An Assessment of the Psychodrama and Sociometry Integrity


in an Educational Group

By Professor Dr. Aliye Mavili Aktas


In this study, the intergrity of the psychodrama group appilication and sociemetry have been exasonied. A group of ten women that completed a course of 100 hours and that consisted of professional career members (doctors ,social worker,psycholog,child development spencialist) has been carried out by two woman adminisrtators, alternately. Both administrators are participated in the group in all of the group sessions.
The administrators doubted in their attempts to understand the process,that with in group dynamics could not troughly be interpreted only observation and the known test results themselves have. They thus chose an open sociemerty application in order to enable the group members to participate in this process more actively. The particular objective of this application is to provide the members with some information about the group dynamics and inner consciousness
Key words:pyschodrama,sociemtry,group dynamics.


I was trying to understand and experience the advantages of the approach as an ardent and curious student in the education group of my respectable professor, Prof. Dr. Abdülkadir Özbek, whom I have been admiring a lot since 1985 when I started my psychodrama education.
I realized that my knowledge was enriched and my executive skills development considerably with the help of the distinguished members of the Moreno Institute (Leutz, Barz, Franke, Ziegler, Gneist) with whom we participated in some marathon groups. I believe that psychodrama is an outstanding technique which enables the professional career members in an education group that I have administered since 1991 to acquire some background knowledge that will help them to understand their creativity and spontaneity. With this in mind, I would like to express my regards and thanks to Prof.Dr. Abdülkadir özbek who helped me to start in on this approach. Prof.Dr. Abdülkadir Özbek, with his various contributions to universality by way of a number of applications and publications in our country, also encouraged me to know more about the approach and improve myself a lot.
The group process carried on in this study is the outcome of teamwork. I am thankfull and indebted to Prof.Dr. Sevil Atauz and Prof. Dr. Bahar Gökler whom I always admire her friendship and generosity with her contributions as a supervisor during the whole year.
I would also like express my gratefulness to the group members who took part in the group process actively and shared their intrinsic values and difficulties with us through integrating the periods “now”, “here”, “there” and that time
Finally, I am indepted to my husband Associate Prof. Dr. Ramazan Aktas and my son Konuralp Aktas for giving their precious time to me and for their patience and invaluable support in the course of the weekend and evening applications.
Prof. Dr. Aliye Mavili Aktas

Conceptual Framework

Sociometry, which has lately had a striking impact for areas found in the fields of microsociology, which is an analysis of small groups, social perception an Parson’s operational theory, has first been developed by Moreno, as a result of vigorous efforts lasting approximately a century. Moreno was appointed to Mitendorf concentration camp near Vienna in the course of Second World War and began studying the communication problems of families that were then living in the camp. In those times, young Moreno developed a questionnaire for the purpose of lodging the harmonious families in the same barracks. The families that completed the questionnaire were shown in the form of a circle and an attraction-repulsion diagram was prepared. It was observed, within the framework of the questionnaire (sociodiagram), that the amount of arguments and conflicts among the relodged families abated considerably, and that the families who were not liked at all exhibited signals of good-natured conduct. (Moreno, 1963), Moreno-C4963)î Moreno believed that sociometry, which plays a pivotal role in analyzing group dynamics, might eliminate conflicts and tensions and prove it possible for a group to be in a better position through making some changes in group-human relations and that a group may be ameliorated just as a patient might be cured by medical people. This has led to the advent of a test called the sociometry test, which is one of the major techniques of sociometry. Moreno’s studies conducted in the above mentioned camps enhanced his views regarding not only the social relations but also the social universe. According to him, the social universe is empirical and can be studied like the physical universe. There must be laws. It is thoroughly important not only to see these laws at their face-value and define them as in traditional sociology, but also to conduct experimental studies on them and doing research on the most abstract domains of the social universe. Moreno had the opportunity to enhance his ideas as regards this subject when he emigrated to the USA in 1925.
Sociometry is a science that narrates in-operation human relations within a group. Sociometry does not study the events or activities that have already finished. It deals with the dynamic or live events that are presently happening. Its research domain is extremely widespread and comprehensive.
Above all, it is grounded on a democratic basis. According to him “Sociometry is a sociology of people designed by the people for the people”. When we consider the group, it can be said that “it is a group sociology designed by the group for the group”. Sociometry, within the framework of its very broad application areas, can also be defined as social psychology of preference and leadership
A sociometry test works around the principle of spontaneity. The preferences and repulsion that the group members determined according to their own will and without any prior preparation provide significant clues with respect to group dynamics. This sort of tests is also a means of keeping spontaneity active within a group. Moreno attempted to scrutinize this force defined, for the first time, as spontaneity in the group environment by way of an experiment method, and thus created the necessary techniques for this study.

Moreno (1963) provides some valuable information concerning the proper use of a sociometry test. A sociometry test is test that examines the emotions of individuals about one another on the basis of a particular criterion. For instance, it is probable to detect the emotional attitudes of group members towards other group members through a stimulus like “In order to fulfil an important task, what individuals in this group do you like to work for? Indicate three individuals in order of importance.” This means, in this type of evaluation, that a message unique to that group has spontaneously been picked up. It is essential, in applying a sociometry test of this sort, to ask the group members about their feelings concerning the preferences they have indicated and the reasons why they have done so. According to Moreno, sociometric preferences surveyed in an independent way without any criteria are not regarded as sociometry studies under any circumstances.

