Member 1 (Saher)

Life Position:
The Life Positions refers to the specific behavior towards others that an
individual learns on the basis of certain assumptions made very early in the
life.
The life positions can be categorized as follows:

1. I am O.K., You are O.K.: This life position shows that an individual has
several O.K. experiences with others. This means, an individual encountered
no severe problems or issues with others in his childhood and had a normal
relationship with them. People with such life positions about themselves and
others around him can solve any problem very easily and realizes the
significance of others being in his life. This position is based on the adult ego.
2. I am O.K., You are not O.K.: This life position is created when an individual
was too much ignored when he was a child. Here, an individual believes that
he is right, and all the others around him are wrong. These are the individual
who possesses the rebellion child ego and put blame on others for anything
that goes wrong with them.
3. I am not O.K., you are O.K.: This life position gets created when an
individual feels that others do things better than him. He feels inferior to
others and believes that others can do many things which he cannot do by
himself. These kinds of people always complain about one thing or the other
and remain highly dissatisfied with their lives.
4. I am not O.K., you are not O.K.: This kind of life position is created by
those who lacks interest in living. They feel life is not worth living and are the
ones who have been neglected by their parents in their childhood and were
brought up by the servants. Such kind of people commits suicide or homicide
to end their lives.
Thus, the life positions talk about the individual developing his identity, sense
of worth and perception about others during his childhood and believing it to
be true until and unless some major experience changes it.

Transactional Analysis of Life Positions: (The Masks we wear)

Transactional Analysis (or TA as it is often called) is an interpersonal relations approach developed

during the 1960s by Dr Eric Berne. It is underpinned by the philosophy that:

o people can change;

o We all have a right to be in the world and be accepted.
Transactional Analysis is based on two notions: That we have three sides or 'ego-states' to our
'personality (Parent, Adult and Child), and that these ego states converse with one another in
'transactions' both internally and externally with other people (hence the name).

According to TA, we are dominated alternately and to varying degrees by one of the three sides of
our personality. By studying the Ego States, the behaviour they incite, the games they lead to, and
the scenarios they cause, Transactional Analysis helps us understand how we relate to others and
gives us useful tools for self-knowledge and personal development.

TA is a common model used in psychotherapy (personal, couple and family therapy), as well as in
education and business (recruitment, skill assessments and understanding relationship dynamics).

Two key concepts in Transactional Analysis – Ego States and Transactions.

Ego States
According to TA, we have three sides or 'ego-states' to our personality – the Parent, Adult and
Child ego states.

An ego state is a way of us experiencing the world. It is an entire system of thoughts, feelings, and
behaviours from which we interact with one another (and even with ourselves in our internal
conversations). Our thinking, feeling and behaviour when we are in each ego state is consistent.

Please note that each ego state is given a capital letter to denote the difference between ego states
and actual parents, adults and children.

The ego states are drawn in diagrammatical form as follows:

(Member 2)

The Parent Ego State

This is a set of feelings, thinking and behaviour that we have copied from our parents and
significant others.

As we grow up we take in ideas, beliefs, feelings and behaviours from our parents and caretakers.
(If we live in an extended family then there are more people to be influenced by and learn from).
When we do this, it is called introjecting and it is just as if we take in the whole of the care giver.
For example, we may notice that we are saying things just as our father, mother, grandmother may
have done, even though, consciously, we don't want to. We do this because we have lived with
this person for so long that we automatically reproduce certain things that were said to us, or treat
others as we might have been treated by them. It’s as if someone has pressed 'play' on a recording
and we play back what we saw and heard without question. The Parent ego state is rooted in the
past.

There are two types of parent we can play:

The Nurturing Parent– This Parent type is caring and concerned and may often appear as a
mother-figure (though men can play it too). They seek to keep the child contented, offering a safe
haven and unconditional love to calm the Child's troubles.

The Controlling (or Critical) Parent – This Parent type tries to make the Child do as the Parent
wants them to do, perhaps transferring values or beliefs or helping the Child to understand and
live in society. They may also have negative intent, using the Child as a scapegoat.

