. 2000 2015 30.., 30 100, 0.949.,, ( ),.,., 15 19,, 30, 2 3.. (Corresponding Author): / Tel: 054-284-3474 / E-mail: kikiki-2@daum.net
(, 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).,, 2000. 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)
, (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).,,.,. 2000 2015,.. (1992),,,,, (2005),,,,,,.,,,,,.
(2012) - -,,,,,, (, 2010;, 2013;, 2012;, 2014;, 2013),,,, 1,..,?, ( - - / / /?, ( ) (,,, 1, )?,?,, 1.. 2000 2015 2,, t, F, p - (8 ). 1 53, 25 78. 78, 28 ( 27, 1 ), 2, 30, 1. 30,,. 2000 2015 2 15. (RISS)., (, 2002).
1 2012 10 40~50 2 / / 2 2013 11 40~50 2 / / 3 2009 10 40~50 2~3 / / / / 4 2011 4 12 60 3 / / 5 2014 10 40 1~2 / 6 2009 12 30 1~2 / / / / / / / /, / 7 2012 10 40 2~3 / 8 2012 10 40~50 1~2 / / 9 2010 8 45 2 / / 10 2011, 8 60 1 / 11 2012 5 10 60 3 12 2012 10 40 1 / / / / / / 13 2010 13 40 1 14 2015 10 80 1 / 15 2011 10 40 1 16 2011 15 40 1~2 / / / / / / / / / / / / 17 2011 10 40 2 / / 18 2014 4 60 1 / / 19 2014 30 10 5 / 20 2015 ( ) 7 80 2 / / / 21 2008 14 50 2 / / 22 2014 20 10 5 / 23 2009 20 45 5 / / / 24 2010 15 20 5 / / 25 2010 12 10 3 26 2008 12 60 2 27 2015 10 50 1 / / 28 2010, 6 120 1 / / / 29 2013 180 30 5 / / 30 2014 10 60 2
Cohen(1988). (, 2014). 30 100, - -,,,. ( ) (,,, 1, ).,,..,.,.,,,,, (Cooper, 2010)..,,. CMA (Comprehensive Meta-Analysis) 2.0,.. (,,,, ) (,,,, 1, ) ( ) (,,, ). 30 100. 2 (Q=621.608, I²=84.074, p=.00),. I² 25%, 50%, 75% (Higgins & Green, 2011).., 0.949, Cohen(1977). U³ Z Z (%) (, 2004).
N p 95% Q I² U3 (%) 100.949.00.808 1.089 621.608 84.074 82.89 50%, 82.89%. 32.89%. - - / / /. 3 (Q=10,135, df=3, p<.05). 1.517,, - -,. 0.242,.. 95%., 4 (Q=25.102, df=5, p<.001). 2.183, N 95% U3 (%) Q(df) p - - 66 0.836 0.066 0.706 0.966 79.67 17 1.253 0.242 0.780 1.727 89.43 13 1.517 0.257 1.013 2.021 93.44 4 0.242 0.577-0.889 1.374 59.48 10.135(3) 0.017 N 95% U3 (%) Q(df) p 8 2.183 0.455 1.292~3.073 98.53 49 0.836 0.070 0.698~0.973 79.67 19 0.518 0.077 0.367~0.668 67.49 6 0.969 0.231 0.516~1.421 83.14 11 1.594 0.440 0.732~2.456 94.40 7 0.739 0.213 0.322~1.156 76.73 25.102(5) 0.000
,,,,., 0.518..,.,, 5 (Q=10.962, df=3, p<.05). 15 19 1.175, 20, 9, 10 14.., 6 (Q=2.730, df=2, p>.05). 15 1.206, 4 9, 10 14., 7 N 95% U3 (%) Q(df) p 9 5 0.531 0.191 0.156 0.906 70.49 10 14 7 0.261 0.308-0.342 0.864 60.25 15 19 5 1.175 0.256 0.673 1.677 87.89 20 83 1.008 0.078 0.854 1.162 85.99 10.962(3) 0.012 N 95% U3 (%) Q(df) p 4 9 14 0.982 0.202 0.586 1.377 83.64 10 14 64 0.870 0.081 0.711 1.028 80.78 15 22 1.206 0.190 0.834 1.577 88.49 2.730(2) 0.255 N 95% U3 (%) Q(df) p 4 29 1.249 0.164 0.928 1.569 89.23 5 8 56 0.740 0.065 0.612 0.868 77.03 15 1.257 0.259 0.751 1.764 89.43 11.186(2) 0.004
(Q=11.186 df=2, p<.05). 1.257, 4, 5 8. 5 8. 1, 8 1 (Q=12.717 df=3, p<.05). 30 1.610, 60 90, 90 120. 90 120,. 90 120., 9 (Q=12.385, df=4, p<.05). 22 3 1.491,, 2, 1 2, 1. 1.,,.,,,,,,, (Compton, 2005; Ryff, 1989),,,,,,, N 95% U3 (%) Q(df) p 30 12 1.610 0.310 1.003 2.217 94.63 30 60 62 0.780 0.060 0.664 0.897 78.23 60 90 22 1.286 0.211 0.872 1.700 89.97 90 120 4 0.242 0.577 0.333-0.889 59.48 12.717(3) 0.005 N 95% U3 (%) Q(df) p 1 23 0.702 0.126 0.455 0.948 75.80 1 2 23 0.787 0.106 0.580 0.994 78.23 2 23 0.848 0.120 0.613 1.082 79.95 2 (2 3 ) 17 1.491 0.230 1.040 1.943 93.18 ( ) 14 1.325 0.277 0.782 1.869 90.65 12.385(4) 0.01