According to Moreno, if sociometric attraction and repulsion do not depend on a particular criterion, it can be difficult to understand their analytical value. The reason why it is difficult to see the analytical value might be the fact that these are interrelated based on a social situation (entertaining etc.). Group members may not express their preferences overtly in an application whose criterion has not been set beforehand. in the group application, group members have the responsibility and right to know the practical results of a sociometry test. (1963).
Moreno asserts that the goal of sociometry application and psychodrama within groups is to vitalize members’ past experiences and response types. Group members help us to witness their dynamic entities and social environment (structural dynamics) in which they live and promote our understanding about the situations that they have experienced. That group members learn how to activate their spontaneity can be possible in the group process and with applications realized by warm-up techniques (1963).
Sociometric assessments achieved within psychodrama groups at various phases of the process are important tools in understanding both the roles that each individual member can assume and the power of emotional diffusion.
A sociometry test can be utilized as a tool for evaluating the group process. The information gathered from this test can be put to use for remedial treatment of group members.
In psychodrama, each individual group member whose behaviors are somewhat controlled is an assisting ego for other group members. As a matter of fact, in our group applications we can see a continuation of sociometric preferences and their effects even in protagonist-centered group psychodramas.
Benefiting from sociometry as regards a group means two complementary sources. One of them is related with the group administrator. The group administrator, who is expected to get ready for a particular task, has the responsibility for proper evaluation of the results she or he obtained. The second source is related with group members. The members take pan in a questionnaire application and indicate their individual preferences for they primarily deal with the sociometric operation.
According to Moreno, if the sociometric record of a group is vague and it gives signals of uncertainty, the differences within the group cannot have any value among the psychological and social peculiarities of this unity.
Sociometry exhibits its value in the area of social operation too.
Behind the sociometry operation are some moral principles. A sincere and friendly approach pursued by group administrators can make it possible for the group members to give sincere and friendly responses (Moreno, 1963).

Moreno’s principles concerning these dimensions can be summarized as follows.
1- Tell the truth, get the right response.
2- If you develop a loving bond towards the group, the group does the same.
3- If you become sincere and act naturally, you get the same sincerity and naturalness.
According to Moreno, these general forces, which we observe as sympathy and antipathy in social structure, were attraction and repulsion forces in physical universe. in his opinion, just like a star cluster or the structure of molecules, these attraction and repulsion forces should have a similar meaning within a social structure. This being the case, then how could these forces be used in social studies, and in addition, how could the conditions which will prevent this study from being affected from outer factors be established beforehand?
Moreno did not find observation, one of the out-dated sociology methods, suitable for this descriptive activity. At the same time, he firmly stood against the idea of exploiting humans as guinea pigs in a humiliating way, and doing research on them as if they are animal subjects
The essential problem as regards this dimension was not conducting the experiment, but it was the modification of the accepted research method for an adaptation to a new situation.

Sociometry test is a way to adapt the experimental sociology method to the conditions of the group. This means that the objects of the method are the former problems of sociology. We believe that studying these concepts that have raised a number of difficulties for social sciences for thousands of years, and that have not been studied so far despite the approval of their existence, is a contribution of sociometry. The development of this new method and approach has been possible with the transformation of the repulsion and attraction concepts into preference and refusal concepts, and with making the subjects subjective, which is regarded as the most important social experiment condition. The meaning of this is as follows.
The subject (the group member) participates in the test not only as an measurable object but also as an entity that does have to with the social structure peculiarities and changes of his own life group. The aim of the experiment is to conduct a study about a social unity, say a family (but not to study its overt qualities only), with its dynamic social-emotional structures al the deep level. and with association conditions found in the consequences of life experiences. that is, social-emotional tensions and their outcomes (Özbek, 1987).

Results obtained from sociometric studies provide us with basic information regarding the therapeutic changes of an existing social condition.
On-the-outside helps based on good intention do not have any value if they are put into effect without sifting through and knowing the deep structures (invisible features) of social units or groups. The reason why they do not help is also that “social conflicts and tensions” grow in a directly proportional manner with sociodynamic differences between the overt structure of the society and sociometric mobility. In this context, Moreno regarded sociometric test subjects (group members) as operational researchers, not as objects for research. Being motivated by their particular social situations a particular period of time, all of the subjects (group members) are required to continue to have the test application for their own benefits. Only under these circumstances can we expect meaning-laden research results. In other words, the reason why a sociometry test is conducted is primarily to make alterations within an existing relationship status, not to do some sympathy research in the form of a public opinion pQM. That the participants are conscious about the fact that these studies are very significant for their lives might be reliable when we consider the preferences with respect to repulsion. Because social conflicts and their treatment on the influences on thought are accepted among the major responsibilities of psychodrama and sociodrama, Moreno has emphasized the importance of a pre-sociometric study for a thorough indication and a precise treatment environment (Moreno, 1963)

One of the building blocks of sociometry is the doctrine of spontaneity and creativity. Sociometry has introduced a method that can be implemented to all social sciences. By the term novelty, we should understand the scientific method of social sciences that would gradually lead to the development of a real sociologist. This method has prevented the researcher from being a passive observer, and made him an active member taking an active pan in experimentation. If studies, in a social science, are congruous with group members and they attempt to measure the activities they have dealt with, they can then approach sociometry more. Sociometry studies the groups that have already been formed or that are presently being established; and concrete situations and useful techniques are utilized. On the one hand it lays the emphasis on group dynamics and action, and on the other hand, it stresses the significance of testing and its evaluation.
By the time sociometry came into being, three major movements in the
American school were rivaling: Pragmatism, Progressive Education and Social Engineering. However, what is more important than the above is perhaps when sociometry came into existence, that the social groups in America had more freedom and independence than those found in the other parts of the world. It can be said that such an environment enables the experimental studies concerning small groups to increase in number. Small group dynamics and the studies in respect to the measurement of these dynamics in this country (the United States of America) have become more prevalent and made a good progress because small groups have acted freely and expressed themselves independently without being exposed to deterring actions of any disciplined culture or political ideology.

