Group training of social competences (Hinsch, Pfingsten)

1. Introduction

Version followed: Hinsch & Pfingsten's standard adult GSK, 7 sessions, as set out in the manual chapter of the 5th edition (2007; e-book 2012, manual pp. 128–137, publisher extract) and the 6th edition (2015: foreword, contents and Chapters 1–2). The 7th edition (2023) keeps the same seven-session contents according to its table of contents, but its manual text is not drawn on [uncertain: any 2023 wording changes]. Worksheet numbers (AB = Arbeitsblatt) follow the 2007/2012 manual and can differ between editions.

Source keys used below: Manual = Hinsch & Pfingsten manual extract (2012 e-book, pp. 128–137); HP-2015 = 6th-edition sample and contents; HP-2023 = 7th-edition sample and contents; GSK-web = the authors' site gsk-training.de (Konzept, Varianten, Trainer-Seminar pages); Thomalla = GSKnast prison adaptation (2008), which lists what it took unchanged from the original; Maier = description of the standard curriculum plus a youth-detention adaptation (2016); Würzburg = University of Würzburg seminar handout on the GSK; GSK-KJ = Jürgens & Lübben, child/adolescent version (2021 sample).

The Gruppentraining sozialer Kompetenzen (GSK; Group Training of Social Competences) is a manualised cognitive-behavioural group programme developed by Rüdiger Hinsch and Ulrich Pfingsten (1st edition 1983). It grew out of assertiveness and social-skills training but deliberately moved its focus from assertiveness alone to social competences in the plural. It is used in outpatient and inpatient psychotherapy, psychiatry, addiction and forensic settings, prisons, schools and leadership training [source: HP-2015 foreword; GSK-web].

Working definition: social competence is having and using cognitive, emotional and motor behaviours that, in particular social situations, lead to a favourable long-term balance of positive and negative consequences for the person acting [source: HP-2015 Ch. 1; HP-2023 sample; Würzburg].

How change happens: the explanatory model (Erklärungsmodell) describes a chain. A situation (with personal goals and social, spatial and time conditions) is processed cognitively (perception, interpretation, anticipation, plus background beliefs). This processing produces emotion and then motor behaviour (approach or avoidance, skills, social rules). The behaviour brings consequences (immediate feedback, objective outcomes, how the person evaluates them), and the whole sequence is stored and shapes the next similar situation. Problems can arise at any link: situational overload, unhelpful cognitions, emotional problems, unskilled motor behaviour, or unfavourable consequences and self-evaluation. GSK works on all levels at once. Participants learn to tell situation types apart, to notice and change self-verbalisations, to calm themselves with active relaxation, and to rehearse broad behavioural strategies in role play with video feedback. They then transfer these to everyday life through in-vivo homework [source: HP-2015 Ch. 2; Würzburg; GSK-web].

2. Framework

Format [source: Manual; GSK-web]

• 7 sessions of about 2.5–3 hours, ideally weekly with no long breaks, so that in-vivo homework can happen between sessions. The authors advise against compact formats such as a weekend, because these leave no time to apply skills between sessions.
• Group: about 8–12 participants with two trainers (Manual); "about 10" on GSK-web; 4–5 participants with one trainer. The 7-session standard is not binding. Variants have used 20 one-hour sessions, and psychiatric units almost always run one-hour sessions. Changes usually lengthen the programme by repeating role plays with video feedback or by adding situation types.
• Setting: with two trainers, two rooms, one of them a role-play room of about 15 m²; a flipchart or board; two cameras with playback, a remote control being helpful; a silent "projective video film" of 5–10 minutes; worksheets [source: Manual].
• Practitioner training: the authors run a 1.5-day GSK trainer seminar. Its aims include running and adapting the programme and reducing the trainer's own fear of video role plays. Familiarity with the book is the prerequisite [source: GSK-web Trainer-Seminar].

Standard session flow: agenda → warm-up → homework review (from session 2) → input on the model or on the cognitive, emotional or motor component → exercises and role plays with video feedback → relaxation → homework set → session rating sheet (Stundenbogen) [source: Würzburg; Manual].

Phases and sessions (the grouping into phases is [synthesis]; session contents [source: Manual; Maier; HP-2015/HP-2023 contents])

Criteria for moving on: the manual is time-structured; sessions follow in a fixed order, and no mastery criteria for moving on are given in the sources [uncertain]. Practical guide [synthesis]: before moving from Type R to B, each participant should have completed at least one Type R role play, including the repeat, in which they can name their own competent behaviours. If several participants cannot yet do this, add a session repeating role plays with video feedback, which is the extension the authors themselves describe [source: Manual]. Optional post-tests at the end of session 7 serve as the outcome check [source: Manual; HP-2015 Ch. 7].

