Sie sind auf Seite 1von 8

Psychotherapy Volume 30/Spring 1993/Number 1

ELEMENTS OF THE SOCRATIC METHOD:


I. SYSTEMATIC QUESTIONING

JAMES C. OVERHOLSER
Case Western Reserve University

The Socratic method includes three sions. The other two components will be de-
primary elements: systematic scribed in future papers.
questioning, inductive reasoning, and Originally, the Socratic form of inquiry (called
"the elenchus") followed a cross-examination for-
universal definitions. Although many mat (Seiple, 1985). Repetitive questioning was
psychotherapists allude to the Socratic used to force people to admit their ignorance
method, most refer only to the (Nelson, 1980) and thus rely on logic instead of
questioning style and few describe the pride or faith when deciding which beliefs are
process in adequate detail. The present valid (Schmid, 1983; Seeskin, 1987). Although
report describes the use of systematic die Socratic inquiry can help people become
more open minded (Schmid, 1983), it often re-
questioning in terms of its format, sulted in public humiliation (Chessick, 1982;
content, and process. Finally, an attempt Santas, 1979). As used today, the Socratic form
is made to provide an intermediate level of inquiry is viewed as a cooperative exploration
of structure so as to facilitate a shaping (Klein, 1986). Tactfully helping clients recog-
process during the interview. nize areas where they do not know the answers
can arouse a desire to learn (Robinson, 1971).
The questioning process should motivate clients
The Socratic method can be a useful technique to discover how to find the answers to their prob-
in many forms of psychotherapy (Overholser, lems (Seeskin, 1987).
1987; 1988). Aaron Beck (Beck & Emery, 1985; Systematic questioning involves the use of a
Beck, Rush, Shaw, & Emery, 1979) and Albert graded series of questions designed to facilitate
Ellis (1962) have alluded to the Socratic method independent thinking in clients. The questions in-
as part of their cognitive therapy approaches. volve the active and collaborative involvement
However, few authors have delineated the struc- of both therapist and client. Also, a progressive
tural or procedural components of the Socratic series of questions can be used to shape the cli-
method in adequate detail. This impedes the abil- ent's thought processes. The Socratic method of
ity of others to learn to apply the Socratic method questioning will be described according to its for-
in a reliable manner. The basic components of mat, content, and process of questioning.
the Socratic method are systematic questioning,
inductive reasoning, and universal definitions Question Format
(Johnson & Matross, 1975; Overholser, 1988; Questions can follow many different formats.
1991). Systematic questioning is the most widely Bloom (1956) and Sanders (1966) have described
used component and will be described in detail seven different types of questions: memory, trans-
in this paper as it is used in psychotherapy ses- lation, interpretation, application, analysis, synthe-
sis, and evaluation. An appreciation of question
I am indebted to Dalia Adams, Hilary Einhorn Katz, Kim
formats is important because the form of a question
Lehneit, and Patti Watson for comments made on an earlier can influence its effect. Clients can be led to en-
version of this manuscript. gage in different kinds of thinking by asking differ-
Correspondence regarding this article should be addressed ent types of questions. The question formats de-
to James C. Overholser, Department of Psychology, Case scribed below are arranged in order from simple to
Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH 44106. complex. However, the question formats are not
James C. Overholser