Sociometry has borrowed the idea of social system from sociology. However, this social system necessitates the partnership of the social life itself. It is essential, within the framework of an experimental approach, to grasp and perceive the dynamics of small groups by way of a planned social action.
Sociometry has been developing more with its three basic sources. sociodrama, psychodrama and group psychotherapy.
Sociometry is grounded on three factors: socius, metrum (criterion) and drama-action. We can talk about three areas of research arising out of this classification. These include studies which can be conducted on group, metrum and action. Real sociometry is always a science of action.
Various influences of sociometry have been observed in a number of sciences such as sociology, psychiatry, anthropology, education and economics. What the sociometry school and the master-apprentice relationship, which continually develops sociometry, have suggested is not traditions or a sort of dedication but principles and methods.

The most significant developments of sociometric theories have been in following areas.
1 – Tele therapy
2- Spontaneity theory
3- Social environment theory
4- Social web and communication theory
5- Actor-in-situation theory

One of the problems that sociometry has encountered during its development is that its theories have not yet thoroughly been understood or recognized despite the immediate approval of its techniques, operations and methods This situation has posed some problems for both the improvement of ideas and the progress of prospective techniques.
Even though the techniques such as sociometry, sociogram, analysis of small groups, r tests, psychodrama, sociodrama have been accepted relatively quickly, the theoretical of such techniques, among which are the actor or the helping ego, spontaneity, tele warming-up. social environment and social interaction web, have been conceptualized depending upon psychodrama and sociometry in social dynamics. This theory and the concepts have been improved by way of certain hypotheses and basic assumptions established on strong bases. There is, however, no likelihood of us distinguishing effortlessly between a technique and a theory of a new field (i.e., sociometry) that has gradually been improving

Vitalizing the spontaneity within the group members, warming them up, observing their stage-to-stage actions and changes and evaluating them are all helpful for an administrator to obtain a data table for a sociometric assessment.
We can speak of three operational categories in sociometry. The spontaneity category means that the group members free themselves of insensibility and turn themselves towards a certain objective; the warm-up means that the group members act through a leader; and the creativity category implies that the group members produce the energy that exists within them and their relations (Moreno, 1963).
Spontaneity and creativity are neither equal nor similar phenomena. Despite the fact that they are strategically interrelated, these two peculiarities may be thoroughly different from one another or even opposite. An individual might have a high level of spontaneity without having a creativity feature at all. Similarly, another person might be a very creative individual while he or she does not have any signals of spontaneity. It is only God that can combine both creativity and spontaneity. Yet it is possible to understand the relationship between creativity and spontaneity on this planet earth we are presently living In the absence of spontaneity, creativity does not mean anything. The higher the level of creativity is, the more powerful spontaneity becomes. Mankind has always experienced a plethora of psychic and social troubles because spontaneity has not developed sufficiently. For this reason, it should be the task of all administrators and educators to improve people’s capability to use their spontaneity. Spontaneity education is a potential triggered in the warmup process in psychodrama. In fact, this potential is a capacity dwelling in group members. Being aware of this potential and directing towards creativity are among the advantages of psychodrama (Moreno, 1963).
Spontaneity is something that stimulates an individual under thoroughly new circumstances so as to make him or her feel relatively contented. And the warming-up is a way to express one’s spontaneity. Spontaneity has numerous stages starting from the scratch and getting more and more elevated, and ultimately getting ready to be at the service of the individual. That an individual can show spontaneity in a new situation depends on his behaviors which fit that particular situation, and on his thoughts and actions. The individual can apply less or more depending upon the necessity of the situation. Spontaneity of the individual may be more or less spontaneous depending upon the essentiality of a situation. It is, in addition, not possible to speak of an individual’s carefulness as regards his or her spontaneity. As mentioned earlier, spontaneity involves a number of phases originating from the scratch and getting higher and higher, and at last becoming at the service of the person. This is partly formed by the society in which we live. Spontaneity begins to operate unexpectedly and instantaneously. This is similar, if not identical, to a lighting device that illuminates our room. Even when we turn it off, everything is still in the room. Nevertheless, an extremely substantial quality is no longer available
Spontaneity and creativity, two basic principles of sociometry, are interrelated This is not an abstraction, but a principle that is noticeable in individuals emotional relations. This principle is equally compatible for those individuals with relations with one another in a group environment. Individuals in a group are not dolls or puppets. It can be seen that they would act according to their spontaneity in the course of their warm-up period or during a drama to be staged (Moreno, 1963).
The new dimension brought by spontaneity and creativity to our realm of thought necessitates the reorganization of psychological and sociological theories or conceptions such
The new dimension brought by spontaneity and creativity to our realm of thought necessitates the reorganization of psychological and sociological theories or conceptions such as the frustration projection, substitution and sublimation. Various interpretations may be obtained when these theories are considered in the Light of the spontaneity and creativity principles. Spontaneity embodies interdependent conditions between creativity and cultural patterns.
Normally, the following four successive phases exteriorize the creative inclination: creativity, spontaneity, warming-up period, and cultural patterns.

