Imagination and Impulsive Behavior

CSGnet Archive CSG2013
1

[From Fred Nickols (2013.09.19.0955 EDT)]

I awoke with a start in the middle of the night, awakened by an idea or insight or whatever you care to call it.

It occurred to me that impulsive and perhaps compulsive behaviors are linked to reference conditions, rehearsal, prehearsal and a whole lot more. Let’s look at some of the terms in what I just tossed out.

Rehearsal. I think most would agree on this; it is the practicing of what you are going to do, much as actors and actresses rehearse or practice their lines, or as is the case in a wedding rehearsal.

Prehearsal. I came across this term in Joseph Weizenbaum’s book Computer Power and Human Reason. He didn’t bother to define it but from the context in which it was used I took it to mean practicing the things you might do. Basically, prehearsal amounts to rehearsing your options.

From PCT we know that action is evoked or emitted as a consequence of a discrepancy between the reference state for a controlled variable and the perceived current state of that variable. We also know from PCT that such “corrective action” is immediate; for example, if the wind is moving your car sideways you don’t wait until it blows you into the next lane to turn the wheel to counteract the effect of the wind.

So now, consider this. Suppose you are imagining, envisioning, fantasizing, picturing a certain scenario, some set of circumstances and your behavior or actions in that setting. Suppose now that you find yourself in that set of circumstances (or a set close enough that any differences are inconsequential). What occurred to me is that you might immediately “leap into action,” as it were, which could look and maybe feel like impulsive or compulsive behavior. The imagined scenario in your head, including your actions, is the reference condition. The perceived circumstances match or are close enough and the only gap is between your imagined and current behavior. You immediately behave in ways that match your behavior in the imagined scenario.

I’m wondering if this might be a fruitful angle of attack in psychotherapy regarding what we ordinarily label as impulsive and compulsive behaviors.

You’ve heard the old saying, “Be careful what you wish for; you might get it.” Well, to paraphrase that, “Be careful what you imagine; you might do it.”

Comments anyone? David?

Regards,

Fred Nickols, CPT

Managing Partner

Distance Consulting LLC

The Knowledge Workers’ Tool Room

2

Hi Fred, neat idea! I am working on various collaborations (cc’d) concerning the imagination mode in PCT, which I think is very neglected. I think your idea makes a lot of sense, and I would also suggest that the same process could be responsible for automatic control that is not impulsive or compulsive but just ‘right’, pending adjustments made to the current perception of the situation as it unfolds. From our perspective, what makes us use the terms ‘compulsive’ or ‘impulsive’ is the existence of conflict - there is another control system whose references for variables that are directly or indirectly controlled by the ‘prehearsed’ system are in conflict - we want to smoke but we also don’t want to smoke - for example. We then use Method of Levels to help make this conflict explicit and reorganise the overarching goals behind the conflict - e.g. to be a worthwhile person…

There is also a large literature on social psychology called Implementation Intentions - which I think describes what you are considering, but unfortunately they don’t take on board PCT and the explanatory advantages this could give them.

There is also a literature on ‘thought action fusion’ whereby people are genuinely terrified of acting on their thoughts and imaginings. I guess therapy is often about helping people to imagine what they REALLY want to happen rather than what they are afraid of doing. Again, to do this we might have to help them access their deeper, higher level goals and imagining a variety of ways to achieve them until one ‘clicks’ and doesn’t create conflict in their imagination.

Making sense?
Warren

···

On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Fred Nickols fred@nickols.us wrote:

[From Fred Nickols (2013.09.19.0955 EDT)]

I awoke with a start in the middle of the night, awakened by an idea or insight or whatever you care to call it.

It occurred to me that impulsive and perhaps compulsive behaviors are linked to reference conditions, rehearsal, prehearsal and a whole lot more. Let’s look at some of the terms in what I just tossed out.

Rehearsal. I think most would agree on this; it is the practicing of what you are going to do, much as actors and actresses rehearse or practice their lines, or as is the case in a wedding rehearsal.

Prehearsal. I came across this term in Joseph Weizenbaum’s book Computer Power and Human Reason. He didn’t bother to define it but from the context in which it was used I took it to mean practicing the things you might do. Basically, prehearsal amounts to rehearsing your options.

From PCT we know that action is evoked or emitted as a consequence of a discrepancy between the reference state for a controlled variable and the perceived current state of that variable. We also know from PCT that such “corrective action” is immediate; for example, if the wind is moving your car sideways you don’t wait until it blows you into the next lane to turn the wheel to counteract the effect of the wind.

So now, consider this. Suppose you are imagining, envisioning, fantasizing, picturing a certain scenario, some set of circumstances and your behavior or actions in that setting. Suppose now that you find yourself in that set of circumstances (or a set close enough that any differences are inconsequential). What occurred to me is that you might immediately “leap into action,” as it were, which could look and maybe feel like impulsive or compulsive behavior. The imagined scenario in your head, including your actions, is the reference condition. The perceived circumstances match or are close enough and the only gap is between your imagined and current behavior. You immediately behave in ways that match your behavior in the imagined scenario.

I’m wondering if this might be a fruitful angle of attack in psychotherapy regarding what we ordinarily label as impulsive and compulsive behaviors.

