The Great Therapists Program: Computerized Learning of

Counseling Theories

DALE R. HALPAIN DAVID N. DIXON

JOHN A. GLOVER

The authors examine the effectiveness and subjective enjoyment of a computer-assisted instruction program to teach neophyte counselors classic methods of psychotherapy. Soft- ware was developed that called for beginning counseling students to simulate dialogue with a client via the computer’s keyboard. Students were able to compare their responses with those of classic therapists. Provisions for a printed record of the session were made. Questionnaires, knowledge tests, and students’ choices of counseling styles provided in- vestigators with feedback on learning and level of positive response to the teaching method. As with most computer-assisted instruction studies, no evidence supporting increases in learning was obtained; however, free responses and ratings indicated that the students positively evaluated the program as a learning experience.

An extremely important aspect in the training of beginning counselors is their development of counseling techniques appropriate for a wide variety of clients and problems (Kanfer & Goldstein, 1980; Krumboltz & Thoresen, 1976; Myers, 1982). Typically, neophyte counselors study transcripts of a range of great therapists to learn a spectrum of coun- seling techniques. Such students become passive-receptive learners, hav- ing limited opportunity for experiential application of their new knowledge, and they have no opportunity for supervision from the great therapists they study.

Efforts to use computers to assist counselors in skill acquisition have taken two forms. In the most popular form counselors act as clients, responding to computerized decision-making programs (e.g., SIGI, MORTON, or PLAT0 DCS) to gain an understanding of potential strat- egies for helping with clients’ problems (Wagman & Keber, 1984). Cairo and Kanner (1984) reported a less common approach in which the com- puter simulates interactive client-counselor communications (e.g., CLIENT 1 [Lichtenberg, Hummel, & Shaffer, 19841). The limited natural lan- guage ability of ‘‘counseling” computers (e.g., ELIZA [Weizenbaum, 19661)

Dale R. Halpain is a doctoral student in counselzng psychology, David N . Dixon is a profe,nor of counseling psychology, and John A . Glover is a professor of educational psy‘cholqgv, University of

Nebraska-Lincoln.

JUNE 1987 25.5

and limited “artificial intelligence,” however, have proven restrictive to production of this form of computer-assisted counselor instruction.

In this study we proposed the improvement of the quality of counselor training by providing students with access to computer-simulated, in- teractive interviews. Computer simulation provided modeling of specific therapeutic approaches in a milieu of unfolding interactions such as those occurring in a normal counseling session. Therefore, beginning students were allowed to attempt application of classic therapeutic meth- ods with the benefits of immediate “expert supervision feedback” but without the risks associated with actual client contact. The testing method was evaluated through students’ understanding of the classic counseling approaches and by students’ self-reports regarding their evaluation of the learning process.

METHOD

Materials

Initially, four classic therapy styles were selected because they repre- sented those frequently included in counselor training curricula. Pro- visions were made to expand the program with other scripts. Through a literature search, interview transcripts of suitable length were found for (a) person-centered therapy (Carl Rogers), (b) Gestalt therapy (Fred- erick Perk), (c) a representative of behavioral therapy (Alan Goldstein), and (d) rational-emotive therapy (Albert Ellis). These transcripts were incorporated into a menu-driven software program that we wrote in BASIC computer language. Operation of the software required an Apple I1 or IIe microcomputer or compatible hardware with one 5 1/4-inch disk drive. Because the program allowed for printed transcripts of ses- sions, a compatible printer was highly desirable.

Description of Simulation Process

The simulation began with instructions on the computer’s screen fol- lowed by a description of the client, his or her specific counseling situ- ation and history, and his or her presenting problem in the words of the great therapist. Then the computer’s screen was divided into three horizontal sections. On the top one-third of the screen, the client’s name appeared with his or her opening statement to the counselor. The middle and bottom sections were blank. After reading the client’s statement, the student typed, in narrative format and in the middle third of the screen, his or her responses to the client’s statement. The student’s responses were limited to approximately 75 words. After the student entered his or her responses, the computer showed, on the bottom portion of the

256 COUNSELOR EDUCATION AND SUPERVISION

screen, the great therapist’s actual response to the client’s comments. The student was then allowed to contrast his or her response with the great therapist’s, but no evaluative feedback was presented, thus limiting client anxiety (Wise, Plake, Eastman, Boettcher, & Lukin, 1986.).

At the student’s command, the screen was cleared and the client’s next statement, in response to the great therapist’s preceding one, was dis- played on the top portion of the screen and the process was repeated (see Figure 1 for an example of a simulation sequence from the person- centered interview). At the end of the simulation session, the student was presented with instructions for obtaining a printed transcript of the session for later study.

Evaluation of Simulations

Master’s-level students (10 women and 6 men) enrolled in a counseling program completed the simulations. Each student simulated one pre- assigned set of two counseling theories, leaving two unsimulated. Each simulation required approximately 45 minutes to complete.

