상담학연구 , , ,, ( ),.,., 15 19,, 30, (Corresponding Author): / Tel: /

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "상담학연구 , , ,, ( ),.,., 15 19,, 30, (Corresponding Author): / Tel: /"

민진 뇌
5 years ago
Views:

1 , , ,, ( ),.,., 15 19,, 30, (Corresponding Author): / Tel: / kikiki-2@daum.net

2 (, 2009)... (Peterson & Seligman, 2004), (, 2011). Fitzgerald(1998),,,,, (, 2009 ). (McCullough, Emmons & Tsang, 2002), (, 2011;, 2008;, 2012, Adler, 2002),,, (Kashdan, Uswatte, & Julian, 2005), (Watkins et al., 2003). ( ) (Wood et al., 2009)., (, 2012; Monica & Desteno, 2006).,, McCullough, Emmons Tsang(2002),, (, 2012;, 2011;, 2013), (2001) (, 2011;, 2012), (1997), (2005) (, 2008;, 2010,, 2008), Emmons McCullough(2003) (, ) (, 2010;, 2009;, 2010), (2001) (, 2010), (,,, 2006;, 2008) (, 2010). (, 2011;, 2012), (, 2015;, 2009;, 2011;, 2010), (, 2009;, 2009;, 2014), (, 2008;, 2010), (, 2014;, 2013), (, 2015), (, 2014), (, 2010).,.. (, 2014). Smith Glass(1977)

3 , (Cohen, Kulik, & Kulik, 1982; Faith, Wong, & Carpenter, 1995)., (Effect Size)., (, 2002). (, 2000). (Whiston & Li, 2011).,. (,,, 2002).,,.. (,,, 2002), / (, 2002;, 2006), (, 2008;, 2003), (, 2006), (, 2008), (, 2009).,,. (, 1993), (, 2001), (, 2004), (, 2003), (, 2004), (, 2004), (, 2004), (, 2008).,,., ,.. (1992),,,,, (2005),,,,,,.,,,,,.

4 (2012) - -,,,,,, (, 2010;, 2013;, 2012;, 2014;, 2013),,,, 1,..,?, ( - - / / /?, ( ) (,,, 1, )?,?,, ,, t, F, p - (8 ). 1 53, , 28 ( 27, 1 ), 2, 30, 1. 30,, (RISS)., (, 2002).

5 ~50 2 / / ~50 2 / / ~50 2~3 / / / / / / ~2 / ~2 / / / / / / / /, / ~3 / ~50 1~2 / / / / , / / / / / / / / ~2 / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / ( ) / / / / / / / / / / / / / , / / / / /

6 Cohen(1988). (, 2014) , - -,,,. ( ) (,,, 1, ).,,..,.,.,,,,, (Cooper, 2010)..,,. CMA (Comprehensive Meta-Analysis) 2.0,.. (,,,, ) (,,,, 1, ) ( ) (,,, ) (Q= , I²=84.074, p=.00),. I² 25%, 50%, 75% (Higgins & Green, 2011).., 0.949, Cohen(1977). U³ Z Z (%) (, 2004).

7 N p 95% Q I² U3 (%) %, 82.89% %. - - / / /. 3 (Q=10,135, df=3, p<.05) ,, - -, ,.. 95%., 4 (Q=25.102, df=5, p<.001) , N 95% U3 (%) Q(df) p (3) N 95% U3 (%) Q(df) p ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (5) 0.000

8 ,,,,., ,.,, 5 (Q=10.962, df=3, p<.05) , 20, 9, , 6 (Q=2.730, df=2, p>.05) , 4 9, , 7 N 95% U3 (%) Q(df) p (3) N 95% U3 (%) Q(df) p (2) N 95% U3 (%) Q(df) p (2) 0.004

9 (Q= df=2, p<.05) , 4, , 8 1 (Q= df=3, p<.05) , 60 90, , , 9 (Q=12.385, df=4, p<.05) ,, 2, 1 2, 1. 1.,,.,,,,,,, (Compton, 2005; Ryff, 1989),,,,,,, N 95% U3 (%) Q(df) p (3) N 95% U3 (%) Q(df) p (2 3 ) ( ) (4) 0.01

10 N 95% U3 (%) Q(df) p (2) 0.507,,,,,,,,,,, (Hinshaw & Anderson, 1996),,,,,.,,, (Diener, 1994) (, 2014), (Compton, 2005; Ryff, 1989). 10 (Q=1.359, df=2, p>.05).,,,,,,,,. Funnel plot, Egger's test. 1 Funnel plot

11 . 30, (t= 3.491, p<.05), Duval Tweedie Trim & Fill 9.., 15.., ,.. (2007) 1.01,, (2014) 0.85.,.,,, - -,. (2011),, REBT,,,,,, (2015),,,,,,.,,.,,,,,,,. (2010),,, (2011),,,,, (2014),,..,, 15 19, 20, Greenberg(2003), 4 5, 7,

12 , (,, 2007)., (,,, 2002)., 15.,.,, 15, 4 9, 10 14,.. (2011), (2007),, (2002) 10 14, (2010)..,,, 4, 5 8. (2014), (2014), 1 6.,, (, 2015)., 1, 30, 60 90, , (2002) 46-75, 136, (2007) , (,, 2007) , 30., (, 2005), 40,,, ,, 2, ( ), 1. (2014), 2, 1., 2

13 ., (2002), (2007).,.,,,. (2010) 1.21, (2004) 1.18, (2001) 1.703, (2011) 1.06.,,,, (,,, )...,. (2014),.,., 15-19,, 30, 2-3,.., 30 2,.,..,,,..,

14 ..,, (2004).,..,,,,,., 30 2, 28 ( 8 ). peer-review, (Cooper, Hedges, & Valentine, 2009)..,.,,.,. (2012).,. (2010)..,. (2005). :., (2011).. (2), (2009).. :.,, (2006). (K-GQ_6). (1), (2015)..

