Difference between revisions of "Nondirective psychotherapy" - New World Encyclopedia

From New World Encyclopedia
 
(16 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
[[Category:Public]]
 
[[Category:Politics and social sciences]]
 
[[Category:Politics and social sciences]]
 
[[Category:Psychology]]
 
[[Category:Psychology]]
{{Contracted}}
+
{{Copyedited}}{{Paid}}{{Approved}}{{Images OK}}{{Submitted}}
'''Client-Centered Therapy''' (CCT) was developed by the humanist [[psychologist]] [[Carl Rogers]] in the 1940s and 1950s. It is used to help a person achieve personal growth and or come to terms with a specific event or problem they are having. CCT is based on the principal of talking therapy and is a non-directive approach. The therapist encourages the patient to express their feelings and does not suggest how the person might wish to change, but by listening and then mirroring back what the patient reveals to them, helps them to explore and understand their feelings for themselves. The patient is then able to decide what kind of changes they would like to make and can achieve personal growth. Although this technique has been criticized by some for its lack of structure and set method it has proved to be a hugely effective and popular treatment. CCT is predominately used by [[psychologists]] and counsellors in [[psychotherapy]].
+
'''Nondirective psychotherapy''' was developed by the [[humanistic psychology|humanistic]] [[psychologist]], [[Carl Rogers]], in the 1940s and 1950s. It is used to help a person achieve personal growth and/or come to terms with a specific traumatic event or [[psychology|psychological]] problem. The method has proved effective and popular, although it has been criticized for its lack of structure. The strength of the approach lies in the emphasis of harmonious relationships, based on respect, congruence, and [[empathy]], in promoting healthy [[psychological development]]. However, while ensuring that the [[counseling|counselor]] is non-judgemental and, therefore, not threatening to the client, there is a concomitant loss of authority and lack of [[norm]]s, or at least alternative viewpoints, to guide clients in deciding how to change in order to achieve greater psychological health.
 +
{{toc}}
  
 
==Introduction==
 
==Introduction==
Client-Centered Therapy or Person-Centered Therapy, now considered a founding work in the [[humanistic]] school of psychotherapies, began formally with [[Carl Rogers]] broadly considered the most influential US psychotherapist in the short history of this field.
+
Carl Rogers developed '''Nondirective psychotherapy''', also called '''Client-centered therapy''' and later, the '''Person-centered approach''', reflecting Rogers' belief that his model applied to interactions between all people, not just therapist-client relations. It is also commonly referred to as '''Rogerian''' therapy. Along with [[Abraham Maslow]], Rogers was the founder of the [[Humanistic psychology|humanistic approach]] to [[psychology]].
 
 
'''Person-Centered Therapy''' was developed by [[Carl Rogers]]. He referred to it as counseling rather than psychotherapy.  He also believed that the relationship between the client and the therapist is not a patient-doctor relationship in which the patient passively submits to something that is done ''to'' him/her by the healer.  On the contrary, it should be a person-to-person relationship in which the therapists talks ''with'' the client. By using the word "client" instead of "patient," Rogers wanted to indicate that the client is not sick in any organic sense.
 
 
 
“Rogerian” psychotherapy is often identified as one of the major school groups, along with Psychoanalytic (most famously [[Sigmund Freud]]), Depth Therapy which bridges from Psychoanalytic through archetypal, mythographical, dream, and unconscious material to existentialists like [[Rollo May]], and the increasingly popular Cognitive-Behavioral school. Others acknowledge Rogers' broad influence on approach, while naming a humanistic or humanistic-existentialist school group; there is large debate over what constitute major schools and cross-influences with more tangential candidates such as feminist, Gestalt, British school, self psychology, interpersonal, family systems, integrative, systemic and communicative, with several historical influences seeding them such as object-relations.
 
 
 
  
 +
He referred to his approach as [[counseling]] rather than [[psychotherapy]], and preferred the term "client" over "patient." He also believed that the relationship between the client and the therapist is not a patient-doctor relationship in which the patient passively submits to something that is done ''to'' him or her by the healer. On the contrary, it should be a person-to-person relationship in which the therapist talks ''with'' the client.
  
 
==Personality Theory==
 
==Personality Theory==
Rogers developed person-centered therapeutic method based on his theory of human [[personality]]. He believed that all human beings naturally strive to achieve their potential, so that [[mental health and illness|mental health]] is actually the process of [[psychological development]]; [[psychopathology|mental disturbance]] is the result of distortion in this growth process.
+
The person-centered approach was developed by [[Carl Rogers]] based on his theory of human [[personality]]. He believed that all human beings naturally strive to achieve their potential, so that [[mental health and illness|mental health]] is actually the process of [[psychological development]]; [[psychopathology|mental disturbance]] is the result of distortion in this growth process.
  
 
===Actualizing tendency===
 
===Actualizing tendency===
 
+
Rogers believed that all creatures have a built-in life force, that he called the "actualizing tendency," which functions as [[motivation]] to develop one's potential as fully as possible. [[Abraham Maslow]] referred to this process in human beings as "self-actualization." Rogers viewed [[psychological development]] as the process of a person following the path of actualization and so becoming more fully themselves.
Rogers believed that all creatures have a built-in life force, that he called the "actualizing tendency," which functions as [[motivation]] to develop one's potential as fully as possible. [[Abraham Maslow]] referred to this process in human beings as "self-actualization." Rogers viewed [[psychological development]] as the process of a person following the path of actualization and so becoming more fully themselves.  
 
  
 
===Fully functioning person===
 
===Fully functioning person===
Rogers termed the healthy person, the one who is clearly on the path of actualization, as "fully functioning," and he identified five qualities that make us healthy:
+
The "healthy person", as termed by Rogers, is the one who is clearly on the path of actualization, as "fully functioning," and he identified five qualities that make us healthy:
 
+
*'''Openness to experience'''
====Openness to experience====
 
 
Openness to experience means that one is able to accurately perceive one's feelings and experiences in the world, and accept that reality. Openness includes feelings, because these are what convey "organismic valuing," or the sense of whether something is good or bad for the person.
 
Openness to experience means that one is able to accurately perceive one's feelings and experiences in the world, and accept that reality. Openness includes feelings, because these are what convey "organismic valuing," or the sense of whether something is good or bad for the person.
 
+
*'''Existential living'''
====Existential living====
 
 
Existential living means living in the present rather than the past, which has gone, or the future, which does not yet exist. Rogers did not mean that the past and future do not exist, though, only that they should be recognized as what they are: the past is contained in [[memory|memories]] from which we can learn, and the future contains our dreams, hopes, and plans for what we intend to do. The present, however, is the reality that we must deal with now.
 
Existential living means living in the present rather than the past, which has gone, or the future, which does not yet exist. Rogers did not mean that the past and future do not exist, though, only that they should be recognized as what they are: the past is contained in [[memory|memories]] from which we can learn, and the future contains our dreams, hopes, and plans for what we intend to do. The present, however, is the reality that we must deal with now.
 
+
*'''Organismic trusting'''
====Organismic trusting====
 
 
Rogers believed that organisms know what is good for them: [[evolution]] has provided all living creatures, including [[plant]]s, [[animal]]s, and [[human being]]s, with [[sense]]s to discriminate between what is good and what is bad for them. Therefore, people should allow themselves to be guided by this process, trusting their own thoughts and feelings as accurate, and doing what comes naturally. According to this view, what feels right is the right thing for a person to do.
 
