Journal of Counselor Preparation and Supervision

Volume 14 Number 4 Article 13

2021

A Practical Application of Self Psychology in Counseling

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.sacredheart.edu/jcps

Part of the Clinical Psychology Commons, Counseling Psychology Commons, and the Counselor
Education Commons

Recommended Citation
Wright, A. (2021). A Practical Application of Self Psychology in Counseling. Journal of Counselor
Preparation and Supervision, 14(4). Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.sacredheart.edu/jcps/vol14/
iss4/13

This Counselor Education Teaching Idea is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@SHU. It
has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Counselor Preparation and Supervision by an authorized editor of
DigitalCommons@SHU. For more information, please contact [email protected],
[email protected].
A Practical Application of Self Psychology in Counseling

Abstract
Self psychology has undergone a significant evolution since it was initially developed and proposed by
Heinz Kohut, including broadening conceptions of what purposes selfobjects can serve for individuals. Its
application to counseling has been as an organizing framework and overarching theory of human
development and psychopathology. The concept of selfobjects, however, has the potential to provide
specific guidance and technique in micro-interactions within counseling. Individual moments within
counseling present opportunities for a counselor to intervene, and self psychology can provide a
deliberate decision-making tool for how to respond. Being deliberate in interventions throughout
counseling has the potential to improve outcomes. Case examples are presented to illustrate the model.

Keywords
Self Psychology, Counseling Process, Counseling, Intervention, Counseling Education

This counselor education teaching idea is available in Journal of Counselor Preparation and Supervision:
https://digitalcommons.sacredheart.edu/jcps/vol14/iss4/13
 Although self psychology has evolved and transformed, Heinz Kohut’s original notion that

other people (selfobjects) perform functions in life that individuals cannot perform for themselves

has persisted (Basch, 1991; Goldberg, 1998; Kohut, 1991; 2009). The premise of the counselor

serving selfobject functions, similarly, has persisted (Kaufman, 1996; Rohde & Roser, 2019). This

is true, even though the term “selfobject” is often not used to describe the counselor serving a

particular purpose that a client cannot accomplish themselves (Benson, 1992; Cooper, Norcross,

Raymond-Barker, & Hogan, 2019; Fenchel & Flapan, 1986; Ullma, 2006).

Self psychology has the potential to offer counselors and counselors-in-training an explicit

model for how to interact with clients moment-to-moment. Counselor education often focuses on

the overall relationship, process, and ‘stance’ that counselors-in-training take with clients

(Sommers-Flanagan, 2015; Swank, Lambie, & Witta, 2012). However, explicit models for the

content of counselors’ interactions is often either focused on microskills, which are problematic in

their lack of theoretical basis and model for deciding when to employ which ones (Ridley, Kelly,

& Mollen, 2011), or require advanced study beyond the master’s degree, such as postgraduate

psychoanalytic training. Counselors are often taught some skills for how to interact with clients

globally, but they are often not given explicit models for deciding exactly when and how to employ

these skills (e.g., domains of competence are most often evaluated in terms of overall abilities to

build relationships, be facilitative of change, etc., rather than specific models applied in sessions;

Swank, Lambie, & Witta, 2012). The model presented in this paper offers a straightforward,

concrete model to help guide counselors and counselors-in-training in this decision making

process.
 Self Psychology

Self psychology is built upon the premise that people have needs—deep, intrinsic needs to

be able to function properly in the world—that they cannot fulfill on their own (Basch, 1991;

Goldberg, 1998; Kohut, 1991; 2009). In order to meet these needs, they interact with what are

termed selfobjects, other people in their lives who help them fulfill these needs.

The original selfobjects delineated by Kohut (1991; Baker & Baker, 1987) consisted of

three primary functions: mirroring, twinship, and idealizing. Mirroring selfobjects provide support

and encouragement for the individual, especially when they cannot muster it themselves, mirroring

back to the person value and self-worth. Twinship selfobjects provide a sense of sameness,

likeness, and fitting in. They provide an empathic other throughout different journeys of an

individual’s life. Idealizing selfobjects provide calm and comfort, serving as a guide to individuals

in times of need. They are more directive and help people through turmoil in a calm, measured,

and experienced (or wise) way. Many have added other selfobject functions, from developmental

functions to unbridled affection (of pets, for example) to music (Goldberg, 1998), but the three

core, original selfobjects have permeated the literature on self psychology consistently.