The three situation types organise the whole programme [source: HP-2015 Ch. 4.2.2; Würzburg; GSK-KJ; book p. 105ff as quoted by soft-skills.com]:

• R – Recht durchsetzen (asserting rights): the demand is backed by law, rules or convention (e.g. returning faulty goods). Competence = effectiveness; the other person's feelings are secondary.
• B – Beziehungen (relationships): demands on partners, friends or colleagues without any entitlement. The overriding goal is to keep or improve the relationship, so the aim is agreement, not winning or compromise.
• S – Um Sympathie werben (winning sympathy): no entitlement; you want the other person to waive their right or to grant a favour, or you want to build quick goodwill (e.g. making contact). Success depends on the other person liking you.

3. Guiding principles

[source: HP-2015 foreword and Ch. 1–2; Manual; GSK-web; Würzburg, unless marked]

• Social competences are plural and situation-specific. Diagnose and train by situation type, not as a global trait; a participant may be competent in R and not in B.
• Long-term balance of consequences is the yardstick. Judge a response by its long-term costs and benefits, not by whether it feels comfortable right now.
• Assertive is not aggressive. Keep the two distinct throughout and keep naming the difference; do not reward aggressive "successes".
• Work on several levels at once. Every session touches cognition (model, discrimination, self-verbalisations), emotion (relaxation, feelings) and behaviour (role play).
• Teach broad coping strategies, not narrow scripts. Give per-type strategies that can be adapted, which is what makes transfer to new situations possible.
• Competence is learnable like any skill; practice is central. Keep explanation short and spend the time on doing: role play first, then real life.
• Use the group as exposure. Performing in front of others is itself part of the treatment, so every participant role-plays.
• Largely standardised, flexibly adapted. Keep the sequence and core elements; adapt situations, worksheets, session length and number to the client group.
• Build on resources. Training both reduces problems and strengthens existing competences; feedback looks for what went well.
• Positive, behaviour-specific feedback; criticism only as an intention. Participants reinforce each other. Improvement is phrased by the actor as a resolution, e.g. "Beim nächsten Mal möchte ich versuchen, …" [source: GSK-web Konzept].
• The trainer plays the counterpart in role plays. This lets you set the difficulty and protect the participant from failing [source: GSK-web; Kramer adaptation]. The Würzburg seminar handout instead uses peer pairs in groups of four [uncertain: which applies in which small-group format].
• Every role play is repeated at least once. The second run consolidates the improved version [source: GSK-web].
• Self-reinforcement is trained explicitly. Participants learn to praise their own competent behaviour precisely, through the self-praise exercise and video self-feedback [source: Manual; Thomalla].
• Relaxation is an active coping skill, not a rest period. Shorten it across sessions so it becomes usable in real situations [source: Manual].
• Transfer through spaced in-vivo homework. Hold sessions weekly and review homework first, every time.
• It is a training, not a self-experience or sensitivity group. Say this at the start to set expectations [source: Manual, introductory event].
• Transparency and voluntariness. Participants sign up voluntarily. Explain what happens to video recordings; the manual recommends recording over each tape with the next recording [source: Manual].
• Realistic expectations. Present outcome data, but warn against expecting a personality change [source: Manual].
• Model modestly. Model videos or model role plays should not show exaggerated assertiveness [source: Manual].

4. Intervention inventory

The GSK's worksheets, situation lists, relaxation texts and questionnaires are copyrighted and come with the book (as PDF or editable Word files). They are named here, not reproduced, and all steps and wording below are paraphrased. The manual's detailed role-play, film and relaxation chapters (6.1–6.3 in the 2015/2023 editions) are not drawn on, so fine-grained steps marked [synthesis] combine the manual's session plan, the authors' website and adaptations that state what they took over from the original.