Rogers believed that organisms know what is good for them: [[evolution]] has provided all living creatures, including [[plant]]s, [[animal]]s, and [[human being]]s, with [[sense]]s to discriminate between what is good and what is bad for them. Therefore, people should allow themselves to be guided by this process, trusting their own thoughts and feelings as accurate, and doing what comes naturally. According to this view, what feels right is the right thing for a person to do.
  
Here, however, it is important to understand that Rogers did not advocate hurting others or oneself just because it might feel good! For Rogers, organismic trusting means trusting what one's "real self" feels, the real self being in touch with what is actually good for the person.
+
However, it is important to understand that Rogers did not advocate hurting others or ones’ self just because it might feel good. For Rogers, organismic trusting means trusting what one's "real self" feels, the real self-being in touch with what is actually good for the person.
 
+
*'''Experiential freedom'''
====Experiential freedom====
+
Experiential freedom refers to the feeling of freedom that we have when choices are available to us. Rogers noted that we are not free to do anything we might want, but there are many aspects of life in which we make choices. Acknowledging these choices and taking responsibility for one's actions is how a fully functioning person experiences freedom.
Experiential freedom refers to the feeling of freedom that we have when choices are available to us. Rogers noted that we are not free to do anthing we might want, but there are many aspects of life in which we make choices. Acknowledging these choices and taking responsibility for one's actions is how a fully functioning person experiences freedom.
+
*'''Creativity'''
 
 
====Creativity====
 
 
Rogers believed that the healthy, fully functioning person naturally participates in human society, and makes every effort to give their best possible contribution to the world. Such contributions may be through work, social relationships, or creative work in the arts or sciences.
 
Rogers believed that the healthy, fully functioning person naturally participates in human society, and makes every effort to give their best possible contribution to the world. Such contributions may be through work, social relationships, or creative work in the arts or sciences.
  
 
===Psychological problems===
 
===Psychological problems===
  
According to Rogers, although we may be born with organismic valuing and an actualizing tendency, the environment in which we live does not always support our needs, and in fact, often misleads us as to what is really in our best interest. This occurs both on the physical level, as food which tastes good is not necessarily nutritious, and on the social level when our [[culture]] values behavior that is counter to our natural disposition, such as the [[United States|American]] emphasis on expressiveness and social interaction that is anathema to the more reserved, contemplative, or [[introver]]ed type, or when teenagers experience pressure to become [[sexuality, human|sexually]] active while their [[conscience]] tells them that maintaining sexual purity until reaching a higher level of maturity is right for them.
+
According to [[Carl Rogers]], although we may be born with organismic valuing and an actualizing tendency, the environment in which we live does not always support our needs, and in fact, often misleads us as to what is really in our best interest. This occurs both on the physical level, as food which tastes good is not necessarily nutritious, and on the social level when our [[culture]] values behavior that is counter to our natural disposition, such as the [[United States|American]] emphasis on expressiveness and social interaction that is anathema to the more reserved, contemplative, or [[introvert]]ed type, or when teenagers experience pressure to become [[sexuality, human|sexually]] active while their [[conscience]] tells them that maintaining sexual purity until reaching a higher level of maturity is right for them.
 
 
Rogers also noted that society often puts conditions on approval, so that we are rewarded with what we need only when we have shown our "worth," and positive regard is withheld from those who do not behave according to society's [[norm]]s. When these norms are not be in our best interest, we lose touch with our organismic valuing and our actualizing tendency, and mold ourselves into "good" people, who may not be happy or healthy. The result of this is that we cease to function according to the nature of our original, real self, and become more and more distant from our goal of being fully functioning, healthy individiduals.
 
  
The aim of person-centered counseling is decrease the gap between the client's current way of functioning and the nature of their original, real self.
+
Rogers also noted that society often puts conditions on approval, so that we are rewarded with what we need only when we have shown our "worth," and positive regard is withheld from those who do not behave according to society's [[norm]]s. When these norms are not in our best interest, we lose touch with our organismic valuing and our actualizing tendency, and mold ourselves into "good" people, who may not be happy or healthy. The result of this is that we cease to function according to the nature of our original, real self, and become more and more distant from our goal of being fully functioning, healthy individuals.
  
====Inocongruity====
+
The aim of person-centered counseling is to decrease the gap between the client's current way of functioning and the nature of their original, real self.
  
Rogers called the "real self" that aspect of an individual that is pursuing the actualizing tendency, following organismic valuing, needing and receiving positive regard and self-regard. It is an individual's potential on the way to being realized. On the other hand, due to society imposing conditions of worth that are out of step with organismic valuing, we develop an "ideal self." This ideal self is not realistic, but a standard that cannot be met, an impossible goal to achieve. The gap between this "ideal self" and the "real self" Rogers termed "incongruity." The greater the gap, the greater the suffering a person experiences. This suffering, due to the mismatch between one's idealized self and one's true self, is Rogers' understanding of [[neurosis]].
+
====Incongruity====
 +
Rogers called the "real self" that aspect of an individual that is pursuing the actualizing tendency, following organismic valuing, needing and receiving positive regard and self-regard. It is an individual's potential on the way to being realized. On the other hand, due to society imposing conditions of worth that are out of step with organismic valuing, we develop an "ideal self." This ideal self is not realistic, but a standard that cannot be met, an impossible goal to achieve. The gap between this "ideal self" and the "real self" is what Rogers termed "incongruity." The greater the gap, the greater the suffering a person experiences. This suffering, due to the mismatch between one's idealized self and one's true self, is Rogers' understanding of [[neurosis]].
  
 
====Defenses====
 
====Defenses====
Rogers developed the idea of "defenses," similar to the [[defense mechanism]]s of [[Sigmund Freud]], to explain what we do when we experience incongruity between our idealized image of ourself and our real self. Such incongruity is threatening, and so brings on feelings of [[anxiety]], which lead us to take defensive action.
+
Rogers developed the idea of "defenses," similar to the [[defense mechanism]]s of [[Sigmund Freud|Freud]], to explain what we do when we experience incongruity between our idealized image of our self and our real self. Such incongruity is threatening, and brings on a feeling of [[anxiety]], which leads us to take defensive action.
  
For Rogers, there are two psychological defense mechanisms: denial and perceptual distortion. Denial is a refusal to acknowledge the threatening situation, either by ignoring some reality (at least temporarily), or by keeping a [[memory]] of an unpleasant situation out of one's awareness, again only temporarily. Thus, it includes both denial and repression in Freud's model. Perceptual distortion is similar to Freud's rationalization, involving a reinterpretation of the situation to make it less threatening. Thus, an individual may blame others, or some circumstance beyond their control for their failure, or misinterpret feedback as positive or supportive when in fact it was critical.
+
For Rogers, there are two psychological defense mechanisms: denial and perceptual distortion. Denial is a refusal to acknowledge the threatening situation, either by ignoring some reality (at least temporarily), or by keeping a [[memory]] of an unpleasant situation out of one's awareness, again only temporarily. Thus, it includes both denial and repression in Freud's model. Perceptual distortion is similar to Freud's rationalization, involving a reinterpretation of the situation to make it less threatening. Thus, an individual may blame others or some circumstance beyond their control for their failure, or misinterpret feedback as positive or supportive when in fact it was critical.
  