Counselors as Selfobjects

Within a self psychology framework, counselors fulfill these selfobject needs for clients,

who most often have not had these needs consistently enough fulfilled in their lives (and thus

require reparative counseling). The idea that counselors fulfill psychological needs for clients is

ubiquitous in the field, even when they are not referred to in self psychology terms (Benson, 1992;

Cooper, Norcross, Raymond-Barker, & Hogan, 2019; Fenchel & Flapan, 1986; Ullma, 2006). The

evolution of this thought, and the associated literature on it, has focused on what overall purpose

a counselor can and does serve for an individual client. Across theories and literature, though, a
single counselor seems to serve many, varied purposes to each client, a complex tapestry of support

and guidance (Enns, 1993; Fonagy & Allison, 2014; Pilette, Berck, & Achber, 1995). The

counselor may serve multiple purposes at any given moment, may serve a consistent purpose

throughout, or may fluctuate between serving different functions for clients in counseling.

The discussion within the self psychology literature is often focused on individual

selfobjects (whether in counseling or in an individual’s everyday life) and what purpose they serve

for the individual that they cannot accomplish themselves. With the acknowledgement that

counseling includes both an overarching feeling and moment-to-moment interactions that are

driving change (Levitt, Butler, & Hill, 2006), counselors need to think about interventions and

interactions at a micro level, not just in terms of the overarching purpose they want to serve for

their clients.

When aligning the three traditional selfobject functions with interactions between

counselor and client, there is a strong tie to Rogers’ core components of effective counseling

(Rogers, 1957; 1959), which have so permeated the field of counseling. The mirroring selfobject—

again, a person who provides support and encouragement—aligns with unconditional positive

regard, as it reflects back positive and reassuring feedback to clients. The twinship selfobject—

again, a person who provides a sameness, likeness, and fitting in—aligns with Rogers’ goal of the

counselor being empathic, working toward joining with and normalizing the experience of the

client. Finally, the idealizing selfobject—again, a person who offers advice and guidance from a

place of expertise—aligns with the congruence ingredient in counseling, consisting of calm,

genuine guidance and feedback in the moment. However, Rogers intended for counselors to

embody all three of these relational traits consistently throughout the counseling relationship, from

interaction to interaction. Some critics of Rogers’ therapeutic stance have pointed to the
impossibility of holding all three of these necessary qualities throughout counseling, as well as

them being so non-directive that, while they build a comfortable environment, they may not be

sufficient for change in counseling (Kensit, 2000; Wachtel, 2007).

Reconciling the obvious utility of the three overarching Rogerian factors in establishing

and maintaining a safe, healthy, and productive counseling relationship with the practical

difficulties actually enacting them consistently (i.e., “being Rogers” in counseling, to which many

of us aspire, and most of us fail) is no easy task. Some have posited that simply striving for these

ideal traits is enough (Brooks & Cochran, 2016; Perlitz, 2016; Rihacek & Danelova, 2015).

However, counselors strive and fall flat. Counselors find moments within the counseling dyad

when they feel they have not been congruent, have not been empathic, or have not been

unconditionally positive. Further, there are moments when the three conditions contradict each

other; when a genuine reaction is not unconditionally positive or empathic, counselors may feel

inadequate at being fully Rogerian.

Selfobjects in Micro-Interactions

Moments in Counseling

Psychodynamic/interpersonal and cognitive-behavioral counselors (as well as everything

in between and beyond these theoretical orientations) have a host of options of how to respond,

ranging from questions to reflections, interpretations, acknowledgements, and guidance statements

(Wiser & Goldfried, 1996). And these do not even include the use of nonverbals, all which can

constitute interventions as well (Evans, 2008). How clients react to individual moments in

counseling can affect the therapeutic relationship, bring about or restrict change, and alter the

trajectory of a client’s life and functioning (Giorgi, 2011; Mahrer, 1988; Santos, Gonçalves, &
Matos, 2011). Each moment in counseling is an opportunity for the counselor to strengthen (or

weaken) the relationship, to better (or worsen) outcomes, and ultimately to be helpful.

Every counseling moment holds the opportunity for deliberate, measured response from

the counselor, and responses can be validating, invalidating, supportive, condescending,

misaligned, empowering, or some mixture of all these and more. The general orientation and

resulting relational stance of a counselor may be more aligned with one or two of the three

selfobject functions, which may make the decision at any one moment somewhat easier or more

likely. However, the flexibility afforded by at least considering alternative responses and

interventions may be quite beneficial to clients (Owen & Hilsenroth, 2014). There is no way of

knowing at this point which of the three choices will be the best, most useful, or most beneficial

choice in any given moment; though it probably does not need citation, it has been said that

“psychologists are not psychics” (Gyollai, 2020, para. 22) and cannot know definitively how

different responses may differentially turn out. But a model for being deliberate about how to

respond to clients in different given situations, such as applying a self-psychological framework,

may prove useful.

