Conceptualizing Group Research

Approaching the topic of conceptualizing group research should arouse misgivings in the most insouciant.When charged with approaching the topic in a constructive way, as we have been, the misgivings become acute.We have been admonished to avoid merely recounting what is wrong with the research; nor can we limit our efforts to a description of what the ideal situation would be.We must also offer some constructive suggestions for investigators of group phenomena.Clearly, angels would fear to tread within these guidelines.We believe that the most imperative problem facing both the investi- gator of group treatments and the consumer of such research is the limited level of conceptualization within the field.The level of con- ceptualization is analogous to that of pre-Galilean astronomy in that it is primitive, incomplete, and probably based upon questionable assumptions.Paradoxically, this condition cannot be ascribed to the methodological naivete of those involved in the research.A review of the literature shows many sophisticated designs and analyses (Bednar and Kaul, forthcoming).We must look elsewhere for the causes of the conceptual malaise.First, we will suggest what seems to us the fundamental cause for the current inadequate state of conceptualization in the area of group