English (United Kingdom)French (Fr)Russian (CIS)Espa
Home Neurothèque Les Bases Interaction - Interactional Analysis Practice
PDF Imprimer Envoyer
Note des utilisateurs: / 4
MauvaisTrès bien 
Neuropiraterie - Les Bases
Écrit par NHA   
Vendredi, 03 Juillet 2009 20:49
There are no translations available.


Interactional Analysis Practice



(For the basics on interaction itself, read Interaction & Core Conditions: The Basics in the Basics section of the library.)

There are several aspects of interactional analysis, briefly [with their related fields in brackets] they are:

  • Situational anaylsis (cognitive social psychology)
  • Discourse analysis (critical discursive psychology)
  • Plot mapping (phenomenology)
  • Learning experiments (cognitive social psychology)
  • Power negotiation analysis (social psychoanalysis)


We're going to look only at the first method here because it's the easiest to start with and it's fun. If you get into advanced NH you will be taking your pick of all these techniques and choosing those most useful to you personally.

An Interactional analysis is a tool like a Functional analysis except it is aimed at situations and behaviors rather than brains and networks. We are analyzing behavior in various situations to determine who is, and who is not, interacting, and to look at what may be getting in the way of that. This enables us to see patterns of interaction that succeed, and patterns of action/reaction (nonuse or wronguse) that don't succeed and that lead to problems. When you get into it, this becomes a great game to play anywhere social in real life too.



Interactional Analysis in all its forms is based on our growing knowledge of how intelligence works, and what intelligence can do as expressed through interaction. You will also encounter this technique in the tutorials. The tutorials are a training program for mental fitness, strength, and flexibility; and it is not coincidental that these are the skills necessary for success in most fields. In the modern world, adaptation to stressful environments and events is still a survival and thriving skill, just as it was in ancient times when a human's ability to hunt big scary things and hit them accurately with spears without being afraid would have been survival skills. Today the mind is still our most expedient tool for personal (and group) success.

Awareness of the power of interaction enables a smart personal strategy for life, or 'personal autonomy', is something all happy, sane and successful people have in common, and this is an ability based on certain habits of mind that can be learned. This doesn't mean that all successful people are smarter or braver or more willing to take risks than anyone else. These habits of thought can be used by anyone; successful people are just the ones who figured out these strategies for themselves early on or were taught them by others. Interactional analysis is one such strategic skill.

It doesn't matter whether you want to use such strategies in running a successful company, being an amazing racing driver, mastering new intellectual skills, or successfully raising a family and keeping emotionally healthy relationships together, Interactional analysis is a tool that works for all scenarios because there is no life situation that intelligence applied strategically to cannot improve.

In situational analysis we look at life situations in terms of interactions, and use that overview to apply the decision-making skills that lead to both understanding what interaction is through experience, and achieving successful outcomes. By analysis of our own interactions (later) we can be confident that we are employing behaviors to increase our success in different kinds of situations (business, health, relationships, creativity etc).



You should treat Interactional Analysis as a game. In order to play, you need to read the introductory notes on Interaction and core conditions in the basics section of the library. At the very least, you need to know about the three basic responses we call 'nonuse' 'wronguse' and 'interaction'.

By going through the quizzes below (we will give you an example scenario and answer first), you will see examples of all three types of responses from a fictional group of people (called “the group”) placed in various situations. Go through each scenario and see if you can spot who is stuck in NONUSE, who is stuck in WRONGUSE and who is interacting using the core conditions, (causing an INTERACTIVE event to take place). Some events do not have all three possibilities going on, but some do.

In each scenario, decide who you think is using which response, then scroll down and look at how your answers compare with ours. By analyzing these situations you will start to get the hang of the types of behavior that lead to interaction, and you can copy them. You'll soon start seeing ways to enable an interaction in various circumstances in real life. Once you do that, you won't need us to tell you what a difference it makes!

(for advanced users) Consider how you personally would have behaved in each situation, and work out how often you would have been able to interact. In the situations where you feel that you would not, work out why.


