features and pathways to change Working with the inner ...

This article was downloaded by: [KU Leuven University Library]On: 11 February 2015, At: 10:01Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Person-Centered & ExperientialPsychotherapiesPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rpcp20

Working with the inner critic: Processfeatures and pathways to changeNele Stinckens a , Germain Lietaer a & Mia Leijssen aa KU Leuven , Department of Clinical Psychology , Leuven ,BelgiumPublished online: 22 Apr 2013.

To cite this article: Nele Stinckens , Germain Lietaer & Mia Leijssen (2013) Working with the innercritic: Process features and pathways to change, Person-Centered & Experiential Psychotherapies,12:1, 59-78, DOI: 10.1080/14779757.2013.767747

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14779757.2013.767747

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rpcp20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/14779757.2013.767747

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14779757.2013.767747

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Working with the inner critic: Process features and pathwaysto change

Nele Stinckens*, Germain Lietaer and Mia Leijssen

KU Leuven, Department of Clinical Psychology, Leuven, Belgium

(Received 31 August 2012; final version received 3 December 2012)

The inner critic symbolizes the strict, inner normative voice that interferes with theindividual’s organismic experiencing process. It forms an essential characteristic forvarious psychological disorders (including depressive disorder, eating disorder, obses-sive-compulsive personality disorder) and leaves traces of its presence in therapy.Although self-criticism has been a topic of interest in psychotherapy literature forseveral decades, systematic model building and research on the self-critical process hasbeen rather limited, with the exception of dialectical-constructivistic theories andEmotion-Focused Therapy. In this paper a comprehensive microtheory is presentedthat offers a detailed and differentiated look at the specific ways the inner criticmanifests itself in the concrete psychotherapy situation. The microtheory has beendeveloped by a profound literature review and a detailed analysis of a varied sample oftherapy episodes (N = 75) in which the inner critic was salient. Diverse process aspectsare distinguished that can be present to a lesser or greater extent; the configuration ofthese process aspects determines the specific “form” in which the inner critic manifestsitself in therapy. Also various pathways to change are discerned which lead to the innercritic evolving into a more adaptive self-aspect, becoming part of the flexible anddynamic self-process in a coherent way. Not all of these pathways need to be exploredin the psychotherapeutic process. Depending on the nature and intensity of the innercritic some pathways will be more appropriate than others.

Keywords: inner critic; self-constraint; process features; pathways to change; self-process

Die arbeit mit dem inneren kritiker: Prozessmerkmale und wege zurveränderung

Der innere Kritiker symbolisiert die strenge, innere normative Stimme, die demorganismischen Erfahrungsprozess des Individuums in die Quere kommt. Sie ist einwesentlicher Bestandteil für verschiedene psychologische Störungen (einschließlichder depressiven Störungen, Essstörungen, Zwangsstörungen, zwanghaftePersönlichkeitsstörungen) und wird in der Therapie ständig spürbar. ObwohlSelbstkritik in der psychotherapeutischen Literatur jahrzehntelang ein interessantesThema war, gab es kaum systematische Modelle und Forschung zum Prozess derSelbstkritik außer den dialektisch-konstruktivistischen Theorien und der Emotions-Fokussierten Therapie. In diesem Artikel wird eine zusammenfassende Mikrotheorievorgestellt, die einen detaillierten und differenzierten Blick auf die besonderen Artenbietet, wie sich der innere Kritiker in der konkreten psychotherapeutischen Situationmanifestiert. Die Mikrotheorie wurde durch einen gründlichen Literaturüberblick undeine detaillierte Analyse verschiedener Beispiele von Therapieepisoden (N = 75)entwickelt, in welchem der innere Kritiker spürbar war. Diverse mögliche

*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]

Person-Centered & Experiential Psychotherapies, 2013Vol. 12, No. 1, 59–78, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14779757.2013.767747

© 2013 World Association for Person-Centered & Experiential Psychotherapy & Counseling

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

KU

Leu

ven

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:01

11

Febr

uary

201

5

Prozessaspekte werden differenziert, die mehr oder weniger intensiv auftreten,. DieKonfiguration dieser Prozessaspekte bestimmt die spezifische "Form" wie sich dieserinnere Kritiker in der Therapie zeigt. Es werden auch verschiedene Wege zurVeränderung erörtert, die dazu führen, dass sich der innere Kritiker zu einem angepas-steren Aspekt des Selbst entwickelt und auf eine kohärente Art Teil des flexiblen unddynamischen Selbstprozesses wird. Nicht alle diese Wege müssen im psychotherapeu-tischen Prozess exploriert werden. Je nach Typ und Intensität des inneren Kritikerswerden manche Wege besser passen als andere.

Trabajando con el crítico interior: Características y vías para el cambio

El crítico interior simboliza la voz normativa interna estricta que interfiere con elproceso organísmico de experienciar de la persona. Forma una característica esencialpara diversos trastornos psicológicos (incluyendo el trastorno depresivo mayor, tras-tornos de la alimentación, trastorno obsesivo-compulsivo de la personalidad) y dejarastros de su presencia en la terapia. Aunque la autocrítica ha sido un tema de interésen la literatura de psicoterapia durante varias décadas, la construcción sistemática deun modelo y la investigación sobre el proceso de autocrítica han sido bastante limit-adas, con excepción de las teorías dialécticas constructivistas y la terapia enfocada a lasemociones. En este artículo se presenta una micro teoría abarcativa que ofrece unamirada detallada y diferenciada sobre las formas específicas en las que el críticointerno se manifiesta en la situación concreta de la psicoterapia. La micro teoría hasido desarrollada por una revisión teórica profunda y un análisis detallado de unamuestra variada de ejemplos de tratamiento (N = 75) en los que el crítico interno teníauna importancia sobresaliente. Se distinguen diversos aspectos del proceso que puedenestar presente en menor o mayor medida; la configuración de estos aspectos delproceso determina la "forma" específica en que el crítico interno se manifiesta en laterapia. También discernimos varios caminos para el cambio que llevan al críticointerno a evolucionar de forma coherente hacia un aspecto del self más adaptativo,convirtiéndose en parte del proceso del self más flexible y dinámico. No es necesarioexplorar todas estas vías del proceso psicoterapéutico. Dependiendo de la naturaleza yla intensidad del crítico interno, algunos caminos serán más adecuados que otros.

Le travail avec le critique intérieur: Caractéristiques du processus etvoies de changement

Le critique intérieur symbolise la voix intérieur, stricte et normative, qui gène leprocessus d’expériencing organismique de la personne. Il constitue unecaractéristique essentielle de divers troubles psychologiques, (y compris ladépression, les troubles du comportement alimentaire, le trouble obsessionnel-compul-sif de la personnalité), et laisse des traces dans la thérapie. Si l’autocritique est un sujetd’intérêt dans la littérature psychothérapeutique depuis plusieurs décennies, la con-struction systématique de modèles et la recherche sur le processus autocritique estassez limitée, exception faite des théories dialectique-constructivistes et de la Thérapie‘Emotion-Focused’. Dans cet article une micro-théorie globale propose une visiondétaillée et différenciée des manières spécifiques dont le critique intérieur se manifestedans la situation concrète de la psychothérapie. La micro-théorie a été développée àpartir d’une révision approfondie de la littérature et d’une analyse détaillée d’unéchantillon varié d’épisodes de thérapie (N = 75) dans lesquelles le critique intérieurest saillant. Divers aspects du processus, plus ou moins présents, sont distingués. Laconfiguration de ces aspects du processus détermine la “forme” spécifique de lamanifestation du critique intérieure dans la thérapie. En plus, l’article discerne desvoies de changement permettant au critique interne d’évoluer vers une adaptabilitéd’aspects du self, ainsi intégrant, de manière cohérente, le processus flexible etdynamique du self. Toutes ces voies n’ont pas nécessairement besoin d’êtreexplorées au cours du processus thérapeutique. Selon la nature et l’intensité du critiqueintérieur, certaines voies seront plus appropriées que d’autres.