FIGURE-I Spontaneity — Creativity — Cultural Patterns


S- Spontaneity
C- Creativity
C.P.-Cultural Patterns (For instance, biological pattern, sociological pattern or cultural elements like books, films, machines, calculator etc.). W.P.- Warming-up Period-an operational term for creativity.

The circle shows the operational area of spontaneity, creativity and cultural patterns
Operation l. Spontaneity triggers creativity . S-C
Operation ll. Creativity responds to spontaneity. S-C
Operation Ill. Cultural Patterns come out as a result of this interdependent action.
Operation IV. Cultural Patterns accumulate at an infinite amount. This is similar to an eternal deep-freeze. Spontaneity needs to be activated if efficacy is desired once again. C.P.-C-C.P. Spontaneity never functions in space. It either turns towards creativity or cultural patterns.
Creativity is a primitive x. It does not have any typical operation, but is recognized by action. We need “spontaneity” for “creativity” to be an action. Spontaneity develops in. the process of warming-up. The product of these interdependent influences is the crystallized and dense patterns of culture. The crystallized and dense patterns of culture are a power abiding by the laws of accumulation. This power is utilized in case of need and in any time, and in other cases it is stored. These patterns can be likened to an automatic contrivance that is at its master’s service. However, if there were no such forms of power as spontaneity and creativity, it would not be probable for the universe or an individual to operate. The universe or that person would then be in suspense at a dead point forever. Spontaneity existing in the universe begins to function in the warm-up process found in psychodrama. That an individual feels frightened by his or her spontaneity can be equated with bizarre behaviors of a person who does not know how to make a fire. Only when one dominates his spontaneity can he lay his fears aside. This can be activated in all phases of psychodrama (Moreno, 1963).

The Group

Definition of the Group

The group is a group that has finished a psychodrama course of 100 hours. Initially, the group consisted of 15 individuals. Four of the group members were from the cities other Ankara (three psychiatrists, one social services specialist). These four individuals coming outside Ankara left the group following the information phase because of their busy working tempo. One of the members who participated from Ankara left the group because she was appointed to another city.
The sociometric evaluation carried out just after the information phase within the group was repeated when an advanced phase of the course was started. In both sociometric tests, the same criteria were used.
The group that has completed a course of one hundred hours consists of ten female members. That the group does not have any male members has caused troubles in the role-assuming procedures (men) and in the provision of feedback concerning communication problems (about spouses and friends) repeatedly expressed.
The following information as regards the members has been introduced.

Fatma-— aged 27, Social ServicesSpecialist, Married for 1 year
Nura•n-— aged 26, Social Servicesspecialist, Single
Bahar — aged 25, Social Servoces Specialist, Married for 2 years
aged 40, Social Services Specialist, Divorced, Mother of one child
IJmran-— aged 47, Social Services Specialist, Single
Sehme=— aged 34, Psychological Counselor, Married, Mother of two children
Senean — aged 34, Child Development Specialist, Divorced, Mother of two children
Derya— aged 41, Social Services Specialist, Single
Fügen»— aged 32, Physiotherapist, Married, Mother of one child
Zeynep— aged 30, Communications Specialist, Single

A Summary of the Processes

The communication problems of the group members caused the protagonistcentered psychodramas to be have been numerically high. The major theme of the protagonist-centered psychodramas is the problems that one experiences with a divorced spouse, a boy friend or his or her marriage partner. (N), one of the single members, shared her health problems with the group. Similarly, (Fü) shared her problems with the group. These included the problems about her parents, her communication troubles with her colleagues and the difficulties she has experienced with her husband. The group members (F), (Z), and (D) have never been a protagonist.
For instance, (S) has been a protagonist five times. And (F) assumed the role of her husband in all of the dramas. (Z) activated the group in warming-up oriented group psychodramas because she had a high level of spontaneity
The main theme of the psychodramas where (S) was the protagonist was the communication problems she experienced with her husband. At the beginning. (S) talked about her attempts concerning her inability to carry out her responsibilities at home. Add to this, the problems experienced with the common friends were shared with the other group members.
A summary of the psychodramas in which (S) took part is as follows
Stage l. (S) s husband (F), their family friend Ms. ($e) and her husband (l) are in the living room. By the way, (S) is tense and angry. She talks to her protagonist side in the following way: “You are trying to corrupt my husband. He is my husband. Your husband is next to you. etc.

