Men who registered to complete the MKP-GW NWTA received a preweekend
research packet from the MKP-GW center office. A postweekend questionnaire was
included in the packet of materials distributed at the end of the NWTA weekend. Additional copies of the postweekend questionnaire were mailed at six months and eighteen months postweekend by the research team. In addition, men were interviewed at
twelve months and nominated two peers to complete rating scales six months and eighteen months postweekend. For the current report of preliminary findings, only pre- and
initial postweekend findings are reported.
Some of the items were selected from existing scales of attitudes toward women
(e.g., Hostility Toward Women Scale Check,
Barton, 1985, and the Simplified Attitudes Toward Women,
Nelson, 1988). However, because the wording of
many of the items on existing scales seemed outdated, we generated additional items for
the purposes of this study.
This discussion is based on closed men's groups--those that are generally private
and open only periodically to add new members. Size and attendance factors may differ
for open groups, in which men from the public are welcome to attend any meeting.
One representative from each active (N = 24) and disbanded (N = 11) I-group
participated. Groups were counted as disbanded if members had stopped meeting or
members had merged into another larger group. Two additional groups began to form
but never met after the eight-week facilitation period. Because this study focused on
factors determining group stability and effectiveness only after the eight-week facilitation
period, these groups were removed from all analyses.
Drawing on organizational records, each representative was sent a survey and asked
to complete it--if possible, in consultation with other members of their group. The
survey asked when the I-group started and (if applicable) stopped meeting, the number
of members in the group over its history, the age of each member, when each member
joined and (if applicable) left the group, and the reason(s) that he left the group (a list
of the following choices was presented: moved, work too busy, family life too busy,
disagreement with the group, disagreement with an individual in the group, disagreement
with MKP-GW, just stopped going, got what he wanted from the group, unknown, and
other, with the option of describing the reason). In addition, for each year of the group's
history, we asked how often the group met, where it met, the average number of members
at meetings, and for a rating of the group's effectiveness. Unless otherwise reported,
analyses were conducted using the group's score on a variable averaged over the years
that it met.
For instance, representatives were asked to describe any changes in the group's
functioning over the course of its history and the factors that contributed to these changes,
the effectiveness of the initial eight-week facilitators, how closely the group followed
MKP-GW rules and guidelines and whether this affected group functioning, and the
specific techniques and processes used by the group and the effect these had on the