entirely distinct because complex questions include us here". The emphasis is on relating new prob-
elements from simple questions. lems to information already possessed (Sanders,
Memory questions require clients to recall or 1966). Also, interpretation questions can be used
recognize information necessary to answer the to help clients learn to interpret symbolism from
question. Examples of memory questions include inductive analogies, asking the client "What does
"When did the problem first begin?"; "When was it mean to you?"; "What can we learn from it?".
the last time it happened?"; "What did you do Application questions ask clients to apply in-
when it happened?". Thus, memory questions formation or skills to a specific problem situa-
typically focus on the client's ability to remember tion. This requires the identification, selection
specific facts and details. However, in order to and implementation of appropriate skills. Exam-
facilitate learning, facts should serve as a means ples of application questions include: "What have
to an end instead of an end in itself. This is you tried to correct this problem?"; "What else
because specific facts and details are forgotten could you do to correct this problem?"; "How
more quickly than general principles. Memorized will you go about making these changes?" Appli-
knowledge does not necessarily represent a high cation questions include a minimum of directions
level of understanding. Questions should focus in order to force clients to identify the specific
on using information instead of simply remem- steps involved. Thus, application questions pro-
bering it (Sanders, 1966). Good questions elicit vide practice in the independent use of knowl-
reasons instead of facts (Blank & White, 1986). edge and skills, encouraging clients to focus on
Also, questions seeking factual information are areas that have been discussed previously and
often threatening because the client's answer can now need to be applied. Questions are used to
be wrong (Dillon, 1990). Nonetheless, occa- bring information already possessed by clients
sional use of memory questions can facilitate the into their conscious awareness (Chisholm, 1979)
systematic questioning process by gathering ba- to help them apply the information to specific
sic information on which to build. situations (Overholser, 1991).
Translation questions require clients to change Analysis questions ask clients to solve a prob-
the information or ideas into a different but paral- lem by breaking it into its parts. Analysis ques-
lel form. Examples of translation questions in- tions focus on developing the conscious aware-
clude: "What does it mean to you?"; "How can ness of thought processes used for reaching
we make sense out of this?"; "What would your logical conclusions. Thus, analysis questions
mother say about this?". Translation questions help clients learn to follow the principles of de-
can help identify gaps in the client's understand- ductive logic when reasoning from cause to ef-
ing and ensure proper understanding. Translation fect. Analysis questions stress the fact that con-
questions can be useful with therapeutic analo- clusions must be based on adequate evidence
gies and inductive reasoning, both important as- (Sanders, 1966), thus promoting objectivity and
pects of the Socratic method (Overholser, 1991). logical thinking. The use of systematic ques-
Interpretation questions help clients discover tioning can help clients notice inadequate evi-
relationships among facts, generalizations, defi- dence or logical inconsistencies in their beliefs
nitions, values, and skills. Clients learn more (Overholser, 1991). Examples of analysis ques-
when they discover relationships on their own tions include: "What do you think is causing the
instead of simply having relationships explained problem?"; "What evidence do you have for
to them (Legrenzi, 1971; McDaniel & Schlager, this?"; "How could you tell if you are right or
1990). Interpretation questions may provide two wrong?"; Are there situations that make the prob-
ideas and ask the client to identify the relation- lem better?"; "Are there things that make it
ship between them. Examples include: "Do your worse?".
marital problems seem similar in any way to your Synthesis questions encourage clients to solve
problems at work?"; "How are these two situa- problems through the use of creative/divergent
tions similar?"; "How do they differ?". Alterna- thinking. The therapist should not have a pre-
tively, the interpretation question may provide planned answer in mind and expect the client
one idea and a relationship and ask the client to generate the same answer. Instead, questions
to identify a second idea that follows from the should suggest many different possible solutions.
evidence. For example, "I wonder if we can learn For example, "What other ways could you look
anything from your first marriage that would help at this situation?" does not limit the range of pos-

