![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 2 to 26 of 26. Go back in thread:
Posted by dj on November 12, 2000, at 12:15:19
In reply to Book recommendation , posted by Rzip on November 12, 2000, at 12:03:29
> > I have always marvelled at the fact that real effective, intense therapy only takes 10 months, one year at most. Unfortunately, many people who comes into therapy expects to be comforted not > >challenged. Maturity is hard to come by.
>On what, other than this book, do you base the 10 month estimate for effectiveness of therapy??? Anyone have any concrete insights on this??
BTW, I scanned this book and the group it portrays are all high achievers in parts of their life and not in others, including the therapist. Not your average group perchance...and it is a group vs one on one, which is entirely another dynamic...
dj
Posted by coral on November 12, 2000, at 12:54:03
In reply to Re: Therapy length and impact??, posted by dj on November 12, 2000, at 12:15:19
Dear DJ,
Re: change.... self-effected or conscious change takes a minimum of nine months for the change to be considered permanent. Researchers don't know the reason for this but one thought is that change is a birthing process, and human beings require nine months from conception to birth - it's just a theory.
Again, this is specific to conscious change. It's easy to lose weight - hard not to gain it back, easy to quit smoking - hard not to start again. If a person keeps weight off for nine months, it's considered a true weight loss, and if a person doesn't smoke for nine months, people (other than intimates) will consider the person a non-smoker, forgetting that he/she ever smoked. This is true for organizations as well. A MINIMUM of nine months of continual attention is necessary for an organization to change. That's why so many organizational programs don't work. They're implemented but not reinforced, therefore, fail.
There is another organizational aspect that may also apply to individuals. When organizations implement but don't reinforce changes, employees become jaded and much more resistant to any "new" programs for improvement, etc., making change itself more difficult and requiring longer reinforcement. Individuals who have experienced failure in seeking treatment, such as incompetent therapists, wrong meds., etc., may become more resistant to change as a means of self-protection.This concept does not apply to external, forced change, such as trauma, where change can be truly instantaneous. Someone gets trapped in an elevator once, and becomes claustrophobic. A person may involuntarily flinch when driving on a road and passes the site of a previous automobile accident.
So, I can't answer the "why", just that the time table is proven.
Coral
Posted by dj on November 12, 2000, at 12:58:35
In reply to Re: Time to change, posted by coral on November 12, 2000, at 12:54:03
> Re: change.... self-effected or conscious change takes a minimum of nine months for the change to be considered permanent. ...
> So, I can't answer the "why", just that the time table is proven.
>Coral,
I've never seen that time frame referenced in any of far too many readings I've done on organizationa and individual change. Do you have any on or off-line sources you can refer me to on this??
Sante!
dj
Posted by coral on November 12, 2000, at 14:52:44
In reply to Re: Time to change coral, posted by dj on November 12, 2000, at 12:58:35
Dear DJ,
I wish that I could. It was something I learned as part of my master's... and have practiced ever sense. Please let me clarify, too, re: change. I'm not talking technical training, but OD change as well as "personal" growth.
Coral
Posted by dj on November 12, 2000, at 18:05:05
In reply to Re: Time to change coral, posted by coral on November 12, 2000, at 14:52:44
> Dear DJ,
>
> I wish that I could. It was something I learned as part of my master's... and have >practiced ever sense.Coral,
What type of master's do you have?
Anyone else,
Any insights or references on this or similar claims would be of interest... a rule-of-thumb I imagine that possibly applies to some more than others, if it is an accurate average as opposed to a belief someone spread, like the oft-quoted concept that we only use 10% of our brain. Me, I use about .0005%, usually unfortunately...
So it goes...
dj
Posted by coral on November 12, 2000, at 20:25:39
In reply to Re: Time to change coral ???, posted by dj on November 12, 2000, at 18:05:05
Dear DJ,
Management.
Maybe it's my interpretation, but it seems like you're saying this concept is akin to the earth being flat. What are your thoughts on the concept? Do you find it difficult to believe or are you just seeking verification?
Coral
Posted by dj on November 12, 2000, at 21:20:17
In reply to Re: Time to change coral ???, posted by coral on November 12, 2000, at 20:25:39
> Maybe it's my interpretation, but it seems like you're saying this concept is akin to the earth being flat. What are your thoughts on the concept? Do you find it difficult to believe or >are you just seeking verification?
Coral,
I don't at all see it as akin to the earth being flat. However I don't blindly accept statements without verification as there are far too many assertations made about this, that and the other for AD's and what have you. And verification from more than one source as I'm curious to what this is based on and under what circumstances it may apply... Just being curious and perhaps a bit skeptical.
Sante!
dj
Posted by coral on November 13, 2000, at 4:13:07
In reply to Re: Time to change, coral ??? others????, posted by dj on November 12, 2000, at 21:20:17
Dear DJ,
Well, if you're going to be THAT way, I won't tell you that I know the true story of Mulder's aliens... LOL
This one will really tickle you . . . it's called the Hawthorne Effect (circa 1920's) that org. change will result in a "temporary" positive result in most employees. The positive result has nothing to do with the actual change, but the change itself. The results were never verified by additional testing because "we" tend to only study so-called abnormalities and negatives. Lots of theories as to why but nothing definitive. But, the Hawthorne Effect is one of the primary reasons that OD pros (competent ones, anyway) won't institute a change without sufficient long-term reinforcement.