60 N. Stinckens et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

KU

Leu

ven

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:01

11

Febr

uary

201

5

Trabalhando com a crítica interna: Características do processo e camin-hos para a mudança

A crítica interna simboliza a voz interior rígida e normativa, que interfere com oprocesso de vivência organísmica do indivíduo. Trata-se de uma característica essen-cial em diversas perturbações psicológicas (incluindo a depressão, perturbações ali-mentares, personalidade obsessivo-compulsiva) e deixa marcas da sua presença naterapia. Apesar de a auto-crítica ser um tema de interesse na literatura psicoterapêuticadesde há várias décadas, a construção de um modelo sistemático e a investigação desseprocesso tem sido limitada, à exceção das teorias dialético-construtivistas e da terapiafocada na emoção. Neste artigo apresenta-se uma micro-teoria compreensiva quepropõe uma perspetiva pormenorizada e diferenciada sobre as formas específicas demanifestação da crítica interna no contexto concreto da psicoterapia. Esta micro-teoriafoi desenvolvida a partir de uma revisão da literatura profunda e da análise detalhadade uma amostra diversificada de episódios terapêuticos (N = 75) nos quais a críticainterna era patente. São distinguidos diversos aspetos referentes ao processo quepodem estar presentes em maior ou menor grau. A configuração destes aspetosreferentes ao processo determina a «forma» específica pela qual a crítica interna semanifesta em terapia. Também são descritos diversos caminhos de mudança que levama crítica interna a evoluir de forma mais coerente. Nem todos esses caminhos têm deser exploradas no processo psicoterapêutico. Dependendo da natureza e da intensidadeda crítica interna, alguns caminhos serão mais adequados do que outros.

内なる批評家との働き：プロセスの特徴と変化への道筋

内なる批評家は個人の有機的体プロセスを干渉する厳密な内なる規範の声を象徴している。それはいろいろな心因性障害（鬱病、摂食障害、強迫性人格障害を含む）の重要な特徴を形作り、セラピーにおいてその存在の跡を残す。自己批評が数十年に渡って精神療法の文献において関心の話題であったが、弁証法的で構成主義的な理論とエモーション・フォーカスト・セラピー　(EFT)を除いて自己批判プロセスの組織的なモデルの構築とリサーチはむしろ制限された。

本論文では、詳細で区別された観察での特定の方法で、内なる批評家が具体的なセラピー状況を明らかにした包括的でミクロ理論が提示されている。ミクロ理論は、深い文献レビューと内なる批評家が顕著だったセラピーのエピソード(N = 75)の様々なサンプルの詳細な分析によって、開発された。より小さい、あるいはより大きい広がりがある異なったプロセスの側面は識別された。それらのプロセスの側面の配置は、セラピーにおいて内なる批評家が明らかになる特定の「形態」を決定する。また変化へのいろいろなプロセスは、認識される。そして、内なる批評家がより適応出来る自己の側面に展開を導き、首尾一貫した方法で柔軟で力強い自己のプロセスの一部となる。これらのプロセスの全てがサイコセラピーのプロセスにおいて探求される必要があるというわけではない。内なる批評家の性質と強さに応じて、いくつかのプロセスが他より適切である。

1. Conceptualization of the inner critic

The “inner critic” concept was introduced within client-centered/experiential theory byGendlin (1981, 1986). It refers to a well-integrated system of critical and negativethoughts and attitudes of the self that interferes with the individual’s organismic experi-encing process. The concept is also described in other therapy orientations, albeit withother terminology and different emphases, including for instance: “harsh superego”(psychoanalysis), “criticial parent” (transactional analysis), “top dog” (Gestalt therapy),“negative beliefs” (cognitive-behavioral therapy), etc.

Person-Centered & Experiential Psychotherapies 61

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

KU

Leu

ven

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:01

11

Febr

uary

201

5

The idea of conceptualizing and labeling self-criticism as a separate authority connectsto a present and widespread approach in psychology and psychotherapy of a “plural self”,characterized by a multiplicity of I-positions or voices (Cooper et al., 2004; Rowan,2010). Self-plurality can be both psychologically healthy and problematic, depending onthe relationship between the different I-positions or voices. Hermans et al. (1993) distin-guishes between “process-enhancing conflicts,” stimulating the self to look for creativecompromises between these conflicting elements, and “process-impeding conflicts,” inwhich interactions between the elements stagnate and the cohesion of the self is threa-tened. Honos-Webb and Stiles (1998) make a similar distinction between “healthy multi-vocality” and “pathological fragmentation.”

In the early years of client-centered therapy, the inner critic was not an explicit issue intheory building. Although the valuing process was given a central role in Rogers’personality theory, a separate definition and analysis of the specific problems or processesinvolved had not taken place. Still, quite a few ingredients corresponding with this issuecan be found between the lines in Rogers’ prolific writings (Stinckens, Lietaer, &Leijssen, 2002). Rogers considers a person to be an autonomous and self-regulatingorganism, with the locus of evaluation being situated inside the person him- or herself.However, due to all kinds of conditions of worth from others, this innate and healthyvaluing process can mutate into a separate normative authority that has a fixed, static andabsolute character and is no longer rooted in an organismic soil (Rogers, 1951). Suchseparate normative authority risks interfering with one’s inner development: what onefeels often collides with what one expects or what one ought to be or to do; but becausethe latter cannot be tampered with, one’s organismic experiences must be reined in – theyare “bad,” “wrong,” “stupid,” “shameful,” “pernicious”, etc. This continually corrodesone’s self-confidence and self-esteem.

In more recent client-centered/experiential literature some new accents are empha-sized, shedding a more differentiated and nuanced light on the conceptualization of thevaluing process and the problem of the inner critic (Barrett-Lennard, 2000; Elliott,Watson, Goldman, & Greenberg, 2004; Gendlin, 1996; Honos-Webb & Stiles, 1998;Mearns & Thorne, 2000; Whelton & Greenberg, 2000).

First of all, the person is approached more from a contextual perspective whichimplies that inborn, intuitive experiencing should enter into a continuous dialectic rela-tionship with the laws of social reality for the valuing process to correspond with thesocial embeddedness of the individual. The valuing process is conceived as a sophisti-cated dialogical system in which the actualizing tendency and social reality are continu-ously balanced. If one or both forces start weighing too heavily on the system, the valuingprocess will shrivel to a rigid valuing approach in which either one’s own values or thoseof others triumph, without being adapted to the specific situation.