Practice & Variation

By using interactional analysis, you can practise interaction in imaginary circumstances and get into the habit of thinking in a way that's in the interests of success. You can then start to apply the same technique in real life in your own situations.

(In all cases below, the names used are for illustration purposes only and bear no deliberate resemblance to real persons.)


Example scenario & answer

  • Alice, Bob, Carl and Donna ('the group') are invited to a party. At the party, they notice that the new DVD player is the same one that was stolen from their house two months previously.
  • Alice says they should call the police.
  • Bob says they should steal it back surreptitiously and leave immediately.
  • Carl says it doesn't matter a toss because they have already got a better model to replace it, but they should ask the owner where they got it from.
  • Donna pours her drink into it.



Alice, Bob and Donna are all stuck in wronguse. They are assuming that the new owner is the original thief. They have no proof for this (it could have been bought from a second-hand shop or off ebay). In all their actions and reactions, somebody loses.

If Carl had just said it didn't matter, this would have been nonuse (nobody gains anything), but his decision to talk to the owner turns this into an interaction. He wants to find out more (always wise). If the new owner says they bought it new from a store, he will discover that there is some dishonesty here and judge the person accordingly. If it was bought second-hand or given as a gift, he may discover who was the original thief. He can then tell the new owner what has happened and not to trust the seller, making a new ally. He is open minded and assuming nothing without proof.


Interactional Analysis Quiz 1

Use the same method to analyze the situations below


1. The group are camping. They return from a night out to find all their food and drink gone. There are empty cans outside a neighboring tent and sounds of drunken laughter from within.

Alice says, “Well I'm glad someone else was happy tonight too!”

Bob gets really angry, does nothing, but decides to glower at the neighbors for the rest of the holiday.

Carl would have gone round the next morning and asked if they'd seen anyone stealing your stuff, but he can't, because…

Donna sets fire to their tent at 4am.


2. The group see an old lady shoplifting some food from a multinational supermarket.

Alice thinks they should call the manager, get her arrested, and testify for the prosecution.

Bob promptly creates a diversion to help her escape.

Carl steals some more food and gives it to her outside.

Donna says they should have ignored it, since it's none of their business anyway.


3. The group come back from lunch and notice that someone has left a magazine prominently in their workspace, opened at an article about personal hygiene.

Alice goes home and soaks in bubble bath, shampoo and disinfectant for six hours.

Bob stands up, waves the magazine and shouts, “Who put this here?”

Carl goes and sits as close as possible to the person who owns up, embracing them and breathing over them at every opportunity.

Donna goes home and asks her friends, “hey, do I smell bad?”


4. An acquaintance tells the group they are marrying a beautiful 17-year-old they met in Thailand. Their partner-to-be cannot speak their language and has no money.

Alice tells them she admires their courage and romance.

Bob tells them that these are the actions of a desperate old lecher.

Carl asks if their partner-to-be has any single friends.

Donna asks them if they realize they are going to get a lot of sarcastic comments as people will think the partner-to-be is a “gold-digger” who is just after cash and/or citizenship in a better place.


5. The group are stopped on the street by a woman doing a survey. They are asked for their opinion on the economy.

Alice suggests that the current government should be tarred and feathered in a public place.

Bob stares blankly at her and says, “What's an economy?”

Carl tells her his mother told him not to talk to strangers.

Donna says she hasn't got time right now, but would be delighted to do an online survey, and hands over the email address of someone she knows is dodgy.


6. Work is under new management and the group all get a promotion. However, the new manager keeps asking them to do non-work-related things like order flowers for his wife, pick up his shopping, and post letters.

Alice flatly refuses, waving her job specification at him.

Bob starts making deliberate mistakes in these jobs, like ordering coal for his wife and squashing his shopping on the way back.

Carl asks him if he needs his toenails cutting or his tires changed.

Donna tells him he needs a personal assistant and says she'd consider the job if it paid more than her current one.


7. The group are at a charity sale, where the proceeds are going to help refugees from a war-torn country. They see a valuable painting for sale at $2.50

Alice says they should tell the organizers immediately.