Coral
Posted by dj on November 13, 2000, at 4:35:09
In reply to Re: Time to change, coral ??? others????, posted by coral on November 13, 2000, at 4:13:07
> > This one will really tickle you . . . it's called the Hawthorne Effect (circa 1920's) that org. change will result in a "temporary" positive result in most employees. The positive result has nothing to do with the actual change, but the >change itself.
It was the fact of being observed and being seen to be 'special' that resulted in the temporary positive effect wasn't it?
Posted by coral on November 13, 2000, at 7:05:39
In reply to Re: Hawthorne effect????, posted by dj on November 13, 2000, at 4:35:09
That was one of the theories. Others include 1) fear of losing one's job, therefore, increased performance, 2) the hope of increased wages, therefore, increased performance, 3) the breaking of routine which increased excitement and anxiety, 4)people saw the change as positive and became hopeful, 5) questions of how the experiment was conducted, i.e. did researchers find what they EXPECTED to find? Just some of the explanations that have been offered.
Posted by shar on November 13, 2000, at 8:22:14
In reply to Re: Time to change, coral ??? others????, posted by coral on November 13, 2000, at 4:13:07
Social science researchers consider the Hawthorn effect as well. Their theory is that people who are in the experiment (or whatever) may change due to the additional attention they get. So, the change can't be attributed to the intervention or experimental variables.
Shar
> Dear DJ,
>
> Well, if you're going to be THAT way, I won't tell you that I know the true story of Mulder's aliens... LOL
>
> This one will really tickle you . . . it's called the Hawthorne Effect (circa 1920's) that org. change will result in a "temporary" positive result in most employees. The positive result has nothing to do with the actual change, but the change itself. The results were never verified by additional testing because "we" tend to only study so-called abnormalities and negatives. Lots of theories as to why but nothing definitive. But, the Hawthorne Effect is one of the primary reasons that OD pros (competent ones, anyway) won't institute a change without sufficient long-term reinforcement.
>
> Coral
Posted by coral on November 13, 2000, at 12:21:51
In reply to Re: Time to change, coral ??? others???? » coral, posted by shar on November 13, 2000, at 8:22:14
Dear Shar,
Excellent point.
Isn't it interesting that the more we learn, the less we know? LOL
Coral
Posted by Rzip on November 16, 2000, at 18:25:50
In reply to Re: Therapy length and impact??, posted by dj on November 12, 2000, at 12:15:19
> BTW, I scanned this book and the group it portrays are all high achievers in parts of their life and not in others, including the therapist. Not your average group perchance...
dj,
Can you please elaborate. Thanks.
Rzip
Posted by stjames on November 17, 2000, at 0:06:22
In reply to Re: Therapy length and impact??, posted by dj on November 12, 2000, at 12:15:19
I have always marvelled at the fact that real effective, intense therapy only takes 10 months, one year at most. Unfortunately, many people who comes into therapy expects to be comforted not > >challenged. Maturity is hard to come by.
On what, other than this book, do you base the 10 month estimate for effectiveness of therapy??? Anyone have any concrete insights on this??
BTW, I scanned this book and the group it portrays are all high achievers in parts of their life and not in others, including the therapist. Not your average group perchance...and it is a group vs one on one, which is entirely another dynamic...
dj
James here...
I would say that unless someone is dealing with the major issues of abuse or negelict, 6-12 months
is enough. Also one does not go into thearpy because they really know what the problems are and how to
fix them. So thearpy is often dificult, as it should be. Why pay money to just have a good chat with a
close friend ?James
Posted by Rzip on November 22, 2000, at 11:06:48
In reply to Book recommendation , posted by Rzip on November 12, 2000, at 12:03:29
Has anyone read this book: "Group, six people in search of a life" by Paul Solotaroff? It really is a very good book, I am almost finished with it. I am still amazed at how much I can draw from it.
To tell you the truth, I previously wanted my book recommendation to be listed anonymous so that people would actually take the recommendation seriously. I really believe that you guys will like the book very much. Holiday is coming up...
Posted by Noa on November 22, 2000, at 12:05:48
In reply to Re: Book recommendation , posted by Rzip on November 22, 2000, at 11:06:48
Ahem, Rzip.
I, for one, do take your bood recommendation seriously! I have no reason not to.
Posted by Rzip on November 22, 2000, at 15:40:35
In reply to Re: Book recommendation » Rzip, posted by Noa on November 22, 2000, at 12:05:48
> Hi Noa,
I am on my Thanksgiving break now :-) But I have finals right afterwards :-(
I have to work on Thanksgiving -- which is o.k. since I am spending the holidays alone.
