PSYCHOTHERAPY: THEORY, RESEARCH AND PRACTICE
VOLUME 17, #2, SUMMER 1980
THE INTENSIVE ANALYSIS OF RECURRING EVENTS
FROM THE PRACTICE OF GESTALT THERAPY
LESLIE S. GREENBERG*
University of British Columbia
ABSTRACT: An intensive analysis of nine events in
which three clients were working on resolving 'splits'
by means of the Gestalt 'two chair method' is presented. These events had previously been shown to
contain good therapeutic process as measured by the
Experiencing Scale and the purpose of this analysis
was to discover performance patterns associated with
resolution. A model of 'split' resolution, constructed
from Voice Quality and Depth of Experiencing data
for the performances in each chair shows that resolution occurs by integration. The softening of the harsh
internal critic emerges as a key factor in resolving
intrapsychic splits. The implications of this model for
practice and research are discussed.
Research, which is both close to the clinical
phenomena and makes attempts to formalize the
phenomena in quantifiable or objective terms, is
much needed to aid the integration of 'scientific'
and 'clinical' endeavors. Empirical approaches
which enable a sense of the 'lived reality' of what
actually occurs in therapy to be maintained have
the advantage of providing research results that
are more readily applicable to clinical practice.
The intensive study of therapeutic events in an
empirical rather than an experimental way
allows one to capture the sometimes subtle
changes in performance that would be completely missed by an experimental approach. The
central goal of this study is to present a descriptive model as close to the data as possible, of
some aspects of the performances of clients engaged in the therapeutic task of resolving a 'split'
by means of the Gestalt 'two chair' method.
The importance of 'healing' splits and
polarities in human functioning has been commented on by many theorists (Bakan, 1966;
* Requests for reprints should be sent to Leslie S. Greenberg, Dept. of Counseling Psychology, University of British
Columbia, 2075 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, B.C., Canada V6T 1W5.
Jung, 1966; Perls, 1951; Rank, 1945). Working
on splits in functioning forms a major part of the
process of the Gestalt approach and the 'two
chair' method of working on splits is often used
in an attempt to facilitate integration. It is the
client's actual performance while engaged in
working on splits by this method that is the focus
of this study.
A 'split' has been defined as being an intherapy statement of conflict with recognizable
distinctive features (Greenberg, 1979). Statements such as "I shouldn't be so lazy" or "I
criticize myself," in which two parts of the self
are presented as being in opposition in a live
or poignant manner, indicate that the person is
experiencing a split in the moment. Three types
of splits, each representing different forms of the
presenting problem, have been identified: the
Conflict type, in which people state a conflict;
the Subject/Object type, in which people report
that they are doing something to themselves; and
the Attribution type, in which people are hypersensitive to some feature in the environment and
report it to be influencing them in a psychologically undesirable way. The clients' performances on these tasks are the subject of this study.
The definitions of the 'split' are regarded as
definitions of the psychological task in which the
person is engaged, i.e., trying to solve the split.
The subtyping of the splits may prove important
for there may be different resolution performances associated with each subtype. The therapist in this approach is construed as part of the
task environment and as providing task instructions to help aid resolution.
The particular therapist operation used for this
task is called the 'two chair' operation. The following principles have been defined (Greenberg,
1979) as representing the structure underlying
the operation and as guiding the therapist's moment by moment interventions. The five princi-
143
144
LESLIE S. GREENBERG
pies are: (1) Maintaining the Contact boundary—maintaining clear separation and contact
between the parts. (2) Responsibility—directing
clients to use their abilities to respond as the
agent of their experience in each chair. (3)
Attending—directing the clients' attention to
particular aspects of their present functioning.
(4) Heightening—highlighting aspects of present experience by increasing the level of affective arousal. (5) Expressing—making actual and
particular that which is intellectual or abstract.
The operation executed according to these principles is essentially designed to encourage the
client to unfold the inner dialogue underlying the
split in a present centered dialectical process.