Bob wants to buy the painting, then auction it on ebay for the charity.

Carl wants to buy the painting and auction it on ebay and keep the money

Donna wants to buy the painting at $2.50 because she really likes it and wants to hang it on her wall.


8. The group are having dinner with an acquaintance and his child. The child is being completely anti-social, loud and aggressive.

Alice wishes she could give it a good slap.

Bob is remembering that he was once a child, and was maybe even as irritating as this.

Carl goes and sits on the porch with a bottle of beer and an ipod.

Donna asks the child if she'd like to come play on the swings in the yard.


9. In a local restaurant, the people on the next table are being extremely rude and offensive to the waiters.

Alice ignores them, but spends the rest of the evening thinking of what she could [and should] have done or said.

Bob asks them to keep their bigoted ignorance to themselves.

Carl slams his glass down and shouts, “Oy! Racist filth! Outside, NOW!”

Donna leans over and slips a laxative into their coffee pot while they are staring at her breasts.


10. An acquaintance asks the group what they think of a new dayglo purple spandex catsuit they have just spent $300 on.

Alice asks them if they're wearing it for a bet.

Bob asks the name of the sci-fi movie they are appearing in.

Carl offers to beat up the shop assistant who sold it to them.

Donna says it's not the sort of thing she likes, regardless of who's wearing it, but what matters is do they like it themselves?


11. The group are offered tickets to see a favorite band in concert by Eve, whom they really dislike.

Alice refuses, and dislikes Eve even more for offering.

Bob goes, enjoys the band, and uses a combination of pretending to be drunk and standing next to the PA to drown out Eve's dull conversation.

Carl goes, determined to get pissed and leary and ruin Eve's night out.

Donna goes, but hardly gets to hear the band for politely listening to Eve moaning all night.


12. The neighbors wake everybody up at 4am, by shouting and banging car doors as they get home from a night out.

Alice does nothing, because she thinks she probably does thoughtless things sometimes that the neighbors find equally annoying.

Bob gets up at 7am, puts the washing machine on and sings opera badly.

Carl buys one of those huge sprung bear traps and leaves it on their drive.

Donna does nothing, because she thinks if she were tired enough it wouldn't have woken her up.



Answers to Interactional Analysis Quiz 1

1. If Alice is telling the truth, and the loss of goods has been no big deal to her, then this is an interaction. She also gains because she will be wiser about leaving things lying around in future. If she is being dishonest though it could be a nonuse [“Well, what can I do?”]

Bob and Donna are doing a wronguse, automatically assuming the neighbors are guilty even though it could have been someone else. Bob's introverted wronguse means he loses even more than just the goods, poisoning himself with cortisol all week. Donna's extroverted wronguse means the neighbors –who may still be innocent- also lose, but this doesn't get her the goods back, so she loses too.

Carl would have achieved the best interaction outcome –he's not automatically assuming guilt, but seeking more information –if the neighbors look guilty when he talks to them he will also have more information and can decide what to do next. Everybody gains something from the situation.


2. Alice does an obvious wronguse –takes it upon herself to judge a situation without knowing all the facts about what is 'beneficial' in reality (societal 'law' is rarely beneficial in real life, due to being “made-up stuff” that is not an integral part of reality). Genuine laws are aligned with reality. Many of them are 'laws of nature'. In reality, it is not 'just' that little old ladies (or entire African villages) should starve while multinational supermarket chains make billions.

Donna is doing a nonuse. –“Well, what can I do?” She doesn't lose, but she doesn't gain –nothing changes.

Bob and Carl achieve an interactive outcome, they open up the possibility of making a new friend, while causing no harm to anyone else. Carl's example opens up a new dimension of interaction because we are reminded that, just like you eating a chicken, the entity involved with the least potential for intelligence (in this case the supermarket) does in fact lose. Energy is removed from the deleterious and given to the beneficial –this is known as “Robin Hood Style”, in which interaction only benefits the 'good guys'. Stealing from an asshole to give to the nice but needy is part of a rational morality rather than a legal one –another difference between reality and “made-up stuff”.

