BERN؛یک روش برای تجزیه و تحلیل گروه های رقص/حرکت درمانی

The field of dance/movement therapy (dmt) lacks a broad conceptual framework for explaining group functioning. It is ironic that while most dance therapists work with groups, most of the research to date focuses on individuals. This is in part because there is no comprehensive system for examining group patterns in dmt, whereas there is a conceptual framework for understanding and examining individual movement patterns—Laban analysis (Laban, 1960). This study meets the need for a broad conceptual framework by offering a social systems approach to the study of dmt groups.

Currently, there are three research approaches that examine videotapes of group dmt through the lens of systems theory. They are Dance Therapy Analyses (DTA) (Schmais & Felber, 1977); Structural Analysis of Movement (SAMS) (Johnson & Sandel, 1996); and Analysis of Interaction in Movement Sessions (AIMS) (Koch, 1996). DTA (Schmais & Felber, 1977) looks at the interaction of group behaviors such as proxemics, touch, vocalizations, synchrony, formations, etc. For example, their analysis of a dmt session with adolescents revealed that moving synchronously and touching, while in a circle, preceded breaking up into smaller grouping. Apparently, in this group, the experience of closeness enabled group members to exert their autonomy and leave the circle. In a similar study with adolescent in-patients, Moss (1978) found that the group used touch, synchrony and group vocalizations to remain within the structure of the circle. She attributes this to the active role of the leader, as well as to the strong dependency needs of the group. Hirsch and Summit (1978) applied DTA to a session with psychotic in-patients. They determined that touch at arms length and moving in and out of the circle enabled the group members to become close to each other. SAMS looks at the interaction of tasks (actions and sounds), space (circles, lines, clusters, etc.) and role (group leader, sidecoach, audience, etc.). The focus is on how the group works or is not working towards its goal in dmt sessions. In a study comparing high and low functioning patients in dmt sessions, Johnson and Sandel (1977) found that high-functioning patients were able to maintain their tasks and roles, whereas the lower functioning patients had difficulty maintaining stability; however, they tended to be more stable when the task was not interactive. In Bruno’s (1981) study, an adult schizophrenic group became unstable when they were dealing with highly affective material, a complex task or a disruptive individual. SAMS was also used to trace the development of a group of low-functioning patients over a 10-week period (Sandel & Johnson, 1983). Initially, the group was socially adaptive and compliant. In the middle phase, the group developed some intimacy and could tolerate loose structures. The last phase was characterized by low attendance, fragmentation and loss of group identity. Leadership was examined in two studies using SAM’s methodology. The first study (Johnson et al, 1983) analyzed the management style of three dance therapists. Each therapist led three sessions, one with a so-called normal group, one with a group of people designated as character-disordered and one with a group of individuals diagnosed as schizophrenic. The results show that each group responded best to a particular style. The schizophrenic groups responded favorably to the leader who evoked intimacy, while maintaining boundaries, whereas the normal groups preferred a laissez-faire style. The character-disordered groups responded to clarity and a well-boundaried social environment. In a similar study (Johnson et al, 1984), three dance therapists separately led groups of normal, schizophrenic and character-disordered people in two dmt sessions. In the first session, they used specific, designated activities, whereas in the second session, they relied on the spontaneous development of movement. The character-disordered clients preferred the highly organized sessions, while the schizophrenic groups responded better to a more open-ended approach. The normal group was dissatisfied with the open-ended session, responding with boredom, but not with the disruptive behavior that was typical of the character-disordered clients. AIMS (Koch, 1996) provides a second-by-second analysis of how a group organizes itself through the subtle and not so subtle behavior of its members. Koch looks at the interaction of four system elements: boundaries, feedback, steady state, and system tension, in combination with three behavioral elements: directives (verbal and movement instructions), orienting (visual and postural focus) and positioning (postures and movements). Much of what appears in the first viewing of the videotape is countervailed in the microanalysis. For example, in one portion of the tape, it appears that group action comes to a halt when the therapist leaves the circle to change a record. However, close examination reveals that the cessation of movement is jointly negotiated by the members even before the music stops. In another segment, it appears as if a disruptive member is stepping out of the circle. However, second-by-second analysis reveals another story, namely, that he is pushed out by the other group members. The members opposite him lean forward, three members gaze directly at him and the members on either side of him literally put pressure on him to move. Each of the models presented addresses a specific aspect of dmt and yields valuable information, but none of them address the emotional, social and cultural aspects of a group, i.e., the feelings, norms, values and expectations that people bring with them into dmt sessions. This study contends that a social systems approach cannot only address how groups function, but might also provide understanding of why groups behave in particular ways. Before discussion of the group as a social system, it is important to define what is meant by a system. von Bertalanffy (1975), the father of general systems theory, defines a system as “a complex of components in mutual interaction” (p. 708). Rapoport 1968 and Whitely and Gordon 1949 elaborates this concept. He defines a system as: 1. Something consisting of a set (finite or infinite) of entities. 