26.10.2014 Views

„‚ CONDITIONS THAT HINDER EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION

„‚ CONDITIONS THAT HINDER EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION

„‚ CONDITIONS THAT HINDER EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

❚❘<br />

INTERPERSONAL FEEDBACK AS CONSENSUAL<br />

VALIDATION OF CONSTRUCTS<br />

Donald A. Devine<br />

A central feature of group process that is frequently discussed is interpersonal feedback.<br />

Few attempts, however, have been made to relate the significance of interpersonal<br />

feedback in the group situation to the process of individual ideation and its subsequent<br />

relationship to behavior (Miller & Porter, 1972; Robinson & Jacobs, 1970).<br />

The fact that giving feedback and receiving feedback are two of the implicit or<br />

explicit objectives of a treatment or awareness-oriented group is well documented<br />

(Bach, 1966; Ellis, 1973; Miller & Porter, 1972). Because of the emphasis that group<br />

members give to the exchange of feedback (an interpersonal process that serves to<br />

consensually validate reality), the parallel intragroup processes of ideation, construct<br />

formation, and inferring are often overlooked.<br />

In our daily interpersonal relationships we form constructs, ideas, or assumptions<br />

about others based on the actions of these others. Both the overt and subtle behaviors of<br />

others are used as the basis for creating a cognitive framework that is then used to<br />

interpret future behavior.<br />

This process of making inferences from behavior is of crucial importance, because<br />

the assumptions, once formed, will tend to be resistant to change (Kelly, 1963) and will<br />

also shape behavioral responses (Ellis, 1973; Kelly, 1963). It is useful to specify the<br />

relationships to behavior of an interpersonal process (consensual validation) and of an<br />

intrapersonal process (construct formation) and to foster awareness of these<br />

relationships. Figure 1 briefly describes these relationships. As can be seen in the figure,<br />

once the initial behavior (Behavior 1) has set this process in motion, it is difficult to<br />

interrupt the flow of interaction that follows.<br />

CONSENSUAL VALIDATION<br />

The one asset of a treatment or awareness group that is not available in an everyday<br />

situation is validation. Groups such as these allow each group member to validate the<br />

inferences that he or she is making concerning a person’s behavior via verbal or<br />

nonverbal feedback. An informal “hold” procedure can be established that willenable a<br />

group member to check his or her inferences concerning present, ongoing group and<br />

individual behavior with the other members of the group. Ideally, this form of validation<br />

will also allow group members to become sensitive to and reevaluate the assumptions<br />

Originally published in The 1976 Annual Handbook for Group Facilitators by J. William Pfeiffer and John E. Jones (Eds.), San Diego,<br />

CA: Pfeiffer & Company.<br />

The Pfeiffer Library Volume 6, 2nd Edition. Copyright ©1998 Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer ❚❘ 187

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!