The problem with using defense mechanisms is that the gap between the ideal and the real self tends to increase, causing more anxiety, which in turn leads to further use of defenses. The neurotic person becomes unable to free him or herself from this cycle of behavior without outside assistance.  
+
The problem with using defense mechanisms is that the gap between the ideal and the real self tends to increase, causing more anxiety, which in turn leads to further use of defenses. The [[neurosis|neurotic]] person becomes unable to free him or herself from this cycle of behavior without outside assistance.  
  
Rogers suggested that [[psychosis]] is the extreme result of this situation, when a person's defenses have become overwhelmed and can no longer protect their sense of self. At that point a "psychotic break" occurs, and the person exhibits bizarre behavior, becomes disoriented, experiences inappropriate [[emotion]]s, and appears to have lost their sense of [[identity]].
+
Rogers suggested that [[psychosis]] is the extreme result of such a situation, when a person's defenses have become so overwhelmed that they can no longer protect the sense of self. At that point, a "psychotic break" occurs, and the person exhibits bizarre behavior, becomes disoriented, experiences inappropriate [[emotion]]s, and appears to have lost their sense of [[identity]].
  
 
==Therapy==
 
==Therapy==
Rogers took the position that every individual has, within him or herself, the resources for personal development and growth and that it is the role of the counselor to provide favorable conditions (namely congruence, empathy and unconditional positive regard) for personal development to occur naturally. Living in the present rather than the past or future, with organismic trust, faith in one's thoughts and feelings, and a responsible acknowledgement of one's freedom with a view toward participating fully in the world and contributing to other people's lives, are hallmarks of Rogers' approach to counseling.
+
Rogers took the position that every individual has, within him or herself, the resources for personal development and growth, and that it is the role of the [[counseling|counselor]] to provide favorable conditions (namely congruence, empathy, and unconditional positive regard) for personal development to occur naturally. Living in the present, rather than the past or future, with organismic trust, faith in one's thoughts and feelings, and a responsible acknowledgement of one's freedom with a view toward participating fully in the world and contributing to other people's lives, are hallmarks of Rogers' approach to counseling.
  
 
According to Bozarth (1998), the basis of Rogers' Client-centered approach can be summarized as follows:
 
According to Bozarth (1998), the basis of Rogers' Client-centered approach can be summarized as follows:
 
#There is one motivating force in a client; i.e., the actualizing tendency.  
 
#There is one motivating force in a client; i.e., the actualizing tendency.  
#There is one directive to the therapist; i.e. to embody the attitudinal quality of genuineness and to experience empathic understanding from the client’s internal frame of reference and to experience unconditional positive regard towards the client.  
+
#There is one directive to the therapist; i.e. to embody the attitudinal quality of genuineness, to experience empathic understanding from the client’s internal frame of reference, and to experience unconditional positive regard towards the client.  
 
#When the client perceives the therapist’s empathic understanding and unconditional positive regard, the actualizing tendency of the client is promoted.  
 
#When the client perceives the therapist’s empathic understanding and unconditional positive regard, the actualizing tendency of the client is promoted.  
  
 
===Requirements of the therapist===
 
===Requirements of the therapist===
Rogers identified three attitudinal requirements for a counselor to be effective: [[Nondirective psychotherapy#Empathetic understanding|empathetic understanding]] of the client's emotions and perspective, [[Nondirective psychotherapy#Congruence|congruence]] or genuineness, and [[Nondirective psychotherapy#Unconditional positive regard|unconditional positive regard]] for the patient. This emphasis contrasts with the dispassionate position which may be advocated for other methods of therapy.  
+
Rogers identified three attitudinal requirements for a counselor to be effective: [[Nondirective psychotherapy#Empathetic understanding|empathetic understanding]] of the client's emotions and perspective, [[Nondirective psychotherapy#Congruence|congruence]] or genuineness, and [[Nondirective psychotherapy#Unconditional positive regard|unconditional positive regard]] for the patient. This emphasis contrasts with the dispassionate position that may be advocated for other methods of therapy.  
  
 
====Empathetic understanding====
 
====Empathetic understanding====
  
Empathetic understanding means that the counselor accurately understands the client's [[thought]]s, feelings, and meanings from the client's own perspective. When the counselor perceives what the world is like from the client's point of view, it demonstrates not only that their view has value, but also that the client is being accepted as a person. However, the counselor should not become bound up in the client’s [[emotion]]s; they should be able to recognize that they are experiencing the client's emotions and simultaneously maintain their own perspective.  
+
Empathetic understanding means that the counselor accurately understands the client's [[thought]]s, feelings, and meanings from the client's own perspective. When the counselor perceives what the world is like from the client's point of view, it demonstrates not only that their view has value, but also that the client is being accepted as a person. However, the counselor should not become bound up in the client’s [[emotion]]s; they should be able to recognize that they are experiencing the client's emotions and simultaneously maintain their own perspective.  
  
 
====Congruence====
 
====Congruence====
By "congruence" Rogers meant that a counselor should be authentic and genuine; he or she should not present an aloof professional facade, but rather be real and transparent to the client. There should be no air of authority or hidden knowledge. Thus, the client should feel that the counselor is being honest with them, responding as a true person, not analyzing the client's [[communication]] according to some theoretical system.
+
By "congruence," Rogers meant that a counselor should be authentic and genuine; he or she should not present an aloof professional facade, but rather be real and transparent to the client. There should be no air of authority or hidden knowledge. Thus, the client should feel that the counselor is being honest with them, and responding as a true person, not analyzing the client's [[communication]] according to some theoretical system.
  
 
====Unconditional positive regard====
 
====Unconditional positive regard====
  
To create an atmosphere of psychological safety within the counseling relationship, Rogers believed the therapist should have unconditional positive regard, or respect, for the client—that is, not judge the client’s character or [[personality]]. If the client feels that his or her character is being evaluated, he or she will put on a false front or perhaps leave therapy altogether. The client should feel free to explore all thoughts and feelings, positive or negative, without danger of rejection or condemnation. There should be no particular actions, communications, or standards of behavior that must be met to "earn" positive regard from the counselor. By giving unconditional positive regard the counselor provides a partial antidote to the client's previous experiences in which parents, teachers, and other authority figures acted toward them as if they had no intrinsic value as a person; their value being derived from behaving in the way others say they ought to behave.  
+
To create an atmosphere of psychological safety within the counseling relationship, Rogers believed the therapist should have unconditional positive regard, or respect, for the client—that is, not judge the client’s character or [[personality]]. If the client feels that his or her character is being evaluated, he or she will put on a false front or perhaps leave therapy altogether. The client should feel free to explore all thoughts and feelings, positive or negative, without danger of rejection or condemnation. There should be no particular actions, communications, or standards of behavior that must be met to "earn" positive regard from the counselor. By giving unconditional positive regard, the counselor provides a partial antidote to the client's previous experiences in which parents, teachers, and other authority figures acted toward them as if they had no intrinsic value as a person; their value being derived from behaving in the way others say they ought to behave.  
  
