Talk:Transactional analysis/Archive 1

Michigan Transactional Analysis
Your main image is stuffed!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.12.34.247 (talk) 04:42, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Can anyone clarify for me exactly which writers or thinkers would be referred to as "Michigan Transactional Analysis"? I believe that is the school of TA that came up with a rather specific 9-part breakdown of the psyche, which Bandler and Grinder (of NLP fame/infamy) were influenced by, but ridiculed for its rigidity and artificiality. -- Jmabel | Talk 22:16, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

I have been a member, officer, and committee member of the International Transactional Analysis Association since 1970. I have also been a member and officer of the USA group since it was founded in the mid 1970's. There has not been a Michigan Transactional Analysis school. There was a group know as the Huron Valley Institute located in Ann Arbor Michigan led by Stanley Woolams, Michael Brown and Kristyn Huige. Woolams and Brown wrote Transactional Analysis: A Modern and Comprehensive Text of TA Theory and Practice, 1978 Huron Valey Institute Press. There are diagrams in the book that break ego states into nine parts. None of the three are currently affiliated with any TA Association.

Jonathon Wagner, Chair, ITAA Internet Committee, Moderator ITAA-forum at yahoogroups.--209.74.154.184 03:42, 29 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks, the "nine parts" and a Michigan location makes it pretty clear this is whom they were talking about. -- Jmabel | Talk 07:04, August 29, 2005 (UTC)

"Inner child"
I notice that the phrase "inner child" appears nowhere in this article. I believe it has TA origins, and it has certainly passed into the language. If someone knows about this on a more solid basis than I do, could you please cite and add to the article? Thanks. -- Jmabel | Talk 22:16, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

In 1993 I was the conference coordinator for the ITAA conference Addiction In Society: Shame Addiction and the Child Ego State. Richard Subby was a featured speaker and guest workshop leader. He is one of several people working in 12 step programs for addictins who have some training in trnsactional analysis. It is this group of professionals who adapted the adapted the transactional analysis chid ego states to the inner child language. Because so much of 12 step care focuses on the internal workings of the mind, inner child is a phrase that fits well with those self help groups.

Jonathon Wagner, Currently, Chair ITAA Internet Committee, Moderator for ITAA-forum at yahoogroups.--209.74.154.184 03:12, 29 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Hmm. I am certain, though, that the expression goes back at least to the mid-1970s. -- Jmabel | Talk 07:08, August 29, 2005 (UTC)


 * Ditto. I would be amazed if Berne and those around him hadn't used the term 'inner child' in the 60s, even if it wasn't written down (fx: goes home to check) The Land 16:16, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Thaddeus Slamp (talk) 01:16, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I used to travel assisting John Bradshaw with his Inner Child workshops.. He was very instrumental in popularising this term. After writing the Homecoming and appearing on Sally Jesse Raphael there seemed to be a virtual explosion of "inner child" work. CWatchman (talk) 22:39, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Life Positions
There is nothing in this article about Life Positions of "I'm OK/Not OK, and you're OK/Not OK" is this not a principle of modern TA? Is Life Positions a central concept on a par with transactions and script (games)? 195.27.17.4 11:39, 26 April 2007 (UTC)Jpur
 * NinjaKid 10:35, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Since noone else more worthy than I has answered you, I will offer that I would think so (in the strong sence of I have difficulty conceiving of how it could not be). (I wrote the preceeding.  Forgot to sign in / sign)Thaddeus Slamp (talk) 23:07, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Kinds of transactions - Reciprocal
Hi, I wondered whether example 2 (A: "Would you like to come and watch a film with me?" - Child to Child). B: "I'd love to - what shall we go and see?" - Child to Child) is actually a good example of child to child communcation. I couldn't quite see it myself. Cheers, --Rebroad 11:18, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I respectfully submit that both (A) and (B) should be categorized as adult to adult. Remember, we're talking about ego states, not the actual ages of the people in the conversation. Two adults can communicate using their child egos while two children can communicate using adult egos.

Nbahn 08:04, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

"Controversy" section
I am not clear on why the existence of a French pyramid scheme involving TA is any more relevant to TA than controversy about Amway would be to an article on soap. - Jmabel | Talk 00:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I see looking through the history that I had removed similar material in December and that it was anonymously restored in February. I will therefore allow time for comment, rather than simply remove it myself. - Jmabel | Talk 00:55, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Maybe it would balance POV to note that if such a scheme or scam existed, it would likely be a local phenomenon, since Games People Play seems to advocate TA's adoption by the psychological community, rather than by a select group. After all, people have turned more mainstream concepts into cults before.  --205.201.141.146 17:31, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I note there is no mention of the Schiff scandal.


