Child-Centered Group Play Therapy
Child-Centered Group Play Therapy (CCGPT), a group-based adaptation of Child-Centered Play Therapy (CCPT), is designed for children ages 3–10 who are experiencing social, emotional, behavioral, or relational disorders. CCGPT aims to create a safe and consistent environment that allows children to grow and uses play and the therapeutic relationship to improve children’s functioning.
The therapeutic relationship with the therapist and interactions with the other children in the group are the primary techniques of CCGPT. Children interact with one to two other children during their sessions, allowing each child to learn and practice new skills with peers. During each CCGPT session, the therapist follows eight child-centered principles: (1) develop a warm, friendly relationship with the child, (2) accept the child unconditionally, (3) establish a feeling of permissiveness in the relationship, (4) recognize and reflect the feelings of the child, (5) respect the child’s innate ability to solve their problems, (6) do not attempt to direct the child’s actions or conversation, (7) recognize the gradual nature of the child’s process, and (8) establish only those limitations that are necessary.
The therapist delivers sessions in a special playroom designed with objects, décor, and toys that serve a purpose. The five types of toys that help the child with self-expression include: (1) family/nurturing toys, (2) scary toys, (3) aggressive toys, (4) expressive toys, and (5) pretend/fantasy toys. The different toys allow the child to address specific emotions, including negative emotions, or to explore the adult world through pretend and role play.
During the session, the therapist facilitates an environment in which each child engages in self-direction and interpersonal decision making. The focus is on each individual child instead of group cohesion. The therapist tries to respond to each child equally throughout the session. During each interaction, the therapist lets the child take the lead and provides short verbal responses that match the child’s tone and approach.
CCGPT may include consultation with parents, schools, and/or teachers but consultation is not required.
CCGPT is rated as a promising practice because at least one study achieved a rating of moderate or high on study design and execution and demonstrated a favorable effect on a target outcome.
A re-review of a study of CCGPT was conducted in July 2023 due to an error wherein a particular study was incorrectly included in the list of studies reviewed. To correct this error, Study 12851 (Bratton, 1995) has been removed from CCGPT. Study 12915 (Su, 2016) has been added to the list of studies for CCGPT. The re-review did not affect the program or service rating.
Date Research Evidence Last Reviewed: Jul 2023
Sources
The program or service description, target population, and program or service delivery and implementation information were informed by the following sources: the program or service manuals, the program or service developer’s website, and the studies reviewed.
This information does not necessarily represent the views of the program or service developers. For more information on how this program or service was reviewed, visit the download the Handbook of Standards and Procedures, Version 1.0
Target Population
CCGPT is designed for children ages 3–10 who are experiencing social, emotional, behavioral, and relational disorders, especially children who struggle with peer or sibling relationships.
Dosage
Therapists deliver CCGPT in a series of sessions with a consistent group of 2–3 children. Session frequency and treatment duration vary based on participant needs, though 35–40 sessions are recommended. Sessions are typically 45 minutes in length but can range from 30-50 minutes.
Location/Delivery Setting
Recommended Locations/Delivery Settings
CCGPT is delivered in a specially designed playroom in a clinical setting.
Location/Delivery Settings Observed in the Research
- School
Education, Certifications and Training
CCGPT therapists must be certified in CCPT. To become certified in CCPT, therapists must have at least a master’s degree in a mental health field and have completed a 40-hour course on the basics of play therapy.
University of North Texas Level 1 Certified Practitioners must (1) complete a minimum of 40 hours of coursework on CCPT through formal university courses or a workshop series led by an approved CCPT trainer, (2) complete the CCPT exam, (3) complete CCPT sessions with three children ages 3–10 under supervision of a CCPT supervisor, (4) complete a self-evaluation paper, (5) hold a professional mental health license, and (6) complete the application. CCPT practitioners must renew their certification every 5 years.