Selfobject Choices in Counseling Moments

Reconceptualizing the three primary selfobject functions within counseling from relational

stances and purposes served as entire objects, each of the three relational functions (i.e., mirroring,

twinship, and idealizing selfobject behaviors) can be seen as therapeutic choices for any given

moment in a counseling. That is, as counselors acknowledge that they intervene at multiple levels,

including very small interactions throughout the counseling process (Kiesler, 2004), they can treat

each opportunity to intervene as a choice that specifically addresses a client’s need at that very

moment. Any time a client interacts with a counselor, they are prompting a relational interaction
that can affect the relationship and therapeutic outcomes (Dietzel & Abeles, 1975; Lichtemberg &

Heck, 1986; Thomas et al., 2014; Tracey, 1985; Wampold & Kim, 1989). Counselors from all

different theoretical orientations understand that there are different options for how to respond in

any given moment, depending on how directive they want to be, how self-disclosing they choose

to be, how they feel in the moment about what the client is saying or doing, and a host of other

variables.

The decisions for counselors of how to respond in any given moment are largely

unconscious, or at least “intuitive” (Betan & Binder, 2010; Hartman, 1971). Taken moment to

moment, applying self-psychological principles to micro-level interactions, the counselor has a

choice of how to respond to clients (in both verbal and nonverbal ways): as an affirming mirror,

as an empathic twin, or as a guiding idealized object. These three options align with what a

counselor feels a client needs in the moment: to feel better (via an affirming, mirroring selfobject

intervention), to feel seen (via an empathic, twinship selfobject intervention), or to feel explicitly

helped (via a guiding, idealizing selfobject intervention). The following case examples illustrate

how selfobject decisions can guide counselor behavior in therapeutic moments.

Selfobject Decisions in Counseling: An Angry Moment

An adult client with a number of ambivalent feelings about his job came into his session

quite angry. His ambivalence generally comes from the fact that he loves the work he does, but he

does not feel valued in his current position, both from within (his boss and coworkers) and from

outside (respect within his given field). This particular session he was extremely upset about his

boss being “dismissive” toward him. While he generally allows his boss to be rude and even

inappropriate with him, he reported that during this past week, he actually yelled at his boss, telling

him to “go to hell!” From the client’s description of the situation, it did in fact sound like his boss
was inappropriately chastising him in front of colleagues, calling him names. Additionally, the

client’s response was confined to the boss’s office, after the public meeting, without any other

colleagues present. After reporting this interaction with his boss, he looked at the counselor,

obviously awaiting a response, at which point the counselor has a deliberate choice to make.

Choosing a Mirroring Selfobject Response

From a mirroring selfobject perspective, the goal of the counselor’s response in the moment

in response to the report of the client shouting at his boss would need to be affirming and mirror

back positive attributes of the client himself (Kohut, 2009). In this case, although the counselor

may feel that the client’s behavior was less than ideal, there are components that are positive. The

counselor cannot praise the client’s impulse control, or judgment, or cool-headedness. However,

what the counselor can offer is a reflection of the change in how the client handled a situation that

has occurred repeatedly and gone unaddressed.

From a mirroring selfobject perspective, the counselor said, “Wow! That took a lot of

guts!” In this moment, the client’s face shifted from somewhat apprehensive to seemingly relieved,

and in that moment, his high-energy, negative-valence (anger) demeanor relaxed into a lower-

energy, negative valence (frustration) one. This new demeanor allowed the counselor and client to

next think through what the situation might mean for the client moving forward in the company.

The mirroring, in that moment, allowed the client to calm himself and reflect, within the context

of his ever more supportive relationship with his counselor. However, in the moment, it ran the

risk of reinforcing what may be an unwise behavior pattern within his boss-employee relationship.

Choosing a Twinship Selfobject Response

From a twinship selfobject perspective, the goal of the counselor’s response in this moment

would be to empathize with the client and show the client that his situation and reaction are
understood (Kohut, 2009). A twinship response has the potential to be just as supportive as a

mirroring response in this situation, possibly without the risk of reinforcing the actual behavior

itself. The counselor would likely not have to work hard to generate a response that is empathic,

given the fact that empathy is one of counseling’s most widely used, deeply ingrained tools (Clark,

2010; Elliott, Bohart, Watson, & Greenberg, 2011).