 
===Reflection===
 
===Reflection===
  
The main technique Rogers recommended is that of "Reflection," or the mirroring of emotional communication. For example, if a client says "I hate men!" the therapist responds, "So you hate <u>all</u> men?" By doing so, the therapist is letting the client know that he or she is listening and trying to understand, as well as clarifying what the client is communicating. Clarification occurs when the therapist abstracts the core or the essence of a set of remarks by the client. In this case, the client may well acknowledge that she does not hate all men, certainly not her brother, or father, or some others, hopefully including the therapist if he is a man. Finally, she may realize that it is not hate she feels but rather a lack of trust toward men, as a result of being hurt by a particular man.
+
The main technique Rogers recommended is that of "Reflection," or the mirroring of [[emotion]]al [[communication]]. For example, if a client says, "I hate men!" the therapist responds, "So you hate <u>all</u> men?" By doing so, the therapist is letting the client know that he or she is listening and trying to understand, as well as clarifying what the client is communicating. Clarification occurs when the therapist abstracts the core or the essence of a set of remarks by the client. In this case, the client may well acknowledge that she does not hate all men, certainly not her brother, father, or some others, hopefully including the therapist, if he is a man. Finally, she may realize that it is not hate she feels, but rather a lack of trust toward men, as a result of being hurt by a particular man.
  
 
===Group therapy===
 
===Group therapy===
Rogers' approach has been applied not only to individual clients, but to small groups.
 
The person-centered approach offers a unique paradigm for group therapy, called the "Basic Encounter Group" by Rogers and his colleagues. Rogers and his colleagues started to experiment with the concept of large community groups of fifty to three-hundred or more individuals, and subsequently to include individuals from different cultures and nationalities. The cross-cultural groups provided Rogers with a foundation from which to conduct workshops using client-centered principles as a way to induce societal change, particularly the diminishing of international tensions among nations.
 
 
Carl Rogers coined the term, ‘The Basic Encounter Group’ to identify encounter groups that operated on the principles of the person-centered approach. It is the contention of this chapter that the person-centered Basic Encounter Group is quite unique and, in fact, offers a different paradigm for group therapy. Indeed, the application of the premises of the person-centered approach in group therapy requires a re-examination of many of the usual presuppositions about group function. This includes presuppositions about leader target population, size of group, establishment of goals and ground rules, and facilitator behavior.
 
 
Rogers is explicit about the foundations of the approach. He (Rogers, 1985) succinctly summarizes:
 
 
The person-centered approach, then, is primarily a way of being which finds its expression in attitudes and behavior that create a growth- promoting climate. It is a basic philosophy rather than simply a technique or a method. When this philosophy is lived, it helps the person to expand the development of his or her own capacities. When it is lived, it also stimulates constructive change in others. It empowers the individual, and when this personal power is sensed, experiences show that it tends to be used for personal and social transformation (p. 5).
 
 
The Transition
 
 
The transition of the client-centered approach with individuals to application in group therapy was not philosophically different. The basic assumptions remained the same. As Wood (1983) states:
 
 
The goal (and art) of person-centered therapy is to facilitate the creation of a climate in each person and the group of persons. An event in which this takes place is the definition of person-centered group therapy (p. 239).
 
 
The facilitator of the group encounter requires the same fluency as the individual therapist to ‘be fluent in the moment-to-moment action of persons in relationship without resorting to speculation and explanations of process’ (Wood, 1983, p. 243).
 
 
The essence of the person-centered philosophy in leadership behavior includes giving autonomy to persons in groups, freeing them to ‘do their thing’ (i.e., expressing their own ideas and feelings as one aspect of the group data), facilitating learning, stimulating independence in thought and action, accepting the ‘unacceptable’ innovative creations that emerge, delegating full responsibility, offering and receiving feedback, encouraging and relying on self-evaluation, and finding reward in the development and achievement of others (Rogers, 1977). This same philosophy underlies the client-centered therapist’s role with an individual client. It was, and remains, a revolutionary idea that the client might be his or her own expert, that the client’s own ideas and feelings could be more important than the therapist’s interpretations and suggestions, that the client could achieve independence in thought and action, that the client might reach ‘acceptable’, innovative self-creations, and that the client might acquire his or her own full self-responsibility.
 
 
It is the fundamental belief system and adherence to the premises of this belief system by the individual therapist or group facilitator that differentiate the person-centered approach from other individual or group therapeutic systems.
 
 
Paradigm Foundations in the Encounter Group
 
 
The functional application of the basic premises of the person-centered approach includes ‘indwelling the client to move rather than dragging him by the hair toward health’ (Coulson, 1984). It includes: being completely present and totally attending to people; promoting equivalency in people; and not presupposing what people will be like, or do, or become during or after the therapeutic encounter. The person-centered approach in groups does not usually presuppose such considerations as the target population, size of the group, establishment of goals and ground rules, or specific facilitator or participant behaviors.
 
 
The facilitator engages the world of each group participant and the developing "group mind" with the same dedication and discipline applied in individual therapy. Behavioral manifestations are different from group to group as they often are with different individuals in one-to-one therapy. Several basic considerations of group work which indicate the uniqueness of the person-centered group are noted below.
 
  
1) Target Population and Size of the Group:
+
Rogers' approach has been applied not only to individual clients, but also to small groups. He coined the term, "Basic Encounter Group" to identify groups that operated on the principles of the person-centered approach, which he believed offered a unique and effective paradigm for [[group therapy]].
  
The major selection criterion for group members is that each person be willing to attend and participate in the group experience. Individuals who convene groups may select participants using varied criteria that meet the facilitators’ biases and capacities; however, selection criteria, if and when applied, are based on the personal views of the facilitators. Participants nearly always select themselves to be in such groups. They are usually from a variety of geographical locations, jobs, and have multiple reasons for attending groups. Most other group approaches do presuppose the selection of their participants rather than being dedicated to the self-selection process.  
+
The functional application of the person-centered approach to groups includes: being completely present and totally attending to people; promoting equivalency in people; and not presupposing what people will be like, do, or become, during or after the therapeutic encounter. The person-centered approach in groups does not usually presuppose such considerations as the target population, size of the group, establishment of goals and ground rules, or specific facilitator or participant behaviors (Bozarth 1986).  
  
The limitation in size of the group is another of the assumptions that has come to be questioned by experiences from person-centered groups. (Rogers 1970) once recommended that the best size for encounter groups was eight to ten people. Since that time, further experience with groups has resulted in other considerations. For example, the relativity of group size is commented upon by John K. Wood, who has been one of the facilitators with Rogers in hundreds of groups. Wood (1982) states:
+
Rogers (1970) once recommended that the best size for encounter groups was eight to ten people. However, further experience with groups led him and his colleagues to consider ways of working with larger groups, including as many as eight hundred people. The major selection criterion for group members is that each person be willing to attend and participate in the group experience. Participants nearly always select themselves to be in such groups. They are usually from a variety of geographical locations, jobs, and have multiple reasons for attending groups.  
  
