Parent, Adult, Child: Structural Analysis — Transactional Analysis 2 (C1)

TRANSACTIONAL ANALYSIS · LESSON 2

Parent, Adult, Child: Structural Analysis

C1 (B2–C2) · 90 minutes

What did you notice?

Task Tell your partner your example from last week: who, what they said, what happened next. Don't say whether they sounded like a parent or a child; your partner guesses. Then agree one answer: what gave it away most, the words, the voice or the body?

1. Did anyone's example sound like a parent and a child at the same time?

2. Was the person aware of the change, do you think?

Words

Voice

Body

READING

Three systems, one person

Most theories of personality start with something you cannot see: drives, instincts, an unconscious. Eric Berne started with something you can. Watching patients in his groups, he noticed that people seemed to shift, sometimes within seconds, between quite different ways of being. A calm, precise accountant might suddenly speak, sit and feel like a hurt schoolboy, and a minute later lecture the group like a stern grandfather.

Berne called each of these ways of being an ego state: a consistent pattern of feeling and experience, directly linked to a matching, consistent pattern of behaviour. The key idea is coherence. An ego state is not one gesture or one phrase but a whole

system in which thinking, feeling and behaving hang together. When the system changes, all three change with it.

He sorted ego states into three kinds.

The Parent ego state is borrowed. It holds thoughts, feelings and behaviour copied from parents and other parental figures: grandparents, older siblings, teachers, even heroes from books and films. In Parent, you replay how one of them thought, felt and acted.

The Adult ego state responds to the here and now. It gathers information, weighs it and decides, using all the resources of a grown person. It has nothing to do with age: a ten-year-old working out a puzzle can be in Adult.

READING · CONTINUED

Three systems, one person

The Child ego state is replayed from your own childhood. In Child, you think, feel and behave as you did when you were small: delighted, frightened, sulky, curious. Berne drew support from the neurosurgeon Wilder Penfield, who reported that stimulating parts of the brain during surgery could make patients relive old experiences, feelings included. Later researchers have questioned how literally such findings can be read.

Two warnings. First, ego states are not roles. A role is a part you choose to play; an ego state is a real shift in how you experience the moment. A father helping his daughter with homework may slip into Child, enjoying the game, while she slips

into Parent and tells him to concentrate.

Second, Parent, Adult and Child are not Freud's superego, ego and id under new names. Berne insisted that Freud's three agencies were theoretical concepts, while ego states could be directly observed. He built on the work of his own analyst, Paul Federn, who had written about ego states as states of the self that a person actually experiences. Berne's step was to sort them into three types and to insist that they could be seen and heard.

Critics reply that "observable" is doing a lot of work here. We observe behaviour, not ego states; the three-part sort is a model, not a discovery.

Three circles

1. Can a four-year-old be in Parent? Can a judge in court be in Child?

2. Why might Berne draw the circles separate, touching but not overlapping?

3. Is the Adult the "best" ego state? What would a life in permanent Adult be like?

P

Parent

copied from parental figures

A

Adult

here and now

C

Child

replayed from my own childhood

READING

Reading the signs

If ego states are observable, how do you observe them? Berne proposed four ways of diagnosing them.

Behavioural diagnosis looks and listens: words, tone of voice, gestures, posture and facial expression. A pointed finger and "How many times have I told you?" suggest Parent. An even voice and "What time does it start?" suggest Adult. A trembling lip and "It's not fair!" suggest Child. Berne treated behavioural diagnosis as the main method, with the other three as checks on it.

No single clue proves anything. The same frown might be Parent disapproval, Adult concentration or Child sulking. What counts is a cluster of clues pointing the same way, and clues differ between people, families and

cultures.

Social diagnosis watches the response. Ego states tend to invite answering ego states: if you suddenly feel like a scolding parent, the person in front of you may well be in Child.

Historical diagnosis asks about the past. Did one of your parents use exactly those words, in that tone? Did you feel like this as a child?

Phenomenological diagnosis is the rarest: the person re-experiences a past moment so intensely that, briefly, they are back in it.