You’ve heard the old saying, “Be careful what you wish for; you might get it.” Well, to paraphrase that, “Be careful what you imagine; you might do it.”

Comments anyone? David?

Regards,

Fred Nickols, CPT

Managing Partner

Distance Consulting LLC

The Knowledge Workers’ Tool Room

–
Dr Warren Mansell
Reader in Psychology
Cognitive Behavioural Therapist & Chartered Clinical Psychologist

School of Psychological Sciences
Coupland I
University of Manchester
Oxford Road
Manchester M13 9PL
Email: warren.mansell@manchester.ac.uk

Tel: +44 (0) 161 275 8589

Website: http://www.psych-sci.manchester.ac.uk/staff/131406

See teamstrial.net for further information on our trial of CBT for Bipolar Disorders in NW England

The highly acclaimed therapy manual on A Transdiagnostic Approach to CBT using Method of Levels is available now.

Check www.pctweb.org for further information on Perceptual Control Theory

3

[From Fred Nickols (2013.09.19.1222 EDT)]

Hi, Warren.

Yep, I figured MoL would play a role in there somewhere. My reasoning was that you’d start with the imagined behavior that had been acted out and ask about what it accomplished or achieved. The answers to that could leads lots of places.

Rather than “sell” folks on PCT/MoL, I’d think a few really good case studies (without the PCT/MoL talk initially but closing with the PCT/MoL theory explanation) might win a few friends/converts.

Fred Nickols

···

From: Warren Mansell [mailto:wmansell@GMAIL.COM]
Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 11:36 AM
To: CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU
Subject: Re: Imagination and Impulsive Behavior

Hi Fred, neat idea! I am working on various collaborations (cc’d) concerning the imagination mode in PCT, which I think is very neglected. I think your idea makes a lot of sense, and I would also suggest that the same process could be responsible for automatic control that is not impulsive or compulsive but just ‘right’, pending adjustments made to the current perception of the situation as it unfolds. From our perspective, what makes us use the terms ‘compulsive’ or ‘impulsive’ is the existence of conflict - there is another control system whose references for variables that are directly or indirectly controlled by the ‘prehearsed’ system are in conflict - we want to smoke but we also don’t want to smoke - for example. We then use Method of Levels to help make this conflict explicit and reorganise the overarching goals behind the conflict - e.g. to be a worthwhile person…
There is also a large literature on social psychology called Implementation Intentions - which I think describes what you are considering, but unfortunately they don’t take on board PCT and the explanatory advantages this could give them.

There is also a literature on ‘thought action fusion’ whereby people are genuinely terrified of acting on their thoughts and imaginings. I guess therapy is often about helping people to imagine what they REALLY want to happen rather than what they are afraid of doing. Again, to do this we might have to help them access their deeper, higher level goals and imagining a variety of ways to achieve them until one ‘clicks’ and doesn’t create conflict in their imagination.

Making sense?
Warren

On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Fred Nickols fred@nickols.us wrote:

[From Fred Nickols (2013.09.19.0955 EDT)]

I awoke with a start in the middle of the night, awakened by an idea or insight or whatever you care to call it.

It occurred to me that impulsive and perhaps compulsive behaviors are linked to reference conditions, rehearsal, prehearsal and a whole lot more. Let’s look at some of the terms in what I just tossed out.

Rehearsal. I think most would agree on this; it is the practicing of what you are going to do, much as actors and actresses rehearse or practice their lines, or as is the case in a wedding rehearsal.

Prehearsal. I came across this term in Joseph Weizenbaum’s book Computer Power and Human Reason. He didn’t bother to define it but from the context in which it was used I took it to mean practicing the things you might do. Basically, prehearsal amounts to rehearsing your options.

From PCT we know that action is evoked or emitted as a consequence of a discrepancy between the reference state for a controlled variable and the perceived current state of that variable. We also know from PCT that such “corrective action” is immediate; for example, if the wind is moving your car sideways you don’t wait until it blows you into the next lane to turn the wheel to counteract the effect of the wind.

So now, consider this. Suppose you are imagining, envisioning, fantasizing, picturing a certain scenario, some set of circumstances and your behavior or actions in that setting. Suppose now that you find yourself in that set of circumstances (or a set close enough that any differences are inconsequential). What occurred to me is that you might immediately “leap into action,” as it were, which could look and maybe feel like impulsive or compulsive behavior. The imagined scenario in your head, including your actions, is the reference condition. The perceived circumstances match or are close enough and the only gap is between your imagined and current behavior. You immediately behave in ways that match your behavior in the imagined scenario.

I’m wondering if this might be a fruitful angle of attack in psychotherapy regarding what we ordinarily label as impulsive and compulsive behaviors.

You’ve heard the old saying, “Be careful what you wish for; you might get it.” Well, to paraphrase that, “Be careful what you imagine; you might do it.”

Comments anyone? David?

