Counselor in Client Centered Therapy ROGERS

8/12/2019 Counselor in Client Centered Therapy ROGERS

1/13

THEATTITUDE ANDORIENTATION OF THE COUNSELORIN CLIENT-CENTERED THERAPY1BYCARLR.ROGERSUNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

I N any psychotherapy, the therapisthimself is ahighlyimportantpartofthe hum an equation. W hat he does, theattitude he holds, his basic concept ofhis role, all influence therapy to amarked degree. Differing therapeuticorientations hold differing views onthese points. It thusseemsappropriateto consider, in greater detail than hasheretofore been done in writing, theorientation and function of the thera-pist inclient-centered counseling.

A GENERAL CONSIDERATIONIt is commonto findclient-centeredtherapy spoken of as a method or atechnique. Nodoubtthisis due inparttoearlierpresentationswhich tendedtooverstresstechnique. It maym ore accu-ratelybesaidthatthe counselorwho iseffectiveinclient-centeredtherapyholdsa coherent and developing set of atti-tudes deeply imbedded in his personal

organization, a system of attitudeswhichisimplementedbytechniquesandmethods consistent withit. It hasbeenour experience that the counselor whotriesto use a "method" isdoomedto beunsuccessful unlessthism ethod is genu-inelyinline withhis ownattitudes. Ontheother handthecounselor whoseatti-tudes are of the type which facilitatetherapymay be onlypartially success-ful, becausehisattitudesare inadequate-ly implemented by appropriate meth-odsand techniques.

1Paper given to the Minnesota Chapter ofPsi Chi, November 4, 1948.

Let us then consider the attitudeswhichappear to facilitate client-center-edtherapy. M ust the counselorpossessthem in order to be a counselor? M aythese attitudes be achieved throughtraining?

THE PHILOSOPHICAL ORIENTATION OFTHE COUNSELOR

Some workers are reluctant to con-sider the relationship of philosophicalviews to scientific professional work.Yetin therapeutic endeavorthis appearsto be one of thesignificant andscientif-ically observable facts which cannot beignored. Our^experience in trainingcounselors wouldindicatetha,tthebasicoTperatwnalphilosophyoftheindividual(which may or may not resemble hisverbalized philosophy) determines,to aconsiderableextent,the timeitwilltakehim tobecomeaskillful counselor.The primary pointof imjgor^ncehereis the attitujfe'^eff'_by the^cpunselor^to-wafaTHe~worth andthe significanceof^_,....r.c9~: -T~s-..uo-J- - -= * *--I =w,w>JJthe"individual., ,IJow dA.we,loak,jyiponDowe seeeachpersonas hav-eing worth anddignityin his ownright?If we do holdthis point of view at theverbal level, to what extent is it oper-ationally evidentat thebehavioral level?Dowetend totreat individualsas per-sons of worth, or do we subtly devalu-ate them by our attitudes and behavior?Is our philosophy one in whichrespectforthe individualisuppermost? Do werespect his capacity and his right toself-direction or do we basically believe

82


2/13

THE ATTITUDE ANDORIENTATION OP THE COUNSELOR 8thathislife wouldbebestguidedby us?Towhat extent do we have a need and adesire to dominate others? Are wewillingfor the individualto select andchoosehis ownvalues,or are ouractionsguided by the conviction (usually un-spoken) ,thathewouldbe happiest if hepermitted us to selectforhim his valuesandstandardsand goals?It is questions of this sort w h i c happear to be important as a basic de-terminer of the therapist's approach.It has been our experience that indj-

tatSBfTwhlch stresses the significanceand worth of "elach person, can,Jealnratherreadily theclient-centered tech-niqtKr'WRicKimplemented,this,,po|nlofview. "Shis is often true of workers ineducation who have a strongly child-centered philosophyofeducation. It isnot infrequentlytrueofreligious work-ers who have a humanistic approach.Among psychologistsand psychiatriststhereare those with similar viewsbutthere are also many whose conceptofthe individual is the concept of an ob-ject, to be dissected, diagnosed, manipu-lated. Such professional workers mayfind it verydifficult to learnor toprac-tice a client-centered form of therapy.In any event, it is thedifferences inthisrespect which seem to determine thereadiness or unreadinessof profession-alworkerstolearnandachieveaclient-centered approach.Eventhisstatementof the situationgives a static impression which is in-accurate. One's operational philosophyis not a fixed andunchanging thing,buta fluid and developing organization.Perhaps it wouldbe more accurate tosaythatthe person whose philosophicalorientation has tended to move in thedirection ofgreater respectfor the indi-vidual often finds in the client-centeredapproach a challenge to and an imple-mentation of his own views. Hemay

findthathereis apointofviewin hu-man relationships which tendsto carryhim much further philosophically thanhehasheretoforeventured,and to pro-vide the possibility of an operationaltechnique for putting intoeffect thisre-spectforpersons, to thefull degreethatitexistsin his ownattitudes. Thether-apistwhoendeavors to utilizethisap-proach soon learns that the develop-ment of the way of lookinguponpeoplewhich underlies this therapy is a con-tinuing process, closely related to thetherapist's own struggle for personalgrowth and integration. He can beonlyas nondirective as he has achievedrespect for others in his own person-ality organization. ^Perhapsitwouldsumm arizethepointbeing made to say that a person can implement , by client-centered tech- fniques, his respect for others onlyinsofar as that respect is an integral fpart of his personality makeup; conse-fquently the person whose operationalphilosophy has already moved in thisdirection of feeling a deep respect forthe significanceand worth of each per-son is more readily able to assimilatethe client-centered techniques w h ic hadequatelyexpress this feeling.