But what if Carl had been caught? Carl would then have revealed himself as not so intelligent as he thought he was, so he either gains knowledge [ie learns from his mistake] or he is relegated to 'less beneficial' from the perspective of reality.


3. Only Donna achieves an unquestioned interaction here. It's success depends on the honesty of her friends, but if they were not honest, they would not be her friends; they would only be acquaintances. (Take notice of the difference between the two; it is vital.)

Alice loses time and resources, never questioning the possibility that her judgment of the situation is presumptuous, and for that reason she is doing an introverted wronguse.

Bob and Carl are doing an extroverted wronguse. Neither of them questions the possibility that the magazine was left open at that page by sheer coincidence. Because Carl uses humor however, he may achieve an interaction if his colleague takes the joke in good form.


4. Carl and Donna achieve an interaction. Carl opens up the possibility of meeting new friends, and Donna solidifies her existing friendship by being helpful.

If Alice is being honest she achieves an interaction too, but she may be doing a nonuse by just being polite and/or sentimental.

Bob does an obvious wronguse, jumping to unproved conclusions. He is not using the core conditions, with which we assume everyone to be operating from the best intent unless their behavior proves otherwise.


5. Donna achieves an interaction here. She doesn't waste her own time, and inconveniences someone harmful. This is close to Robin Hood style, because she steals time from the deleterious.

Alice does a blatant wronguse.

Bob and Carl both use overt humor, so their interaction depends on whether the interviewer appreciates that. If she does, they may achieve an interaction too, and in the end it may be a better one (they could become friends and broaden the woman's own perspective). If the interviewer is irrevocably dumb, they have avoided wasting valuable time.


6. Alice does an obvious wronguse.

Bob does an introverted wronguse, which is more likely to annoy the boss rather than teach him a lesson, and at worst gives the impression he is incompetent.

Carl uses humor, but his success at interaction depends on the boss's ability to get the joke and learn from it.

Donna achieves an interaction only if the boss is receptive to the suggestion.


7. This is a difficult one, because there are many variables.

Alice could achieve an interaction if she makes friends with the organizers, and benefit the cause if the organizers are honorable and if the charity is worthwhile. But that's a lot of 'ifs'.

Bob gets a bit closer to straightforward interaction by cutting out one variable, but the outcome is still dependant on the integrity of the charity organizers.

Carl could achieve an interaction if the money is spent on beneficial things, but he is assuming that he has better use for the money than the charity does, and there is no proof for this yet. The charity may be a money-making scam, but it may be genuine.

Donna could achieve an interaction but it is dependant on how much inspiration she gains from the aesthetics of the painting over time versus whether the charity is legitimate or not; another unknown variable. She could just photograph the painting, and put a print on her wall!

Perhaps you begin to see how complex interaction can be, and how we can only choose the correct strategy when we are able to weigh many things against each other very fast in real time. This cannot be achieved by mere logic; it requires other aspects of intelligence that must be developed.


8. Alice does an introverted wronguse, poisoning herself getting wound up all day.

Bob may achieve an interaction, if he is trying to learn and to get perspective, but he is probably doing a nonuse [well, what can I do?]

Carl at first glance does a nonuse, opting out rather than interacting. He is however preserving his own peace of mind, and may make it plain to his host that it's not a fun household to visit. Carl's likelihood of successful interaction therefore depends on how intelligent his host is.

Donna achieves an interaction despite having to invest her own energy and time. She wins the gratitude of everyone involved and maybe teaches a lesson to their host as well. She sees exactly what is needed and provides it. The child is almost certainly the agent with the highest possibility for an increase in intelligence, consequently this is a high quality interaction.


9. Donna comes closest to achieving an interaction here. Her friends' respect for her will soar. The 'bad guys' will blame the food for their bad stomachs and will not return to the restaurant. If she confesses to the waiters later she will make more friends, and she has the personal satisfaction of imagining what will happen. Notice that Donna has a very cool strategy of going out 'prepared' (she has her secret laxative weapon in her bag).

