By: Dr Jennifer Tylee

Analysing Verbal Transactions

Note: This material covered by this module is equivalent to two regular lectures.

This module examines the general understanding of information contained in verbal responses. It includes the universals of verbal communication as well as the pitfalls, barriers and principles of verbal communication. In addition the session covers an introduction to the specific field of Transactional Analysis (TA) as a tool for understanding what may be occurring psychologically in an interaction. This module complements the tutorial sessions on listening. Part of the skill in listening is to hear both the content and the meaning that is conveyed (thoughts and the feelings) and therefore to understand the full meaning being communicated in the interaction.

At the completion of this module you will be able to:

1. Outline the universals of verbal communication.
2. List the pitfalls and principles of verbal communication.
3. Outline the barriers to verbal communication.
4. Analyse hidden agendas and determine the purpose of the agendas.
5. Describe basic interactions in using Transactional Analysis.
6. Begin to identify the parent, child and adult aspects of your own and others communication.

Return to Contents

It is through language that we communicate the thoughts that are in our minds to the minds of others and they use language to communicate their thoughts back. The language that is used to communicate can only represent the meaning or thought that we intended. Indeed DeVito (1989, 160) defines the human language system as a "productive system capable of displacement and composed of rapidly fading, arbitrary, culturally transmitted symbols". This definition contains the five universals of human communication. These are as follows:

• Productivity – this refers to the fact that our verbal messages are generated anew. Except for some trivial utterances such as "good luck" we are not repeating memorised sentences or phrases. This is also the case when we understand new utterances in that the meaning must be interpreted anew. The language system also allows for the production of new words.
• Displacement – this refers to the fact that messages may have effects or consequences that are independent of their context. For example, sentences spoken today may have effects elsewhere at another point in time.
• Rapidly Fading – Generally speaking speech sounds rapidly fade and must be received immediately after being spoken or they will not be received at all.
• Arbitrariness – language signals do not possess any of the physical properties or characteristics of the things for which they stand.
• Cultural Transmission – any form of the human language is culturally transmitted.

The creation of meaning is an active process between the sender and the receiver. Meaning is not only a function of messages (verbal and non-verbal) but also the interaction of the messages sent and the receiver’s thoughts, feelings and attitudes (DeVito, 1989, 164). The meaning is not simply received it is created. Because of this if we are to analyse the meaning of some message we must look into people and not just the words used.

We can never fully know what the other person thinks and feels, we can only approximate this on the basis of what we receive and this is greatly affected by what we are thinking and feeling. It also needs to be recognised that meaning will change over time as our thoughts and feelings change.

Because of the way the meaning in messages is developed no two people derive the same meaning from a given message. As a result of this there is the need to check the meaning of the message by asking questions, by reflecting back to the sender the thoughts and feelings we perceive as being sent. (This is a part of effective listening and is the topic of tutorial sessions 4 and5.)

DeVito (1989, 187) presents six pitfalls (ways of verbalising our thoughts and feelings that have a negative influence on others) to verbal interaction and the corresponding principles to be followed to avoid the negative reactions.

The pitfalls are as follows:

Talking down and up

In situations of talking down we are made to feel that the speaker has ‘the word’ and is passing it onto those who are lesser beings. Examples of this are when health care professionals talk to lay people in medicalese or when colleagues put themselves above others by using phrases like "you probably didn’t realise this but…". The impression gained is that the speaker thinks they are ‘above the rest’. Another way a person talks down is when they address someone else by their first name but expect to be addressed by their title plus their last name. An example of this is when the nurse introduces themselves to the patient; "Hi, Jane. I’m Nurse Jones."

Talking Up is an equally difficult form of communication in that the communicator approaches you as though you have the answers, as if you are the authority. Sometimes the person talks up in an attempt to manipulate you so that you will see what is following in a kind fashion. This type of communication often begins with disqualifiers such as "I’m probably wrong but I was wondering…" or "You know this better than I do…".

When the downward and the upward talk is used to intimidate or manipulate it creates problems for all those involved. The most helpful principle in dealing with this talk is that of equity. To recognise that all those involved in the communication are equal in the sense that what each person has to say is worthwhile and that each person has something to contribute.

Disconfirmation

Is a communication pattern in which we ignore someone’s presence and their communication, that is, we deny the persons significance.