In this case, the counselor said, “Wow, that situation sounds so tough.” This is a simple

statement, and for some may be too noncommittal, but it serves the purpose of conveying to the

client that the counselor understands what it is like to be in a difficult position like the client

described. The client’s reaction to this response looked strikingly different from the response to

the mirroring response: his high-energy, negative-valence (anger) demeanor actually heightened

in energy, with an immediate elaboration on his experience. “Yeah! It sucks! He has pushed me

and pushed me for so long, I just couldn’t take it anymore!” While his state did not change to one

that could reflect more soberly on the situation, his emotions in the moment did deepen and

intensify, such that he was communicating clearly with the counselor just how difficult and

untenable his situation with his boss is. The twinship, in that moment, validated his feelings and

allowed him to deepen and elaborate on them without shame.

Choosing an Idealizing Selfobject Response

From an idealizing selfobject perspective, the goal of the counselor’s response in this

moment is to provide calm but genuine feedback, specifically about the appropriateness of the

client’s response to his boss (Kohut, 2009). The risk of providing such a response is obviously to

engender shame in the client, conveying that his response was inappropriate in some way.

However, it is very likely that the client already knows that his response was not ideal, which is

why he brought it up and why he is looking pointedly at this moment for a response. Of course,
when delivering directive, challenging, or implicitly disapproving interventions, the counselor

must find a way to do so empathically and gently (Vanaerschot, 1993). But the heart of an

idealizing selfobject response should be calm and directive.

In this case, the counselor wondered aloud, “Ok…I wonder if there are other ways you

could have handled the situation in the moment.” This response certainly conveyed disapproval

for the client’s handling of the situation, but that disapproval may be entirely appropriate within

the framework of this counseling (so as not to reinforce such volatile or ill-advised behaviors).

When the client heard this, his apprehensive look turned to one of some resignation, and with a

sigh he said, “Yes…of course I could have handled it better.” His high-energy, negative-valence

(anger) demeanor turned to a low-energy, negative-valence (probably shame or embarrassment)

one, and the client and counselor engaged in a strategy to enumerate possible alternative reactions

in the situation and how they likely would have played out. Although this may not be appropriate

in all forms of counseling, there may in fact be room for counselor disapproval (as a form of

operant conditioning) toward ultimate therapeutic goals, and this is present across theoretical

orientations (Zeig, 1987). Whether a counselor thinks this is appropriate and likely to be useful in

the moment depends a great deal on the relationship with the client, as well as all the data the

counselor has collected about the client to that point.

Selfobject Decisions in Counseling: A Self-Doubting Moment

A woman has struggled with depression and anxiety for much of her life, and she has had

some recent difficulties in a romantic relationship, which ultimately ended recently. She has been

working with her counselor for about a year, and they have been taking a primarily cognitive-

behavioral approach to treatment, focusing a great deal on her symptoms, utilizing cognitive

restructuring and behavioral activation, and challenging her maladaptive beliefs. She came into
the session just after the breakup and, after a little bit of time, said, “I keep failing in life. I’ll never

be any good.” She did not look up at her counselor, though she did fall silent, looking down with

a forlorn demeanor. The counselor, feeling compassion for her, had to decide how to intervene

during this key moment.

Choosing a Mirroring Selfobject Response

From a mirroring selfobject perspective, the major priority for the counselor in this moment

is to reassure the client that she is a good person and, despite some setbacks, does not “keep failing

in life.” Although this moment is ripe for a cognitive intervention, the counselor may feel that such

an intervention would be more effective if they, as Pine (1985) would say, strike when the iron is

cold. That is, getting the client into a more stable, less emotionally-charged state may make her

better equipped to employ a cognitive strategy in the moment.

The counselor thus offered, “You’re forgetting all the great things you’ve done and that

have happened for you!” This is a purely supportive statement, and often counter to what would

be considered therapeutic in a given moment. However, the counselor offered it deliberately and

specifically for the purpose of interrupting the client’s active negative automatic thoughts (or her

beating herself up in the moment). While it did not change much in the overall course of treatment,

the client responded with a slight shrug and a softened facial expression, showing that she at least

could consider this counter-evidence in the moment. The counselor continued by listing a few

notable positive things that the client had accomplished recently, and once the client was back in

a state in which she could tolerate looking at the counselor, they continued with some cognitive

techniques to challenge the client’s reflexive way of thinking negatively.

Choosing a Twinship Selfobject Response

the intensity on the client’s current negative feelings, but in fact to deepen her emotional state in

order to help her regulate painful affect within a positive counseling relationship in service to

consolidating her self-experience (Russell & Fosha, 2008). As such, the counselor may approach

the moment from a twinship selfobject perspective, with the goal to empathize and normalize the

client’s experience in the moment. One common strategy in offering twinship interventions in the

moment is for the counselor to access moments when they have felt similarly, or to affectively

disclose in the moment, when their experience is similar to that of the client. However, another

way is to offer a normative response.

