Processes of meaning reconstruction in group counselling: an analysis of markers of change with the Innovative Moments Coding System

ntroduction: In the field of process research, many studies haveanalyzed the emergence of narrative markers of change along thesessions of individual psychotherapy with good or bad outcomes(e.g.Angus, Levitt, & Hardtke, 1999). Nevertheless, not enoughis known on which types of narrative markers of change appearedin group psychotherapy and counselling (Burlingame & Jensen,2017; Greene, 2016). The objective of this study is to analyzewhich narrative markers of change emerge in nine-sessionsgroups counselling aimed at promoting reflexive functions withunderachieving university students lagging behind in their stud-ies. Methods: Four groups counselling (N Group A=7; N GroupB=7; N Group C=7; N Group D=5) of underachieving universitystudents at risk of drop-out were considered for this study. Students were enrolled in the bachelor and master degree coursesof the University of Naples Federico II. Groups counsellingadopted a multimodal narrative method (Narrative MediationPath) which combined in a unique methodology both five narra-tive modes (metaphorical, iconography, writing, bodily, andagency) and the group narrative device. Groups counselling wereconducted by two clinical psychologists in 2017 and 2018 andthey took place in different locations of the SInAPSi center (Cen-ter for Active Participation and Inclusion of University Students;University of Naples Federico II). In order to assess the effective-ness of the counselling paths, the academic performance inven-tory (API; Esposito et al., 2016) was administered in the pre andpost-test phase. Socio-demographic information and markers ofacademic performance (ECTS, number of examination passed,etc.) were detected. Transcripts of 36 audio-recorded sessionswere analyzed through the innovative moments coding system(IMCS; Gonçalves et al., 2011), which is a reliable method forstudying change by tracking innovative moments (IMs), namelynarrative innovations (Action 1 and 2, Reflection 1 and 2, Protest1 and 2, Reconceptualization) in the therapeutic process. IMswere assessed by two reliable coders who showed a strong inter-rater agreement on IMs (from 83.5% to 95.6%) and high Cohen’sKappa for IM categories (from .94 to 1). Results: Outcome resultsshowed that two groups improved in terms of academic perform-ance. Specifically, students reported a significant improvementof ECTS (Group A: Z=-2.36; p=.01; Group B: Z =-2.21; p =.02)and of examinations passed (Group A: Z=-2.38; p=.01; GroupB: Z=-2.2; p =.02) from pre to post-test. Process analysis withIMCS showed that, in the good outcome groups, members pro-duced a higher proportion of IMs (about 15% vs 10%). Moreover,despite reflexive IMs (Reflection 1 and 2) appeared both in goodand bad outcomes groups, the most complex form of IM, namelyReconceptualization, emerged only in the good outcome groupscounselling and from the middle of the counselling. Conclusions:The results seem to confirm the previous findings obtained instudies conducted in the field of individual psychotherapy(Gonçalves et al., 2011) which showed the key role of Recon-ceptualization for the effectiveness of psychotherapy. Moreover,these findings put on the spotlight the relevance of this complexform of meaning construction also in group counselling. Specif-ically, the discussion will regard the relation between group coun-selling outcomes and the emergence of Reconceptualization,which implies a process of meaning reconstruction along thetherapeutic process and which seems to play a key role for theeffectiveness of group counseling.