[ Contents ]
From: Gunars K. Neiders
Date: 10/11/02
Time: 9:19:00 AM
Remote Name: 134.29.30.25
Dear Margaret,
I really loved your article on Personal Construct Theory!!!
I am a psychology doctorate student who recently (six months ago) discovered the "Constructivist Psychologies" which are based on the original constructivist psychology Personal Construct Theory founded by George Kelly.
I consider my theoretical orientation now as Constructivistic Collaborative Competency-Based Rational Emotive Behavior Therapist.
I agree with everything that George Kelly proposes am also reading:
Neimayer, R.A. & Mahoney, M.J. (eds) (1999). Constructivism in psychotherapy. Washington DC: American Psychological Association
Neimayer, R.A. & Raskin, J.D. (eds) (2000). Constructions of disorder: Meaning-making frameworks for psychotherapy. Washington DC: American Psychological Association
By "constructivism" I mean that we really do not know reality, but have constructed in our heads an image of reality. When this construction of reality causes us to malfunction (e.g. stutter) or causes us distress about minor dysfluencies (e.g. anxiety, depression, etc.) we can deconstruct the schemata and reconstruct them as you have shown in your article dealing with Michael.
"Collaborative" implies that the therapy process is a collaborative effort between the client and the therapist. The client is the EXPERT in everything personal that has happened to himself, how he has constructed his reality to cope with his problems, what is functional in his life, what is dysfunctional in his life, what life goals he has, and how much is he willing to "pay" to attain these goals. The client is the author of his life story, past, present, and future.
He, the client, is responsible, with the help of the therapist of deconstructing and reconstructing his life.
The therapist is the sage who can, through Socratic questioning, lead the client in examining the client?s self-constructed reality. The therapist can show the client the from his "warehouse of tools" cognitive, perceptive, emotive, and action based psychological and speech exercises.
Together they can decide which may be appropriate to a) discover new ways of reconstructing reality and b) to rewire the client?s brain so that the new way of thinking becomes automatic.
"Competency-Based" means that the client?s competency is not called into question. The client is within the "zone of proximal and potential development" (Lev Vygotsky, Thought and Language - Rev'd Edition MIT Press) where the therapist can show the client to become his own therapist.
The client is empowered AND encouraged to make choices for himself in a way, such that his EXPERTISE on who he "is" and wants "to become", is optimally utilized.
"Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy(REBT)" (the best known of all the Cognitive Behavioral Therapies) has the warehouse of tools ranging from cognitive reconstructing, emotive-experiential exercises, behavioral homework home work exercises, in vivo desensitization, reality testing, guided imagery, sane semantically healthy self-talk, etc.
From your article I see the commonality of our approaches. Especially as to the outcome:
a) "being an effective communicator, with an ability to manage stuttering (rather than being fluent all the time) ? I call it anti-perfectionism: speaking well, frequently, and with comfort, instead of speaking perfectly.
b) "being able to talk openly with Catherine about stuttering" ? I call it lack of shame about stuttering or "advertising" stuttering either by talking about it or by doing voluntary pseudo-stuttering and realizing that there is nothing awful, terrible or horrible about "managed stuttering"
c) "ability to focus on positive outcomes" ? I call it positive feedback
d) "Disadvantages to being equal with the teacher held a threat to the kind of relationship they had, and M. was unable to predict what would happen if they were equal. Until this was resolved and the advantage of Michael being equal to others were clear, becoming more confident and more fluent were not going to be automatic."
What I hear you saying here is that until we, who stutter, UNCONDITIONALLY ACCEPT OURSELVES, instead of only have self-esteem when we do well, we will have greater than necessary problems with stuttering. This anti-rating of self and others is very, very important.
e) "Michael thought for awhile, and said So its all in my head this problem." This I interpret to mean that when an Activating event (A) a speaking situation occurs, the Beliefs (B)(beliefs about the urgency/all importance of the situation, equality of the participants, ability of stuttering to make us worthless persons, etc.) are acted upon, and the consequential (C) stuttering occurs. AxB->C as Albert Ellis the founder of REBT says.
The greatest hindrance to fluency are the MUSTS, 1)B = I MUST do well, 2)B = I MUST impress others, 3)B =I MUST speak perfectly, etc.. When these musts are reconstructed to be only preferences, 1)I would like do well, 2)I only prefer to impress others, but I don't have to, 3)I would like to speak better, the pressure is off the speaker and he can speak more flowingly.
Sorry for the long and enthusiastic reply.
Have I understood you correctly?
I am still a novice at putting the constructivist pieces together with my REBT background.
Gunars Neiders, PhD.EE, Psychology Doctorate Student