Bob and Carl do an extroverted wronguse. Although their actions may win them friends among the clientele and staff, they risk personal damage and damage to the property. The offenders are unknowns and could be complete nutters who carry knives.

Alice does a nonuse [well, what can I do?], but with a touch of introverted wronguse in retrospect, poisoning herself with toxic hormones.


10. Alice, Bob and Carl are all using humor, but it is unlikely to be shared by their acquaintance, whose fondness for them diminishes, and this is therefore a WRONGUSE.

Donna achieves an interaction. She does not offend, but points out to their acquaintance the importance of their own opinion over other people's.


11. Alice and Donna do a nonuse, but well, what can they do? Donna may even have given Eve the mistaken impression that she wants to be closer friends!

Carl does a wronguse. He's not enjoying the band; he's just being nasty. Nobody wins.

Bob gets the closest to an interaction here because he gets to enjoy the band and avoids overtly offending anybody (the worst that can happen is that someone who he doesn't like will get bored with him).


12. Alice may be doing a nonuse, but she may achieve an interaction if she's being honest.

Bob and Carl both do an extroverted wronguse.

Donna achieves an interaction, because her decision is based on the truth and is quite insightful. In reality, being awake when you are not tired is a good idea, so she wins extra time. The neighbors are doing her a favor! Genuinely tired people (including babies) will sleep through anything.



Interactional Analysis Quiz 2

1. A friendly stranger in a pub invites the group to a party. When they arrive they realize that they know absolutely nobody there.

Alice pretends to be a millionaire, and has a good laugh watching how people respond.

Bob drinks everything he can find, behaves disgracefully, and ends up having to spend the next month apologizing to or avoiding people.

Carl spends all night in the kitchen, talking to people when they come in for drinks.

Donna starts doing the washing up


2. The group goes to visit an acquaintance in hospital. Against doctors orders, the patient has pleaded with them to smuggle in some cigarettes.

Alice refuses, saying that smoking really isn't good for you.

Bob gets them a packet of 10 very low tar cigs.

Carl takes in 500 fags, an ounce of rolling tobacco and a little bit of cannabis for good measure.

Donna takes in some nicotine patches.


3. An acquaintance invites the group to a drumming and chanting weekend for 'consciousness-raising'. It costs $200.

Alice tells them to go get a life.

Bob tells them his consciousness is raised enough to spot a new age ripoff when he sees one.

Carl accepts, and looks forward to a weekend of rows with hippies.

Donna contacts the consciousness-raising group on their website and tells them she would like to have her consciousness raised but hasn't got any money.


4. A very boring stranger keeps trying to start a conversation with the group in a cafe. Eventually he asks directions to the library, where they are going next.

Alice starts directing him to the sewage works on the other side of town.

Bob draws him an accurate map, then tells the others he didn't really want to go to the library today.

Carl says he'll show the guy the way there because he's going too.

Donna says she'll go with them, intending to loudly accuse him of making indecent suggestions when they get there.


5. A barkeeper refuses to serve the group, saying he doesn't want 'their sort' in the pub.

Alice squares up to her full height, does her best evil glare and says, “I'll be back”.

Bob goes home, gets changed into a suit, slicks his hair down and goes back in wearing shades, ordering a drink in a foreign accent.

Carl phones up about 50 more 'your sorts' to go in and ask for drinks.

Donna tells the barman she will report him for discrimination against the disabled, and limps out, later phoning the brewery and doing just that.


6. The group sees two kids in school uniform bullying a third.

Alice runs over and kicks the bullies in the ass.

Bob pulls them apart, telling the bullies they're assholes.

Carl tells the kids that school is not compulsory, and gives them all an 'education otherwise' leaflet.

Donna complains to the school.


7. The group are self-employed and need to employ someone. An acquaintance submits a badly-put-together application with a note saying, “since we're mates, I hope I'll get the job!”