…when we worked with 800, many people said, ‘I feel uncomfortable in this large group. . .to really be myself. I need to be in a smaller group.’ We divided into groups of 100 to 150 and immediately these people expressed relief and there was considerable personal sharing of feelings and meaningful encounter, just like any group of 10 or 12. People can quickly become personal, speaking in one conversation at a time even in a group of 800 participants (pp. 13-14).  
+
Group goals are not defined prior to the group experience, and although the group may develop goals, these are often more in the form of plans, such as scheduling meetings at certain times, and decisions to meet for certain lengths of time. The group will often move in a common direction as though the group is one organism (Rogers, 1970). However, such direction is not in the form of goals.  
  
2) Goals and Ground Rules:
+
The role of the facilitator in the person-centered group is that of creating an atmosphere in which members are enabled to discover their own power to heal themselves. The facilitator does not necessarily expect that any particular process will occur, nor will he or she attempt to accelerate any particular process. The facilitator acts on the assumption that participants have the power within themselves to resolve their problems, heal themselves, and move in positive constructive directions.
  
Group goals are not defined prior to the group experience, since the development of the personal power of individuals is likely to lead in multiple directions. The group may develop goals, but often group plans are more common occurrences than group goals; e.g., plans to schedule meetings at certain times, and decisions to meet for certain lengths of time. Experiences in person-centered groups suggest that idiosyncratic development of personal power dilutes the development of ‘group goals’ (Bozarth, 1981). The group will often move in a common direction as though the group is one organism (Rogers, 1977). However, such direction is not in the form of goals.  
+
Rogers describes his facilitator role in the following way:
 +
<blockquote>My hope is gradually to become as much a participant in the group as a facilitator. This is difficult to describe without making it appear that I am consciously playing two different roles. If you watch a group member who is honestly being himself, you will see that at times he expresses feelings, attitudes, and thoughts primarily directed toward facilitating the growth of another member. At other times, with equal genuineness, he will express feelings or concerns that have as their obvious goal the opening of himself to the risk of more growth. This describes me, too, except that I know I am likely to be the second, or risking, kind of person more often in the later than in the early stages of the group. Each facet is a real part of me, not a role.</blockquote> (Rogers 1970: 48-49).  
  
3) The Facilitator:
+
The fundamental assumption of the person-centered approach in groups is that each individual has the capacity to allow his or her innate potential to develop in order to become personally empowered to move in a constructive direction for self and society. The facilitator perpetuates this growth process by embodying and communicating his or her attitudinal qualities to the group without presupposing what its members should do, be like, or become.
  
The role of the facilitator in the person-centered group is that of creating an atmosphere in which members are enabled to discover their power and to own inner sources of healing. The facilitator does not necessarily expect that any particular process will occur, nor will he or she attempt to accelerate any particular process. If there are ground rules for the facilitator, they can be stated as openness to surprise and to their own surrender to unity (Wood, 1982). The facilitator acts on the assumption that participants have the power within themselves to resolve their problems, heal themselves, and move in positive constructive directions. Rogers describes his facilitator role in the following way:
+
These fundamental assumptions suggest a different paradigm from other theoretical approaches. Many assumptions about groups are altered and the facilitator does not have the intention of creating any particular group behavior. As such, the person-centered Basic Encounter Group is unique (Bozarth 1986).
 
 
My hope is gradually to become as much a participant in the group as a facilitator. This is difficult to describe without making it appear that I am consciously playing two different roles. If you watch a group member who is honestly being himself, you will see that at times he expresses feelings, attitudes, and thoughts primarily directed toward facilitating the growth of another member. At other times, with equal genuineness, he will express feelings or concerns that have as their obvious goal the opening of himself to the risk of more growth. This describes me, too, except that I know I am likely to be the second, or risking, kind of person more often in the later than in the early stages of the group. Each facet is a real part of me, not a role. (Rogers, 1970, pp 48-49).
 
 
 
It is significant that Rogers does not have a goal of encouraging other members to be therapeutic, and does not participate in self-disclosure as a way to encourage others to self-disclose. Rather, he is consistent with the basic premises; that is, treating participants as their own best experts of their lives; and, by being who he is while embodying the attitudinal qualities, promoting the self-actualizing tendencies of individuals. Rogers may offer reflective responses, or may explore his own feelings or concerns in a group, or may participate in a structured group experience.
 
 
 
Facilitative involvement predicated on the attitudinal qualities does not preclude a reflective response style nor does it demand a particular style of response. The therapist is free from being the expert for another person and free to allow the individual client or group member to be his/her own best expert (Spahn, 1984). The person-centered approach to group counseling and psychotherapy is a paradigm shift from most other approaches to group counseling. As such, many interpretations of the application of the person-centered approach are not adequately understood and certain facilitator techniques and behaviors are emphasized rather than fundamental assumptions of the approach. Although some client-centered therapists consider the reflective response to be the basic response pattern for client-centered therapists, it is clear that it is the implementation of the attitudinal qualities that are central to the approach (Temaner and Bozarth, 1984).
 
 
 
The fundamental assumption of the person-centered approach in groups is that each individual has the capacity to allow her or his innate potential (inner healer, inner self) to develop in order to become personally empowered to move in a constructive (albeit idiosyncratic) direction for self and society. The facilitator perpetuates this growth process by embodying and communicating his/her attitudinal qualities to the group without presupposing what its members should do, be like, or become.
 
 
 
These fundamental assumptions suggest a different paradigm from other theoretical approaches. Many assumptions about groups are altered and the facilitator does not have the intention of creating any particular group behavior. As such, the person-centered Basic Encounter Group is unique.
 
  
 
==Criticism==
 
==Criticism==
  
A frequent criticism of the person-centred approach is that delivering the core conditions is what all good therapists do anyway, before they move on to applying their expertise and doing the real work of 'making clients better'. On the face of it, this criticism reflects a misunderstanding of the real challenges of consistently manifesting unconditional positive regard, empathic understanding and congruence. This is especially true of congruence: to the extent that some therapeutic techniques deployed in some other traditions depend on the counsellor's willingness to 'hold back', mentally formulate hypotheses about the client, or conceal their own personal reactions behind a consistent professional face, there is a real challenge in applying these techniques with the openness and honesty which defines congruence. It may also demonstrate something of a reluctance to take seriously the empirical research on counselling effectiveness and the conclusion that the quality of the client-counsellor relationship is a leading predictor of therapeutic effectiveness — although this is somewhat more controversial, since one might argue that providing the core conditions is not the only way to achieve a quality relationship.
+
Although popular, and achieving a certain level of success, the person-centered approach has its weaknesses. In particular, the emphasis on counselors' exhibiting congruence, respect, and empathy toward their clients, has led them to become supportive of their clients' situation and viewpoint to such an extent that the clients feel no need to change. Without invoking some standard or [[norm]], or at least presenting alternative viewpoints, the counselor does not have any position of authority from which to guide the client to make constructive changes. While this was in no way Rogers' intention, it has led to counselors validating actions, otherwise deemed unacceptable by society, because their clients experience satisfaction from them.  
  
