Seeing the Situational Gestalt - Movement in Therapeutic Spaces

Buchholz, Michael B.

doi:10.2478/gth-2020-0011

Abstract

This paper starts with a short review of recent developments in psychotherapy process research and analyzes that a medical, or better, technical approach in process research – using words such as ‘intervention’, ‘effect’ and ‘outcome’ – is gradually acknowledged as only one side of psychotherapy; the other, more human or ‘humanistic’ side, is ‘conversation’, described by prominent authors as ‘low technology’. Conversation analysis cannot study psychotherapy as a whole. Sessions are subdivided into ‘situations’. What are situations? I make a proposal to answer this question by three components: open up, select and control options. Then, 11 transcribed extracts from psychoanalytical therapy sessions are used to describe three types of situations and the special kind of requirements they demand from a therapist. Obviously, such situations appear during a session, they can be handled if therapists are sensitized for certain difficulties to arise. Shift-of-situation and double meaning are new observations in this approach to define the situational gestalt and train ‘seeing’ it.

References

Antaki, C. (2008). Formulations in psychotherapy. In A. Peräkylä, C. Antaki, S. Vehviläinen, & I. Leudar (Eds.), Conversation analysis and psychotherapy (pp. 26–43). Cambridge/New York, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Arden, M. (1984). Infinite sets and double binds. The International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 65, 441–450.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Asch, S. (1955). On the use of metaphor in the description of persons. In H. Werner (Ed.), On expressive language. Worcester, MA: Clark University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Auer, P., Couper-Kuhlen, E., & Müller, F. (1999). Language in time: The rhythm and tempo of spoken interaction. Oxford studies in sociolinguistics. New York: Oxford University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Barber, J. P. (2009). Toward a working through of some core conflicts in psychotherapy research. Psychotherapy Research, 19, 1–12.10.1080/1050330080260968019206018
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bateson, G. (1978). The birth of a matrix or double bind and epistemology. In M. M. Berger (Ed.), Beyound the double bind: Communication and family systems, theories and techniques with schizophrenics (pp. 11–36). New York, NY: Brunner/Mazel.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bazan, A., Kushwaha, R., Winer, E. S., Snodgrass, J. M., Brakel, L. A. W., & Shevrin, H. (2019). Phonological ambiguity detection outside of consciousness and its defensive avoidance. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 13, 479.10.3389/fnhum.2019.00077646034631024274
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Benjamin, L. T. J. (2007). A brief history of modern psychology. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bohart, A. C., & Tallman, K. (2010). Clients: The neglected common factor in psychotherapy. In B. L. Duncan, S. D. Miller, B. E. Wampold, & M. A. Hubble (Eds.), The heart and soul of change: Delivering what works in therapy (2nd ed., pp. 83–111). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi: 10.1037/12075-00310.1037/12075-003
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bohleber, W. (2013). Introduction to Herrmann Argelander’s paper ‘The scenic function of the ego and its role in symptom and character formation’. The International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 94, 333–336.10.1111/j.1745-8315.2012.00602.x23560906
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bowers, R. (1990). Mountains are not cones: What can we learn from chaos? In J. E. Alatis (Ed.), Linguistics, language teaching, and language acquisition. The interdependence of theory, practice, and research (pp. 123–136). Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Brinkmann, M. (2020). Pädagogisches (Fremd-)Verstehen. Zur Theorie und Empirie einer interkorporalen Ausdruckshermeneutik. In M. Brinkmann (Ed.), Phänomenologische Erziehungswissenschaft. Verkörperungen. Postphänomenologische Untersuchungen zwischen erziehungswissenschaftlicher Theorie und leiblichen Praxen in pädagogischen Feldern (pp. 131–158). [S.l.]: VS Verl. für Sozialwiss.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Buchholz, M. B. (2014). Die Feinheiten therapeutischen Sprechens. Konversationsanalyse eines psychoanalytischen Erstgesprächs. In I. Bozetti, I. Focke, & I. Hahn (Eds.), Unerhört - Vom Hören und Verstehen.: Die Wiederentdeckung der grundlegenden Methoden der Psychoanalyse. (pp. 219–240). Stuttgart, Germany: Klett-Cotta. doi: 10.13140/2.1.2784.8008
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Buchholz, M. B. (2016). Conversational errors and common ground activities in psychotherapy – insights from conversation analysis. International Journal of Psychological Studies, 8(3), 134–153.10.5539/ijps.v8n3p134
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Buchholz, M. B. (2017). Empathie und »Typische Problem-Situationen« (TPS). Plädoyer für einen psychoanalytischen Situationismus. Psyche - Z Psychoanal, 71(1), 28–59.10.21706/ps-71-1-28
