Refine
Year of publication
- 2011 (2) (remove)
Document Type
- Doctoral Thesis (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Keywords
- Diversity Beliefs (1)
- Diversity Climates (1)
- Diversity Management (1)
- Diversität (1)
- Diversitätsüberzeugungen (1)
- Einfühlung (1)
- Einstellung (1)
- Empathie (1)
- Identifikation (1)
- Identität (1)
Institute
- Psychologie (2)
Soziale Phobie gilt als eine der am weitesten verbreiteten psychischen Störungen (Wittchen & Fehm, 2003; Magee et al., 1996). Obgleich zahlreiche Interventionsansätze zur Behandlung der sozialen Ängste zur Verfügung stehen, gibt es viele Betroffene, die nicht von den Behandlungsmöglichkeiten profitieren oder nach einer Therapie Rückfälle erleben. Aus diesem Grund beschäftigt sich die vorliegende Arbeit mit der Weiterentwicklung von Psychotherapie bei Sozialer Phobie. Sie greift verschiedene Forschungsperspektiven auf, um aktive Wirkfaktoren im therapeutischen Prozess zu identifizieren und für zukünftige Behandlungen nutzbar zu machen. Publikation 1 (Consbruch & Stangier, 2007) gibt einen Überblick über den aktuellen Forschungsstand bzgl. der Diagnostik, Ätiologie und Therapie bei Sozialer Phobie. Die in dieser Publikation dargestellten Forschungsarbeiten zur Behandlung sozialer Ängste vergleichen die therapeutische Wirksamkeit unterschiedlicher Therapieansätze und suchen so nach spezifischen Wirkfaktoren in der Behandlung Sozialer Phobien. Es zeigt sich, dass die kognitiv-verhaltenstherapeutische Behandlung am häufigsten untersucht wurde und dass sich ihre Effektivität durch die Berücksichtigung von Prozessen, die nach Clark und Wells (1995) an der Entstehung und Aufrechterhaltung der Sozialen Ängste beteiligt sind, erheblich verbessern lässt. Publikation 2 (Stangier, Consbruch, Schramm & Heidenreich, 2010) verlässt die ausschließlich an spezifischen Wirkmechanismen interessierte Forschungsperspektive und wendet sich der Frage nach dem Zusammenspiel von spezifischen und allgemeinen Wirkfaktoren zu. Sie vergleicht das Ausmaß der Aktivierung von allgemeinen Wirkfaktoren nach Grawe (1995) sowie deren Einfluss auf das Therapieergebnis in einer kognitiven Verhaltenstherapie (N=29) und einer interpersonellen Therapie (N=33). Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass Therapeuten in der Interpersonellen Psychotherapie die Aktivierung von Bewältigung, Ressourcenorientierung und Motivationaler Klärung geringer einschätzten als Therapeuten in der kognitiven Verhaltenstherapie, während sie bezüglich der Problemaktivierung und der Güte der therapeutischen Beziehung keine Unterschiede angaben. Stärkere Ressourcenaktivierung stand in beiden Therapieansätzen mit besseren Therapieergebnissen in Beziehung, während höhere Problemaktualisierung nur in KVTBehandlungen zu verbessertem Outcome beitrug. Da die Ressourcenaktivierung in der KVTBedingung stärker ausgeprägt war als in der IPT-Bedingung, lassen sich die Ergebnisse so interpretieren, dass die Problemaktualisierung nur dann zu positiveren Therapieergebnissen führt, wenn sie durch ausreichende Ressourcenaktivierung gestützt wird. Die Studie legt somit nahe, dass spezifische Behandlungsansätze allgemeine Wirkfaktoren, die einen Einfluss auf das Therapieergebnis haben, in unterschiedlichem Maße nutzen. Durch das Fehlen von Angaben zur Therapieintegrität bleibt jedoch offen, welche Rolle individuelles Therapeutenverhalten bei der Aktivierung der allgemeinen und spezifischen Wirkfaktoren spielt. Um zukünftig die Therapieintegrität in der kognitiv-verhaltenstherapeutischen Behandlung von Sozialer Phobie sicherstellen zu können, wurde die Cognitive Therapy Competence Scale for Social Phobia (CTCS-SP) entwickelt, deren psychometrische Eigenschaften in Publikation 3 (Consbruch, Clark & Stangier, in press) dargestellt werden. Zur Bestimmung der Beobachterübereinstimmung wurden 161 Therapiesitzungen von jeweils 2 Ratern mit der CTCS-SP beurteilt. Die Ergebnisse der vorliegenden Untersuchung demonstrieren eine gute interne Konsistenz und gute Interraterreliabilität der Skala, wobei erstmals auch individuelle Items mit ausreichender Reliabilität gemessen werden konnten. Mit der CTCS-SP steht somit ein reliables Messinstrument zur Erfassung therapeutischer Kompetenz in der kognitivverhaltenstherapeutischen Behandlung der Sozialen Phobie zur Verfügung, welches – bei noch zu prüfender Validität - vielfältig eingesetzt werden kann, um die Erforschung
spezifischer und allgemeiner Wirkfaktoren in der kognitiv-verhaltenstherapeutischen Behandlung Sozialer Phobien zu vertiefen.