Stage ll. (Se) and (S) are in the living room. ($e) talks about ordinary subjects and about what she has done. (S) does not listen to her. She asks her: “How is your relationship with your husband?”‘ (Se) answers: “He does not understand me. it is not possible for him to change.” (S) speaks like a therapist (in fact she herself wants to make such a speech and acts like a therapist). “You do not treat your husband the same way as you treat other men.” And the administrator adds and provides a pairing: “For example, the same way as you treat my husband.
This being the case, the protagonist looks at (Se) and says to her: “l do not want you to be that close to my husband.” “We are very old friends. He is so special to me.” answers (Se). (S) responds to ($e) in the following way: “Do I treat your husband this way? Know your limits. Do not poke your nose into my family relations. Go concern yourself with your own husband.” She is now somewhat relaxed. She also wishes to talk to her husband

Stage Ill. (S) is together with her husband. They are in the living room. (S) talks to her husband: “Your close relationship with ($e) disturbs me. Our own relationship will get worse. Do I treat her husband that close?” Her husband (F) responds: “We are old friends.
You know I have played a very important role in their marriage, (F helped Se escape from home and he became an important means in their marriage). Don’t you know how much I adore you?”
The protagonist wants to end the psychodrama. The psychodrama now reaches an end. The group members supported (S) and shared the problems of (S), Those who assumed roles in the psychodrama expressed that they felt as if they were in the role of (S) rather than their own roles.
This psychodrama of (S) has been performed before the first sociometry application.
(S) expressed, prior to the second sociometry application, that her husband kept himself away from her, that he resorted to force when he approached their children and that she was anxious about the future of their marriage. In one of the final sessions, (S) said that her husband had been with a woman for one year and that this situation caused her to lose her morale and inner peace! in the course of (S)’s psychodramas, the group members put themselves in the shoes of (S)’s husband rather than (S) herself and provided emphatic feedback for (S)’s husband. (S)’s husband will pick her up. in the sociometric feedback, there are people who find her repulsive. (S)’s selfconfident and narcissistic personality might have agitated the group. Most of the group members (Z and D) who have took on roles in (S)’s last psychodramas have not provided any feedback. (U) supported (S)’s husband rather than (S) herself. ($e), öne of the group members, has given (S) a lot of positive assistance. However, she has also been cheated by her husband and she has divorced him for this reason. Because (Se) recalled her own past experiences through (S)’s psychodrama, she supported (S) in the process of providing identity feedback.
1. In the drama, the symbols of the group members have been used.
2. In psychodrama, through one’s protagonist side, it is possible to have someone say the things he or she feels even though he or she normally does not utter them overtly.

Sociometry Tables or An Evaluation of Sociograms

The basic reason why a sociometry application was realized in the group that later became a group of ten women (the sum total of the group was initially 15 and this number subsequently decreased) was to make changes in the relationship characteristics and the dynamics of the group. It has been observed in the course of both sociometry applications that D and Z avoided feedback and that they did not provide any identity feedback. (D) and (Z) have reciprocally been chosen by their close friends (B) and ($e). (D) has also chosen (Z) who had the same peculiarities as hers.
The sociometry test has been applied on the basis of two basic criteria. One of the criteria is called “a trip to deserted island”. Through this criterion, the aim is to determine the group members with whom one wants to be together for the purpose of having enjoyment. in the second of the criterion, individuals whom one wishes to work with in order to carry out an important task have been surveyed.
The first sociometry test has been conducted after the information phase (following a period of 36 hours), and the second test has been carried out before the completion of a 70-hour period of the second phase course. In the first applications of the sociometry tests, the number of the group members has been large (15 individuals). The group members presented their preferences in the a row of 1 .2.3. The first sociometry test has been evaluated by not considering the members w it) are not in the procedure any longer in the latter stages because they left the program

The sociograms have been give below.



Deserted island, Interpretation and Evaluation of the Sociograms I

The-group members were told to choose three individuals from the group in order to leave for a deserted island.
As can be seen in Sociogram (l), ($e) is the preference star. (Z) and (D) who did never become a protagonist, overlooked the role feedback and did not provide any identity feedback were reciprocally chosen by (B) and ($e). (Z) who did not share anything with anybody chose (Z), and (Z) was chosen by (Fü) and she chose (S). (N), who has been cheated by her husband, was chosen reciprocally by (l) and she chose (U).
The fact that some corresponding preferences came out in the group (except for the close friends) stemmed from the shared theme and the same psychodramas found in the protagonist-centered psychodramas. Despite the fact that (Z) did not bring anything (concerning herself), she obtained two preferences. There have been five members (Fü, N, S, B, D) who obtained one preference. (U) has obtained two preferences, (Z) and (F) have obtained three preferences; and ($e) has obtained four preferences and she has become an attraction star. The triangular and rectangular formations in the group indicate the communication density. That the group consisted of some quiet and silent members is preoccupying (this situation has arisen from either the presence of very close friends or from the group dynamics that the main theme of the group has brought forth).
The communication in the group, the group psychodramas and protagonistcentered psychodramas have produced significant changes in the second sociogram with the same criterion (deserted island)
Two more different preference stars (l) and (B) were formed in the second sociogram when ($e)’s function as a preference star continued. At the same time, (S) became a repulsion star. it can be said that what (S) brought to the group and her personality characteristics could be influential in making her a repulsion star. These beliefs were confirmed in the event that the sociogram results were shared in the group. (D) holds a reciprocal preference with (Se) and (l). Fü, U, and N are lonesome members that have never been preferred or found repulsive by anyone. However, they have had preferences and repulsion. Although Z has never been a protagonist, she holds a reciprocal preference relationship with her close friend (B), and she has been preferred by Fü. There are concentric triangles and rectangular formations.
Important Task, Interpretation and Evaluation of the Sociogram I – ll.
As can be seen in Figüre Ill, (B) is the preference star by seven preferences in the second sociogram. (S) is in the last row (in the third row) with four preferences. l, U, and Z have not obtained any preferences. ($e) has chosen (S) in the second row while (S) has chosen ($e) in the third row. By the way, the reciprocal preference between $e and D (in the 1 st and 2 nd row) still proceeds. (B)’s reciprocal preference between $ and F are in the same level. The reciprocal preference between N and F are effectual at different levels (rows 2 and 3).
The happenings encountered in the group procedure have suggested a number of changes in the second sociogram with the same criterion. To give an example, there was no relation between IJ and Z in the first sociogram while this changed in the second sociogram and some sort of reciprocal repulsion was realized. The one-sided preference between Z and Fü (Z chose Fü) became reciprocal. (S) has obtained five repulsion stars. Even though (F) has never been a protagonist, in her roles as an assisting ego, a spouse Or as an antagonist, she provided, in the course of giving identity feedback, the members with quite a positive support in the group psychodramas and protagonist-centered psychodramas (F has studied psychodrama for two years in her undergraduate years). A number of triangular and I rectangular formations are noticeable in the second sociograms. This shows the density of group communication.
That the attraction and repulsion peculiarities have altered in both sociograms is an expected situation. Yet it was important to clarify and elucidate the relationship of this situation with the experiences encountered in the processes and within-group dynamics. Although (S) has been a protagonist several times, it is preoccupying that she has obtained repulsion (2). it was important to take the effects of not only shared feedback but also the nonshared feedback into account in the process of interpreting and evaluating the results of these sociograms. The group was a group of education and it was considered that the group members had the responsibility to explain the sociograms and study their results