Differences between confirmation and disconfirmation (DeVito, 1989, 191)

Confirmation	Disconfirmation
1. Acknowledge the presence of the other verbally or non-verbally.	1. Ignore the presence of the other.
2. Acknowledge the contributions of the other by either supporting or taking issue with what the other person is saying.	2. Ignore what the other says; appear indifferent to the other person and what they say.
3. Make non-verbal contact with the other by eye contact, touching or some other demonstration.	3. Make no non-verbal contact with the other – avoid eye contact and touching.
4. Engage in Dialogue.	4. Engage in a monologue – there is no real interaction.
5. Demonstrate understanding.	5. Jump to interpretation or evaluation without understanding what the other person means.
6. Reflect back the other person’s feelings to demonstrate understanding of these feelings.	6. Express your own feelings and ignore the feelings of the other.
7. Ask questions of the other person concerning both thought and feelings.	7. Make statements about yourself and ignore any lack of clarity in the other’s remarks.
8. Praise the other person.	Praise oneself or a third person and appear indifferent to the other person.
9. Acknowledge the other person’s requests, answer their questions, return phone calls and so forth.	9. Ignore the other person’s requests, fail to return their phone calls and so forth.
10. Encourage the other to express their thoughts and feelings.	10. Interrupt or otherwise make it difficult for the other to express themselves.
11. Give responses that are relevant to what the other person says.	11. Respond with irrelevant comments that indicate a failure to listen.
12. Respond directly and exclusively to what the other says.	12. Respond vaguely by acknowledging the other’s comment but then shift the focus in another direction.

 

Excluding Talk

This is where there is the use of in-group talk in the presence of someone who is not a member of the group. This is a particular problem in nursing when a group of health care professionals get together at the bed side of a patient to discuss the patient but continue to talk in medicalese and do not adjust to the patient’s presence. To avoid this problem, when care related issues are discussed the practitioners can ask the patient’s perspective and can draw analogies, about what is being discussed, with the patient’s field of knowledge.

 

Talking about self or others

Many people talk constantly about themselves, their job, their accomplishments, their plans, their families, their problems and so forth. Rarely do they ask others about themselves. Other people are at the opposite extreme and rarely talk about themselves. These are called underdisclosers – they do not want to reveal anything that will make them vulnerable. There really needs to be a balance between too much and too little self-talk.

 

Criticising and praising

In many interpersonal situations there is the expectation that criticism, evaluation or some kind of judgement is made. This is particularly the case in the helping professions such as nursing. The difficulty arises when the criticising is carried outside of the helping situation or is used inappropriately or to excess. The same is true of excessive praise. What is required is honest appraisal (in an appropriate context).

 

Offending Talk

This may include comments about race or sex or include jokes or put-downs. The language used needs to neither offend nor demean others.

The communication of meaning may encounter barriers at any point in the process from the sender to the receiver. DeVito (1991, 105) presents eight possible barriers to the communication of verbal messages. These barriers are as follows:

Polarisation

Refers to the tendency to look at the world in terms of opposites and to describe it in extremes. For example, sick or healthy, positive or negative, intelligent or stupid. Although the extremes do exist most people are somewhere in the middle. However there is a tendency to view only the extremes and to categorise people in terms of the polar opposites.

 

Intensional Orientation (the 's' in intensional is intentional)

refers to the tendency to view people, objects and events as they are talked about, that is, by their reputation. So if someone has a reputation of being disorganised then we tend to see that person through that label without first looking at the person. We believe the label rather than checking its validity. If, however, we were to have an extensional orientation we would look to the person, object, or event first and then look at the label.

 

Fact-Inference Confusion

We make statements about what we observe and also about what we infer from what we observe. For example we can say "Mr Jones is wearing yellow pyjamas." We can also say "Mr Jones has an absurd sense of humour." We can actually observe Mr Jones’s pyjama colour but we can only infer that Mr Jones has an absurd sense of humour. The problem arises when we act on the inferential statements as though they were factual statements.

 

Pragmatic implications

This is a similar problem to the fact inference confusion. DeVito (1991, 108) provides the following example. You hear that one of your lecturers has been replaced for the next year. Further, you know that the students have been complaining that the classes are boring. On the basis of this information you draw the conclusion that the lecturer has been replaced for ineffective teaching. This is the pragmatic implication from the information you have. It may or may not be correct. The problem is created in the way that our memory system stores the information. We remember the inferences in the same way that we remember the facts.

 

Bypassing

Is a pattern of misevaluation in which the sender and the receiver fail to communicate their intended meanings. DeVito (1991, 110) provides the example where two people actually agree but assume they disagree because they are using different words.