I have to say I really appreciate you taking the time to help me curb my preoccupation with this board. I kind of see you as my "sponsor" :-)
As for the book recommendation thing...I always get this anxiety that people do not like me. But I still think that it is a good book. That's why I tried to recommend it anonymously.
Happy Thanksgiving!
- Rzip
Posted by Noa on November 22, 2000, at 15:53:24
In reply to Re: Book recommendation » Noa, posted by Rzip on November 22, 2000, at 15:40:35
>
> Happy Thanksgiving!
> - RzipTo you, too, Rzip!
Posted by dj on November 22, 2000, at 23:20:10
In reply to Re: Therapy length and impact?? » dj, posted by Rzip on November 16, 2000, at 18:25:50
> > BTW, I scanned this book and the group it portrays are all high achievers in parts of their life and not in others, including the therapist. Not your average group perchance...
>
> dj,
>
> Can you please elaborate. Thanks.
>
Rzip,Sorry, I didn't notice this question to me until just now. What I meant was that the folks portrayed in the book were all people from New York city who generally excelled in their careers, some high profile, but not in their personal lives. They are not the kinda folks you are going to find in your run of the mill therapy group nor was the group set-up, duration and therapist of the variety avaialbe to most.
That's what I gathered from a scan of the book.
Sante!
dj
Posted by Rzip on November 23, 2000, at 17:05:40
In reply to Re: Therapy length and impact??, posted by dj on November 22, 2000, at 23:20:10
> What I meant was that the folks portrayed in the book were all people from New York city who generally excelled in their careers, some high profile, but not in their personal lives. They are not the kinda folks you are going to find in your run of the mill therapy group nor was the group set-up, duration and therapist of the variety avaialbe to most.
I like this book (which I am still reading) because it took six specimens of the Homo Sapien race from one isolated region-- New York City. A quite controlled "study" condition for real life. I thought the author did justice to the study and I learned a lot from the book on human potentiality to change their habits. I just thought this is a good, concrete piece of psychology literature.- Rzip
Posted by dj on November 23, 2000, at 22:12:17
In reply to Re: Study of Homo Sapiens » dj, posted by Rzip on November 23, 2000, at 17:05:40
> I like this book (which I am still reading) because it took six specimens of the Homo Sapien race from one isolated region-- New York City. A quite controlled "study" condition for real life. I thought the author did justice to the study and I learned a lot from the book on human potentiality to change their habits. I just thought this is a good, concrete piece of psychology literature.
>Rzip,
All I'm saying is that this is a very unique group of high achievers in a city where high achievement is worshiped and the focus of many. Even the therapist fits that mold, which is why he allowed a book to be written. My impression is that much therapy, group and individual is more dull, grinding and slow moving, human potential or not... However, I would love to find out differently, personally, without paying a small fortune which is what I imagine these folks did...
Hope you are well and your therapy is going well for you.
Sante!
dj
Posted by Rzip on November 23, 2000, at 22:41:29
In reply to Re: Study of Homo Sapiens Rzip, posted by dj on November 23, 2000, at 22:12:17
I would love to find out differently, personally, without paying a small fortune which is what I imagine these folks did...
Although PSB is not "therapy", it is FREE :o)
> Hope you are well and your therapy is going well for you.
I am stable and thus well. I changed therapist. I really like my new therapist, he is humorous.
How are you doing?
- Rzip
Posted by dj on November 23, 2000, at 22:55:01
In reply to Group support » dj, posted by Rzip on November 23, 2000, at 22:41:29
> I am stable and thus well. I changed therapist. I really like my new therapist, he is humorous.
>
> How are you doing?Rzip,
Me? So, so -- up and down like a yo-yo...
Good luck with your new therapist!! This one isn't encouraging you to abandon PB or is this just a weekend break before you're back to studies??
Remember PB may be free but it is NOT the same as in-person interractions and can shield one from the same if used excessively, as can all electronic communications. In person can be that much more challenging, dissapointing and rewarding, hence the role of therapists which may pay off in time, if both sides are working well together. I have yet to gel on that front. Too good at self-sabotage... Oh well...
Sante!
dj
Posted by Rzip on November 23, 2000, at 23:17:58
In reply to Re: Group support, posted by dj on November 23, 2000, at 22:55:01
> Me? So, so -- up and down like a yo-yo...
Want to talk about it?
> Good luck with your new therapist!! This one isn't encouraging you to abandon PB or is this just a weekend break before you're back to studies??
This new therapist knows about PSB and he warned me to be cautious and not get too caught up on-line.During Christmas break (three weeks), I am going to hound this board like crazy. I going back to my parents' place and there is tension brewing already. I'll be visiting here quite a bit, I suspect. Ah! Good old defense mechanisms...
- Rzip
Posted by dj on November 23, 2000, at 23:32:18
In reply to Re: Group support, posted by Rzip on November 23, 2000, at 23:17:58
> > Me? So, so -- up and down like a yo-yo...
>
> Want to talk about it?Been doing that in person with various folks today with some folks who know me, some, and am tired of that routine. Thanks anyway. Time to crash...been off and on here and on-line too much tonight and lately, posting or not...
Night!
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Social | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.