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Buchholz, M. B. (2019). Szenisches Verstehen und Konversationsanalyse. Psyche – Z Psychoanal, 73(06), 414–441.10.21706/ps-73-6-414
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Buchholz, M. B., & Kächele, H. (2017). From turn-by-turn to larger chunks of talk: An exploratory study in psychotherapeutic micro-processes using conversation analysis. Research in Psychotherapy: Psychopathology, Process and Outcome, 20, 161–178.10.4081/ripppo.2017.257745134832913749
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Buchholz, M. B., & Reich, U. (2015). Dancing insight. How a psychotherapist uses change of positioning in order to complement split-off areas of experience. Chaos and Complexity Letters, 8(2–3), 121–146.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Buchholz, M. B., Spiekermann, J., & Kächele, H. (2015). Rhythm and Blues – Amalie’s 152nd session. From psychoanalysis to conversation and metaphor analysis – and back again. The International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 96(3), 877–910.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bühler, K. (2011 [1934]). Theory of language. The representational function of language: (transl. by Donald Fraser Goodwin and Achim Eschbach). Foundations of semiotics. Amsterdam, Netherlands Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Collins, R. (2008). Violence – A micro-sociological theory. Princeton, Oxford, NJ: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9781400831753
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
de Bilbao, F. (2011). Beyond the image. The International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 92, 859–877.10.1111/j.1745-8315.2011.00422.x21843239
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Deane, P. (2005). Multimodal spatial representation: On the semantic unity of over. In B. Hampe & J. E. Grady (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics research: Vol. 29. From perception to meaning. Image schemas in cognitive linguistics (pp. 235–284). Berlin, New York, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Detel, W. (2011). Geist und Verstehen. Historische Grundlagen einer modernen Hermeneutik. Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Vittorio Klostermann.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ehmer, O. (2011). Imagination und Animation. Die Herstellung mentaler Räume durch animierte Rede. Linguae & litterae: Vol. 7. Berlin, New York, Germany: de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110237801
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ekberg, K., & LeCouteur, A. (2015). Clients’ resistance to therapists’ proposals. Managing epistemic and deontic status. Journal of Pragmatics, 90, 12–25.10.1016/j.pragma.2015.10.004
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Enfield, N. J. (2011a). Elements of formulation. In J. Streeck, C. Goodwin, & C. D. LeBaron (Eds.), Learning in doing: social, cognitive and computational perspectives. Embodied interaction. Language and body in the material world (pp. 59–66). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Enfield, N. J. (2011b). Sources of asymmetry in human interaction: Enchrony, status, knowledge and agency. In T. Stivers, L. Mondada, & J. Steensig (Eds.), The morality of knowledge in conversation (pp. 285–312). Cambridge/New York, UK: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511921674.013
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Enfield, N. J. (2017). Distribution of agency. In N. J. Enfield & P. Kockelman (Eds.), Distributed agency (pp. 9–14). Oxford, New York, UK: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190457204.001.0001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Fiksdal, S. (1999). Metaphorically speaking: gender and person. Language Sciences, 21, 345–354.10.1016/S0388-0001(98)00034-5
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Fitzgerald, T. K. (1993). Metaphors of Identity. A culture-communication dialogue. New York, NY: State University of New York Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Fonagy, P., & Allison, E. (2014). The role of mentalizing and epistemic trust in the therapeutic relationship. Psychotherapy, 51(3), 372–380.10.1037/a003650524773092
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Freud, S. (1913). On beginning the treatment (Further recommendations on the Technique of Psychoanalysis). SE XII, p. 121-144.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Gallagher, S. (2009). Philosophical antecedents of situated cognition. In P. Robbins & M. Aydede (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of situated cognition (pp. 35–52). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Goffman, E. (1963). Behavior in public places. Notes on the social organization of gatherings. New York, NY: The Free Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Goffman, E. (1964). The neglected situation. In J. J. Gumperz & D. Hymes (Eds.), The ethnography of communication (pp. 133–136). Menasha, WI: American Anthropologist Association.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Goffman, E. (1971). Relations in public. Microstudies of the public order. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Goldfried, M. R. (2019). Obtaining consensus in psychotherapy: What holds us back? The American Psychologist, 74(4), 484–496.10.1037/amp000036530221947