At a deeper level, however, there is a more sophisticated point lurking, which many expositions of person-centred theory seem to avoid addressing head-on. Namely, given that the self is the single most important resource the person-centred counsellor brings to the therapeutic relationship, it makes sense to ask: what (if anything) is it important that this self has, apart from the three core conditions? I.e., manifesting of the core conditions does not by itself tell us what experiences or philosophies the counsellor is bringing to the relationship. It tells us that the client will have transparent access to that self -- because the counsellor is congruent — but it doesn't tell us anything else about that self. Whether or not that self should be developed in any particular way, or whether that self should acquire any particular background knowledge, seems to me a question which is more often side-stepped than answered within the person-centred tradition.
+
Another frequent criticism of the person-centered approach is that embodying the three requirements of the therapist is what all good [[psychotherapy|therapist]]s do anyway, before they move on to applying their expertise and doing the real work of "making clients better." However, this criticism reflects a misunderstanding of the real challenges of consistently manifesting unconditional positive regard, empathic understanding, and congruence in the therapeutic situation. Just being able to maintain openness, honesty, empathy, and respect toward a client, while listening to their account of traumatic experiences and subsequent responses, may indeed be a defining attribute of a successful counselor. Beyond this though, it is fair to question whether other attributes of the self that the counselor brings to the relationship, which will be transparent to the client, are relevant to the healing process. The person-centered approach fails to address the issue of whether that self should have developed in any particular way through personal experience or specific training, or should have acquired any particular background knowledge, in order to be qualified and effective as a counselor.
  
(Another way to understand this point is this: given two counsellors, each of whom manifests the core conditions to some specified degree, what else, if anything, matters? Would it be better for a given client to have the one who is an expert at astrophysics or the one who is an economist? Would it be better for a given client to have the one who struggled through a decade of ethnic cleansing in a war-torn country or the one who went to private school in an affluent suburb and subsequently worked as a stockbroker? Aside from academic expertise and personal history, what about personal philosophy, parenthood, and other factors?)
+
Nevertheless, there is research that indicates that the [[personality]] of the therapist is a better predictor of success than the techniques used (Boeree 2006). Thus, Rogers' emphasis on the harmonious relationship between counselor and client should be appreciated as a significant insight into the therapeutic process.
  
Although popular, and achieving a certain level of success, Rogers' approach has its weaknesses. In particular, the emphasis on counselors' exhibiting congruence, respect, and empathy toward their clients, has led them to become supportive of their clients' situation and viewpoint to such an extent that the clients feel no need to change. Without invoking some standard or norm, or at least presenting alternative viewpoints, the counselor does not have any position of authority from which to guide the client to make constructive changes. While this was in no way Rogers' intention, it has led to counselors validating actions, otherwise deemed unacceptable by society, because their clients experience satisfaction from them.
+
Rogers' theories continue to inspire counselors working with individuals, couples, families, and larger groups.
 
 
On the other hand, there is research that indicates that the personality of the therapist is a better predictor of success than the techniques used (Boeree, 2006). Thus, Rogers' emphasis on the harmonious relationship between counselor and client should be appreciated as a significant insight into the therapeutic process.
 
 
 
His theories continue to inspire counselors working with individuals, couples, families, and larger groups.
 
  
 
==References==
 
==References==
 +
* Boeree, C. George. 2006. [http://www.ship.edu/%7Ecgboeree/rogers.html ''Carl Rogers'']
 
* Bozarth, Jerold. D. 1986. The basic encounter group: An alternative view. ''The Journal for Specialists in Group Work'', 11(4), 228-232.  
 
* Bozarth, Jerold. D. 1986. The basic encounter group: An alternative view. ''The Journal for Specialists in Group Work'', 11(4), 228-232.  
* Bozarth, Jerold. D. 1998. ''Person-centred Therapy: A Revolutionary Paradigm'' PCCS Books Lts. ISBN 1898059225  
+
* Bozarth, Jerold. D. 1998. ''Person-centered Therapy: A Revolutionary Paradigm'' PCCS Books Ltd. ISBN 1898059225  
 
* Bruno, Frank J. 1977. Client-Centered Counseling: Becoming a Person. In ''Human Adjustment and Personal Growth: Seven Pathways'', pp. 362-370. John Wiley & Sons.
 
* Bruno, Frank J. 1977. Client-Centered Counseling: Becoming a Person. In ''Human Adjustment and Personal Growth: Seven Pathways'', pp. 362-370. John Wiley & Sons.
 
* Rogers, Carl R. 1942. ''Counseling and Psychotherapy''. Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 0395053218  
 
* Rogers, Carl R. 1942. ''Counseling and Psychotherapy''. Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 0395053218  
 
* Rogers, Carl R. 1951. ''Client-centered Therapy''. Houghton Mifflin College Division. ISBN 0395053226  
 
* Rogers, Carl R. 1951. ''Client-centered Therapy''. Houghton Mifflin College Division. ISBN 0395053226  
 
* Rogers, Carl R. 1961. ''On Becoming a Person''. Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 0395081343  
 
* Rogers, Carl R. 1961. ''On Becoming a Person''. Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 0395081343  
 +
* Rogers, Carl R. 1970. ''Carl Rogers On Encounter Groups''. Harper Collins. ISBN 0060669942
 
* Rogers, Carl R. 1980. ''Becoming Partners: Marriage and Its Alternative''. Dell Publishing Co.
 
* Rogers, Carl R. 1980. ''Becoming Partners: Marriage and Its Alternative''. Dell Publishing Co.
 
* Rogers, Carl R. 1980. ''A Way of Being''. Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 0395299152
 
* Rogers, Carl R. 1980. ''A Way of Being''. Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 0395299152
Line 167: Line 121:
  
 
==External links==
 
==External links==
* [http://counsellingresource.com/types/person-centred/index.html CounsellingResource]
+
All links retrieved November 15, 2022.
* [http://www.biblioconcept.com/themes/A/approche_centree_sur_la_personne.htm A bibliography on the Person-Centered Approach]
+
* [http://counsellingresource.com/types/person-centred/index.html An Introduction to Person-Centred Counselling]
[[Category:Psychotherapy|Person-centered psychotherapy]]
+
 
* [http://www.ship.edu/%7Ecgboeree/rogers.html Personality Theories] - Carl Rogers
 
* [http://www.panarchy.org/rogers/person.html Carl R. Rogers, On Becoming a Person (1961)]
 
* [http://person-centered.net/book.html Person-centered Therapy: A Revolutionary Paradigm]
 
  
 
{{Credit2|Client-Centered_Therapy|46725380|Person-centered_psychotherapy|47849700|}}
 
{{Credit2|Client-Centered_Therapy|46725380|Person-centered_psychotherapy|47849700|}}

Latest revision as of 09:59, 11 March 2023


Nondirective psychotherapy was developed by the humanistic psychologist, Carl Rogers, in the 1940s and 1950s. It is used to help a person achieve personal growth and/or come to terms with a specific traumatic event or psychological problem. The method has proved effective and popular, although it has been criticized for its lack of structure. The strength of the approach lies in the emphasis of harmonious relationships, based on respect, congruence, and empathy, in promoting healthy psychological development. However, while ensuring that the counselor is non-judgemental and, therefore, not threatening to the client, there is a concomitant loss of authority and lack of norms, or at least alternative viewpoints, to guide clients in deciding how to change in order to achieve greater psychological health.

Introduction

Carl Rogers developed Nondirective psychotherapy, also called Client-centered therapy and later, the Person-centered approach, reflecting Rogers' belief that his model applied to interactions between all people, not just therapist-client relations. It is also commonly referred to as Rogerian therapy. Along with Abraham Maslow, Rogers was the founder of the humanistic approach to psychology.

