Strong Lasting Results

Synopsis and Discussion 

—Page 6 of 6—

Long-term changes are highly desirable for the proponents of any clinical or educational intervention. To seek long term changes, and then to have evidence for the support of such changes, is not only desirable, but an ethically reasonable goal for the proponents of any educative methodology. Bob Hoffman, the originator of the Quadrinity Process, often alluded to long-term changes, but had little supporting evidence beyond his own observations, and anecdotal reports. This dissertation study clearly supports this notion of significant changes over time. Further longitudinal studies of the same subjects would further confirm the longevity of the Quadrinity Process experience.

Long term changes are desirable in group therapy and educational settings. Furthermore, some interventions are more prone to creating positive changes than others. Windhausen, in the examination of the two groups, effectively demonstrated that the effect of the 8-day Quadrinity Process was larger and more stable than that of the three-month clinical therapy control group. This is an important result, in that efficacy of any method or process is an important ethical and financial consideration for both health professionals and their clients alike.

Windhausen hypothesized a reduction of reported symptomatology, increased self worth and self acceptance, increased self assurance, development of emotional competence, and increased ability to deal with life circumstances. She has effectively marshaled supporting evidence for all these hypotheses, and has made her point that the Quadrinity Process is an effective intervention for positive change of the individual. A cautionary statement must be added to these strongly supportive results, in that a replication study, in another venue, with different investigators would further confirm or disconfirm the present report. Additionally, other tests and styles of investigation would add richness and texture to the question of the efficacy of the Quadrinity Process

Commentary on Methodology, Results Analysis, and Future Research

This is obviously a preliminary study with an understandably small sample size. The Adapted from the original design does not include random assignment of the subjects to the experimental control conditions. As is obvious from Table 1, (Windhausen, p. 95), the Quadrinity Process individuals were substantially older, and more educated. The researcher did not control for these demographic differences in the analyses.

A further condition of the study was that there were many scales administered to this rather small sample, resulting in a n to k ratio problem, not using the Bonferroni correction. In other words, the significance of the results were inflated, as one would expect. The validity and reliability of the scales themselves were not documented in the dissertation. With the exception of the SCL 90-R it is not clear whether or not these scales have been published, as no references have been given. An Appendix with these measures would have aided in the interpretation of this study.

Third, the analytic plan was somewhat puzzling. Of course, translating from the English to German language and national differences may have added to the differences in the statistical presentation and planning. While it is understandable that the author would want to standardize the SCL 90-R, which is clearly skewed in the sample, scoring such measures in such a small sample is usually not attempted. It is not clear why the author chose non-parametric statistics once the data had been standardized. As far as can be determined from the Tables, primarily within-group analyses were done using the Friedman test. Thus, one cannot determine if there were between-group differences over time.

The preferred method of analysis would have been a repeated-measures MANCOVA co-varying out demographic differences between groups. While the data are skewed, MANCOVA's are typically robust enough to overcome problematic distributions. Only a group by time interaction effect could determine whether the groups do vary significantly over time.

The above suggestions, using these added methodological features, may possibly show robust results and high levels of significance. With randomization, effects can be established with increased confidence. We highly recommend the above analysis with larger samples and randomization be conducted in the future.

Ron Meister, Ph.D. 12/19/98

If you are interested in the Quadrinity Process, here is our current schedule for the Australia.