Perspective HERE-NOW THE OBSERVER
HERE-NOW
HERE-NOW
THERE-THEN Psychological
Content THE DOER
Self as Content
Self as Process
Self as Context
Figure 1 shows that in self as content your psychological content is located HERE and NOW (see figure, top right), as is the observer (the latter is always the case). The coordination between the observer and the doer in this way increases the likelihood that your content will exert control over your behavior. This relationship also accounts for why the sufferer often feels overwhelmed and threatened, because who you know is coordinated with what you think and so on. In essence, it is the
relationship between the observer and the doer at any point in time that is captured by the three selves, and in self as content, they are at their most coordinated (or psychologically “equivalent”).
Self as process. Self as process is a psychological space in which on- going activity facilitates continuous distinctions between the observer and the doer. In short, who you are is distinct from what you think, feel, remember, and so on. For ACT, this psychological space does not entail fusion, because the observer can perceive the processes of thinking, feeling, and so on (the doings), and the evaluations that accompany these. Naturally, this distinction has the potential to reduce the previous pain associated with those evaluations (i.e., the observer wouldn’t feel as overwhelmed as when in self as content).
The ongoing awareness of those content- based processes is a critical feature of self as process. In essence, because you can perceive your content as continuously changing, attachment to it is not facilitated.
Consider the example “I feel depressed and am having depressed thoughts, but these are just thoughts and feelings at this moment, and they may be different tomorrow.” This ongoing awareness is synonymous with the concept of mindfulness, because you are being mindful of your content as it comes and goes.
Operating in self as process readily permits values- consistent behav-ior, rather than content- driven behavbehav-ior, because you have a distinct awareness of your content while remaining open to values. In simple terms, self as process permits both, thereby allowing you greater flexibil-ity with regard to your actions. Hence, you can live a rich and full values- based life if you can see your content for what it is. Notice, however, that self as process does not require you to somehow be “content- free” (if that were even possible) but simply offers you a different place from which to observe the ever- changing nature of your content.
On balance, it is also important to recognize that sticky psychological content (with which you have struggled in the past) is likely to create resurgence to self as content. That is, you cannot assume that all you need to do is stay in self as process, because your history will likely dictate that certain powerful content will slide you back into self as content, the minute it shows up. Accordingly, for ACT, there is a very fine line between self as content and self as process, and it is primarily ongoing awareness that keeps you in the latter and away from the grasp of the former. Let us
On a regular basis, Martin feels pain in one part of his body or maybe several at the same time. As soon as this experience occurs, his history of operating in self as content with this experience is almost inevitably brought to bear, and his behavioral flexibility is greatly reduced so that the alleviation of pain is perceived as the only option (i.e., “I must be someone who is pain free”). What this fusion in self as content precludes him from seeing is that even in that instant he does have other options regarding his pain, although they will certainly be difficult. For example, what he cannot see is the logical possibility that the pain can be endured, in the service of values. In short, perhaps, even when pain is present, other valued actions can be conducted. But, none of this can be experi-enced if pain- related content is not experiexperi-enced on an ongoing basis, as one pain- related experience after another, and another, and another.
Because even before Martin can learn to accept the pain, he must learn to operate from a different place in which the processes of his pain expe-riences can be observed. This would be self as process.
Now let us consider how RFT can account for what is happening at a relational level in self as process. Look at the right- hand side of Figure 1 again, and you will see that there is no relational difference between self as content and self as process, although they are significantly different experientially. In both selves, the doer is located HERE- NOW and, as always, the observer is HERE- NOW also. In self as process, there is a sense of the movement of psychological content from HERE- NOW to THERE- THEN. This means that although psychological content is problematic in self as content because it is HERE- NOW, self as process is different in that your content as HERE- NOW is simply the way we learn to talk about our thoughts, feelings, and behavior, and thus facili-tates self- knowledge rather than fusion.