2. Among which a set of relations is specified so that 3. Deductions are possible for relations to others or form relations among the entities to the behavior or the history of the system (p. 453). Briefly, a system can be described in terms of hierarchy, boundaries, openness, wholeness and steady state Buckley 1967 and Rice and Rutan 1987). Each system is part of a larger system and at the same time is made up of smaller units. For example, a dmt group exists within a hospital and is itself made up of individual patients. Each system has a boundary separating it from the environment in which it exists. The boundaries of a group determine who is and who is not a member. Human systems are open in that they have significant interchanges with the environment. Human systems are whole—changes in one part of the system effect all parts of the system. Systems maintain an ever-changing balance—a steady state. For example, when the norms of a group change, readjustment in behavior are made to accommodate to that norm. If adjustments cannot be made, the group eventually disintegrates. A social system is made up of the relationships of individuals cooperating within a larger system—culture. The structural components of a social system are interacting persons. It is roles rather than personalities that are the units of the social structure (Parsons & Shils, 1951). Parsons (Parsons & Shils, 1951) defines a social system as follows: A social system is a system of the actions individuals, the principal units of which are roles and constellations of roles. It is a system of differentiated actions, organized into a system of differentiated roles. Internal differentiation, which is a fundamental property of all systems requires integration. It is a condition of the existence of the system that the differentiated roles must be coordinated either negatively, in the sense of the avoidance of disruptive interference with each other, or positively, in the sense of contributing to the realization of certain shared collective goals through collaborated activity. (Parsons & Shils, 1951, p. 23) Mills (1967) applied Parson’s sociological perspective to the study of groups. He sees the group as a self-directing, goal seeking, boundary-maintaining social system subject to internal differentiation in response to personal, social and environmental realities. Mills divides the interpersonal processes within groups into five components: 1. Behavior: How persons overtly act in the presence of others. 2. Emotions: The drives persons experience and the feelings they have towards one another. 3. Norms: Ideas about how persons should act, should feel or should express their feelings. 4. Goals: Ideas about what is most desirable for groups as units to do. 5. Values: Ideas about what is most desirable for groups as units to be and become (p. 58). The above model was developed for the study of verbal groups. To adapt this model for the study of dmt groups one must take into account some basic differences between verbal psychotherapy groups and dmt groups. One of the critical differences is that dance and movement exist in the present. The verbal exchanges that take place in dmt generally relate to concrete behaviors rather than to abstract concepts. Feelings, memories and associations are evoked from the moment-to-moment gestures of the dance. Likewise, the dance form permits group members to move at the same time, doing the same thing, which is highly unlikely in a verbal group. In addition, the choreography of a dance group has symbolic meaning for the group as a whole. Themes of unity, power and caring are symbolically displayed as in folk or ritual dance. Lastly, the leadership role is different. In dmt the leader exerts a powerful influence since his or her movements are highly visible to the entire group at all times, whereas in a verbal group the leader talks for just a portion of the time and his or her non-verbal behaviors are limited. Adapting Mills’ (1967) system for the study of dmt required changing some components and redefining others to accommodate to the characteristics inherent in a dmt group. The four components (BERN) that seem appropriate for the study of a dmt group are: Full-size image (<1 K)ehaviors of the group Full-size image (<1 K)motions of the group Full-size image (<1 K)oles Full-size image (<1 K)orm The following changes have been made. The Behavior component has been divided into two subcategories: dance behaviors and verbalizations. The Emotions component is defined in term of Bion’s (1961) concepts. Roles is a new category based on the work of Merton (1975) and Norms, Goals and Values have been collapsed into one category—Norms. Following is a discussion of each of the categories. 