PsychologicalReporn, 1991, 68, 513-514.
O Psychological Reports 1991
CRISIS INTERVENTION: LONGER-TERM TRAINING EFFECTS ' RONALD D. TAYLOR
MICHAEL P. BRADY AND PAUL R. SWANK
Columbia College
University of Horrston
Summary.-10 months following a crisis-intervention training program which focused on interpretation of signal events, 17 participants more frequently reported increased belief in their ability to recognize the need for intervention and to intervene effectively than did 22 control subjects. Perceived frequent). of intervention by trained participants, however, had decreased rather than increased. Implications of the findlngs and recommendations for research are discussed. Interpretation of signal events, as defined in our research, is the observation that life events are occurring or have recently occurred which may differentially produce psychological distress
for persons involved. The relative merits of focusing on such interpretation in crisis-intervention training have been discussed in terms of both viability (I), and congruence in judgment among adults and older (6) versus younger youth (7). Also, perceived short-term influences upon beliefs have been reported for persons receiving this focused crisis-intervention training (5). Participants believed training had increased their ability to recognize the need for intervention, but not their ability to intervene effectively. The purpose of this study was to extend prior findings by investigating longer-term training effects on participants' beliefs and behavior. The hypotheses were that, when contrasted with untrained control subjects, trained participants would more frequently: (a) believe training had improved their ability to recognize the need for crisis intervention and (b) believe themselves more capable of intervening effectively. Also, it was hypothesized that trained partidpants would report having been involved in an increased number of interventions in [he period following training. The importance of conducting and evaluating crisis-intervention training has been discussed extensively elsewhere (4). Method -Participants were elementary and secondary teachers enrolled in graduate education progrdrns. Their experience ranged from one to more than 20 years. All were currently involved in educational roles, and all quadrants of the contiguous states of the USA were represented, as well as Alaska. Trained participants (n = 17) were teachers (29%, n = 5, men and 71%, n = 12, women) in signal-event-focused crisis intervention. The format was designed to train participants (a) to recognize life events (from a developmental context) Likely to produce psychological distress and (b) to intervene in a sequence of five steps: offering to help and establishing rapport, exploring the problem, assisting in generation of solutions, assisting in selection of a solution, and following-up. Ten months after training, participants responded to a three-item survey by marking responses on a 15-mm undifferentiated scale line. No (absolutely) and yes (absolutely) anchored extremes of the scale lines for Items: (1) you are better able to recognize situations which may necessitate crisis intervention and (2) you are more effective when you conduct an intervention. Many fewer and many more anchored extremes on the scale line for Item 3, how would you describe the number of interventions you have conducted since training? Untrained control teachers (n = 22; 14%, n = 3, men and 86%, n = 19, women) similarly responded to a survey containing only Items 1 and 2. Marked scale lines were measured and responses categorized. Marks from 0 to 9 mm were labeled no (Items 1 and 2) or fewer (Item 3) to ensure a conservative judgment of treatment effects. ALI marks beyond 9 mm were labeled yes (Items 1 and 2) or more (Item 3), respectively. An independent rater repeated the procedure to assure reliability of coding. Initially, an agree-
'Address correspondence to R. D. Taylor, Ed.D., Education/Psychology Program, Columbia College, 10th and Rogers, Columbia, MO 65216.
