Psicologia Psicoterapia e Salute, 2014, Vol. 20, No. 1/2/3, 229-230
Psicologia Psicoterapia e Salute, 2014, Vol. 20, No.1-2-3, 229 – 230
A critical response to the social-cognitive model
Mark Widdowson
Dear Colleagues,
Many thanks for your e-mail.
My feedback is as follows. You may not wish to use this, but these
are my reflections:
Whilst I applaud the considerable work and effort that has gone into developing this model, and in verifying its coherence using Benjamin's SASB model, I am critical of the theory of social-cognitive TA.
The model also presents an interesting review of developmental theory drawing on theorists such as Millon
However, the model is in my view far too complex to be of practical use to a therapist when they are in the room with their client. This
is in contrast to the functional model of ego states which is simple to
remember and sufficiently complex to understand many presentations
of ego states in the therapy room. As I see it, Scilligo and his colleagues have generated some impressive research which has validated
the coherence of the functional model, and have made this case using
the previously established and well-validated SASB framework.
As I was reading the material, I kept thinking 'why?' and 'how can
this be of use to therapists?'
From my position, I can see the use of this model for the purposes
of research, but can see no direct clinical applications of it.
I feel ambivalent.
I admire the efforts of the originator and his colleagues who have
developed this model, and been robust and rigourous in developing
their research. I saw some of their research presented last year at the
EATA research conference in Luton and was impressed with how
thorough it was. However, this admiration and respect is balanced
with a sense of disappointment. My feelings are probably influenced
230
230
Mark Widdowson
Mark Widdowson
by my own perspective- I am a psychotherapy researcher who is interested in process and outcome research, not in construct validity research. Personally, I would rather research efforts went into exploring
the outcomes of TA psychotherapy in order to secure our place as an
empirically –supported therapy, or in investigating the optimal conditions of TA therapy so we can make what we do more effective. I
think that as a community we need to use our research expertise and
energy wisely, and in ways that are strategically important. To me, the
most obvious direction is focusing research energy into outcome research. The research team who have developed the social-cognitive
model clearly are rigorous and very competent and have considerble
research expertise- I think if they put that energy into conducting outcome studies they could have an incredible impact on TA and in promoting wider acceptance of TA.
I am struggling to see how this model adds anything to the functional model. It seems to me that each functional sub-division has had
all the other functional sub-divisions placed within it. I cannot see
how that can be useful to me in the therapy room. I can see the value
of understanding the traditional three ego state model. I can also see
the value in categorising behaviour into free, rebellious, nurturing and
controlling divisions, and certainly do not see these as exhaustive or as
describing all of human behaviour. What I am struggling to see is the
value in combining it all to create a twelve ego state model. I am also
struggling to see how I could possibly teach this to students, and especially to clients. Also, I am struggling to see how I could use this
model for research purposes (although do recognise that my own research preferences probably influence this).
So, perhaps I have missed something in the papers, but these are
my thoughts so far.
Warm wishes
Mark