Leader and Group Effects for Outcomes in Emotional Cultivation Groups for Youth

Group leaders typically lead only one group; consequently, leader and group effects are often confounded in group counseling research. Therefore, we do not know the relative importance of leaders and groups in promoting group member outcome. We address this limitation by identifying the sizes of leader and group effects in a large sample of emotional cultivation groups for Taiwanese youth, where group leaders led multiple groups. Data from 1,495 participants (56.2% boys and 43.8% girls) from 255 emotional cultivation groups were analyzed. A four-level hierarchical model (time of assessment nested within group members, who were nested within groups, that were nested within group leaders) was used to partition the data. Results indicated significant improvement from pretest to follow-up in 20 out of 21 outcomes assessed. The suppression aspect of Emotion Regulation Questionnaire did not change significantly between pretest and follow-up. Average leader and group intraclass correlations were 0.07 and 0.06, respectively, collectively explaining 13% of the variance in group member outcomes. A cluster analysis, using leader and group intraclass correlations, identified a two-cluster solution: Flexible Cognitive, Emotional, and Relational Strategies (33% of outcomes) and School, Social, and Emotional Adjustment (66.67% of outcomes). In the Flexible Cognitive, Emotional, and Relational Strategies cluster, both leader and group effects were significant, with the group effect three times larger than the leader effect. In the School, Social, and Emotional Adjustment cluster, both effects were also significant, but the leader effect was five times greater. Both the group that a child/youth belongs to and the group’s leader influence improvement to an equal extent.