5 14
R. D. TAYLOR, ETAL.
ment index of .98 was obtained, but 1.00 was reached upon remeasure by both raters. An independent samples chi-squared test (3) then was used to analyze the data from Items 1 and 2. A one-sample X2 was used to analyze Item 3 data. Alpha was specified a priori at the .01 level to maximize protection from Type I error. Resrr1ts.-Regarding Hypotheses 1 and 2, trained participants more frequently perceived themselves as more able to recognize the need for crisis intervention (x' = 18.85, p .Dl); rather, the majority of participants (53%, n = 9) reported conducting fewer, not more, interventions. Small sample size and confounded effects in the design impose a demand for caution in interpreting results and making generahzations. However, the findings may prove important, given the call for increased participation by educators in crisis-intervention training ( 2 ) and the need to evaluate training efforts (4). Previously, teachers have reported themselves willing to perform interventions but have felt themselves poorly prepared to do so (1). Signal-eventfocused training may offer one method for overcoming those beliefs of inadequacy. Participants beliefs of being more capable to recognize the need for intervention were found both in the short-term (5) and, herein, over the longer-term. The results further imply that beliefs about self-efficacy for conducting interventions also may be increased over the longer-term but may not be apparent in short-term evaluations of training. O n the other hand, if an objective of training is to increase frequency of intervention, signal-event-focused training may be contraindicated. Research must focus on testing these training implications. It would be useful to obtain external measures of change (8) rather than inquire about beliefs. Also, we can only speculate abouc che reasons trained participants reported fewer interventions. Was it because fewer interventions were required, intervening became more discretionary, or some other reason? Obtaining intervention frequencies for trained and untrained participants would permit a more accurate interpretation of results in the future. REFERENCES J. E. (1984) Stress in childhood: an intervention 1. BLOM, G. E., CHENEY,B. D., & SNODDY, model for teachers and other professionals. New York: Teachers College Press. 2. LONDON, P. (1987) Character education and clinical intervention: a paradigm shift for U.S. schools. Phi Delta h p p a n , 68, 667-673. 3. SIEGEL, S. (1956) Nonparametric statzstics for the behavioral sciences. New York: McGrawHill. 4. SLAIKEU,K. A. (1990) Crisis intervention: a handbook for practice and research. Boston, MA: AUyn & Bacon. 5. TAYLOR, R. D., BRADY,M. P., & SWANK,P R. (1987) Does crisis intervention training change teachers' beliefs abouc helping skills? Paper presented to the Phi Delta Kappan Research into Practice Conference, University of Houston, Houston, TX. 6. TAYLOR,R. D., BRADY,M. P., SWANK,P. R., & HAWKINS,J. (1989) The effects of antecedent cues on teachers' and mental health workers' perceptions of students' life event stressors. Educational Psychology, 9, 53-61. 7. TAYLOR, R. D., & SPIESS, G . A. (1989) Effect of age on congruence between adults' and youths' ratings of life event stressors. Psychological Reports, 65, 1017-1018. 8. YANCEY, G. B., & KELLY, L. (1990) The inappropriateness of using participants' reactions to evaluate effectiveness of training. Psychological Reports, 66, 937-938.
Accepted March 15, 1991
'A table of data by item for each respondent is on file in Document NAPS-04819. Remit $12.55 for photocopy or $4.00 for fiche ro Microfiche Publications, POB 3513, Grand Central Station, New York, NY 10163.
O Psychological Reports 1991
CRISIS INTERVENTION: LONGER-TERM TRAINING EFFECTS ' RONALD D. TAYLOR
MICHAEL P. BRADY AND PAUL R. SWANK
Columbia College
University of Horrston
Summary.-10 months following a crisis-intervention training program which focused on interpretation of signal events, 17 participants more frequently reported increased belief in their ability to recognize the need for intervention and to intervene effectively than did 22 control subjects. Perceived frequent). of intervention by trained participants, however, had decreased rather than increased. Implications of the findlngs and recommendations for research are discussed. Interpretation of signal events, as defined in our research, is the observation that life events are occurring or have recently occurred which may differentially produce psychological distress
for persons involved. The relative merits of focusing on such interpretation in crisis-intervention training have been discussed in terms of both viability (I), and congruence in judgment among adults and older (6) versus younger youth (7). Also, perceived short-term influences upon beliefs have been reported for persons receiving this focused crisis-intervention training (5). Participants believed training had increased their ability to recognize the need for intervention, but not their ability to intervene effectively. The purpose of this study was to extend prior findings by investigating longer-term training effects on participants' beliefs and behavior. The hypotheses were that, when contrasted with untrained control subjects, trained participants would more frequently: (a) believe training had improved their ability to recognize the need for crisis intervention and (b) believe themselves more capable of intervening effectively. Also, it was hypothesized that trained partidpants would report having been involved in an increased number of interventions in [he period following training. The importance of conducting and evaluating crisis-intervention training has been discussed extensively elsewhere (4). Method -Participants were elementary and secondary teachers enrolled in graduate education progrdrns. Their experience ranged from one to more than 20 years. All were currently involved in educational roles, and all quadrants of the contiguous states of the USA were represented, as well as Alaska. Trained participants (n = 17) were teachers (29%, n = 5, men and 71%, n = 12, women) in signal-event-focused crisis intervention. The format was designed to train participants (a) to recognize life events (from a developmental context) Likely to produce psychological distress and (b) to intervene in a sequence of five steps: offering to help and establishing rapport, exploring the problem, assisting in generation of solutions, assisting in selection of a solution, and following-up. Ten months after training, participants responded to a three-item survey by marking responses on a 15-mm undifferentiated scale line. No (absolutely) and yes (absolutely) anchored extremes of the scale lines for Items: (1) you are better able to recognize situations which may necessitate crisis intervention and (2) you are more effective when you conduct an intervention. Many fewer and many more anchored extremes on the scale line for Item 3, how would you describe the number of interventions you have conducted since training? Untrained control teachers (n = 22; 14%, n = 3, men and 86%, n = 19, women) similarly responded to a survey containing only Items 1 and 2. Marked scale lines were measured and responses categorized. Marks from 0 to 9 mm were labeled no (Items 1 and 2) or fewer (Item 3) to ensure a conservative judgment of treatment effects. ALI marks beyond 9 mm were labeled yes (Items 1 and 2) or more (Item 3), respectively. An independent rater repeated the procedure to assure reliability of coding. Initially, an agree-
'Address correspondence to R. D. Taylor, Ed.D., Education/Psychology Program, Columbia College, 10th and Rogers, Columbia, MO 65216.