There have been a number of theoretical
statements as to the nature of the clients' experience and behavior in the process of change in
Gestalt therapy that are relevant to this analysis
of the client performance in a 'split' task. The
first are those by the founder of Gestalt Therapy,
Fritz Perls. He commented on the resolution of
the top-dog/under-dog and other splits "by listening we can bring about reconciliation" of the
two parts (Perls, 1969). In a further elaboration,
he proposed that, when people listen to themselves, integration occurs through a synthesis of
polarities:
The basic philosophy of Gestalt Therapy is that of nature—differentiation and integration. Differentiation by
itself leads to polarities. As dualities, these polarities will
easily fight and paralyze one another. By integrating opposite traits we make the person whole again. For instance, weakness and bullying integrate as silent
firmness. (Perls, 1965).
and that the process is one of
the reconciliation of opposites so that they no longer waste
energy in useless struggle with each other but can join in
productive combination and interplay. (Perls, 1970).
Perls suggested that resolution occurs by a
process of listening to oneself and by a synthesis
of opposites. Polster & Polster (1976) note in
addition that each faction in the opposition
adopts different unproductive ways of dealing
with the struggle for internal unity and that "To
bring the interaction up to date, the warring parts
must confront each other, the struggle must be
expressed and articulated." Encouraging contact between the parts and acceptance of both
sides appears to be an important component of
helping the person to encompass the paradox of
opposites.
METHOD
If affective tasks, to which different clients
repeatedly seek resolution in therapy, can be
identified then these client task performances
can be studied as phenomena in their own right,
in order to reveal the structures underlying the
affective problem solving strategies. The 'split,'
as defined (Greenberg, 1979), possesses qualities of an affective task. It has a stable structure
and it occurs repeatedly within and across clients. In addition, clients experience the splits as
problems to be solved which constantly 'nag' at
them and demand attention until they are resolved.
The approach used here for the intensive
analysis of client performances on this task is a
form of task analysis developed for the study of
psychotherapeutic events (Greenberg, 1976).
Because of the many variables in a problem
solving event of this nature and because so much
goes on in any single problem solving encounter,
experiments of the classical sort are only rarely
useful for studying this type of phenomenon.
What is important is to collect enough data about
each individual subject and his/her performance
in a particular task in order to be able to identify
his/her method of resolving the task. Task
analysis requires the identification of the sequential stages through which a person progresses in
order to reach some objective. In general, task
analysis involves three components: identifying
and describing the task to be performed (the
split), breaking down of the task instructions so
that each item of the instruction conveys a separate and unique message (the two chair operation), and describing the actual moment by
moment performances of the individual engaged
in the task.
The task performances presented in this paper
were collected from individuals of specified
characteristics who had participated in a study of
the specific process effects of different therapist
operations (Greenberg, 1976). The clients were
specified as good prognosis clients for client
centered therapy and were selected on the basis
of having at least six out of twenty focused voice
statements midway in an initial interview (Rice
& Wagstaff, 1967). In addition all had focusing
responses on the post-focusing questionnaire
(Gendlin et al., 1966). Three events were collected for each of three clients from therapy
sessions in which the therapists were trained in
the recognition of splits and in the 'two chair'
145
ANALYSIS OF RECURRING EVENTS
operation. An event consisted of three parts: a
client statement of the task, in this case the
'split'; the ongoing task instructions presented
by the therapist, in this case the 'two chair operation' ; and the ongoing client task performance to
some point of termination of this performance.
In each event, therefore, a good prognosis client
was engaged in attempting to resolve a' split'.
In the study of effects the 'two chair' operation
led to deeper levels of experiencing than did
empathic reflections when both were randomly
applied to naturally occurring 'splits' which
clients reported in therapy (Greenberg, 1976). In
addition, it was shown that for these clients there
was a significant increase in the depth of experiencing over time in the Gestalt event. Having
shown that something therapeutically significant
was consistently occurring within these Gestalt
events, it appeared that a more intensive analysis
should be undertaken to explore the phenomena
more deeply and it is this analysis that is presented here. In problem solving terms, therefore,
the attainment of high levels of experiencing
(five and above) on the split performance was
regarded as a global process indicator of problem
resolution or approaches thereto. Level five on
the experiencing scale requires that problems or
propositions about feelings and personal experiences are being dealt with in an exploratory and
elaborative way and level six that the content is
"a synthesis of readily accessible, newly recognized or more fully realized feelings and experiences to produce personally meaningful structures or to resolve issues" (Klein etal., 1969).