 * Given the time allowed for further comment since Jmabel's helpful notes above, I have cut this section and transcribe it below for the record. The French report cited in the section doesn't just single out TA for criticism (on grounds that are not very clear) but also takes a shot at NLP and a bunch of other things. The Schiff scandal is about someone who may, or may not, have claimed to be a TA practitioner, but I cannot find any evidence that her fatal techniques were endorsed by any TA organisation. By the way, for the record, in making these cuts I would like to state that I have no particular affiliation to TA. Transcribed cut section follows:
 * "In 2001 the French Interministerial Anti-Cult Mission (MILS) (PDF)

wrote (p 101-2 ):

"MILS examined the organisation of a French group offering training in 'transactional analysis'. This organisation reveals a system of pyramid selling. Every new 'member' is authorised, or even obliged, to take on patients for 'transactional analysis' while they are themselves still training as therapists. Treating patients provides them with the means of paying for their own training.  Dues are payable to the organisation's master in psychotherapy at regional, national and international level.  The patients undergoing therapy form the base of the pyramid, followed by the 'contracts,[…] those being trained in the four fields', i.e., guidance, education, organisation, and psychotherapy.  The 'contracts' may become 'qualified in the four fields', 'trainee teachers' or 'trainers'..." "MILS has also been informed of practices contrary to individual dignity by psychotherapists or practitioners of 'transactional analysis'. There was clearly collusion and solidarity among dubious professional organisations and groups to the detriment of victims. Self-styled ethics committees or professional ethics commissions discredit the complaints, gather false witness statements and come out in favour of the psychotherapists concerned.."

In the United States, a controversy existed (and was eventually resolved - not least by her death) regarding Jacqui Schiff's abuse of TA, not to mention her abuse of one particular patient, for whose death she was responsible." Hugh Mason (talk • contribs 06:59, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Jacqui Lee Schiff does not appear here or anywhere on wikipedia. Rebirthing is described as a "New Age Therapy" dealt with in once sentence, and the way in which Schiff's rebirthing brand of TA caused great controversy, some claim great results, and also when things went awry, to a large extent appear to have reduced the popularity of TA as a result of its association with her. The . Schiff is not mainstream TA but historically at least she had a great impact so the secrecy/omission/lack-of-mention(?), while understandable, seems to be a shame[1]. --Timtak (talk) 02:07, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Ego states, Games People Play and Psychoanalytic
The ego states reflect the Freudian ego, including the superego but not the rest of the id. Games People Play is technically poor, in that some of the "games" have no switch, so are in fact rackets. TA is not a psychoanalytic therapy, in that insight (awareness) is only part of the intended result (autonomy). The biography of Berne by Ian Stewart (Berne Institute) is a good reference for TA ideas.

—The preceding comment was added by 195.27.17.4 07:35, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[User:Jpur] 07:26, 25 April 2007 (UTC).

De Vries
I feel that De Vries's article is important here, but not sure where to add it or how: What's Playing in the Organizational Theater? Collusive Relationships in Management MFRK De Vries, Human Relations, 1999 http://www.springerlink.com/content/t88101p7681458m6/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)

If I may be so bold as to make a suggestion.....
.....it seems to me that Born to Win: Transactional Analysis with Gestalt Experiments By Muriel James and Dorothy Jongeward (Addison-Wesley, 1971) is worthy of mention in the article. I respectfully submit that it is a good introduction to transactional analysis (And gestalt therapy, as well!). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nbahn (talk • contribs) 19:13, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

If no one objects, then I will insert Born To Win into the article next weekend.

Nbahn 07:53, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Berne has mistakenly included an Adult ego state....SAYS WHO...?!!!!!
alright now i think that Berne's three ego-state model is true....but since the article adopted another opinion i think that it should be mentioned that " according to whom" was Berne's model faulty. thats really important because the article suggests that Berne's model was wrong as a fact.!!!!!!!!!

Bashar al-said 02:40, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

How dare any contributor assert that there is widespread dissatisfaction with Berne's three ego-state model? He is a movement of one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.206.28 (talk) 13:31, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

what have you done for me lately?
Have there been books on ta that have gained any popularity since the 70's? If so, mentioning them strikes me as an extremely good idea. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thaddeus Slamp (talk • contribs) 01:27, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Weasely section
Firstly thanks for a great article! Because it's so good I've highlighted the section "Transactional Analysis Today" and those instances within it which IMO are unencyclopaedic because of the [weasel words] in it and absence of citations. The section reads like a personal and negative point of view and whilst the content may be entirely accurate (or not) it needs references, and the deletion of the weasel words if these are not corroborated through citations. LookingGlass (talk) 07:40, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree. I also felt that labelling Wilder Penfield's research as 'discredited' is misleading. My reading around Penfield (documented in references added to article on him) is that some of his findings have proved difficult to reproduce but also that there are good reasons for that. It is hard to argue that Penfield does not remain a thoroughly credit-worthy giant in the history of neuroscience and I cannot find evidence that his work is 'discredited'. If someone else finds such evidence, please revert the edit. Hugh Mason (talk • contribs 06:46, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