Within the group, an occasion of giving feedback to one another could be made possible through a group psychodrama like speaking behind someone. After all, it was probable that the sociometric preferences remained covert and it might have not been possible for us to know about the results of the sociograms. These reasons caused the administrator to have utilized an overt sociometry application. This study primarily aimed at changing the inner dynamics of the group and easing the way the group members expressed them (D and Z in particular) properly.
The group members were told that some information regarding their sociometric preferences were being collected, that these facts were shared by the administrators and that the group members had the right and responsibility to know and understand these facts. The group members were confused at the beginning. However, they took part in the procedure.
The procedure was first started with the participation of (U). IJ wanted to talk to individuals who were her preferences and found her repulsive.
The administrator told the group members that she expected each member to make a speech and that she could share the feelings of the members in a face-to-face manner.
U, one of the group members, firstly wanted to talk to her own repulsion. (U) chose (Z) and (S) for the Important task and she wanted only (Z) to be in the deserted island.
(U) wanted to talk to (S). She sat together with (S). “l consider you important in the group. You shared a lot of things for you trusted us a lot. I tried to understand you in the psychodramas where you have been the protagonist. Yet I feel that there are differences between the “you” within the group and the “you” in your real life. I began to feel that I was becoming quite distant from you due to such emotions I developed.” (S) listened to her. She did not want to say anything. (N) said similar things to (U). (Fü) approached (U) and told her that she trusted her and that she did a lot of things for her.” Later on, (Fü) went towards (N, IJ and S) and spoke to them with similar words. (S) told them that she passed through bad moments those days, that the sharing within the group became significant, yet that she could not leave some time for such a participation, and that she would contemplate the shared ideas and she would share them at a latter stage. (S) obtained five series of repulsion in the group.
(Fü) was chosen by (F) and (S); yet (S) was repulsed by (Fü) and (F), it was weird that the preference star also repulsed her. it is considered meaningladen that the difference explicit s ego in the group and her inner self in her actual life was realized by the group members
The group session of that day has ended. A group circle was suggested. The group felt the circle a while and then departed.
The second session was an extension of the former process. At the beginning of the process, (U) expressed that she was troubled because she was the first person to provide a sharing in the former session. (S) explained that the problems pertinent to her private life made her busy a lot and that she could not come up with and idea. The group overlooked the problems of (S), which could normally be regarded as much more important The administrators went on to the process.
(N) wished to talked to (Z). They sat together. The group was provided with the formerly-stated instructions. “You can make a pair with a member you wish to become together. Both negative and positive feelings can be shared
(N) said to (Z): “you are more spontaneous man you are in the group psychodramas, and you are participating actively. But you share very little with us. You share things only in some of the roles. You have never talked about yourself to us. I feel that I am being observed and judged.” (Fü) approached (N) and said to (Z) “you are very valuable for me. I consider you very important.” Z and Fü were reciprocally chosen by one another. (Z) said to (Fü): “you are important for me, too.” “l know you are passing through a lot of things within you. I wish she trusted me and us.” said (Fe). This kind of sharing supported her and made her feel emotional. Her best friend (B) was not in the group. She started talking in a tearful way, in a trembling tone of voice: “l do not want see him, my father, any more. He deceived all of us. He just thinks of himself.” The administrator approached (Z) and said to her “we can study your relationship with your father.
An open sociometry has changed the fact that (Z) has not been a protagonist. Also that her best friend has not been there that day influenced this in a positive way. Z was ready to perform.