68
Systematic Questioning

sible answers. Also, clients can be helped to (Dillon, 1990; Long, Paradise, & Long, 1981)
identify all relevant sources of information so thereby reducing the interrogational aspects of
they can be synthesized into a unified whole. the interview.
Thus, synthesis questions often use inductive rea-
soning to connect diverse elements into a mean- Question Content
ingful pattern (Tomm, 1987). Finally, synthesis The content of most Socratic questions is de-
questions play an important role when using uni- signed to foster independent, rational problem-
versal definitions, such as asking a medical stu- solving in clients. Overholser (1987) has sug-
dent who remains ambivalent about his career gested that the Socratic method can be integrated
choice: "What does becoming a doctor mean to with the problem-solving approach developed by
you?". D'Zurilla & Goldfried (1971). This integration
Evaluation questions ask clients to make a uses systematic questioning to help clients simul-
value judgment according to specified standards. taneously learn and apply the stages of problem-
This decision-making process involves first iden- solving: problem definition, generation of coping
tifying appropriate standards and then determin- alternatives, decision making, and implementa-
ing how closely the idea or behavior meets these tion (see Table 1).
standards. Controversial issues often can be cri- The problem definition stage uses a series of
tiqued through questions. Examples of evaluation questions to help clients operationally define a
questions focusing on establishing standards in- specific problem area. Evaluation questions can
clude: "What do you look for in a marriage?"; be used to help identify the emotional and judg-
"What does it mean to you to be a success?". mental aspects of the problem. For example, ask-
Evaluation questions comparing the actual per- ing "What do you see the problem to be?"; "What
formance to the client's standards include: "How makes that a problem?"; "How bad does it get?"
would you rate your marriage?"; "How do you can help clients identify what conditions are un-
feel about yourself as a person?". Evaluation acceptable. Also, future oriented evaluation ques-
questions can help clients clarify and integrate tions (e.g., "What do you hope to accomplish?")
their thoughts and feelings, an important goal of can help cultivate and solidify the client's goals
the Socratic method (Haden, 1984). (Tomm, 1987). Goals should be described in spe-
In summary, the Socratic method uses a mix- cific, concrete, and realistic terms (D'Zurilla,
ture of formats throughout the systematic ques- 1986). Then, memory questions can help ensure
tioning process. A mixture of question formats an accurate and thorough assessment of the prob-
promotes conceptually integrated understanding lem area. Emotional and interpersonal problems
(Farrar, 1986). However, the Socratic method is often appear overwhelming to clients, making it
more likely to rely on analysis, synthesis, and difficult to think and act in a rational manner. By
evaluation questions because they elicit higher forcing clients to answer questions regarding the
level cognitive processes. Socratic questions typ- frequency, intensity, and duration of the problem,
ically attempt to go beyond information gathering an overwhelming problem can seem more man-
in order to emphasize the integration and synthe- ageable. Useful questions include: "How often
sis of different sources of information (Over- does the problem occur?"; "When it happens,
holser, 1991). Good Socratic questions allow a how long does it last?"; "Are there ever times
tremendous amount of latitude in the range of when the problem goes away completely?". Also,
acceptable answers that are possible. In order for analysis questions can be used to identify the ante-
clients to avoid feeling interrogated by the inves- cedents and consequences temporally sur-
tigational process, the therapist should avoid ask- rounding the problem so clients can begin to iden-
ing questions for which the therapist already tify possible causes and potential solutions.
knows the answer. Such a tendency makes for Analysis questions can help clients become more
game-playing in the session, with the client ex- objective in their description of problems as they
pected to read the mind of the therapist. When learn to distinguish facts from beliefs (Bloom,
memory questions are used, they usually are part 1956).
of a broad interviewing style. Also, it should be The generation of alternatives stage involves
noted that not all questions need to be phrased using a series of questions to help clients think
as questions. Many questions can be rephrased of new and creative ways of coping with the iden-
as reflections, clarifications, or direct statements tified problem. Synthesis questions are used to

69
James C. Overholser

TABLE 1. Question Formats as Used with Different Problem-solving Content

Question Format
Question Content Memory Application Analysis Synthesis Evaluation

Problem definition
Generate alternatives
Decision-making
Verification
Planning
Appraisal

Note. + indicates question format plays a minor role with that content
+ + indicates question format plays a moderate role with that content
+ + + indicates question format plays a major role with that content

encourage divergent thinking and to help clients knowledge, they can make good decisions if
formulate a plan of action (Bloom, 1956). Criti- questioned properly (Seeskin, 1987). Useful
cal thinking is postponed until a later stage in questions at this stage include: "What do you
order to help clients overcome critical tendencies think needs to be done?"; "How well do you
that may limit perceivable options. Application think it will work?"; "What could you gain by
questions can be used to help clients learn about behaving that way?"; "What could you lose?";
the management of a specific problem area. Use- "What would be the worst thing that could hap-
ful questions include: "Have you ever noticed a pen?"; "How likely is it that would happen?".
problem like this before?"; "How did you deal Finally, the implementation stage involves
with it then?"; "Would the same solution work asking clients to implement the chosen alterna-
again?"; "Any other ideas of what might help?". tive and appraise its effects. The first aspect of
the goal at this stage is to increase the quantity the implementation stage involves using applica-
and variety of options (D'Zurilla, 1986), assum- tion questions to help clients plan the specific
ing quality will follow. The use of open-ended course of action that was selected in the decision-
questions helps clients generate many useful cop- making stage. Application questions are designed
ing options not limited by the therapist's frame to put a plan of action into effect (Bloom, 1956).
of reference. Unexpected answers may be very Socratic questions may include implied directions
appropriate and extremely useful (Blank & (Garner, 1978), designed to promote a change of
White, 1986). behavior. Questions facilitating the implementa-
In the decision-making stage, questions are tion of the chosen strategy include: "So, what do
used to help clients identify the advantages and you plan to do?"; "Have you thought about when
disadvantages of each coping option. Analysis and where you will do it?"; "How well do you
questions are used to promote critical thinking so think it will go?"; "Is there anything we can do
clients can evaluate the probable short-term and to improve your chances of doing well?".
long-term consequences of each alternative in a After clients have implemented the response,
systematic manner. Evaluation questions are evaluation and analysis questions can be used to
used to examine each option in terms of the sub- appraise the outcome and help clients learn from
jective value of its most likely outcome. Finally, their successes and failures. Clients can identify
application questions are used to estimate the approaches that are either likely or unlikely to be
amount of time, energy, and emotions required successful should the problem recur. Questions
to implement the option. By examining the po- designed to appraise the strategy after it has been
tential risks and benefits of each option, clients implemented include: "Are you satisfied with
should be able to identify the best coping alterna- how things turned out?"; "Why do you think
tive or combination of alternatives. This process things went like they did?"; "What can we learn
can help clients learn how to maximize the bene- from this experience?"; "What do you wish you
fits and minimize the costs in their decision mak- had done differently?"; "Next time the problem
ing. Thus, although clients may lack certain occurs, how will you deal with it?".