CULT ORSCIENCE?The questionmay well arise, inviewofthisdiscussion,as to whether client-centered therapy is then simplya cult,ora speculative philosophy, in whichacertain type of faith or belief achievescertain results, and where lack ofsuchfaith prevents these results from occur-ring. Isthis,inother words, simplyanillusion which produces further illu-sions?Sucha question deserves carefu l con-sideration, but the evidencewouldseemto point in the direction of a contraryanswer. This seems most strikingly in-dicated in the experience of various


3/13

CARL R ROGERScounselors whose initial philosophicorientation hasbeenrather distant fromthatdescribed. Theexperienceintrain-ing of such individuals has seemed tofollow something of apattern. Initial-ly there is relatively little trust in thecapacity of the client toachieveinsightor constructive self-direction. Thecounselor is intrigued intellectually bythepossibilities ofnondirective therapyandlearnssomethingof the techniques.Hestartscounseling clients withaverylimited hypothesis of respect, whichmight be stated somewhat in theseterms: I will hypothesize thatthe in-dividualhas alimited capacitytounder-standhimselftosome degreeincertaintypesofsituations. In many situationsandwith many clients I, as amoreob-jective outsider, canbetter knowthesituation and better guide it. It isonthislimitedanddivided basisthathebegins his work. He is often not verys u c c e s s f u l . But as he observes hiscounseling results, hefindsthat clientsacceptandmake constructive use ofre-sponsibility when he is genuinely wil-ling for them to do so. He is often sur-prised with their effectivenessin han-dling this responsibility. He cannothelp butcontrastthe quality of the ex-perience in those situations where theclient has learned significantlyforhim-self,with the less vital quality of the ex-perience in those situations where he,the counselor, has endeavored to in-terpret, evaluate and guide. Thus hefinds that the first portion of his hy-pothesis tends to beproved beyond hisexpectations while the second portionproves disappointing. So,littleby little,thehypothesis upon whichhebases allhis therapeutic work shifts to an in-creasingly client-centered foundation.This type ofprocess, which wehaveseen repeated many times, would appeartomean simplythis,thattheattitudinalorientation, the philosophy of human

relationships which seemsto be a nec-essary basis for client-centered coun-seling, is notsomething which must betaken onfaith ,orachievedall atonce.It is a point ofview whichmay be a-doptedtentativelyandpartially,and puttothetest. It isactuallyan hypothesisin humanrelationships,and will alwaysremain so. Even for the experiencedcounselor,who hasobservedinhundredsofcasestheevidence which supports thehypothesis, it is still true that for thenew client whocomesin the door, thepossibility ofself-understanding and in-telligent self-direction is still, for thisclient, acompletely unprovedhypothe-sis.It would seemto bejustifiableto saythatthe faith, thebelief,in the capac-ity of the individual to deal with hispsychological situationandwith himselfis of the same order as any scientifichypothesis. It is a positive basis foraction, but it is open to proof or dis-proof. Hence, to put in more summa- 'rized or definitive form the attitudinalorientation which appearsto beoptimalfor the client-centered counselor, wemay say: thatthecounselor chooses toact consistently upon the hypothesis'thatthe individualhasasufficientcapac-;ity todeal constructively withall thoseaspects of his lifewhichcanpotentially\come into conscious awareness. This\means the creation of an interpersonal \situation in which material m ay comeintotheclient'sawareness, and amean-ingful demonstration of the counselor'sacceptanceof theclientas aperson com-petent ofself-direction. Thecounseloracts upon this hypothesis in a specificand operational fashion, being alwaysalert to note those experiences (clini-cal or research) which contradict thishypothesis as wellas those whichsup-portit.Though he isalert to all the evidence;thisdoesnotmeanthathekeeps shift-


4/13

THE ATTITUDE AND ORIENTATION OP THE COUNSELOR 85ing his basic hypothesis in counselingsituations. If thecounselor feels,in themiddleof an interview, thatthis clientmaynothavethecapacity for reorgan-izing himself, andshifts to thehypoth-esisthatthecounselor must bearacon-siderable responsibility forthisreorgan-ization, he confuses the client, and de-feats himself. He has shuthimselfofffrom proving or disproving either hy-pothesis. It isthis confused eclecticism,whichhas been prevalent in psychother-apy, which has blocked scientific pro-gressin the field. Actually it is only byacting consistentlyupon a well-selectedhypothesis,thatitselementsof t r u t handuntruthcanbecome known.THE SPECIFIC IMPLEMENTATION OP THE

COUNSELOR'S ATTITUDEThus far the discussion has been ageneral one, considering the counselor'sbasicattitude toward others. How does

thisbecome implemented in the thera-peuticsituation? Is itenoughthatthecounselor hold the basic hypothesis wehavedescribed,andthatthis attitudinalorientation will then inevitablym o v etherapy forward? Most assuredly thisis not enough.t Itispossiblethatone of themost sig-I nificant general contributions of the