4.1 Introductory event (Einführungsveranstaltung)

• Purpose / when: before session 1, to inform people, build motivation and correct expectations, take voluntary sign-ups and collect pre-tests [source: Manual].
• Steps: (1) Present the three problem areas: asserting justified demands; representing your needs with partners, friends and acquaintances; winning others' sympathy, e.g. when making contact. (2) Give the basic assumptions: assertive behaviour is learned like any skill, so practice comes first, first in role play and then in real life as homework. Say clearly that this is not a self-experience or sensitivity group. (3) Outline the contents: active relaxation, the difference between aggressive and assertive behaviour, and self-verbalisations; go into more detail where participants show interest. (4) Present outcome data, e.g. a graph for "being able to make demands", and warn against unrealistic expectations. The follow-up self-help book (Hinsch & Wittmann) may be recommended. (5) Optionally show a model role-play video that is not overly assertive, and explain where it comes from. (6) Organisation: voluntary sign-up list, dates, session length, any fees. (7) Pre-tests: allow time, because the slowest participant needs about twice as long as the fastest [source: Manual].
• Example language (illustrative): "This group is a training, like learning to drive: we explain a little, then practise a lot, first here, then in your week."
• Watch for: people expecting to explore their past or to receive therapy for a single acute crisis; very high anxiety about cameras (address it here; see 5). Working: people sign up knowing what will happen, including the video.

4.2 Agenda and warm-up

• Purpose / when: opening of every session, to lower arousal and to model the group's tone [source: Manual; Würzburg].
• Steps: write the agenda on the board; run a brief warm-up. The manual names warm-up but the specific games were not found [uncertain]. Adaptations recommend warm-ups that are non-exposing, non-competitive and non-provocative, with the trainers joining in [source: Kramer adaptation].
• Example language (illustrative): "Today: homework round, the model on the board, then role plays, and we finish with relaxation."
• Watch for: warm-ups that demand performance from very anxious members too early.

4.3 Explanatory model (Erklärungsmodell), session 1

• Purpose / when: the core of session 1. Gives a shared, de-stigmatising account of why social situations go wrong and of what the training changes. The manual says the trainers must present it convincingly [source: Manual].
• Steps: (1) Draw the chain on the board: situation → cognitive processing (perception, interpretation, expectations) → feelings → behaviour → consequences → effect on the next similar situation. (2) Contrast an unassertive sequence (negative self-talk → anxiety → avoidance → short-term relief, long-term loss) with an assertive one (realistic or encouraging self-talk → manageable tension → approach → long-term gain) [source: Würzburg simplified model; HP-2015 Ch. 2]. (3) Small groups apply the model to an example or to their own situation using AB 1 [source: Manual]. (4) Plenary: collect where in the chain each person usually gets stuck. (5) Link each GSK element to a link in the chain [synthesis].
• Example language (illustrative): "Notice the arrow from the situation goes through your head first. What you tell yourself shapes how anxious you feel, and that shapes what you do."
• Watch for: participants who conclude that "the other person" alone causes their feelings (GSK-KJ makes separating feelings from self-verbalisations an explicit exercise). Working: participants can place their own example in the chain. Adaptation for forensic or youth groups: add an "aggressive" branch next to the unassertive and assertive ones [source: Maier; Thomalla].

4.4 Discrimination training: assertive / unassertive / aggressive (AB 3)

• Purpose / when: session 2 (a long and a short version exist), to sharpen perception of the three response styles before any role play [source: Manual; HP-2015 worksheet list]. It is based on a discrimination test after Jakubowski [source: Thomalla; GSK-web Varianten].
• Steps: (1) Small groups read short described scenes, each with a response, and classify each response as assertive, unassertive or aggressive. (2) They justify the classification with observable criteria (voice, eye contact, wording, apologising, threats, giving in). (3) Plenary: write the criteria on the board and resolve disagreements by pointing to concrete features, not intentions. (4) Discuss likely short- and long-term consequences of each style [source: Thomalla; GSK-KJ; partly synthesis].
• Example language (illustrative): "Not whether you like it, but what you can see and hear: what makes this one aggressive rather than firm?"
• Watch for: some participants confuse the response described with their own reaction; write scenes in the third person to prevent this (Thomalla reports roughly a fifth of prisoners doing so). Watch also for moralising discussions; summarise and move on. Working: classifications converge and criteria are named spontaneously.

4.5 Instructions for assertive behaviour, Type R (AB 4) and model role play

• Purpose / when: session 2, before the first participant role plays; gives a broad strategy for situations with a legitimate claim [source: Manual].
• Strategy content (paraphrased from the book, p. 105ff, as quoted secondarily): be polite but firm, not aggressive; state the facts and your demand clearly; don't apologise or make excuses; repeat the demand rather than debating it; use I-statements and express irritation calmly; keep eye contact; speak loudly and clearly; tolerate the discomfort until the demand is met [source: soft-skills.com quoting HP 6th ed.; Würzburg; GSK-KJ].
• Steps: (1) Go through the criteria (AB 4). (2) The two trainers act a Type R model role play (one demands, one refuses) at a realistic, not exaggerated, level. (3) The group identifies which criteria they saw [source: Manual; partly synthesis].
• Example language (illustrative, model role play): "I bought this kettle on Monday and it doesn't heat. I'd like my money back." … "I understand it's not your decision. Please call someone who can make it. I'd like my money back."
• Watch for: participants treating repetition as rudeness; reframe it as staying friendly while not debating.