Voice Quality (Rice & Wagstaff, 1967) and
Depth of Experiencing (Klein et al., 1969) both
of which have been shown to be indices of productive therapeutic process were used to rate the
client performance in the events. The taped excerpts of each event were broken into two-minute
segments and all the segments were randomized.
Experiencing scores were obtained for each chair
in all the segments by two raters. Voice was rated
by statement for each two-minute segment and
the predominant voice quality for each chair in
all the segments was obtained. A client statement
was defined as anything the client said between
two therapist responses. Voice was rated by one
rater for two clients and a second rater for the
third client. In addition, for a reliability check,
each rater overlapped on one-third of the material for each client. The reliability on the experiencing rating ranged from .72 to .81 on the
Pearson product moment correlation coefficient
for the three clients. Cohen's kappa, a coefficient of interjudge agreement (Cohen, 1960)
on voice ratings was significant at the .01 level
for each of the three clients.
RESULTS
The concrete events were separated from the
stream of in-therapy performance so as to study
the client performance on each task. The goal
was to identify some repeatable regularities in
these performances that would aid in characterizing the nature of a resolution performance. The
hypotheses with which the data were approached
were not clearly articulated as is to be expected in
a task analytic approach (Newell & Simon,
1972; Pascual-Leone, 1976). The characteristics
of each chair on the Experiencing Scale and on
voice quality were scrutinized to see if anything
would be revealed concerning the process of
resolving splits. As the graphic representations
of the data were inspected (Figs. 1, 2 & 3) some
interesting differences in the two chairs on the
experiencing scale became apparent. Further intensive observation of the data from the three
clients led to the construction of the following
idealized model of the task performance.
On the experiencing scale, the two chairs can be regarded
as initially functioning as independent systems, i.e., the
two chairs can be characterized by different levels of
experiencing, one chair being consistently higher than the
other. At a certain point in the performance, a merging of
these two systems takes place by an increase in the level of
experiencing of the lower one. The two systems thereafter
proceed to task resolution at levels of experiencing which
do not distinguish them apart and which are collectively
higher than before. (Greenberg, 1976)
This pattern revealed itself consistently throughout the nine events from the three clients. In
addition, the following performance details appeared in the nine events:
1) Chair II, called "the experiencing chair,"
proceeded predominantly at level four or above.
2) Chair I, "the other chair," proceeded initially at lower levels and then, at a point called
the "merging point," increased to levels similar
to those of chair II.
3) In the latter part of the event, after the
increase in the "other chair" beyond level four,
i.e., after the merging point, both chairs tended
to attain levels of exp riencing higher than four.
This pattern occurred in all cases and the event
could therefore be characterized as consisting of
146
LESLIE S. GREENBERG
G0F3
6
•
Experiencing
_ Chair
5
4
Depth of
Experiencing
(P«ak
Values) 2
-
1
-
i
f/
/ /
I
i""O
\ /
Other Chair
Depth of
A'\ K
Experiencing 3 g
V
(Peak
-
Split
i
i
5
10
Merging
Point
i
15
i
20
Segments
Figure l(a)
Figure 2(a)
GOF 10
Experiencing Chair
4
Depth of
Experiencing 3
(Peak
Values)
2
1
ft
A
5 -
GAT 5
p
*
• r
Experiencing Cnair
Other Chair
-
Expariendng,
'
(Peak
Values!
,
Split
•
i
5
10
i
Merging
Point
v
•
i
Other Chair
Merging
Point
Split
20
Segments
30
Figure l(b)
35
Segments
Figure 2(b)
GAT 11
GOF 11
6
Experiencing
Chair^ p ^
5
,
4
Depth of
Experiencing 3
(Peak
Values) 2
1
V
»' \ »'
Depth o f 4
Experiencing
(Peak
*
Values
^ A ,v
/
Other C h a i r "
Merging Point
Split
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
15
Segments
Figure l(c)
20
Segments
Figure 2(c)
Clients Segment by Segment Depth of Experiencing for Each Chair for the Nine Events.
two phases, a pre-resolution phase, prior to the
increase in the other chair, and a resolution phase
in which both chairs tend to increase in depth of
experiencing.