In this case, the counselor offered, “Everyone has felt this way before at some point in their

lives. It sucks.” This intervention offers three things to the client. It validates that it is perfectly

acceptable for her to be feeling this way in the moment. It also offers the implication that the

counselor (in twinship fashion) has also felt this way. And, finally, it gives the client permission

to deepen her feeling of sadness and smallness. Although their largely cognitive-behavioral frame

is most often targeted toward decreasing negative emotional states, the counselor feels that it is

also important for the client to be able to tolerate negative emotional states, as well as to learn in

a deep, experiential way that they are ephemeral and will not last indefinitely. The client did in

fact, in this moment, in response to the twinship intervention, begin to cry softly. The client and

counselor sat together in the sadness and crying, knowing that the moment can deepen the empathic

connection between them and also provide a safe environment that can improve therapeutic

outcomes (Labott, 2001; Nelson, 2008; Van Heukelem, 1979).

Choosing an Idealizing Selfobject Response

could employ a primarily idealizing selfobject response, calmly offering specific advice and

guiding the client where the counselor thinks she should go. Specifically, the counselor offers the

following response: “Let’s try one of our cognitive strategies to evaluate how accurate that

statement is.” This intervention is not unempathic, nor does it convey to the client that her feeling

is invalid. However, its primary goal is to guide the client to employ a specific strategy (which the

“expert” has taught her previously and feels will work in the current situation) to address the

underlying, problematic core belief. In a way, it is urging the client to be her own mirror and twin,

weighing evidence for her assertion that she is “failing in life” (as an observing twin) against

evidence that she in fact has positive experiences as well (as an observing mirror).

The premise of self psychology asserts that selfobjects serve purposes that individuals

cannot accomplish themselves; however, this idealizing selfobject strategy is meant to teach the

client to do just that, to be, in the moment, both a twin and a mirror. The client’s response to the

intervention, true to their previous therapeutic experience, was to do just that. She began to list off

her recent “failures,” followed by evidence against her assertion. Throughout this process, less

mired in her emotional state, she engaged more and more with the task and with the counselor,

until she had completed the suggested task and determined that, for now, she is not all bad.

Selfobject Decisions on a COVID-19 Helpline: A Frustrated Moment

Although the model presented is focused primarily on counseling, there is likely a place

for its application in other, less traditional counseling modalities as well (or any helping

relationship that involves a relationship between a helper and another person). Counselors work in

a variety of settings beyond traditional, one-on-one counseling, including multifaceted work within

agencies, mobile and other crisis intervention and hotlines, and a variety of other human service
positions (Cornelius et al., 2003; Harmon, 2017; Ulupinar et al., 2020; West, Hosie, & Mackie,

1987). This example comes from a counselor working on a COVID-19 helpline, which was

marketed to first responders, frontline healthcare workers, and other essential workers, in order to

provide emotional and other support (but specifically not counseling).

As part of the COVID-19 helpline, a man called presenting with a significant amount of

frustration. This client was a truck driver, and he was calling “to vent” his frustration about his

current circumstances, as well as the lack of recognition he and his fellow truck drivers were

receiving. Specifically, he reported that he was working longer-than-normal shifts (often being

expected to drive for 18 hours straight at a time), had very few rest stops open to either purchase

food and coffee or even use the bathroom, and felt that nobody was valuing the work he was doing

to keep the country running and safe (including delivering personal protective equipment across

the country). The man said, “Not knocking doctors or nurses or anything, but I’m working my ass

off and no one cares!” He then went silent on the phone, presumably awaiting a response. The

counselor on the phone has many options for how to respond.

Choosing a Mirroring Selfobject Response

If the counselor in this moment chooses to utilize a mirroring selfobject perspective, the

goal is to champion the client by mirroring back a positive and supportive view of his self. When

working within the limitations of a helpline, specifically marketed not to be counseling, the

counselor is already working from a different model. Goals may include helping individuals with

resources, calming them down if they are in a heightened emotional state, linking them with mental

health professionals who can provide actual counseling, or some other immediate and generally

quite shallow goal (Labouliere et al., 2020; Rosenbaum & Calhoun, 1977). That is, the goal is not

behavior change, deep insight, or any other typical goal one might expect from formal counseling.
So offering encouragement and championing someone who is doing good work makes a great deal

of sense in this context.

The counselor offered the following mirroring-driven intervention: “You’re doing such

important work! People should really recognize that.” This validating, supportive set of statements

elicited a high-energy, positive response from the client. “Right?!” The client went on to affirm

the important work he is doing and that he is benefitting society in “unsexy” ways. After a few

minutes, during which his frustration had clearly transformed to pride, he thanked the counselor

and hung up.

