Approach To Carl Rogers’ Psychotherapy

Labeled as speculative and anti-scientific by its detractors, and seen as the ideal therapy by its followers, The Rogerian approach has gone through various transformations, ranging from the simple proposal of a working hypothesis – a product of the counseling work that its author developed in the 1930s – to the development of a theory of personality. The development of this conception also rested on a considerable amount of research that guided its development, clarifying doubts and giving empirical validity to the hypotheses he posed.

However, despite this, there are those who think that this psychotherapy is based only on good intentions, on philanthropic desires coming from existentialist philosophy a, and in the goodness of Rogers’ own character. This reasoning responds, we believe, more to ignorance than to the intrinsic characteristics of the approach.

in his books Psychological counseling and psychotherapy, Client-centered psychotherapy and The process of becoming a person Rogers makes a series of approaches aimed at clarifying his position regarding the therapeutic process, personality and human nature.

In these texts he establishes the following hypothesis as the axis of his entire psychological conception: “That the individual has sufficient capacity to constructively manage all aspects of his or her life that can potentially be recognized in consciousness” (Rogers, 1972, 1978).

This hypothesis is, in our opinion, the essential approach of the approach, and, in turn, what generates the greatest controversies.

Let’s look at it more closely. Rogers assumes – based on empirical data, as he says – that there is in every human being an innate tendency to update, that is, to progressive development and constant improvement, if the appropriate conditions are present (Rogers and Kinget, 1971 ). Something similar to self-realization, also innate, proposed by Maslow and May and all other humanistic psychotherapists (Frick, 1973), and to Perls’s organistic self-regulation (Perls, 1987).

Man, says Rogers, is positive by nature, and therefore requires absolute respect, especially regarding his aspirations for improvement (Di Caprio, 1976). It follows that it is contraindicated for the psychotherapist to carry out any type of guidance or direction on the individual; any type of diagnosis or interpretation, because this would constitute an attack against the possibilities of the subject and against his tendency to update. It is required, or rather, recommended, to place oneself in the client’s point of view, assume their perceptual field and work based on it as a kind of alter ego. Even the word “client” is assumed in a special way: the client is that person who responsibly seeks a service and participates in the therapeutic process in the same way; one, aware of his unused capacity for development, who does not go “looking for help” but tries to help herself.

The terms patient, sick, healing, diagnosis, etc. are discarded from the Rogerian language, because they connote dependence, limitation and lack of respect for the person.

This attitude towards patient dignity, unconditional acceptance and respect that are held to be of such importance that they are considered factors that favor or hinder (if not) the acquisition of the client-centered approach. Acceptance and respect must be rooted in the therapist’s personality, form an essential part of his being, and this involves, first of all, accepting oneself.

In summary, the central hypothesis proposes that the human being can, if presented with the appropriate conditions, develop or update, expand your capabilities and be aware of what you experience in order to be able to control yourself. “You cannot effectively manage what you do not consciously perceive,” Rogers proposes. Hence the need to expand the client’s self-concept, his self, and to include in it everything (or almost everything) that he experiences. But it is not intended to do so by acting on him but, as Kinget says, by “accompanying” him in the experience, providing him with the required conditions and giving him security (Rogers and Kinget, 1971).

At this point in the exposition, a therapist not versed in the Rogerian approach could argue that nothing new has been said so far, given that all approaches seek to a greater or lesser extent to promote the capacity for growth, and that every psychotherapist who merit such a title must begin by accepting and trying to understand their patients. However, it is not just a matter of piously taking these aspects into account, displaying humanitarianism or having had good training. These aspects ARE the basis of the approach and constitute rather than gaseous notions, fully assimilated attitudes from which the techniques are going to emerge.

Paraphrasing Claudio Naranjo (1991) when he talks about Gestalt therapy, client-centered psychotherapy is not basically made up of techniques but, essentially, of the therapist’s attitudes, which can be instrumentalized in various ways.

Two factors are thus considered: 1) The therapist’s attitude its basic operational philosophy regarding the dignity and significance of the individual (basic hypothesis), and 2) Its instrumentalization through appropriate methods.

The therapist’s attitudes must be transmitted indirectly, impregnated in the communications but not openly formulated in any of them. Sometimes this is not fully understood and for this reason some assume that the customer-centered attitude consists of being passive and indifferent, of “not meddling.” But this is flat out incorrect and, even more, it is harmful, because passivity is in fact assumed as rejection; Furthermore, it usually ends up boring the subject when he sees that he receives nothing.

The approach proposes rather that The therapist must help clarify the client’s emotions, be a facilitator in the process of making them aware, and therefore manageable and non-pathological. But not assuming an all-knowing and all-powerful role, that he takes the client by the hand saying “I accept you” and giving him back “chewed” the material that the client provides him.

If there is sincere and absolute respect, it will rather ensure that the client directs the process. In this case, the therapist’s interventions will be presented as possibilities, almost as echoes of the material presented, and not as value judgments, statements or interpretations.

The image of the echo can be used to understand the phenomenon: an echo is an amplified and modulated reproduction (which implies adequate perception and a good dose of empathy towards what is reproduced), something that sounds the same and different at the same time, and that allows to the sender a new and more complete recapture of the message emitted (now he is both the sender and receiver of himself, and no longer just the sender). Furthermore, the echo supposes a “something” in community with us, another person (an alter-ego) who listens to us and reproduces and/or reformulates our messages in an environment of acceptance.