The graphs in Figures 1, 2 and 3 indicate the
actual experiencing levels of the two chairs for
the three clients in each two chair event. In one
case, GOF 10, (Fig. 1 b) resolution is not as clear
as in the other cases because the other chair only
reaches 4.5 and the experiencing chair only
reaches 5. This event was terminated prematurely by the client because she had another appointment which she had to make. She reported
in the following interview that she had experienced discomfort all day and had only achieved a
sense of completion when she was able to attend
147
ANALYSIS OF RECURRING EVENTS
KAT 22
i
6r
5 "
A
Chair J{
Depth of 4 L f * ^ *
Experiencing
'
(Peak 3 • /
Values)
A
2 1 -
~<X><A
^oI
\ /
-/?
Other
Chair
SP"*
\J
a
Merging
Point
t
5
\f
10
15
20
25
Segments
Figure 3 (a)
KAT 3
I
61"
^ -
Depth of
Experiencinc
(Peak ' 3 r
Values!2 -
/
Experiencing / r ^ .
p.^ Chair Ji
^ 4 , / ' r ^ a 5 \ . ^•o-e£^
,ofr*rcrG£>.
Nio^K^r
^V^^?^
?!h;r
Chair
1 -
Split
Merging
Point
5
10
15
20
25
30
Segments
Figure 3(b)
KAT 7
,
Experiencing
Chair
r
. ^
i
\
/
tJ^
/YV
Depth of
/
\
Experiencing3
(Peak
Values) 2
1
/
V
'
Split Merging
| , I Point ,
5
10
Other Chair
|
15
!
20
t
25
Segments
F i g u r e 3(c)
to the problem prior to going to sleep. In the rest
of the cases, however, the higher levels reached
are all convincingly greater than or equal to five.
These levels on the Experiencing Scale clearly
represent conflict resolution or approaches to
resolution. The pattern of the two independent
systems which merge is shown clearly in all but
one of the nine events. In this exceptional case
(KAT 7), "the other chair," rather than proceeding initially at lower levels, immediately starts
off at level 5 and this event can be regarded as
proceeding directly to the resolution phase (i.e.,
level five or above on both chairs).
Excluding KAT 7, (Fig. 3c) which has no
experiencing before the merging, we see that
"the other chair" is always lower than "the
experiencing chair," in the preresolution phase.
The difference in mean levels of experiencing in
the preresolution phase is statistically significant
on a one-tailed test at the .05 level on the Mann
Whitney U test for both GOF and GAT. The
sample of two for KAT is too small to be tested
but it can be seen that both KAT events clearly
manifest the same phenomenon. Table 1 shows
the mean experiencing scores for the two phases
for each chair. Each client score was obtained by
averaging the mean phase score for the three
events. It can be seen that for each client both
chairs increase levels in the resolution phase.
The difference in preresolution and resolution
scores for each chair is statistically significant on
a one tailed test at the .05 level on the Mann
Whitney U test.
This data from experiencing ratings, therefore, demonstrate that in these events, the two
chairs follow different experiencing tracks until
such time as the lower chair increases in depth of
experiencing to levels comparable to that of the
experiencing chair. At this time, resolution is
approached and subsequently attained by the two
chairs both of which increase in level and tend to
reach levels of five and six on the experiencing
scale. The experiencing chair does, on some
occasions, measure higher levels before the resolution phase occurs, but the other chair never
reaches these before it peaks at level five or
above. This attainment of the "merging point"
by the "other chair'' can therefore be regarded as
a sufficient condition of resolution and a signal of
the resolution phase.
TABLE 1. Mean Experiencing in the Preresolution and Resolution Phases
Other Chair
Experiencing Chair
Client
Preresolution
Resolution
Mann Whitney U
GOF
GAT
KAT
GOF
GAT
KAT
3.2
3.5
3.7
4.2
4.5
4.2
4.5
4.5
4.6
5.2
4.9
5.1
0*
significant at the .05 level.