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Goodman, D. M. (2016). The McDonaldization of psychotherapy: Processed foods, processed therapies, and economic class. Theory & Psychology, 26(1), 77–95.10.1177/0959354315619708
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Gotsbachner, E., Mroczynski, R., & Ziem, A. (2015). Kollaborative Argumentationsstruktur-Konventionen in gesprochenem Deutsch. In A. Ziem & A. Lasch (Eds.), Konstruktionsgrammatik IV - Konstruktionen als soziale Konventionen und kognitive Routinen (pp. 63–89). Tübingen, Germany: Stauffenburg.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Haley, J. (Ed.) (1971). Changing Families. A Family Therapy Reader. New York/San Francisco/London: Grune & Stratton.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hamburger, A. (2015). Refracted attunement, affective resonance. Scenic-narrative microanalysis of entangled presence in a Holocaust Survivor’s Testimony. Contemporary Psychoanalysis, 51(2), 239–257.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Heritage, J. (1984). A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action (pp. 299–346). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hobson, R. F. (1985). Forms of feeling. The heart of psychotherapy. London/New York, UK: Tavistock/Routledge.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Huber, D., & Klug, G. (2016). Münchner Psychotherapiestudie. Psychotherapeut, 61, 462–467.10.1007/s00278-016-0139-7
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Huron, D. (2006). Sweet anticipation – Music and the psychology of expectation. A Bradford book. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/6575.001.0001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hutchins, E., & Nomura, S. (2011). Collaborative construction of multimodal utterances. In J. Streeck, C. Goodwin, & C. D. LeBaron (Eds.), Learning in doing: Social, cognitive and computational perspectives. Embodied interaction. Language and body in the material world (pp. 29–43). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Jaffe, J., Beebe, B., Feldstein, S., Crown, C. L., & Jasnow, M. D. (Eds.). (2001). Rhythms of dialogue in infancy. Coordinated timing in development. Monographs of the society for research in child development, serial no. 265, vol. 66, No. 2. Boston, MA, Oxford: Blackwell.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Jefferson, G. (1996). On the poetics of ordinary talk. Text and Performance Quarterly, 16, 1–61.10.1080/10462939609366132
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kazdin, A. E. (2009). Understanding how and why psychotherapy leads to change. Psychotherapy Research, 19, 418–428.10.1080/1050330080244889919034715
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Keselman, H., Osvaldsson Cromdal, K., Kullgard, N., & Holmqvist, R. (2018). Responding to mentalization invitations in psychotherapy sessions – A conversation analysis approach. Psychotherapy Research, 28(4), 654–666.10.1080/10503307.2016.121942227580952
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things. What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago/London, IL: The University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Leichsenring, F., Steinert, C., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2019). Toward a paradigm shift in treatment and research of mental disorders. Psychological Medicine, 49(13), 2111–2117.10.1017/S003329171900226531474241
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Levinson, S. C. (2006). On the human “interaction engine”. In S. C. Levinson & N. J. Enfield (Eds.), Roots of human sociality. Culture, cognition and interaction (pp. 39–69). Oxford, UK: Berg.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Levy, K. N., & Anderson, T. (2013). Is clinical psychology doctoral training becoming less intellectually diverse? And if so, what can be done? Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 20(2), 211–220.10.1111/cpsp.12035
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Lorenzer, A. (2016). Language, life practice and scenic understanding in psychoanalytic therapy. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 97(5), 1399–1414.10.1111/1745-8315.1260127761904
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Madill, A. (2015). Conversation analysis and psychotherapy process research. In O. C.G. Gelo, A. Pritz, & B. Rieken (Eds.), Psychotherapy research (pp. 501–516). Vienna, Austria: Springer Vienna.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Markowitz, J. (1979). Die soziale Situation. Entwurf eines Modells zur Analyse des Verhältnisses zwischen person-alen Systemen und ihrer Umwelt. (1. Aufl.). Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Suhrkamp.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Miller, S. (2006). Conversation: A history of a declining art. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Muran, J. C. (2019). Confessions of a New York rupture researcher: An Insider’s guide and critique. Psychotherapy Research, 29(1–2), 1–14.10.1080/10503307.2017.1413261609225829254460
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Norcross, J. C., & Wampold, B. E. (2018). A new therapy for each patient: Evidence-based relationships and responsiveness. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 74(11), 1889–1906.10.1002/jclp.2267830334258