Besides the continuous interaction between intrapsychic and interpersonal processes,the self is also considered as a dynamic system in which several self-aspects are inter-related in a complex network of mutual, dialectical relations. This more differentiatedview gives more insight into the dysfunctional mechanisms of the inner critic, and morespecifically into the manner and degree to which the original unity between self andorganismic experiencing is affected. Following Elliott, Watson, Goldman & Greenberg(2004), the inner critic can be conceived as a process task in which specific dysfunctionalprocesses need to be worked on. In our opinion, these dysfunctional processes can besituated on a continuum, varying in degrees from less to more process blocking. In thefirst place, the critic can manifest itself in the form of a continually recurring voice thatquestions or judges certain aspects of the person (e.g. “You’re lazy,” “Why can you never


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

KU

Leu

ven

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:01

11

Febr

uary

201

5

be on time?!”). This creates short circuits in the overall synthetic process that can threatenthe integration of the self, although it doesn’t necessarily cause a process blockage. Thecritic can also root itself more deeply in the self and take on the form of a maladaptiveself-scheme (e.g. “I’m a failure,” “I’m a weakling”). In this case the critic has become ahabitual part of the self that is internalized to such a degree that it is no longer experiencedas a “voice from outside,” but more as something “that is part of me.” The degree towhich the person identifies with this self-scheme determines whether the whole self oronly part of it is contaminated. When the critic extends its tentacles throughout the entireself-system, the person totally overlaps with his or her critic and other, more positive self-aspects have no longer the right to exist. In this case, the critic assumes responsibility forthe preservation and survival of the self and needs to protect the self against everypossible internal and external threat (Mearns & Thorne, 2000).

The inner critic forms an essential characteristic for various psychological disorders(including, depressive disorder, eating disorder, obsessive-compulsive personality dis-order) and leaves traces of its presence in therapy (e.g. interrupting the process of self-exploration, blocking emotional processing etc.). According to Firestone et al. (2002)the inner critic is hard to work with in psychotherapy, because it turns out to be veryresilient to change: Clients stubbornly holds onto the security of their inner critic, givingthem a sense of having their internal world completely under control, just as is the casefor other rigid structures. When the trusted self-schemes are being unstitched, clientswill do anything to keep them intact. This happens when the therapist questions ordiscusses the client’s self-scheme. More global experiences of success, prosperity andgrowth are also resisted as these threaten to have an impact on the individual’s trustedself-schemes.

In this article we present a comprehensive microtheory that offers a detailed anddifferentiated look at the specific ways the inner critic manifests itself in the concretepsychotherapy situation. It has been construed by a profound literature review and adetailed analysis of a varied sample of therapy episodes (N = 75) in which the innercritic was salient. The microtheory consists of three components as demonstrated inFigure 1.

The process marker indicates that the inner critic appears within the client. Diverseprocess aspects can be distinguished at this stage (see below). Each of the process aspectscan be present to a lesser or greater extent and the configuration of these process aspectsdetermines the specific “form” in which the inner critic manifests itself in therapy.

Various pathways to change are discerned in the client process which lead to theinner critic evolving into a more adaptive self-aspect, becoming part of the flexible anddynamic self-process in a coherent way. Finally, the therapeutic approach facilitates thedevelopment of this change process. There are two important aspects that are distin-guished here, although in practice these are difficult to separate: The relational and thetask aspects. The relational environment forms the foundation onto which interpersonalexperiences are grafted and it functions as a medium for corrective interpersonalexperiences. The task aspects represent the strategies the therapist uses to help the clientto navigate through the various pathways to change. These strategies also help toreinforce the working alliance.

The first two components are explored more systematically in this article: (1) theprocess aspects that are considered to typify the inner critic, and (2) the change processthat needs to be initiated in order to allow the critic to evolve in a constructive way. Thethird component, the therapeutic approach used to modify and adapt the critic in aconstructive way, is discussed in a second article in this issue (Stinckens, 2013).


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

KU

Leu

ven

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:01

11

Febr

uary

201

5

2. The process marker: Features of the inner critic

Clinical impressions

Various experiential authors have described particular aspects that are characteristicof the way in which the inner critic appears in therapy (Gendlin, 1996; Hinterkopf,1998; Leijssen, 1995; Müller, 1995). These authors have particularly focused on theprocess aspects or characteristic way in which the inner critic disrupts the experientialprocess. It is their opinion that the destructive nature does not so much flow fromthe contents introduced by the inner critic, but rather the way in which the inner criticbrings these contents. The following process features have been highlighted by variousauthors (Stinckens & Leijssen, 1999).

Not rooted in experience

The inner critic is not rooted in the individual’s own experiences, rather it drowns out theinner experience by arguing against the client rather than for the client. Many clientsexperience a harsh, mean, unfriendly “voice” or “authority” which rattles off the same olddemands and pours out destructive judgments.

Figure 1. Microtheory for working with the inner critic.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

KU

Leu

ven

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:01

11

Febr

uary

201

5

Non-nuanced

The inner critic does not have an eye for nuances and does not allow any exceptions to therule. Its attacks are predictable, simplistic and generalized; it uses terms such as “always,”“everybody,” “nobody.” The inner critic prefers to focus on the past or future: It makes theclient feel guilty about something that went wrong in the past and that cannot be undone;or it will scare an individual about something that is going to happen in the future,something the client has no control over as yet. This non-nuanced, “muscular” languagegives the inner critic a veneer of invulnerability.

Not situation-specific

The attacks by the critic are automatically activated, irrespective of the circumstances.Although the critic is often triggered by particular failures or shortcomings, its attacks aremostly not in proportion to the specific circumstances. They can be even activated bypositive incidents (e.g. being complimented) or neutral events. The critic turns up quiteunpredictably and keeps the client in rigid and repetitive patterns that are not appropriateto the current situation.

No moral authority

At first sight it appears as if the inner critic represents a healthy, moral authority; this,however, is not the case. The attacks by the critic encourage the individual to do anythingbut change his/her behaviour in a constructive sense; the critic blocks precisely thoseprocesses that contribute to the development of values, ideals, realistic self-assessmentsand openness towards others.

Dysfunctional

The inner critic ensures that the client starts to feel worse. It keeps the individual fromattaining his/her potential or it will put the client under continuous pressure and preventhim/her from living a full life. The effect is primarily dejection, anxiety, dissatisfaction,depression and inhibition. This is also manifest in facial tension, crossed arms and legs,heavy breathing and a tense body posture.

By means of these process features the inner critic is clearly differentiable fromexpressions of the inner experiential stream. Figure 2 is based on Hinterkopf (1998) andsets the features of the critic against the features of the “voice” of inner experiencing.

A more systematized and integrative vision

These primarily clinical impressions from the client-centered/experiential authorsthrow a light on the problem of the inner critic; however they do not, as yet, provideevidence of a systematized and supported theory. For these reasons we drew on theinsights from other authors for the further development of our microtheory. It concernsauthors who do not necessarily belong to any particular therapy orientation, becausethey are heading towards a more integrative direction. A light will be thrown on themultitude of manifestations of the inner critic in concrete situations and with diverseclient problems.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

KU

Leu

ven

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:01

11

Febr

uary

201

5

Taking a lead from Rugel (1995) the characteristics of the inner critic will be groupedinto five interlinked categories: (1) a family history of rejection, restriction and neglect;(2) a critical and negative self-attitude; (3) problems in information processing; (4) self-protective mechanisms; and (5) Interpersonal difficulties.

A family history of rejection, restriction and neglect

The dynamics around the development of the inner critic appear to be extremely complex.Most authors assume that the inner critic finds its origins in a parent-child relationshipwhere the parents were critical, intrusive, controlling and demanding. The client perceivesand judges him-/herself in the same critical and condemnatory way as the parents haddone in the past. Different studies have shown that an orientation of parental criticism,where parents set high standards for their children and excessively criticize their childrenwhen failing to meet these standards, contribute to the development of an inner critic(Glassman et al., 2007; Yates, Tracy, & Luthar, 2008). In other words, the inner critic canbe considered as an introjected, critical parent figure (Bergner, 1995; Blatt, 1995; Rugel,1995; Stone & Stone, 1993).

