So here’s my general strategy for working with clients on self- as- context: In essence, I deliberately pull out all the stops and use everything ACT has to offer— language use, metaphors, experiential exercises, and general discussion. The work begins immediately in terms of language use as discussed above. That is, from the outset of therapy I demonstrate self- as- process and self- as- context when talking about my own experiences in session and when reflecting back to clients what they have said. When it comes to talking more explicitly about self- as- context, I like to make the soil as fertile as possible. Ideally, my client demonstrates some ability to defuse from thoughts, and some willingness to be present to the moment rather than engaged in a control/avoidance strategy. For this reason I often head into self- as- context after having worked with clients on willingness and defusion.
184
Advanced ACTMindfulness is central to self- as- context and is something to pull in from the beginning of the therapy. In fact, mindfulness meditation has long been thought to help humans contact the transcendent self. With mindful awareness of the moment, specifically awareness of our ever- changing thoughts, feelings, sensations, evaluations, judgments, and so forth, we learn experientially that everything changes. We learn that the internal phenomena of the moment are transient and part of an ongoing flow of experience, and we become aware of the Observer watching the flow. We build awareness of the Experiencer that has thoughts, feelings, sensations, and so on, but is distinct from those internal experiences. In mindfulness meditation, we learn over time and with much practice (at defusing and simply noticing) that we are more than these experiences.
As previously discussed, regularly incorporating mindfulness into your ACT ses- sions is helpful on many levels. Therapists are able to regularly assess clients’ abilities in several core processes: getting present (which requires willingness), defusion, and self- as- process/self- as- context. Building clients’ abilities with self- as- process paves the way for explicit work on self- as- context. I have found it both a natural progression and effective to begin explicit self- as- context work with the “Observer exercise” (some- times referred to as the “Continuous You” exercise). This exercise was first introduced by Hayes, Strosahl, and Wilson (1999) and is geared toward helping clients access self- as- context. In this guided imagery exercise, clients are asked to remember what they were experiencing at different points in time (for example, that morning, at some point during the previous week, during the previous summer, during high school, or as a child). Clients are cued to revisit these points in time as fully as possible, and to notice the attendant internal events (for example, “What thoughts are you having at this moment?”). The therapist draws a continuous thread through these points of time, helping clients see that there is a locus of perspective, a “continuous you” that is constant throughout. Clients are guided to become aware of this continuous locus of perspective (the “Observer” noticing those experiences), as well as what is unfolding in the present moment. (For more detailed examples see Hayes et al., [1999] and Walser & Westrup [2007]).
It is important to check in with clients following this exercise. I have seen clients experience epiphanies, really contacting the “self that is continuous and larger than thoughts or feelings.” It is also not at all uncommon for clients to report something along the lines of “I don’t get what you mean by the ‘self’.” I like to use such opportuni- ties for in- the- moment work:
Me: “So, are you aware that you are sitting there, looking at me?” Client: “Yes… .”
Me: “And did you hear yourself say ‘Yes’?” Client: (Nods.)
The Conundrum of Self- as- Context
185
Client: “Yeah.”Me: “And are you aware of your body in the chair?” Client: “Yeah.”
Me: “And can you catch any thoughts you are having? Like maybe thoughts about what we’re doing right now?”
Client (slight laugh): “Yep.”
Me: “And check in for a moment— you don’t need to answer. See if you can identify any emotions that are showing up right now.” (Pausing for a few moments.) “Did you notice any?”
Client: “Yeah.”
Me: “So that entity doing all the noticing? That’s the self we’re talking about here. The self that is aware of being in this moment, that can notice the thoughts, feelings, and sensations of the moment. That’s the same observing self that was in those different situations we just went through in the exercise— that self that knows you are here in this moment, that knew you were there in those moments.”
I cannot recall a situation in which this sort of in- the- moment work has not helped clients recognize the conceptualized self. A typical move at this point would be to move from this sort of discussion to a metaphor or additional experiential exercise. I really try to come at self- as- context from a variety of directions to solidify and fill out this process for clients.
Now enters the chessboard metaphor, a key intervention. There are several useful metaphors for self- as- context (such as “house with furniture” and “box with stuff in it”). However, the chessboard metaphor is a powerful classic. Since first presented in the original ACT book by Hayes, Strosahl, and Wilson (1999), the chessboard meta- phor has been one of the central interventions in ACT. It is a personal favorite simply because I have found it to be effective; it is often the chessboard metaphor that helps clients finally understand what we mean when we talk about the “self that is larger.” (Note the hierarchical framing involved here: that even while recognizing a self— a locus of perspective— that is distinct from or larger than present thoughts or feelings, we see that they belong together. The experienced thoughts, feelings, and sensations belong to that larger self.) Yet I have found the chessboard metaphor to be the hardest of the commonly used metaphors for therapists to do effectively. The idea may seem straightforward, but execution can be a bit tricky.
Most of the difficulties have to do with setup. I’ll talk about setup again in the next chapter when discussing general ways to maximize ACT metaphors and exercises.
186
Advanced ACTBefore you begin here, it is important to get clear on just what it is that you hope your client will take away from the metaphor. Let’s apply this goal to the chessboard meta- phor specifically:
Main process being targeted: self- as- context (contacting the self as the chessboard) Other processes facilitated: defusion (from the chess pieces as thoughts/feelings),
willingness (simply holding the pieces), committed action (the board moves with the pieces)
Supporting points: chess pieces cannot be removed from the board (history is addi-
tive), there’s no winning (since pieces can’t be removed), the board contacts all the pieces (this is not a strategy), the board is intact (the self is distinct from the pieces), being the board is different from feeling whole and intact.
In identifying these various clinical objectives, therapists are guided to set up the metaphor in a way that will help them convey these points. A central strategy in opti- mizing ACT is to use every available opportunity to further psychological flexibility. In other words, although you may be targeting a particular process, why not further other abilities as well, if the opportunity is there and your client seems ready for them? While the chessboard metaphor is geared toward self- as- context, there is rich opportunity to make headway in willingness and committed action, for example. There is another significant opportunity as well. When clients learn to operate at “board level,” they see that they are whole and intact regardless of the pieces they carry.
In chapter 6, I stressed the importance of word choice in ACT, stating that even small wording differences can have important implications. As it applies to the chess- board, sometimes therapists don’t specify, when establishing the metaphor, that the board “extends in all directions” (that there are no edges to the board). The client then does not understand why individual chess pieces must remain on the board. As another example, many therapists support clients in evaluating their experiences by labeling pieces as “good” or “bad,” rather than taking the opportunity to help clients defuse from such thoughts.
I have seen therapists set themselves up for a struggle with this metaphor when they set the stage in an overly elaborate manner. That is, they get caught up in detail that doesn’t really add anything clinically. One consequence is that they open them- selves up to a complicated discussion that is off point. They can get bogged down in some detail of the metaphor rather than focusing on the processes being targeted. Another consequence is that the main point is diminished. I have seen cases where the therapist put so much into the setup that the client had lost interest by the time the “you are the board” point was reached. So the point is not “the story of the chess- board.” The metaphor is meant to illuminate a process (self- as- context), and it’s advis- able to get there as cleanly as possible. Keeping the intended function of the metaphor firmly in mind will help you determine how much detail— and which details— to provide. Consider keeping it concise.
The Conundrum of Self- as- Context