Who should supply such a cognitive framework? There is evidence that one that is extracted from the clients' own experiences will most effectively explain their behavior. Clearly, however, counseling outcomes are more effective when a framework is suggested by the counselor than when no framework is provided (Hoffman & Teglasi, 1982). Not only is it necessary to supply a cognitive framework during the counseling process, but it may also be necessary to refute any inaccurate frameworks the client may have. For example, in her study of the transmission of knowledge in the science classroom, Resnick (1983) found that most students held naive theories about the scientific world that interfered with their ability to absorb or integrate scientifically based explanations of behavior. She showed that students would revert quickly to these views, which were rudimentary personal beliefs that had never been challenged, unless they were exposed and directly countered during the learning process. Since some of the laws of physics are counterintuitive, it is easy to see how a more intuitive naive theory would persist, despite its inaccuracy. Similarly naive and counterintuitive beliefs may be responsible for career intervention failures (Krumboltz, 1983).
In an extension of his social learning theory of career development, Krumboltz (1983) argued that it was not necessarily the accuracy of private career beliefs that made them troublesome, but rather the problems they could produce, including the following:
- faulty generalizations about the world of work from a single career-related experience;
- social comparisons with an idealized role model;
- sustained emotional overreactions to negative career events;
- erroneous attributions of the causes of specific career outcomes, including the overweighting of low-probability negative outcomes (see also Markus & Nurius, 1986); and
- self-deception.
By countering such erroneous and irrational thinking, and substituting more veridical and constructive beliefs, the client will be prepared for engaging in more constructive behaviors, as Postulate 1 summarizes:
Postulate 1. Effective career counseling will provide the client with a clear framework, either self-derived or counselor imposed, that offers an intellectual or cognitive structure for understanding career selection and that will counter any inaccurate theories about the world of work that the client may possess.
Skillful feedback, whether in group, class, or individual interventions, helps the client to internalize the insights and options that emerge during counseling. This feedback must challenge self-defeating or non-constructive attitudes and behaviors while encouraging more constructive alternatives. If this feedback process, however, does not result in a clear framework for the client's subsequent use, gains will be shorter in duration and less powerful. Interest inventories or ability measures should be interpreted after a cognitive framework is in place, not before or instead of the framework. If the client has no clear framework before the delivery of career information, it is unlikely that such information can be readily absorbed or used (Fogg, 1983). Clients will quickly forget much of what is presented to them (Meichen-baum &Turk, 1987), but the existence of cognitive framework will slow that process if naive theories have first been effectively rebutted.
The beginning phase of counseling concentrated on building the therapeutic rapport, obtaining information, setting limits, and interpreting tests (Kirschner, 1988). This beginning phase seemed more structured, with the counseling dealing with resistance and limit setting, whereas the next phase "began to focus more on the client's self-concept, obstacles to her career development and values and skills assessment" (p. 228). In the last phase, "occupational research, information synthesis, processing of the counseling relationship and ... termination ...," (p. 228) were addressed. At this point the counselor appeared to use more change intentions and increasingly focused on the relationship. Throughout the sessions, insight for this particular counseling intervention was frequently the counselor's intention. Generally, both client and counselor rated as "smooth" those sessions in which more structuring was employed.
Between the fourth and fifth sessions the client showed an increase in hopefulness, self-support, self-understanding, and responsibility taking. This critical break appeared to mark the beginning of real gains for this client. Several components of the intervention were judged by both client and counselor to be particularly effective, with the most important being the counselor's interpretation of the interests, skills and values instruments. Also helpful was the counselor's feedback about the client's organizational and analytic strengths and her tendency to underestimate her abilities. The client's exploratory research appeared to help her decide to stay in her present career and to expand her opportunities within it. Kirschner concluded that the factors that had proved most successful in this situation-social support, information giving, cognitive rehearsal of aspirations, and a framework for understanding self and work-were quite similar to those described by Holland, Magoon, and Spokane (1981) in their review of career interventions. In addition, several of the interventions found also in psychotherapy studies appeared to have been helpful in this career counseling case, especially
- inspiring and maintaining a client's expectations of help,
- arousal of client emotions,
- providing new learning experiences,
- enhancing a client's sense of mastery,
- providing opportunities for the client to internalize and maintain the gains experienced in counseling (Highlen & Hill, 1984).