N 95% U3 (%) Q(df) p 21 1.150 0.185 0.787 1.513 97.49 58 0.917 0.091 0.738 1.095 82.12 21 0.910 0.158 0.600 1.221 81.83 1.359(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
. 30, (t= 3.491, p<.05), Duval Tweedie Trim & Fill 9.., 15.., 30 100,.. (2007) 1.01,, (2014) 0.85.,.,,, - -,. (2011),, REBT,,,,,, (2015),,,,,,.,,.,,,,,,,. (2010),,, (2011),,,,, (2014),,..,, 15 19, 20, 10 14. Greenberg(2003), 4 5, 7, 10. 20
83 1.008 20, (,, 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, 90 120., (2002) 46-75, 136, (2007) 106 135, 45. 1. (,, 2007). 30 60, 30., 30 40 (, 2005), 40,,, 76 30..,, 2, ( ), 1. (2014), 2, 1., 2
., (2002), (2007).,.,,,. (2010) 1.21, (2004) 1.18, (2001) 1.703, (2011) 1.06.,,,, (,,, )...,. (2014),.,., 15-19,, 30, 2-3,.., 30 2,.,..,,,..,
..,, (2004).,..,,,,,., 30 2, 28 ( 8 ). peer-review, (Cooper, Hedges, & Valentine, 2009)..,.,,.,. (2012).,. (2010)..,. (2005). :., (2011).. (2), 489-504. (2009).. :.,, (2006). (K-GQ_6). (1), 177-190. (2015)..
,. (2000). :. (2002).. (1), 131-155.,, (2002).. (1), 47-62. (2011)..,. (2008)..,. (2011).,. (2011).,. (2009)..,. (2008)..,. (2006).,. (2001).,. (2002)..,. (2010).,. (2001)..,. (2015)..,., (2007).. (3), 965-978. (2014).. (3), 541-562. (2015)..,. (2014)..,. (1993)..,. (2005)..,. (2009).. (3), 607-623. (2014)..,. (2014)..,. (2008)..,. (2004)..,.
(2012)..,. (2009)..,. (2010)..,. (2008)..,. (2004)..,. (2014)..,. (2008)..,. (2013).. (2), 259-28 0. (2002).. :. (1997). :. (2010).,. (2011).,. (2011)..,. (2008)..,. (2012)..,. (2011)..,. (2012)..,. (2010)..,. (2003)..,., (1992). :. (2009)..,.,, (2014).. (6), 2269-2290. (2012).,. (2010).. (1), 1-17. (2003).,. (2006)..,. (2010).
.,. (2001).. :. (2004)..,. (2015)..,. (2010)..,.,, (2004).., 61-74. (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, 237-248. 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, 103-157. 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), 377-389. Faith, M. S., Wong, F. Y., & Carpenter, K. M. (1995). Group sensitivity training: Update, meta-analysis, and recommendations. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 16, 319-324. 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. 113-149). 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), 177-199. McCullough, M. E., Emmons, R. A., & Tsang, J. A. (2002). The gratitude disposition: A conceptual
and empirical topology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(1), 112-127. Monica, Y. B., & Desteno, D. (2006). Gratitude and prosocial behavior helping when it costs you. Association for Psychological Science, 17(4), 319-325. 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, 1069-1081. Smith, M. J., & Glass, G. V. (1977). Meta-analysis of psychotherapy outcome studies. American Psycholog ist, 32, 752-760. 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), 431-451. Whiston, S. C., & Li, P. (2011). Meta-analysis: a systematic method for synthesizing counseling research. Journal of Counseling & Development, 89(3), 273-281. Wood. A., Maltby, J., Stwart, N., Linely, P., & Joseph, S. (2007). Conceptualizing gratitude and appreciation as a unitary. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 619-630. 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), 43-48. : 2015. 06. 15. : 2015. 08. 04. : 2015. 08. 11.
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