He referred to his approach as counseling rather than psychotherapy, and preferred the term "client" over "patient." He also believed that the relationship between the client and the therapist is not a patient-doctor relationship in which the patient passively submits to something that is done to him or her by the healer. On the contrary, it should be a person-to-person relationship in which the therapist talks with the client.

Personality Theory

The person-centered approach was developed by Carl Rogers based on his theory of human personality. He believed that all human beings naturally strive to achieve their potential, so that mental health is actually the process of psychological development; mental disturbance is the result of distortion in this growth process.

Actualizing tendency

Rogers believed that all creatures have a built-in life force, that he called the "actualizing tendency," which functions as motivation to develop one's potential as fully as possible. Abraham Maslow referred to this process in human beings as "self-actualization." Rogers viewed psychological development as the process of a person following the path of actualization and so becoming more fully themselves.

Fully functioning person

The "healthy person", as termed by Rogers, is the one who is clearly on the path of actualization, as "fully functioning," and he identified five qualities that make us healthy:

  • Openness to experience

Openness to experience means that one is able to accurately perceive one's feelings and experiences in the world, and accept that reality. Openness includes feelings, because these are what convey "organismic valuing," or the sense of whether something is good or bad for the person.

  • Existential living

Existential living means living in the present rather than the past, which has gone, or the future, which does not yet exist. Rogers did not mean that the past and future do not exist, though, only that they should be recognized as what they are: the past is contained in memories from which we can learn, and the future contains our dreams, hopes, and plans for what we intend to do. The present, however, is the reality that we must deal with now.

  • Organismic trusting

Rogers believed that organisms know what is good for them: evolution has provided all living creatures, including plants, animals, and human beings, with senses to discriminate between what is good and what is bad for them. Therefore, people should allow themselves to be guided by this process, trusting their own thoughts and feelings as accurate, and doing what comes naturally. According to this view, what feels right is the right thing for a person to do.

However, it is important to understand that Rogers did not advocate hurting others or ones’ self just because it might feel good. For Rogers, organismic trusting means trusting what one's "real self" feels, the real self-being in touch with what is actually good for the person.

  • Experiential freedom

Experiential freedom refers to the feeling of freedom that we have when choices are available to us. Rogers noted that we are not free to do anything we might want, but there are many aspects of life in which we make choices. Acknowledging these choices and taking responsibility for one's actions is how a fully functioning person experiences freedom.

  • Creativity

Rogers believed that the healthy, fully functioning person naturally participates in human society, and makes every effort to give their best possible contribution to the world. Such contributions may be through work, social relationships, or creative work in the arts or sciences.

Psychological problems

According to Carl Rogers, although we may be born with organismic valuing and an actualizing tendency, the environment in which we live does not always support our needs, and in fact, often misleads us as to what is really in our best interest. This occurs both on the physical level, as food which tastes good is not necessarily nutritious, and on the social level when our culture values behavior that is counter to our natural disposition, such as the American emphasis on expressiveness and social interaction that is anathema to the more reserved, contemplative, or introverted type, or when teenagers experience pressure to become sexually active while their conscience tells them that maintaining sexual purity until reaching a higher level of maturity is right for them.

Rogers also noted that society often puts conditions on approval, so that we are rewarded with what we need only when we have shown our "worth," and positive regard is withheld from those who do not behave according to society's norms. When these norms are not in our best interest, we lose touch with our organismic valuing and our actualizing tendency, and mold ourselves into "good" people, who may not be happy or healthy. The result of this is that we cease to function according to the nature of our original, real self, and become more and more distant from our goal of being fully functioning, healthy individuals.

The aim of person-centered counseling is to decrease the gap between the client's current way of functioning and the nature of their original, real self.

Incongruity

Rogers called the "real self" that aspect of an individual that is pursuing the actualizing tendency, following organismic valuing, needing and receiving positive regard and self-regard. It is an individual's potential on the way to being realized. On the other hand, due to society imposing conditions of worth that are out of step with organismic valuing, we develop an "ideal self." This ideal self is not realistic, but a standard that cannot be met, an impossible goal to achieve. The gap between this "ideal self" and the "real self" is what Rogers termed "incongruity." The greater the gap, the greater the suffering a person experiences. This suffering, due to the mismatch between one's idealized self and one's true self, is Rogers' understanding of neurosis.

Defenses

Rogers developed the idea of "defenses," similar to the defense mechanisms of Freud, to explain what we do when we experience incongruity between our idealized image of our self and our real self. Such incongruity is threatening, and brings on a feeling of anxiety, which leads us to take defensive action.

For Rogers, there are two psychological defense mechanisms: denial and perceptual distortion. Denial is a refusal to acknowledge the threatening situation, either by ignoring some reality (at least temporarily), or by keeping a memory of an unpleasant situation out of one's awareness, again only temporarily. Thus, it includes both denial and repression in Freud's model. Perceptual distortion is similar to Freud's rationalization, involving a reinterpretation of the situation to make it less threatening. Thus, an individual may blame others or some circumstance beyond their control for their failure, or misinterpret feedback as positive or supportive when in fact it was critical.

The problem with using defense mechanisms is that the gap between the ideal and the real self tends to increase, causing more anxiety, which in turn leads to further use of defenses. The neurotic person becomes unable to free him or herself from this cycle of behavior without outside assistance.

Rogers suggested that psychosis is the extreme result of such a situation, when a person's defenses have become so overwhelmed that they can no longer protect the sense of self. At that point, a "psychotic break" occurs, and the person exhibits bizarre behavior, becomes disoriented, experiences inappropriate emotions, and appears to have lost their sense of identity.

Therapy

Rogers took the position that every individual has, within him or herself, the resources for personal development and growth, and that it is the role of the counselor to provide favorable conditions (namely congruence, empathy, and unconditional positive regard) for personal development to occur naturally. Living in the present, rather than the past or future, with organismic trust, faith in one's thoughts and feelings, and a responsible acknowledgement of one's freedom with a view toward participating fully in the world and contributing to other people's lives, are hallmarks of Rogers' approach to counseling.

According to Bozarth (1998), the basis of Rogers' Client-centered approach can be summarized as follows:

  1. There is one motivating force in a client; i.e., the actualizing tendency.
  2. There is one directive to the therapist; i.e. to embody the attitudinal quality of genuineness, to experience empathic understanding from the client’s internal frame of reference, and to experience unconditional positive regard towards the client.
  3. When the client perceives the therapist’s empathic understanding and unconditional positive regard, the actualizing tendency of the client is promoted.

Requirements of the therapist

Rogers identified three attitudinal requirements for a counselor to be effective: empathetic understanding of the client's emotions and perspective, congruence or genuineness, and unconditional positive regard for the patient. This emphasis contrasts with the dispassionate position that may be advocated for other methods of therapy.

Empathetic understanding

Empathetic understanding means that the counselor accurately understands the client's thoughts, feelings, and meanings from the client's own perspective. When the counselor perceives what the world is like from the client's point of view, it demonstrates not only that their view has value, but also that the client is being accepted as a person. However, the counselor should not become bound up in the client’s emotions; they should be able to recognize that they are experiencing the client's emotions and simultaneously maintain their own perspective.