1. Behavior For the study of dmt, it is important to look at dance behaviors and group verbalizations. a) Dance behavior is essentially the group choreography. It incorporates some of the categories studied by Schmais and Felber (1977) and Johnson and Sandel (1977). Dance behavior includes group formations (circles, lines, etc.), spatial paths (in and out, circular, serpentine, etc.), organization (small group, trios, pairs, etc.) and most importantly, the group actions (reaching, opening, stamping, touching, etc.). b) Group verbalizations include the leader’s directives, questions, comments, images, etc., as well as the members responses, suggestions, associations, etc. 2. Emotions Mills (1967) defines this category in terms of how “individuals” act in the presence of others. For a dmt group it seems more useful to look at group emotions which is why we turned to Bion (1961), a psychiatrist. In his classic work Experiences in Groups and Other Papers, he formulated concepts about group emotions which can aptly be applied to dmt groups. Bion addresses both the conscious and unconscious levels of functioning that exist within a group. On a conscious level, a group is concerned with accomplishing its task. In dmt the basic task is to become an effective therapeutic group, which means promoting group cohesion, supporting differentiation, facilitating expression and distributing power. On an unconscious level, a group often undermines its task orientation. Bion (1961) called the latter the basic assumption group. Basic assumptions are defenses against anxiety aroused by group activity. He describes three emotional modalities of the basic assumption group: a) dependence, b) pairing and c) flight/fight behavior. Dependency exists when the group seeks to retain the leader as the all powerful figure—protector, judge, commander, etc. The leader will then do all the work. Pairing exists when the group fosters dyadic behavior in the hope that this will provide a solution, or a new leader. Flight/fight exists when the group refuses or resists engaging in the task, or when the group tries to get the leader to fight against external forces. Thelan (1954) developed a method of recording group behaviors based on the above categories by analyzing the content of verbal utterances. How these basic assumptions are enacted in a dmt group is somewhat different than in a verbal group. For example, in a verbal group fight/flight might be evident by people yawning or changing the topic, whereas in a dmt group, people can literally take flight by moving away from the group. Pairing is also more obvious since group members can move towards each other or dance together in couples. Likewise, dependency can be seen when the group dutifully follow the leader. 3. Roles Roles can be defined as clusters of behaviors of functional significance for the group system (Livesly & MacKenzie, 1983). When group membership is stable, people are expected to act in predictable ways. These social roles become part of the group’s normative structure. Merton (1975) developed a paradigm for explaining the roles of people who are alienated from society. His formulation defines five roles based on a means/end relationship: conformist, ritualist, innovator, retreatist and rebel. Conformists accept a society’s ends or goals and also accept the means of achieving those ends. Ritualists accept the means but lose sight of the goals. Innovators accept the ends but wish to substitute new means. Retreatists reject both the means and the ends. Rebels want to change both the means and the ends. This way of defining roles seems quite appropriate for mental patients—they are certainly among the alienated. The roles they play in groups generally conform to Merton’s descriptions. 4. Norms Norms can be defined as “abstract patterns held in mind that set limits for behavior” (Johnson, 1960, p. 8). Social norms are those accepted by a group. Violators suffer consequences. They can be ostracized, cooperation and friendship are withheld, prestige is lost and they incur concrete penalties. The opposite is true for those who abide by the social norms. Those who conform continue to enjoy the unexpected cooperative performances of others; they maintain good standing in their group; and they receive rewards or positive sanctions, such as praise, bonuses and promotions. (Johnson, 1960, p. 9) An operative norm is one that is considered worth following in actual behavior. In looking at a dmt group we can determine the norms by the group’s behavior, such as the actions they choose to take, the feelings they choose to express and the roles they choose to play. To see if this approach furthers the understanding of group process, a pilot study was done using the above components (behavior, emotions, roles and norms) as the basis for describing a dmt group. The subjects were 25 dance therapists who attended a training seminar at the 1988 American Dance Therapy Association conference. They participated in a 30-minute dmt session that was videotaped using two cameras. The cameras were placed in opposite corners of the room in order to capture the fronts and backs of all the participants. Two observers examined both tapes and recorded the presence of behaviors, emotions, roles and norms on a time line. The data were divided into segments based on the group norms. Following is an abbreviated analysis of this dmt group based on the interaction of the four components of BERN. Analysis During the warm-up part of this session, two distinct aspects of the group task (becoming a therapeutic group) emerge: becoming better acquainted and focusing on the self. Walking softly in and out of an expanding and contracting circle is the first expression of the “getting acquainted” theme, as individuals check the group out. The theme of self-focus is introduced when the leader directs the group’s attention to body isolations, i.e., “shoulders moving,” “playing around with your feet.” As is typical of a beginning group, anxiety is allayed by following the leader (innovator). The group emotion is dependency. Members engage in the conformist role as they abide by the group norm “to be the same.” Gradually freed from the structure of a circle, the dance behavior evolves into weaving pathways, creating momentary meetings