The construct diversity describes the collective amount of differences among members within a social unit. The present dissertation is based on the assumption that, through engagement with diversity, people acquire an understanding of what role diversity plays in the societies, organizations, work groups, or other social units they are part of. This understanding of the role diversity plays in a given social unit provides a vantage point from which people will engage with diversity in the future. These vantage points from which people engage with diversity are the general subject matter of the present dissertation. Two main research questions are addressed in this regard: First, whether the role diversity is given in a particular context does have effects on groups and the individual members therein. Second, if such effects exist, it seeks to explore the processes and mechanisms they are based on. Both questions are addressed from different perspectives in the three main chapters of this dissertation. Chapter 5 contains two meta-analyses on the effects of diversity beliefs and diversity climates. Diversity beliefs are individual attitudes that describe the degree to which diversity is ascribed an instrumental value for achieving beneficial outcomes or avoiding detrimental ones. Diversity climates depict such a value of diversity on the group-level. Building on the social identity approach, I explain how diversity beliefs and climates can obviate diversity’s detrimental effects and foster beneficial ones. As both diversity beliefs and climates can cause such effects, they are considered together in the main analyses in the chapter. In the first part of the chapter, a meta-analysis on these moderator effects of diversity beliefs/climates is presented (k = 23). The majority of studies that addressed such effects reported significant results. The patterns of these results showed that, in general, diversity will be more positively related to beneficial outcomes the more it is valued. However, the analysis also revealed that there are at least two types of patterns of this moderation. So far, it cannot be explained which pattern will occur under what circumstances. In the second part of the chapter, a meta-analysis on the main effects of diversity beliefs/climates on beneficial outcomes is presented (k = 71). These effects did not receive much attention in the primary studies. Based on the social identity approach and the fact that diversity is a ubiquitous feature of modern organizations, I argue that they are important nonetheless. The meta-analysis revealed a significant positive main effect of diversity beliefs on beneficial outcomes (r = .25; p < .0001). However, the effect sizes varied considerably across studies. Both moderator and main effects were found across a broad array of outcomes, study designs, levels of analysis, and operationalizations of the constructs involved. They were found irrespective of whether diversity beliefs or diversity climates were considered. The heterogeneity of results in the meta-analyses suggests that there is still much to be learned about when differences in vantage points from which people engage with diversity will have an effect and about the processes that underlie these effects. Chapter 6 is, therefore, predominantly concerned with these underlying processes. Most of the previous research has treated pro-diversity beliefs and pro-similarity beliefs as opposite poles of one underlying continuum. There is, however, evidence that people can hold both types of beliefs simultaneously. Therefore, I propose that both diversity in certain aspects and similarity in other aspects can simultaneously constitute valid and valued parts of an organization’s identity, and that, hence, identifying with the organization can create two forms of solidarity among the employees: organic solidarity – based on meaningfully and synergistically interrelated differences, and mechanic solidarity – based on the common ground that all employees share. Furthermore, I propose that both forms of solidarity can coexist and that both are positively related to the quality of collaboration within the organization. Thus, organizational identification is proposed to influence quality of collaboration indirectly through both organic and mechanic solidarity. These propositions were tested with regard to the collaboration of different teams within two organizations: a German university (Study 1, N = 699) and a Taiwanese hospital (Study 2, N = 591). The results from both studies confirm the predictions. However, the relative importance of each form of solidarity varied across study contexts and across different facets of the quality of collaboration. Chapter 7 also builds on the findings from the meta-analyses and is again predominantly focussed on the processes underlying the effects of diversity beliefs and diversity climates, yet from a different angle. Previously, diversity beliefs and climates have often been discussed with regard to their potential to influence whether diversity will lead to more and deeper elaboration of information within the group. In chapter 7 a theoretical model is developed that complements these cognitive processes by addressing the emotional side of diverse groups. Central to the model is the assumption that group diversity can stimulate group members to engage with each other emotionally, resulting in higher levels of state affective empathy: an emotional state which arises from the comprehension and apprehension of fellow group members’ emotional state. State affective empathy, in turn, is known to lead to a variety of beneficial team processes that can ultimately enhance individual and group-level performance. Thus, the central proposition of the model is that the relationship between diversity and performance is mediated through state affective empathy. The other propositions in the model specify moderators that determine when diversity will indeed have this empathy-stimulating effect. Diversity beliefs and climates are considered second-order moderators that shape the relationship between diversity and empathy through their influence on the first-order moderators. In general, it is proposed that diversity is related to empathy more positively if it is valued by the group or its members. In summary, the results from the meta-analyses in chapter 5, the results from the field studies in chapter 6, and the theoretical arguments presented in chapter 7 can be interpreted such that differences in vantage points from which people engage with diversity can indeed affect groups and their members. Therefore, the first research question of the present dissertation can be answered affirmatively from three different perspectives. However, it also became clear that there is still much uncertainty about the mechanisms underlying these effects. In line with the second research question of the present dissertation, these mechanisms were examined more closely in chapter 6 and 7. The field studies in chapter 6 highlighted the role of identification as the driving force behind the effects of different vantage points on diversity. Furthermore, they also corroborate the proposition that valuing diversity and valuing similarity can be co-occurring phenomena that both influence the collaboration within the group positively. The theoretical model presented in chapter 7 opens up a new emotional way in which diversity beliefs and climates can influence whether diversity will lead to better or worse performance. In sum, therefore, also with regard to the second research question of the present dissertation, progress has been made.