Choosing a Twinship Selfobject Response

The counselor wanting to employ a twinship selfobject orientation in this moment needs to

convey to the client that they understand the frustration, and that it seems rational, logical, and

warranted. This strategy is one of empathy, but also alignment with the client. Feeling

misunderstood and especially unappreciated is something most counselors can identify with. The

counselor offered, “I hear you. I’d be upset as well. In fact, I am!”

In this case, the twinship response served a similar purpose as did the mirroring response.

“Right?!” was the client’s response. However, instead of affirming the important work he is doing

(as in the mirroring situation), the client went on to focus on his frustration. He described that his

wife does not understand how important his job is, and “just focuses on the fact that I’m home

less.” It is hard not to be appreciated, especially when doing good work, and the counselor

continued to affirm how frustrating that can be. After a few minutes, the client told the counselor

that he felt “heard,” thanked the counselor, and hung up.

Choosing an Idealizing Selfobject Response

to offer concrete advice, resources, or guidance. In this moment, though, the counselor taking an

idealized selfobject perspective can offer specific guidance to the client for how to take some sort

of action to mitigate his frustration. Certainly, there are options of guidance to be given, including

urging the client to seek out mental healthcare of some sort. In this case, the counselor chose to

suggest a strategy of channeling the client’s frustration toward something positive, prosocial, and

beneficial for both society and himself (Koellhoffer, 2009).

The counselor calmly asked, “Is there a union or advocacy group you could contact, not

just for support, but also to see if there’s a way you could get involved in raising awareness and

improving your circumstances?” Although the client reported that he had “griped” with other truck

drivers, he had not contacted his local Teamsters union to discuss the practical challenges. His

demeanor changed immediately from heightened frustration to thoughtful “gears” turning in his

mind about how he could advocate for himself and his colleagues. Taking positive action has two

potential benefits: he could in fact change some of the circumstances (the long hours, not having

rest stops, etc.), and he can feel that he is taking action to change his situation, which can lift mood

(McKay, Davis, & Fanning, 2011). Sounding excited to take some action, he thanked the counselor

and hung up.

Implications for Counselors and Counselor Educators

As a deliberate, moment-to-moment technique, applying selfobject-driven decisions in

micro-interactions affords counselors conscious and mindful technique for meeting client needs.

Additionally, it can serve as a post-mortem framework for evaluating counseling interactions that

did not go well, or even led to alliance ruptures. That is, in deconstructing interactions that were

problematic between counselor and client, one way of framing them is what selfobject need (if
any) was being met in that moment, and whether the client in fact needed one of the others.

Certainly, repairing therapeutic alliance ruptures can benefit the counseling relationship and

ultimately outcomes (Safran, Muran, & Eubanks-Carter, 2011). One way of doing so is addressing

that an intervention moment was not what a client needed, and this framework can provide a

language for understanding that.

Further, although rooted in psychoanalytic theory, this application of self psychology can

also serve as a concrete and relatively straightforward model for counseling across theoretical

orientations. While there are benefits and drawbacks of employing a microskills model in training

novice counselors (Ridley, Kelly, & Mollen, 2011), finding ways to improve clinical skill that are

easily understood and translated into practice can hold a great deal of value, especially when

training counselors in shorter amounts of time, such as within master’s programs. Although

applying a decision-making model in the moment with any given client is actually quite complex

and nuanced, the ability to be flexible and have deliberate, alternative potential responses within

clinical micro-interactions may prove a valuable tool in the counselor’s toolbox.

Conclusion

Counselors and counselors-in-training need tools to build their competence, and they

receive a great many of them in their training programs. In the limited amount of time afforded to

didactic training in programs, though, concrete and straightforward models for how to intervene

psychotherapeutically can be extremely beneficial. The model presented in this paper can offer

counselors-in-training a tool to use for in-the-moment decisions and counselor educators a tool to

use to evaluate moments in their supervisees’ clinical work.

