This study attempts to explore and describe the public’s image on pastoral counselor in the comparison with other helping professionals. Using a sample (n=1,156) collected from high school students, college students, and citizens, this study comparatively examines the public’s image on five helping professionals such as pastoral counselors, social welfare professionals, psychiatrists, clinical psychologists, and nurses. In measuring the public’s image, this study uses a semantic differential scale that is composed of 16 pairs of adjective words. In overall, among five helping professionals, pastoral counselor is the least publicly recognized; thus, its total score is the lowest. By using correspondence analysis, pastoral counselors belong to the second quadrant that includes “trustworthy”and “warm”. However, the analysis reveals that pastoral counselors’expertise is not highly evaluated. On the other hand, ANOVA shows that there are statistically significant differences between pastoral counselors and other helping professionals except for psychiatrists. Finally, MANOVA shows that social demographic variables such as age, gender, religious backgrounds and education do make differences in the public’s image on pastoral counselors. In conclusion, this study discusses directions and practical measures to strengthen pastoral counselors’competencies including expertise and promote the public’s image on pastoral counselors.
This study attempts to explore and describe the public’s image on pastoral counselor in the comparison with other helping professionals. Using a sample (n=1,156) collected from high school students, college students, and citizens, this study comparatively examines the public’s image on five helping professionals such as pastoral counselors, social welfare professionals, psychiatrists, clinical psychologists, and nurses. In measuring the public’s image, this study uses a semantic differential scale that is composed of 16 pairs of adjective words. In overall, among five helping professionals, pastoral counselor is the least publicly recognized; thus, its total score is the lowest. By using correspondence analysis, pastoral counselors belong to the second quadrant that includes “trustworthy”and “warm”. However, the analysis reveals that pastoral counselors’expertise is not highly evaluated. On the other hand, ANOVA shows that there are statistically significant differences between pastoral counselors and other helping professionals except for psychiatrists. Finally, MANOVA shows that social demographic variables such as age, gender, religious backgrounds and education do make differences in the public’s image on pastoral counselors. In conclusion, this study discusses directions and practical measures to strengthen pastoral counselors’competencies including expertise and promote the public’s image on pastoral counselors.
I. 서론 II. 선행연구 정리 및 검토 III. 연구 질문 및 연구 방법 IV. 분석결과 및 논의 V. 결론 및 제언 참고문헌