• Person 1: I want a permanent relationship (meaning continue to see each other exclusively).
• Person 2: I’m not ready for that (thinking and meaning marriage). Lets keep things they way they are (meaning continue to see each other exclusively).

Allness

We never see all of anything or experience anything fully. We see part of an object, event or person and on the basis of that information we conclude what the whole is like. We always have insufficient information but when we must make a judgement we need to be aware that the judgement is on the basis of the part we know and not the whole. We may later be shown to be incorrect.

 

Static Evaluation

When we form a verbal statement about someone that statement remains static and unchanging, but the person or object to whom it originally referred may change considerably. The evaluations of yourself and others need to change to reflect the changes in the real world otherwise you will be left with attitudes and ideas about a world that no longer exists.

 

Indiscrimination

Occurs when we concentrate on the classes of people, objects or events and do not recognise that each is unique and needs to be looked at individually. This is at the centre of stereotype development.

Return to Contents

One of the reasons that the pitfalls and problems in communication that have been presented by DeVito (1989, 1991) occur, is because of hidden agendas on the part of the speaker. The material presented by DeVito (1989, 1991), and in particular that associated with the manner in which to correct the problems and pitfalls, does not take into account the secondary gains that someone may experience in using particular form of verbal interactions. DeVito (1989, 1991) seems to work on the assumption that everyone desires open and direct communication. However, this is not necessarily the case. There are a number of reasons for people not using direct and open communication, some of which are consciously held but many of the reasons are not known to the speaker and arise from the unconscious. Similarly, changing the pattern of communication to be open and direct is not a simple matter. The speaker needs to be aware of not only what they are saying but also the reasons behind the communication chosen. Even when this insight into the communication patterns has been achieved, actually altering the communication requires a concerted effort.

McKay, Davis & Fanning (1983, 77) suggest that communication which contains the pitfalls and problems outlined above, contains hidden agendas. These are to prove that the speaker is smart, good, blameless and so forth. They are defensive manoeuvres to protect the speaker from being rejected by creating the desired impression. The hidden agendas prevent closeness as nobody can get to know the ‘real’ speaker. McKay et al (1983, 78) outline eight major hidden agendas. These are as follows:

I’m Good

The stories you tell about yourself present the picture of what you want people to know about you. A frequent one of these for nurses is that they are caring, sensitive people. This is the picture that is shown to the world – as if you are on the stage, and it is indeed a terrific character. However it is not the authentic person. The aspects of yourself that are less than wonderful are hidden. There are two major problems with the I’m Good agenda. First, it is hard for people to get to know you as they only see the I’m Good person of the stories. Second, people get bored of the stories and tired of the same mask and go away.

 

I’m Good (But You’re Not)

In this approach you show how good you are by showing how bad everyone else is. McKay et al (1983, 78) quote a nurse who often complained "I’m always willing to stop and answer a light even if it’s not my patient. I’ll help another nurse lift someone who’s heavy, but do you think I can get anyone to help me? Not on your life." In this case the nurse points out how hard she/he works to help others but the criticism implied is that the other nurses are lazy. Other variations on this are what Berne (1964) and James & Jongeward (1971) called the Courtroom where an array of ‘evidence’ is provided to prove how bad the other is. Berne (1964) and James and Jongeward (1971) also identify the If it weren’t for you variation where the blame is placed on another person or situation for problems or restrictions in their lives. This agenda can boost the self- esteem but at the price of people feeling threatened and put down.

 

You’re Good (But I’m Not)

This can be the agenda of flattery or the idolising of smart, beautiful or strong people. It is often the agenda of the depressed person and the basic statement is "I’m wrong, bad, damaged, stupid and so forth so take pity on me." The alcoholic, chronic gambler and unfaithful spouse may also use the "I’m no good" position as a way of heading off criticism and as an excuse not to change.

 

I’m Helpless, I Suffer

This is the agenda of the victim and their stories focus on the misfortune, injustice and the abuse they have suffered. The person is implying that they do not want to do anything about the suffering as they are not responsible. Berne (1964) and James & Jongeward (1971) see these as the I’m Helpless and the Ain’t it awful agendas. The injustices that they suffer are all beyond solution. The Why Don’t You…Yes But situation is where a second person makes suggestions to the ‘helpless’ who always has a reason for not being able to undertake the solution. The suffering is always beyond their ability to control. With this agenda the person can avoid new solutions to problems and can then avoid change.

 

I’m Blameless

This tends to be the agenda often chosen when things go wrong. It is the "I didn’t do it" and the "see what you made me do" agenda. You never have to be responsible for anything.