15 ,. (2000). :. (2002).. (1), ,, (2002).. (1), (2011)..,. (2008)..,. (2011).,. (2011).,. (2009)..,. (2008)..,. (2006).,. (2001).,. (2002)..,. (2010).,. (2001)..,. (2015)..,., (2007).. (3), (2014).. (3), (2015)..,. (2014)..,. (1993)..,. (2005)..,. (2009).. (3), (2014)..,. (2014)..,. (2008)..,. (2004)..,.

16 (2012)..,. (2009)..,. (2010)..,. (2008)..,. (2004)..,. (2014)..,. (2008)..,. (2013).. (2), (2002).. :. (1997). :. (2010).,. (2011).,. (2011)..,. (2008)..,. (2012)..,. (2011)..,. (2012)..,. (2010)..,. (2003)..,., (1992). :. (2009)..,.,, (2014).. (6), (2012).,. (2010).. (1), (2003).,. (2006)..,. (2010).

17 .,. (2001).. :. (2004)..,. (2015)..,. (2010)..,.,, (2004).., (2014).,. (2004)..,. (2013).,. (2014).. :. Adler, M. G. (2002). Conceptualizing and measuring appreciation: The development of a positive psychology construct. Doctoral dissertation Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ. Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences(4th ed.). New York: Academic Press. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences(2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Cohen, P. A., Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. (1982). Education outcomes of tutoring: A meta-analysis of findings. American Educational Research Journal, 14, Comptom, W. C. (2005). An introduction to positive psychology. Standfod, CT: Thomson. Cooper, H. M. (2010). Research synthesis and meta-analysis: A step-by-step approach. LA: Sage Publication. Diener, E. (1994). Assessing subjective well-being: Progress and opportunities. Social Indicators Research, 31, Emmons, R. A., & McCullough, M. E. (2003). Counting blessing versus burdens: An experimental investigation of gratitude and subjective well-being in dailylife. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 84(2), Faith, M. S., Wong, F. Y., & Carpenter, K. M. (1995). Group sensitivity training: Update, meta-analysis, and recommendations. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 16, Greenberg, K. R. (2003). Group counseling in K-12 schools: A handbook for school counseling. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Higgins, J., & Green, S. (2011). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0, The Codhrane Collaboration. Retrieved from www. cochrane-handbook.org. Hinshaw, S. P., & Anderson, C. A. (1996). Conduct and oppositional defiant disorders. In E. J. Mash & R. A. Barkley(Eds), Child Psychopathology (p ). New York: Guilford Press. Kashdan, T. B., Uswatte, G., & Julian, T. (2005). Gratitude and hedonic and eudaimonic well-being in vietnam warveterans. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 44(2), McCullough, M. E., Emmons, R. A., & Tsang, J. A. (2002). The gratitude disposition: A conceptual

18 and empirical topology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(1), Monica, Y. B., & Desteno, D. (2006). Gratitude and prosocial behavior helping when it costs you. Association for Psychological Science, 17(4), Peterson, B. E., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classfication. New York: Oxford University Press. Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everthing, orisit? Explorations on the meaning of psychology well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, Smith, M. J., & Glass, G. V. (1977). Meta-analysis of psychotherapy outcome studies. American Psycholog ist, 32, Watkins, P. C., Woodward, K., Stone, T., & Kolts, R. L. (2003). Gratitude and happiness: The development of a measure of gratitude and relationship with subjective well-being. Social Behavior and Personality, 31(5), Whiston, S. C., & Li, P. (2011). Meta-analysis: a systematic method for synthesizing counseling research. Journal of Counseling & Development, 89(3), Wood. A., Maltby, J., Stwart, N., Linely, P., & Joseph, S. (2007). Conceptualizing gratitude and appreciation as a unitary. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, Wood, A. M., Joseph, S., Lloyd, J., & Atkin, S. (2009). Gratitude influences sleep through the mechanism of pre-sleep cognitions. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 66(1), : : :

19 The Meta-Analysis on the Effects of Group Gratitude Counseling Programs Kyungpook National University This meta-analysis study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of group gratitude counseling programs. A total of 30 studies published from 2000 through 2015 were selected. The results are as follows: First, a total of 100 effect sizes were calculated and the overall effect size of the programs was 0.949, indicating a large effect size. Secondly, effect sizes were compared in regard to moderator variables including program content, participant characteristics, various parameters of group operation, and dependent variables. As a result, the most of content was the gratitude meditation, the most of group was the child, the most of group members range was 15-19, the most term of group counseling was intensively, the most of time for one session was less 30 minutes, the most of frequency a week was 2-3 times. Based on these findings, implications for future research and program implementation were discussed. Key words : meta-analysis, gratitude counseling program, effect size

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp DOI: * The Mediating Eff

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp.159-177 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21024/pnuedi.26.2.201608.159 * The Mediating Effects of Self-esteem on the Relationship between Social