University of North Texas Level 2 Certified Advanced CCPT Practitioners/Supervisors must (1) hold a Level 1 certification, (2) hold a professional mental health license, (3) complete either a formal university course in Advanced CCPT or a minimum of 40 hours of CCPT supervision training through a workshop series, (4) complete 100 sessions with a minimum of 10 children ages 3–10 with an approved CCPT supervisor, and (5) provide 10 supervisory sessions for a beginning therapist. CCGPT Practitioner/Supervisors must renew their certification every 5 years.
Program or Service Documentation
Book/Manual/Available documentation used for review
The Advanced Play Therapy Manual is implemented in conjunction with the CCGPT Implementation Guide.
Ray, D. (2011). Advanced play therapy: Essential conditions, knowledge, and skills for child practice. Taylor & Francis.
Ray, D., & Cheng, Y. (2018). Child-Centered Group Play Therapy implementation guide. University of North Texas Center for Play Therapy.
Available languages
The Advanced Play Therapy Manual is available in English, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and Turkish. The CCGPT Implementation Guide is available in English.
Other supporting materials
Cheng, Y., & Ray, D. (2018). Child-Centered Group Play Therapy skills checklist. The Center for Play Therapy at the University of North Texas.
Landreth, G. L. (2012). Play therapy: The art of the relationship (3rd ed.). Routledge.
For More Information
Website: https://cpt.unt.edu/child-centered-group-play-therapy
Phone: (940) 565-3864
Email: cpt@unt.edu
Note: The details on Dosage; Location; Education, Certifications, and Training; Other Supporting Materials; and For More Information sections above are provided to website users for informational purposes only. This information is not exhaustive and may be subject to change.
| Results of Search and Review | Number of Studies Identified and Reviewed for Child-Centered Group Play Therapy |
|---|---|
| Identified in Search | 13 |
| Eligible for Review | 4 |
| Rated High | 2 |
| Rated Moderate | 1 |
| Rated Low | 1 |
| Reviewed Only for Risk of Harm | 0 |
| Outcome | Effect Size
 and Implied Percentile Effect
|
N of Studies (Findings) | N of Participants | Summary of Findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Child well-being: Behavioral and emotional functioning |
0.45
17 |
3 (11) | 67 |
Favorable:
1 No Effect: 10 Unfavorable: 0 |
| Child well-being: Social functioning |
0.65
24 |
2 (6) | 46 |
Favorable:
1 No Effect: 5 Unfavorable: 0 |
| Adult well-being: Positive parenting practices |
Not Calculated
|
1 (1) | 8 |
Favorable:
0 No Effect: 1 Unfavorable: 0 |
| Adult well-being: Parent/caregiver mental or emotional health |
Not Calculated
|
1 (2) | 8 |
Favorable:
0 No Effect: 2 Unfavorable: 0 |
| Adult well-being: Family functioning |
Not Calculated
|
1 (3) | 8 |
Favorable:
1 No Effect: 2 Unfavorable: 0 |
| Adult well-being: Parent/caregiver physical health |
Not Calculated
|
1 (1) | 8 |
Favorable:
0 No Effect: 1 Unfavorable: 0 |
Note: For the effect sizes and implied percentile effects reported in the table, a positive number favors the intervention group and a negative number favors the comparison group. Effect sizes for some outcomes were not able to be calculated by the Prevention Services Clearinghouse.