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Norcross, J. C., & Wampold, B. E. (Eds.). (2019). Psychotherapy relationships that work: Volume 2: Evidence-based therapist responsiveness (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Orlinsky, D. E., & Ronnestad, M. H. (2005). How psychotherapists develop. A study of therapeutic work and professional growth. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Peräkylä, A., Henttonen, P., Voutilainen, L., Kahri, M., Stevanovic, M., Sams, M., & Ravaja, N. (2015). Sharing the emotional load. Recipient affiliation calms down the storyteller. Social Psychology Quarterly, 78(4), 301–323.10.1177/0190272515611054
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Popper, K. (1976). Unended quests. Glasgow, Scotland: Collins/Fontana.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Rae, J. (2008). Lexical substitution as a therapeutic resource. In A. Peräkylä, C. Antaki, S. Vehviläinen, & I. Leudar (Eds.), Conversation analysis and psychotherapy (pp. 62–79). Cambridge, New York, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Reik, T. (1976). Hören mit dem dritten Ohr. Die innere Erfahrung eines Psychoanalytikers. Hamburg, Germany: Hoffmann und Campe.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ruusuvuori, J. (2007). Managing affect: Integration of empathy and problem-solving in health-care encounters. Discourse Studies, 9(5), 597–622.10.1177/1461445607081269
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Sacks, H., & Jefferson, G. (1992/1995). Lectures on conversation. Edited by Gail Jefferson, with an introduction by Emanuel A. Schegloff. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Scarvaglieri, C. (2013). “Nichts anderes als ein Austausch von Worten”: Sprachliches Handeln in der Psychotherapie. Reihe Germanistische Linguistik: Vol. 298. Berlin, Germany: de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110319033
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Shotter, J. (1985). Social accountability and self specification. In K. J. Gergen & K. E. Davis (Eds.), The social construction of the person. New York/Berlin/Heidelberg/Tokyo, NY: Springer.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Stevanovic, M. (2018). Social deontics: A nano-level approach to human power play. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 13(4), 361.10.1111/jtsb.12175
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Stevanovic, M., & Peräkylä, A. (2012). Deontic authority in interaction: The right to announce, propose, and decide. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 45(3), 297–321.10.1080/08351813.2012.699260
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Stiles, W. B., Hill, C. E., & Elliott, R. (2015). Looking both ways. Psychotherapy Research, 25(3), 282–293.10.1080/10503307.2014.98168125427829
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Stivers, T. (2007). Alternative recognitionals in person reference. In N. J. Enfield & T. Stivers (Eds.), Person reference in interaction. Linguistic, cultural, and social perspectives (pp. 73–96). Cambridge, UK, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Tarplee, C. (1996). Working on young children’s utterances: Prosodic aspects of repetition during picture labelling. In E. Couper-Kuhlen & M. Selting (Eds.), Prosody in conversation. Interactional Studies (pp. 406–435). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Timimi, S. (2014). No more psychiatric labels: Why formal psychiatric diagnostic systems should be abolished. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 14(3), 208–215.10.1016/j.ijchp.2014.03.004
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Tolstoj, L. N. (2010). Krieg und Frieden (erster Band). München, Germany: Hanser. Retrieved from http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/705795189
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Voutilainen, L., Henttonen, P., Kahri, M., Ravaja, N., Sams, M., & Peräkylä, A. (2018). Empathy, challenge, and psychophysiological activation in therapist-client interaction. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 530.10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00530590426129695992
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Waldenfels, B. (2007). Antwortregister. Frankfurt, Germany: Suhrkamp.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Wampold, B. E. (2001). The great psychotherapy debate – Models, methods and findings. Mahwah, NJ/London: Lawrence Earlbaum.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Wampold, B. E., & Imel, Z. E. (2015). The great psychotherapy debate. The evidence for what makes psychotherapy work (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.10.4324/9780203582015
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Watters, E. (2010). Crazy like us: The globalization of the American psyche. New York: Free Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Wilshire, B. (1982). Role-playing and identity: The limits of theatre as metaphor. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article

Seeing the Situational Gestalt - Movement in Therapeutic Spaces

Abstract

Paradigm

My account