4.6 Role play with video feedback (core method; every session from 2 to 7)

• Purpose / when: the central behavioural exercise and the in-session exposure; used for every situation type [source: Manual; GSK-web; HP-2015 Ch. 6.1 title].
• Preparation: participants have rated the situation list for the current type at home (AB 2, 6, 10), which lets them choose a situation of suitable difficulty [source: Manual; Thomalla; Kramer adaptation; the rating purpose partly inferred]. Split into small groups, one per trainer and room [source: Manual]. Explain what happens to the recordings, which are erased by recording over them [source: Manual].
• Steps [source: GSK-web Konzept; Thomalla; Würzburg; Kramer adaptation; sequence partly synthesis]: (1) The protagonist picks a situation; briefly set the scene (who, where, what the goal is) and re-read the relevant strategy points. (2) The trainer plays the counterpart, starting with moderate resistance. (3) Play for about 1–3 minutes with the camera running [synthesis: duration]. (4) Watch the video immediately. Pause it at moments where the protagonist did something competent. (5) The protagonist speaks first, naming specific behaviours they did well (self-reinforcement). (6) Group members and the trainer add specific positive feedback, about behaviour and not about the person. (7) Anything to change is voiced by the protagonist as an intention for next time. (8) Replay the same situation at least once, then watch and praise again. (9) The protagonist says how it felt. The Würzburg variant debriefs with four questions: how the players felt, what the observers saw, where it went wrong, and how it could go better.
• Example language (illustrative): "Stop the tape here. What did you do just now that you want to keep?" / "Say it as a plan for next time: 'Next time I want to try...'" / to a peer: "Tell her exactly what she did, e.g. 'you kept eye contact when he said no'."
• Watch for: self-devaluation while watching the video (redirect to concrete competent moments); peers giving global or critical comments (re-teach the rule); the trainer playing the counterpart too harshly. Working: shorter latency to speak, fewer apologies, steadier voice and gaze in the replay, and the protagonist naming competent behaviours unprompted.

4.7 Projective video film: analysing self-verbalisations (session 3)

• Purpose / when: session 3. Makes automatic self-talk in social situations conscious and shows how it drives feelings and approach or avoidance [source: Manual; HP-2015 Ch. 6.2 title; Würzburg].
• Materials: a silent film of 5–10 minutes showing an everyday social scene from the viewer's perspective. Three examples came on the book's CD-ROM, and the authors' site lists further films [source: Manual; GSK-web].
• Steps: (1) Ask participants to imagine they are the person in the scene. (2) Play the film and pause it at the numbered points; at each pause, everyone writes down what they would be thinking at that moment [source: Würzburg]. (3) Collect the thoughts and sort them into self-verbalisations that make you anxious or discouraged and those that encourage you or are realistic. (4) Link them to the model: negative self-talk leads to anxiety and avoidance, positive self-talk to confidence and approach [source: Würzburg]. (5) Each participant formulates one or two helpful self-statements for their own difficult situation and uses them in the next role play [synthesis: step 5 as a link to transfer; GSK-KJ adds homework on noticing one's own self-talk].
• Example language (illustrative): "Freeze. You're about to walk into the room. Write down the first sentence going through your head, word for word."
• Watch for: participants writing descriptions ("I'd feel nervous") instead of thoughts; prompt for the actual sentence. Working: participants recognise their typical self-talk patterns and can generate alternatives without help.

4.8 Self-praise exercise (Selbstlobübung) (session 3)

• Purpose / when: session 3. Counters the habit of devaluing oneself, which is common in socially unsure people, and prepares the self-reinforcement used in video feedback [source: Manual; HP-2015 Ch. 3.6 title (unfavourable self-reinforcement habits); GSK-KJ].
• Steps: the exact format in the manual was not found [uncertain]. A workable version [synthesis]: (1) Each participant names something specific they did well recently, in a sentence without qualifiers. (2) Peers respond only with acknowledgement. (3) The trainer gently blocks "but" clauses and minimising remarks. (4) Discuss how unusual it felt and why self-praise matters for keeping new behaviour going.
• Example language (illustrative): "Say it without the 'but': 'I stayed calm and repeated my request.'"
• Watch for: adolescents in particular may find self-praise awkward or "unnatural", as reported in a youth evaluation [source: diplomarbeiten24 abstract]; normalise this and keep the statements behaviour-specific. Working: in later video feedback, participants name their own strengths before anyone else does.

