Survey of Psychodramatists' Opinions: Issues Facing the Profession for the New Millennium.

As the new millennium approaches, it was felt that a thoughtful questioning of the psychodrama profession could be a valuable process in evaluating potential areas of change. A survey was mailed to 200 randomly selected individuals from the Directory of the American Board of Examiners in Psychodrama, Sociometry and Group Psychotherapy. Sixty-five respondents indicated the degree to which changes are anticipated and offered suggestions. A general consensus was that change is inevitable and that the profession would be better served if potential areas of change would be addressed in an organized and thoughtful manner. Areas of predicted change receiving the greatest responses included: populations served by the profession, use of technology, training, ethical issues, and recognition by other therapeutic modalities.

Introduction and Method

In order to ascertain the opinions of psychodramatists about issues facing their profession for the next millennium, a survey was mailed to 200 individuals selected at random from the directory of the American Board of Examiners in Psychodrama, Sociometry and Group Psychotherapy. The survey was designed by two psychologists and contained primarily closed-ended questions for ease of response, individuals were encouraged to provide additional qualifying or elaborating information for each area of potential change. Sixty-five responses to the survey were received. Of those responding, 25 self-identified as female and 20 as male; 61 reported being White/Caucasian/European American, 1 as African American, 1 as Hispanic/Latino/Latina, and 1 as Hispanic/ White (Biracial). Ages reported included: 3 as 30-39, 20 as 40-49, 23 as 50-59, 13 as 60-69, and 6 as 70 or over.

Of the 65 respondents, 33 indicated that they were certified at the Practitioner level and 32 were credentialed at the Trainer, Educator and Practitioner (TEP) level. In terms of practice as a psychodramatist, 6 reported 5 or less years, 19 reported 6-10 years, 23 said 11-20 years, 13 indicated 21-30 years, and 4 reported 31 or more years. When asked, "Do you identify yourself primarily as a psychodramatist?", 15 replied "yes" and 50 replied "no". Of those indicating that they did not primarily identify themselves as a psychodramatist, 14 reported their primary professional identification as psychologist, 10 as social worker, 7 as psychotherapist, 7 as counselor, 3 as marriage-family counselor, and 2 as occupational therapist.

Results

Following is a summary of responses to the survey about potential areas of change in the psychodrama profession. In some instances no response was given; so the total for each item may not be 65.

Question/Item

                                    Not
                                   At All   Some   Extensive

Do you visualize the psychodrama
  profession changing in the
  next millennium                     3      39       20

In what areas do you predict
greatest changes:

Training                              8      40       14
Certification                        11      41       11
Populations Served                    8      29       27
Ethical Issues                       11      37       15
Organizational Membership             8      41       11
Use of Technology                     9      31       21
Recognition by Other Therapeutic
  Modalities                          8      40       14
Feelings of Empowerment by
  Organization Members               12      37       12
Characteristics of the
  Psychodramatist                    11      39       13

The 65 respondents generally saw some to extensive changes for the profession of psychodrama in each area of response. Each survey asked for elaboration if the respondent chose to provide it. The authors reviewed the comments for common themes, grouped comments by themes, and did not include duplicated comments. Thus, of those responding that changes in the area of training were forecast, the following additional comment-themes were received.

* There needs to be a greater variety of training opportunities. Training needs to branch out and focus on non-clinical areas rather than just mental health; include other settings such as education, government agencies, hospitals, and business.

* Integrate psychodrama's theoretical and practical tenants within other established modalities; teach psychodrama within those modalities at colleges/universities.

* There need to be more CEU offerings relating to practical applications and job search. Internships need to be in real world settings, especially practical applications that will lead to employment.

* We need training on how to survive in a managed care environment.

* Aspects of training need to include short term and brief therapy techniques rather than just classical psychodrama. We need to be more receptive to new ideas, not just "rehash" the old. Conforming psychodrama practices to brief therapy may enable reimbursement.

* Training needs to better meet the needs of cultural diversity. We need to learn new techniques that are applicable to new populations.

* Ethics training is very important. We need to keep standards high.

* The ability to conduct research about psychodrama is important. Psychodrama needs to become more pragmatic, research based, and focused on outcomes.

* Perhaps there should be a research coordinator within ASGPP. Outcomes based research will help ground our therapy and give strength to its viability.

* There need to be better boundaries in training between trainers and trainees, and training needs to include better mentoring.

In the area of certification, several suggestions were offered, including:

* Certification should be based on more objective data, with more clearly defined criteria, and less on personal contacts.