Another study of the psychotherapy process (Hill & O'Grady, 1985) showed similar decreases in counselor intentions to set limits, get information, support, clarify, hope, and cathart, and increases in the insight, change, and reinforce change intentions across the sessions. Hill's (1989) innovative work also suggested that the counselor's interpretation would reliably lead to the client's increased insight. Below shown are Hill et al.'s (1988) description of possible client reactions to counselor interventions, which indicates that therapist intentions were more strongly related to client reactions in successful therapy cases than in unsuccessful ones.
Positive Reactions
- Understood: I felt that my therapist really understood me and knew what I was saying or what was going on with me.
- Supported: I felt accepted, reassured, liked, cared for, or safe. I felt like my therapist was on my side or I came to trust, like, respect, or admire my therapist more. This may have involved a change in my relationship with my therapist, such that we resolved a problem between us.
- Hopeful: I felt confident, encouraged, optimistic, strong, pleased, or happy, and felt like I could change.
- Relief: I felt less depressed, anxious, guilty, angry, or had fewer uncomfortable or painful feelings.
- Negative thoughts or behaviors: I became aware of specific negative thoughts or behaviors which cause problems for me or others.
- Better self-understanding: I gained new insight about myself, saw new connections, or began to understand why I behaved or felt a certain way. This new understanding helped me accept and like myself.
- Clear: I got more focused about what I was really trying to say, what areas I need to change in my life, what my goals are, or what I want to work on in therapy.
- Feelings: I felt a greater awareness or deepening of feelings or could ex-press my emotions better.
- Responsibility: I accepted my role in events and blamed others less.
- Unstuck: I overcame a block and felt freed up and more involved in what I have to do in therapy.
- New perspective: I gained a new understanding of another person, situa-tion, or the world. I understand why people or things are as they are.
- Educated: I gained greater knowledge or information. I learned something I had not known.
- New ways to behave: I learned specific ideas about what I can do differently to cope with particular situations or problems. I solved a problem, made a choice or decision, or decided to take a risk.
- Challenged: I felt shook up, forced to question myself, or to look at issues I had been avoiding.
Negative Reactions
- Scared: I felt overwhelmed, afraid, or wanted to avoid or not admit to having some feeling or problem. I may have felt that my therapist was too pushy or would disapprove of me or would not like me.
- Worse: I felt less hopeful, sicker, out of control, dumb, incompetent, ashamed, or like giving up. Perhaps my therapist ignored me, criticized me, hurt me, pitied me, or treated me as weak and helpless. I may have felt jealous of or competitive with my therapist.
- Stuck: I felt blocked, impatient or bored. I did not know what to do next or how to get out of the situation. I felt dissatisfied with the progress of therapy or having to go over the same things again.
- Lack of direction: I felt angry or upset that my therapist didn't give me enough guidance or direction.
- Confused: I did not know how I was feeling or felt distracted from what I wanted to say. I was puzzled or could not understand what my therapist was trying to say. I was not sure I agreed with my therapist.
- Misunderstood: I felt that my therapist did not really hear what I was trying to say, misjudged me, or made assumptions about me that were incorrect.
- No reaction: I had no particular reaction. My therapist may have been making social conversation, gathering information, or was unclear.
Martin (in press) maintained that the effects of any therapist intervention were mediated by the client's cognitive reactions to that intervention. Martin argued that the cognitive interplay between counselor and client is so complex as to allow only for probabilistic statements about what client reactions and behaviors could result from a given counselor intervention. There is evidence that career counseling may require more structure than psychotherapy (Holland et al., 1981) and therefore may involve more homogeneous goals and assumptions from both client and counselor than is generally the case with psychotherapy. In career counseling, the focus is clearer, the client's goal is always implicit (even when unstated), and the available technology results in less variable interventions than in psychotherapy. Consider the study by Hampl, Lonborg, Lassiter, Williams, and Schmidt (1987), which found no differences in process or outcome of career counseling for clients of quite differing conceptual level.