Even the lack of confirmation or denial by the parents can instil a negative, criticalauthority in the self: The individual is not able do anything good for themselves and cannever compliment themselves (Rugel, 1995). According to Young et al. (2003) it is theconstant, persistent effect of these parental patterns in particular – rather than an isolatedtraumatic event – that contribute to the child treating themselves in similar, negative ways.When an individual repeatedly is told that they are good for nothing or they do not meetthe grade, they will start to accept it as true and view themselves as “worthless,” “bad” or“never good enough.”

In addition to an open or more subtle criticism from parents, Firestone et al. (2002)also highlights other parenting behaviors that could lie at the origins of the inner critic. Inmore general terms, this involves patterns of behavior whereby the child is treated in anegative manner by his most important parental figures: A lack of interest for the child’ssocial world, insufficient sensitivity to his needs and requirements, emotional or physicaldeprivation, neglect and mistreatment. Furthermore, excessive permissiveness or incon-sistence in parenting may lead to a critical or negative self-attitude in the child. In this case

Figure 2. Process features of the inner critic versus the “voice” of inner experiencing.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

KU

Leu

ven

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:01

11

Febr

uary

201

5

the inner critic appears to compensate for the lack of limitation and predictability of theparents. Finally, self-development can also be impaired in a more indirect way byimitating the negative characteristics (for instance, a rigid, demanding and controllingattitude) or maladaptive coping mechanisms (such as complete self-effacement) of theparents. In these cases, the way in which parents cope with themselves is adopted by thechild.

However, the fact that the inner critic is usually difficult to get rid of demonstrates thatthe origins of the critic do not purely lie in the introjections of negative parentingbehavior. The inner critic often appears to have been functional in the past havingassumed a primitive protective function. The inner critic had the important role of helpingand protecting the vulnerable child or to keep unbearable feelings under control (Leijssen,1995; Stone & Stone, 1993; Weiser Cornell, 2005). This has been further explored byFirestone et al. (2002), who have proposed that in situations of physical and emotionalabuse, the child assumes the characteristics of the strong, critical or punishing parent in adesperate attempt to escape from the overwhelming anxiety and psychological pain. Thechild incorporates the destructive attitude of the parent(s) in the form of critical andnegative self-evaluations. In this way the child acquires the illusion of safety and controland anxiety is warded off to a greater or lesser extent. However, the reverse effect of thisis that the child continues to do this, even when it does not appear to be necessary anylonger.

A critical and negative self-attitude

These critical and negative self-evaluations developed early in life will become a promi-nent part of the later self-concept and form the core of how an individual evaluates andassesses him- or herself. Young (1999) and Young et al. (2003) introduced the term “earlymaladaptive self-schemes” to describe these core evaluations of the self. This concernsextremely stable and durable personal evaluations, which once developed in childhoodbecome reinforced in later years and are to a significant extent dysfunctional: They have adestructive influence on psychological well-being and are associated with all kinds ofnegative emotions: stress, depression, despondency, despair, and powerlessness. Theysometimes lead to self-harming behaviour and (non)suicidal self-injury (Pompili, 2010).Claes, Soenens, Vansteenkiste, and Vandereycken (2012) therefore consider perfectionismand nonsuicidal self-injury as the “scars of the inner critic.”

Information processing problems

The early maladaptive self-schemes function as a type of filter in selecting and processinginformation. This means that only a limited amount of information is processed and thatprocessing occurs in an automatic way. Attention will by preference be focused oninformation confirming the self-schemes, whilst information contradicting the self-schemes will be minimalized or denied. A vicious circle is perpetuated by these limitationsin information processing leading to an increasing inflexibility of the self-schemes. Pacht(1984) discusses this in terms of a no-win scenario referring to the inherent impossibilityof experiencing success and building up of a positive self-image.

Various authors (Blatt, 1995, 2008; Rugel, 1995; Sorotzkin, 1985) have highlightedspecific information processing problems that are characteristic of people with a criticaland negative self-attitude: Expecting negative events to happen, over-generalizing, selec-tive abstraction and dichotomous thinking – perceiving themselves, others and the world


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

KU

Leu

ven

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:01

11

Febr

uary

201

5

in a polarized way in terms of “black and white,” “always – never,” “everything –nothing.” These information processing problems are predominantly manifested whenthe underlying schemes are being challenged. Information will be modified in order tokeep the self-schemes intact.

Illustration:

Kim is receiving therapy because she has not been able to come to terms with her sister’ssuicide. She feels responsible for her sister’s death; she is convinced that she let her sisterdown. “Something in me is telling me how bad I am ... Something like “you shouldn’t bepretending that you’re sad, because things are looking alright for you, you don’t have to doyour exams anymore now ...” I try and tell myself that I had to quit my studies, because Icouldn’t make it anymore, but the voice says “You’re deceiving yourself.” It says: “you don’thave to cover it any longer, you’ve just been weak and you stopped because you just didn’twant to continue and because you're lazy and wanted attention.”

Self-protective mechanisms

According to Rugel (1995) it is human nature to arm oneself against negative emotionsand to protect one’s sense of self-worth. This often leads, directly or indirectly, to self-limiting or self-destructive behaviour. In fact, these behaviours are creative responses ofthe organism to the dominant presence of the inner critic.

Some attempt to frenetically avoid maladaptive self-schemes or the associated painusing all types of avoidance strategies. Blocking of thoughts or images that may evokethe schemes is an active form of avoidance (Young et al., 2003). Furthermore, uncon-scious avoidance manoeuvres such as dissociation, depersonalization and a pre-occupa-tion with one’s own fantasy world are used to escape from the pain evoked by the earlymaladaptive self-schemes (Firestone, 1997). Other avoidance manoeuvres include: physi-cal dependencies (alcohol and drug dependency, bulimia, excessive masturbation) andobsessive behaviors (television and gambling compulsions, sexual escapades, compulsiveshopping, etc.) (Young et al., 2003); they serve as “painkillers” to avoid confrontationwith the painful self-schemes.

Others will attempt to compensate for the supposed shortcomings that permeate theirself-image. They will impose an iron discipline on themselves, employ strict self-control,will not leave anything to chance, adhere to strict plans and will be excessively cautious(Rugel, 1995; Young et al., 2003). Another way to compensate for one’s own short-comings is by camouflaging them and demanding status and recognition. Bluffing,impressing with results and overworking are just some examples of this (Young et al.,2003). Cognitive distortions are also used by individuals to mask negative self-schemesand to keep grimly going on. In fact, this involves information processing problems whichare opposite to those discussed in the previous sub-paragraph: people stress their ownmerits, refuse to recognize their own negative characteristics, blame other people for theirown shortcomings and attempt to increase their own feelings of self-worth by comparingthemselves to others who are less successful and noteworthy (Rugel, 1995).

Illustration:

Ben is in therapy because he wants to re-orientate himself professionally. He has a sense of“not having achieved anything yet” and “not being anywhere.” He tries to impress with hiswork and results in order to hide the notion of inadequate performance. He says: “I’msomeone who can make statements with a lot of bluffing and sometimes I’ll even try a bit


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

KU

Leu

ven

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:01

11

Febr

uary

201

5

of exaggeration... If I’ve done something five times, I don’t mind saying that I’ve got fiveyears of experience doing it in order to give it that extra sheen.” He uses the image of areckless stunt pilot – a symbol that came to him in a dream – in this process. He characterizesthe stunt pilot as follows: It’s taking risks, it’s having the guts and it’s also highly exagger-ated. It’s attempting to fly really high, but it’s not something supported by anything real. It’sactually about getting attention, to make a statement, to find a niche.”