* The certification process should be more dynamic and less rigid, with more, options offered in the training paradigm.

* Certification needs to move more toward licensure, which will also enable 3rd party payments. We need to lobby to be included in HMO/insurance reimbursements.

* Keep standards high, but practical and usable in real world settings.

* There needs to be better screening to keep out emotionally unstable individuals.

Regarding projected changes which might enable the profession to more effectively deal with the populations served, the following comments were offered. It was notable that this area was the one in which the most extensive change was anticipated by the respondents.

* We need to broaden the populations served, to reach beyond middle class Whites to people of color; this broadening may mean fitting psychodrama training to better serve others in their environments.

* We need to expand our service to other populations in non-clinical settings, such as businesses, hospitals, schools, social conflicts, wellness, spirituality, etc. We need to expand psychodrama's influence and better publicize what we do as a profession.

* Psychodramatists will come from more diverse backgrounds and should provide a greater representation for other racial/ethnic groups.

In reply to the question about professional ethics, the following suggestions were given:

* Ethics should be kept central to the values of the organization. We should have a strong set of ethical guidelines and place more stress on ethics in training.

* There needs to be a creation of better boundaries between trainers and trainees.

* CEU's should be given for ethics at psychodrama conferences.

Suggestions regarding organizational membership included the following:

* We need to broaden our membership from a culturally diverse perspective. At present, we appear to be a predominately White, middle-class group. We are too inbred and need to reach out more to include more diverse groups.

* Our organization should focus on how better to support one another, including better dialogue among members about future needs and how to make new members feel more comfortable and empowered within the organization. We need more positive and constructive communication; better avenues of connection among members.

* We should explore how to effectively encompass new energy from new members and to integrate new members more effectively into the organization.

* We need to increase our lobbying efforts and to become more politically savvy.

* There appears to be too much control by an "old-guard" that seems elitist. We should look for productive ways to spread out responsibility and ownership.

Several suggestions regarding the use of technology were offered. Use of technology received the second highest number of "extensive" responses in terms of anticipated changes for the profession.

* Technology could be used to more effectively dispense psychodrama information, market our organization better, widen our audience, answer questions, and connect with other groups and creative therapies.

* We should use the internet to exchange ideas and for professional discourse.

* Our skill base, such as sociometry work, could be developed through technology.

Quite a few recommendations were offered about recognition by other therapeutic modalities:

* Our organization is too insular. Psychodrama needs more recognition by other modalities and the public at large.

* We need to increase our base of influence and form greater alliances with other professional organizations.

* There should be more articles about Psychodrama in other professional journals and presented at other professional conferences, especially those of other mental health modalities.

We need to explore how to more effectively adapt our principles to other viable modalities and to become more accepted as a viable vendor in the marketplace.

* Better outcome studies would increase our visibility, show our innovations, demonstrate the importance of our approach to others, and enable psychodrama to become more accepted and integrated into the mainstream of therapeutic schools.

A number of respondents offered ideas on feelings of empowerment by organization members:

* There needs to be a greater sense of empowerment and involvement. Improved dialogue and dissemination of information would help.

* The organization needs to spread responsibilities around more than it does.

* Board membership needs to better represent the general membership. There is a feeling that a "good old boys club" runs this organization. We need a set of check and balances to prevent muscle of power at the executive level.

* We need to support new ideas, encourage more members to take leadership roles, enhance creativity among members, energize the organization, and increase our membership. Sociometry could be used for better inclusion and empowerment. Perhaps we could give awards annually for new applications and/or innovations.

* We should lobby for licensure as a psychodramatist, not just certification, which would likely enable 3rd party payments to members.

Summary

While 65 voluntary respondents may not be representative of the entire organization, it was hoped that their perceptions and opinions will provide avenues of exploration and discussion for organizational change and improvements as the psychodrama profession approaches the new millennium. Their comments clearly identified areas of concern and suggestions about ways to approach those concerns. As a group, their perception was that significant issues face the profession and that the organization needs to be prepared for change. Some to extensive change was projected in each area covered by the survey, with the top two areas of predicted change as the populations being served by the profession and the use of technology. Other areas of greater predicted change included: training, ethical issues, and recognition by other therapeutic modalities.

Peter L. Kranz, Ph.D., Director, Counseling Center, Tennessee Technological University, Cookeville, Tennessee. Nick L. Lund, Ph.D., Executive Director, Northern Arizona University in Yuma, Yuma, Arizona.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Dr. Nick L. Lund, Executive Director, Northern Arizona University in Yuma, Yuma, Arizona.