In 1964, Eric Berne had published his book “Games People Play”. It introduced Transactional Analysis. The book has sold several million copies over the years and is still selling now. It is a cognitive behavioural approach to psychotherapy. However, TA had its heydays in the 70’s and 80’s. Since then Cognitive Behavioural Therapy overtook it in popularity.
Another, more recent look at the human psyche is IFS, Internal Family Systems, which sees us as made up of discrete sub-personalities. Both see us as being made up of discrete ‘parts’ as opposed to a unified whole. The Gestalt Therapy, “Empty Chair” technique also reflects this concept, but perhaps more implicitly so than explicitly.
But TA theory isn’t only the underpinning of a psychotherapy, it is much more. It explains how our psyche is ‘constructed’; it explains how we tend to behave and how we interact with others and ourselves.
In addition to that, it should be of interest to everybody because it is a fascinating way of looking at ourselves and others. It can also be fun. It is simple, obvious and powerful.
It begins with Freud and how he described the three forces of our psyche; the Id, the Ego and the Superego. Berne reframed both name and to some extent their definitions while maintaining the broader picture.
The Id, that part of us that is not only a driving force but is amoral, seeking instant gratification and which can cause us to behave in a variety of negative ways if not controlled, became the ‘Child’. Freud’s Ego, the part of us that is in touch with reality and sees things as they are, was transformed into the ‘Adult’. The Superego, which is basically our conscience, the seat of our guilt feelings, changed into the ‘Parent’.
Figure 1 is how this structure is pictured. All of our behaviour is derived from one of, what are termed, our ego states. A mother feeding her infant does so from her Parent ego state. When she is explaining something to the infant she does so from her Adult ego state; from her Child, she will sit on the carpet and play. Same person but three distinct types of behaviour.
Are you exactly the same person at work as you are at a party? Are not your behaviours distinctly different? Is not even the vocabulary you tend to use also different? What would happen if you reversed those roles? Go to work and behave as you would at a party. Next time you go out on a social evening to have fun, try using the same language and vocabulary you use at work.
Now a perfect person would have equally strong ego states and his energies would be able to move freely between them as appropriate to the situation.
Unfortunately, most of us aren’t perfect. We can have an overpowering ego state, or a weak one. We can have an ego state so weak it appears to have gone missing.
You’ve heard of the saying, “All work and no play.”? That would describe somebody with little or no Child.
How about, “He’s totally irresponsible.” Probably somebody with a weak Parent.
“There’s something wrong with him, he never washes, goes out or has any friends, just sits at home and reads books.” That would be somebody ‘stuck’ in their Adult.
Transactional Analysis is an excellent way of describing such concerns, and analysing them in order to bring about resolution.
With practice you can tell which ego state a person is in. That is a useful gift. Knowing what ego state a person is in when you meet them will enable you to greet them on the same terms. If you meet somebody who is in their Parent ego state, and you respond from your Child, that is likely to be the terms of any ongoing relationship. Not a lot of good if you’re applying for a job for obvious reasons.
So how can you tell another’s state? Introspection. Look into yourself as you are looking at the person. How do you feel? We seem to have an instinctive way of knowing how others are feeling. However, it isn’t instinct, it is learning. At an unconscious level we all have learnt how to read expressions and body language. Even if we can’t verbalise what we perceive, introspection can make you consciously aware of what you already unconsciously know.
Does the person make you feel as though you’re about to be interrogated and you’d better be on the ball? If so, you’re probably with somebody in their Adult state. Do you somehow feel in control? They are in their Child. If you’re feeling small and maybe a little inferior then you’re with a Parent.
Knowing that, you can respond accordingly. It is often not a lot of good responding to a Parent from Child. Parent to Parent works. If they’re in Child? Well, either be a caring Parent or have some fun together. But that last suggestion isn’t recommended for a job interview. It might’ve been fun, but what the
interviewer got from it probably wasn’t what he or she wanted. And, of course, an Adult needs to communicate with another Adult. Cracking a joke (Child) probably isn’t going to get you any Brownie points with an Adult.
So what sort of thing can happen if you transact from an inappropriate ego state?
Figure 2 depicts a simple
Adult — Adult transaction. The statements are emotion free.
It is when you get, what Berne referred to as a ‘Crossed Transaction’ (Figure 3) that you get problems. Crossed Transactions will always have emotional content. They will nearly always cause dissonance and bad feeling.
However, the transaction depicted in Figure 3 is usually the commencement of what Berne termed “A Game” (hence the book title).
Psychological Games have set patterns and always end in the same way. Each player in the Game has one of three roles — Persecutor, Victim or Rescuer. During the course of the Game roles change. For example in the Game that is about to begin in Figure 3, the respective roles are obvious. The Parent is Persecuting the Child. By the end of the Game roles will have changed. The Persecutor ends up as the Victim; the original Victim ends up as the Rescuer is a possible scenario (the Payoff in Game terminology) depending on what Game took place. Games should be avoided at all cost.
So how can we avoid playing Games (aka having a big row in this instance)? In the above case by responding to the attack from one’s own Parent. “You’re absolutely right. I have been wasting money on rubbish. Now look where its got us. Would you help me sort myself out? (Appealing to the nurturing side of the other’s Parent).
What happens next would depend upon how strong the urge to play a Game was. But such a response, as suggested would be better than any defensive response from the Child.
TA is the ideal therapy for couples or families that need to sort out the dynamics of their interactions. The process does not generally require any in- depth analysis. It is about understanding what is going on and with that understanding steps can be taken to stop the ongoing Games and find more positive ways to interact.
We also transact with ourselves internally and the same rules apply. If, while we’re trying to solve a problem, a little voice pops up saying, say, “You can’t do that you idiot.” Then you’ve just had your Parent having a go at your Child. With the same results as if it had been an external transaction.
So what do you do if that sort of thing happens? You have choices. Take on board the self-insult; ignore it and carry on solving the problem; somehow reject it; or forget the problem and put the television on. What do you do, or what would you do? In other words, I am asking what you do with your negative thoughts when you get them.
Ignoring them tends to be the most common answer to that question. Unfortunately, it is probably the worst possible response. Do not ignore negative thoughts, they undermine you. Do something about them. Answer them back! Tell yourself, in the above case, that you’re not an idiot and prove it by thinking of something positive that disproves it.
However, if you could understand the internal Game you are playing and why you need to play it you could take the necessary steps to stop playing.
This has been a brief description of TA with mention of crossed transactions, Games and Roles and how it can be utilised in everyday events, both external and internal. It can even be used for a little amusement as we analyse ourselves and others we know.
A final note on TA. The structural analysis above is first order structure but there is also a second and third order. In second order, the Parent is divided into Nurturing Parent and Critical Parent. The Adult often remains untouched in that structure whereas the Child has three divisions. Namely, the Adapted Child, the Free or Natural Child, and the Little Professor. So the Child’s structure resembles (not by coincidence) an adult’s first order structure.