70
Systematic Questioning

In summary, a series of questions can be used It is important to use an intermediate level of


to guide the problem-solving process. The So- structure when formulating the leading question.
cratic method emphasizes a self-control approach Either too much or too little structure will prove
(Chessick, 1982). Thus, the therapist serves as a ineffective. The therapist should provide structure
guide, facilitating a self-discovery process. The only to the extent necessary because if questions
client is seen as the expert, knowing the problem- are overly directive, clients may begin to pas-
situation first-hand. In this way, two goals are sively wait for the therapist to lead the session
accomplished simultaneously: the specific prob- (Long, Paradise, & Long, 1981). Skillful ques-
lem is solved and the client begins to learn the tions force the client to think instead of simply
problem-solving process (Sklare, Portes, & answer. Patience is required of both parties in
Splete, 1985). It is important for the therapist to order to persist with a line of questioning when
place the responsibility on clients to solve their the answer does not seem readily apparent (Over-
own problems (Long, Paradise, & Long, 1981). holser, 1992).
Both the decision and responsibility for action The explication occurs when the client has not
rest with clients because only they will experi- understood the leading question. It can be im-
ence the consequences of their behavior. portant to make all assumptions explicit in order
to test them (Haden, 1984). For example, clients
Questioning Process are likely to respond "I don't know" if asked
"What else could you have done?". The ques-
The effective use of systematic questioning re- tioning process must not stop at this point, but
quires an awareness of the process involved (Ha- the therapist must be prepared to re-evaluate the
den, 1984). Because the Socratic method uses a implications of the original leading question. For
series of questions, a temporal sequence devel- example, asking "Could you have done anything
ops. The therapist alternates among several differ- else?" forces the client to evaluate the basic as-
ent interviewing styles as the session pro- sumption underlying the leading question. The
gresses. Five elements of the questioning process explication openly asks the assumption that had
have been identified: the leading question, the been implied in the leading question. However,
explication, the defense, a sequential progression, it is important that the explication not occur very
and the use of short sequences (see the Appendix often because it implies the therapist has mis-
for a detailed example). judged the client's level of understanding and
The leading question contains an implied as- disrupts the therapeutic relationship (Kahn &
sumption, often serving as a spotlight to focus Cannell, 1957). Clients may feel threatened if
the client's attention onto a specific area. How- repeatedly unable to follow the line of ques-
ever, the phrasing of the question should not push tioning (Kahn & Cannell, 1957). Thus, the thera-
clients toward one response over another (Bern- pist should use the client's responses to adjust
stein & Bernstein, 1985; Kahn & Cannell, 1957). the questioning process to the client's abilities
For example, it may be useful to ask "Do you (Farrar, 1986).
think talking about this with your spouse would The defense follows an explication, asking cli-
help the two of you learn to deal with this prob- ents to defend their view. A simplification se-
lem, or would it just stir up more of an argu- quence can be used to reformulate the original
ment?". This kind of question provides adequate question at a more basic level (Blank & White,
structure without unnecessarily biasing the cli- 1986). Repeating or rephrasing the original ques-
ent's response. Instead of requesting factual in- tion, in light of the previous explication, can en-
formation, the leading question may ask clients courage clients to go beyond the "I don't know"
to think about certain issues and express their response. The defense forces clients to critique
views. Evaluation questions can help clients ex- their logic and helps promote insight into the rea-
press their views and defend or abandon these soning they used to answer the question. Some-
views when probed (Seeskin, 1987). Socratic times asking "Why do you think so?" can help
questions frequently offer two alternatives so as clarify their assumptions (Ennis, 1982). Al-
to minimize using excessively biased questions though "Why" questions may increase the cli-
(Santas, 1979). For example, it can be useful to ent's defensiveness when seeking justification or
ask "Is that a good sign or a bad sign?" to direct explanation of one's behavior (Long, Paradise, &
clients onto issues of critical evaluation. Long, 1981), "Why" questions can be effective if

