>I guess I wasn't all to clear in my last post. I would use real clients,
>but some of the subjects I will interview haven't seen any client so far
>-they're still studying. So I need a group of elements that enable me to
>compare between those who have had therapeutic experience and those who
>have not.A little bit harder, isn't it?
Peggy Kaczmarek & I did something similar when comparing the construing
of less experienced (1st year undergrads) and moe experienced (final year
Masters) counseling students, in a study of the professionalisation
process. The elements were "helpers"; different people a person might
turn to for help, and these covered the range ofroles more and less
"sophisticated" clients might have in mind. Could that be adapted to your
needs? The reference is:
Kaczmarek P. & Jankowicz A.D. "American students' perceptions of
counselor approachability: professional implications" International
Journal for the Advancement of Counseling 1991, 14, 4.
Incidentally, John Mayes says:
>I'm having some difficulty understanding what you are attempting here. You
>appear to be wanting students to form constructs about something about
>which they have no experience.
And why not? I have plenty of constructs about things of which I have no
experience (e.g. Eskimo fishing techniques; sons-in-law; what it's like
to be on my deathbed; being the Pope; the ways in which gays express
their love and affection.... ) As does everyone. Depends what we mean by
"experience". And the matter of the "accuracy" of those constructs is
something else entirely, but one would surely proceed from the thought
that my constructs about these elements serve, or do not serve, my
present purposes in making sense of my experience. I can have a construct
about _anything_!
Kind regards,
Devi Jankowicz
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%