Al though current research on the e

Al though current research on the efficacy and perceived use fulness of online support groups is limited, it is critical to determine if they offer the therapeutic features of face-to-face support groups.Preliminary research is suggestive of positive comparisons and comparable effects (Davison etal, 2000; Harris-Bowlsbey, 2000). In four studies,online support group participants reported feeling supported and connected to others who shared similar issues (Dunham et al., 1998; Weinberg, Schmale,Uken & Wessel,1995a, Winzelberg, 1997; Meier, 1997). For instance,in one online support group for people with eat ingdisorders, Winzelberg (1997) reported that 31 percent of members disclosed personal distress, 23 percent gave information(but 12 percent of the information was inaccurate),16 percent gave emotional support, and 15 percent so ught help unrelated to eating disorders.Weinberg, Uken, Schmale, and Adamek (1995b) concluded that several of Yalom's (1995) therapeutic factors had significant therapeutic benefits in one online support group for cancer survivors. In particular, the three therapeutic factors of instillation of hope, group cohesion,and universality were deemed the most active of all therapeutic factors and were especially beneficial for the cancer support group members. The se therapeutic factors contributed to the online support group's bonding and perceived helpfulness.
In addition to positive research results, most participant self-reportswere positive. Participant sperceived online support groups as being helpful,validating, and supportive, and most would not continue to participate without some perceived benefit (Callahan, Hilty, &Nesbitt, 1998; Meier,1997). However, dissatisfied participants cited three issues that created abarrier to their participation:(1) an absence of visual, auditory, and interpersonal cues, (2) a sense of isolation for those who prefer face-to-face interaction, and (3) technology problems such asbeing cut off line(Galinsky, Schopler & Abell, 1996).

Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 1:

Al though current research on the efficacy and perceived use fulness of online support groups is limited, it is critical to determine if they offer the therapeutic features of face-to-face support groups.Preliminary research is suggestive of positive comparisons and comparable effects (Davison etal, 2000; Harris-Bowlsbey, 2000). In four studies,online support group participants reported feeling supported and connected to others who shared similar issues (Dunham et al., 1998; Weinberg, Schmale,Uken & Wessel,1995a, Winzelberg, 1997; Meier, 1997). For instance,in one online support group for people with eat ingdisorders, Winzelberg (1997) reported that 31 percent of members disclosed personal distress, 23 percent gave information(but 12 percent of the information was inaccurate),16 percent gave emotional support, and 15 percent so ught help unrelated to eating disorders.Weinberg, Uken, Schmale, and Adamek (1995b) concluded that several of Yalom's (1995) therapeutic factors had significant therapeutic benefits in one online support group for cancer survivors. In particular, the three therapeutic factors of instillation of hope, group cohesion,and universality were deemed the most active of all therapeutic factors and were especially beneficial for the cancer support group members. The se therapeutic factors contributed to the online support group's bonding and perceived helpfulness.Selain untuk positif hasil penelitian, paling peserta positif self-reportswere. Peserta sperceived online mendukung kelompok-kelompok sebagai berguna, memvalidasi, dan mendukung, dan kebanyakan tidak akan melanjutkan untuk berpartisipasi tanpa beberapa manfaat yang dirasakan (Callahan, Hilty, & Nesbitt, 1998; Meier, 1997). Namun, tidak puas peserta dikutip tiga isu yang dibuat abarrier ke participation:(1) mereka adanya isyarat visual, pendengaran, dan interpersonal, (2) rasa isolasi bagi yang suka tatap muka interaksi, dan (3) masalah teknologi asbeing seperti memotong garis (Galinsky, Schopler & Abell, 1996).

Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 2:

Al meskipun penelitian terkini tentang khasiat dan dirasakan penggunaan kegenapan kelompok dukungan online terbatas, sangat penting untuk menentukan apakah mereka menawarkan fitur terapi dukungan groups.Preliminary penelitian tatap muka adalah sugestif dari perbandingan positif dan efek yang sebanding (Davison dkk, 2000; Harris-Bowlsbey, 2000). Dalam empat penelitian, peserta kelompok dukungan online melaporkan merasa didukung dan terhubung dengan orang lain yang berbagi masalah yang sama (Dunham et al, 1998;. Weinberg, Schmale, Uken & Wessel, 1995a, Winzelberg, 1997; Meier, 1997). Misalnya, dalam satu kelompok dukungan online bagi orang-orang dengan makan ingdisorders, Winzelberg (1997) melaporkan bahwa 31 persen anggota diungkapkan distress pribadi, 23 persen memberi informasi (tapi 12 persen dari informasi yang tidak akurat), 16 persen memberikan dukungan emosional, dan 15 persen sehingga ught membantu yang tidak terkait dengan makan disorders.Weinberg, Uken, Schmale, dan Adamek (1995b) menyimpulkan bahwa beberapa dari (1995) faktor terapeutik Yalom ini memiliki manfaat terapeutik yang signifikan dalam satu kelompok pendukung online untuk penderita kanker. Secara khusus, tiga faktor terapeutik angsur harapan, kohesi kelompok, dan universalitas dianggap paling aktif dari semua faktor terapeutik dan sangat bermanfaat bagi anggota kelompok pendukung kanker. Se faktor terapi berkontribusi ikatan dukungan kelompok secara online dan menolong dirasakan.
Selain hasil penelitian yang positif, yang paling peserta diri reportswere positif. Peserta sperceived kelompok dukungan online sebagai membantu, memvalidasi, dan mendukung, dan paling tidak akan terus berpartisipasi tanpa beberapa manfaat yang dirasakan (Callahan, Hilty, & Nesbitt, 1998; Meier, 1997). Namun, peserta tidak puas dikutip tiga isu yang dibuat abarrier untuk partisipasi mereka: (1) tidak adanya visual, auditori, dan isyarat interpersonal, (2) rasa isolasi bagi mereka yang lebih interaksi tatap muka, dan (3) masalah teknologi asbeing seperti memotong jalur (Galinsky, Schopler & Abell, 1996).