The Adult Ego State

The Adult ego state is the 'grown up' rational person who talks reasonably and assertively, neither
trying to control nor reacting aggressively towards others. The Adult is comfortable with him/herself
and is, for many of us, our 'ideal self'.

The Adult ego state deals with the here and now reality. It is the processing centre and important
because it is the only ego state that is not connected to the past. The Adult ego state is able to
deal with current things in ways that are not unhealthily influenced by our past. If you were asked
how to make a paper airplane you would probably reply from your Adult ego state.

The Adult ego state is about being spontaneous and aware, with a capacity for intimacy. The Adult
is able to see people as they are, rather than what we project onto them. The Adult asks for
information, rather than staying scared or making assumptions.

In the structural model, the Adult ego state circle is placed in the middle of the Parent and Child
ego states to show how it needs to orchestrate between these two. For example, the Parent may
criticise the Child, saying "You are no good, look at what you did wrong again, you are useless".
The Child may then respond with "I am no good, look how useless I am, I never get anything right".
(Most people don’t hear their internal dialogue as it goes on so much they just believe life is this
way). An effective Adult can intervene by stating that this kind of parenting is not helpful and asking
if it is prepared to learn another way. Alternatively, the Adult can just stop any negative dialogue
and decide to develop another positive Parent ego state perhaps taken in from other people they
have met over the years.

The Child Ego State

The Child ego state is rooted in the past and plays back thoughts, feelings and behaviours that we
experienced as a child. For example, if the boss calls us into his or her office, we may immediately
get a churning in our stomach and wonder what we have done wrong. If we explored the reason
for this automatic thinking, we might remember the time the head teacher called us in to tell us off.
In the same way, we might go into someone's house and smell a lovely smell and remember our
grandmother's house when we were little, and all the same warm feelings we had as a six-year old
may come flooding back.

There are three types of Child we can play:

The Natural Child – This child type is largely un-self-aware and is characterized by the non-
speech noises they make (yippee, whoo-hoo etc.). They like playing and are open and vulnerable.

The Little Professor – This child type is the curious and exploring Child who is always trying out
new stuff (often much to their Controlling Parent's annoyance). Together with the Natural Child
they make up the Free Child.

The Adaptive Child – This child type reacts to the world around them, either changing themselves
to fit in and so being very good, or rebelling against the forces they feel and so being naughty.

Both the Parent and Child ego states are constantly being updated. For example, we may meet
someone who gives us the permission we needed (but did not get) as a child, to be fun and joyous.
We then use that person in our imagination "I wonder what X would say now?" to counteract our
old ways of thinking and give us new permissions. So instead of thinking that we must work longer
and longer hours to keep up with everything, we relax and take some time out. Subsequently,
rather than beating ourselves up for what we did or did not do, what tends to happen is we
automatically start to give ourselves new permissions and take care of ourselves.

(Member 3)

Transactions (Communications)
Transactions refer to the communication exchanges between people. (Put in TA terms, a
transaction is an exchange of strokes. I will explain strokes in the article ‘Transactional Analysis -
Part II’)

At any one time, an individual will be transacting from one of his or her ego states - Parent (values),
Adult (rationality) and Child (emotions & creativity). Communication works well, or is successful,
when the activated ego states are complementary or sympathetic to each other. For example, to
the question: "Have you seen my keys?" (Adult) the answer would be "Yes, they are on the table."
(Adult).

On the other hand, communication is unsuccessful when the roles oppose each other and a “game”
begins. So, to the question: "Have you seen my keys?" (Adult), the other person answers "Oh no,
not again! You always lose everything, you're just like a child!" (Critical Parent). It is easy to see
that such an exchange can degenerate very quickly.

Many of our problems come from transactions which are unsuccessful. Transactional analysts are
trained to recognize which ego states people are transacting from and to follow the transactional
sequences so they can intervene and improve the quality and effectiveness of communication.