 

I’m Fragile

This is the statement of "Don’t hurt me" and the stories revolve around the betrayals and wounds of the past. It is clear that the speaker needs protection and cannot hear the whole truth.

 

I’m Tough

This is the muscle your way through. The muscle may be psychological or physical. It is the workaholic or the superperson who takes on an endless number of things to do. Conversation is often a list of the things achieved and the details of your current labours and that you will soon have to rush off to do something else. Berne (1964) and James & Jongeward (1971) call this the harried game. The underlying message is that you work longer, harder and smarter than anyone else and the pay-off is admiration and that people won’t ask you for much because you are so busy. In this agenda people don’t tend to slow down, they collapse both psychologically and physically. The I’m Tough is also the position of the dangerous and the physically aggressive. This may be seen as the masculine ideal. However, the agenda is usually to ward off hurt and to protect a fragile self-esteem.

 

I Know It All

This is the agenda of the perpetual instructor and people don’t get too close. The agenda prevents re-encounters with early experiences of not being adequate and shame at not knowing something.

McKay et al (1983, 82) suggest that agendas serve two functions:

1. To build up and preserve a basic position in the world. The agenda then becomes a strategy for coping with core feelings of inadequacy. Harris (1967) suggests that we all carry over from childhood the feelings of inadequacy. These feelings are dealt with by asserting our worth (the I’m good agenda) or protecting the vulnerability (I’m tough, I’m fragile agendas).
2. To promote some ulterior motives and needs. These may be to gain comfort and assistance in the I’m helpless and I’m blameless agendas. It communicates the position of helplessness or blamelessness and at the same time has the ulterior motives of producing guilt and forcing others to change.

The agendas ultimately isolate and stop people from knowing and accepting you for what you really are.

Return to Contents

A further step in the understanding of verbal interactions has been provided by the work of Berne (1964) on Transactional Analysis. This work has been developed further by a number of writers and has become a popular way of understanding what is happening in an interaction. Berne (1964) suggests that every human has three ego positions from which they conduct their interactions: the parent, the adult and the child. In any day you will probably spend some time in each of these positions and each of the positions will affect how you interact and behave. The way you communicate will vary markedly from one ego position to the other.

Harris (1967), James & Longeward (1971) and McKay et al (1983) consider that the internal ego parent is a collection of rules, moral directives and the ho-to-do-it instructions that were provided by your parents. Everything the child saw the parents do and everything the child heard the parents say are recorded on ‘the tapes’. These are carried around like a tape recording inside everyone. The ‘tapes’ were probably recorded in the first five years of life and continue to be played throughout life. The rules were important as a child because they provided protection from danger. The parent rules also gave information on how-to eat at the table, to fill a glass, to cope in social interactions and so forth. The patent tapes provide a structure for conducting life. Some parent tapes are supportive and encouraging, others are more strict and punitive. You can usually tell when you are talking from the parent tape because of the use of words like - should, never, stop, always and so forth. The punitive parent will have judgements such as disgusting, stupid, ridiculous and so on. The supportive parent will use more words like perfect, wonderful, terrific and so on.

Just as your parents still exist in the parent tapes, the child that you were is still in the child ego state. The child state consists of all the urges to know, to feel, to experience the world. The child is curious and wants to discover and to know things and to do things. However the child ego state is also the site of the punishment, disapproval and strong feeling, particularly the negative feelings brought about by confrontations with parents. Harris (1967) suggests that because of these confrontations that all children experience (even those with supportive and encouraging parents) they conclude that they are Not Ok. The child ego state then contains the emotions, the attractions, love, delight, as well as the fear, anger, and the feelings of not being adequate, of being Not Ok, that are a result of the turmoil of growing up.

McKay (1983, 86) suggests that you are communicating from your child when you are expending emotional energy in tears, tantrums and whining. The child is also the source of the exuberance, the curiosity, the giggling and the sexual excitement. The phrase like "hate, I wish, Why do I have to" come from the child state. The child state retreats to hurt and anger when it senses rejection or is told it is Not Ok.

People sometimes function from the child ego state when they are ill or injured. Patients may then display the negative feeling and fears of the Not Ok child state. (It is quite common for adults and children to regress somewhat when ill, that is, to revert to ways of thinking, feeling and behaving consistent with an earlier developmental stage.)

