Module 03. Glossary
Terms of the module
- Active expectations
- Career map (18 questions)
- Components of thinking (10)
- Cycle of abuse (8 stages)
- Emotional needs (10)
- Exiting the triangle (16 tools)
- Myth-making (the structure of influence, 5 steps)
- Speech techniques (5)
- Star of joy and results (5 rays)
- Three scenarios (pre-empting transference)
- Transference (and 3 ways out)
- Values (5 steps of working through)
Active expectations
One of the ten components of thinking: attitudes that sound in your head like “I know for sure that it will…,” and that don’t just wait but push you to behave in a way that makes the expected thing come true. If you expect a meeting to fail, you arrive tense and closed, and the meeting really doesn’t go well; if you expect interest, you stay open, and the conversation comes alive. The best-known proof of the power of expectations is Robert Rosenthal’s experiment: teachers were told that randomly chosen students were “promising,” and by the end of the year it was these children who had made more progress than the others, because the teachers spoke to them differently, waited longer for their answers and praised them more often. An expectation is not a forecast but an instruction that we carry out ourselves without noticing, and make others carry out too.
Positive expectations mobilize, negative ones lead to avoidance and sabotage: anxiously expecting a refusal, a person asks in a way that makes it easiest to refuse them. The mechanism is related to self-confirming beliefs (module 1) and to the second rule of how the mind works: what the mind expects is likely to happen (module 8). The practical step is to notice your expectation before an important situation and ask: “How is it already affecting what I’m doing right now?”
Career map (18 questions)
Working through the image of the professional activity you want. Imagine your workplace and describe it; what is around you; who you work with and who your clients are; what the atmosphere is like; how you feel there; what fills your day and your week; how much time you devote to reflection, and to what kind; what tasks you do and how; your strengths; your values; the qualities you value in yourself and in others; who you are in your profession — a leader, an expert, a mentor, an organizer; what you are striving for in three, five, ten years; what your unique contribution to other people’s lives will be; what meaning you see in your work; what was useful; what the first step will be. The questions are built from the bottom up, like Robert Dilts’s logical levels: from environment and actions through capabilities and values to who you are and what for — and so the map doesn’t let you stop at “where I’ll sit” but takes you all the way to “why.” Erik Erikson saw the last levels — contribution and meaning — as the main task of maturity and called this generativity: the need to leave something to those who come after.
The map turns a vague “I want to do something of my own” into a clear vision with an understandable first step; often, already at the question “how do you feel there,” a person discovers that they have drawn not their own dream but their parents’. It rests on values and continues the logic of goals (module 2): first clarify what for, then what to do. It continues on the business side with self-presentation (module 5) and the mission of your work from the principles of professionalism (module 7).
Components of thinking (10)
What the “thinking” step in the chain “event — thinking — reaction” is made of: beliefs about yourself (what am I like?), about others (what are others like?), about the world (what is the world like?); memories that get activated (“I remember how…”); cognitive distortions; active expectations (“I know for sure that it will…”); behavioral habits, including your attitude toward agreements; bodily sensations and how you feel physically; lifestyle — food, sleep, movement; automatic thoughts — that very “blah-blah-blah” in your head. The first three components are Aaron Beck’s cognitive triad, but the list is broader than cognitive therapy: Freud noticed that a memory that surfaces “by chance” at the moment of an event is chosen by the present and says no less about it than about the past, and neuroscience has confirmed that the body suggests a decision before the head has had time to think it over — Antonio Damasio called these somatic markers. Lack of sleep is also a component of thinking, and it turns a work remark into a catastrophe more reliably than any belief.
If the ABC model says that between the event and the reaction there is a thought, here that thought is broken down into its parts, and you can see exactly which component is failing: for one person it is a memory, for another lack of sleep, for a third an expectation. You look for the point of change where the failure is, not “somewhere in your head in general”: sometimes it is more honest to get some sleep than to argue with a belief.