I client-centered approach hasbeen its in-sistence upon the investigation of thedetailed implementation of thecounsel-or's point of view in the interview it-jself. Many differenttherapistsfrom alaumber of differing orientations statetheirgeneral purposes in somewhat sim-ilarterms. Only by acareful studyofthe recorded interviewpreferably withboth the sound recording and tran-scribed typescript availableis it pos-sibletodetermine what purposeorpur-posesareactually being implementedinthe interview. Am I actually doingwhat Ithink I amdoing? Am I opera-tionally carryingout thepurposes which

Iverbalize? Thesearequestions whicheverycounselor must continually be ask-ing himself. There is ample evidencefrom ourresearch analysis that a sub-jectivejudgmentby the counselor him-self regarding these questions is notenough. Only an objective analysis ofwords, voice and inflection can ade-quately determine the realpurpose thetherapistispursuing. As weknowfrommany experiences in therapist's re-actions totheir recorded material, andfrom a research analysisby Blocksma[1], the counselor is not infrequentlyastonished to discover the aims he isactually carrying out in the interview.Notethatindiscussingthispointtheterm technique hasbeen discarded infavor of implementation . The clientis apt to be quick to discern when thecounselor is using a method , an in-tellectuallychosentoolwhichhe has se-lected forapurpose. On theother handthe counselor is always implementing,bothinconsciousandunconscious ways,the attitudes which he holds toward theclient. Theseattitudescan be inferredand discovered from their operationalimplementation. Thusacounselorwhobasically does not hold the hypothesisthat theperson hassignificant capacityfor integratinghimself,maythinkthathe hasused nondirective methods and techniques , and proved to his ownsatisfaction that these techniques areunsuccessful. Arecording ofsuch ma-terial tends to show however that intoneofvoice,in thehandlingof the un-expected,in the peripheral activitiesofthe interview, he implements his own hy-pothesis, not the client-centered hy-pothesisas hethinks.

AFORMULATIONOF THE COUNSELOR'SROLE

Throughout the developmentof t h eclient-centered point ofview,there hasbeenasteady progression ofattempts to


5/13

86 CARLB.ROGERSformulatewhat is involved in the coun-selor's role. It has been seen bysomeas involving merely apassive and lais-sez-faire attitude, a formulation whichhas proved unrewarding in practiceIt hasbeen seenasbeing primarilytheclarification and objectification of theclients emotionalized attitudes. This,whilegenerallyprofitable, has at timeslead inpractice to asomewhatcold,de-clarative attitude on the therapist'spart, which has also been therapeutic-ally ineffective.

At the present stage of thinking inclient-centered therapy, thereisanotherattempt todescribe what occurs in themost satisfactory therapeutic relation-ships, another attempt to describe theway in which the basic hypothesis isimplemented. This formulation wouldstate that it is C KintefnaTframe of

as he isseenHByTimself,and to layasideallper-Colons rg^J e^^efnal frame o re-ference while,..doing so.1 Raskin,in an unpublishedarticle [2]has given a vivid description of thisversion of thecounselor'sfunction.

There is another level of nondireetive coun-selor response which to the writer representsthe nondireetive attitude. In a sense, it is agoal rather than onewhich is actually prac-tised by counselors. But, in the experience ofsome,it is ahighlyattainablegoal, which....changes the nature of the counseling processin a radical way. Atthis level, counselor par-ticipation becomesan active experiencing withthe clientof the feelingstowhichhe givesex-pression, the counselor makes a maximumef-fort to get under the skin of the person withwhom he is communicating,he tries to getwithin and to live the attitudes expressed in-steadof observingthem,tocatch every nuanceof their changingnature;in aword,to absorbhimself completelyin theattitudesof the other.And in struggling to dothis, there is simplynoroomfor anyothertype ofcounselor activ-

ity orattitude;if he isattemptingtolive theattitudesof the other, hecannotbediagnosingthem,hecannot beworrying about their rela-tionship to him, the therapist, he cannot bethinking ofmaking the process gofaster. Be-cause he is another, and not the client, theunderstanding is not spontaneousbut must beacquired, and this through the most intense,continuous and active attention to the feelingsof theother,to the exclusionof any other typeof attention.Even thisdescription may berathereasily misunderstood since t h e exper-iencing with theclient,the livingof hisattitudes, is not in terms of emotionalinvolvement or emotional identificationon the counselor's part, but rather anempathicidentification, wherethecoun-selor is perceiving the hates andhopesand fears of the client through immer-sionin anempathicprocess,but withouthimself,ascounselor, experiencingthosehatesandhopes and fears.Anotherattempt tophrasethis point

of view has been made by the author.It is asfollows.As time has gone by we have cometo putincreasing stress upon the client-centered-ness of the relationship, because it is moreeffective the more completely the counselorconcentrates upon trying tounderstand thecli-ent as th e client seems to himself. As I lookback upon some of our earlier published cases the case of Herbert Bryan in my book, orSnyder's case of Mr. M.I realize that we

have gradually dropped the vestiges of subtledirectiveness which are all tooevidentinthesecases. W e have come to recognizethat if wecan provide understanding of the way the cli-ent seems to himself at this moment, he cando the rest. Thetherapist must lay aside hispreoccupationwith diagnosisand hisdiagnosticshrewdness, must discard histendency tomakeprofessional evaluations, must cease his en-deavors to formulate an accurate prognosis,must give up the temptation subtly to guidethe individual, an d must concentrate on onepurpose only; that of providing deep under-standing an d acceptance of the attitudes con-sciously held at this momentby the client ashe explores step by step into the dangerousareas whichhe has been denyingtoconscious-ness.