| Outcome | Effect Size
and Implied Percentile Effect
|
N of Studies (Findings) | N of Participants | Summary of Findings |
Months after treatment when outcome measured
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Child well-being: Behavioral and emotional functioning |
0.45
17 |
3 (11) | 67 |
Favorable:
1 No Effect: 10 Unfavorable: 0 |
- |
| Study 12859 - CCGPT vs. Waitlist Control (Cheng, 2016) | |||||
| Social Emotional Assets and Resilience Scales – Parent: Self-Regulation/Responsibility |
0.43
16 |
- | 38 | - | 0 |
| Social Emotional Assets and Resilience Scales – Parent: Self-Regulation/Responsibility |
0.32
12 |
- | 38 | - | 1 |
| Study 12915 - CCGPT vs. No Treatment Control (Su, 2016) | |||||
| Parenting Stress Index – Third Edition: Child Domain, Mood |
Favorable
*
not calculated |
- | 8 | - | 0 |
| Parenting Stress Index – Third Edition: Child Domain, Distractibility/Hyperactivity |
Null
not calculated |
- | 8 | - | 0 |
| Parenting Stress Index – Third Edition: Child Domain, Adaptability |
Null
not calculated |
- | 8 | - | 0 |
| Parenting Stress Index – Third Edition: Child Domain, Reinforces Parents |
Null
not calculated |
- | 8 | - | 0 |
| Parenting Stress Index – Third Edition: Child Domain, Demandingness |
Null
not calculated |
- | 8 | - | 0 |
| Parenting Stress Index – Third Edition: Child Domain, Acceptability |
Null
not calculated |
- | 8 | - | 0 |
| Study 12924 - Intensive Sibling Group Play Therapy (CCGPT) vs. Waitlist Control (Tyndall-Lind, 2001) | |||||
| Child Behavior Checklist: Externalizing |
0.82
29 |
- | 21 | - | 0 |
| Child Behavior Checklist: Aggressive Behavior |
0.69
25 |
- | 21 | - | 0 |
| Child Behavior Checklist: Attention Problems |
0.28
11 |
- | 21 | - | 0 |
| Child well-being: Social functioning |
0.65
24 |
2 (6) | 46 |
Favorable:
1 No Effect: 5 Unfavorable: 0 |
- |
| Study 12859 - CCGPT vs. Waitlist Control (Cheng, 2016) | |||||
| Social Emotional Assets and Resilience Scales – Parent: Social Competence |
0.64
23 |
- | 38 | - | 0 |
| Social Emotional Assets and Resilience Scales – Parent: Empathy |
0.80
*
28 |
- | 38 | - | 0 |
| Social Emotional Assets and Resilience Scales – Parent: Social Competence |
0.38
14 |
- | 38 | - | 1 |
| Social Emotional Assets and Resilience Scales – Parent: Empathy |
0.07
2 |
- | 38 | - | 1 |
| Study 12915 - CCGPT vs. No Treatment Control (Su, 2016) | |||||
| Social Skill Behaviors and Characteristics Scale (Student Report) |
1.97
47 |
- | 8 | - | 0 |
| Social Skill Behaviors and Characteristics Scale (Teacher Report) |
1.67
45 |
- | 8 | - | 0 |
| Adult well-being: Positive parenting practices |
Not Calculated
|
1 (1) | 8 |
Favorable:
0 No Effect: 1 Unfavorable: 0 |
- |
| Study 12915 - CCGPT vs. No Treatment Control (Su, 2016) | |||||
| Parenting Stress Index – Third Edition: Parent Domain, Competence |
Null
not calculated |
- | 8 | - | 0 |
| Adult well-being: Parent/caregiver mental or emotional health |
Not Calculated
|
1 (2) | 8 |
Favorable:
0 No Effect: 2 Unfavorable: 0 |
- |
| Study 12915 - CCGPT vs. No Treatment Control (Su, 2016) | |||||
| Parenting Stress Index – Third Edition: Parent Domain, Isolation |
Null
not calculated |
- | 8 | - | 0 |
| Parenting Stress Index – Third Edition: Parent Domain, Depression |
Null
not calculated |
- | 8 | - | 0 |
| Adult well-being: Family functioning |
Not Calculated
|
1 (3) | 8 |
Favorable:
1 No Effect: 2 Unfavorable: 0 |
- |
| Study 12915 - CCGPT vs. No Treatment Control (Su, 2016) | |||||
| Parenting Stress Index – Third Edition: Parent Domain, Role Restriction |
Favorable
*
not calculated |
- | 8 | - | 0 |
| Parenting Stress Index – Third Edition: Parent Domain, Attachment |
Null
not calculated |
- | 8 | - | 0 |
| Parenting Stress Index – Third Edition: Parent Domain, Spouse |
Null
not calculated |
- | 8 | - | 0 |
| Adult well-being: Parent/caregiver physical health |
Not Calculated
|
1 (1) | 8 |
Favorable:
0 No Effect: 1 Unfavorable: 0 |
- |
| Study 12915 - CCGPT vs. No Treatment Control (Su, 2016) | |||||
| Parenting Stress Index – Third Edition: Parent Domain, Health |
Null
not calculated |
- | 8 | - | 0 |
*p <.05
Note: For the effect sizes and implied percentile effects reported in the table, a positive number favors the intervention group and a negative number favors the comparison group. Effect sizes and implied percentile effects were calculated by the Prevention Services Clearinghouse as described in the Handbook of Standards and Procedures, Section 5.10.4 and may not align with effect sizes reported in individual publications. Effect sizes for some outcomes were not able to be calculated by the Prevention Services Clearinghouse.