Cycle of abuse (8 stages)
Abuse is acting on another person without their consent in order to change their picture of the world for the sake of inner and outer gain; its types are physical, sexual, psychological, economic. The cycle of abuse is a series of games over time, a circle or a downward spiral: a neutral pause, when outwardly everything is calm; tension building — grievances and irritation pile up; minor forms of abuse — sarcasm, humiliation, disapproving remarks; a major act — an outburst, a scene, physical violence; explanations and apologies — “I didn’t mean it, it was an accident”; reconciliation — it seems that it’s all behind you; the “honeymoon” — care and generosity so that the victim will “forget”; a return to the neutral pause with the problems unresolved. The model goes back to Lenore Walker, who, working with women who had survived beatings, described three phases — tension, explosion, honeymoon; the course’s eight stages spell it out in more detail. Why it is so hard to leave the circle is explained by traumatic bonding: alternating pain and tenderness binds more strongly than steady kindness — just as a slot machine that pays out rarely and unpredictably holds you more tightly than one that always pays.
Each new round is usually harsher: the sensitivity threshold drops, and the honeymoon reinforces the pattern in both the aggressor and the victim. The course also distinguishes four types of victim behavior: aggressive victims (who commit abuse themselves until they get it in return — Ferenczi called this identification with the aggressor), active ones (who provoke, “accidentally” doing what is bound to provoke abuse), passive ones (“hit me — it’s safe”) and accidental ones — who ended up in the situation through circumstances and are actively looking for a way out. The typology describes learned roles, not guilt: responsibility for abuse always lies with the one who commits it. It is important to approach this topic with care: the knowledge here is not a reason to rush other people’s decisions but something to lean on, so as to see the situation more clearly and seek help in time.
Emotional needs (10)
The needs that stand behind emotions and that are important to be aware of, so as to take care of yourself directly rather than through games: for love and acceptance without conditions; for safety and protection; for understanding and compassion; for support and encouragement; for guidance and direction; for stability and predictability; for autonomy and competence; for clear boundaries; for freely expressing needs and emotions; for spontaneity and play. The list brings together what different schools discovered separately: Bowlby showed that the need for secure attachment is as basic as the need for food; self-determination theory named autonomy and competence as the conditions of any healthy motivation; Winnicott explained why a child needs boundaries and predictability — they are the very environment that “holds.” An emotion is a signal about the state of a need, and as long as the need hasn’t been named, the signal sounds like whims, grievances and a strange tiredness.
Organizing life so that these needs are met is the responsibility of the person themselves: the course’s question is “How can you be a Nurturing Parent to your Inner Child?” In psychoanalysis such an inner parent is called a good internal object — an internalized figure of care that can be built up even in adulthood if there wasn’t enough of it in childhood. Behind a flash of resentment there is often an unacknowledged need for recognition, behind anxiety — a need for safety. A deepening of the three hungers (module 1); the root layer is core emotional needs (module 9); the family angle is family needs (module 6).
Exiting the triangle (16 tools)
Everything covered so far, assembled into a single set for exiting the Karpman Drama Triangle: decisions from CAP+, the “8 states” model, the laws of agreements, internal defense against manipulation, speech techniques for countering hooks, the fourth floor and attention to your PBR, revisiting cognitive distortions, SOMED, parental injunctions, dependency and codependency, goal setting, putting values into words, the ability to say “no,” defense against myth-making, the cycle of abuse, the principles of effective learning. In transactional analysis the triangle has a healthy counterpart, described by Acey Choy: the Victim becomes a vulnerable person who asks for something specific, the Rescuer a caring person who helps without taking away responsibility, the Persecutor an assertive person who speaks about their boundaries without attacking; the course’s sixteen tools are ways of reaching these three positions from any point in the drama.
The value is that in a real situation you don’t try to remember “which technique should I use,” but act as a whole: recognize the state, check it against your values, choose a move from the Adult position. The test of whether you are out is simple: if facts, questions and requests have appeared in the conversation instead of judgments, grievances and rescuing, you are already outside the triangle. The course’s tools are not a set of tricks but parts of a single logic, and the middle of the course is the moment to see it whole.