6/13

THEATTITUDEANDORIENTATION OP THE COUNSELOR 87I trust it is evident from this descriptionthat this type of relationship can exist onlyif the counselor is deeply and genuinely ableto adopt these attitudes. Client-centered coun-

seling,if it is to beeffective, cannotbe atrickor a tool. It is not a subtle way of guidingthe client while pretending to let him guidehimself. To beeffective,it must be genuine. Itis this sensitive and sincere client-centered-ness in the therapeutic relationship that Iregardas thethird characteristicofnondirec-tive therapy which sets it distinctively apartfrom other approaches. [3]RESEARCH EVIDENCE OF A TREND

t f - .< 5- - . . = 15 .--__-----

A research study recently completedwouldtendto confirm someof the pre-c e d i n g statements [4]. Counselortechniquesused bynondirectivecounse-lorsin cases handled in 1947-48 havebeenanalyzedintermsof the categoriesusedby Snyder [5] inanalyzing caseshandled in 1940-42. This gives anopportunity to note any observabletrend. It is found that at the earlierdate the counselors used a numberofresponses involving questioning, inter-preting, reassuring, encouraging, sug-gesting. Such responses, though alwaysformingasmall proportionof the total,would seemto indicate on the counse-lor's part a limited confidence in thecapacityof theclienttounderstandandcopewith his difficulties. The counselorstill felt it necessary at times to takethe lead,to explain the client to him-self, to besupportive,and topointoutwhat to the counselor were desirablecourses of action. As clinical experienceintherapy has continued, there has beena sharp decrease in all of these formsofresponse. In the later cases, the pro-portion of responses of any of thesetypesisnegligible. Over85 per centofthe counselor responses are attempts toconveyan understanding of theclient'sattitudes andfeelings. Itappears quiteclear that nondirective counselors, onthe basis of cM^irfuiniftKeWpeuliic ex-perience, have come to depend more

fully upon the basic hypothesis of theapproach than was true a half dozen jyears ago. This seems significant, since jit wouldbenaturaltosupposethatwith jincreasing security in clinical experi-ence there might be an increasingspread of variation in counseling tech-niques. Actuallyit isevidentthatmorean dmore the nondirective therapist hasjudgedunderstandingandacceptancetobeeffective, and concentrateshiswholeeffort upon achieving a deep under-standing of the private world of theclient.THE DIFFICULTYOFPERCEIVING THROUGH

THE CLIENT'SEYESThis struggle to achievethe client'sinternal f rame ofreference,togainthecenter of his ownperceptual field andsee with him as perceiver, is rathercloselyanalagousto someof theGestaltphenomena. Justas, byactive concen-

tration, one can suddenly see the dia-gramin the psychologytextasrepres-entinga descendingratherthanan as-cending stairway or can perceive twofacesinsteadof acandlestick,so, by ac-tiveeffort thecounselorcan puthimselfintotheclient's frameofreference.Butjust as in the case of visual percep-tion the figure occasionally changes, soin the caseof the counselor,he may attimes finds himself out of the client'sframe ofreference, and lookingat theclientas anexternal perceiver. T h i salmostinvariably happens,forexample,in a longpauseorsilenceon theclient'spart. The counselor may gain a fewclueswhich permit an accurate empa-thy, but to someextent he is forced toviewtheclientfromanobserver'spointof view, and can onlyactively assumethe client's perceptual field when sometype ofexpression again begins.The reader canattempt this role invariousways,cangive himself practiceinassumingtheinternal frameofrefer-


7/13

88 CARLR. ROGERSence of another while overhearing aconversation on the streetcar, or whilelistening to a friend describe anemotional experience. Perhaps some-thing of what is involved can even beconveyedonpaper.Totry togive you,thereader,asome-what more real and vivid experienceofwhat is involved in the attitudinal setwhichwe arediscussing,it is suggestedthatyou putyourself in theplaceof thecounselor, and consider the followingmaterial,which istaken from completecounselor notes of the beginning of aninterview with a man in his thirties.Whenthematerialhas been completed,sit back and consider the sorts ofatti-tudes and thoughts which were inyourmind as youread.

Client: Idon'tfeel very normal,but I wantto feel that way. . . IthoughtI'dhave some-thing to talk about then it all goes aroundin circles. I was trying to think what I wasgoing to say. Then coming here it doesn'twork out....I tell you,it seemedthat itwouldbe much easier beforeI came. I tell you,I just can't make a decision; I don't knowwhat I want. I've tried to reason this thingoutlogically triedto figure outwhichthingsareimportant to me. I thought thatthere aremaybe tw o things a man might do; hemightget married and raise a family. But if he wasjust a bachelor, just making a living thatisn'tvery good.I findmyselfand my thoughtgetting backto thedays whenI was a kid andI cry very easily. The dam would breakthrough. I've been in the Army four and ahalf years. I had noproblems then,nohopes,no wishes. M y only thought was to get outwhen peace would come. My problems, nowthat I'm out, are asever. I tell you, theygobackto a long time beforeI was in the Army.. . . I love children. WhenI was in thePhil-ippines Itell you, whenI wasyoungIsworeI'd never forget my unhappy childhood sowhen I saw these children in the Philippines,Itreated them very nicely. Iusedtogive themice cream cones and movies. It was just aperiod I 'd reverted back andthat awak-enedsome emotions in me I thought I had longburied. (A pause. He seems very near tears.)