Interpersonal problems

The inner critic also leaves traces behind in interpersonal issues. This is reflected in adependent relational attitude, where individuals are constantly dependent on others forsupport, affirmation and approval (Rugel, 1995). Individuals anticipate rejection andare oversensitive to criticism (Arieti & Bemporad, 1978; Blatt, 1995, 2008; Pacht,1984). Stone and Stone (1993) suggest that the inner critic sabotages intimate relation-ships between equals as individuals are constantly looking for approval andaffirmation. Individuals are unable to express their own feelings, needs and desiresin order to ensure this affirmation. They overadapt believing they are pleasing othersin doing so; these individuals are never “congruent” or “authentic” in their relationshipwith others. Furthermore, they never or rarely take the initiative in relationships(van Kessel, 1999).

Illustration:

Ann feels she is unable to make choices and doesn’t know who she is and what she wants.She tries to encourage others to make decisions for her and to take care of her. The same hashappened in therapy: Ann has the sense that something is stopping her from starting to talk intherapy. She finds it difficult that the initiative has to come from her; she would prefer that thetherapist decided the subject. She is scared to come across as silly and ridiculous in what shesays.

Some people choose a totally different interpersonal stance. Fear of disenchantment ordisappointment leads these individuals to isolate themselves and avoid any form ofmeaningful contact or intimacy. Or they place a singular emphasis on independence andself-sufficiency (Firestone, 1997; Rugel, 1995; Young et al., 2003).

Finally, there are those who compensate for their sense of inferiority by adopting adominant attitude, react aggressively and criticize others in order to feel superior (Young,1999; Young et al., 2003). In other words, the inner critic transforms into an external critic(Stone & Stone, 1993). The interpersonal conflicts that inevitably arise due to this are alsodealt with in the same self-protective way: Individuals react in a recriminatory way,offensively and disdainfully and are not able to look at their own shortcomings in arealistic manner (Rugel, 1995). This leads to conflict continuing to flare up even more,which eventually leads to people “catching the full blast” again, which they suffered somuch from as a child.

Illustration:

Nick’s relationships are in a mess. He feels inferior in respect of others and attempts to avoidthese feelings of inferiority by seeking praise and recognition from others, often in anaggressive way. In Nick’s words: “I demand recognition from others, so “please give merecognition, otherwise I'll start beating it out of you.”


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

KU

Leu

ven

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:01

11

Febr

uary

201

5

A taxonomy of different types of inner critic

The inventory of process features leads to the conclusion that the inner critic manifestsitself in various ways. Each of the above process features may be present to a greater orlesser degree and the configuration of the process features determines the specific form inwhich the inner critic arises during therapy. In literature a distinction has been made byvarious authors between the different types of inner critic both on the basis of etiologicalcharacteristics (Firestone, 1997; Sorotzkin, 1985) as well as on the basis of descriptivecharacteristics (Bergner, 1995; Stone & Stone, 1993; Young et al., 2003). By synthesizingthe various contributions of these authors we have been able to distil a taxonomy in whichvarious manifestations of the inner critic are distinguished (Stinckens, 2000). This tax-onomy comprises six types of inner critic to which the following descriptions wereallocated (refer to Figure 3): (1) the degrading/undermining critic; (2) the punitive/accusatory critic; (3) the over-demanding/controlling critic; (4) the subservient/neglectfulcritic; (5) the distant/avoidant critic; and (6) the domineering/compensating critic. Thefirst three types are easy for the therapist to recognize, as clients express their negative,critical and over-demanding inner voice themselves. However, the inner critic can also bemanifest in a more indirect way which easily withdraws from detection by the therapist. Itappears through a circuitous route, by way of self-protective responses evoked by thecritic. The subservient/neglectful critic, the distant/avoidant critic and the domineering/compensating critic are variations of a “hidden critic” like this.

3. The change process: Evolution of the inner critic

The central mechanism of change in working with the inner critic is the transformation ofthis process disruption to a more adaptive self-aspect which forms part of the flexible anddynamic self-process in a coherent way. Self-criticism and judgment are replaced in the

Figure 3. Taxonomy of types of inner critic.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

KU

Leu

ven

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:01

11

Febr

uary

201

5

process to self-acceptance and self-compassion (Gilbert & Irons, 2005; Neff, 2003). Self-compassion implies: “being open to and moved by one’s own suffering, experiencingfeelings of caring and kindness toward oneself, taking an understanding, nonjudgmentalattitude toward one’s inadequacies and failures, and recognizing that one’s own experi-ence is part of the common human experience” (Neff, 2003, p. 224). This process iscomparable to what’s called “self-soothing” in Emotion-Focused Therapy (Elliott et al.,2004; Goldman & Greenberg, 2010).

Gaining self-compassion does not imply that clients adopt an unrealistic view ofthemselves, but it allows for the clear recognition of their shortcomings and the abilityto rectify these shortcomings in a healthy way. This means not avoiding or compensatingone’s shortcomings or failures, but maintaining a kind and balanced awareness andunderstanding and gently encouraging change where needed. Different therapeutic path-ways can be navigated in the transformation of the inner critic. Three change processes aredistinguished in the current client-centered/experiential literature that lead to a fluid andcomplex self-organization (Elliott et al, 2004; Greenberg & Pascual-Leone, 1997; Honos-Webb & Stiles, 1998; Leijssen, 1995; Mearns & Thorne, 2000; Stinckens, Lietaer &Leijssen, 2002a; Whelton & Greenberg, 2000): removing the experiential block, restoringinteractions between various self-aspects and the development of an active and integral“I.” In order to display these change processes in concrete terms they will be shownalongside an illustrative therapy excerpt.

Removing the experiential block

Removing the experiential block leads to the restoration of the free flow of experientialinformation. The client is re-introduced to the richness of his/her internal experientialworld that had previously been removed from sight by the critic. The inner critic hadensured that only limited amounts of information were symbolized in a repetitive way;personal experiences were systematically interpreted in a critical or negative way. Byrestoring contact with the organismic experiential process the complex significance sensedwithin a situation is once again accessible to the consciousness.

The first essential step in this change process is that the individual becomes aware of hisor her inner critic. The client needs to learn to differentiate between the unfriendly,demanding, denigrating voice of the critic and the softer and quieter voice of the organismicexperience. Subsequently the client needs to learn to place the inner critic at a workabledistance. This means that the individual needs to come to realize that the negative thoughtsand feelings are only part of themselves and are not their entire being. Individuals are notpurely and only a collection of negative thoughts; in addition to the critical self-aspect thereis also another vulnerable self-aspect that feels it is being criticized.

Illustration:

Ben mentions that he doesn’t succeed in developing a satisfying relationship nor a suitableprofessional life. He is often suffering from inner voices that “get him off the right track.”

T: You notice that you’re carrying with you such a powerful part that makes the emotionalthings inside yourself unimportant … but it also has a very aggressive and destructiveinfluence on your relationships. Maybe it’s important to clarify that powerful, destructivepart of yours that’s turning up sometimes.

C: (Silence 20 sec., deep breath, client starts to weep).


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

KU

Leu

ven

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:01

11

Febr

uary

201

5

T: It seems that something else is happening right at this moment.C: It’s like… if I recognize this power-mad part, then it creates some space for the emotional part.T: Then you get in touch with the part that has suffered under this.C: (interrupts) Also the feeling… like… I mean, a feeling like… “Everyone has that problem,

it isn’t really important.”T: Hmhm. You feel the tendency to relativize it immediately.C: Everyone has his problems. Everyone must bear his cross.