Myth-making (the structure of influence, 5 steps)
The structure of a manipulation by which a distorted picture of reality is gradually “molded” for a person. Step one — attracting attention: with a loud lie, with greedy curiosity, with a hard blow to the most intimate needs. Step two — smoothly immersing the ear in the myth: stories, intimidation, the benefits of using it, the harm of ignoring it, success stories. Step three — the command: what exactly to do, how and when, from directive to indirect. Step four — continuing to weave the myth so that the ear doesn’t notice the command but comes on its own to the conclusion that it must be carried out. Step five — quietly returning the ear to the everyday noise, shifting the focus from the episode to something else. The same sequence is described in research on ideological indoctrination: Robert Lifton, who studied the “re-education” of prisoners, found in it control of the environment, a special language and a conclusion the person reaches “on their own”; Roland Barthes showed that myth works by turning someone else’s decision into “the natural order of things,” and Racamier described how a manipulator makes the other person doubt their own perception until they take someone else’s version of reality for their own. The fifth step explains why victims don’t remember the moment they agreed: it was deliberately erased.
Unlike a crude hook, this is slow and systematic conditioning, and if you know the steps, you can interrupt it at an early stage — at the very first blow to a need: “I suddenly want this very urgently — who made that happen, and why?” An essential technique for neutralizing a myth is the question “If X, does that mean Y?” and the rules of mental hygiene (module 6); a catalog of specific techniques is the 38 manipulation tactics (module 4) and the vulnerability buttons (module 6).
Speech techniques (5)
Five formulas for answering difficult and manipulative remarks; each begins with cushioning and ends with taking the lead. The first: a substantive answer + taking the lead + strengthening the lead. The second: “you probably think X, although in fact Y” — to “something’s wrong with you, are you all right?” the answer is: “situations vary; you probably think something’s wrong with me, although in fact everything’s fine. Do you want to be of use to me?” The third: “the last thing I’d want is X, because what matters to me is Y” — to “I’m doing this for you, you know” the answer is: “the last thing I’d want is to be in your debt; what matters to me is to act as I see fit. And what does support mean to you?” The fourth: “it’s good that…” — emphasize the positive in the other person’s words: “I’m glad my work matters to you; what did you like about it?” The fifth: “imagine X,” “what if X,” “as if X” — to “are you even listening to me?” the answer is: “right now I’ve heard you. What if right now is exactly when we’re ready to hear each other? What do you really want to talk about?” The techniques have a lineage in family and brief therapy: the second formula is a redefinition of meaning that the Palo Alto school called reframing, the fourth is the positive connotation of the Milan school, which finds the good part even in the most unpleasant remark and responds to it, the fifth is the hypothetical question of solution-focused therapy. What all five have in common: they don’t argue with the content, they change the course of the conversation.
The aim of practice is to make sure they are universal: to think up five different answers to the same hook, because a person with one answer for everything is predictable, and one with five is free. Later the arsenal grows with humor (module 5) and the professional’s techniques (module 7), and comes together in the eight techniques for utilizing hooks (module 7).
Star of joy and results (5 rays)
A self-diagnosis model: to what extent you are the cause of what happens to you, rather than the effect of circumstances. Five rays: being informed — having the information you need and understanding the link between actions and results; responsibility — “I am the cause of what is happening,” the opposite of the victim position; influence — a real ability to change the situation, without which there is no genuine responsibility either; joy — pleasure in the process and the result, without which your resources quickly run dry; results — concrete, measurable outcomes that are useful not only to you. The second and third rays are what psychology calls an internal locus of control and belief in your own efficacy, and what Winnicott called creative living: the feeling that life is mine and is made by me, rather than happening to me. The ray of joy is not decoration: as a rule, the people who burn out are responsible people with a lot of influence and no pleasure.
For each ray, look honestly at where you act as the author and where you have taken the position “nothing depends on me”; a star with one short ray is lopsided, and it shows in the results. Through the same model the course suggests looking at over-protection and criticism from the “8 states” model: both states take the rays of influence and responsibility away from the other person, and someone next to an over-protective parent or manager is helpless not by nature but because of how the relationship is set up. The theme of codependency (module 2), turned toward yourself: not “whose fault is it,” but “where is my zone of influence.”
