Contents
Externalization is a psychotherapeutic technique in which a person’s problem is seen not as an internal characteristic, but as some kind of external imaginary living entity that interferes with human life.
A closely related concept is subpersonality. Only a subpersonality is considered as something inside a person, a part of his personality, and when externalized, the problem is taken out of the person.
Externalization and the study of the impact of the problem
When a problem is described as an inherent characteristic of a person (a child is called, for example, a «stupid» or «hooligan»), this largely sets the range of his possible actions, and even more so — the possible interpretations of these actions. Unfortunately, teachers and psychologists often describe children in this way, using such “diagnostic”, pseudo-scientific terms as “uncontrollable”, “anxious”, “asocial”, etc. These terms form our expectations from the child, deprive him of self-confidence and give him a certain status in the school community.
Placing the problem outside is called externalization. This technique allows you to weaken the influence of shame and guilt, and free up a person’s ability to act.
The problem is viewed as a kind of imaginary entity, a living being that has its own goals, intentions and plans, as well as its own style of their implementation. After the narrative practitioner and the person who turned to him for help choose an appropriate name for the problem, the “mapping” of the problem’s impact on the person’s life takes place. In some cases, the word «mapping» can be taken literally — it is drawing a map of a person’s life, its different areas. Sometimes mapping is work on a speculative level, without «materialized» schemes.
In addition to the influence of the problem on the person, the narrative practice is also interested in the influence of the person’s actions on the problem — what he can do, think, etc., in order to limit the influence of the problem, to weaken it. When mapping the impact of an externalized problem, it is useful to keep three dimensions in mind: duration, breadth, and depth.
Duration implies questions such as: “How long has this problem been around?”, “When did it start?”, “Did it get better or worse over time?”. Here you can also talk about a possible future (“if, for example, everything develops in the same direction as now …”). You can draw a «lifeline» of the problem.
The breadth implies the prevalence of the problem in different areas of life, such as: feelings, states, self-image, attitude to different areas of life, relationships with people, behavior in the classroom, school success, climate in the family, friendship, study and other affairs, plans professional development, sports, parties, etc.
Depth describes the intensity of the impact of the problem: “How hard is it pressing on you?”, “Is it always so hard, or are there moments/situations when it gets easier?”, “On a scale of 1 to 100, indicate how much of your life depression has taken over ?”, “Has depression convinced you of something that goes against your previous self-image?”
Narrative practitioners are convinced that the roots of problems lie in the discourses around us; problems are applied to the life of an individual «from the outside», from (and through) the process of interaction in the context. Thus, externalization brings problems back to where they should be. Externalization makes possible a more casual, even mischievous, approach to serious, painful problems. Typically, externalization continues and develops throughout the counseling process. It rarely happens that in the first meetings it is possible to arrive at a neat externalizing formulation that remains true and unchanged in subsequent sessions. We should not forget that in people’s lives there can be several problems confused with each other.
What and how is externalized
When externalizing, remember not to rush into externalizing the first thing the client talks about as a problem. You need to listen to a fuller description of the situation and the client’s thoughts so that the externalized description of the problem that you create captures its breadth and complexity. Perhaps you should first explain to the person who asked for help what you are going to do. You could say something like this: “Sometimes I look at problems as something external to people and explore how problems affect people. This helps to look at the problem in a new way and, accordingly, to find ways to overcome it — such that they did not come to mind before. Do you mind if we try this approach for your situation and see if it works?”
It is quite normal to call an as-yet unexplored problem «this», «it», «this problem», or «these difficulties». Such designations give the consultant time to explore the problem and avoid overly narrowing the problem statement. Then take on the task of naming the problem with the client together. To do this, you can remind the client about what expressions he used to describe it. Sometimes it is useful to refer to descriptions and names of similar problems given by other clients. Then you can play «hot-cold»: «Let’s say that this is the name for the problem — this is» heat. And what name would you suggest for her to make it “hot”? The title of the problem should reflect the severity of the problem for the client. If instead of the emotionally loaded terms «humiliation» or «bullying» we use the terms «conflict» or «bad class relations», we can do a lot of harm. If the name of the problem does not match the client’s experience, the counseling situation can serve as a confirmation to him that his story is not being heard or understood.
If the client brings several problems, there is a danger that the one that the consultant plans for externalization may not be the most significant, not the most relevant for the client. You should ask him what exactly is relevant, what would be important to work with right now. Externalization has its most powerful impact when it is directed at the self-evident positions of the dominant internalizing discourse. Feelings such as resentment, anger, indignation, embarrassment, shame, and guilt indicate the presence of this discourse and its impact on a person. Instead of externalizing the feelings themselves, one should ask about the situation that provokes them and externalize the situation itself. For example, if a girl is offended because gossip is spread about her at school, you should externalize Gossip and say that Gossip causes offense. If in this gossip the girl is called “fat trust”, but what needs to be externalized as a problem is not Overeating (because in this case the problem is internalized again as a lack of willpower, etc.), but Ideal Body Image, which affects the mind of those who spread gossip and undermines the self-esteem of the girl herself.
It can be useful to personify an externalized problem (this works especially well with children, but with some adults it is also good). In this case, we ask the client not only to give the problem a name, but also to describe what features characterize it as a person: the problem can be cunning, greedy, vindictive, gloating or discouraged. The personification of the problem makes conversations about change more lively and dramatic.
Other meanings of the term
A term denoting the general direction of mental processes, expressed in the attribution by the individual of the attributes of internal phenomena to the external world …
The process by which the psychic image appears outside of ITSELF; whereby an «internal OBJECT» (see also INTERNAL) is projected onto some object in the external world. In this sense, it is synonymous with PROJECTION and is the opposite of INTROJECTION and INTERNALIZATION. Fairbairn, however, uses the terms «externalization» and «internalization» in his understanding to describe the localization of objects outside and inside oneself during the transitional stage of development. See FAIRBAIRN PSYCHOPATOLOGY REVISED; RECEPTION; QUASI-INDEPENDENCE.