In this dialogue with the therapist (which is essentially a dialogue with myself) I begin to feel accepted, since whatever I say, whatever I do, I only receive empathy and warmth, instead of advice, diagnoses or interpretations; Thus, I gradually realize that I am not as bad, as strange or different as I thought, and I begin to allow my capacity to grow to make its way.

Similar to the gestalt figure-ground dichotomy, in this psychotherapy the aim is for the background (the non-conscious experiential field, the hidden, the feared) to become a figure (consciousness, part of the self, of the self). The ego “gets fatter”, it becomes more effective in managing internal reality, consuming less energy in building defenses that protect it against anguish.

Regarding the details of the psychotherapeutic process, Rogers stated the following: “Let us say, at the outset, that there is no precise distinction between the process and the results of therapy. The characteristics of the process correspond, in fact, to elements differentiated from the results” (Rogers and Kinget, 1971).

According to Rogers, when therapeutic conditions are present and maintained that is:

• There is a relationship of contact between client and therapist ;
• A situation of anguish and internal disagreement in the client;
• A situation of internal agreement in the therapist;
• feelings of respect, understanding, unconditional acceptance and empathy in the therapist; Then, motivated by the innate tendency to update, a certain process that we can classify as therapeutic is set in motion, which would consist of the following characteristics:
• Increase in the client’s ability to express their feelings verbally and non-verbally.
• These expressed feelings refer more to the Self.
• It also increases the ability to distinguish the objects of your feelings and perceptions.
• The feelings he expresses increasingly refer to the state of disagreement that exists between certain elements of his experience and his notion of the Self.
• Arrives consciously feel the threat that this state of internal disagreement carries with it The experience of threat is made possible by the therapist’s unconditional acceptance.
• Thanks to this, the client comes to fully experience (by converting the background into a figure) certain feelings that until then he had distorted or not confessed.
• The image of the I (self) changes, expands, until it allows the integration of elements of the experience that were not made conscious or were deformed.
• As the reorganization of the structure of the Self continues, the agreement between this structure and the total experience constantly increases. The Self becomes capable of assimilating elements of experience that were previously too threatening for consciousness to admit. Behavior becomes less defensive.
• The client is increasingly able to feel and acknowledge the therapist’s acceptance without feeling threatened by this experience.
• The client feels an attitude of unconditional acceptance of oneself
• He realizes that the center of evaluation of his experience is himself.
• The assessment of your experience becomes less and less conditional, and is carried out on the basis of lived experiences. The client evolves towards a state of internal agreement, of acceptance of her experiences.

Rosemberg brilliantly summarizes the participation and role of the therapist in the aforementioned process: “The therapist is the real person who truly understands the client’s hesitations and weaknesses and accepts them, without trying to deny or correct them. He accepts, appreciates and values ​​the whole individual. , giving you, unconditionally, the security and stability in the relationships you need to take the risk of exploring new feelings, attitudes and behaviors.

The therapist respects the person as they are, with their anxieties and fears, so it does not impose any criteria on how it should be. It accompanies them along the path that they themselves trace, and participates as a present and active element in this process of self-creation, facilitating at all times the perception of personal resources, and the directions followed along the way, just as the person “experience them” (Rogers and Rosemberg, 1981; pp. 75-76).

The personal characteristics that Rogers considers necessary in any good therapist who attempts to instrumentalize his approach are the following: a) Empathic capacity; b) Authenticity; c) Unconditional positive consideration

This leads one to think that the client-centered therapist cannot be an ordinary person , but someone special, who has the tranquility and internal coherence typical of the self-realized person, self-realization that will try to infect the client. However, the therapist should not be seen as a superior person; He is someone who has simply managed to give free rein to his capacity for updating, and who can therefore manage his experiential field more effectively and productively and help others do so as well.

The traits mentioned are not innate or impossible to learn Rogers and Kinget (1971) consider that even an authoritarian person can develop non-directive attitudes; The main thing, let’s say the beginning, is the real desire to want to adopt them. The remaining process comes alone and is acquired in therapeutic practice, although it can be catalyzed through training.

Rogers (1972) states four phases in therapist training customer focused.

1. The first phase It emphasizes clarifying the attitudes of the aspiring therapist, before focusing on the technical aspects. The desire to be a Rogerian therapist must be the result of a process of personal discovery that cannot be encouraged from outside in any way.
2. The second phase emphasizes techniques once the student’s attitudes have been clarified.
3. The third phase It is considered fair to provide the student with his own experience of therapy, if possible by having him undergo it himself as a client.
4. The fourth phase points out that the student must practice psychotherapeutic practice from the moment it is practicable.

therapeutic experiences Counseling and guidance, from the Rogerian perspective, cover a wide range that goes from the treatment of normal people, in pedagogical or vocational conditions, to psychotherapy in schizophrenic psychotics (Rogers et al., 1980).

There are applications of this concept in various areas such as clinic, education, couple relationships, ludo therapy, group dynamics (the famous meeting groups), etc. It covers a wide spectrum of ages, from two-year-olds to the elderly. And this is possible, we believe, because the non-directive or client-centered approach constitutes, in addition to a technique, applicable to this or that problem, a conception of the human being and interpersonal relationships. For this reason, it transcends the boundaries of the office to form a theory about “good living”, that is, about living fully, in constant improvement, open to all experiences, without fear, with the ability to choose and take responsibility for what we choose.

This article is merely informative, at PsychologyFor we do not have the power to make a diagnosis or recommend a treatment. We invite you to go to a psychologist to treat your particular case.

If you want to read more articles similar to Approach to Carl Rogers’ psychotherapy we recommend that you enter our Personality category.