5 14
R. D. TAYLOR, ETAL.
ment index of .98 was obtained, but 1.00 was reached upon remeasure by both raters. An independent samples chi-squared test (3) then was used to analyze the data from Items 1 and 2. A one-sample X2 was used to analyze Item 3 data. Alpha was specified a priori at the .01 level to maximize protection from Type I error. Resrr1ts.-Regarding Hypotheses 1 and 2, trained participants more frequently perceived themselves as more able to recognize the need for crisis intervention (x' = 18.85, p .Dl); rather, the majority of participants (53%, n = 9) reported conducting fewer, not more, interventions. Small sample size and confounded effects in the design impose a demand for caution in interpreting results and making generahzations. However, the findings may prove important, given the call for increased participation by educators in crisis-intervention training ( 2 ) and the need to evaluate training efforts (4). Previously, teachers have reported themselves willing to perform interventions but have felt themselves poorly prepared to do so (1). Signal-eventfocused training may offer one method for overcoming those beliefs of inadequacy. Participants beliefs of being more capable to recognize the need for intervention were found both in the short-term (5) and, herein, over the longer-term. The results further imply that beliefs about self-efficacy for conducting interventions also may be increased over the longer-term but may not be apparent in short-term evaluations of training. O n the other hand, if an objective of training is to increase frequency of intervention, signal-event-focused training may be contraindicated. Research must focus on testing these training implications. It would be useful to obtain external measures of change (8) rather than inquire about beliefs. Also, we can only speculate abouc che reasons trained participants reported fewer interventions. Was it because fewer interventions were required, intervening became more discretionary, or some other reason? Obtaining intervention frequencies for trained and untrained participants would permit a more accurate interpretation of results in the future. REFERENCES J. E. (1984) Stress in childhood: an intervention 1. BLOM, G. E., CHENEY,B. D., & SNODDY, model for teachers and other professionals. New York: Teachers College Press. 2. LONDON, P. (1987) Character education and clinical intervention: a paradigm shift for U.S. schools. Phi Delta h p p a n , 68, 667-673. 3. SIEGEL, S. (1956) Nonparametric statzstics for the behavioral sciences. New York: McGrawHill. 4. SLAIKEU,K. A. (1990) Crisis intervention: a handbook for practice and research. Boston, MA: AUyn & Bacon. 5. TAYLOR, R. D., BRADY,M. P., & SWANK,P R. (1987) Does crisis intervention training change teachers' beliefs abouc helping skills? Paper presented to the Phi Delta Kappan Research into Practice Conference, University of Houston, Houston, TX. 6. TAYLOR,R. D., BRADY,M. P., SWANK,P. R., & HAWKINS,J. (1989) The effects of antecedent cues on teachers' and mental health workers' perceptions of students' life event stressors. Educational Psychology, 9, 53-61. 7. TAYLOR, R. D., & SPIESS, G . A. (1989) Effect of age on congruence between adults' and youths' ratings of life event stressors. Psychological Reports, 65, 1017-1018. 8. YANCEY, G. B., & KELLY, L. (1990) The inappropriateness of using participants' reactions to evaluate effectiveness of training. Psychological Reports, 66, 937-938.
Accepted March 15, 1991
'A table of data by item for each respondent is on file in Document NAPS-04819. Remit $12.55 for photocopy or $4.00 for fiche ro Microfiche Publications, POB 3513, Grand Central Station, New York, NY 10163.