Berne held that the more methods agree, the more reliable the diagnosis. In everyday life, and on a video call, behaviour is usually all you have.

Sort the clues

Task Copy the table. Write each letter under P, A or C. Circle any letter you can't agree on, and decide what extra information (voice, face, the situation, the person's past) would settle it.

A. "You should always check before you press Send."

B. Wagging a forefinger at someone

C. "What time does the last train leave?" in an even voice

D. Giggling with a hand over the mouth

E. "Oh, you poor thing, come here."

F. Head tilted down, eyes looking up at the boss

G. Upright posture, steady eye contact, level voice

H. "Wow! Brilliant! Let's do it right now!"

I. A loud sigh and rolled eyes

J. "In my experience, it usually takes about three days."

K. Hands on hips, standing over someone who is sitting down

L. "I can't. I just can't. It's too hard."

Which clue might mean something different where you come from?

P (Parent)

A (Adult)

C (Child)

Analyse real talk

Task Label each line P, A or C. Star the two lines you find hardest to label and argue both sides. For each starred line, say what you would need to hear or see to be sure.

Friday, 5.40 p.m. A small team in an open-plan office. Their client presentation is due on Monday.

1. Lena: The client has moved the meeting to 9 a.m. on Monday. There are twelve slides still to finish.

2. Mateus: (slumping back in his chair) Oh no. Not this weekend. It's my sister's wedding!

3. Lena: How many of the twelve are yours?

4. Priya: Honestly, Mateus, this is what happens when people leave everything to the last minute.

5. Mateus: (arms folded, looking at the floor) You always say that. I did all the data analysis!

6. Priya: (sighing) Fine. Send them to me. I'll do them tonight. Go and enjoy the wedding.

7. Lena: Wait. Before anyone volunteers, let's check what really has to be ready by Monday.

8. Mateus: (sitting up, grinning) I knew you'd save me, Priya. You're the best!

9. Priya: Well, somebody on this team has to be the grown-up.

10. Lena: (laughing) Shall we start with the slides full of numbers? Mateus, they're yours.

READING

When the Adult is not alone

The circles of the structural diagram are drawn apart for a reason. In a well-functioning personality each ego state has clear boundaries: you can tell, at least afterwards, which one you were in. Berne described two main ways in which the boundaries fail.

Contamination happens when Parent or Child content leaks into the Adult and is taken for Adult fact. The person sincerely believes they are being objective. On the diagram,

the Parent circle or the Child circle overlaps the Adult.

When the Parent contaminates the Adult, the result is prejudice: a slogan absorbed in childhood, such as "people like that can't be trusted", treated as a fact about the world and never checked. When the Child contaminates the Adult, the result is an old fear or fantasy treated as fact: "If I make one mistake, everyone will turn against me." TA's term for the Child form is delusion.

READING · CONTINUED

When the Adult is not alone

In its strongest forms that word belongs to serious mental illness, but the same structure appears in everyday life as quieter, ordinary fears. Both kinds of contamination can happen at once.

TA's remedy is decontamination: testing the belief against present-day evidence, so that the Adult takes back its own territory.

Exclusion is the opposite failure. Instead of leaking, a boundary closes, and one ego state is shut out.

Someone who excludes their Child may be dutiful and efficient but find it hard to play or to feel. Someone who excludes their Parent may have to work out every rule from scratch. In the extreme, a person may operate from a single ego state almost all the time.

One objection is hard to avoid. Who decides what counts as "fact"? One person's contaminated Adult may simply be another person's culture.

When the Adult is not alone

P

P

Parent contamination: prejudice

A

A

Child contamination: delusion

C

C

Fact or contamination?

Task Every statement below sounds like Adult fact. Write A (clean Adult), P in A (Parent prejudice inside) or C in A (Child fear inside) next to each. For each contaminated one, write one question the Adult could ask to check it.

1. "The meeting starts at ten, and the figures you need are on page four."

6. "Real men sort out their problems on their own."

2. "People from big cities are colder and less friendly. Everyone knows that."

7. "Nobody ever answers my emails, so there's no point writing to the manager."

3. "If I speak up in the meeting, everyone will think I'm stupid. That's just how it is."