and greetings within a closely, defined space. At this point, two individuals engage in the reciprocal roles of retreatist and ritualist. The retreatist moves alone on the group’s periphery. The ritualist mirrors her. Through mirroring, the ritualist mitigates against her partner’s isolation and forces her momentarily to maintain the group task of “becoming acquainted.” The leader furthers the group task by reforming the circle, thus reabsorbing this dyad while supporting the group norm of “being the same.” Throughout the warm-up section, the group moves back and forth repeatedly between a focus on the group and a focus on the individual. Shifting from one to the other enables this group to continue pursuing their task of “furthering acquaintance.” The roles of this section are varied: innovators give new impetus to the dancing, conformists ensure the group’s continuance by following the group movement, and lastly, the ritualist tries to neutralize the behavior of the retreatist. While most of the group was oriented to the task of becoming a cohesive group, the retreatist was emotionally in fight/flight. The group norm continued to be “the need not to stand out.” As the warm-up gives way to the development, the group quickly reestablishes its dependence upon the leader. The movement wanes drastically, while waiting for her next directive. But soon, the group moves from emotional dependency towards task orientation (becoming a cohesive group) as their desultory movements develop into a loud celebratory stomping dance. They dance together synchronously throughout this segment, frequently changing from strong rhythmic movements to soft, trance-like movements with a self-involved focus. They find a multitude of ways to dance their “togetherness” throughout this section. Meanwhile, the retreatist, previously mentioned, is still maintaining her separatist status. At various times, a couple of group members take on the ritualist role. Using eye contact and movement, they pair with her in an attempt to have her join the group. Many of the movement transitions (either from indulgent behaviors to more assertive movements or changes in spatial formations, from a formal circle to weaving pathways) appear to be direct responses by the group to neutralize, and thus reabsorb the retreatist back into the group. These attempts are at best only minimally successful. The dance behaviors of this section have consistently focused on getting the group closer. The roles of this section continue much as before, with the innovators creating the dance, conformists maintaining it and the ritualists trying to shepherd the retreatist back into the group. The group emotion has been in flux, moving between sections of pairing to sections when the group attempts to come together, i.e., to fulfill its task. The norm has fluctuated between the need “not to stand out” and group togetherness. Towards the end of the development section, the group slows down, they give themselves hugs and again create an atmosphere of self-involvement. As the music lapses into silence, the leader suggests this as “a good place to end.” Following the leader’s verbalization, all dance/movement ceases and the pedestrian behaviors of adjusting clothes and hair takes over. During the ensuing moments in which the leader has left the circle to turn the music off, the group does not disperse, instead, their laughter and chatter increase dramatically as they protest against the ending of the group. When the leader returns, she joins the protest by quickly taking hands on either side of her and they are off into another high energy celebratory circle dance linked by hands. The retreatist’s presence, still evident, becomes even more pronounced when the group forms itself into a tight rotating circle connected by arms over shoulders. Though physically caught up in the circle, the retreatist pulls away from the circle, thus disrupting its form. In their bid “not to end,” the group as a whole becomes energized into an emotional state of fight. Eventually, as the energy and movement climbs, the leader again attempts closure by suggesting they “say goodbye to everyone.” They begin waving, but what begins as a wave of the hand soon develops into a whole body wave, and a completely new movement theme begins, which is “keep on moving” rather than “saying goodbye.” The leader suggests taking hands and asks “who wants to lead us?” The scattered group briefly forms a circle, which becomes a serpentine line following a new leader (innovator) who volunteers from the group, while the original leader brings up the rear. A victory celebration ensues as the serpentine line’s energy builds and falls. The line tightly knots and unknots itself as the movement behavior continues to serve the group’s need “not to end.” Finally, the group sinks domino fashion to the floor accompanied with much groaning and sighing. From outside the group, one of the workshop leaders says, “you did very well,” promoting cheers and applause from the group. Throughout this final section, the roles have run the gamut, from rebels bidding to “not end,” innovators stepping forward to keep the action going, and conformists quickly moving to embrace the guidance of the “new” leader. The retreatist of previous sections remains in evidence throughout by her continued refusal to join the group in a synchronous manner. Recommended articles Dance/movement therapy faces multiple transitions 1997, The Arts in Psychotherapy more The role of dance/movement therapy in treating at-risk African American adolescents 1997, The Arts in Psychotherapy more Self and body-self: Dance/movement therapy and the development of object relations 1996, The Arts in Psychotherapy more View more articles » Citing articles (4) Related book content