As this material wasread, thoughts

of the followingsorts wouldrepresentan external frame of reference in you,the counselor .I wonder if I should help him get startedtalking.Is this inability to get underway a type ofdependence?

Why this indecisiveness? What could be itscause?What is meant by this focus on marriageandfamily?Heseemsto be a bachelor. I hadn'tknownthat.The crying, the dam , sound as thoughthere must be a great deal of repression.He's aveteran. Could hehave been a psy-chiatric case?I feel sorry fo r anybodywhospent four an done-half years in the service.Sometimewe willprobably need to dig intothose early unhappy experiences.What is this interest in children? Identifi-cation? Vaguehom osexuality?Thoughts which might go throughyour mind if you were quite successfulin assuming the client's internal frameof reference would tend to be of thisorder.You're wanting to struggle toward normal-ity,aren'tyou?It's really hard for you to get started.Decision-making just seems impossible toyou.You want marriage, but it doesn't seem toyou to be much of a possibility.You feel yourself brimming over with child-ishfeelings.Toyou the Army represented stagnation.Beingvery nicetochildrenhas somehowhadmeaning fo r you.B ut it has beenand isa disturbing ex-perience fo r you.If these thoughts are couched in afinal and declarative form, then theyshift over into becoming an evaluation

from thecounselor's perceptual vantagepoint. But to the extentthat they areempathic attempts to understand, ten-tative in formulation, then theyrepre-sent the attitude we are trying to de-


8/13

THE ATTITUDEAND ORIENTATION OF THE COUNSELOR 89scribe as

THE RATIONALE OP THE COUNSELOR'SROLE

Thequestionmayarise in themindsofmany, why adopt thispeculiar typeof relationship? In what way does itimplement the hypothesis from whichwe started? What is the rationaleofthisapproach?Inordertohaveaclearbasisforcon-sidering these questions, let us attempt

to put first informalandthen inliter-ary terms, a statement of the counse-lor'spurpose whenhefunctionsinthispWay. In psychological terms, it is thej counselor's aim to perceive as sensitiv-1 ely and accuratelyaspossibleall of theI perceptual field as it is being experi-[ encedby theclient, withthesamefigureandground relationships,to the fullde-; gree that the client is willing tocom-municatethatperceptualfield;andhav- ingthus perceivedthis internal frame\ of reference of the other ascompletely\ aspossible,toindicateto theclientthej extent towhichhe isseeing through the|client's eyes.

Suppose that weattempt a descrip-tion somewhat more in terms of thecounselor's attitudes. The counselor saysin effect, To be ofassistanceto you Iwill pu t aside myselfthe self of ordi-nary interaction and enter into yourworldof perception as completely as Iam able. Iwill become,in asense,an-other self for youamirror heldup toyour ow nattitudes and feelingsanop-portunity for you to discern yourselfmore clearly, to understand yourselfmore truly and deeply, to choose moresatisfyingly.THE COUNSELOR'S ROLE AS IMPLEMENTA-

TION OP AN HYPOTHESISIn what ways doesthisapproach im-

plement the central hypothesis of ourwork? It wouldappear thatfor me, ascounselor, to focusmy wholeattentionand effort uponunderstandingandper-ceiving as the client perceives and un-derstands, is a striking operational dem-onstration of the belief I have in theworth and the significanceof this in-dividual client. Clearly the most im-portant valuewhichIholdis, asindica-ted by myattitudes and myverbalbe-havior,theclienthimself. AlsothefactthatIpermit the outcome torest uponthisdeep understanding is probably themost vital operational evidence whichcouldbegiven that Ihaveconfidence inthe potentiality of the individual forconstructive changeanddevelopmentinthedirection of a more full and satisfy-ing life. As aseriously disturbed clientwrestles with his utter inability to makeany choice, or another client struggleswithhisstrong urgetocommitsuicide,thefact that I enter with deep under-standing into the desperatefeelings'thatexistbut do notattempttotake overre-sponsibility, is a most meaningful ex-pression ofbasicconfidence in the for-ward-moving tendencies in the humanorganism.W emight saythen,that form a n ytherapists functioning from a client-centered orientation,thesincereaim ofgetting within the attitudes of theclient, of entering the client's internalf r a m e of reference, is the most com-plete implementation which has thusfarbeen formulated,for thecentral hypoth-esisofrespectforand reliance uponthecapacity of the person.

T H E C L I E N T S E X P E R I E N C E O FT H E C O U N S E L O RThe questionwouldstillremain, whatpsychological purpose is served by at-tempting toduplicate,as it were, theperceptual field of the client in themindof the counselor? Here it may as-


9/13

9 CARL R. ROGERSsistus to see how the experience seemsto theclient. From themanys t a t e -ments written orgivenbyclients aftertherapy onerealizesthatthecounselor'sbehavior is experienced in avarietyofways, but there appear to be certainthreads which are frequently evident.A first excerpt may betaken from astatement by a professionally sophis-ticated client who had recentlycomple-ted a series offiveinterviews. She hadknown and worked with the counselorin another professional capacity.

