All of the instructors in the data were authoritative Enneagram instructors in the Story Tradition. New Enneagram Interval training Programs utilized five pri form of panels, (2) didactic studying, (3) reflection training, and (4) experiential mining. Enneagram Intensive Courses instructors used an outline called The latest Enneagram Intensive®: Partnering Psychological Lifestyle and Spirit.
The three Introductory training courses incorporated pri reading modalities. The fresh Berkeley direction provided everyday Enneagram particular panels and you may didactic understanding. The fresh Minnesota path put all of no. 1 training strategies. The newest Palo Alto path put Enneagram type panels, didactic discovering, and you will experiential mining like led visualization.
Forms were composed of the a report secretary and you will sent to a beneficial Cook-Greuter-certified SCT scorer (Hy and you may Loevinger 1996) thru article send. Password quantity were used therefore the rater are blind so you’re able to the nature of the decide to try, this new times of your own try, additionally the studies class particular. The fresh scorer then followed the training by Susan Prepare-Greuter, utilising the original Loevinger manual, apart from stems outside the tips guide (Cook-Greuter 1999). Obtained responses was indeed delivered back on boffins during the a stand out give layer which had been after that utilized for investigation study. To be certain precision of rating having causes and this members ran right up or off two or more degree, a sample of these studies was also scored from the Cook-Greuter by herself.
An analysis of variance (ANOVA) confirmed that there were no pre-existing ego development differences at baseline among the participants between the sites, F(8, 9) = 0.38, p = .93. The pretest and posttest ego development scores were significantly correlated (r = .48, p < .001), whereby participants with higher pre-training scores also had higher post-training scores.
Since there are far more over the age of more youthful grownups contained in this sample, a diagnosis is used to evaluate the relationship between age group and degree feeling. As a whole, forty participants (33%, n = ) increased one or more stages pursuing the knowledge. Proportionally, a whole lot more 50–59 season olds (45%, n = ) versus most other age range enhanced a minumum of one level just after the education (20%, letter = 1/5, significantly less than 31; 0%, letter = 0/step three, 30–39 season olds; 25%, n = 7/twenty eight, 40–44 seasons olds; and you can 24%, n = 8/33, 60+ year olds). To look at whether or not so it pattern is actually mathematically high, a good ? dos shot of liberty was computed by the contrasting many years category and you will if or not an associate experienced pride phase development of you to or more amounts adopting the input (or perhaps not).
An analysis was also presented to test the partnership between fellow member gender and you will knowledge perception. Even in the event proportionally, so much more ladies (36%, letter = ) than people (18%, n = 4/22) cutting-edge one or more amount following the training, a ? 2 try out-of independence revealed zero relationship anywhere between gender and pride invention.
Two repeated-measures ANOVAs were conducted to test for within-subject ego development changes across the training sites. The first model examined the interaction term of ego development by training site type as a dichotomous variable (intensive site vs. introductory site); the model was not significant at the p < .05 level, F(1,120) = 1.32, p = .25. The second model examined the interaction term of ego development by individual training site; the model was also not significant at the p < .05 level, F(7, 114) = 1.40, p = .21.
Paired sample t tests were conducted to examine whether there were significant changes in ego development scores before compared to after the Enneagram training interventions at each site. Data revealed that the Asheville 2005 participant group showed a significant increase in ego development scores following https://datingranking.net/dominicancupid-review/ the intervention, t(22) = ? 3.36, p < .01. Table 4 sument scores and the paired t test results.