71
James C. Overholser

they help the client to reason through a problem one question should be asked at a time, letting
to its solution (Sanders, 1966). The Socratic clients tell their own story (Johnson, 1981).
method attempts to help clients evaluate their rea-
soning (Chessick, 1982). Although the tenacious Conclusions
questioning can be useful in forcing clients to
pursue a persistent line of thought, clients may Systematic questioning involves a complex in-
feel threatened or interrogated. The therapist terplay of question format, content, and process
must help the client think through the issues with- issues. The format of Socratic questions empha-
out appearing to doubt or distrust the client. So- sizes higher level cognitive processes. Instead of
cratic questions can ask "What reason do you asking clients to remember facts and details, So-
have for believing this?" without expressing cratic questions are more likely to encourage the
doubts in the client's honesty or intelligence analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of different
(Chisholm, 1979). sources of information. The content of Socratic
A sequential progression occurs when a second questions focuses on developing independent
leading question is used to carry the discussion problem-solving skills in the client. The process
closer to the intended goal. Insight comes of systematic questioning emphasizes a collab-
through a slow and methodological progression orative interaction between therapist and client
(Nelson, 1980). A shaping process is used to per- (Overholser, 1992).
sistently refine the client's understanding, ap- The Socratic method is not without its limita-
preciation, and integration of complex issues tions. Systematic questioning should not be used
while avoiding questions that are too difficult for when the client is unlikely to benefit from a cog-
the client to comprehend (Long, Paradise, & nitive exploratory process. Young children are
Long, 1981). In some ways, the process is simi- too concrete to appreciate the complexities of the
lar to helping a child assemble a puzzle. If you Socratic method. Likewise, patients suffering
hand the child a piece but the child cannot find from psychosis, dementia or other organic brain
the proper place, you do not keep handing the syndromes may lack the abstract abilities to bene-
child the same piece. Instead, you can give the fit. Finally, because of the emphasis on verbal
child a few other pieces. As the picture starts to interactions, the Socratic method may be ineffec-
develop, the child can easily place the original tive with hearing impaired individuals and clients
difficult piece. Thus, early questions should be whose primary language is different from that of
used to lay the foundation for more complex the therapist. Many complications can arise when
questions. For example: "How do you think your interviewing clients from a different cultural
parents will react?"; "Why do you think that background (Fletcher, 1980). Thus, systematic
would happen?"; "If you are right, what will you questioning should be used with caution.
do next?"; "So, what does this tell you about Socratic questioning can be used to facilitate
handling this type of problem?". self-initiated discovery, helping clients realize
Finally, systematic questioning should be used the answers they already possess (Navia, 1985).
in short sequences, alternating between Socratic Self-discovery is important because explicit in-
and non-Socratic dialogue. Despite the advan- structions are often counterproductive (Claiborn
tages of the systematic questioning process, it & Dixon, 1982). The Socratic method can pro-
should not be overused. Questions can limit mote autonomy (Overholser, 1987) and reduce
spontaneity by restricting the client's communi- resistance (Overholser, 1991). The questioning
cation to responses to specific questions (Engel process can be used to help clients identify and
& Morgan, 1973). The overuse of questions will develop skills they lack (Blank & White, 1986).
limit the client's self-exploration (Long, Para- Clients can learn to identify and self-correct il-
dise, & Long, 1981). The Socratic style often logical reasoning (Seeskin, 1987) and learn to
needs to be suspended or discontinued in order find answers independently.
to explain and discuss the issues from a non-
Socratic style. This can help reduce the interroga- Appendix: Socratic Questioning
tional nature of an interview that relies solely on Process Example
persistent questioning. Frequent use of comments
and discussion can protect the therapeutic rela- Patient: "I feel like such a failure when I
tionship (Blank & White, 1986). Finally, only make even small mistakes."

