Research Note from Mark Macgowan: Group Engagement Measure (GEM)

The Group Engagement Measure (GEM) was developed to assess engagement of individual group members in treatment groups. The original GEM consists of 37 items in seven dimensions: attendance, contributing, relating (to worker and with members), contracting, and working (on own problems, on others' problems). Several studies involving clinical and non-clinical samples have supported the measure’s reliability (internal consistency, test-retest, and interrater), validity (construct, concurrent, and predictive), and standard error of measurement, with favorable results (Macgowan, 1997, 2000; Macgowan & Levenson, 2003). To test the dimensionality of the measure, the factor structure was tested using confirmatory factor analysis involving clinical and non-clinical groups (Macgowan & Newman, 2005). The study confirmed the dimensionality of the original 7-factor, 37-item GEM for clinical groups. Two shorter versions were produced: A 7-factor, 27-item version for clinical groups, and a 5-factor, 21-item version suitable for clinical or non-clinical groups.

The GEM was conceived to be leader-scored. However, previous studies included validation measures completed by both members and leaders, suggesting minimal rating bias. In addition, member and leader ratings were correlated in previous research (Levenson & Macgowan, 2004; Macgowan, 1997).

Several publications offer ideas for using the measure in clinical practice. The first two were evidence-based approaches to increasing engagement in groups (Macgowan, 2003, 2006b). The second study was an application of the measure for women in a psychoeducational parenting skills group for substance abuse treatment (Plasse, 2000).

An unpublished pilot test of the GEM’s reliability was done by Macgowan involving a sample of adolescents (N = 71) from a larger study that compared Westchester Model Student Assistance Program group counseling (10 session, standardized format) with assessment/referral-only. An independent rater listened to audio tapes of sessions and completed the GEM on each adolescent at early (3rd or 4th session) and late (7th or 8th session) group stages. The coefficient alphas were .94 and .96 for the early and later group sessions, with Standard Error of Measurements of 5.22 and 5.06, respectively. Test-retest reliability was .68, p < .001. Thus, preliminary data suggest that the GEM has excellent internal consistency, a low SEM, and good stability with this sample of adolescents. The GEM has also been used in research on AOD use among Hispanics (Prado, Pantin, Schwartz, Lupei, & Szapocznik, 2005; Tapia, Schwartz, Prado, Lopez, & Pantin, 2006). A general overview of the GEM, with a focus on how it relates to AOD groups, has also been published (Macgowan, 2006a). For more information on the Group Engagement Measure, contact the author at Macgowan@fiu.edu.

Also, some readers may be interested in Mark Macgowans's new book, A Guide to Evidence Based Group Work published in January, 2008 by Oxford University Press. For easy on-line purchase, click this link!


References

Levenson, J. S., & Macgowan, M. J. (2004). Engagement, denial and treatment progress among sex offenders in group therapy. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 16(1), 49-63.

Macgowan, M. J. (1997). A measure of engagement for social group work: The Groupwork Engagement Measure (GEM). Journal of Social Service Research, 23(2), 17-37.

Macgowan, M. J. (2000). Evaluation of a measure of engagement for group work. Research on Social Work Practice, 10(3), 348-361.

Macgowan, M. J. (2003). Increasing engagement in groups: A measurement based approach. Social Work with Groups, 26(1), 5-28.

Macgowan, M. J. (2006a). The Group Engagement Measure: A review of its conceptual and empirical properties. Journal of Groups in Addiction and Recovery, 1(2), 33-52.

Macgowan, M. J. (2006b). Measuring and increasing engagement in substance abuse treatment groups: Advancing evidence-based group work. Journal of Groups in Addiction and Recovery, 1(2), 53-67.

Macgowan, M. J., & Levenson, J. S. (2003). Psychometrics of the Group Engagement Measure with male sex offenders. Small Group Research, 34(2), 155-169.

Macgowan, M. J., & Newman, F. L. (2005). The factor structure of the Group Engagement Measure. Social Work Research, 29(2), 107-118.

Plasse, B. R. (2000). Components of engagement: Women in a psychoeducational parenting skills group in substance abuse treatment. Social Work with Groups, 22(4), 33-50.

Prado, G., Pantin, H., Schwartz, S. J., Lupei, N. S., & Szapocznik, J. (2005). Predictors of Engagement and Retention into a Parent-Centered, Ecodevelopmental HIV Preventive Intervention for Hispanic Adolescents and their Families. Journal of Pediatric Psychology.

Tapia, M. I., Schwartz, S. J., Prado, G., Lopez, B., & Pantin, H. (2006). Parent-Centered Intervention: A Practical Approach for Preventing Drug Abuse in Hispanic Adolescents. Research on Social Work Practice, 16(2), 146-165.