The effectiveness of dream interpretation groups with recently separated and divorced women was the topic of this investigation. 34 women aged 23 - 57 participated in this study; 22 were assigned to a dream interpretation group and 12 to a wait-list control condition. Four eight-week groups, with a semi-structured dream interpretation format were run. It was hypothesized that dream interpretation group intervention would help this population to feel less anxious, less depressed, to experience higher self-esteem and to cope better with the stress of the divorcing process. Outcome measures were administered at pre- and post-test points. Client psychological-mindedness was expected to moderate treatment effectiveness. Women in the experimental condition were expected to gain dream interpretation skills. Trained raters judged the insight of interpretations collected from all subjects at pre- and post-test points. In an effort to understand the role of group process in treatment effectiveness. three process measures were examined: (a) Clients and therapists utilized a sociometric instrument after each session to nominate whom they believed to be most "involved," (b) clients and therapists both rated the working climate of the group each week. using the Group Climate Questionnaire, and (c) trained Judges viewed 30 minute segments of the three middle sessions (4, 5. and 6) on videotape and rated group cohesion. An overall MANOVA for treatment effectiveness was significant. indicating that group participants made more progress on outcome measures than did controls. However. due to low statistical power, univariate analyses of the effects due to each of these factors were all nonsignificant. A t-test of independent means for insightfulness of dream interpretations was significant. suggesting that group members improved their dream interpretation skills more than control subjects did. Psychological-mindedness was not found to be related to any of the predictors and thus was dropped as a covariate. In general. measures of group process (cohesion. group climate, client involvement) were neither significantly related to client outcomes nor to each other. Clients and therapists were not in agreement concerning group climate or client involvement. Observer and participant perspectives of group cohesion differed. as well.