Regards,

Fred Nickols, CPT

Managing Partner

Distance Consulting LLC

The Knowledge Workers’ Tool Room

–

Dr Warren Mansell
Reader in Psychology
Cognitive Behavioural Therapist & Chartered Clinical Psychologist
School of Psychological Sciences
Coupland I
University of Manchester
Oxford Road
Manchester M13 9PL
Email: warren.mansell@manchester.ac.uk

Tel: +44 (0) 161 275 8589

Website: http://www.psych-sci.manchester.ac.uk/staff/131406

See teamstrial.net for further information on our trial of CBT for Bipolar Disorders in NW England

The highly acclaimed therapy manual on A Transdiagnostic Approach to CBT using Method of Levels is available now.

Check www.pctweb.org for further information on Perceptual Control Theory

4

Cheers Fred, sounds like a good idea!
Warren

···

On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 5:25 PM, Fred Nickols fred@nickols.us wrote:

[From Fred Nickols (2013.09.19.1222 EDT)]

Hi, Warren.

Yep, I figured MoL would play a role in there somewhere. My reasoning was that you’d start with the imagined behavior that had been acted out and ask about what it accomplished or achieved. The answers to that could leads lots of places.

Rather than “sell” folks on PCT/MoL, I’d think a few really good case studies (without the PCT/MoL talk initially but closing with the PCT/MoL theory explanation) might win a few friends/converts.

Fred Nickols

From: Warren Mansell [mailto:wmansell@GMAIL.COM]
Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 11:36 AM
To: CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU
Subject: Re: Imagination and Impulsive Behavior

Hi Fred, neat idea! I am working on various collaborations (cc’d) concerning the imagination mode in PCT, which I think is very neglected. I think your idea makes a lot of sense, and I would also suggest that the same process could be responsible for automatic control that is not impulsive or compulsive but just ‘right’, pending adjustments made to the current perception of the situation as it unfolds. From our perspective, what makes us use the terms ‘compulsive’ or ‘impulsive’ is the existence of conflict - there is another control system whose references for variables that are directly or indirectly controlled by the ‘prehearsed’ system are in conflict - we want to smoke but we also don’t want to smoke - for example. We then use Method of Levels to help make this conflict explicit and reorganise the overarching goals behind the conflict - e.g. to be a worthwhile person…
There is also a large literature on social psychology called Implementation Intentions - which I think describes what you are considering, but unfortunately they don’t take on board PCT and the explanatory advantages this could give them.

There is also a literature on ‘thought action fusion’ whereby people are genuinely terrified of acting on their thoughts and imaginings. I guess therapy is often about helping people to imagine what they REALLY want to happen rather than what they are afraid of doing. Again, to do this we might have to help them access their deeper, higher level goals and imagining a variety of ways to achieve them until one ‘clicks’ and doesn’t create conflict in their imagination.

Making sense?
Warren

On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Fred Nickols fred@nickols.us wrote:

[From Fred Nickols (2013.09.19.0955 EDT)]

I awoke with a start in the middle of the night, awakened by an idea or insight or whatever you care to call it.

It occurred to me that impulsive and perhaps compulsive behaviors are linked to reference conditions, rehearsal, prehearsal and a whole lot more. Let’s look at some of the terms in what I just tossed out.

Rehearsal. I think most would agree on this; it is the practicing of what you are going to do, much as actors and actresses rehearse or practice their lines, or as is the case in a wedding rehearsal.

Prehearsal. I came across this term in Joseph Weizenbaum’s book Computer Power and Human Reason. He didn’t bother to define it but from the context in which it was used I took it to mean practicing the things you might do. Basically, prehearsal amounts to rehearsing your options.

From PCT we know that action is evoked or emitted as a consequence of a discrepancy between the reference state for a controlled variable and the perceived current state of that variable. We also know from PCT that such “corrective action” is immediate; for example, if the wind is moving your car sideways you don’t wait until it blows you into the next lane to turn the wheel to counteract the effect of the wind.

So now, consider this. Suppose you are imagining, envisioning, fantasizing, picturing a certain scenario, some set of circumstances and your behavior or actions in that setting. Suppose now that you find yourself in that set of circumstances (or a set close enough that any differences are inconsequential). What occurred to me is that you might immediately “leap into action,” as it were, which could look and maybe feel like impulsive or compulsive behavior. The imagined scenario in your head, including your actions, is the reference condition. The perceived circumstances match or are close enough and the only gap is between your imagined and current behavior. You immediately behave in ways that match your behavior in the imagined scenario.

I’m wondering if this might be a fruitful angle of attack in psychotherapy regarding what we ordinarily label as impulsive and compulsive behaviors.

You’ve heard the old saying, “Be careful what you wish for; you might get it.” Well, to paraphrase that, “Be careful what you imagine; you might do it.”

Comments anyone? David?

Regards,

Fred Nickols, CPT

Managing Partner

Distance Consulting LLC

The Knowledge Workers’ Tool Room

–

Dr Warren Mansell
Reader in Psychology
Cognitive Behavioural Therapist & Chartered Clinical Psychologist
School of Psychological Sciences
Coupland I
University of Manchester
Oxford Road
Manchester M13 9PL
Email: warren.mansell@manchester.ac.uk

Tel: +44 (0) 161 275 8589

Website: http://www.psych-sci.manchester.ac.uk/staff/131406

See teamstrial.net for further information on our trial of CBT for Bipolar Disorders in NW England

The highly acclaimed therapy manual on A Transdiagnostic Approach to CBT using Method of Levels is available now.