Initially wediscussedthepossibility of theseinterviews interfering with our relationship asco-workers.I veryd efinitely feel thattheinter-views in no way altered this relationship. W ewere tw o entirely different people in our tworelationships and the oneinterfered not at allwith the other. I believe that thiswas due inlargemeasure to the fact thatwe almost un-consciously, because of the nature of therapy,accepted each otherandourselvesasbeing dif-ferent people in our relationships with eachother. As workers we were two individualsworking .together on various everyday prob-lems. In counseling wewere mostly m ework-ing together on my situation as I found it.Perhaps the last sentence explains to a con-siderable extent how I felt in the counselingrelationships. I was hardly aware duringtheinterviews of just who it was sitting in theoffice with me. I was the onethat mattered,my thinkingwas thethingthatwas importantand my counselor was almost a part of meworking on my problemas I wanted to workon it.My most prominent impression of the inter-views, is difficult to put into words. As Italked I would almost feel that I was out ofthis world. SometimesI would hardly knowjust what I was saying. Thisone may easilydo if onetalks fo r long periods to oneself becoming soinvolvedin verbalization that oneis not keenly aware of just what one is say-ing and very definitely not aware of what thewords actually mean to one. It was the roleof the counselortobringme to myself,to helpm eby being withme in everything I said, torealize what I was saying. I was never con-scious that he was reflecting or re-statingthings I hadsaid but onlythathe wasrightalong withm e in mythinking becausehewouldsay to me things which I had stated but he

would clear them for me, bring me back toearth, help me to see what I had said andwhat it meant to me.Several times, by his use of analogies, hewould help me to see the significanceofwhatI hadsaid. Sometimeshewouldsay somethinglike Iwonderifthisiswhat youmeanor , is that what youmean? and Iwas consciousof a desire to get what I hadsaid clarified, not somuch to him as a personbut through him, clarified to myself.During the first two interviews he inter-rupted pauses. I know that this was becauseI hadmentionedbefore counselingstartedthatpauses mademeself-conscious. However,Ire-member wishing at the time that he had letmethink without interruption. The oneinter-viewthat stands out most clearly in mymindwas one inwhichtherewere many long pausesduring which time I was working very hard.I was beginning to get some insight into mysituationand, although nothingw assaid, I hadthe feelingby the counselor's attitude, thathewasworkingrightalong withme. He was notrestless, he did not take out a cigarette, hesimply sat, Ibelieve looking hard rightat me,while I stared at the floor and workedin mymind. It was an attitude ofcomplete coopera-tion and gaveme the feelingthathe waswithmeinwhatI wasthinking. I see now thegreatvalue of pauses, if the counselor's attitude isone of cooperation, not one of simply waitingfor timetopass.Ihave seen nondirective techniques usedbe-fore not onmyself where the techniqueswere the dominating factors, and I have notalways been pleased with the results. As aresultof my ownexperience as a client I amconvincedthatthecounselor's complete accept-ance,his expressionof the attitudeof wantingto helpthe client and his warmth of spirit asexpressed by hiswhole-hearted giving of him-self to the client incomplete cooperation witheverything the client does or says are basicinthistypeoftherapy.

Notice how the significant themeofthe relationship is, "wewere mostlym eworkingtogether on mysituation as Ifound it. Even grammaticallythe twoselveshave somehowbecome onewhileremaining two "wewere me. Thisidea is repeated several times; mycounselor was almostapartof mework-ingon myproblemas Iwantedtoworkonit; it was theroleof thecounselor


10/13

THE ATTITUDE AND ORIENTATION OF THE COUNSELOR 91tobringme tomyself; I wasconsciousof adesireto getwhat Isaid clarified,not so much to him as a person butthrough him, clarified tomyself. Theimpression isthattheclientwas in onesense talkingto herself, and yetthatthiswas a very different process whenshe talked to herself through the me-dium ofanother person.Another example may be taken froma report written by a young woman whohad been, at the time she came in forcounseling, rather deeply disturbed.Sheh a d someslightknowledge aboutclient-centered therapy before comingfo r help. The report from whichthismaterial istaken waswritten spontan-eously and voluntarily some six weeksafter the conclusion of the counselinginterviews.

I can remember sitting in my room andthinking about the components of infantileneeds an d dependence in maladjustment, an dstronglyresistingtheideathat therewas anyelement of dependence in my behavior, I thinkI reacted the way I might have if a therapistin an interview situation had interpreted thisfor me before I was ready for it. I keptthinking about it, though, and began to seethat, although I kept insistently telling my-self I wanted to be independent, there wasplentyofevidencethatI wasalso wantingpro-tection and dependence. Thiswas a shamefulsituation, I felt. I did not come toaccept thisindecision in myself until I had guiltilybrought it up in the interviews, had it ac-cepted, and then stated it again myself withless anxiety. In this situation, the counselor'sreflection of feeling with complete acceptancelet me see the attitudewith some objectivity.In this case, the insight was structured ra-tionally beforeI wentto the interview. How-ever, it was notinternalized until the attitudehad been reflected back to me free of shameandguilt,a thing initself which I could lookat and accept. Myrestatements and furtherexposition of feeling after the counselor's re-flection were my own acceptance and inter-nalization of the insight.