Stage l. (Z) choses her mother and father. (Fü) becomes her mother (this is a reciprocal preference) and (F) becomes her father. She introduces her mother and father. She is closer to her mother than she is to her father. They are at their home. She talks to her mother.
She has a sentimental conversation with her mother. in their dialogue, her mother says that her father has cheated her and that he wants to divorce her in order to live together with that woman. (Z) says that her father has been indifferent to them and has not been at home. “Why has then this not been told to us? He has been cheating us for one year.” says (Z). (Z) is very confused and angry. She says that she does not want to see her father yet she can talk to him, when asked whether to see him pr not. A new platform is arranged. Her father lies on the ground. And his face and body are covered (this position has been prepared by Z).

Stage ll. She begins to talk to the father whose face is covered. She insults her father in trembling tone of voice. The father keeps on lying on the ground She cries and curses him. Her father does not speak even a word. She does not want to take his place. (Z) wishes to end the psychodrama. An emotional discharge has been experienced
The group supports (Z) in the course of providing sharing. They hug her. Some of the members (those who left their spouses and lived together with their lovers) express that they do not understand the reality of the father and they have always become in the role of (Z). (Se) expresses in a tearful manner that (Z)’s sharing created a feeling of delinquency in herself. ($e) says: “l do not demand anything since-I ponder my boy friend’s family. (l) who has assumed the father’s role expresses that the consequences of sociometry have become very heavy and that she thinks she has not got tired this much before. By the way, (l) expresses that she has always felt that she has been in the role of (Z), that she remembers her son living together with his father, that she has a feeling of guilt, and that she would like to contact her son just after that group session.
The administration told ($e) and (l) that (Z) was expected to be a protagonist after the sociometry application and that this was a positive starting point for her. However, she told them that only one psychodrama could not solve everything and that (Z) could provide other series of sharing in case she wishes. Yeanwhile, it has also been asserted that the feelings of guilt found within (S) and (l) do have to with their own individual processes.
Knowing about the consequences of open sociometry has been a considerable step for Z, one of the group members. At the end of both these two applications, the group members Fü, F, U, N S, $e and Z were cooperatively able to express their feelings. Z, who did not provide any sharing, was able to utter the word I
In the first process following (Z)’s being a protagonist, and just after the announcement of the sociometric results, a suggestion regarding the observation of the group integration was made and a group-tree psychodrama was suggested. The group members called this psychodrama “the expectation tree”. The administrators expressed that there have been significant developments in both the group and individual group members and that the term “the expectation tree” would be appropriate.

Expectation tree

Young Tree, Shoat s

Withered                                                                                                                      Flowers


The members were told to make an expectation tree. The expectation tree of the group is as follows: (S) is not present in the group. At the bottom parts of the expectation tree are (D) and (Z) attached through the root (B), it is, however, preoccupying that (D) is a withered leaf. Her father passed away one month ago and she was absent in the last two sessions. it seemed that the dead leaf symbolized the situation that she was in. (l) is the wind giving a feel of coolness to all parts of the expectation tree. (Fü) expresses her loneliness at times and shows her contradictions at other times in her series of sharing and in protagonist psychodramas.
The other members, (Se), (F), (U) and (N), emphasize their growth and hope as branches, young shoots, and flowers. (l), with the symbol of the wind, has been independent of all of the other members, she expresses, as an individualized member, that she causes all parts of the tree to experience a pleasant feeling. The other members that touch one another and entwine themselves round each to the other symbolize integration through the two root members at the bottom of the tree. The mobility of the wind reaches almost every component. Some similarities in the sociometric preferences (attractions among Fü, Z and B) can also be observed in the expectation tree, Nevertheless, there have been changes in the ranking and closeness of the other group members.
The group members stated that the expectation tree helped them pass through positive feelings in the course of sharing opinions. (D) said that she had an experience she wished to share in the group and that she could never share this if she did not share it this week. The group members supported (D) and told her that they were ready to show their interest in what had happened
They had a walk together with (D). (D) told .them that she began to question her life after her father’s death. She wanted to talk to her (step) mother at home.
Stage l. (D) is at home. She is together with her stepmother and sibling. (D)’s father has got married to her stepmother after her real mother’s death. (D) has had a stepbrother from her stepmother. And now her father is dead. She feels alone at this home. Her stepbrother does not know that she is his stepsister. (D) now enlivens her home, She chooses (U) as her stepmother. (U) is the person whom (D) finds repulsive (Sociogram Il). She chooses (Z) as her brother. (Z) is the preference individual.
(D) initially talks to her stepmother. She tells her that she (the mother) does not have any relationship with her (D) and she (the mother) can leave if she wishes (D has not had such a conversation with her stepmother). The stepmother says to her: “This house is yours, too. I know he was your father. And he was my husband. We are a family.” (D) cannot say anything else. She goes to her stepbrother’s room. He is asleep. She enters the room and wants to talk to him. However, when she approaches him, she says to him: “l love you.
(D) says at the end of the psychodrama: “l do not want anything else. A short holiday will do good.

This sort of sharing is supportive. Only after one year has (D) been able to express herself properly. After the application of open sociometry, (D), one of the members that have obtained few preferences (only from $e), has been a protagonist, too. “it has been somewhat exhausting but we think a new period will start.” said (l) and ($e). They have repeated the young shoots and flowers in the expectation tree. A group photo has been suggested. The group members are very close to each other and they touch one another. Z, U, Fü and F are next to each other, and just behind them are $e, D, l, N and B. The group is like a large and integrated family. (D), in the very center of the group has been hugged by all of the members.