In the last sentence the inner critic appears again: the client is putting a sharp curb on himselfand restraining himself. Gradually, he is becoming aware of the control function of his innercritic. He says: “There really is something inside me that wants to keep an eye on what I’mdoing. If that person doesn’t stay in control any longer, what the hell would happen to me?”When speaking about “this person,” he’s also sensing it in his body: he’s feeling a crick in hisneck, as if a guillotine is pushing on it. He realizes that this guillotine is cutting off anddestroying his inner self. In further exploring this metaphor, the inner critic is put on adistance and some room is made for more positive self-feelings: the client expresses atendency to nourish and cherish himself.

According to Hinterkopf (1998) this change process implies that clients adopt a kindof metaposition towards their critic, from which they can decide which messages to taketo heart and which to ignore. In this way clients re-discover a sense of autonomy and self-determination which can be used to disabuse the critic of its original power. Sometimesthe organismic part stands up more explicitly to the critic (“I do not deserve suchtreatment!”), resulting in more assertive anger, self-empowerment and self-assertion(Elliott et al., 2004; Pascual-Leone & Greenberg, 2007).

Restoring interactions between self-aspects

Authors who adopt a dialectical-constructivistic standpoint (Elliott, 2004; Greenberg &Pascual-Leone, 1997; Greenberg, Rice & Elliott, 1993; Honos-Webb & Stiles, 1998;Mearns & Thorne, 2000) concentrate primarily on the short-circuits in the self-processcaused by the inner critic. The self is fragmented and the mutually enhancing interactionsbetween the various self-aspects are impaired or broken. This leads to a developmentalstagnation of the various self-aspects and they degenerate into rigid, repetitive structures(“top dog” and “underdog;” “accepted (dominant) voice” and “unwanted (problematic)voice”). In this instance, a constructive change process consists of restoring the interactionsbetween the different self-aspects in order for the self to recover its flexible and dynamiccharacter. This process can be split into three important stages: experiencing opposition andconflict, assimilation and differentiation, and accommodation and integration.

In the first stage the client becomes aware of the internal conflict between the two self-aspects. The client experiences in increasing measure how the introjected norms, demandsand obligations are at odds with organismic needs and feelings. Although the organismicvoice often starts to come through quite loudly, the introjected voice continues to overrideit; the client is firmly anchored to the position adopted by the inner critic.

In the second stage the client shifts to a position where the inner critic is overriding toa position where both self-aspects can be heard; in other words, both self-aspects becomeassimilated into the self-structure which means they can differentiate further. The innercritic becomes more specific: demands, norms and expectations become more detailed andmore focused on concrete situations. The organismic part of the self unfolds itself frominitial reactive affects (hopelessness, fear, resistance, etc.), to more complex experiences(sadness, loneliness, etc.) and underlying needs and requirements.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

KU

Leu

ven

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:01

11

Febr

uary

201

5

As both self-aspects become assimilated, explored in depth and transformed, theopportunity arises to realize a new synthesis where both self-aspects can be integrated.The inner critic lowers its norms, demands and expectations by exposing itself to theneeds and requirements of the organismic self. Even the organismic self is often moreamenable to negotiation and will, if necessary, take account of the critic’s cares anddemands. The fluid, dynamic and coherent nature of the self is restored through theinteraction and accommodation of both self-aspects.

Illustration:

Kim says that she constantly takes into account what others could be thinking of her; thismeans she can’t truly be herself. The therapist discusses both self-aspects alternately.

T1: You give me the sense that you’re a small mouse that always wants to be creeping away.C1: Yes, that’s right. It’s precisely as if I always feel the need to be as normal as possible and

not stand out.T2: However, you also give me the impression that that little mouse wants to make itself

known every now and again ...C2: Yes. I also feel the need to really put myself to the foreground, to really allow myself to

be seen. But I’d need a guarantee that that would be positive, that I wouldn’t flop.T3: It has to be safe for the mouse?C3: Yes. It’s exactly as if I do everything to avoid making myself vulnerable. Nobody is

allowed to have any reason to think anything bad about me. That would do a terribleamount of harm.

Developing an active and integral “I”

Some authors, particularly those who hold to a systemic vision of the Self (Bouwkamp,1999; Keil, 1996; Mearns & Thorne, 2000) place the loss of the active and central “I” ascentral. There is no longer a central, integrating body that is constantly engaged inintegrating the experiences of the various self-aspects into a meaningful and coherentwhole. The inner critic has taken over the leadership and is dominating the entire self-system, which it does in a frenetic, authoritarian and rigid manner.

A constructive evolution implies, in this instance, that a change to the internal powerstructure within the self will take place. An active and integral “I,” which assumes thepower of the critic and co-ordinates the self-process from a meta-position, needs to bedeveloped. This change process is not analyzed in successive steps of change. Rather avery gradual process is encouraged where the critic is not immediately disabused of all itspower. After all, the critic has a protective function – it is responsible for the survival andmanagement of the entire self-system – and can therefore not be pushed aside quickly.Firstly, the critic needs to develop trust in the new leadership of the “I,” before it will dareto give up its protective function.

Illustration:

Ben has in the course of the therapeutic process learnt to show more of who he really iswithout having to hide himself behind a protective mask. He uses the image of a deeplyrooted tree in this process.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

KU

Leu

ven

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:01

11

Febr

uary

201

5

C1: It feels like I’m discovering the pure truth. I’m not lying to myself anymore or to others…The feeling in my body that goes with it has a slower rhythm, the rhythm of a treegrowing. You don’t notice it is growing, but it does, it becomes a beautiful tree.

T1: Slowly, deep inside, something is growing … something very solid and supporting.C2: And in a way… it doesn’t matter if I’m getting off the track sometimes… I know where

the tree is growing, I know that I can return to it. Before I had a feeling of beingdestroyed when I was criticized or rejected, but now I have a feeling that this tree won’tdisappear. I can always return to it, it’ll always be there, as long as I’m aware of it. Itgives me some security and trust. This tree was there long before me and it’ll be thereafter I’m dead.

4. Research

Goal

The microtheory described in this article (see Figure 1) was tested in detail in a compre-hensive and varied sample of therapy episodes (N = 75) in which the inner critic wassalient. The episodes were selected from a broad collection of client-centered and experi-ential therapies, derived from 32 clients and 11 therapists. More specifically, we exploredto what extent and in which way the various ingredients of the microtheory wereencountered in a sample of real-life therapy episodes. This happened in two successiveempirical phases. In the first phase, a macro-analysis was done of the total sample oftherapy episodes. The focus in this phase was on the identification of process markers ofthe inner critic and their evolution during the individual episodes. In the second phase, aselected sample of revealing episodes was studied in more detail. The focus was on thesequences or patterns of change that are emerging between client and therapist responsesduring these episodes. For more information about the research we refer to the PhDproject of Stinckens (2001).

Empirical phase 1: Identification of process markers

In a first stage the problem of the inner critic was unravelled in various process aspectsand appropriate quantitative and qualitative measures were sought for each of theseprocess aspects. The Information Processing Scale (Toukmanian, 1996; Stinckens,Lietaer & Leijssen, 1999), the Self-attitude Scale (SASB Introject; Benjamin, 1974) andthe Category System for Maladaptive Self-schemes and Dysfunctional Scheme Processes(self-constructed system based on Young’s Schema Therapy (1999)) were used in order toassess these process aspects (Stinckens, 2001).

The in-depth analysis of the therapy episodes demonstrated that the total Gestalt ofprocess markers best typified the inner critic. In the majority of clients the critic appearedto be expressed in different manifestations. At some moments, for example, the criticappeared as an accusatory judge, punishing the person in a harsh and ruthless way. Atother moments it showed oneself through self-protective mechanisms, by keeping distanceand blocking the experiential process or by bluffing and blaming others for their ownshortcomings.