How shall we understand the counse-lor's function as it wasexperienced bythisclient? Perhapsitwouldbeaccur-

ate to saythatthe attitudeswhichshecouldexpressbut couldnotaccept as apartofherself became acceptable whenan alternate self, the counselor, lookeduponthem with acceptanceandwithoutemotion. It wasonly whenanotherselflooked upon her behavior withoutshame or emotion that she could lookupon it in the same way. These atti-tudes were then objectifiedfor her, andsubjecttoorganizationandcontrol. Theinsights which were almost achievedinherroom became genuine insights whenanother had accepted them, and statedthem, with the result that she couldagain state them with less anxiety.Here we have a different yet basicallysimilar experiencing of the counselor'srole.

ATHEORYOP THE THERAPIST'S ROLEWith this type of material in mind,a possible psychological explanation of

the effectiveness of the counselor's rolemight be developed in these terms. Psy-chotherapy deals primarily with theorganization and the functioning of theself. Thereare many elements of ex>perience which the self cannot face,cannot clearly perceive, becauseto facethem oradmit them would beinconsis-tentwithandthreateningto thecurrentorganization ofself. In client-centeredtherapy the client finds in the counselora genuinealter ego in an operationaland technical sense a self which hastemporarily divested itself (insofar aspossible) of its own selfhood, exceptfor the one quality of endeavoring tounderstand. In the therapeutic exper-ience, to see one's ownattitudes, confu-sions, ambivalences, feelings, and per-ceptions accurately expressed by anoth-er, but stripped of their complicationsof emotion, is to seeoneself objectively,and paves the way for acceptance intothe self of all these elements which arenow more clearly perceived. Reorgan-


11/13

92 CARL R. ROGERSizationof the self, andmore integratedfunctioningof theselfarethusfurther-ed. If thistheoryiscorrectitwould helpto explain why this adoption of theclient's internal frame of reference isgradually experienced astherapeutic.

A BY-PRODUCTAs a somewhat parenthetical com-ment, it may be mentioned that theconcept of the therapist's attitude andfunctionwhich has been outlined above

tendstoreducegreatlyaproblem whichhas been experienced by other thera-peuticorientations. Thisis theproblemof how to prevent the therapist'sownmaladjustments, emotional biases, andblind spots, from interfering with thetherapeuticprocessin theclient. Therecan be no doubt that every therapist,evenwhen he has resolved many of hisowndifficulties in atherapeutic relation-ship, still has troubling conflicts, tend-enciestoproject,orunrealistic attitudesoncertainmatters. How tokeepthesewarped attitudesfrom blocking therapyor harming the client has been an im-portant topic in therapeutic thinking.In client-centered therapy this prob-lem has been minimized considerablyby the very nature of the therapist'sfunction. Warped or unrealistic atti-tudesaremost likelyto beevident wher-ever evaluations aremade. When evalu-ationof the clientor of his expressionsisalmost nonexistent, counselor biashaslittle opportunity tobecome evident,orindeed, to exist. In any therapy inwhich the counselor is asking himselfHow do I seethis? How do I under-stand this material? the door iswideopen for the personal needsor conflictsof thetherapisttodistort these evalua-tions. Butwherethecounselor's centralquestion is How does the client seethis? and where he is continuallychecking his ownunderstanding of the

client's perceptionbyputtingforth ten-tativestatementsof it, distortionbasedupon the counselor's conflicts is muchlessapt toenter, andmuch moreapt tobe corrected by the client if it doesenter. r,,This may beworded in aslightlydif- ferent fashion. In a therapeutic rela-tionship inwhichthetherapistas aperson enters, making interpretations,evaluating the significance of the ma-terial and the like, then his distortionsenter with him. In a therapeutic rela-tionship inwhichthe therapist endeav-ors to keep himself out, as a separate iperson,andwherehiswhole endeavoristo understand the other so completelythathe becomes almost an alter ego oftheclient, then personal distortionsandmaladjustments are much less likely tooccur. The deep emotional entangle-ment of client andtherapist which canoccur where the therapist sees his roleas anevaluative one, doesnot occur inourexperience. ^

SOME DEEP ISSUESThe assumption of the therapeuticrole which has been described raisessome very basic questions indeed. Anexample from a therapeutic interviewmay pose some of these issues for ourconsideration. Miss Gil, a young wo-

manwho has shown deep confusion andconflict,and who has been quite hopelessabout herself,hasspent themajor partof one of her therapeutichours discus-sing her feelings of inadequacy andlack of personal worth. Part of thetime she has been aimlessly using thefinger paints. She has just finishedexpressing her feelings ofwanting t ogetaway from everyone tohave noth-ing to dowith people. After a l o n gpause comesthefollowing.

Miss G .: I've never said this before to any-on e but I've thoughtforsuchalong timeThis is a terriblething to say, but if I could


12/13

TH E ATTITUDEANDORIENTATIONOP THE COUNSELOR 93justwell, (short, bitterlaugh pause) IfI could just find some glorious cause that Icould give my life for I would be happy. Icannotbe the kindof a person I want to be.I guess maybe I haven't the guts or thestrength to kill myself and if someoneelse would relieve me of the responsibility or I wouldbe in an accident I - I justdon't want to live.