As well as the adaptive child as outlined above there is the natural healthy child. This is the source of much learning, having fun, being creative and insightful. This aspect of the ego often needs to be developed as it is linked to the positive feelings of happiness and a general sense of wellbeing.

There is a part of the ego state that has to measure the feelings and impulses of the child as well as the rules and dictates of the parents. This is the adult state. The adult has to process the information it receives and make decisions based on the data. It makes assessments of situations and makes predictions about likely outcomes. Sometimes the adult is overwhelmed by the demands of the parent or the child and is unable to make an effective decision. The healthy adult knows the needs of the child and the rules of the parent but can function independently of these. The adult ego state communicates and makes decisions without blocking out either the child or the parent ego state nor handing over the control to either of them.

The benefit of Transactional Analysis is learning to identifying which part of the ego state is communicating. Harris (1967) and James & Jongeward (1971) suggest a number of ways to analyse your communications. Primarily you need to:

1. Identify your ego child: its vulnerabilities, fears, and ways of expressing its feelings.
2. Identify your ego parent: its rules, fixed ideas, judgements, and way of expressing its commands.

When you recognise these states in yourself you will find it easier to recognise them in others.

Return to Contents

Verbal language is what we generally consider to be the means of communication. However there are a number of pitfalls and problems with verbal language that affect the meaning of the language used. Some of the pitfalls include talking down and up, disconfirmation, excluding others and talking excessively about ourselves. All these disrupt shared meaning in communication and present problems for the development of close relationships. At the base of some of the pitfalls in language use are hidden agendas. Some of these include; I’m Good, I’m Blameless, I Suffer, I’m Tough and so forth. These agendas are for the purpose of preserving a way of viewing the world and therefore avoiding having to change and to promote ulterior motives and needs. Berne (1964) has suggested that the meaning in much communication is determined by the ego state from which it emanates. These states may be the parent, child and the adult. When these deeper levels of meaning are deciphered we have a better understanding of what is actually occurring in the verbal communication.

Exercise: Identifying Parent, Child and Adult Ego Statements

Aim:

• To assist you in identifying parent, child (adaptive) and adult statements.

Process:

Identify the following statements as:
    (P)arent,
    (C)hild, or
    (A)dult.

Return to Contents

Additional Reading and Exercises

1. Read Units 11 and 12 pp.187-211 in:

DeVito J.A. 1989, The interpersonal Communication Book, 5th edn, Harper & Row, New York.

2. Read Chapter 2 Parent, Adult and Child in:

Harris, T.A. 1967, The Book of Choice, Jonathan Cape, London.

3. Exercise 1: Identifying Hidden Agendas

(Adapted from McKay et al (1983,82).

Aims:

• To have you become aware of your verbal interactions.
• To begin the process of agenda identification.
• To have you write down a verbatim of your verbal interactions and begin to analyse that interaction. (As a part of your assessment for this subject you are required to analyse an interaction.)

Process:

1. For one day, count the number of times you use one of the eight agendas outlined above. Write down the stories you tell and the remarks you make. You may want to use a verbatim of the interaction, that is, write down exactly what is said by the person/people involved in the sequence that it is said. (It may be a little difficult to recall an exact interaction the first time you try but as you practice you will become better at the process of recalling. You may want to start with a brief interaction at first and then build to more lengthy conversations.)
2. At the end of the day make an assessment of the agendas. Are agendas a major influence on you interactions? If they are, repeat the process on a second day and see what further understanding you are able to gain on your use of agendas.

4. Exercise 2: Transactional Analysis on a Verbatim

Aim:

• To identify parent, child and adult aspects of your communication.
• To learn more about how you interact with others.

Process:

1. Refer to the verbatim scripts that were undertaken for the purposes of identifying hidden agendas. Use these transcriptions and identify parent, child and adult aspects of the statements.
2. What have you learnt about yourself from the exercise?

Return to Contents

Berne, E. 1964, Games People Play, Grove Press, New York.

DeVito, J.A. 1989, The Interpersonal Communication Book, 5th edn, Harper & Row, New York.

DeVito, J.A. 1991, Human Communication: The Basic Course, 5th edn, Harper Collins, New York.

Harris, T.A. 1967, The Book Of Choice, Jonathan Cape, London.

James, M. & Jongeward, D. 1971, Born to win: Transactional Analysis with Gestalt Experiments, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts.

McKay, M., Davis, M. & Fanning P. 1983, Messages: The Communication Skills Book, New Harbinger, Oakland, California.

Return to Contents

Return to Contents

Use this link if you want to send e-mail to the author. (removed)