Three scenarios (pre-empting transference)
A model for starting work with a client or partner that removes transference in advance — the attempt to place on you the role of a parent or a rescuer. Seven steps: “it matters to me to be truly useful to you, so allow me to tell you about the three scenarios of my work”; you can always switch between them — you do A but not B and C; A and B but not C; A, B and C — and each has its pluses and minuses; which option is closer to you; how might you get in your own way on this path; how can you support yourself; if resistance appears, keep me posted, I’m your ally; the contract — who does what and when. In psychoanalysis what these steps build is called the working alliance: Ralph Greenson showed that treatment rests on the alliance between the analyst and the adult, reasonable part of the patient, not the part that expects a miracle from him; the three scenarios forge such an alliance within the first ten minutes, addressing the other person’s Adult and offering them a choice instead of the role of someone in your care.
The person understands that they have options and that they themselves choose how much effort to put in and what result to get; the roles are those of partners, responsibility is returned to the client, and later, when they say “but you promised,” you can go back to what they chose themselves. Distance, boundaries, role position, turning the implied into the expressed — all in one model. It is related to RBT (module 5) and to the partnership conversation (module 7).
Transference (and 3 ways out)
An unconscious mechanism in which a person transfers onto their present conversation partner feelings, expectations and images once experienced with other people. Your boss reminds you of your father with his tone of voice — and you answer him like a teenager, not as one adult to another. The concept was discovered by Freud, who found that patients reproduce with the analyst “new editions” of old relationships, and he made transference the main instrument of treatment: in the consulting room it is not removed but explored, whereas in life the course teaches you to notice it and step out of it. There are two reasons for it: the striving to make what is happening predictable and understandable, and the wish to satisfy unmet needs — for the unconscious, as Freud also wrote, time does not exist, and when it sees something similar, it tries to “complete” the past. Melanie Klein added that what is transferred is not a single figure but a whole situation: both the other person’s old role and your own.
What makes transference insidious is that from the inside it doesn’t feel like a mistake: the feeling is experienced as real and addressed to this very person; the clue is disproportion — the reaction is stronger than the occasion. The course offers three techniques. “Easy, but not simple”: cushioning + “do I understand correctly that you think…” + “this really is important” + taking the lead — hearing their own words from someone else’s mouth, a person often wakes up. “A friend’s dad”: “right now I’m talking to you not as beingness A (who I tend to be seen as), but as beingness B (who I am); the task in front of you is C, for the sake of result D, so I will refuse or offer E, because F.” And separating roles: “as A I want B, but as C I must D” — “as your friend I want to help, but as your manager I can’t allow myself that.” Pre-emptive work with transference is the “Three scenarios” model.
Values (5 steps of working through)
Deep reference points for what truly matters to a person; unlike goals, which are reached and closed, a value is a constant “where to”: not “get the position,” but “growth” or “honesty.” Acceptance and commitment therapy expresses this difference with the image of a compass and a destination: you can arrive at a goal, but you can only walk in the direction of a value, and every day you either go its way or you don’t. In psychoanalysis the closest relative of a value is the Ego Ideal, the image of who I want to be; the difference is that an ideal demands that you match it, while a value demands a direction, and so a value doesn’t humiliate you for being imperfect. Five steps of working through: putting it into words; what it means to me — the first associations; a metaphor, an image — “it’s like…”; what I see, hear and feel that tells me this value is present in my life; “every time I do ___, I strengthen the value of ___.”
The fourth step gives you value markers — recognizable signs in real life; strong anger or admiration is also a pointer: somewhere close by, a value has been touched, and anger at someone else’s unreliability will tell you more precisely than any questionnaire that reliability matters to you. Values serve as that very “must” from CAP+ (module 1) — the criterion by which a decision is checked for being in agreement with yourself; a life that goes against them feels like a quiet unease, even when from the outside “everything is fine.” The “I don’t want → What matters to me” technique works through values (module 4).