Baker, H.S., & Baker, M.N. (1987). Heinz Kohut’s self psychology: An overview. The American
Journal of Psychiatry, 144(1), 1-9.
Basch, M. F. (1991). Are selfobjects the only objects? Implications for psychoanalytic technique.
In A. Goldberg (Ed.), The Evolution of Self Psychology: Progress in Self Psychology (Vol.
7, pp. 3–15). Hillsdale, NJ: The Analytic Press.
Benson, C. K. (1992). Forgiveness and the psychotherapeutic process. Journal of Psychology and
Christianity, 11(1), 76–81.
Betan, E. J., & Binder, J. L. (2010). Clinical expertise in counseling: How expert counselors use
theory in generating case conceptualizations and interventions. Journal of Contemporary
Counseling, 40(3), 141-152.
Brooks, T. P., & Cochran, J. L. (2016). The core conditions in counseling chronically undecided
career decision-makers. Person-Centered & Experiential Psychotherapies, 15(2), 142-155.
Clark, A. (2010). Empathy: An integral model in the counseling process. Journal of Counseling &
Development, 88, 348–356.
Cooper, M., Norcross, J. C., Raymond-Barker, B., & Hogan, T. P. (2019). Counseling preferences
of laypersons and mental health professionals: Whose counseling is it? Counseling, 56(2),
205–216.
Cornelius, L. J., Simpson, G. M., Ting, L., Wiggins, E., & Lipford, S. (2003). Reach out and I'll
be there: Mental health crisis intervention and mobile outreach services to urban African
Americans. Health & Social Work, 28(1), 74-78.
Dietzel, C. S., & Abeles, N. (1975). Client-therapist complementarity and therapeutic outcome.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 22, 264-272.
Elliott, R., Bohart, A. C., Watson, J. C., & Greenberg, L. S. (2011). Empathy. Counseling, 48, 43–
49.
Enns, C. Z. (1993). Twenty years of feminist counseling and counseling: From naming biases to
implementing multifaceted practice. The Counseling Psychologist, 21(1), 3-87.
Evans, H. M. (2008). Panel report: The action in therapeutic action: Nonverbal interventions.
Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 56(2), 565-572.
Fenchel, G. H., & Flapan, D. (1986). The developing ego in group counseling. Group, 10(4), 195-
210.
Fonagy, P., & Allison, E. (2014). The role of mentalizing and epistemic trust in the therapeutic
relationship. Counseling, 51(3), 372-380.
Giorgi, B. (2011). A phenomenological analysis of the experience of pivotal moments in
counseling as defined by clients. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 42(1), 61-106.
Goldberg, A. (1998). Self psychology since Kohut. The Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 67, 240–255.
Gyollai, D. (2020). Getting into it in the wrong way: Interpretative phenomenological analysis and
the hermeneutic circle. Nursing Philosophy, 21(2), e12294.
Harmon, D. E. (2017). Careers in Mental Health. The Rosen Publishing Group, Inc.
Hartman, J. J. (1971). The case conference as a reflection of unconscious patient-counselor
interaction. Contemporary Psychoanalysis, 8(1), 1-17.
Kaufman, K. (1996). The counselor as selfobject. Clinical Social Work Journal, 24(3), 285-298.
Kensit, D. A. (2000). Rogerian theory: A critique of the effectiveness of pure client-centred
counseling. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 13(4), 345-351.
Kiesler, D. J. (2004). Intrepid pursuit of the essential ingredients of counseling. Clinical
Psychology: Science and Practice, 11(4), 391-395.
Koellhoffer, T. (2009). Dealing with Frustration and Anger. Infobase Publishing.
Kohut, H. (1991). The search for the self: Selected writings of Heinz Kohut: 1978–1981 (Vol. 4;
P. H. Ornstein, Ed.). Madison, CT: International Universities Press.
Kohut, H. (2009). How Does Analysis Cure?. University of Chicago Press.
Labott, S. M. (2001). Crying in counseling. In A. J. J. M. Vingerhoets & R. R. Conrelius (Eds.),
Adult Crying: A Biopsychosocial Approach (pp. 213-226). Hove, UK: Brunner-Routledge.
Labouliere, C. D., Stanley, B., Lake, A. M., & Gould, M. S. (2020). Safety planning on crisis lines:
feasibility, acceptability, and perceived helpfulness of a brief intervention to mitigate future
suicide risk. Suicide and Life‐Threatening Behavior, 50(1), 29-41.
Levitt, H., Butler, M., & Hill, T. (2006). What clients find helpful in counseling: Developing
principles for facilitating moment-to-moment change. Journal of Counseling Psychology,
53(3), 314–324.
Lichtenberg, J. W., & Heck, E. (1986). The analysis of pattern and sequence in process research.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 33, 170-181.
Mahrer, A. R. (1988). Research and clinical applications of "good moments" in counseling.
Journal of Integrative & Eclectic Counseling, 7(1), 81–93.
McKay, M., Davis, M., & Fanning, P. (2011). Thoughts and Feelings: Taking Control of Your