Alice thinks they should get the job.

Bob writes back to them, saying they decided not to employ anyone they knew because others would think it favoritism.

Carl says they should tell the cheeky sod to piss off.

Donna says they should refuse and tell the person someone else agreed to do the job for free.


8. An acquaintance tells the group she thinks they're all a bit nuts and should go in for therapy.

Alice tells her she may be misunderstanding the group's sense of humor.

Bob tells her that suggestion is obviously a cry for help and she is welcome to join in a group therapy session.

Carl tells her that's no way to talk to the emperor of France.

Donna goes round to her house later dressed up in rags and kicks the door in, shouting, “I've found the tunnel, Johnson! It's this way!”


9. At the movies, the people on the row in front of the group talk all the way through the movie.

Alice says nothing, but gently places pieces of popcorn on top of their heads.

Bob keeps saying “Shhhhhhhhh!!!!” every time they speak.

Carl moves seat and spills his cola on them as he does so.

Donna threatens them with sickening violence.


10. The group discover a housemate's diary in the communal living room.

Alice says they should not read it in order to respect privacy.

Bob goes through it and makes detailed notes, to be used in any future rows.

Carl reads it and says nothing.

Donna goes through it and changes all the bits she disagrees with.


11. The group overhears the neighbor talking about them...”So noisy...terrible taste in furniture...etc.”

Alice decides to refit the house, and whispers for the next six months.

Bob paints the garden wall with a mural of war scenes and starts learning to play the bagpipes.

Carl puts on the sort of music the neighbors listen to and starts dancing around the garden in a hawaiian shirt just like the neighbor wears.

Donna invites them round for coffee.


12. The group are staying with some friends, who start to have an enormous row in their presence.

Alice says “Excuse me for interrupting, but would you like us to bugger off?”

Bob goes and sits in the toilet until they've finished.

Carl goes out and spends the night wandering around the neighborhood

Donna joins in the row and keeps switching sides.



Answers to Interactional Analysis Quiz 2

1. Bob does an obvious wronguse. Alice amuses herself, but misses the chance to make new allies by being dishonest. If nobody at the party is interesting enough to befriend, she'd be better off going home. Carl and Donna are interacting; Carl is opening up the possibility of making new friends and so is Donna; doing something that needs to be done to keep the party going with a swing. The hosts are likely to be particularly pleased with her!


2. Alice is doing a wronguse (assuming things without enough information) and also possibly losing a potential friend (although we are told the person is currently only an acquaintance). Bob is playing it safe, but if the acquaintance is careless may end up annoying the doctor (another potential friend), although this is a possible interaction he also doesn't know enough, and could end up harming the patient.

Carl is doing a wronguse bigtime, he has no idea what medication this dude is on and could cause serious problems (if the patient is hypoglycemic, or has low BP, even death!) Donna's chance of achieving an interaction here is highest. The acquaintance may not be satisfied with the patches, but will at least see that she is trying to help, ditto the doctor. Donna will find out how sensible the acquaintance is, which gives her extra information, and if the dude is happy to use the patches she has made a new friend.

Nobody gets full marks here, however. A good interaction would be based on finding out as much as possible from both doctors and patient before proceeding.


3. Alice and Bob(and this may surprise you) are interacting. They have enough information to know that the people running the event are dodgy, and are being honest in expressing disgust. Alice doesn't express it in a very polite way, but the communication is only to an acquaintance, and is just rude enough to stop them inviting her again. If the acquaintance wishes to be closer friends with Alice, they will reconsider their attitude towards this event or ask Alice why she feels this way –and they will learn something, but this would be wronguse if Alice were talking to a friend.

Carl's behavior is clearly wronguse; he will lose resources and make enemies –everybody loses. Donna has the best interaction here, especially if she informs the acquaintance of what she is doing (the consciousness-raising group's reply may reveal things to them too).


4. Bob and Carl are interacting, as long as Bob is being honest about his situation. Alice and Donna are in wronguse. If the stranger had been offensive rather than just boring, though, Alice's solution would have been an interaction.