According to Berne, there are three ways in which we transact or communicate with each other
and each method has its own set of consequences. It is useful to understand what happens when
we use each method, if we want to enjoy successful communication with others.
Complementary Transactions
A complementary transaction (also referred to as a reciprocal transaction) is one in which person
A says something from one ego state that invites a response from person B from a complementary
ego state. For example, if person A says “I think you need to go and wash your dirty face” from a
Parent ego state they are inviting person B to respond from their Child ego state and comply with
something like “OK.”

Equally, the conversation could be Adult to Adult:

Person A: “It’s lovely weather for this time of year.”

Person B: “Yes, isn’t it nice to see the sun.”

Or Child to Parent:

Person A: “Ow! I’ve cut myself”

Person B: “Oh dear, come here and let me clean it up for you”.

There are other combinations such as Child to Child and Parent to Parent etc.

The important thing to understand is that whilst the transactions remain complimentary the
conversation can go on indefinitely. Clearly it will stop at some stage, but this psychologically
balanced exchange can continue for some time. (If you want to learn to do small talk, just
respond from the ego state the person you are talking to is inviting you to come from and you can
chat forever!)

Further Examples:

A: 'Have you written the report?' (Adult to Adult)

B: 'Yes - I'm about to email it to you.' (Adult to Adult)

A: 'Would you like to skip this meeting and go watch a film with me instead?' (Child to Child)
B: 'I'd love to - I don't want to work anymore. What should we go and see?' (Child to Child)

A: 'You should have your room tidy by now!' (Parent to Child)

B: 'Will you stop hassling me? I'll do it eventually!' (Child to Parent)

Crossed Transactions
In a crossed transaction the response to the stimulus is from an ego state other than the one that
has been invited. For example, when person A says “I think you need to go and wash your dirty
face” person B responds with “Don’t be so rude!” Here person A is inviting a Child ego state
response but receives a Parent ego state response. They are likely to be a bit confused as a
result.

Communication failures are typically caused by a 'crossed transaction'.

Further Examples:

A: “Can you tell me what time it is?” (Adult)

B: “Why are you always rushing me?” (Adapted Child)

A: “Can you tell me what time it is?” (Adult)

B: “You are always late anyway. Why do you care?” (Critical Parent)

A: 'Have you written that report?' (Adult to Adult)

B: “Will you stop hassling me? I'll do it eventually!” (Child to Parent)
 This is a crossed transaction likely to produce problems in the workplace. 'A' may respond
with a
Parent-to-Child transaction; for instance:
A: “If you don't change your attitude, you'll get fired.”

A: “Is your room tidy yet?” (Parent to Child)

B: “I'm just going to do it, actually.” (Adult to Adult)
This is a more positive crossed transaction. There is, however, the risk that 'A' will feel that
'B' is acting responsibly and not playing their expected role, and the conversation will develop
into:
A: “I can never trust you to do things!” (Parent to Child)
B: “Why don't you believe anything I say?” (Child to Parent)

Ulterior Transactions
Berne says that we can communicate on two levels. There is the social message – what we say,
and the psychological message – what we mean.

In the case of an ulterior transaction the explicit social conversation occurs in parallel with an
implicit psychological transaction; for example:
A: “I need you to stay late at the office with me.” (Adult words), body language indicates sexual
intent (flirtatious Child)
B: “Of course.” (Adult response to Adult statement), winking or grinning (Child accepts the hidden
motive).

Sometimes the social and psychological message do not match. Sarcasm is a great example of
this. When someone is sarcastic, what they say is the opposite of what they mean. The person
who they are being sarcastic to picks up the psychological message rather than the social
message. When this happens the transaction is said to be ulterior.

(Member 4)
Transactional Analysis of Life Positions: (The Games we play)
There are two more key concepts in Transactional Analysis – Strokes and Games

Strokes:
Eric Berne defined a stroke as the “fundamental unit of social action”. A stroke is a unit of
recognition, when one person recognizes another person. A stroke can be physical, verbal or non-
verbal and so could be a hand shake, a compliment or a nod of the head. It could also be a “Hello”,
“Go away!” or a dismissive wave of the hand. All of these acknowledge that the other person exists.