0*
148
LESLIE S. GREENBERG
TABLE 2. Proportion of Different Voices in the Two Chairs
Client Session
GOF
GAT
KAT
3
10
11
3
5
11
1
3
7
Sign
Chair 2 (Experiencing Chair)
Chair 1 (Other Chair)
X + L*
F+E*
X+L
F+E
.42
.38
.44
.7
.22
.43
.64
.73
.59
.58
.62
.56
.3
.8
.57
.27
.25
.42
.18
.2
.22
.6
.71
.5
.73
.75
.58
.82
.8
.78
.4
.29
.5
.36
.27
.41
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
* X external, L limited voice, Ffocused, E emotional voice.
The next step in this intensive analysis was to
see if the voice data in any way corroborated the
findings suggested by this model. If voice was
different in the two chairs, this would strengthen
the model that the two chairs act as independent
systems. Changes in voice after the merging
point would similarly strengthen the model that
there was some change phenomenon occurring
in the resolution phase. The graphs of the statement voice qualities used by the two chairs are
not presented due to their size and complexity. In
their place, summary statistics describing the data
are presented. In Table 2, the proportion of voice
statement groupings made in each chair are
shown. It shows the proportion of Limited plus
External statements and Focused plus Emotional
statements made in each chair. Limited and External are the voice styles that have been shown
to be indices of less productive therapy, while
Focused and Emotional have been shown to be
indices of productive psychotherapy as indicated
by the level of correlation between these styles
and successful outcome in client-centered therapy (Rice & Wagstaff, 1967; Rice etal., 1978).
It is seen that in each event, "the other chair"
uses more of the Limited plus External combination of voice qualities than does "the experiencing chair." A sign test applied to test
for a difference in the voice quality between
chairs shows that the proportions in the two
chairs are significantly different on a one tailed
test at the .01 level. The nine events are, however, not nine independent measures, as required
by the test; rather, there are three clusters of three
dependent measures. This violates the independence assumption of the test used. However, on
inspection it can be seen that the scores for each
event and for means of each client all show the
same effects, viz. the proportion of external plus
limited is always higher in the "other chair".
This indicates that the effect sh )wn by the test is
not due to bias from dependent subset of scores
but it an effect contributed to by all events and
clients. We may, therefore, view this finding
as indicating that the two chairs use different
voices.
The "other chair," therefore, uses more of a
combination of an energetic, outerdirected voice
(externahX) and an energyless, restricted voice
(limited:L) whereas the "experiencing chair"
uses more of a combination of a high energy
inner directed voice (focused:F) and a high enTABLE 3. Proportion of F+E Before and After
Merging in Chair 1 (Other Chair)
Client
GOF
GAT
KAT
Before
After
Sign
1
1
.55
+
+
3
10
11
.5
.6
.6
mean
.57
3
5
11
.25
.75
.43
mean
.47
1
3
7
.27
.125
.93
.38
.36
mean
.198
.37
.85
1
.9
.9
+
+
+
+
+
149
ANALYSIS OF RECURRING EVENTS
energy emotionally expressive voice (emotional :E). The "other chair" can be considered,
from this voice data, to be less involved and
making poor contact with itself or with the ' 'experiencing chair."
Although the "other chair" uses more poor
contact voice over the whole event, it was found
that the proportion of this voice used by this chair
was greater in the preresolution phase than in the
resolution phase. In other words, the proportion
of good contact voice in Chair I was higher in the
resolution phase. This is shown in Table 3 by the
proportion of good contact voice (F&E) being
greater in the resolution phase for seven of the
nine events. In GOF 11, there is a reversal, i.e.,
the proportion in preresolution is greater than in
the resolution phase and in KAT 7, as already
mentioned, there is no preresolution phase.
Using a sign test and regarding these as nine
independent events, the difference between preresolution phase and resolution phase is significantly different on a one-tailed test at the .05
level. From the means we see that the direction
of difference on the means is the same for each
client as in the majority of events. This again
gives an indication that the effect tested for on the
three clusters of three dependent measures was
contributed to by all of the clusters. This finding
therefore indicates that in' 'the other chair'' there
is a shift from the talking at, poor contact, voice
in the preresolution phase to the use of more
involved, good contact, voice in the resolution
phase.
In the case of GOF 11, where this was not the
case, the "other chair" made only five statements out of forty-two in the preresolution
phase, three of these five being focused. The
"other chair" is therefore seen to have spoken
very little in this phase. The proportion score for
focused voice is therefore based on a very small
sample and is not a highly stable estimate. The
score for "the other chair" in the resolution
phase by comparison is more stable, being based
on eleven statements out of a total of fifty-two
statements by both chairs.