72
Systematic Questioning

Therapist: "What does failure mean to you?" T: What if you were the instructor, how would
P: If I make mistakes, it means I can't do as you deal with students?
well as everyone expects of me; I'm incom- P: I think I'd probably criticize their work.
petent and worthless. T: Which style would you want to have?
T: Making mistakes means you're incompetent P: The one that praises their work.
and worthless? T: Why that one?
P: Yes. If I make mistakes, I'm not doing a P: It has a positive effect on the students; it's
good job. I need to feel I can handle my job more constructive, helping them to learn
without needing other people to always help and enjoy learning.
me out. T: What if you had a few "craft-clods" in class,
T: What happens when you react like that? people who have no artistic abilities whatso-
P: It tells me that I need to push myself if I ever. How would you deal with them?
ever hope to get any better. P: I would tell them how good they've done
T: What would happen if instead of criticizing but point out ways they can improve their
your shortcomings, you praised the progress work.
you have made? T: So, even with people who don't do very
P: I'd stop trying to improve myself. I'd settle well, you could still find some good things
for where I'm at and would get fat and lazy. to say about their work?
I have so many things I need to work on, I P: Well, I'd try. I'd try to find some things I
need to keep pushing myself. liked so I could give them some positive
T: Let's look at this from a different angle. Say feedback along with the suggestions on how
you were taking one of your craft classes. to do a better job.
Would praise or criticism make you do T: Why do you sugar-coat it?
better? P: I don't know.
P: I'd like hearing the praise but I wouldn't T: What happens if you don't sugar-coat it?
necessarily believe it. P: I guess if I get too critical, they won't like
T: What determines whether or not you believe me.
the praise? T: How would it affect their mood?
P: If I hear it too often I won't believe it. P: They'd be angry at me and depressed with
T: What if the instructor didn't praise every- themselves.
thing you did, but every so often you did T: How would it affect their motivation in
something that really worked out well and class.
he said you did a great job, it looked won- P: I think they would enjoy it less and probably
derful. How would you react? not try as hard.
P: I'd like hearing the praise. It would make T: But if you praise someone for doing a good
me feel good about myself and what I job even though it's not perfect, won't they
could do. settle for a poor performance?
T: Would you stop trying to improve yourself? P: No, I think it helps people enjoy what
P: No, I think it would help me enjoy learn- they're doing and work harder at it.
ing more. T: Do these same things happen when you are
T: What if you took a different class with a critical or supportive of yourself?
different instructor, one who could always P: Yes, I guess so.
find something to criticize? T: So, what does this tell us about criticizing
P: I'd hate it. I might learn some things, but I yourself?
wouldn't like the class. P: I guess if I focus on the positive things in
T: What if the instructor said you made many myself, it might be more constructive with-
mistakes and need to work harder to even out causing me to settle for where I'm at?
get up to average level. Would you be likely T: So, how can we get you to be the good
to agree? instructor toward yourself?
P: No, I know I can at least do average.
T: What would you think of the instructor? References
P: I'd hate him. I'd wonder if I could ever BECK, A. T. & EMERY, G. (1985). Anxiety disorders and
make him happy. phobias: A cognitive perspective. New York: Basic.

