CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology ResearchCounseling Practices and Supervision

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 38 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Facing the Dilemma of Forced Termination: What to Consider and Address When Removing a Member from a Group

Weinberg, Haim, Adler, Mitchel·2024·International Journal of Group Psychotherapy
DOI 10.1080/00207284.2024.2420282
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The authors explore the group leader's considerations before removing a group member from group sessions. The authors integrate an approach that warns against a too hasty decision without considering the group-as-a-whole dynamics and the possibility of scapegoating, with the approach that looks at the group therapist's countertransference that prevents them from considering the group's best interest. The rule of thumb the authors suggest is that when a severe breach of the group agreement happens, especially continuously, and when it cannot be followed by exploration, reflection, and an agreement by the group member who violated the agreement to make an effort to avoid repeating this event, the group leader might consider removing the person from the group. The article distinguishes between removing a member in the early stages of the group and at later stages of the group's development. It also recommends exploring this issue with the group and following up with the removed member. Special attention is given to cases of racism, microaggressions, and trauma.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/00207284.2024.2420282

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Bion, W. R. (1952). Group dynamics: A review. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 33(2), 235–247.
  2. Ernsberger, C. E. (1990). Modern countertransference theory: Some elaborations and clinical illustrations. Modern Psychoanalysis, 15(1), 11–31.
  3. Heimann, P. (1950). On countertransference. The International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 31, 81–84.
  4. Ormont, L. (1970). The use of the objective countertransference to resolve group resistances. Group Process, 3, 95–110.
  5. Winnicott, D. W. (1949). Hate in the counter-transference. The International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 30, 69–74.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 2

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Weinberg, H., & Adler, M.
Corresponding author
Weinberg, Haim
ORCID
Weinberg, Haim
Venue
International Journal of Group Psychotherapy
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2024-10
Volume
74
Issue
4
Pages
449-471
ISSN
  • 0020-7284 (ISSN-L)
  • 1943-2836
DOI
10.1080/00207284.2024.2420282
OpenAlex
W4405439460
Semantic Scholar
e3e48692a512a5b13faea305e176364ab541daaa
Cited by
2
References
38
Citations by year
2025: 2
FWCI
0.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Group Psychotherapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Counseling Practices and Supervision
Keywords
group termination, group dynamics, scapegoating, countertransference, group development stages, microaggressions, trauma, group therapy
MeSH terms
Adult, Aggression, Countertransference, Group Processes, Humans, Psychotherapy, Group

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review