The data from an inspection of voice and experiencing in conjunction at the merging point is
shown in Table 4. The middle column, 3, represents the voice quality of that segment which
accompanied the first increase or merging in
experience of the "other chair." This is the
"other chair's'' voice at the merging point or the
beginning of the resolution phase. On either side
TABLE 4. 'Other Chair'Voice Around Merging Point
Segments
1
2
At
Merging
3
Interview
3
GOF 10
11
GAT 3
5
11
KAT 1
3
7
X
X
X
X
L
L
X
X
-
X
F
F
X
F
L
X
X
X
F+E
F+E
F
F
F
F
E
F
F+E
Before
Merging
After
Merging
4
5
F
—
F
—
F
F
X
L
X
—
—
X
—
F
F
X
X
F
of this column are the voice qualities on the two
preceding segments (column 1 and 2) and the
two proceeding segments (column 4 and 5),
whenever these existed. It is seen that the voice
quality of "the other chair" at the beginning of
resolution is characteristically focused or emotional, what has been called good contact voice.
In six out of nine cases, the preceding two segments are either external or limited. In the other
three cases, the immediately preceding statement is focused but this is preceded by an external or limited voice segment. The ' 'other chair''
can therefore be regarded as having changed
from a poor contact to a good contact voice in the
immediate vicinity of the "merging point.'' This
is an interesting finding. The "other chair" is
sometimes focused before the merging point and
more often after the merging point, showing that
this voice is not in itself a sufficient condition for
resolution. Change to focused voice, however,
does appear to be a necessary condition for resolution. This change of voice by the other chair is,
therefore, an important therapeutic cue. When
this voice change in the "other chair" is accompanied by an increase in experiencing to the level
of the "experiencing chair," the task performance has entered the resolution phase.
DISCUSSION
What then emerges from this quantitative description of the actual performance? We find that
the two chairs can be thought of as independent
systems on voice and depth of experiencing and
that voice and depth of experiencing change in
such a manner as to imply two phases of the
150
LESLIE S. GREENBERG
event, a preresolution and a resolution phase. In
the preresolution phase, the "other chair" operates at levels of experience consistently below
level four and the "experiencing chair" consistently above level four. In the preresolution
phase, the ' 'other chair'' uses more poor contact
voice than in the resolution phase. We therefore
have a picture in the preresolution phase of the
"other chair" as uninvolved with its own experiencing and not in good contact with the "experiencing chair'', which is itself only moderately
involved and making some contact. The beginning of the resolution phase is marked by the
"other chair" simultaneously moving to a significantly deeper level of experiencing (above
4.5) and changing to a contactful voice. The
"experiencing chair" proceeds in resolution
phase at increased levels, around five and above
on the Experiencing Scale, while the other chair
now uses more contact voice and proceeds at
levels of experiencing clearly above level four.
The observed facts are in accord with the
idealized notion of a reconciliation of two parts
by integration. In the resolution phase, the
' 'other chair'' appears to soften; it becomes more
similar in style to the "experiencing chair", is
more involved and subjective, and describes its
own feelings more personally. There is a complementarity in the levels of depth of experiencing in the two chairs. The voice data suggests a
movement in the "other chair" from talking at
oneself to talking to oneself.
This perspective on the different nature of the
chairs can be used to help describe the unfolding
of the dialogue in productive therapeutic process. The "experiencing chair" represents the
experiencing part of the client which is similar to
the organism or the self of other experiential
therapies. Initially, when the dialogue is progressing well, this part engages in a process of
inner exploration and experiencing. The "other
chair", in contrast, is filled with the ego alien
parts of the personality and with the client's
attributions in the form of people or objects. The
person in this chair initially uses a more external
or lecturing voice and engages at low levels of
experiencing. The occupant of this chair is more
like the client's persecuting internal objects or
the outer world objects onto whom these have
been projected. The organism or the self in the
"experiencing chair" reacts or feels in the face
of the attitudes and actions of the occupant of the
"other chair.'' At some point in the dialogue the
"other chair" changes and becomes more similar to the "experiencing chair." The person in
the "other chair" shifts to higher levels of experience and more focused-expressive voice,
much as though he or she is becoming less critical, softer and more focused on his or her inner
experiencing in that chair.