8. "Money always ruins friendships, so I never lend it."

4. "Young people today don't want to work hard."

9. "If this project fails, my career is over."

5. "I compared three suppliers. The second is cheapest, but it has the longest delivery time."

Talking it over

Task Choose three or four questions. Spend most of your time on the one your group disagrees about.

1. Is the Adult really neutral, or is "rational" simply the Parent of your own culture?

2. Can a whole society's Adult be contaminated? Where have you seen it?

3. If ego states can't be found in the brain, can the model still be useful?

4. Do some cultures welcome Child behaviour in adults more than others? Is that true where you live?

5. Berne's model is far simpler than Freud's. Is that its strength or its weakness?

6. Should managers or teachers be trained to read ego states? What could go wrong?

Private reflection

Task Choose one prompt and write privately. Nobody will read what you write. Sharing afterwards is optional.

Prompt 1

Think of a belief you once held as plain fact and later found was an old rule or an old fear. How did you find out?

Prompt 2 (lighter)

Think of a voice from your past that still speaks in your head: a saying, a rule or a warning from a parent, grandparent or teacher. Do you still agree with it?

Back to your example

Task Look again at your example from last week. Which ego state was it, and which method of diagnosis would you use to check?

1. Would you still say the words, the voice or the body gave it away?

Words

Voice

Body

Before Lesson 3

This week, notice one moment when someone tells you what to do, and one when someone looks after you.

P

A

Write down both: what they said, how they said it, and how it made you feel.

Next lesson: The Functional Model. Not what the ego states are made of, but what they do.

C

TEACHER'S REFERENCE · SKIP OR DELETE BEFORE CLASS

Answer key (1)

SORT THE CLUES suggested; the letters marked borderline are there to be argued over

• P: A, B, E, K

• A: C, G, J

• C: D, F, H, L

• Borderline: I (rolled eyes are often Child rebellion; a loud sigh can be Parent exasperation). J (Adult if it reports real experience; Parent if it is used to shut down a younger colleague). E (Parent comforting, but could be Adult kindness if the tone is plain). B (a wagging finger means different things in different cultures; in some it is a warning, in others a playful "no").

ANALYSE REAL TALK suggested labels; starred lines are genuinely open

1 Lena: A. Information, no judgement.

2 Mateus: C. Slumping, "Oh no", a protest about his weekend.

3 Lena: A. A here-and-now question that gathers data.

4 Priya: P. A general rule about "people", delivered as a reproach.

5 Mateus: C, though "I did all the data analysis" is a fact and could be Adult in a level voice. The folded arms and "You always say that" point to Child.

6 (starred) Priya: P (rescuing, taking over) or A (a practical solution)? The sigh and "Go and enjoy the wedding" lean to Parent.

7 Lena: A. She stops the rescue and returns to the facts.

TEACHER'S REFERENCE · SKIP OR DELETE BEFORE CLASS

Answer key (2)

8 Mateus: C. Delight at being saved.

9 (starred) Priya: P ("the grown-up" casts herself as parent to the team), but a resentful or wounded tone would make it Child.

10 (starred) Lena: A with humour, or P (assigning work), or playful C in the laugh. A good example of how one line can carry more than one ego state.

FACT OR CONTAMINATION? suggested; 7, 8 and 9 have no single answer

1 A

2 P in A. A stereotype passed on as common knowledge. Check: "How many people from big cities do I actually know?"

3 C in A. An old fear presented as how things are. Check: "What happened last time someone spoke up?"

4 P in A. A generational slogan. Check: "Compared with whom, and measured how?"

5 A

6 P in A. An inherited rule about gender. Check: "Who told me this, and does it work?"

7 C in A or A. "Nobody ever" suggests Child despair; it is Adult only if the evidence really supports it. Check: "How many emails, to whom, over what period?"

8 P in A or C in A. Could be a family rule (Parent) or a fear from a painful experience (Child). Check: "Where did I learn this?"

9 C in A or A. Usually Child catastrophe; Adult only if the stakes really are that high. Check: "What actually happened to people whose projects failed here?"