Check www.pctweb.org for further information on Perceptual Control Theory

–
Dr Warren Mansell
Reader in Psychology
Cognitive Behavioural Therapist & Chartered Clinical Psychologist
School of Psychological Sciences

Coupland I
University of Manchester
Oxford Road
Manchester M13 9PL
Email: warren.mansell@manchester.ac.uk

Tel: +44 (0) 161 275 8589

Website: http://www.psych-sci.manchester.ac.uk/staff/131406

See teamstrial.net for further information on our trial of CBT for Bipolar Disorders in NW England

The highly acclaimed therapy manual on A Transdiagnostic Approach to CBT using Method of Levels is available now.

Check www.pctweb.org for further information on Perceptual Control Theory

5

[From Fred Nickols (2013.09.19.0955 EDT)]

I awoke with a start in the middle of the night, awakened by an idea or insight or whatever you care to call it.

It occurred to me that impulsive and perhaps compulsive behaviors are linked to reference conditions, rehearsal, prehearsal and a whole lot more. Let’s look at some of the terms in what I just tossed out.

Rehearsal. I think most would agree on this; it is the practicing of what you are going to do, much as actors and actresses rehearse or practice their lines, or as is the case in a wedding rehearsal.

Prehearsal. I came across this term in Joseph Weizenbaum’s book Computer Power and Human Reason. He didn’t bother to define it but from the context in which it was used I took it to mean practicing the things you might do. Basically, prehearsal amounts to rehearsing your options.

From PCT we know that action is evoked or emitted as a consequence of a discrepancy between the reference state for a controlled variable and the perceived current state of that variable. We also know from PCT that such “corrective action� is immediate; for example, if the wind is moving your car sideways you don’t wait until it blows you into the next lane to turn the wheel to counteract the effect of the wind.

So now, consider this. Suppose you are imagining, envisioning, fantasizing, picturing a certain scenario, some set of circumstances and your behavior or actions in that setting. Suppose now that you find yourself in that set of circumstances (or a set close enough that any differences are inconsequential). What occurred to me is that you might immediately “leap into action,� as it were, which could look and maybe feel like impulsive or compulsive behavior. The imagined scenario in your head, including your actions, is the reference condition. The perceived circumstances match or are close enough and the only gap is between your imagined and current behavior. You immediately behave in ways that match your behavior in the imagined scenario.

I’m wondering if this might be a fruitful angle of attack in psychotherapy regarding what we ordinarily label as impulsive and compulsive behaviors.

You’ve heard the old saying, “Be careful what you wish for; you might get it.� Well, to paraphrase that, “Be careful what you imagine; you might do it.�

Comments anyone? David?

Regards,

Fred Nickols, CPT

Managing Partner

Distance Consulting LLC

The Knowledge Workers’ Tool Room

6

Cheer Tim, that’s really helpful. I wish Wegner & Clark had used PCT in their ‘ironic control theory’ model of thought suppression and rebound as it would make it some much easier to understand! And you’re right, there is such a broad point here about how to get everyone thinking in terms of environment as a continuous experience, driven by the individual rather than as a ‘trigger’. I think it might be because unpredictable environments are so unusual that we notice them - awareness shifts to reorganise the systems involved in controlling them - but this means that large swathes of psychology, especially our field, think this is how the environment works. Actually it is the exception rather than the rule…
Warren

···

On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Tim Carey tim.carey@flinders.edu.au wrote:

Hi Warren,

Thanks for this. Nice summary. In B:CP I really like the way Bill described a kind of rebound phenomenon with conflict. “When a disturbance forces the controlled
quantity close enough to either reference level, however, there will be a reaction. The control system experiencing lessened error will relax, unbalancing the net output in the direction of the
other reference level.” (1st ed., -. 255).

For me, that seems to provide a pretty good account of what we might call “impulsive” behaviours.

Part of the difficulty for me in discussing these kinds of labels is that they’re generally labels from an observer’s perspective rather than from the behaver’s
perspective which is the PCT point of view.

A couple of nitpicks in what Fred wrote … from a PCT perspective I wouldn’t say that action was “emitted or evoked”. That sounds a lot like a response to stimulus
idea. In PCT variables (such as actions) are treated as continuous rather than discrete variables. Actions, then, are varied to oppose disturbances and minimise error. It’s maybe a minor point but it relates to another idea of Fred’s when he suggests that
“Suppose now that you find yourself in that set of circumstances”. This seems to take agency away individual. People don’t just “find themselves” in environments, they place themselves or positions themselves in environments as part of the control processes
that are going on.

It might seem like people “find themselves” in environments from time to time but that requires drawing an arbitrary demarcation between when they were “in” the
environment and when they were “out” of it. If we think of control as a continuous, dynamic process it becomes a lot harder (and even unnecessary) to make that demarcation.

Thanks for sharing this.