Congruence

By "congruence," Rogers meant that a counselor should be authentic and genuine; he or she should not present an aloof professional facade, but rather be real and transparent to the client. There should be no air of authority or hidden knowledge. Thus, the client should feel that the counselor is being honest with them, and responding as a true person, not analyzing the client's communication according to some theoretical system.

Unconditional positive regard

To create an atmosphere of psychological safety within the counseling relationship, Rogers believed the therapist should have unconditional positive regard, or respect, for the client—that is, not judge the client’s character or personality. If the client feels that his or her character is being evaluated, he or she will put on a false front or perhaps leave therapy altogether. The client should feel free to explore all thoughts and feelings, positive or negative, without danger of rejection or condemnation. There should be no particular actions, communications, or standards of behavior that must be met to "earn" positive regard from the counselor. By giving unconditional positive regard, the counselor provides a partial antidote to the client's previous experiences in which parents, teachers, and other authority figures acted toward them as if they had no intrinsic value as a person; their value being derived from behaving in the way others say they ought to behave.

Reflection

The main technique Rogers recommended is that of "Reflection," or the mirroring of emotional communication. For example, if a client says, "I hate men!" the therapist responds, "So you hate all men?" By doing so, the therapist is letting the client know that he or she is listening and trying to understand, as well as clarifying what the client is communicating. Clarification occurs when the therapist abstracts the core or the essence of a set of remarks by the client. In this case, the client may well acknowledge that she does not hate all men, certainly not her brother, father, or some others, hopefully including the therapist, if he is a man. Finally, she may realize that it is not hate she feels, but rather a lack of trust toward men, as a result of being hurt by a particular man.

Group therapy

Rogers' approach has been applied not only to individual clients, but also to small groups. He coined the term, "Basic Encounter Group" to identify groups that operated on the principles of the person-centered approach, which he believed offered a unique and effective paradigm for group therapy.

The functional application of the person-centered approach to groups includes: being completely present and totally attending to people; promoting equivalency in people; and not presupposing what people will be like, do, or become, during or after the therapeutic encounter. The person-centered approach in groups does not usually presuppose such considerations as the target population, size of the group, establishment of goals and ground rules, or specific facilitator or participant behaviors (Bozarth 1986).

Rogers (1970) once recommended that the best size for encounter groups was eight to ten people. However, further experience with groups led him and his colleagues to consider ways of working with larger groups, including as many as eight hundred people. The major selection criterion for group members is that each person be willing to attend and participate in the group experience. Participants nearly always select themselves to be in such groups. They are usually from a variety of geographical locations, jobs, and have multiple reasons for attending groups.

Group goals are not defined prior to the group experience, and although the group may develop goals, these are often more in the form of plans, such as scheduling meetings at certain times, and decisions to meet for certain lengths of time. The group will often move in a common direction as though the group is one organism (Rogers, 1970). However, such direction is not in the form of goals.

The role of the facilitator in the person-centered group is that of creating an atmosphere in which members are enabled to discover their own power to heal themselves. The facilitator does not necessarily expect that any particular process will occur, nor will he or she attempt to accelerate any particular process. The facilitator acts on the assumption that participants have the power within themselves to resolve their problems, heal themselves, and move in positive constructive directions.

Rogers describes his facilitator role in the following way:

My hope is gradually to become as much a participant in the group as a facilitator. This is difficult to describe without making it appear that I am consciously playing two different roles. If you watch a group member who is honestly being himself, you will see that at times he expresses feelings, attitudes, and thoughts primarily directed toward facilitating the growth of another member. At other times, with equal genuineness, he will express feelings or concerns that have as their obvious goal the opening of himself to the risk of more growth. This describes me, too, except that I know I am likely to be the second, or risking, kind of person more often in the later than in the early stages of the group. Each facet is a real part of me, not a role.

(Rogers 1970: 48-49).

The fundamental assumption of the person-centered approach in groups is that each individual has the capacity to allow his or her innate potential to develop in order to become personally empowered to move in a constructive direction for self and society. The facilitator perpetuates this growth process by embodying and communicating his or her attitudinal qualities to the group without presupposing what its members should do, be like, or become.

These fundamental assumptions suggest a different paradigm from other theoretical approaches. Many assumptions about groups are altered and the facilitator does not have the intention of creating any particular group behavior. As such, the person-centered Basic Encounter Group is unique (Bozarth 1986).

Criticism

Although popular, and achieving a certain level of success, the person-centered approach has its weaknesses. In particular, the emphasis on counselors' exhibiting congruence, respect, and empathy toward their clients, has led them to become supportive of their clients' situation and viewpoint to such an extent that the clients feel no need to change. Without invoking some standard or norm, or at least presenting alternative viewpoints, the counselor does not have any position of authority from which to guide the client to make constructive changes. While this was in no way Rogers' intention, it has led to counselors validating actions, otherwise deemed unacceptable by society, because their clients experience satisfaction from them.

Another frequent criticism of the person-centered approach is that embodying the three requirements of the therapist is what all good therapists do anyway, before they move on to applying their expertise and doing the real work of "making clients better." However, this criticism reflects a misunderstanding of the real challenges of consistently manifesting unconditional positive regard, empathic understanding, and congruence in the therapeutic situation. Just being able to maintain openness, honesty, empathy, and respect toward a client, while listening to their account of traumatic experiences and subsequent responses, may indeed be a defining attribute of a successful counselor. Beyond this though, it is fair to question whether other attributes of the self that the counselor brings to the relationship, which will be transparent to the client, are relevant to the healing process. The person-centered approach fails to address the issue of whether that self should have developed in any particular way through personal experience or specific training, or should have acquired any particular background knowledge, in order to be qualified and effective as a counselor.

Nevertheless, there is research that indicates that the personality of the therapist is a better predictor of success than the techniques used (Boeree 2006). Thus, Rogers' emphasis on the harmonious relationship between counselor and client should be appreciated as a significant insight into the therapeutic process.

Rogers' theories continue to inspire counselors working with individuals, couples, families, and larger groups.

References
ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

  • Boeree, C. George. 2006. Carl Rogers
  • Bozarth, Jerold. D. 1986. The basic encounter group: An alternative view. The Journal for Specialists in Group Work, 11(4), 228-232.
  • Bozarth, Jerold. D. 1998. Person-centered Therapy: A Revolutionary Paradigm PCCS Books Ltd. ISBN 1898059225
  • Bruno, Frank J. 1977. Client-Centered Counseling: Becoming a Person. In Human Adjustment and Personal Growth: Seven Pathways, pp. 362-370. John Wiley & Sons.
  • Rogers, Carl R. 1942. Counseling and Psychotherapy. Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 0395053218
  • Rogers, Carl R. 1951. Client-centered Therapy. Houghton Mifflin College Division. ISBN 0395053226
  • Rogers, Carl R. 1961. On Becoming a Person. Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 0395081343
  • Rogers, Carl R. 1970. Carl Rogers On Encounter Groups. Harper Collins. ISBN 0060669942
  • Rogers, Carl R. 1980. Becoming Partners: Marriage and Its Alternative. Dell Publishing Co.
  • Rogers, Carl R. 1980. A Way of Being. Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 0395299152
  • Rogers, Carl R. 1989. The Carl Rogers Reader. Mariner Books. ISBN 0395483573

External links

All links retrieved November 15, 2022.


Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.