Berne introduced the idea of strokes into Transactional Analysis based upon the work of Rene
Spitz, a researcher who did pioneering work in the area of child development. Spitz observed that
infants deprived of cuddling, touching and handling (in other words, not receiving any physical
strokes) were more likely to experience emotional and physical difficulties.

Berne took Spitz’s observations of these infants and developed theories about the needs of adults
for strokes. Berne postulated that adults do need physical contact just like infants, but have learned
to substitute other types of recognition for physical stimulation. So while an infant needs cuddling,
an adult craves a smile, a wink, a hand gesture, or some other form of recognition. Berne defined
this requirement of adults to receive strokes by the term “recognition-hunger” or “stroke-hunger”.
He said that we are all desperately seeking strokes from others and that a lot of what we do is in
order to be stroked.
Understanding how people give and receive both positive and negative strokes, and changing the
unhealthy patterns of stroking are important aspects of TA.

Types of Strokes
There is a great variety of stroke needs and styles present in the world – this is the result of
differences in wealth, culture and parenting methods – but all these can be divided into two big
categories of strokes: positive strokes and negative strokes. These can be conditional,
or unconditional.

As mentioned above, one major aspect that drives us is our need for strokes (recognition). The
ideal for us is to constantly receive positive strokes, but positive recognition is not always possible,
so we have to choose between getting negative strokes (negative recognition) or no strokes at all.

Berne reasoned that any stroke (positive or negative), is better than no stroke at all. For example,
if you are walking out of your house and you see your neighbour, you will most likely smile and say
“Hi.” Your neighbour will most likely say “Hello” back. This is an example of a positive stroke. Your
neighbour could also say nothing, but just frown at you. This is an example of a negative stroke.
Either case is better than no stroke at all, as when, for example, your neighbour ignores you
completely.

Getting some sort of recognition is more appealing than being ignored and feeling as if we are not
being seen at all, and so a child who doesn’t receive enough positive strokes will develop
behaviours that will at least attract negative strokes. Anything is better than nothing.

As far as “conditional” and “unconditional” strokes are concerned, Berne stated that
unconditional strokes are related to what you are (strokes for being), while conditional strokes are
about what you do (strokes for doing).

Implications of Strokes
It is important to recognize each person’s need for strokes and the impact strokes have on each
of us. Most of the time we don’t even think about it, but when we greet someone, when a stranger
smiles at us, when someone moves their chair slightly in a restaurant so we can pass through, that
means we’re being recognized. Every time someone does anything to recognize another, that
person is offering a stroke. Most of the time, between people, there are several strokes going back
and forth simultaneously.

In a way, needing strokes is the same as needing people to acknowledge that we exist. The
philosophical question about the tree falling in the forest with nobody around to hear the noise is
relevant. If nobody hears the noise, did it really ever exist? If a person is not being stroked, is that
person’s existence real?

The question sounds terrifying to some, and considering how its roots start growing from the
moment of birth (or, according to some theories, from even earlier on), when the infant’s survival
depends on his existence being acknowledged, it’s easy to understand why our stroke-hunger is
such a powerful driving force.

It is interesting to note that although many people propound the death sentence to be the worst
form of punishment, it is not. Solitary confinement is. Numerous studies have documented the
negative effects of solitary confinement on prisoners. If prisoners are not mentally ill when entering
an isolation unit, by the time they are released their mental health has been severely compromised.
However, this is not true for those on death row.
Games
Berne defined certain socially dysfunctional behavioural patterns as "games." According to Berne,
Games are “sets of ulterior transactions, repetitive in nature, with a well-defined psychological
payoff.” These repetitive, devious transactions are principally intended to obtain strokes, but
instead they reinforce negative feelings and self-concepts, and mask the direct expression of
thoughts and emotions.