For most clients we found a unique constellation of process markers fluctuatingthroughout therapy and even during an episode, in accordance with the specific therapistresponse or depending on certain eliciting factors. Therefore, grouping the inner critic intotypes did not appear to correspond with actual therapy practice. There were only a fewwell-demarcated types; the data consisted primarily of mixed types with different process


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

KU

Leu

ven

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:01

11

Febr

uary

201

5

markers that were covarying. However, a taxonomy of types of inner critic does offer theadvantage that it fulfils an important requirement for the practising therapist where thepreference is for a few clear “eye catchers” than a long laundry list of diverse processmarkers. But, at the other hand, it risks the oversimplification of therapeutic reality. Inorder to be able to diagnose the critic adequately, it is essential not to fixate on a rigidentirety of process markers. There needs to be sufficient sensitivity devoted to thediversity of process markers of the inner critic, and as a consequence, the therapeuticapproach needs to be flexibily tailored to these specific process markers.

Empirical phase 2: Analysis of change process

In a second stage the change process was analyzed. Our study showed that there werevarious pathways to change that were followed. The higher level of information processingduring the episodes and the decrease of rigid and static statements and externally focusedexplorations showed the gradual unblocking and restoring of the free flow of experientialinformation. The deepening of the inner conflict and the expression of both critical andexperiential part appeared from the alteration of negative self-attitudes (self-controlling, self-blaming and self-destructive statements) and positive self-attitudes (self-loving, self-affirm-ing and self-responsible statements). The process of self-soothing could be deduced from astronger representation of positive self-attitudes at the end of the episodes. The downturn ofmaladaptive self-schemes and dysfunctional processes, at last, illustrated the development ofa more constructive self-process. However, the change patterns weren’t always that success-ful. In almost half of the episodes there was no evolution or a negative evolution in level ofinformation processing, self-attitude and self-schemes.

The choice of a well determined pathway to change appeared, on the one hand, tobe prompted by the underlying working model of the therapist. On the other hand thenature and opportunities of pathways to change were also strongly determined by thespecific way in which the critic manifested itself in the ongoing therapeutic process.This is another argument for an integration of different pathways to change, where thechoice of a given pathway is based on processing diagnostic knowledge about the innercritic.

The various stages distinguished by Elliott et al. (2004) in the two-chair interventionhave been extensively investigated in the last 30 years by Greenberg and colleagues(Elliott et al., 2004; Greenberg et al., 1998). There was evidence supporting theproposed model and certain stages were further developed. For instance, the researchsuggested, amongst other things, that an additional stage needed to be added prior to theconflict stage for those clients where the inner critic is blocking contact with theorganismic self opposite in a substantial way. It was also found in the same researchthat verbal self-exploration and paralinguistic voice quality demonstrated a higherexperiential level when used in a two-chair intervention than in empathic reflection.Furthermore, the research demonstrated that clients came more in contact with theirneeds and requirements in sessions where the inner critic was becoming less harsh thanin sessions where the critic remained rigid and obstinate. This was also demonstrated inour research: we found more successful change processes with clients having higherlevels of information processing from the start. These clients were well able to dis-identify with their critic and to take a metaperspective. On the other hand, a strongly“disdainful” critic together with a lack of resilience to react against this appeared to beassociated with process stagnations.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

KU

Leu

ven

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:01

11

Febr

uary

201

5

5. Conclusion

In this paper we have discussed how the inner critic is a multidimensional problem whichis manifested in extremely diverse ways: In the form of a diverging conflict where a battlerages between two opposite powers pulling the individual in different directions; in theform of a negative self-image affecting the sense of self-worth and belief in personalpotential; in the form of a perfectionist attitude where individuals maintain unachievablenorms and ideals. The critic can also be expressed in more indirect manifestations: Viarelational problems, such as passive, subservient and appealing behaviour; or via self-protective mechanisms, such as avoidance strategies or compensatory processes. In ourmicrotheory we have attempted to explain the complexity of the inner critic by describinga broad palette of process markers. It is the total Gestalt of process markers that besttypifies the inner critic problem.

However, in concrete therapy practice it appears that the critic does not present as astatic Gestalt, but rather as a kaleidoscopic multitude of manifestations. In order to beable to diagnose the critic adequately it is essential not to fixate on a rigid entirety ofprocess markers. One needs to be sufficiently sensitive to the constantly varying ways inwhich the inner critic continues to re-appear, from being “centre stage” to “back in thewings.”

Furthermore, one needs to realize that working with the inner critic is often “hardlabour” and a “long-winded” process. It is therefore not a simple process with immediateand guaranteed success. One should not be blinded by the pathways to change described:The change process often appears to be precision work, particularly where the critic isvery obstinate and rigid and where the critic disappears momentarily into the backgroundonly to surface once again in full force.

ReferencesArieti, S., & Bemporad, J.R. (1978). Severe and mild depression: The therapeutic approach. New

York: Basic Books.Barrett-Lennard, G.T. (2000). The warp and weft of therapy. Relations within the self – Self within

relationship. Perth, Australia: Unpublished manuscript.Benjamin, L.S. (1974). Structural analysis of social behaviour (SASB). Psychological Review, 81,

392–425.Bergner, R.M. (1995). Pathological self-criticism: Assessment and treatment. New York: Plenum.Blatt, S.J. (1995). The destructiveness of perfectionism: Implications for the treatment of depression.

American Psychologist, 50(12), 1003–1020.Blatt, S. J. (2008). Polarities of experience: Relatedness and self-definition in personality develop-

ment, psychopathology, and the therapeutic process. Washington, DC: American PsychologicalAssociation Press.

Bouwkamp, R. (1999). Helen door delen. Experiëntiële interpersoonlijke therapie. Theorie, meth-odiek, onderzoek [Healing through separation. Experiential interpersonal therapy, Theory, meth-odology, research]. Maarssen: Elsevier/De Tijdstroom.

Claes, L., Soenens, B., Vansteenkiste, M., & Vandereycken, W. (2012). The scars of the inner critic:Perfectionism and nonsuicidal self-injury in eating disorders. European Eating DisordersReview, 20, 196–202.

Cooper, M., Mearns, D., Stiles, W.B., Warner, M., & Elliott, R. (2004). Developing self-pluralisticperspectives within the person-centered and experiential approaches: A round-table dialogue.Person-centered and Experiential Psychotherapies, 3(3), 176–191.

Elliott, R., Greenberg, L.S., & Lietaer, G. (2004). Research on experiential psychotherapies. In M.J.Lambert, Bergin & Garfield’s handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (pp. 493–539).New York: Wiley.

Elliott, R., Watson, J.C., Greenberg, L.S. & Goldman, R. (2004). Learning emotion-focused therapy.Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

KU

Leu

ven

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:01

11

Febr

uary

201

5

Firestone, R.W. (1997). Combating destructive thought processes. Voice therapy and separationtheory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Firestone, R.W., Firestone, L., Catlett, J., & Love, P. (2002). Conquer your critical inner voice. Arevolutionary program to counter negative thoughts and live free from imagined limitations.Oakland: New Harbinger Publications.