Tim

From: Warren Mansell [mailto:wmansell@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, 20 September 2013 1:06 AM
To: Control Systems Group Network (CSGnet)
Cc: Huddy, Vyv; Filippo Varese; sara.tai@manchester.ac.uk; Tim Carey

Subject: Re: Imagination and Impulsive Behavior

Hi Fred, neat idea! I am working on various collaborations (cc’d) concerning the imagination mode in PCT, which I think is very neglected. I think your idea makes a lot of sense, and I would
also suggest that the same process could be responsible for automatic control that is not impulsive or compulsive but just ‘right’, pending adjustments made to the current perception of the situation as it unfolds. From our perspective, what makes us use the
terms ‘compulsive’ or ‘impulsive’ is the existence of conflict - there is another control system whose references for variables that are directly or indirectly controlled by the ‘prehearsed’ system are in conflict - we want to smoke but we also don’t want
to smoke - for example. We then use Method of Levels to help make this conflict explicit and reorganise the overarching goals behind the conflict - e.g. to be a worthwhile person…

There is also a large literature on social psychology called Implementation Intentions - which I think describes what you are considering, but unfortunately they don’t take on board PCT and the explanatory advantages this could give them.

There is also a literature on ‘thought action fusion’ whereby people are genuinely terrified of acting on their thoughts and imaginings. I guess therapy is often about helping people to imagine
what they REALLY want to happen rather than what they are afraid of doing. Again, to do this we might have to help them access their deeper, higher level goals and imagining a variety of ways to achieve them until one ‘clicks’ and doesn’t create conflict in
their imagination.

Making sense?
Warren

On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Fred Nickols fred@nickols.us wrote:

[From Fred Nickols (2013.09.19.0955 EDT)]

I awoke with a start in the middle of the night, awakened by an idea or insight or whatever you care to call it.

It occurred to me that impulsive and perhaps compulsive behaviors are linked to reference conditions, rehearsal, prehearsal and a whole lot more. Let’s look
at some of the terms in what I just tossed out.

Rehearsal. I think most would agree on this; it is the practicing of what you are going to do, much as actors and actresses rehearse or practice their lines,
or as is the case in a wedding rehearsal.

Prehearsal. I came across this term in Joseph Weizenbaum’s book
Computer Power and Human Reason. He didn’t bother to define it but from the context in which it was used I took it to mean practicing the things you
might do. Basically, prehearsal amounts to rehearsing your options.

From PCT we know that action is evoked or emitted as a consequence of a discrepancy between the reference state for a controlled variable and the perceived current
state of that variable. We also know from PCT that such “corrective action” is immediate; for example, if the wind is moving your car sideways you don’t wait until it blows you into the next lane to turn the wheel to counteract the effect of the wind.

So now, consider this. Suppose you are imagining, envisioning, fantasizing, picturing a certain scenario, some set of circumstances and your behavior or actions
in that setting. Suppose now that you find yourself in that set of circumstances (or a set close enough that any differences are inconsequential). What occurred to me is that you might immediately “leap into action,” as it were, which could look and maybe
feel like impulsive or compulsive behavior. The imagined scenario in your head, including your actions, is the reference condition. The perceived circumstances match or are close enough and the only gap is between your imagined and current behavior. You
immediately behave in ways that match your behavior in the imagined scenario.

I’m wondering if this might be a fruitful angle of attack in psychotherapy regarding what we ordinarily label as impulsive and compulsive behaviors.

You’ve heard the old saying, “Be careful what you wish for; you might get it.” Well, to paraphrase that, “Be careful what you imagine; you might do it.”

Comments anyone? David?

Regards,

Fred Nickols, CPT

Managing Partner

Distance Consulting LLC

The Knowledge
Workers’ Tool Room

–

Dr Warren Mansell
Reader in Psychology
Cognitive Behavioural Therapist & Chartered Clinical Psychologist
School of Psychological Sciences
Coupland I
University of Manchester
Oxford Road
Manchester M13 9PL
Email: warren.mansell@manchester.ac.uk

Tel: +44 (0) 161 275 8589

Website:
http://www.psych-sci.manchester.ac.uk/staff/131406

See teamstrial.net for further information on our trial of CBT for Bipolar Disorders in NW England

The highly acclaimed therapy manual on
A Transdiagnostic Approach to CBT using Method of Levels is available now.

Check www.pctweb.org for further information on Perceptual Control Theory

–
Dr Warren Mansell
Reader in Psychology
Cognitive Behavioural Therapist & Chartered Clinical Psychologist
School of Psychological Sciences

Coupland I
University of Manchester
Oxford Road
Manchester M13 9PL
Email: warren.mansell@manchester.ac.uk

Tel: +44 (0) 161 275 8589

Website: http://www.psych-sci.manchester.ac.uk/staff/131406

See teamstrial.net for further information on our trial of CBT for Bipolar Disorders in NW England

The highly acclaimed therapy manual on A Transdiagnostic Approach to CBT using Method of Levels is available now.