4.9 Discovering and naming feelings (AB 7; homework AB 8) (session 4)

• Purpose / when: session 4, to prepare Type B, where expressing your own feelings and recognising the partner's feelings is the core skill [source: Manual; HP-2015 worksheet list].
• Steps [partly synthesis]: (1) Build a shared vocabulary of feelings beyond "good" and "bad" (AB 7). (2) Practise noticing your own feeling in a remembered relationship situation and putting it into words as an I-statement. (3) Practise guessing and checking the other person's feeling. (4) Homework AB 8: name feelings in everyday situations.
• Optional exercise (secondary source, inclusion in the original not confirmed) [uncertain]: the Würzburg seminar has participants list 5 pleasant and 5 unpleasant feelings, draw them as segments of a circle (heart for pleasant, lightning for unpleasant), and consider what useful signal the unpleasant ones carry.
• Example language (illustrative): "Instead of 'you never call', try the feeling: 'I felt left out on Saturday.'"
• Watch for: feelings named as judgements ("I feel that you're unfair"). Working: participants spontaneously use feeling words in Type B role plays.

4.10 Instructions for Type B, relationships (AB 9), and model role play (session 5)

• Purpose / when: session 5, before the Type B role plays [source: Manual].
• Strategy content (paraphrased): state your own feelings and needs rather than arguing with norms (norms invite long, fruitless debates, feelings do not); show understanding for the partner's feelings and needs; admit your own uncertainty openly, which invites the other to do the same; accept that you have no right to the other person's compliance but do have the right to voice your wish; aim for agreement and a shared solution [source: soft-skills.com quoting HP 6th ed.; Würzburg; GSK-KJ].
• Steps: (1) Go through AB 9. (2) The trainers act a model Type B role play (e.g. a partner disagreement), including one moment of showing understanding. (3) Participants then role-play Type B situations from AB 6 using the procedure in 4.6 [source: Manual].
• Example language (illustrative): "I've been feeling stretched thin with the cleaning. I know you're tired after work too. Could we work out a split that suits us both?"
• Watch for: participants using Type R tactics (insisting, repeating) on partners, or arguing about who is "right". Working: role plays end with a joint proposal rather than a winner.

4.11 Collecting ways to reinforce others (Verstärkermöglichkeiten sammeln) (session 6)

• Purpose / when: session 6, to prepare Type S by building a repertoire of ways to make an interaction pleasant for the other person [source: Manual; Thomalla, who renamed it "responding to others"].
• Steps [synthesis on format]: (1) Brainstorm on the board everything that makes someone feel good in a brief encounter: verbal (thanks, compliments, interest, questions, humour) and nonverbal (smile, eye contact, friendly tone). (2) Mark the ones each participant finds easy or hard. (3) Each participant picks two to use in their Type S role play.
• Example language (illustrative): "What did the friendliest shop assistant you ever met actually do? Let's collect it."
• Watch for: reinforcers that sound like flattery or manipulation; emphasise genuine interest.

4.12 Instructions for Type S, winning sympathy (AB 11), model role play, Type S role plays (session 6)

• Strategy content (paraphrased): give compliments and show genuine interest; ask questions; reinforce what the other person does; disclose a little about yourself, in measured amounts; admit uncertainty where it fits, which makes you likeable; adapt flexibly to the person and situation instead of following a fixed script [source: soft-skills.com quoting HP 6th ed.; Würzburg; GSK-KJ].
• Steps: go through AB 11; the trainers act a model role play (e.g. asking a neighbour for a favour); participants role-play AB 10 situations as in 4.6; set the in-vivo homework AB 12 [source: Manual].
• Example language (illustrative): "Your garden looks wonderful. How do you get the roses like that? … I wanted to ask you something a bit cheeky: could you water my plants next week?"
• Watch for: Type S is considered the hardest type to train because it depends on judgement rather than fixed patterns [source: soft-skills.com commentary]; give more repeats and model variations.