Gendlin, E.T. (1981). Focusing (rev. ed.). New York: Bantam Books.Gendlin, E.T. (1986). Process ethics and the political question. The Focusing Folio, 5(2), 68–87.Gendlin, E.T. (1996). A process view of the superego. In Focusing-oriented psychotherapy: A

manual of the experiential method (pp. 247–258). New York: Guilford.Glassman, L.H., Weierich, M.R., Hooley, J.M., Deliberto, T.L., & Nock, M.K. (2007). Child

maltreatment, non-suicidal self-injury and the mediating role of self-criticism. BehaviourResearch and Therapy, 45, 2483–2490.

Goldman, R., & Greenberg, L.S. (2010). Self-soothing and other-soothing in emotion-focusedcouples therapy. In A.S. Gurman (Ed.), Clinical casebook of couples therapy. New York:Guilford.

Greenberg, L.S., & Pascual-Leone, J. (1997). Emotion in the creation of personal meaning. In M.Power, & C. Brewin (Eds.), The psychotherapeutic process: A research handbook (pp. 3–20).New York: Guilford.

Greenberg, L.S., Rice, L.N., & Elliott, R. (1993). Facilitating emotional change. The moment-by-moment process. New York: Guilford.

Greenberg, L.S., Watson, J.C., & Lietaer, G. (1998). Handbook of experiential psychotherapy. NewYork: Guilford.

Gilbert, P., & Irons, C. (2005). Therapies for shame and self-attacking, using cognitive, behavioural,emotional imagery and compassionate mind training. In P. Gilbert (Ed.), Compassion:Conceptualisations, research and use in psychotherapy (pp. 263–325). London: Routledge.

Hermans, J.H.M., Rijks, T., & Kempen, H. (1993). Imaginal dialogues in the self: Theory andmethod. Journal of Personality, 61, 207–237.

Hinterkopf, E. (Ed.) (1998). Focusing and the inner critic. In Integrating spirituality in counseling:A manual for using the experiential focusing method (pp. 41–50). Ross-on-Wye: PCCS Books.

Honos-Webb, L., & Stiles, W.B. (1998). Reformulation of assimilation analysis in terms of voices.Psychotherapy, 35(1), 23–33.

Keil, S. (1996). The self as a systemic process of interactions of ‘Inner Persons’. In R. Hutterer, G.Pawlowsky, P. F. Schmid, & R. Stipsits (Eds.), Client-centred and experiential psychotherapy: Aparadigm in motion (pp. 53–66). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

Kessel, W. van (1999). Depressie en interactie [Depression and interaction]. Tijdschrift voorCliëntgerichte Psychotherapie [Journal of Client-centred Psychotherapy], 37(4), 296–309.

Leijssen, M. (Ed.) (1995). Een innerlijke relatie [An inner relationship]. In Gids voor gespreksther-apie [Guide for counselling therapy] (pp. 131–195). Utrecht: De Tijdstroom.

Mearns, D., & Thorne, B. (Eds.) (2000). Person-centred therapy with ‘configurations’ of self. InPerson-centred therapy today. New Frontiers in theory and practice (pp. 120–143). London:Sage.

Müller, D. (1995). Dealing with self-criticism: The critic within us and the criticized one. The Folio:Journal for Focusing and Experiential Psychotherapy, 23(3), 151–165.

Neff, K.D. (2003). Self-compassion: An alternative conceptualization of a healthy attitude towardoneself. Self and Identity, 2, 85–102.

Pacht, A.R. (1984). Reflection on perfection: American Psychologist, 39, 386–390.Pascual-Leone, A., & Greenberg, L.S. (2007). Emotional processing in experiential therapy: Why

“the only way out is through”. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 75(6), 875–887.Pompili, M. (Ed.) (2010). Suicide in the words of suicidologists. New York: Nova Science

Publishers.Rogers, C.R. (Ed.) (1951). A theory of personality and behavior. In Client-centered therapy

(pp. 481–534). Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin.Rowan, J. (2010). Personification: Using the dialogical self in psychotherapy and counselling. New

York: Routledge.Rugel, R.P. (1995). Dealing with the problem of low self-esteem: Common characteristics and

treatment in individual, marital/family and group psychotherapy. Springfield: Charles C.Thomas.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

KU

Leu

ven

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:01

11

Febr

uary

201

5

Sorotzkin, B. (1985). The quest for perfection: Avoiding guilt or avoiding shame? Psychotherapy,22, 564–571.

Stinckens, N. (2000). De innerlijke criticus in beeld gebracht: Een typologie van verschijningsvor-men. [Imaging the inner critic: A typology of manifestations]. Tijdschrift voor CliëntgerichtePsychotherapie [Journal of Client-centred Psychotherapy], 38(3), 201–215.

Stinckens, N. (2001). Werken met de innerlijke criticus. Gerichte empirische verkenning van eencliëntgericht-experiëntiële microtheorie. [Working with the inner critic. Tailored empiricalexploration of a client-centred/experiential microtheory]. Doctoraatsverhandeling (Doctoralthesis), K.U. Leuven.

Stinckens, N. (2013). Working with the inner critic: Therapeutic approach. Person-Centered &Experiential Psychotherapies, 12, 000–000.

Stinckens, N., & Leijssen, M. (1999). Werken met de innerlijke criticus vanuit cliëntgericht-experiëntieel perspectief. Illustratie van een micromodel. [Working with the inner critic froma client-centred/experiential perspective. Illustration of a micro model]. Tijdschrift voorPsychotherapie [Journal of Psychotherapy], 25(1), 5–26.

Stinckens, N., Lietaer, G., & Leijssen (1999). Handleiding Informatieverwerkingsschaal.Nederlandstalige herwerking [Manual of the Information processing scale: A Dutch translationof) Toukmanians ‘Level of Client Perceptual Processing’ scale]. Niet-gepubliceerde brochure[Unpublished brochure]. Centrum voor cliëntgerichte therapie en counseling, K.U. Leuven.

Stinckens, N., Lietaer, G., & Leijssen, M. (2002a). The inner critic on the move: Analysis of thechange process in a case of short-term client-centred/experiential therapy. Counselling andPsychotherapy Research, 2(1), 40–54.

Stinckens, N., Lietaer, G., & Leijssen, M. (2002b). The valuing process and the inner critic in theclassic and current client-centred/experiential literature. Person-centered and ExperientialPsychotherapies, 1(1&2), 41–55.

Stone, H., & Stone, S. (1993). Embracing your inner critic: Turning self-criticism into a creativeasset. San Francisco, CA: Harper Collins Publishers.

Toukmanian, S.G. (1996). Clients’ perceptual processing: An integration of research and practice. InW. Dryden (Ed.), Research on counselling and psychotherapy: Practical applications (pp. 184–210). London: Sage.

Weiser Cornell, A. (2005). Radical gentleness: The inner critic transforms. In The radical accep-tance of everything: Living a focusing life (pp. 109–125). Berkeley, CA: Calluna Press.

Whelton, W.J., & Greenberg, L.S. (2000). The self as a singular multiplicity: A process-experientialperspective. In J.C. Muran (Ed.), Self-relations in the psychotherapy process (pp. 87–106).Washington, DC: APA.

Yates, T.M., Tracy, A.J., & Luthar, S.S. (2008). Nonsuicidal self-injury among privileged youths:Longitudinal and cross-sectional approaches to developmental process. Journal of Consultingand Clinical Psychology, 76, 52–62.

Young, J.E. (1999). Cognitive therapy for personality disorders: A schema-focused approach (3rded.). Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press.

Young, J.E., Klosko, J.S., & Weishaar, M.J. (2003). Schema therapy: A practitioner’s guide. NewYork: Guilford.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

KU

Leu

ven

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:01

11

Febr

uary

201

5

features and pathways to change Working with the inner ...

Documents

Transcript of features and pathways to change Working with the inner ...