C: At the present time things look so blackto you that you can't see much point in liv-ing MissG.:Yes IwishI'dneverstartedthistherapy. I washappy whenI was living in mydream world. There I could be the kind ofperson I wantedto be But now There issuch a wide, wide gap betweenmyidealand what I am. I wish people hated me. Itry to make them hate me. Because then Icould turn away from them and could blamethem but no It is all in my hands Here is my life and I either accept thefact that I am absolutely worthless orI fight whatever it is that holds me in thisterrible conflict. And I supposeif I acceptedthe fact that I amworthless, then I couldgoaway someplace and get alittleroom some-place get amechanical jobsomeplace andretreat clear backto thesecurityof mydreamworld where I could do things, have cleverfriends,be apretty wonderful sort ofpersonC: It's really a tough struggle digginginto thislikeyou are and at timesthe shel-ter ofyour dream world looks moreattractiveand comfortable.Miss G.: M ydream world or suicide.C: Your dream world or something morepermanent thandreams

Miss G .: Yes, (a long pause. Completechange of voice) So I don't see why I shouldwaste your time comingin twice aweekI'm not worth it What do you think?C: It's up toyou,Gil It isn'twastingmytimeI'dbegladto see you wheneveryoucome but it's how you feel about it ifyou don't want to come twiceaweek or ifyou do want to come twice a week? once aweek?It's up to you. (Long pause.)MissG.: You'renotgoingtosuggest that Icome in oftener? You're not alarmed andthink I oughttocomein everyday untilI get out ofthis?C:I believeyou are abletomake yourowndecision. Ill see you whenever you want tocome.Miss G.: (Noteof awe in her voice) I don'tbelieve you are alarmed about I see I

may be afraid of myself but you aren'tafraid for me (Shestandsup astrangelook on her face ).C: You say you may be afraid of yourself and are wonderingwhy I don't seemto beafraid for you?

Miss G .: (Another short laugh) You havemoreconfidencein methanIhave. (Shecleansup the finger-paint mess andstartsout of theroom) I'll see you next week (that shortlaugh) maybe.Her attitude semed tense, depressed, bitter,completelybeaten. Shewalked slowly away.This excerpt raisessharply theques-

tionas to how far thetherapistisgoingto maintain his central hypothesis.Where life, quite literally, is at stake,whatis thebesthypothesis upon whichto act? Shall his hypothesis still re-maina deeprespect for the capacityofthe person, or shall he change his hy-pothesis? If so what are the alterna-tives? Onewouldbe thehypothesisthat"I can be successfully responsible forthe life of another. Still another isthe hypothesis, I can be temporarilyresponsible for the life ofanother with-out damaging the capacity for self-de-termination. Still another hypothesisis: The individual cannot be respon-siblefor himself,nor can I berespons-ible for him but it is possible to findsomeone who can be responsible forhim.Does the counselor have the right,professionally or morally, to permit aclientseriously to consider psychosis orsuicideas a wayout, without makingapositive effort toprevent these choices?Is it a part of our general social re-sponsibility that we m a y not toleratesuchthinkingorsuch actionon thepartofanother?

These are deep issues, which striketo the very core of therapy. They arenot issues which oneperson candecidefor another. Different therapeutic ori-entations have acted upon differenthypotheses. Allthatone person can do


13/13

94 CARL E. ROGERSis to describe his own experience andthe evidence which grows out of thatexperience.THE BASIC STRUGGLE OF THE COUNSELOR

It has been my experience that onlywhenthe counselor, through onemeansor another, has settled within himselfthe hypothesis upon which he will act,thathe can be of maximumaidto theindividual. It has also beenmy experi-

_ . _ o e sh e discoverthat_strengti . Ithas seemed clear, from our clinicalexperienceaswellas ourresearch,thatwhen the counselor perceives and ac-ceptsthe client as he is, when he laysasideall evaluation andenters into theperceptual frame of reference of theclient,he frees the client to explore hislife and experience anew, frees him toperceive in that experience new mean-ingsand newgoals. But is thetherapistwilling to give the client full freedomas to outcomes? Is hegenuinely willingfor the clientto organizeanddirecthislife? Is he willing for him to choosegoalsthatare social or antisocial, moralor immoral? If not, it seems doubtfulthat therapy willbe a profound experi-ence for the client. Ev en m ore difficult,is hew illingfor the clientto choosere-

gressionratherthan growth ormatur-ity? to chooseneuroticism rather thanmentalhealth? to chooseto reject helprather than accept it? to choosedeathrather than life? To me itappearsthatonlyas thetherapistis completely will-ing that any outcome, any direction,may be chosenonly then does herea-lize the vital strength of the capacityand potentiality of the individual forconstructive action. It is as he iswill-ingfor deathto be the choice,that lifeis chosen, for neuroticism to be thechoicethata healthy normality is chos-en. The more completely heacts uponhiscentralhypothesisthem ore convinc-ing is the evidencethat the hypothesisiscorrect.Received October 2 5, 1948.

R E F E R E N C E S1. BLOCKSMA, D. D. An experimental studyof the learning of client-centered counsel-ing in a six weeks trainingcourse. Amer.Psychologist 1948, 3, 285. (Abstract)2. RASKIN, N. J. The nondirective attitude.(Unpublished ms.)3. ROGERS, C. R. Significant aspects of cli-ent-centered therapy. Amer. Psychologist,1947, 2, 358-368.4. SEEMAN,J. Astudyof the processof non-directive therapy. J. consult. Psychol.1949, 13, (in press).5. S N Y D E K , W. U. Aninvestigation of the na-ture of nondirectivetherapy. J. gen. Psy-chol, 19415, 33, 193-223.

Documents

Counselor in Client Centered Therapy ROGERS