These research results suggest that the therapeutic task is to initially promote experiencing
in the one chair and criticisms and projections
in the other chair. The knowledge of what good
'split' resolution performances look like provides therapists with a 'road map' of the territory which enables them to guide clients who
are losing their way. Being alert to any change in
tone and quality in the way the person relates to
themselves from the "other chair" can greatly
enhance the probability of facilitating split resolutions. The slightest indication of the other chair
softening or turning in on its own experience is
then promoted by the therapist in order to aid
integration.
The softening of the harsh internal critic appears to allow the experiencing in the "other
chair" to emerge and a constructive interchange
between alienated parts of the self to follow. The
process is similar to interpersonal conflict resolution in which the two parties initially quarrel but
then when the blamer takes a different stance in
the interaction and expresses some of what is
happening inside him or her the victim of the
attack is more able to listen to the other person.
Intrapsychic resolution similarly seems to require a change in stance by the internal blamer
followed by a process of mutual listening between parts of the self. Listening to oneself or
accepting oneself in order to resolve splits seems
to occur in a number of different ways. First, in
the experiencing chair the person must fully experience and accept the unaccepted or hidden
aspects of the self. Second the harsh critic, in
order to take a different stance, must accept,
listen to, or contact the feelings and fears underlying its criticism. By so doing a softening of the
criticism and a feeling of understanding and
compassion for the self occurs. Third, from the
base of self acceptance and self appreciation
established by the above processes, the two
chairs can then listen to each other or negotiate to
form a creative resolution between the parts.
Examination of the content of the dialogues in
the events studied show the shifts in the "other
chair" seemed to occur by a softening and a
151
ANALYSIS OF RECURRING EVENTS
greater sense of self acceptance. In the events
collected, the "other chair," at the merging
point, contained either another person or a part of
the self. Excerpts from GAT 3, a dialogue in
which a projected parent is the part in the ' 'other
chair," is given below to show the nature of the
shift at the merging point.
Preresolution phase
Other:
Do you want to go to hell? You must
want to —couldn't you even do it just for
us. What can I do—how can I be your
mother and have such a daughter?
Experiencing: I want you to love me because of who I
am / T say this again / Love me because
of who I am. What do you mean by that
she would say / T and what do you say?
I feel no guilt for the way I have lived.
I have made mistakes but I feel positive
about my life in the last few years. You
feel negative that they are lost years. You
have not believed me in the past which
has been really hard for me (soft voice).
T:
Exp:
T:
Exp:
T:
Exp:
Merging Point
Exp:
T:
Other:
T:
Other:
T:
Exp:
You see me through your eyes and according to your rules.
Come over here. How do you see her?
Be those eyes. What do you see over
there?
I see a sad girl, (focused voice)
So tell her this.
I see a lonely girl, you've had sex with all
sorts of men. I don't know how you could
be happy. I feel sad when I see you unhappy. I want to do something but I don't
know what to do. I want to see you make
a decision on what to do next, a good decision. Then I would say . . . (focused
voice)
Change
That's right—it took me years and years
to actually make a good decision as to
what to do next because I was floundering
the whole time trying to bring together
in a whole person the person who was
struggling between two ideas, I don't
know what to call it, you represented the
one commitment and what made it hard
for me was the emotional bond that you
loved me and required this of me . . .
I had no time for anything else. I had
no time to become, to make any sound
decisions career wise, marriage wise,
barely friend wise. I had no time for anything (cries) but untangling.
Resolution Phase
Exp:
I'm sad that I had to spend so much time
untangling. That's what I'm sad about
T:
and I'm actually pretty good these days
and I'm still a little lost but I'm really enjoying finding my way. I'm really enjoying i t . . . it's not a bad thing at all. I think
that coming to university has given me a
chance to enjoy finding my way, given
me some time to look around and prepare
myself.
So what's happening now—how are you
feeling?
I'm . . . I don't know what I'm feeling.
I don't. . .
Check out inside — what's happening?
I remember—I'm feeling very . . . as
soon as I explained how I'm enjoying
finding my way now I forget I had . . .