+++++ "Personal and negative point of view" - yes, as one with some inside knowledge of the TA scene, and how it fell apart on the death of Eric Berne, I understand the tone as that of someone trying to give an overview of the current scene without ruffling feathers, particularly when it comes to minimising the Jacqui Schiff scandal. The late JS ended up psychotic and was responsible for the death of at least one client, but because she was one of the original group around EB, the TA establishment buried their heads in the sand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.209.93 (talk) 10:33, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

The “Transactional Analysis Today” section contains too many ambiguous sentences and incomplete thoughts to understand what and who are involved. I have listed some questions below. The section will be far more comprehensible when it answers the following questions:

1) a. Could you explain which “phenomenological approach” Berne used to introduce Transactional Analysis (TA) to the world? b. How does the philosophical school of phenomenology relate to TA?

2) Which part of Penfield’s theories are “discredited science”?

3) Which part of Spitz’s theories are “discredited science”?

4) Could you give me an example of TA theory based Erikson research?.

5) Could you give me an example of TA theory based on “interpersonal motivational theory”?

6) Could you provide some examples of TA’s “opposition to the psychoanalytic traditions”?

7) Could you provide some examples of how TA contains “inherited troubled aspects of his [Berne’s] thinking and personality”?

8) Could you provide an example of “rebelliousness and antagonism toward the psychoanalysis of his day”?

9) a. What is the “ill-informed equation of ego states of transactional analysis”? b. What part(s) of TA ill-informed? c. What do you mean by “equation”? d. When you say, “They,” who are you referring to?

10) a. “[T]he popularity of his [Berne's] book Games People Play” led to what consequences? b. Could you give an example of the consequences?

11) How does TA relate to “coercive reparenting techniques (the 1980s Schiff scandal)”?

12) Why is, “…transactional analysis as it established its own standards for competency based credentialing without taking into account other training or certification in occupational fields…” relevant? Many professional associations, including ITAA, establish their own standards for competency based on accreditation, without taking into account other training or certification from other fields.

13) a. Can you name the person(s) who were “cultivating the “pop psychology” image? b. Can you explain why the unnamed people wanted to cultivate “pop psychology”? c. Why did the “mental health clients and other consumers in organizations and education” find TA useful?

Oneofshibumi (talk) 18:21, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

You Son of a Bitch???
Is this a serious piece of work by Berne? There are no refences in this section and some weasel words. Can someone please provide or else I suggest the section is deleted. 84.249.205.20 (talk) 10:09, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

+++++ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.209.93 (talk) 10:25, 5 April 2008 (UTC) Yes, it is a serious piece of work by Berne. Source? 'Games People Play' - his bestseller.

Suggestion : "Rapo" game needs clarification and expansion.
My recollection of my studies on 'rapo; were that some references, if not all in Dr. Berne's book, did not mention 'rape' at all.

The 'game' involved manipulating a person, (male or female) into an act, an act that would later be called criminal.

If I recall the example, it involved 'violence' where the actual abuser was the victim. ( a paradox )

For example. It has been suggested that one country, would use 'medical ships' to convoy arms, and then tell the enemny of this. When 'the enemy' would blow them up, the incident would be used against them.

--Caesar J. B. Squitti :  Son of Maryann Rosso and Arthur Natale Squitti 10:31, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

What about Psychotherapy?
The article as written presents a form of analysis as to how personal problems are originated and maintained. But it doesn't say anything about how they are to be treated (unless you're supposed to just be told the products of an analysis, and the resulting insight is supposed to change you by itself, which seems a bit implausible to me). So: Can anyone say how TA is used in psychotherapy, or what therapeutic techniques are associated with TA? That would be a great help. RGipps (talk) 14:52, 4 December 2008 (UTC)R Gipps

What I Believe Is Required In Terms of Editing For This Article

 * 1) The introduction needs to be expanded.
 * 2) The Sections That Need To Be Merged  (DONE -- more or less, anyway)
 * 3) The two (2) "History" sections need to be merged (for obvious reasons).  (DONE)
 * 4) "TA Outline" and "Philosophy of TA".  (DONE -- albeit crudely)
 * 5) "History" and the entire "Transactional Analysis Today" section.  (DONE -- albeit not to my complete satisfaction)
 * 6) "Key Ideas of TA" needs to be broken out into its own article and replaced with its own summary.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nbahn (talk • contribs) 15:02, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

--NBahn (talk) 15:05, 15 April 2009 (UTC) "History " TA is not only post-Freudian but according to its founder's wishes consciously extra-Freudian. That is to say that while it has its roots in psychoanalysis - since Berne was a psychoanalytic-trained psychiatrist - it was designed as a dissenting branch of psychoanalysis in that it put its emphasis on transactional, rather than "psycho-", analysis.