Only publications with eligible contrasts that met design and execution standards are included in the individual study findings table.
Full citations for the studies shown in the table are available in the "Studies Reviewed" section.
The participant characteristics display is an initial version. We encourage those interested in providing feedback to send suggestions to preventionservices@abtglobal.com.
The table below displays locations, the year, and participant demographics for studies that received moderate or high ratings on design and execution and that reported the information. Participant characteristics for studies with more than one intervention versus comparison group pair that received moderate or high ratings are shown separately in the table. Please note, the information presented here uses terminology directly from the study documents, when available. Studies that received moderate or high ratings on design and execution that did not include relevant participant demographic information would not be represented in this table.
For more information on how Clearinghouse reviewers record the information in the table, please see our Resource Guide on Study Participant Characteristics and Settings.
| Characteristics of the Participants in the Studies with Moderate or High Ratings | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Study Location
|
Study Year
|
Age or Grade-level
|
Race, Ethnicity, Nationality
|
Gender
|
Populations of Interest*
|
Household Socioeconomic Status
|
| Study 12859 - CCGPT vs. Waitlist Control | ||||||
| Characteristics of the Children and Youth | ||||||
| Southwest, United States | -- | Average age: 5 years; 86% 5 years old, 14% 6 years old; 100% in kindergarten |
44% Hispanic 33% Caucasian 23% African American |
70% Male 30% Female |
-- | -- |
| Study 12915 - CCGPT vs. No Treatment Control | ||||||
| Characteristics of the Children and Youth | ||||||
| Northern Taiwan | -- | Average age: 9 years; Age range: 8-9 years; 38% age 8, 25% age 8.5, 38% age 9; 50% second graders, 50% third graders |
38% Mother's nationality Vietnamese 38% Mother's nationality Thai 25% Mother's nationality Chinese |
50% Male 50% Female |
-- | -- |
| Study 12924 - Intensive Sibling Group Play Therapy (CCGPT) vs. Waitlist Control | ||||||
| Characteristics of the Children and Youth | ||||||
| Texas, USA | 1994 | Average age: 6 years; Age range: 4-9 years |
45% African American 38% Caucasian 18% Hispanic |
62% Girls 38% Boys |
100% Staying in a battered women's shelter | -- |
“--” indicates information not reported in the study.
* The information about disabilities is based on initial coding. For more information on how the Clearinghouse recorded disability information for the initial release, please see our Resource Guide on Study Participant Characteristics and Settings. The Clearinghouse is currently seeking consultation from experts, including those with lived experience, and input from the public to enhance and improve the display.
Note: Citations for the documents associated with each 5-digit study number shown in the table can be found in the “Studies Reviewed” section below. Study settings and participant demographics are recorded for all studies that received moderate or high ratings on design and execution and that reported the information. Studies that did not report any information about setting or participant demographics are not displayed. For more information on how participant characteristics are recorded, please see our Resource Guide on Study Participant Characteristics and Settings.