Check www.pctweb.org for further information on Perceptual Control Theory

7

Let’s say ‘uncontrollable experience in the environment’, or at least experience in the environment that we haven’t encountered before sufficiently to know for certain how well we can control them!
Warren

···

On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 8:10 AM, Warren Mansell wmansell@gmail.com wrote:

Cheer Tim, that’s really helpful. I wish Wegner & Clark had used PCT in their ‘ironic control theory’ model of thought suppression and rebound as it would make it some much easier to understand! And you’re right, there is such a broad point here about how to get everyone thinking in terms of environment as a continuous experience, driven by the individual rather than as a ‘trigger’. I think it might be because unpredictable environments are so unusual that we notice them - awareness shifts to reorganise the systems involved in controlling them - but this means that large swathes of psychology, especially our field, think this is how the environment works. Actually it is the exception rather than the rule…
Warren

–
Dr Warren Mansell
Reader in Psychology
Cognitive Behavioural Therapist & Chartered Clinical Psychologist
School of Psychological Sciences

Coupland I
University of Manchester
Oxford Road
Manchester M13 9PL
Email: warren.mansell@manchester.ac.uk

Tel: +44 (0) 161 275 8589

Website: http://www.psych-sci.manchester.ac.uk/staff/131406

See teamstrial.net for further information on our trial of CBT for Bipolar Disorders in NW England

The highly acclaimed therapy manual on A Transdiagnostic Approach to CBT using Method of Levels is available now.

Check www.pctweb.org for further information on Perceptual Control Theory

On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Tim Carey tim.carey@flinders.edu.au wrote:

Hi Warren,

Thanks for this. Nice summary. In B:CP I really like the way Bill described a kind of rebound phenomenon with conflict. “When a disturbance forces the controlled
quantity close enough to either reference level, however, there will be a reaction. The control system experiencing lessened error will relax, unbalancing the net output in the direction of the
other reference level.” (1st ed., -. 255).

For me, that seems to provide a pretty good account of what we might call “impulsive” behaviours.

Part of the difficulty for me in discussing these kinds of labels is that they’re generally labels from an observer’s perspective rather than from the behaver’s
perspective which is the PCT point of view.

A couple of nitpicks in what Fred wrote … from a PCT perspective I wouldn’t say that action was “emitted or evoked”. That sounds a lot like a response to stimulus
idea. In PCT variables (such as actions) are treated as continuous rather than discrete variables. Actions, then, are varied to oppose disturbances and minimise error. It’s maybe a minor point but it relates to another idea of Fred’s when he suggests that
“Suppose now that you find yourself in that set of circumstances”. This seems to take agency away individual. People don’t just “find themselves” in environments, they place themselves or positions themselves in environments as part of the control processes
that are going on.

It might seem like people “find themselves” in environments from time to time but that requires drawing an arbitrary demarcation between when they were “in” the
environment and when they were “out” of it. If we think of control as a continuous, dynamic process it becomes a lot harder (and even unnecessary) to make that demarcation.

Thanks for sharing this.

Tim

From: Warren Mansell [mailto:wmansell@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, 20 September 2013 1:06 AM
To: Control Systems Group Network (CSGnet)
Cc: Huddy, Vyv; Filippo Varese; sara.tai@manchester.ac.uk; Tim Carey

Subject: Re: Imagination and Impulsive Behavior

Hi Fred, neat idea! I am working on various collaborations (cc’d) concerning the imagination mode in PCT, which I think is very neglected. I think your idea makes a lot of sense, and I would
also suggest that the same process could be responsible for automatic control that is not impulsive or compulsive but just ‘right’, pending adjustments made to the current perception of the situation as it unfolds. From our perspective, what makes us use the
terms ‘compulsive’ or ‘impulsive’ is the existence of conflict - there is another control system whose references for variables that are directly or indirectly controlled by the ‘prehearsed’ system are in conflict - we want to smoke but we also don’t want
to smoke - for example. We then use Method of Levels to help make this conflict explicit and reorganise the overarching goals behind the conflict - e.g. to be a worthwhile person…

There is also a large literature on social psychology called Implementation Intentions - which I think describes what you are considering, but unfortunately they don’t take on board PCT and the explanatory advantages this could give them.

There is also a literature on ‘thought action fusion’ whereby people are genuinely terrified of acting on their thoughts and imaginings. I guess therapy is often about helping people to imagine
what they REALLY want to happen rather than what they are afraid of doing. Again, to do this we might have to help them access their deeper, higher level goals and imagining a variety of ways to achieve them until one ‘clicks’ and doesn’t create conflict in
their imagination.

Making sense?
Warren

On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Fred Nickols fred@nickols.us wrote:

[From Fred Nickols (2013.09.19.0955 EDT)]

I awoke with a start in the middle of the night, awakened by an idea or insight or whatever you care to call it.

It occurred to me that impulsive and perhaps compulsive behaviors are linked to reference conditions, rehearsal, prehearsal and a whole lot more. Let’s look
at some of the terms in what I just tossed out.

Rehearsal. I think most would agree on this; it is the practicing of what you are going to do, much as actors and actresses rehearse or practice their lines,
or as is the case in a wedding rehearsal.

Prehearsal. I came across this term in Joseph Weizenbaum’s book
Computer Power and Human Reason. He didn’t bother to define it but from the context in which it was used I took it to mean practicing the things you
might do. Basically, prehearsal amounts to rehearsing your options.

From PCT we know that action is evoked or emitted as a consequence of a discrepancy between the reference state for a controlled variable and the perceived current
state of that variable. We also know from PCT that such “corrective action” is immediate; for example, if the wind is moving your car sideways you don’t wait until it blows you into the next lane to turn the wheel to counteract the effect of the wind.