Two instruments were used in evaluting the procedure: (a) a posttest of the student’s knowledge of content and techniques of each theory, and (b) an evaluation survey assessing the great therapist program as a learning experience, as an aid to skill improvement, and as an enjoyable experience. Additionally, students were required to complete two case studies, each requiring the student to specify a therapeutic style for conceptualization.

No significant differences on the knowledge posttest were found among those theories simulated versus those not simulated. The evaluation sur- vey, based on a 7-point Likert scale with highest scores most positive, revealed that overall the students (a) believed that the computer and program were easy to operate (M = 6.63), (b) generally believed that the selected transcripts represented the theories as understood (A4 = 5.3 l), (c) learned from the simulations (M = 5.33), (d) preferred the format to simply reading a printed transcript of a session (M=5.75) , (e) were positive about the gains in insight into the therapeutic process of the great therapists (M = 5.13), and (f) enjoyed the simulation (M = 5.38). No significant differences were found for the choice of theoretical base for the case studies among those theories simulated and those not simulated.

The results of the posttest and the case conceptualization assignment did not indicate that simulation affected learning or familiarity leading to a favored selection of styles. This result is generally consistent with other computer-assisted instruction studies (Rohrbach, 1983). Also, it was not surprising that no differences were found due to other student experiences. Some students entered the theories course with extensive knowledge of a theory or theories, and readings in the course provided information additional to the simulations. For several students, their

J U N E 1987 2.57

Screen A.

(client's statement) Mrs. Oak: Yes, that's right. Again it's ... it's a feeling of being very objective ... and yet I've never been so close to myself. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....................................

(statement entered from the keyboard) Student: That must be very confusing, to be so "outside" of yourself and at the same time feel so close to your self! .................................... ....................................

(appears after student's statement) Dr. Rogers: Almost at one and the same time standing off and looking at yourself and yet somehow being closer to yourself that way than ...

Screen B.

Mrs. Oak: Mm-Hm. And yet, for the first time in months I am not thinking aboout my problems. I'm not actually ... working on them.

Student: You are feeling the distance and the closeness, but you are not doing work in order to experience your problems

Dr. Rogers: I get the impression you don't sort of sit down to work on "my problems". It isn't that feeling at all.

I= I I I===I IPPI==IPI= Ip l r=p=Lp====I===========

.................................... ....................................

FIGURE 1 Simulation Example

COUNSELOR EDUCATION AND SUPERVISION 2.58

previous or concurrent supervision in practicum settings may have pro- vided a fourth source of exposure to theory.

DISCUSSION

This study has made evident the need for additional research on this instructional method. The question of the effectiveness of the method remains an open one, and comparisons with other computer simulations and reading of printed transcripts might clarify the issue. An advantage of computerized simulation is its unique suitability to research method- ologies because it represents a standardized independent variable.

As a teaching and training method, the great therapist program of- fered several advantages. It allowed students to be self-directed in their learning and did not require faculty presence or supervision. “Super- vision” was provided by the great therapists in an immediate but non- evaluative manner, and the feedback could be studied later at the student’s leisure or accompanied by an instructor. There seemed to be some sub- jective evidence (both empirical and nonempirical) that the computer simulations fostered interest in the theories course and, as such, provided a stimulating adjunctive teaching approach. This approach to presenting case study material is a manageable, stimulating addition to traditional reading and lecture formats.

REFERENCES Cairo, P.C., & Kanner, M.S. (1984). Investigating the effects of computerized approaches

to counselor training. Counselor Education and Supervision, 24, 2 12-22 1. Kanfer, F.H., & Goldstein, A.P. (1980). Helping people change (2nd ed.). New York: Per-

gamon. Krumboltz, J.D., & Thoresen, C.E. (Eds.) (1976). Coulwelzng methods. New York: Hoit,

Rinehart and Winston. Lichtenberg, J.W., Hummel, T.J., & Shaffer, W.F. (1984). CLIENT 1: A computer sim-

ulation for use in counselor education and research. CounselorEducation and Suprrvision, 24, 155-167.

Myers, R.A. (1 982). Education and training-The next decade. Counsrling Psychologut, 10(2), 39-44.

Rohrbach, N.F. ( 1 983). Microcomputer use in teaching graduate students in agricultural education: Economics, instruction, and tutorials (Doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri, Columbia, 1983). Dissertation Abstracts International, 45, 4502A.

Wagman, M., & Kerber, K.W. (1984). Computer-assisted counseling: Problems and pros- pects. Counselor Education and Supemision, 24, 142-154.

Weizenbaum, J. (1966). ELIZA-A computer program for the study of natural language communications between man and machine. Commu,nzcations of the Awxiation of Com- puting Machinery, 9, 36-45.

Wise, S.L., Plake, B.S., Eastman, L.A., Boettcher, L.L., & Lukin, M.E. (1986). The effects of item feedback and examinee control on test performance and anxiety in a coniputer- administered test. Computers in Human Behavior, 2 , 21-29.

JUNE 1987 259