"With its focus on transactions, TA shifted its attention from internal psychological dynamics to the dynamics contained in people's interactions. Rather than believing that increasing awareness of the contents of unconsciously held, whatever the perspective preferred by the individual TA practitioner, all share a common group of Bernian concepts: ego states, transactions, strokes, games, Transactional analysis, commonly known as TA to its adherents, is an integrative approach to the theory of psychology and psychotherapy. Integrative because it has elements of psychoanalytic, Humanist and Cognitive approaches. It was developed by Canadian-born US psychiatrist Eric Berne during the late 1950s. "

Except for a fragment of a sentence, all of the above shows up in the first "History" section. I believe that the second "History" section was something that someone forgot to delete. Therefore, I'm deleting it. I have also come up with a crude way of achieving Editing Goal #2.2. --NBahn (talk) 18:23, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Not so crude... BusterD (talk) 11:14, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Brilliant reorganisation! However, a "TA after Berne" section is required that mentions incidents such as the Jacqui Schiff scandal - a founder of one of the 'schools' of TA, she became psychotic and caused the death of at least one of her clients. The ITAA, being a corporation, took a stance tantamount to cowardice. Then there is the little matter of Eric Berne Memorial Prize winner Pat Crossman seceding from TA in general; though admittedly, her revised point of view is given ample expression in her paper cited in the 'skepticism' section. Nor would it do any harm to point out that Berne, while undoubtedly a true guru, messed with his followers' heads just as much as any false guru; so that when he died, the TA scene fell into a state of disarray that has hardly been mitigated by the ITAA, Berne's official successor. (It is the ITAA's role to dish out the Doctorates of Thinkology, so it would amount to professional suicide for a TA therapist to rock the boat.) Could such a section at least mention how many TA therapists have bought into the lies that alcoholism is an illness and that homosexuality is not Script determined? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.169.245.207 (talk) 23:12, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * If I can find second-hand sources documenting what you've described, I don't have a problem adding it in. --NBahn (talk) 00:48, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

NBahn - The first third of this is now reading much better. This is no criticism (as I know that work is still in progress) but clearly we need more references and, as those go in, perhaps there will be justification for leaving out the many POV statements that currently lurk in this piece. Clearly TA raises some strong feelings and those have got to be reflected here if they can be referenced and are not just hearsay/individual opinion. I hope to get some time off from Dad duty to add refs in future but in the meantime wanted to encourage the good work. Hugh Mason (talk • contribs 16:30, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Semi-major rewrite of article in the works.....
I propose to replace "Key ideas of TA" with a summary in order to make Transactional analysis a sub-article (If that's the right term?). Please go here and then offer critiques on the talk page. Thank you. --NBahn (talk) 06:36, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

How do you do?
The following example of a four-stroke ritual is given in the "Rituals" section:


 * "For instance, two people may have a daily two stroke ritual, where, the first time they meet each day, each one greets the other with a "Hi". Others may have a four stroke ritual, such as:


 * A: Hi!


 * B: Hi! How are you?


 * A: Getting along. What about you?


 * B: Fine. See you around."

Does anyone, other than 86.166.212.162 (talk) have a problem with this example? I changed it to "How are you?" from "How do you do?" in the second line. 86.166.212.162 reverted me. I pointed out that "How do you do?" is more formal and is usually used only upon first meeting someone. The response was to revert me, with the edit summary: "I am English, do not try and teach me English." Rather than edit war, I would like to sort this out here. As to usage, here's an example of British English that says the phrase "How do you do?" is formal and must be accompanied by a handshake. Here's another comment on usage that distinguishes between the two terms:


 * "How do you do?" is basically limited to introductions. In other words, you can say it only once to someone (just after being introduced) and then never again. Instead of saying "How do you do?" you can also say "It's nice to meet you" or "Pleased to meet you."


 * "How are you?" is a standard greeting. If you see someone daily, you could say "How are you?" to that person every single day.

Thus it seems to me that the best phrase for the example is "How are you?" If you do not agree, please provide sources rather than reverting. Sunray (talk) 01:26, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 16:00, 1 May 2016 (UTC)