So now, consider this. Suppose you are imagining, envisioning, fantasizing, picturing a certain scenario, some set of circumstances and your behavior or actions
in that setting. Suppose now that you find yourself in that set of circumstances (or a set close enough that any differences are inconsequential). What occurred to me is that you might immediately “leap into action,” as it were, which could look and maybe
feel like impulsive or compulsive behavior. The imagined scenario in your head, including your actions, is the reference condition. The perceived circumstances match or are close enough and the only gap is between your imagined and current behavior. You
immediately behave in ways that match your behavior in the imagined scenario.

I’m wondering if this might be a fruitful angle of attack in psychotherapy regarding what we ordinarily label as impulsive and compulsive behaviors.

You’ve heard the old saying, “Be careful what you wish for; you might get it.” Well, to paraphrase that, “Be careful what you imagine; you might do it.”

Comments anyone? David?

Regards,

Fred Nickols, CPT

Managing Partner

Distance Consulting LLC

The Knowledge
Workers’ Tool Room

–

Dr Warren Mansell
Reader in Psychology
Cognitive Behavioural Therapist & Chartered Clinical Psychologist
School of Psychological Sciences
Coupland I
University of Manchester
Oxford Road
Manchester M13 9PL
Email: warren.mansell@manchester.ac.uk

Tel: +44 (0) 161 275 8589

Website:
http://www.psych-sci.manchester.ac.uk/staff/131406

See teamstrial.net for further information on our trial of CBT for Bipolar Disorders in NW England

The highly acclaimed therapy manual on
A Transdiagnostic Approach to CBT using Method of Levels is available now.

Check www.pctweb.org for further information on Perceptual Control Theory

–

Dr Warren Mansell
Reader in Psychology
Cognitive Behavioural Therapist & Chartered Clinical Psychologist

School of Psychological Sciences

Coupland I
University of Manchester
Oxford Road
Manchester M13 9PL
Email: warren.mansell@manchester.ac.uk

Tel: +44 (0) 161 275 8589

Website: http://www.psych-sci.manchester.ac.uk/staff/131406

See teamstrial.net for further information on our trial of CBT for Bipolar Disorders in NW England

The highly acclaimed therapy manual on A Transdiagnostic Approach to CBT using Method of Levels is available now.

Check www.pctweb.org for further information on Perceptual Control Theory

8

[From Fred Nickols (2013.09.20.0620 EDT)]

Warren: Thanks for passing along Tim’s comments. A couple of responses on my part (Oops, there’s that behaviorist in me talking again).

I agree that my use of “evoked” smacks of behaviorism; I thought about that when I wrote it but I let it stand. I’m less willing to tar “emitted” with the behaviorist brush. It seems to me that behavioral output is in fact emitted.

I get Tim’s point about agency in my remark about “finding yourself” in an imagined set of circumstances. I agree that we often enough place ourselves in this or that situation. However, I would also assert that on occasion we do “stumble” into this or that situation, and we are often surprised by what we encounter.

Fred Nickols

···

From: Warren Mansell [mailto:wmansell@GMAIL.COM]
Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 3:10 AM
To: CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU
Subject: Re: Imagination and Impulsive Behavior

Cheer Tim, that’s really helpful. I wish Wegner & Clark had used PCT in their ‘ironic control theory’ model of thought suppression and rebound as it would make it some much easier to understand! And you’re right, there is such a broad point here about how to get everyone thinking in terms of environment as a continuous experience, driven by the individual rather than as a ‘trigger’. I think it might be because unpredictable environments are so unusual that we notice them - awareness shifts to reorganise the systems involved in controlling them - but this means that large swathes of psychology, especially our field, think this is how the environment works. Actually it is the exception rather than the rule…

Warren

On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Tim Carey tim.carey@flinders.edu.au wrote:

Hi Warren,

Thanks for this. Nice summary. In B:CP I really like the way Bill described a kind of rebound phenomenon with conflict. “When a disturbance forces the controlled quantity close enough to either reference level, however, there will be a reaction. The control system experiencing lessened error will relax, unbalancing the net output in the direction of the other reference level.” (1st ed., -. 255).

For me, that seems to provide a pretty good account of what we might call “impulsive” behaviours.

Part of the difficulty for me in discussing these kinds of labels is that they’re generally labels from an observer’s perspective rather than from the behaver’s perspective which is the PCT point of view.

A couple of nitpicks in what Fred wrote … from a PCT perspective I wouldn’t say that action was “emitted or evoked”. That sounds a lot like a response to stimulus idea. In PCT variables (such as actions) are treated as continuous rather than discrete variables. Actions, then, are varied to oppose disturbances and minimise error. It’s maybe a minor point but it relates to another idea of Fred’s when he suggests that “Suppose now that you find yourself in that set of circumstances”. This seems to take agency away individual. People don’t just “find themselves” in environments, they place themselves or positions themselves in environments as part of the control processes that are going on.