In a group session that lasted more than a hundred hours, the process of acquiring a new understanding of the group members themselves and of who they are has been analyzed through a protagonist-centered drama, group psychodramas, the sociogram and a sociometry criterion conducted via two criteria. The professional career members (doctor, social services specialist psychologist, child development specialist, Communications specialist) who spent a certain period of time together experienced some inner changes in the course of acquiring new ways of behaviors. First of all, the relationship of certain conflicts among the group members with their inner conflicts (between Z and U) has been elucidated through open sociometry. it is interesting that the individuals took part in the last rows in the individual psychodramas when we consider the sociometric preferences of the assisting egos assuming antagonistic roles
The open sociometry studies carried out in the group made it possible for the relationship among the group members to be analyzed in detail. My particular purpose of interest was not to understand the reasons why someone is angry with another person (i.e., Z with U, etc.) or why she attracts or repulses the other person, but it was to reveal what in fact impeded the group communication. it was my belief that studying what sort of a situation diadic and triadic relations create in the group could help improve some agreements and inner consciousness even in individual processes. As a matter of fact, an account of the within-group repulsion and attractions helped the Z and D to improve themselves. Z decided to contact her father. And D, following a short holiday, realized the importance of her stepbrother.
It was also considered important that the group members become angry with each other because they do not know one another very well. it is believed that one way to cope with anger or angers is to work with them since each particular group member causes the other to recollect one of her past experiences or to restrain her or them in some respects (i.e., the shared anger towards S), it was obvious that an open application of this sort of a sociodrama/sociogram study in the whole group would take the group to somewhat vivacious and intense emotional co-experiences. This is because even the administrators do not know about the individual worlds of Z and D Add to this, it is considered significant to realize whether or not their silent and quiet conducts do have to do with the group and the administrators attitudes alike.
An open sociometry and sociogram study conducted with the participation of the whole group members has given the group a new feel of dimension and status. Those members who were able to express themselves began to observe the other members that they have repulsed in a different way. Similarly, the members who have been repulsive have developed a more emphatic approach towards those members that could express themselves properly. They have also taken on things far more effortlessly. This type of group application has caused them to acquire a new understanding of themselves and of who really they are. For instance, some of the members could notice the expression “l am angry” not because it was something that made them angry but it was something that occasionally made them experience the feelings of anger.

Final Remarks

A group of ten women that completed a course of 100 hours and that consisted of professional career members (doctor, social services-specialist psychologist, child development specialist) has been carried out by two woman administrators alternately. Both administrators participated in the group in all of the group sessions.
The sociometric preferences of the group members in the group psychodramas and individual psychodramas were observed meticulously in the event that they chose their role identities. As Moreno (1963) also emphasized, it is regarded as a crucial factor that the group members act in a reserved or indifferent manner in their role declarations with respect to the sociometric orientation of the group. There have been stereotyped situations in the psychodramas realized collectively by the group members. F, Çe, U, S D and Z were not able to say “l” while certain other members seemed to have acquired a more vivid inner consciousness. It is believed that the group formations around individuals, couples and stars in the sociometry test applied within this framework presented superficial facts in defining the group.
Moreno (1963) stresses the necessity that the sociometry test should be utilized as an important means in the process of the group evaluation. in addition to this, he states that sociometry has the potential to make some changes in human relations and hinder the conflicts and anxieties found in a group. The sociometric criterion is believed to be an important factor in which the group and the administrators should take part actively for the group dynamics to be explained thoroughly and be changed if necessary. The administrators have taken on the fact that, in Moreno’s terms, evaluating not only one side of the glass but also the communication network (of the group members) on the other side of the glass is meaning-laden.
The administrators doubted, in their attempts to understand the process, that within-group dynamics could not thoroughly be interpreted only through observation and the known test results they themselves have. They thus chose an open sociometry application in order to enable the group members to participate in this process more actively. The particular objective of this application is to provide the members with some information about the group dynamics and inner consciousness.
In the sociometry application carried out within the framework of such reasons, Z and D, who have never been protagonists, have subsequently been protagonists. And the individual inner processes of l, Se and IJ have improved considerably and undergone a number of positive changes. That the process started by Z perseveres uninterruptedly depends upon the possibility that she be a protagonist in other processes. D has decided to go on a holiday and noticed the affection and presence of her stepbrother at home that she thinks that she does not belong.
It is interesting to note that the integration at the end of the session has been maintained by way of a more intense and stronger inner consciousness. This is because all of the group members have participated actively in the realization of this project and they have formed an expectation tree together with the other group members. At the end of the protagonist play, a group the members of which have become interwoven has been formed.
Moreno (1963) emphasizes that when sociograms obtained only by way of a sociometric evaluation (on the basis of repulsion and attraction) are evaluated independently of psychodramas and group dynamics formed in group psychotherapy, such sociograms do not provide any detailed information about the group that is being evaluated. Within this framework, theory and practice should be combined and. Making use of psychodrama and actionoriented group atmosphere in order to cruise safely in the boundaries of the social ocean (the group, in our case) creates an environment in which the captain (or captains) has the opportunity to deal with grasping concrete facts rather than reaching far lands. Thinking of far lands is obviously an imagination, which is not a fact. There may be a sort of isolation and insufficiency in all kinds of evaluations carried out without taking the group dynamics into consideration.
When all of these facts are taken into consideration, conceiving the other side of the glass within the boundaries of psychodramas (actions) is regarded as being of pivotal importance.