I felt really good because it's true. My
life isn't any easier than it ever was but
I'm enjoying it.
I heard some real life and energy come
into that. . . That's when you're in touch
with that. . . then you feel strong.
Yeah, it's very true I don't feel about myself the way my family feels toward me
regarding my past which has been really
patchy what would you call it checkered.
It really has been . . . I ' v e done a lot of
things and tried many things that to an
outsider might appear one way or the
other very good or very bad but within
myself I know that I was always, true, I
might as well tell her that.
Uhhum.
In this example, the client moves from criticizing and derogating herself in the "other chair"
in the preresolution phase to feeling compassion
("I see a sad girl") and personalizing her experience in this chair ("I feel sad," "I want to do
something") at the merging point. A resolution
then emerges in the "experiencing chair," "I'm
finding my way," etc. The key element of
change occurs when the harsh critic takes a different stance, stops blaming and begins to feel a
form of empathy or compassion toward the self.
Rather than being scolding, this 'other' part of
the self begins to talk about its own experiences,
wants and fears, and the emphasis shifts toward a
dialogue of mutual understanding. A content
analysis of the transcripts thus adds weight to the
model constructed from the voice and experiencing data.
CONCLUSION
This study demonstrates the power of intensive analysis in psychotherapy research. It enables the 'clinician researcher' to identify and
rigorously describe phenomena which exist but
which have yet to be rendered visible in their
LESLIE S. GREENBERG
152
essential form. Intensive analysis of these Gestalt events has allowed a detailed elaboration of
some of the subtleties of the therapeutic process
and by so doing has opened new avenues for
clinical practice and research. These results can
enhance therapeutic functioning by alerting the
therapist to the independent systems in the
chairs, to shifts in the "other chair" and to
merging between the chairs. In addition, the
isolation of this client task and the discovery of
repeatable regularities in the task performances
allows us to begin to seek answers to questions
such as, what are the cognitive, attentional and
affective mechanisms associau d with the shift at
the merging point?
REFERENCES
BAKAN, D. The duality of human existence. New York:
Jossey-Bass, 1966.
COHEN, J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 37-46,
1960.
GENDLIN, E. et al. Focusing ability in psychotherapy, personality and creativity. In J. Shlein (Ed.), Research in
Psychotherapy. Vol. Ill: A.P.A., 1968, pp. 217-328.
GREENBERG, L. A task analytic approach to the events of
psychotherapy. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, York
University, Toronto, 1976.
GREENBERG, L. Resolving splits: Use of the two-chair technique. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice,
16,316-324, 1979.
JUNG, C. G. The collected works of C. G. Jung. G. Adler,
M. Fordham and H. Read (Eds.). New York: Bellingen
Foundation, 1966.
KLEIN, M., MATHIEU, P., KIESLER, D. & GENDLIN, E. The
experiencing scale. Madison, Wise: Wisconsin Psychiatric Institute, 1969.
NEWELL, A. & SIMON, H. Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1972.
PASCUAL-LEONE, J. Metasubjective problems of constructive cognition: Forms of knowing and their psychological
mechanisms. Canadian Psychological Review, 17, 110125,1976.
PERLS, F. Gestalt therapy and human potentialities, Esalen
Paper, No. 1,1965.
PERLS, F. Gestalt therapy. Lafayette, Calif.: Real People
Press, 1969.
PERLS, F. Four lectures. In J. Fagan & I. Shepherd (Eds.),
Gestalt Therapy Now. Palo Alto: Science and Behavior
Books, 1970.
POLSTER, E. & POLSTER, M. Therapy without resistance. In
A. Burton (Ed.), Gestalt Therapy in What Makes Behaviour Change Possible, Brunner/Mazel, 1976.
RANK, O. Will therapy and truth and reality. New York:
Alfred A. Knopf, 1945.
RICE, L. & WAGSTAFF, A. Client voice quality and expressive style as indices of productive psychotherapy. Journal
of Consulting Psychology, 31, 557-563, 1967.
RICE, L.,
KOKE, C ,
GREENBERG, L. & WAGSTAFF, A.
Voice quality training manual. Counselling & Development Centre, York University, Toronto, 1978.