Moods and Your Life. New Harbinger Publications.
Nelson, J. K. (2008). Crying in counseling: Its meaning, assessment, and management based on
attachment theory. In: A. J. J. M. Vingerhoets, I. Nyklicek, & J. Denollet (Eds.), Emotion
Regulation and Health. Conceptual and Clinical Issues (pp. 202-214). New York:
Springer.
Owen, J., & Hilsenroth, M. J. (2014). Treatment adherence: The importance of counselor
flexibility in relation to counseling outcomes. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 61(2),
280-288.
Perlitz, D. (2016). Beyond Kohut: From empathy to affection. International Journal of
Psychoanalytic Self Psychology, 11(3), 248-262.
Pilette, P. C., Berck, C. B., & Achber, L. C. (1995). Therapeutic management of helping
boundaries. Journal of Psychosocial Nursing and Mental Health Services, 33(1), 40-47.
Pine, F. (1985). Developmental Theory and Clinical Process. New Haven, CT: Yale University
Press.
Ridley, C. R., Kelly, S. M., & Mollen, D. (2011). Microskills training: Evolution, reexamination,
and call for reform. The Counseling Psychologist, 39(6), 800-824.
Rihacek, T., & Danelova, F. (2015). How counselors change: What motivates counselors towards
integration. European Journal for Qualitative Research in Counseling, 8, 5-31.
Rogers, C. (1957). The necessary and sufficient conditions of therapeutic personality change.
Journal of Consulting Psychology, 21(2): 95–103.
Rogers, C. (1959). A theory of counseling, personality and interpersonal relationships as
developed in the client-centered framework. In S. Koch (Ed.), Psychology: A Study of a
Science: Formulations of the Person and the Social Context (Vol. 3, pp. 184-256). New
York: McGraw Hill.
Rohde, A., & Roser, K. (2019). Transference in Intersubjective Self Psychology. In G. Hagman,
H. Paul, & P. B. Zimmermann (Eds.), Intersubjective Self Psychology (pp. 25-36). New
York: Routledge.
Rosenbaum, A., & Calhoun, J. F. (1977). The use of the telephone hotline in crisis intervention: A
review. Journal of Community Psychology, 5(4), 325-339.
Russell, E., & Fosha, D. (2008). Transformational affects and core state in AEDP: The emergence
and consolidation of joy, hope, gratitude, and confidence in (the solid goodness of) the self.
Journal of Counseling Integration, 18(2), 167-190.
Safran, J. D., Muran, J. C., & Eubanks-Carter, C. (2011). Repairing alliance ruptures. Counseling,
48(1), 80.
Santos, A., Gonçalves, M. M., & Matos, M. (2011). Innovative moments and poor outcome in
narrative counseling. Counselling and Counseling Research, 11(2), 129-139.
Sommers-Flanagan, J. (2015). Evidence-based relationship practice: Enhancing counselor
competence. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 37(2), 95-108.
Swank, J. M., Lambie, G. W., & Witta, E. L. (2012). An exploratory investigation of the
Counseling Competencies Scale: A measure of counseling skills, dispositions, and
behaviors. Counselor Education and Supervision, 51(3), 189-206.
Thomas, K. M., Hopwood, C. J., Woody, E., Ethier, N., & Sadler, P. (2014). Momentary
assessment of interpersonal process in psychotherapy. Journal of Counseling Psychology,
61(1), 1-14.
Tracey, T. J. G. (1985). Dominance and outcome: A sequential examination. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 32, 119-122.
Ullma, C. (2006). Bearing witness: Across the barriers in society and in the clinic. Psychoanalytic
Dialogues, 16(2), 181-198.
Ulupinar, D., Zalaquett, C., Kim, S. R., & Kulikowich, J. M. (2020). Performance of Mental Health
Counselors in Integrated Primary and Behavioral Health Care. Journal of Counseling &
Development, 99(1), 37-46.
Vanaerschot, G. (1993). Empathy as releasing several micro-processes in the client. In D. Brazier
(Ed.), Beyond Carl Rogers (p. 47–71). Constable & Robinson.
Van Huekelem, J. F. (1979). Weep with those who weep: Understanding helping the crying person.
Journal of Psychology and Theology, 7, 83-91.
Wachtel, P. L. (2007). Carl Rogers and the larger context of therapeutic thought. Counseling
Theory Research & Practice, 44(3), 279-284.
Wampold, B. E., & Kim, K. H. (1989). Sequential analysis applied to counseling process and
outcome: A case study revisited. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 36, 357-364.
West, J. D., Hosie, T. W., & Mackey, J. A. (1987). Employment and roles of counselors in mental
health agencies. Journal of Counseling & Development, 66(3), 135-138.
Wiser, S., & Goldfried, M. (1996). Verbal interventions in significant psychodynamic-
interpersonal and cognitive-behavioral counseling sessions. Counseling Research, 6(4),
309-319.
Zeig, J. K. (Ed.). (1987). The Evolution of Counseling. Psychology Press.