4.13 Discriminating between situation types (session 7)

• Purpose / when: session 7, to make sure participants choose the right strategy in real life, where situation types are not labelled [source: Manual; HP-2015 contents].
• Steps: present mixed scenarios, decide R, B or S, justify the choice (Is there an entitlement? Does the relationship matter long-term?), and name the matching strategy points. Then discuss mixed situations, e.g. a legitimate claim against a friend [source: Manual; Thomalla's "SV or AB?" exercise; mixed situations synthesis].
• Example language (illustrative): "Does the law or a clear rule back you here? Will you see this person again? Then which strategy fits?"
• Watch for: defaulting to Type R everywhere. Working: participants classify quickly and give reasons.

4.14 Role plays on participants' own situations (session 7)

• Purpose / when: session 7. Transfers the strategies to each participant's real upcoming situations [source: Manual].
• Steps: each participant describes a real situation; the group decides its type; the participant plays it as in 4.6, with the trainer as the counterpart, using the actual words they plan to use.
• Watch for: situations that are too loaded (e.g. an abusive partner); see 5.

4.15 Relaxation training (progressive muscle relaxation, shortened stepwise) (sessions 1–4, with home practice)

• Purpose / when: active self-control of arousal as an emotional coping skill, practised in every session from 1 to 4 and at home [source: Manual]. The method is progressive muscle relaxation after Jacobson [source: Thomalla, "taken over unchanged"; Würzburg].
• Sequence: session 1, long version of about 35–40 minutes; session 2, about 18 minutes; session 3, about 9 minutes with a calm image (Ruhebild); session 4, about 7 minutes with the calm image and a relaxation cue word (Entspannungswort). Participants practise daily at home with a recording [source: Manual; HP-2015 worksheet list].
• Steps (general PMR procedure, own wording) [synthesis based on the sequence above]: (1) Explain the rationale: tension and anxiety are incompatible with deep muscle relaxation, and relaxation is a skill gained through practice. (2) Seated, tense each muscle group for about 5–7 seconds, then release and notice the difference for about 30 seconds; work through hands and arms, face, neck and shoulders, trunk, legs. (3) In shorter versions, combine muscle groups. (4) From session 3, add a personally chosen calm image at the end. (5) From session 4, pair the relaxed state with a cue word, so the word can later be used just before a difficult situation. (6) Ask about home practice at each homework review.
• Example language (illustrative): "Make a fist with your right hand… hold… and let go. Notice the warmth spreading as the tension leaves."
• Watch for: pain or injury in a muscle group (skip it or tense gently); rare relaxation-induced anxiety (eyes open, shorter version) [synthesis]. Working: participants report using the cue word before real situations.

4.16 Homework: rating role-play situations and in-vivo exercises (AB 2, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12)

• Purpose / when: transfer to everyday life between weekly sessions; reviewed at the start of every session from session 2 [source: Manual].
• Steps: (1) Before each type, participants rate the situations on the list (AB 2/6/10). (2) After the Type R and Type S role plays, they carry out a matching real-life exercise (AB 5, AB 12) and record what happened: situation, self-talk, behaviour, outcome, self-praise [source: Manual; recording fields partly synthesis]. (3) At review, reinforce each attempt regardless of outcome, then troubleshoot.
• Example language (illustrative): "Pick something small enough that you'll actually do it this week, like asking for a different table in a café."
• Watch for: participants deliberately seeking conflict to complete homework; Thomalla instructs participants not to. Working: steadily more ambitious attempts.

4.17 Session rating sheets, feedback sheets and outcome measures

• Purpose / when: session sheets (Stundenbogen, AB 19 in the 2007/2012 numbering) at the end of each session; pre-tests at the introductory event and post-tests after session 7 [source: Manual].
• Instruments named by the authors: an insecurity questionnaire (Unsicherheitsfragebogen), the IE-SV-F questionnaire on control beliefs (Dorrmann & Hinsch), a problem questionnaire, the session sheet and a feedback sheet, with comparison values for different groups [source: HP-2015 Ch. 7 contents; GSK-web Downloads]. Use the licensed versions from the book; items are not reproduced here.
• Watch for: falling session ratings as an early sign of overload or a rupture (see 5) [synthesis].

5. Handling problems

The manual has a section on general role-play problems (Ch. 6.1.3 in 2015/2023) and one on measurement problems (Ch. 7.2), but neither text is drawn on [uncertain]. The guidance below draws on the authors' website, the manual's session plan, and adaptations that report problems and their solutions. Items without a source are [synthesis].

