the effect of therapeutic factor in catharsis. Hence, it explained the accumulation of emotion during the discussion on personal experience regarding dissatisfaction towards other in early group session, and eventually developed into catharsis that helped ones on relieved and released his anger in late group stage. When members expressed their suppressed feeling and allowed emotion flow freely, members become more self-aware on what happened
56
on themselves and how past experience affected them in daily life. With the self-awareness, members would gained sense of control in decide what was they capable to do for themselves and move forward in changes for their behavior and action. As result, members displayed more positive emotion transition in late group stage than early group stage, and the presence of negative emotion transition helped members to clarify their life situation.
57