Studies Rated High
Study 12859Cheng, Y. J., & Ray, D. C. (2016). Child-Centered Group Play Therapy: Impact on social-emotional assets of kindergarten children. Journal for Specialists in Group Work, 41(3), 209-237. https://doi.org/10.1080/01933922.2016.1197350
This study was conducted in a usual care or practice setting (Handbook Section 6.2.2)Study 12915
Su, S. H., & Tsai, M. H. (2016). Group play therapy with children of new immigrants in Taiwan who are exhibiting relationship difficulties. International Journal of Play Therapy, 25(2), 91-101. https://doi.org/10.1037/pla0000014
This study was conducted in a usual care or practice setting (Handbook Section 6.2.2)Studies Rated Moderate
Study 12924Tyndall-Lind, A., Landreth, G. L., & Giordano, M. A. (2001). Intensive group play therapy with child witnesses of domestic violence. International Journal of Play Therapy 10(1), 53-83. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0089443
This study was conducted in a usual care or practice setting (Handbook Section 6.2.2)Studies Rated Low
Study 12864Danger, S., & Landreth, G. (2005). Child-Centered Group Play Therapy with children with speech difficulties. International Journal of Play Therapy, 14(1), 81-102. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0088897
This study received a low rating because it did not meet design confound standards.Studies Not Eligible for Review
Study 12842
Baggerly, J. (2004). The effects of Child-Centered Group Play Therapy on self-concept, depression, and anxiety of children who are homeless. International Journal of Play Therapy, 13(2), 31-51. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0088889
This study is ineligible for review because it does not use an eligible study design (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.4).
Study 12844
Blalock, S. M., Lindo, N., & Ray, D. C. (2019). Individual and Group Child-Centered Play Therapy: Impact on social-emotional competencies. Journal of Counseling & Development, 97(3), 238-249. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcad.12264
This study is ineligible for review because it does not report program or service impacts on an eligible target outcome (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.5).
Study 12870
Fry, M. L., Maclin, V., Newmeyer, M., & Baggerly, J. (2020). Effectiveness of child-centered and psychoeducational groups on disruptive behavior. International Journal of Play Therapy, 29(4), 201-212. https://doi.org/10.1037/pla0000124
This study is ineligible for review because it is not a study of the program or service under review (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.6).
Study 12911
Shen, Y.-J. (2002). Short-term group play therapy with Chinese earthquake victims: Effects on anxiety, depression and adjustment. International Journal of Play Therapy, 11(1), 43-63. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0088856
This study is ineligible for review because it is not a study of the program or service under review (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.6).
Study 12916
Swan, K. L., Kaff, M., & Haas, S. (2019). Effectiveness of group play therapy on problematic behaviors and symptoms of anxiety of preschool children. The Journal for Specialists in Group Work, 44(2), 82-98. https://doi.org/10.1080/01933922.2019.1599478
This study is ineligible for review because it does not use an eligible study design (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.4).
Study 12917
Swank, J. M., Cheung, C., Prikhidko, A., & Yi-Wen, S. (2017). Nature-based Child-Centered Group Play Therapy and behavioral concerns: A single-case design. International Journal of Play Therapy, 26(1), 47-57. https://doi.org/10.1037/pla0000031
Swank, J. M., Cheung, C., Prikhidko, A., & Yi-Wen, S. (2017). Nature-based Child-Centered Group Play Therapy and behavioral concerns: A single-case design: Correction to Swank et al (2017). International Journal of Play Therapy, 26(1), 47-57. https://doi.org/10.1037/pla0000031
This study is ineligible for review because it does not use an eligible study design (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.4).
Study 12919
Swank, J. M., Cheung, C., & Williams, S. A. (2018). Play therapy and psychoeducational school-based group interventions: A comparison of treatment effectiveness. Journal for Specialists in Group Work, 43(3), 230-249. https://doi.org/10.1080/01933922.2018.
This study is ineligible for review because it does not use an eligible study design (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.4).
Study 13759
Flahive, M. W., & Ray, D. (2007). Effect of group sandtray therapy with preadolescents. The Journal for Specialists In Group Work, 32(4), 362-382. https://doi.org/10.1080/01933920701476706
This study is ineligible for review because it is not a study of the program or service under review (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.6).
Study 13760
Packman, J., & Bratton, S. C. (2003). A school-based group play/activity therapy intervention with learning disabled preadolescents exhibiting behavior problems. International Journal of Play Therapy, 12(2), 7-29. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/h0088876
This study is ineligible for review because it is not a study of the program or service under review (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.6).