Selection, safety and consent (role plays are exposure)

• Screen before admission. One clinical adaptation excludes people in acute crisis phases or at risk of harming others, and recommends individual preparation first for severe social phobia [source: Kramer adaptation, child and adolescent psychiatry]. For adults [synthesis]: defer acute psychosis, mania, acute suicidality (assess individually with standard risk assessment and safety planning, outside the group), intoxication, and severe dissociation.
• Consent: explain the video procedure, its purpose and erasure before sign-up, and repeat this before the first recording [source: Manual]. Participation is voluntary [source: Manual]. Any participant may decline a specific scene or the camera at a given moment without losing their place [synthesis].
• Graded difficulty: participants choose situations they have rated themselves, and the trainer playing the counterpart controls how much resistance they meet, which prevents failure [source: GSK-web; Kramer adaptation].
• Do not role-play situations involving current violence or abuse. Address safety individually instead of training assertiveness toward an abuser [synthesis].

Fear of role play or of the camera / overwhelm in a scene

• Bring the projective film forward or start with the camera off for the first run [source: Maier, youth adaptation, which moved the film earlier for camera-shy participants]. The authors' trainer seminar explicitly targets trainers' own fear of video role plays, which tends to transfer to participants [source: GSK-web Trainer-Seminar].
• During a scene [synthesis]: if the participant freezes, cries or panics, stop the scene, praise what they managed, lower the difficulty (a smaller request, a softer counterpart), use the relaxation cue word, and replay a shorter version. End with a successful repeat rather than abandoning the scene.
• Use small groups with a trainer present, so personal situations and criteria are worked on with fewer observers [source: Kramer adaptation].

Refusal to repeat a role play / low motivation

• Don't push; pressure is experienced as coercion and can harm the relationship. Decide case by case depending on the group climate [source: Thomalla]. Point out that the repeat is where the improvement shows [synthesis].
• For extrinsically motivated groups (court- or ward-referred), use the introductory event to build problem awareness and motivation [source: Maier]. Personal situations may be held back at first; encourage them over time [source: Maier].

Non-adherence to homework

• Most participants do not practise relaxation daily. One adaptation shortened relaxation practice or dropped it as a daily task [source: Thomalla]; others moved it out of the session when time was short and asked participants to continue alone [source: Kramer adaptation; Maier].
• [synthesis] Make in-vivo tasks smaller and specific (who, where, when), rehearse them in the session, and reinforce every attempt at review. Ask what got in the way, rather than whether the task was done. Session 5 deliberately sets no new homework, so participants can catch up [source: Manual].

Discussion instead of practice

• End long debates early by summarising the points raised and moving to the role play [source: Thomalla]. In Type B, arguments about norms ("who is right") predictably lead to long, unproductive discussions; redirect to feelings and needs [source: Würzburg].

Aggressive participants or responses

• Keep assertive and aggressive behaviour clearly apart. Add an aggressive branch to the model for groups where aggression is how insecurity shows [source: Maier]. If possible, do not mix markedly unassertive and markedly aggressive participants in one group, because they reinforce each other's patterns and differ in motivation; Thomalla built a separate programme for aggressive prisoners [source: Thomalla]. In role play, stop aggressive escalation immediately, name the effect on long-term consequences, and replay [synthesis].

Cognitive or attention limits, psychiatric inpatients

• Shorten sessions and increase their number. The manual mentions 20 one-hour sessions, and psychiatric units mostly use one-hour sessions [source: Manual; GSK-web]; a youth adaptation used 90-minute sessions over about nine sessions [source: Maier]. Use visual material, filmed model role plays, situations close to participants' lives, and units of about 75 minutes for young adults with multiple disabilities [source: GSK-web Varianten, Brattig]. Write discrimination items in the third person [source: Thomalla].
• Where participants don't know their rights (e.g. youth, prisoners), add brief information sheets on rights before the Type R work [source: Maier; Thomalla's exercise on personal rights].

Ruptures in the group or with the trainer (sources do not address this) [synthesis]

• Signs: falling session-sheet ratings, sarcasm about the exercises, a member feeling exposed after a video review.
• Responses: acknowledge it openly and briefly; check the feedback rule (behaviour-specific, positive, change only as the actor's own intention); offer an individual conversation after the session; if a peer's feedback hurt, have the peer restate it as a specific observation. If a participant feels the training is "learning to be fake", discuss long-term consequences and the right to choose not to assert themselves in a given situation.

Stuck participants (no change across sessions) [synthesis, building on the model]

• Use the explanatory model diagnostically: is the bottleneck perception or type discrimination, self-talk, arousal, motor skill, or consequences (e.g. an environment that punishes assertiveness)? Target that link: more discrimination practice, an individual self-talk analysis, the cue word before the scene, extra repeats with modelling, or problem-solving about real-world costs.
• Consider whether social anxiety disorder, depression, autism-spectrum conditions or personality problems call for additional individual treatment. One adaptation notes that autism-spectrum conditions may need a dedicated programme [source: Kramer adaptation].