5. Alice is in wronguse. Her reaction is pointless and achieves nothing. Bob is also wasting his time –why does he want to drink in a place run by idiots and give his resources to them?

Carl's solution is funny, and also an interaction –his friends learn where not to drink and the word spreads that the barkeeper is dodgy, enabling sensible people to avoid the place. Donna is also interacting, and her solution may be the best –the barkeeper has an opportunity to interact by changing his mind, and if he doesn't, he may get into trouble and possibly even be replaced. (If Donna had said nothing and then reported him, however, this would have been a wronguse).

NB This is a genuine example, although the names have been changed. In real life, half a dozen friends all reported the same person in a similar manner. It succeeded in getting a rude, violent barkeeper replaced by the brewery concerned, to the benefit of a whole village.)


6. Only Carl manages an interaction here. Everyone else misses the point that they have no idea what led to this situation –how do they know that the 'bullied' kid has not been bullying the others for months and is finally getting their own medicine as the victims get together for defense? They know nothing about the situation, and Alice, Bob and Donna are in wronguse. Donna slips from wronguse to nonuse and hands the problem over to 'professionals'. Carl's response could ultimately remove some or all of these kids from school and solve the problem completely, and also spreads the word about alternative education. He speaks to all three with equal respect and is using the core conditions.


7. Nobody manages an interaction here. This is some classic non-thinking, and everybody is in wronguse. The only relevant questions here are: can this person do the job? Has anyone else applied who may do it better?


8. Alice is interacting here, giving the acquaintance an opportunity to get to know the group better. Everyone else uses humor, but it's all wronguse. If the acquaintance is dumb enough to think the group is nuts in the first place, she won't understand the jokes and could well be frightened, especially by Donna's behavior (and Donna could even get herself hurt).

If other, more intelligent people or 'unknowns' were present, for example at a party, Carl's response would be a good one, repelling the idiot and attracting anyone smarter to spend more time in his company, but in this case the acquaintance is alone and the response pointless.


9. Again, nobody manages an interaction here. Alice amuses herself, but it doesn't solve the problem. In all cases, everybody loses. They don't consider interactive options (for example asking the people quietly to keep it down a bit, sitting somewhere else, surreptitiously telling the attendant that the people in front of them are taking drugs, using their own mental ability to tune out annoyance).


10. Carl achieves the best interaction here. He gets the information (which may be useful) but respects privacy and tells no one. Alice would have achieved an interaction if the diary had been in someone's private space, but it isn't; it's in a communal area. The owner needs to learn that private things should be kept in private places, and it's good they can learn this now (when with friendly housemates) than make the mistake somewhere really disastrous.

Bob and Donna are both in wronguse, and in these circumstances Alice is in nonuse. There is no point ignoring what could be useful information, as long as intent is pure. (What if Carl got to the end and read “god I'm so depressed, I wish someone would help me”?)


11. Alice is in introverted wronguse, scared of what other people think of her. Bob is in extroverted wronguse and will simply cause more anxiety.

Carl's solution is very funny, so it's an interaction with his housemates, but unless he wants to keep it up for months it will not lead to interaction with the neighbors, so it's a waste of time and virtually a nonuse. Only Donna is interacting. When people know nothing about you, they will quite happily make stuff up. At least she has a chance of making friends.


12. Bob and Carl are in nonuse (well, what can they do?) Donna is in obvious wronguse. Alice risks injury if the row is vicious, but is the closest to interaction. If the whole group had got together and said, “Give us a ring when you're finished and we'll visit again” and promptly left, this would have been the best interaction, especially if followed up, when contacted, with “We really like you, but we're not coming round if you guys are rowing, okay?” This gives a clear message that the behavior is unacceptable and repels nice people from visiting. It also separates the behavior from the people, which is a great thing to do in interaction.


You can find more interactional analysis practice in the article called 'More Interactional Analysis Practice' (in progress) in the Methods & Technology section of the library.


Mise à jour le Vendredi, 02 Août 2013 13:47