| Abstract: | Explored the applicability of laboratory findings of the effects of massed vs distributed practice to an applied situation. Using a hierarchical design, 4 types of groups were compared: massed practice, distributed practice, combination massed and distributed practice assertion-training groups, and no-treatment control groups. 66 college students participated. Assertiveness was assessed by self-report measures (e.g., College Self Expression Scale), a role-play test, and peer ratings before, immediately after, and 4 wks following assertion training. Results of analyses of covariance and preplanned comparisons indicate that although assertion training produced greater increases in assertiveness than no treatment, there were no differences between the different types of assertion-training groups. Data indicate that at least for the type of program and Ss involved in the study, scheduling of sessions can be guided by the convenience of group leaders and participants without loss of effectiveness. (7 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) |