Modality-specific difficulties

• Type S feels manipulative or is too hard: stress genuine interest, model several variations, and allow extra repeats [source: soft-skills.com commentary on difficulty; responses synthesis].
• Cultural norms about assertiveness, eye contact or directness: discuss the cultural meaning of behaviours and adapt the criteria; one adaptation for migrant women includes a unit on the cultural meaning of behaviour [source: Götte-El Fartoukh contents]. Adjust criteria rather than imposing one style [synthesis].
• Compact or weekend formats: possible, but they sharply limit in-vivo practice. Add follow-up contacts to review real-life exercises [source: GSK-web on the limitation; follow-ups synthesis].
• Video logistics or data protection: explain erasure; one camera per small-group room; a remote control makes stopping the tape easy [source: Manual].
• Drop-out and turnover (inpatient, forensic): limit the course to a short time span, about two months at most in prisons [source: Thomalla]. Ask for a written commitment, hold a pre-meeting for late joiners, and keep the same co-trainer [source: Kramer adaptation].

Sources

Sources:

• Library record: Hinsch & Pfingsten, GSK, 5th ed. 2007
• Manual extract, Ch. 4 Manual zum GSK, pp. 128–137 (Beltz e-book 2012, Content-Select)
• Leseprobe Hinsch & Pfingsten, GSK, 6th ed. 2015 (foreword, contents, Ch. 1–2)
• Table of contents, GSK 6th ed. (Beltz)
• Leseprobe Hinsch & Pfingsten, GSK, 7th ed. 2023
• GSK-Training (authors' site): home
• GSK-Training: Konzept GSK
• GSK-Training: Varianten
• GSK-Training: Downloads
• GSK-Training: Trainer-Seminar
• GSK-Training: Ratgeberbuch
• Thomalla (2008), GSKnast: self-assertiveness training for prisoners
• Lübben (2003), GSK-UK for socially insecure children (excerpt)
• Götte-El Fartoukh (2002), GSK variant for adolescent migrant women (contents)
• University of Würzburg seminar handout: Das GSK (Würzburg)
• Maier (2016), GSK standard curriculum and youth-detention adaptation (silo.tips)
• Konzept Sozial-Kompetenz-Training, Klinik Sonnenhof ("Kramer adaptation", silo.tips)
• Jürgens & Lübben, GSK-KJ, 2nd ed. (Leseprobe)
• GSK-KJ Leseprobe (preface and Ch. 1)
• Three situation types, quoting HP 6th ed. p. 105ff (soft-skills.com)
• socialnet review of GSK 2015 (Hahn)
• socialnet review of Güroff (2016), mentions GSK history
• Pfingsten (2018), Training sozialer Kompetenz, chapter abstract (Springer)
• Diplomarbeit (2001) on GSK with adolescents, abstract
• Universität Mannheim outpatient clinic: group therapies
• UKH Halle psychiatry: Gruppentraining sozialer Kompetenzen

Books cited:

• Hinsch, R., & Pfingsten, U. (2007). Gruppentraining sozialer Kompetenzen (GSK) (5th ed.). Weinheim: Beltz PVU.
• Hinsch, R., & Pfingsten, U. (2015). Gruppentraining sozialer Kompetenzen GSK: Grundlagen, Durchführung, Anwendungsbeispiele (6th ed.). Weinheim: Beltz.
• Hinsch, R., & Pfingsten, U. (2023). Gruppentraining sozialer Kompetenzen (GSK) (7th ed.). Weinheim: Beltz PVU.
• Hinsch, R., & Wittmann, S. (2010). Soziale Kompetenz kann man lernen (2nd ed.). Weinheim: Beltz PVU.
• Pfingsten, U. (2018). Training sozialer Kompetenz. In J. Margraf & S. Schneider (Eds.), Lehrbuch der Verhaltenstherapie, Band 1 (pp. 477–485). Berlin: Springer.
• Jürgens, B., & Lübben, K. (2021). Gruppentraining sozialer Kompetenzen für Kinder und Jugendliche (GSK-KJ) (2nd ed.). Weinheim: Beltz.

Further reading (not drawn on): Pfingsten's chapter "Soziale Ängste" in Verhaltenstherapiemanual (2015) and the manual's role-play, film and relaxation chapters (6.1–6.3) [uncertain].