View/Open - Scholarly Commons Home

Appendix Two – The Methodology in Action - Page A2-5
An example from the study is an episode to be considered in Chapter Five (A
Beginning - Session 10), which looks at the tension in the learning group as one
member tries to voice the experience of regression induced in her in the Reflective
Group, and one of the tutors slips to an ambiguous phrase (bringing up/up-bringing).
This seems to be an instance where both Foulkes’s (1975) levels (current, transference,
projective and primordial) and Matte-Blanco’s (1988; Rayner & Tuckett, 1988) strata
(from One, exhibiting almost fully asymmetrical logic, through to Five, exhibiting fully
symmetrical logic) are useful. Given that one member has apparently induced a slip in
the tutor, it would seem that the projective level is almost certainly involved. However,
in his consideration of Foulkes’s primordial level, Usandivaras (1986) describes how
one member can come to voice experience of the primordial level on behalf of the
group, and the utterance in this example seems to suggest that there is something quite
primordial involved here. Another way of looking at this is that the student has reflected
on what they want to say, so that it is initially conscious. At the same time, her
unconscious frustration with the lateness of her peers leads her to convey her irritation
by the disruption to her speech. Instead of this being voiced directly, it is experienced
(possibly below the level of conscious awareness) by the group.
In this case, the model is useful in enabling diagnostic consideration of the multiple
levels of communication and experience that are involved in the interaction in question.
Understanding Group Processes in order to Foster Group
Analytic Capacity (Developmental Use)
This is an extended example from the professional community where the main study
took place. A series of processes are described. (I am using third-person passive tense
here, to gain some distance from my own community). This is intended as a