It might seem like people “find themselves” in environments from time to time but that requires drawing an arbitrary demarcation between when they were “in” the environment and when they were “out” of it. If we think of control as a continuous, dynamic process it becomes a lot harder (and even unnecessary) to make that demarcation.

Thanks for sharing this.

Tim

From: Warren Mansell [mailto:wmansell@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, 20 September 2013 1:06 AM
To: Control Systems Group Network (CSGnet)
Cc: Huddy, Vyv; Filippo Varese; sara.tai@manchester.ac.uk; Tim Carey

Subject: Re: Imagination and Impulsive Behavior

Hi Fred, neat idea! I am working on various collaborations (cc’d) concerning the imagination mode in PCT, which I think is very neglected. I think your idea makes a lot of sense, and I would also suggest that the same process could be responsible for automatic control that is not impulsive or compulsive but just ‘right’, pending adjustments made to the current perception of the situation as it unfolds. from our perspective, what makes us use the terms ‘compulsive’ or ‘impulsive’ is the existence of conflict - there is another control system whose references for variables that are directly or indirectly controlled by the ‘prehearsed’ system are in conflict - we want to smoke but we also don’t want to smoke - for example. We then use Method of Levels to help make this conflict explicit and reorganise the overarching goals behind the conflict - e.g. to be a worthwhile person…

There is also a large literature on social psychology called Implementation Intentions - which I think describes what you are considering, but unfortunately they don’t take on board PCT and the explanatory advantages this could give them.

There is also a literature on ‘thought action fusion’ whereby people are genuinely terrified of acting on their thoughts and imaginings. I guess therapy is often about helping people to imagine what they REALLY want to happen rather than what they are afraid of doing. Again, to do this we might have to help them access their deeper, higher level goals and imagining a variety of ways to achieve them until one ‘clicks’ and doesn’t create conflict in their imagination.

Making sense?
Warren

On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Fred Nickols fred@nickols.us wrote:

[From Fred Nickols (2013.09.19.0955 EDT)]

I awoke with a start in the middle of the night, awakened by an idea or insight or whatever you care to call it.

It occurred to me that impulsive and perhaps compulsive behaviors are linked to reference conditions, rehearsal, prehearsal and a whole lot more. Let’s look at some of the terms in what I just tossed out.

Rehearsal. I think most would agree on this; it is the practicing of what you are going to do, much as actors and actresses rehearse or practice their lines, or as is the case in a wedding rehearsal.

Prehearsal. I came across this term in Joseph Weizenbaum’s book Computer Power and Human Reason. He didn’t bother to define it but from the context in which it was used I took it to mean practicing the things you might do. Basically, prehearsal amounts to rehearsing your options.

From PCT we know that action is evoked or emitted as a consequence of a discrepancy between the reference state for a controlled variable and the perceived current state of that variable. We also know from PCT that such “corrective action” is immediate; for example, if the wind is moving your car sideways you don’t wait until it blows you into the next lane to turn the wheel to counteract the effect of the wind.

So now, consider this. Suppose you are imagining, envisioning, fantasizing, picturing a certain scenario, some set of circumstances and your behavior or actions in that setting. Suppose now that you find yourself in that set of circumstances (or a set close enough that any differences are inconsequential). What occurred to me is that you might immediately “leap into action,” as it were, which could look and maybe feel like impulsive or compulsive behavior. The imagined scenario in your head, including your actions, is the reference condition. The perceived circumstances match or are close enough and the only gap is between your imagined and current behavior. You immediately behave in ways that match your behavior in the imagined scenario.

I’m wondering if this might be a fruitful angle of attack in psychotherapy regarding what we ordinarily label as impulsive and compulsive behaviors.

You’ve heard the old saying, “Be careful what you wish for; you might get it.” Well, to paraphrase that, “Be careful what you imagine; you might do it.”

Comments anyone? David?

Regards,

Fred Nickols, CPT

Managing Partner

Distance Consulting LLC

The Knowledge Workers’ Tool Room

–

Dr Warren Mansell
Reader in Psychology
Cognitive Behavioural Therapist & Chartered Clinical Psychologist
School of Psychological Sciences
Coupland I
University of Manchester
Oxford Road
Manchester M13 9PL
Email: warren.mansell@manchester.ac.uk

Tel: +44 (0) 161 275 8589

Website: http://www.psych-sci.manchester.ac.uk/staff/131406

See teamstrial.net for further information on our trial of CBT for Bipolar Disorders in NW England

The highly acclaimed therapy manual on A Transdiagnostic Approach to CBT using Method of Levels is available now.

Check www.pctweb.org for further information on Perceptual Control Theory

–

Dr Warren Mansell
Reader in Psychology
Cognitive Behavioural Therapist & Chartered Clinical Psychologist
School of Psychological Sciences
Coupland I
University of Manchester
Oxford Road
Manchester M13 9PL
Email: warren.mansell@manchester.ac.uk

Tel: +44 (0) 161 275 8589

Website: http://www.psych-sci.manchester.ac.uk/staff/131406

See teamstrial.net for further information on our trial of CBT for Bipolar Disorders in NW England

The highly acclaimed therapy manual on A Transdiagnostic Approach to CBT using Method of Levels is available now.

Check www.pctweb.org for further information on Perceptual Control Theory