73
James C. Overholser

BECK, A. T., RUSH, A. J., SHAW, B. & EMERY, G. (1979). KAHN, R. & CANNELL, C. (1957). The dynamics of inter-
Cognitive therapy of depression. New York: Guilford. viewing: Theory, technique, and cases. New York: John
BERNSTEIN, L. & BERNSTEIN, R. (1985). Interviewing: A Wiley.
guide for health professionals (4th ed.). Norwalk, CT: Ap- KLEIN, S. (1986). Socratic dialogue in the Meno. Southern
pleton-Century-Crofts. Journal of Philosophy, 24, 351-363.
BLANK, M. & WHITE, S. (1986). Questions: A powerful but LEGRENZI, P. (1971). Discovery as a means to understanding.
misused form of classroom exchange. Topics in Language Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 23, 417-
Disorders, 6, 1-12. 422.
BLOOM, B. (19S6). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The LONG, L., PARADISE, L. & LONG, T. (1981). Questioning:
classification of educational goals. New York: Longmans, Skillsfor the helping process. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Green, & Co. MCDANIEL, M. & SCHLAGER, M. (1990). Discovery learning
CHESSICK, R. (1982). Socrates: First psychotherapist. Ameri- and transfer of problem-solving skills. Cognition and In-
can Journal of Psychoanalysis, 42, 71-83. struction, 7, 129-159.
CMSHOLM, R. (1979). Socratic method and the theory of NAVIA, L. (1985). Socrates: The man and his philosophy.
knowledge. Ratio, 21, 97-108. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
CLABORN, C. & DIXON, D. (1982). The acquisition of con- IfeLSON, L. (1980). The Socratic method. Thinking, 2,34-38.
ceptual skills: An exploratory study. Counselor Education OVERHOLSER, J. C. (1987). Facilitating autonomy in passive-
and Supervision, 21, 274-281. dependent persons: An integrative model. Journal of Con-
DILLON, J. T. (1990). The practice of questioning. New temporary Psychotherapy, 17, 250-269.
York: Routledge. OVBRHOLSER, 1. C. (1988). Clinical utility of the Socratic
D'ZURIHA, T. (1986). Problem-solving therapy: A social method. In C. Stout (Ed.), Annals of clinical research
competence approach to clinical intervention. New York: (pp. 1-7). Des Piaines, IL: Forest Institute.
Springer. OVERHOLSER, I. C. (1991). The Socratic method as a tech-
D'ZURILLA, T. & GOLDFRIED, M. (1971). Problem solving nique in psychotherapy supervision. Professional Psychol-
and behavior modification. Journal of Abnormal Psychol- ogy: Research and Practice, 22, 68-74.
ogy, 78, 107-126. OVERHOLSER, J. C. (1992). Socrates in the classroom. College
ELLIS, A. (1962). Reason and emotion in psychotherapy. Sec- Teaching, 40, 14-19.
aucus, NJ: Citadel. ROBINSON, R. (1971). Elenchus. In G. Vlastos (Ed.), The
ENOEL, G. & MORGAN, W. (1973). Interviewing the patient. philosophy of Socrates: A collection of critical essays (pp.
Philadelphia: Saunders. 78-93). Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
ENNIS, R. (1982). Identifying implicit assumptions. Synthese, SANDERS, N. (1966). Classroom questions: What kinds?. NY:
51, 61-86. Harper & Row.
FARRAR, M. (1986). Teacher questions: The complexity of SANTAS, G. (1979). Socrates: Philosophy in Plato's early
the cognitively simple. Instructional Science, 15, 89-107. dialogues. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
FLETCHER, C. (1980). Listening and talking to patients: IV. SCHMID, W. T. (1983). Socratic moderation and self-knowl-
Some special problems. British Medical Journal, 2S1, edge. Journal of the History of Philosophy, 21, 339-348.
1056-1057. SEESKJN, K. (1987). Dialogue and discovery: A study in So-
GARNER, R. (1978). Chisholm on Socratic interrogation. Phi- cratic method. Albany: SUNY Press.
losophia, 7, 441-460. SEVLE, G. (1985). The Socratic method of inquiry. Dialogue,
HADEN, J. (1984). Socratic ignorance. In E. Kelly (Ed.), New M, 16-22.
essays on Socrates (pp. 17-28). Lanham, MD: University SKLAKE, G., PORTES, P. & SPLETE, H. (1985). Developing
Press of America. questioning effectiveness in counseling. Counselor Educa-
JOHNSON, W. R. (1981). Basic interviewing skills. In C. E. tion and Supervision, 25, 12-20.
Walker (Ed.), Clinical practice of psychology (pp. 83- TOMM, K. (1987). Interventive interviewing: Part II. Reflex-
128). New York: Pergamon. ive questioning as a means to enable self-healing. Family
JOHNSON, D. & MATROSS, R. (1975). Attitude modification Process, 26, 167-183.
methods. In F. Kanfer and A. Goldstein (Eds.), Helping
people change: A textbook of methods (pp. 51-88). New
York: Pergamon.

74

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen