The Miniscriptby Taibi Kahler, Ph. D. with Hedges Capers, Div.M., LHD. *

See also the 1999 addendum by Taibi Kahler.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this article is to present a concept that furthers counterscript [1] theory; defines sequences of not-OKness; focuses on second by second interlocking [2] script behavior [3]. It focuses as well on second by second individual scripty behavior; links second by second behavior with the life script; [4] and finally suggests a theory of specific, transaction by transaction, script transmission.

ASSUMPTIONS

In Games Alcoholics Play Steiner [5], defines the counterscript as "an acquiescence to the cultural and social demands that are transmitted through the Parent". [6] Steiner further reports that since the witch mother or troll father injunctions are more potent than the counterscript, the counterscript never succeeds. When Berne discusses a winner's script in What Do You Say After You Say Hello [7]?, he suggests the basic rule seems to be that such a script payoff comes from the Nurturing Parent through the counterscript slogans: "A nonwinner gets his payoff from the controlling Parent through injunctions. A loser is led down the path to a bad payoff by the provocations and seductions of his parent's crazy Child, which tempts his self-destructive demons." [8]

The Miniscript concept suggests that there are not-OK counterscripts and OK counterscripts. Shulamit Peck, [9] Taibi Kahler, and others have diagrammed two script matrixes (as shown in figure 1).

(An article explaining this idea and elaborating on structural and script analysis has just been

completed.)

There are five not-OK counterscript slogans, or drivers, which come from the not-OK Nurturant Parent, or Rescuing part. These counterscript drivers seem to be helpful, but only invite the occurrence of the not-OK script injunction. The five OK counterscript slogans, or allowers, come from the OK Nurturant Parent, or Permission giving part. These counterscript allowers strengthen the OK script injunction and yield a winner, a person who makes his own destiny through authenticity.

Capers' belief that all human behavior starts with the Little Professor as the initiator, coupled with Kahler's internal loop concept, yields the following theory of OKness. As Little Fahrquahr is born, he is completely dependent upon Mom and Dad, when they are in their OKness as well as when they are in their not-OKness.

Fahrquahr's Little Professor senses that he must someday be more self-sustaining. Mom and Dad charge one or two batteries within him as his life begins. The more OK they are, the more his OK battery will be charged. The more not-OK they come on, the more his not-OK battery will be charged. Each battery must have a certain level charge before it can be used. His Little Professor senses this and starts activating an internal mechanism which will help him have parents with him throughout life; thus the establishment and purpose of the Parent ego state. This ego state functions as a tape recorder to be turned on when necessary. Fahrquahr's Little Professor will survive if he can keep a battery charged up. If Mom and Dad first charge a not-OK battery by discounting and stroking negatively, [10] he is not able to start his own OK battery -- this needs to be done from an external source initially -- so Fahrquahr activates his not-OK Parent tape recorder and beats on himself when Mom and Dad are not around to do it for him. This Parent acts as a generator for charging the battery (see figure 2).

This cycle -- Little Professor, through not-OK battery, to not-OK Parent generator, to not-OK battery -- self-perpetuates not-OKness in Fahrquahr's existence.

The more positive strokes Mom and Dad give, however, the more Fahrquahr's OK battery gets charged, thus allowing a sequence of self-perpetuating OKness: Little Professor through

OK battery, through OK Parent generator back to OK battery (see figure 3).

(This theory suggests primary internal sequences consistent with the sequence of the miniscript.)

These apparent internal patterns offer an explanation for acceptance of discounts or strokes going into drivers (discount related) or allowers (positive stroke related). Fahrquahr must have some battery going to exist. If he does not have sufficient source of energy to charge his OK battery, and his not-OK battery is faltering, he will seek a discount or negative stroke to get his not-OK battery charged, thus continuing to perpetuate his life that way. When Fahrquahr decides he cannot take the pain of this searching and Parent beating, in order to keep this not-OK battery charged, he will risk trying to get his OK battery charged, or he will turn off all generators, shut down outside stimuli, and withdraw to death.

This explanation fits in with the continuum idea of going from loser to non-winner to winner suggested by Muriel James and Dorothy Jongeward in Born to Win. [11]

DEFINITION OF THE MINISCRIPT

The miniscript is a sequence of behavior, occurring in a matter of minutes or even seconds, that results in a reinforcement pattern for life.

The not-OK miniscript is a sequence of not-OK behavior (pathology), occurring in a matter of minutes or even seconds that results in the reinforcement of the not-OK life script. The OK miniscript is a sequence of OK behavior, occurring in a matter of minutes or even seconds, that results in the reinforcement of script-free, self-directed, autonomous behavior.

The miniscript is also a concept readily applicable to structural, transactional, game and script analysis, as well as a tool to be used in treatment.

The Not-OK Miniscript

Good therapy has been done and continues to be done working with the script injunctions

and with the script payoff. [12]

There is, however, a better and faster tool - the miniscript. The miniscript is not a new kind of script, but rather a tool to be used in a treatment setting to enable the patient to re-direct his life.

The four parts of the not-OK miniscript are: counterscript drivers; stoppers, (or script injunctions); [13] Vengeful Child; and final miniscript payoff.

In the not-OK miniscript are the counterscript drivers that is, messages that seem to invite the person to come out of his stopper, yet in the long run only invite him to go deeper into it. For example, to a stopper of "Feel inadequate," a counterscript driver might be "Be perfect" (get all A's). The gut level message is "You're inadequate." In order for the child to get out of feeling inadequate, he believes he must "Be perfect" (get all A's). If he does not get all A's he has set himself up to feel even more inadequate. Thus, the counterscript driver is not a way out of the script but, in reality, an invitation to go even deeper.

Little Fahrquahr has just been born. He has 20-20 vision and sees life and people very clearly. Since Mommy and Daddy live under the influence of their own not-OK messages, they insist that he does not see life clearly and invite him to put on a pair of script glasses very similar to their own. With these scripty glasses Fahrquahr will see an image of life consistent with that distortion described as reality by his parents. After a little while, they see Little Fahrquahr going blind from wearing these glasses. They decide that in order for him not to go blind they will grind the lens of the top part of the glasses in such a way that he will be able to see a little bit, the counterscript driver part.

As Fahrquahr grows older he will seek people who see the same type of distortions -- whether they be friends or spouse.

Vengeful Child behavior is spiteful behavior. When a person is in his Vengeful Child he's saying, "I'll show YOU." [14] The Vengeful Child position incorporates not-OK parts of Critical Parent as well as Vengeful Child, a part of the Adapted Child. An active Vengeful Child can be seen by games of NIGYSOB or Blemish; or through, for example, practical jokes. Passive-aggressive Vengeful Child behavior can be seen in the following example: Little Fahrquahr has a stopper of "Feel confused" (You're stupid). He is asked to take the garbage out. In doing so he spills it by the side of the garbage can onto the lawn (Vengeful Child), returns to an irate mother who is screaming, "You stupid..." He gets a payoff by being called "stupid" (Adapted Child) and at the same time, although he is the underdog (home-base position of I'm not-OK--You're OK), he believes he is "making mother angry by his Vengeful Child actions. Procrastination is another passive-aggressive Vengeful Child maneuver.

Just as not-OK rebellion is reflected in Vengeful Child behavior, and OK rebellion is reflected in Free Child behavior, so Vengeful Child is reflected in not-OK antiscript

behavior: 1) "They may have been living on their counterscript, and the apparent rebellion is merely an outbreak of script;" 2) "Conversely, they may have been living on their scripts, and shifted to their counterscripts;" 3) "They may have different script directives from each parent, or from one set to another;" 4) "They may be merely following a special script directive that tells them to rebel;" 5) "The person may be a 'script failure' who has despaired of carrying out his script directives and has simply given up." Examples of OK (Free Child rebellion) antiscript behavior include: 1) "They may have found the spellbreaker, and be released from their scripts;" and 2) "He may have freed himself and 'got out of his script' through his own efforts or with the help of psychotherapy. [15]

The final miniscript payoff may incorporate such behavior as feeling alone, unwanted, unloved, not worthwhile, cornered, hopeless, and so on. This fourth position -- the final miniscript payoff -- called final because a person may choose to have a payoff at any one of the four positions.

The Sequence of the Not-OK Miniscript

The not-OK miniscript is an observable pattern of behavior. All not-OKness will be reflected in the not-OK miniscript. First the person behaves under the influence of the counterscript driver; then he behaves under the influence of the stopper (which may emerge as Vengeful Child behavior to avoid the I'm not-OK feeling); then, possibly, he moves into final miniscript payoff behavior. This may be written as a formula and diagrammed as in figure 4.

The position of a person when he is in his counterscript driver is I'm OK -- If.... The position of a person when he is in his stopper is I'm not-OK -- You're OK, which is a "Get away from" position. The position of a person when he is in his Vengeful Child is I'm OK -- You're not OK, which is a "Get rid of" position. The position of a person when he is in his final miniscript payoff behavior is I'm not-OK -- You're not-OK, which is a "Get nowhere" position.

A person will advance to that position in his miniscript that provides reinforcement for his not-OK life position(s).

Figure 5 reflects the relative "needs" a person has to keep a life space constant. [16] In order to maintain this life space, a person would be in his OK miniscript about one-eighth of his time, thus reinforcing the I'm OK -- You're OK position enough to maintain that position. He would spend most of his not-OK miniscript time (transactions) in his stopper; second most in his final miniscript payoff; and least time in his Vengeful Child.

Every second of the day a person is in either his OK miniscript or his not-OK miniscript. When he is in his not-OK miniscript, he is generating energy to strengthen his (not-OK) life script. He will be reinforcing one (rarely two) of six such life scripts. Berne describes each:

1) Never; "I never make it. As a child I was forbidden by my parents to do the things I wanted to do."2) Always; "If that's what you want to do, then you can spend the rest of your life always doing it. You made your bed of sin, now you have to lie in it."3) Until; "You can't have fun until4) After; "You can have your fun for awhile, but then afterwards your troubles will begin. If life is good, something bad will happen. Things have to balance out."5) Over and Over; "I almost made it, but not quite. I do the same thing over and over. If only, if only..."6) Open End; "I've made no plans after retirement, menopause, when the kids leave home, etc." [17]

Counterscript Drivers

Observations of several thousand people strongly suggest that there are five -- and only five -- basic counterscript drivers: "Be perfect," "Try hard," "Hurry up," "Please me," and "Be strong." Each counterscript driver is like a door leading to a staircase connecting a series of basements. each one full of I'm not-OK - You're OK position rackets, such as

depressing, guilt, The first level is full of I'm not-OK - You're OK position rackets, such as depression, guilt, worry, inadequacies, confusion, etc. The second level basement is full of I'm OK -- You're not-OK rackets such as anger and triumph. The deepest basement is full of I'm not-OK -- You're OK rackets such as aloneness, unloved, cornered, unwanted, rejected, and so on. Before a person can feel any of these racket feelings, he first must go through one or more of these five counterscript driver doors in order to got into the basement of his not-OKness.

The "Hurry up" counterscript driver invites a person to do things faster, talk rapidly or more quickly. The person, when under this driver influence, believes that he must do everything "right now." He may interrupt people, thus "hurrying them up" to finish their sentence, glance at his watch frequently, or tap his fingers impatiently. When he is demanding others to hurry, he is under this "Hurry up" influence. This counterscript driver is symbolized by the White Rabbit, who insists, "I'm late, I'm late, for a very important date!" Alice has to hurry to catch him.

When a person is under the influence of his "Be perfect" counterscript driver, he strives for perfection, or expects others to do so. He may use big words, tell more than he is asked to tell, Or cover all the bases. He believes he has to give a great deal of information so that people will understand him "just right." He is under the misconception that if he is not perfect, that means that he is not-OK. The pedantic caterpillar in Alice in Wonderland who demanded perfect grammar symbolizes "Be perfect."

When a person is under the influence of his "Try hard" counterscript driver, he invites others to try hard with him. He may not answer questions directly, may repeat questions, pause, go off on tangents, or say things like "It's hard for me," or "I don't know" (when he actually does). An example of the "Try hard" driver is when a man is caught in quicksand with safety within his reach. If he struggles (Try hard), he will sink. If he moves slowly and thoughtfully he will reach safety.

When a person is under the influence of his "Be strong" driver, he is stoic, holding in his feelings. He may talk in a monotone and evidence few signs of excitement. Spartan warriors were programmed very early to believe that feelings were a weakness, that a man should be strong.

When a person is under the influence of his "Please me" driver, he feels responsible for "making" others feel good. He may agree freely with others. It may be important for him to be liked, and he may have an investment in getting the approval of others. He may look away before he answers questions, nod his head frequently, raise his eyebrows, say "um hmm" often, or be interested in finding out "How am I doing?" This is the Good Guy or Sweetheart. [18]

THE OK MINISCRIPT

(by Hedges Capers)

Just as the not-OK part of the miniscript invites a person into not-OKness, so the OK part invites him into OKness. The four parts of the OK miniscript are: the allower; the goer; the Affirming Free Child,- and the wower.

When a person sees his not-OK miniscript on the blackboard, he is faced with a decision either to hold onto it or to give it up and make some new choices. We have observed reactions from the "Wow! I can see that" and "I can change that" to the frightened person who says "Now what will I do?" When a person considers change, the Parent tapes play louder than ever. This is the phenomenon of the despairing patient who "is now faced with the archaic fears which he previously warded off by playing games, thus fulfilling his script." [19] It often seems too much to write a new script. At this point, the therapist draws the OK miniscript beside the not-OK miniscript on the board and explains it, and he and the patient explore the OK parts of his miniscript (see figure 6).

"What can you substitute for the driver?" Life-giving, nurturing allowers begin with "It's OK to With humor and hope and support the therapist asks "What does your Child need? What does your Child want?" For the driver, "Be perfect," the allower can be It's OK to make a mistake; It's OK to fail; It's OK to get dirty. These reparenting [20] messages selected by the patient, who knows his own needs, form the specifics for his allowers that are the antitheses to his drivers. It is not humanly possible to be perfect, or have others be perfect. He sets himself up for disappointment with that unrealistic driver. "It's OK to be human; You don't have to make an impression."

The "Hurry up" driver leaves the person trying to get someplace else. His allower is "It is OK to live now, to take your time." "You have time to do anything you want to do." Instead of "Try hard," the allower is "It's OK to do it; it's OK to finish what you're doing; it's OK to do it well; It's OK to win. I like you just like you are -- you are beautiful. Life can be fun."

When a person is in his "Please me," he needs to know it's OK to rely on his own judgments and to take care of his own needs. He needs to know he is lovable and his worth is not dependent upon other people's judgment. It is OK for him not to be responsible for other people's feelings. It is OK for him to accept the responsibility for his own feelings.

The antithesis to "Be strong" is the allower "Be open"- to be close and feel and express feelings. "It's OK not to be strong." "It's OK to be human."

For each river, there is an allower, as in table 1:

TABLE I

Be perfect. It's OK to be yourself.

Hurry up. It's OK to take your time. Try hard. It's OK to do it.Please me. It's OK to consider yourself and respect yourself.Be strong It's OK to be open (and to take care of your own needs).

These allowers are available to all of us and seem, at this point, to be inclusive. The fact that a patient is in therapy shows him that he has some Permission to live and to be. So just as we render impotent the driver by giving him the option of the allower (not-OK Parent to OK Parent) so we deal with the script injunction, the stopper. We give the client Permission to disobey the primary script injunctions and to do something he chooses in place of the "Don't be" messages. In an early lecture, Dr. Berne responded to a mother who asked about children who play You've Got to Listen to Me that this is a possible position of the criminal. She was dismayed that he said that you give your children a whole smorgasbord of options and they choose what they need or want. You can't take blame or credit for the specific choice they make. I have never known a parent who gave his children only bad messages. The good ones can be brought into focus.

In the goers, we are helping the client see and remember the positive options they gave him, or to choose the new (reparenting) messages he wants.

For the wide range of "Don't be" messages, there are corresponding "Be" or "Go" messages. We deal with Vengeful Child activities in the same way. Acting out Vengeful Child can be replaced by Free Child appropriate behavior -- and the final miniscript payoff feelings can be given up and replaced by a "Wow" feeling of choice. Instead of feeling inadequate -- feel confident. Instead of unloved -- feel loved. Instead of rejected -- feel accepted.

It is important that the person be in his Adult when these methods are being discussed with him. Putting the two miniscripts on the blackboard, asking him to fill in the messages and feelings, enhances the chances of his being in his Adult.

It is not enough just to know about our not-OKness. Keeping in the OK miniscript assists the patient in giving up despair and in having hope.

The Sequence of Getting Well

As a person in therapy becomes "more OK" and shifts from a loser to a non-winner to a winner, he is beginning to listen more to CK messages and injunctions than to not-OK ones. He takes off his hearing aid (along with the glasses, a present from Mom and Dad) and begins listening in the "here and now." This is, in essence, parenting - giving himself Permission to listen and respond to the messages which form the OK miniscript. Reparenting with the OK miniscript consists of listening without his hearing aid to someone (OK), whom he loved or revered. This would enable him to discover his new OK miniscript options and to choose his new OK miniscript payoffs.

Getting well (I'm OK -- You're OK) means shifting from the negative, not-OK miniscript to the positive, OK miniscript, which, perforce, means extinguishing the (not-OK) life script. There is a definite pattern in getting well. A person will have extinguished first position four in the not-OK miniscript (the final miniscript payoff); next he will have extinguished position three (the Vengeful Child position); next, he will have extinguished position two (the stopper); last, he will extinguish his drivers. Not only has this been observed, but it is also logically consistent.

Given that a person spends ten units of time per day in driver behavior, he may escalate into his stopper seven of those times, into his Vengeful Child five of those times, and all the way into his final miniscript payoff only three of the original ten times. Since the not-OK miniscript is a sequence either of 1-2, 1-2-3-, 1-2-3-4-, 1-2-4, or 2-3-4, by focusing on position one, a person reduces the number of times that he would be able to escalate into any of the other three positions. By reducing the number of times he is in his driver by three, he

has therefore extinguished his final miniscript payoff, leaving then seven times in the driver, four times in the stopper and two times in the Vengeful Child. If he further reduces his driver by two, he will have eliminated Vengeful Child; and by reducing it by another two he will have eliminated the stoppers.

Since the not-OK miniscript is a sequence, a person is not able to feel any racket feelings (worry, guilt, depression, anger, inadequacy, unloved, confusion, hopelessness, etc.) without first going through one of the five counterscript drivers. This means that a person who stops his driver behavior will not ever again escalate into a racket feeling. Stopping driver behavior is, without a doubt, easier than focusing on a racket feeling like depression and stopping it. By using a different word, changing a facial expression, adjusting a posture, shifting a tone, or altering a gesture, it is possible to stop resultant feelings of inadequacy, confusion, guilt, worry, anger, depression, and so on, from again occurring.

Not-OK Miniscript Chart

The not-OK miniscript is the kernel from which emerges the (not-OK) life script. At first Little Fahrquahr mimics sensed patterns of behavior. (Not-OK miniscript sequences have been observed in year-old babies.) Soon Little Fahrquahr starts integrating and elaborating on this basic, sensed patterned, 11 required" by Mom and Dad. He selects his stoppers very early in life, along with certain rackets, and later adds other reinforced rackets to his collection. His five drivers are sifted out and reinforced by Mom and Dad so that a definite ranking is established. These counterscript drivers were implanted within the first few years, yet the specific ways of implementing them were not fixed until between the years of six and twelve.

The miniscript differs from Berne's formula for the script by the inclusion of counterscript. Berne's formula is: Early Parental Influence [Counterscript ] Program Compliance Important Behavior Payoff. Berne's script formula was linear; that is, it grew as a function of time. The miniscript seed suggests growth on two dimensions -- intensity and expansion. As Little Fahrquahr grows older, the more he stays in not-OKness, the more he will comply with the not-OK messages he has accepted. Had he accepted a message to "feel inadequate," the more he would stay in his not-OK life script and the more intense he would allow that message of inadequacy to become. Important behavior originally starts as a behavioral phenomenon [21] (words, tones, gestures, posture, and facial expressions). This important behavior grows by expanding into major behavioral aspects of the (not-OK) life script, such as recurrent hospitalization, divorces, suicide, attempts, and so on.

The miniscript chart is useful in identifying the not-OK miniscript for group treatment and personal purposes.

It affords a person the advantage of identifying the specific times and ways that he goes into not-OKness. The completed driver section reflects typical examples of such counterscript behavior. By close scrutiny of second-by-second transactions, a person can fill out his not-

OK miniscript chart as well as an OK miniscript chart.

Just as games can be interrupted at any point, so can the not-OK miniscript. Stopping the not-OK miniscript at the initial counterscript driver level insures, however, that no further rackets will be felt. Just as all games start with a discount, [22] so do all not-OK miniscripts. By stopping games, one does not stop his not-OK miniscript. By stopping his drivers one does, however, stop one's games, rackets, not-OK positions, and not-OK life scripts.

The Not-OK Miniscript and Structural, Transactional, Game and Script Analysis

The not-OK miniscript reflects structural analysis by presenting the sequence of not-OKness that a person may go through. This sequence will start with an internal discount triggering one or more of the five drivers. As he comes on to another actively with his not-OK miniscript behavior, a person is evidencing transactional analysis. Game analysis, as observed by John Kesterson, is reflected by two people transacting from their counterscript drivers at the social level, and from their stoppers, Vengeful Child, or final miniscript payoff positions at the ulterior level. Script analysis is also explained by the not-OK miniscript concept. An integral dynamic of transmitting a script is the invitation to another to accept one's own driver, stopper, Vengeful Child, or final miniscript payoff. Little Fahrquahr's Mom and Dad invited him to accept either or both of their drivers so he could see life as they did. A person with a "Be perfect" driver when asked questions like, "How much is two plus two?" might well respond, if in his not-OK miniscript, "That is a function of the base system to which you are referring." He is "being perfect" in mathematical theory as well as in grammar. If the other person has an interlocking driver such as "Be perfect" or "Try hard" or "Please me," he may be prompted to be perfect, try hard, or please others by asking more "intelligent and perfect questions," thereby having a script symbiosis, or interlocking not-OK miniscript relationship, with that other person. Such as interlocking not-OK miniscript would invite not-OKness more frequently and more rapidly, with the help of the other person's not-OK part. A person when in his driver of "Try hard" may repeat questions, not answer questions directly, pause or say, "I don't follow you," with a frown or perplexed appearance. The invitation to another is for him to accept this driver and "Try hard" to get the initial person to understand.

Fanita English has suggested the hot potato or episcript phenomenon? [23] Such a phenomenon exists at all four positions of the not-OK miniscript, not just at the hot potato (Vengeful Child) intensity. Thus, a warm potato phenomenon is suggested, which is consistent with Frank Ernst's idea of the invitation of passing off one's rackets to another. [24]

[The Miniscript Chart]

Interlocking Miniscripts

Eric Berne discovered the dynamics of the not-OK miniscript in one of his groups:

Mrs. Sayers stretched her arms out across Mrs. Catter's chest to reach for an ash tray on the end table. As she drew her arms back she lost her balance and almost fell off the couch. She recovered just in time, laughed deprecatingly, muttered "Excuse me!" and settled back to smoke. At this moment Mrs. Catter took her attention away from Mr. Troy long enough to mutter "Pardon me." Here, condensed into a few seconds, is the story of Mrs. Sayer's life. She tries to be careful but does things in an awkward way. She almost comes to grief but is rescued just in time. She apologizes, but then someone else takes the blame [25]

Elements of two interlocking not-OK miniscripts are apparent. Mrs. Sayer has a "Try hard" (to be careful) driver; both a "feel inadequate" (clumsy) stopper and a "don't feel what you feel" (deprecating laugh) stopper; and, finally, a hurt feelings (grief) final miniscript payoff. Mrs. Catter has a "Try hard" (took her attention away from Mrs. Troy) to "Please me" (pardon me) driver; a "feel guilty" (take the blame) stopper, which will probably lead to depression as a final miniscript payoff.

A person will choose another (as a mate) on the basis of an interlocking not-OK miniscript. By focusing on the dynamics of interlocking not-OK miniscripts, a marriage counselor will be able to predict the probability of success and potential time spent in not-OKness in pre-marital counseling with a couple. For example, a person with a "Be perfect" will search for a person with a "Please me." An example of such interlocking not-OK miniscripts can be diagrammed, as in figure 7.

When Ruth is in her driver of "Pleasing and Being perfect," David is invited to "Be perfect," to which he readily agrees, having such a driver. He, at this point, plays a subtle game of NIGYSOB, "Obviously you should have thought about ..." (Vengeful Child). She then responds in the stopper by feeling inadequate. David then feels responsible for her inadequacy and feels guilty, she feels responsible for him too, and she withdraws with depression into her final miniscript payoff of unloved. He observes her withdrawal and shifts into his own final miniscript payoff of aloneness. Ruth may recycle by trying to please him, and so on, ad infinitum.

Ruth and David originally met at a party where the men put their script glasses on a table and the women put theirs on another. While pastiming and gaming the men tried on each woman's glasses and each woman tried on every man's glasses. David and Ruth discovered that they could see through each other's glasses - it was love at first image. The closer they became, the more they did not see and the more their images departed from reality, each inviting the other deeper into his not-OK miniscript and (not-OK) life script,

The basis for all interlocking miniscript (not-OK) behavior is the single belief that "I can make you feel (good, or bad) by what I say" and/or "You can make me feel (good or bad) by what you say." This single belief is the key to all scripting, as well as to individual not-OKness. When a patient gives up the belief that others are responsible for feelings, he will extinguish his not-OK behavior. The second most hampering message is "don't think." If a person obeys this "rule," he cannot understand his problem, be aware of his stopper, examine his past decision and consider making a new one. "Don't think" means don't plug in your Adult. [26]

The Miniscript in Therapy

The miniscript is a valuable tool for treatment, in that it affords the therapist a means of identifying and treating the (not-OK) life script by breaking up the behavior of the not-OK miniscript. This not-OK miniscript follows a definite order, a predictable sequence which permits here and now confrontations of scripty behavior. For example a therapist might confront a patient who continues to "Try hard" by not answering a question directly with a contract for direct answers. To a patient who looks away ("Please me") before answering, a contract may be offered to keep eye-to-eye contact. If he "forgets," the therapist may repeat the contract or use his Free Child by moving his head to catch the patient's attention. If the patient continues to "forget" the contract by "slipping," this means he has a strong "Try hard" and possible problems with his anger. (He may well have a "Never" script.)

When a patient comes for an initial interview, the following sequence is used. Allow him to talk for a few minutes and jot down his not-OK miniscript. (It is possible, by focusing on words, tones, gestures, postures, and facial expressions, to pick up a person's not-OK miniscript within a few minutes, even if he talks about the weather.) The sequence is shown to him, without labels, asking if it is accurate (not telling him). The miniscript is an incredibly powerful tool. Like any tool, it can be used in an OK way or in a not-OK way. Using this tool in a non-threatening way with OK Nurturant Parent and Free Child, when appropriate, affords the optimal invitation to a patient to enter his OK miniscript.

When the patient sees and agrees to his sequence of not-OKness, a contract is offered for each position of the not-OK miniscript. It is then explained that all these contracts can be fulfilled by stopping position one (driver) behavior.

An explanation of the not-OK miniscript is then offered to the patient.

The final miniscript payoff is just a racket feeling; it has no power in itself; it can be owned, examined, accepted, rejected, or replaced. The patient's Vengeful Child activities are patterned puppet behavior, and that behavior was once valuable, but no longer brings satisfaction, and he can decide to behave differently. The stopper is recorded and the recording is going to stay there -- the patient has made a decision some time before to accept that injunction, because it seemed most appropriate at that time. He is told that it is no longer appropriate and that he can make a new decision. Most potent and most easily accepted is the belief that the patient can understand his drivers and decide not to live under their influence any more. This decision is often the easiest decision to make. The decision pertaining to the stopper (Vengeful Child behavior) and final miniscript payoff behavior are all gut-level decisions based on a concretized kind of thinking which is best understood by a child and difficult for a person using rational thinking to cope with. The thinking which went into the decision to accept the drivers was made by the patient at a time when he was not old enough to use rational thinking. This kind of thinking is easier to redecide than the others. A person deciding not to live under the influence of his drivers cannot go under the influence of his stoppers; nor will he engage in Vengeful Child activities or accept final miniscript payoff.

Good therapy is being done when a person chooses to turn in bad feelings and gets good feelings. As a person acknowledges not-OK sequences he is in his Adult (out of bad feelings). A patient often says "Wow!" indicating that he's learned something and feels it - and at this point, therapy has begun.

Although traditional techniques are used, a here-and-now focus is the fastest way of stopping the not-OK miniscript. If, for example, a person asks to be regressed [27], or have an early Child cathected, he is Adult enough to use his Adult, instead of regression, to observe his here-and-now behavior. Only when a person refuses to cathect his Adult after several different invitations by the therapist is it appropriate to use a technique which attempts to "clean out the rackets." Immediately after, the Adult can analyze the not-OK

sequence that allowed such racket feelings to occur. An ounce of prevention is worth a ton of cure.

TA therapists have indicated that it takes two years for a person to extinguish his not-OK life script. With the miniscript, people have, at a gut-level, extinguished their not-OK life scripts within seven months.

A therapist needs to be aware of his own life script and his not-OK miniscript so that he does not risk interlocking with his patients. Some patients choose a therapist on the basis of how they can interlock in not-OK miniscript behavior with him. This is not conscious, yet may persist. Observation, preferably recorded by a video tape, of therapy sessions is a valuable means of tracking down not only the patient's miniscript, but also any interlocking not-OK miniscript behavior between therapist and patient that may exist. (A camera on each has proved valuable .) [28]

Examples

A therapist who has a high-ranking "Try hard" driver may "have difficulty" in getting contracts.

A therapist who has a high-ranking "Please me" driver will usually be well liked, yet sets up patients to get well for him (Please me), rather than getting well for themselves. By nodding, raising eyebrows, saying "um hmm" or "OK" after the patient speaks, the therapist may be in his "Please me," setting up the patient to please him. This appears as if the therapist is thoughtful and conscientious and a good stroker. The reinforcement, if done from "Please me," sets up transference quickly (since "Please me" usually results in an I'm not-OK escalation, the other person does not " need" to fear a Critical Parent), and perhaps permanently, unless the therapist stops his driver.

A therapist can avoid getting hooked into his "Try hard" driver by listening carefully for set-ups.

Patient: "I've really got a problem." (Pause) This is an invitation to the therapist to "Try hard" ("What is it you want?"). A response from the therapist is not required.

The following are clinical examples of training therapists working with patients:

Therapist: "In what situations do you feel depressed? When do you feel more depressed?" (Two questions in a row without a response indicate a "Try hard.")

Patient: "Well, that's hard to nail down." ("Try hard.")

Therapist: "Would you do this now?" ("Would" is "Please me;" "Will" is Adult.)

Patient: "Yes, if you really want me to." ("Please me.")

Therapist: "Exactly what do you feel right now in the pit of your stomach?" ("Be perfect.")

Patient: "I wish I could tell you, I get so confused." ("Please me" confusion.) Patient: "... then I got in touch with ...... Therapist: (interrupting) "... that same old anger, and then what?" ("Hurry up.")

Patient: "Which anger was that?" ("Try hard.")

When the therapist does not go into his drivers, a patient will either stay in his OK miniscript with him (a result of charging up his OK battery), or go into his drivers in hopes of hooking the therapist. If the therapist does not choose to be hooked, the patient may escalate to his favorite position in his own not-OK miniscript (e.g., I'm not-OK -- you're OK, "because I'm so confused by you-," I'm OK -- You're not-OK, "because you don't have any feelings, because I'm paying you to help me!;" I'm not-OK -- You're not-OK "because if I keep quiet you'll keep analyzing me and thinking I'm dumb, and if I say something you'll jump on it.").

A therapist must be Potent before he can give Permission. [29] When a therapist is authentic and consistent (congruent in words, tones, gestures, posture, facial expressions) with his Permission to a patient, he is in his OK miniscript. Being out of his not-OK miniscript and not letting himself get hooked by a patient's drivers, establishes his Potency with that person. Before a patient will accept Permission, then, he must sense that the therapist will not stay in his own not-OK miniscript.

More-than-Hunches

There may be primary and secondary not-OK life scripts. The earlier in life the script is formed, the stronger it is. Until and After scripts are examples of early (at birth or preverbal) primal scripts. These scripts may be products of stoppers, while secondary scripts, such as Open end, may be a result of drivers. Extinguishing one of the six life scripts without the use of the miniscript by traditional TA techniques does not always yield a shift into the "I'm OK -- You're OK" position. [30] Janov's [31] findings are not inconsistent with this. He has observed in hundreds of cases that when a patient who has had gut-level drive "to wait until ... to do something" (Until script) goes through a birth primal, he no longer manifests any (FMP, VC, S) behavior. In either therapy, the drivers are still present -- an invitation to escalate into racket feelings and more not-OKness.

The order of the drivers may be useful in predicting the not-OK life script. For example, a person with a number one driver of "Be perfect" will probably have an Until script, with stoppers of "don't be close," "don't trust ... .. feel guilty," "feel inadequate," and "don't be a child" or "don't have fun." He will spend most of his not-OK time in his Vengeful Child (I'm OK -- You're not-OK) playing NIGYSOB or Blemish, seldom escalating to a final miniscript payoff. If he does, the rackets will be unloved or unwanted. He may be a constant Adult, [32]

having had to be the "man in the family," either because he was the oldest or because his dad was not around. His games may also include Harried; I'm Only Trying to Help You; Freemasonry; or They'll Be Glad They Knew Me. He will be invited to marry a woman who has a "Please me" as her first driver.

Footnotes

* At the February, 1973, workshop of the San Diego Institute for Transactional Analysis, Hedges Capers christened the miniscript as the Kahler Miniscript.

** With special thanks to Stephen Karpman for editorial assistance.

---REFERENCES

[1] Steiner, Claude. "Script and Counterscript," TAB, V:18, April, 1966, p. 143.

[2] Berne, Eric. What Do You Say After You Say Hello? New York: Grove Press. 1972, p. 233.

[3] Ibid. p. 42.

[4] Berne, Eric. Sex in Human Loving. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1970.

[5] Steiner, Claude. "Script and Counterscript," TAB, V:18, April 1966, p. 134.

[6] Steiner, Claude. Games Alcoholics Play. New York: Grove Press, 1971, p. 47.

[7] What Do You Say After You Say Hello? p. 205.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Peck, Shulamit. Presented at the Eric Berne Seminar in San Francisco, September, 1973.

[10] Kahler, T. and Cooper, T. "Classifications of Strokes and Discounts," unpublished ms.

[11] James, M. and Jongeward, D. Born to Win. Menlo Park: Addison-Wesley, 1971, p. 1.

[12] What Do You Say After You Say Hello? pp. 110,113.

[13] Ibid. p. 107..

[14] Selinger, Zelig. Paper presented at the Ninth Annual Summer Conference, San Francisco,

California, August, 1971.

[15] What Do You Say After You Say Hello? pp.132,133.

[16] Ernst, Franklin. "The OK Corral: The Grid for Get-On-With," TAJ, I:4, October, 1971, p. 23 1.

[17] Sex in Human Loving, pp. 163-171.

[18] Harris, Amy. "Good Guys and Sweethearts, TAJ, III:1, January 1972, pp. 13-19.

[19] Berne, Eric. Principles of Group Treatment. New York: Oxford University Press, 1966, p. 278.

[20] Schiff, Jacqui. "Reparenting Schizophrenics," TAB, VIII:31, July 1969, pp. 49, 50.

[21] Transactional Analysis in Psychotherapy. pp. 75,76.

[22] Schiff, Jacqui. Personal communication.

[23] English, Fanita. "Episcript and the 'Hot Potato' Game," TAB, VIII:32, Oct. 1969, pp. 77-82.

[24] Ernst, Franklin. "Psychological Rackets in the OK Corral," TAJ, III:2, April 1973, pp. 19--23.

[25] Transactional Analysis in Psychotherapy. p. 123.

[26] Kahler, T. and Stuntz, E. "Treating Stupid Players," TAJ, III:2, April 1973, p. 33.

[27] Schiff, Jacqui. "Reparenting Schizophrenics," TAB, VIII:31, July 1969, pp. 58-60.

[28] Such supervision is being done at the San Diego Institute for Transactional Analysis.

[29] Crossman, Pat. "Permission and Protection," TAB, V:19, July 1966, pp. 152-154.

[30] Kahler, Linda. Personal communication.

[31] Janov, Arthur. "Primal Scream" (film), 1971.

[32] Born to Win, p. 21

Copyright © Taibi Kahler, all rights reserved.

About the Author

In 1974, at the time of this article's writing,

Dr. Taibi Kahler, Provisional Teaching Member, was on the staff of the San Diego Institute for Transactional Analysis.

Dr. Hedges Capers, Teaching Member, was the Director of the San Diego Institute for Transactional Analysis.

*This article was originally published in the Transactional Analysis Journal, vol. 4, no. 1, January 1974, pp. 27-42.

See also the 1999 addendum by Taibi Kahler.

Addendum to the 1974 article The Miniscript

by Taibi Kahler, Ph. D.

January 1999

I am grateful to the editorial board of TAJnet for this opportunity to revisit the original miniscript article and to update the applications and research done for the last twenty eight years on the concept, and its offsprings, the Process Communication Model and Process Therapy.

In 1972 I conducted a research project [1] correlating drivers, ego states, psychological needs, life positions, rackets, script injunctions, scripts, roles, games, and myths. I administered the Kahler Transactional Analysis Script Checklist, which I had created for my dissertation [2], to 1,200 people. With completed responses by 982, six of the ten Drivers (five from Child and five from the Parent) were selected as the most experienced: Please you, Try hard for you, Be strong for you, Be perfect for you, Be strong for you, Be perfect for you, Be strong for me, and Be perfect for me. Although this study did not demonstrate significant correlations between these six major groupings of driver (types) and expected item responses, there were significant correlations among non-driver related item responses constituting a natural loading on six clusters. For example, there was a strong correlation between and among, -CP, frustration, NIGYSOB, I'm OK - You're Not OK, Don't have fun, and the Until script. The mutually exclusive and significant factor loadings strongly suggested that six patterns were representing at least 95% of the negative behaviors, as identified by these T.A. terms. I had shared many of these correlations with a good friend and colleague, Dr. Paul Ware, who had read Shapiro's work [3] and later postulated six adaptations [4]. We both seemed to be on the same track, from differing directions.

I started teaching and writing about the six patterns and their correlations, calling them Overreactors, Workaholics, Doubters, Manipulators, Disapprovers, and Daydreamers, adding a seventh to identify some of the clinically unaccounted for population, and called this adaptation Cyclers [5].

About 1975, I began to travel and lecture a great deal, and slowly shifted away from clinical presentations to personal awareness and growth seminars, and then to business application conferences. With my role at NASA in 1978 in the selection and placement of the astronauts, came an obvious need for more efficient ways of interviewing hundreds of candidates.

The timing was perfect. Although I had not focused any more on clinical or miniscript applications, I had looked and thought a great deal about the positive behavior patterns of these primary six adaptations, and I began calling them personality types. It was time for more research.

For several years, I had been looking at personality structure as a layering of these six (positive) personality types. I trained a group of Parent Educators in Florida over a period of twenty years. They in turn taught about ten thousand parents (an average of 500 parents of two through five-year olds in ten Lab Schools each year) how to assess personality structure, connect with their children, motivate them, and deal with their negative behaviors. We hypothesized that this ordering of these six personality types within an individual was mostly “set” by age seven. Subsequent test-retest research [6] has substantiated that personality structure remains consistent over time.

In about 1978 I made perhaps the most important theoretical discovery of my life, including the miniscript [7]. I called it “phases”. I was searching for a key to unlock such questions as:

1. Why people were motivated by different psychological needs at different times in their lives?

2. Why a person's primary driver never changes even though he or she might have a [negative][*] miniscript sequence that will correlate to a [positive] personality type other than the one associated with this primary driver?

3. Why people will or can have a different predominant script at different times of their lives?

4. Why people can demonstrate not just one, but two [negative] miniscripts?

In order to answer these questions I began another study, finished in 1982 [8], that included a research a paper and pencil inventory, and expanded the questions to connect personality types with character traits, environmental preferences and management styles. It also tested for phases, the emergence of a foreground personality type that determines, to some extent, what our new psychological needs will be, and what the new [negative] miniscript will be.

This research also tested for what had been observed in the perceptions of each of the six personality types. This was a consistent and logical outgrowth from Paul Ware's model [9] of

expanding Berne's feeling, thinking and behaving designations. I renamed “feelings” to “emotions”. I observed the singularity “thoughts” to be a mixture of thoughts and opinion). And I observed “behaving” divided into action, reaction, and inaction. Results indeed indicated significant correlations between Reactors and emotions, Workaholics and thoughts, Persisters and opinions, Promoters and actions, Rebels and reactions, and Dreamers and inactions.

Three “experts” in assessing these six Personality types independently interviewed 100 people. All six Personality types were represented in the sample. All three judges agreed on 97 assessments, yielding an interjudge reliability significant at >.001.

These same experts were to determine phase. Using again Kendall's coefficient of concordance, W, and testing this significance with the critical values of chi-square, interjudge reliability was again significant at >.001.

An additional number of people were assessed and selected by the judges independently so that a minimum number of 30 persons were available for each classification of Personality type, yielding a total sample of 180 identified “assessed” people.

Two hundred and thirteen items including extractions from the original study item pool were administered to 112 randomly selected subjects. Analysis of this data indicated once again a natural loading on six criteria - - the six Personality types.

Two hundred and four of these items were administered to the 180 identified Personality types. Only items with a correlation of greater than .60 (significant at >.01) were accepted for inclusion in the final Personality Pattern Inventory (PPI).

I was elated not only with the results of the research, but with using it to reinterpret the 1972 research findings.

To illustrate with a typical example:

(Promoter) Be strong for me(Dreamer) Be strong  (Persister) Be perfect for me(Rebel) Try hard  (Reactor) Please you  (Workaholic) Be perfect  

In the original research, if a person had a primary Be perfect driver, it was hypothesized that he or she would then experience the following cluster of behaviors: -CP, Don't have fun, frustration, NIGYSOB, Until, I'm OK - You're Not OK, etc., as these all were highly

correlative.

Yet to be realized was the most important human behavioral factor, phases. In the above example, if the person had “phased” and was currently in the second floor identified as “Please you”, then even though his primary, that is, most used observable driver, was still “Be perfect”, the actual [negative] miniscript behavior will start with “Please you” and contain such correlatives: “I'm Not OK - You're OK”; “-AC”, “victim”; “Stupid” and “Kick Me”; confusion; “Don't feel” your anger; “Almost”; etc. With such concurrent and predicative validity results, we could conclude that when a person does not get his/her phase-psychological-needs met positively, they will attempt to get the very same needs met negatively by coping and defending with the [negative] miniscript pattern that correlates with that phase personality type.

Therefore, since each person's behavior can be observed, described, explained, categorized, and monitored second by second with this model, I liken personality structure to a six floor condominium, complete with an elevator. The order is determined by birth (probably the first floor) and by environment (probably floors two through six.) There are 720 unique combinations, and with the identification of the phase, this yields a total of 4,320 unique personality structures, each floor of which has “energy” that can be measured from 1 to 100%. In other words, one could interpret that there are millions of positive miniscripts.

Although originally I identified five drivers from the Parent (i.e., I'm OK - - You would be if...) and five from the Child (i.e., You're OK - - I would be if...), only six of these ten drivers significantly correlated with other six factor loadings: Please you, Try hard for you, Be strong for you, Be perfect for you, Be strong for me, and Be perfect for me. In other words, observation and research suggests that six [negative] miniscript sequences describe and encompass a significant percentage of the general population.

Another result of the second research endeavor was the production of a paper and pencil inventory that gives these business, personal, and clinical correlations in the forms of profile reports and seminars. More than 500,000 people have now been profiled, in more than 20 countries, in 10 different languages, complete with reliability and validity scales. 135 people have been certified in the U.S. and 170 internationally.

Although it is not my purpose here to give a treatise on Process Therapy, I would be remiss if I did not caution the reader on several points postulated in the original article. Most importantly, drivers should neither be confronted directly, nor should they be “eliminated.” The phase driver starts a [negative] miniscript sequence that connects that driver and a decisional consequence at the script injunction level. Therefore, the driver functions as a defense mechanism and should be treated as such: (As I recall, Bob and Mary Goulding identified this correctly and offered this caveat) There are, however, preferred transactions and perceptions to use when you transact with a person in a driver. Furthermore, just providing “permissions” relating to drivers or stoppers (functional script injunctions) is not

likely to be profitable.

For those who would like an annotated research, including ten dissertations, and a presentation list or an overview of Process Therapy, including [negative] miniscript sequences, please e-mail me at kahlercom@aristotle.net. Please note that any teaching or training of non-clinical applications of the miniscript model (a.k.a. Process Communication Model) is copyrighted and requires certification by Kahler Communications, Inc. in the U.S., and Taibi Kahler Associates, Inc. in all other countries.

*I wish I had called the Not-OK miniscript the negative miniscript - - it's a bit more descriptive and a little less evaluative.

Footnotes

[1] Kahler, Taibi, Ph.D., “Personality Pattern Inventory Validation Studies”. Kahler Communication, Inc., 1982.

[2] Kahler, Taibi, Ph.D., Purdue University, 1972. Dissertation. “Predicting academic underachievement in ninth and twelfth grade males with the Kahler Transactional Analysis Script Checklist.”

[3] Shapiro, David, M.D., “Neurotic Styles”. Basics Books, 1972

[4] Ware, Paul, M.D., “Personality Adaptations”. Transactional Analysis Journal, January 1983

[5] Kahler, Taibi, Ph.D., “Process Therapy in Brief.” Human Development Publications, 1979.

[6] Stansbury, Pat, “Report of Adherence to theory discovered when the Personality Pattern Inventory was administered to subjects twice.” Kahler Communications, Inc., 1990.

[7] Kahler, Taibi, Ph.D. with Capers, Hedges, “Miniscript”, Transactional Analysis Journal, January 1974

[8] Kahler. op.cit.

[9] Ware, op.cit.

Copyright © Taibi Kahler, all rights reserved.

About the Author

Taibi Kahler holds a Ph.D. in Child Development and Family Life from Purdue University, is a licensed psychologist, and is the originator of the Process Communications Model - used in sales, management, education,

parenting, mentoring, relationships, team work, assessing and predicting of personal and professional distress sequences.

He is the recipient of the 1977 Eric Berne Memorial Scientific Award for the Miniscript. In 1978, he was invited by Dr. Terry McGuire, NASA's psychiatric consultant, to be an interviewing psychologist. As a result, astronauts have taken Dr. Kahler's profile as part of their selection process and have used his communication and team-building model in their training program.

He has held membership in 13 national and international organizations, 4 high-I.Q. societies, and has been the guest speaker at more than a dozen international congresses, and 400 local and national conventions. A prolific writer, Dr. Kahler has authored 3 books and more than 40 articles, booklets and profile reports.

He was hired as the psychodemographer in the Clinton/Gore 1996 campaign, and is a consultant to the President.

TAJnet reprint of the 1974 article The Miniscript , by Taibi Kahler and Hedges Capers...

home | itaa | transactional analysis | events | training | resources | community | contact us | membership info