Self as context. Self as context is a psychological space in which there is the strongest distinction between the observer and the doer. For ACT, self as context embodies defusion because who you are is distinct from what you think, feel, remember, and so on. Consider the following example, “I feel depressed and am having depressed thoughts, but I know that who I am is more than these negative thoughts and feelings.”
Naturally, this distinction has the potential to reduce the previous pain associated with content and its evaluations (i.e., the observer wouldn’t feel as overwhelmed as when in self as content). To illustrate the ACT approach with regard to facilitating self as context, let us return to Martin.
At the outset of therapy, Martin’s experience of his pain, when he discriminates its presence, is always fused with self- knowledge as a suf-ferer of pain. This dominates his sense of self, such that in the here and now when there is pain, there is little else. Training in self as context would permit Martin to experience a sense of self that is distinct from the pain, as well as highlighting the fact that other experiences can coexist with pain. When Martin learns to make more contact with this sense of self, it also increases his access to values, as a dominant source of behavior, and a greater sense of self as context will allow him to con-sistently keep his behavior going in that valued direction. Self as context will also foster greater acceptance by him because it opens up a safe place in which pain can be experienced as not completely overwhelming or dominant. It is a part of who he is, but not all that he is.
At a relational level, RFT suggests that in self as context the doer is located THERE- THEN, rather than in HERE- NOW, as was the case with the other two selves (see Figure 1, bottom right). This strong rela-tional distinction between observer and doer renders this the safest place from which to view your thoughts, feelings, and so on, and likely facili-tates the greatest distinction between content and overt behavior. In other words, when psychological content is not located in the same place as the observer, the content has no intrinsic power to control behavior.
Thus you can live your life in a values-consistent manner without influ-ence from psychological content.
From an ACT perspective, self as context facilitates maximum defu-sion (or least fudefu-sion) because it provides the largest distinction between the observer and the doer. However, there are two important points that should be remembered. First, it might seem that the ideal place from which to operate is self as context, such that you should operate in this mode all the time. But this is neither feasible nor essential, because self as process should suffice for much content and historically sticky content will likely draw you back to self as content anyway. As a result, self as process is perhaps the best mode of operating for most of the time, while self as context is safest when sticky content has a history of sucking you into self as content.
Indeed, a primary goal of ACT is to establish psychological flexibil-ity, which involves the ability to switch among the three selves, as neces-sary. In short, to minimize fusion, ACT suggests switching from self as
dangerous place to be because you can easily get sucked back into self as content, ACT exercises also promote flexibility in switching from self as process to self as context (i.e., to maximize defusion).
Consider again the example of Martin. In the beginning, Martin was operating in self as content with regard to his experiences of pain and became primarily a pain sufferer (i.e., maximum fusion). This fusion then makes it more likely that his behavior will be largely governed by attempts to remove the pain, with thoughts such as “I cannot be who I was until the pain is gone.” Teaching Martin to operate with regard to his pain from self as process would allow him to notice on an ongoing basis the nature and frequency of pain experiences and would facilitate some defusion in this regard. For example, his ACT professional might encourage him to notice one pain event after another, and another, and another, like leaves floating down a stream. This self as process exercise would reduce the fusion with some pain events but of course not all, given his history. Hence, at the same time, it would be important to teach Martin how to operate from self as context in which he can come to see that he is much more than his pain experiences (i.e., BIG observer, small doer). In this case, both self as process and self as context can be used to facilitate behavioral flexibility in the service of values because Martin can learn that even when pain shows up, it can be noticed, acknowledged, and yet alternative values- based action can still happen.
In the sections below, we explore the potential overlap between ACT and RFT approaches to self and various exercises from the field of posi-tive psychology. Although each hails from a very different philosophical and psychological tradition, there is much utility in examining potential common ground for both scientific and therapeutic perspectives. In par-ticular, we selected two positive psychology exercises that appeared to have a strong basis in one’s sense of self.