Symbolic modeling

The practice of symbolic modeling is built upon a foundation of two complementary theories: the metaphors by which we live,Lakoff & Johnson, 1980 and the models by which we create. It regards the individual as a self-organizing system that encodes much of the meaning of feelings, thoughts, beliefs, experiences etc. in the embodied mind as metaphors.Lawley & Tompkins, 2000 Symbolic modeling aims to heighten awareness of clients' personal "symbolic domain of experience", facilitating them to develop a unique "metaphor landscape" and to explore their internal metaphors, which in conceptual metaphor theory are seen to govern behavior.Needham-Didsbury, 2012

The symbolic modeling process guides the client through an exploration of the client's own metaphors, their organization, interactions, and patterns. These embodied metaphors can restrict a client's ways of viewing the world and his or her coping strategies, due to the inner logic prescribed by the metaphors. Without shifting these metaphors, lasting change may be difficult, as the embodied mind may continue to work within the constraints of this old paradigm. Through the facilitation, the client can discover how these metaphors can change to meet their desired outcomes, transformative shifts can occur within a client's "metaphor landscape", bringing about meaningful change on cognitive, affective and behavioral levels.

The "metaphor landscape" phenomenon is not a new discovery, with some similarities to "waking dream" or rêve evéillé, a term coined by Robert Desoille in the 1930s.Martin, 2007

Symbolic modeling proceeds through five defined stages, as follows:

• Stage 1: Entering the symbolic domain
• Stage 2: Developing symbolic perceptions
• Stage 3: Modeling symbolic patterns
• Stage 4: Encouraging transformation
• Stage 5: Maturing the evolved landscape

Clean language is used throughout, to avoid contaminating or distorting the developing metaphor landscape through the form, content or presentation of the therapist's questions.Lawley & Tompkins, 2000

A more structured subset of the above process called symbolic modeling lite is used in coaching:Lawley & Tompkins, 2011

• Phase 1: Set up
• Phase 2: Identify a desired outcome
• Phase 3: Develop a desired outcome landscape
• Phase 4: Explore effects of desired outcome landscape
• Phase 5: Mature changes as they occur
• Phase 6: Set down

A number of studies have assessed the efficacy of symbolic modeling with 95 dyslexic coachees;Doyle & McDowall, 2015Doyle & McDowall, 2024 in a psychotherapy case study;Rees & Manea, 2016 and in an organisational setting.Robinson, 2012/2013

While therapy and coaching are the primary application areas of symbolic modeling, researchers have started to apply the method to metaphor research,Akbari, 2013 game design,Rusch, 2017 problem solving,Groppel-Wegener, 2015 modelling excellence, Lawley, 2015Lawley, 2022 and as a qualitative research methodology.van Helsdingen & Lawley, 2012 Tosey et al., 2014

{{reflist}}

• Akbari, M. (2013). Metaphors about EFL Teachers' Roles: A Case of Iranian Non-English-Major Students, International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies, Vol: 1, Issue: 2, July–September. [https://doaj.org/article/c0279baf69cd424da2720d3d43673e0f doaj.org/article/c0279baf69cd424da2720d3d43673e0f]
• Doyle, N. & McDowall, A (2015). Is coaching an effective adjustment for dyslexic adults? Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice 8(2): 154-168. [https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17521882.2015.1065894 doi:10.1080/17521882.2015.1065894]
• Doyle, N. & McDowall, A. (2024). Neurodiversity Coaching: A Psychological Approach to Supporting Neurodivergent Talent and Career Potential. United Kingdom: Taylor & Francis. [https://www.routledge.com/Neurodiversity-Coaching-A-Psychological-Approach-to-Supporting-Neurodivergent-Talent-and-Career-Potential/Doyle-McDowall/p/book/9781032436524 ISBN 9781032436524]
• Groppel-Wegener, A. (2015). Design Tasks Beyond the Studio. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference for Design Education Researchers Volume 1 pp. 93–108 Editors: Robin Vande Zande, Erik Bohemia & Ingvild Digranes. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.1200.7520 [https://www.academia.edu/13300548/Proceedings_of_the_3rd_International_Conference_for_Design_Education_Researchers_volume_1_ academia.edu/13300548]
• Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
• Lawley, J & Tompkins, P (2011). Chapter 4 of Innovations in NLP: Innovations for Challenging Times, L.Michael Hall & Shelle Rose Charvet (eds.) Crown House Publishing. {{ISBN|9781845907341}}
• Lawley, J (2015) Acquiring Excellence. HEC Alumni Journal Sept/Oct pp. 66-67. [https://cleanlanguage.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Lawley2015-Acquiring-Excellence.pdf Acquiring-Excellence.pdf]
• Lawley J. (2022) Enhancing clean language interviewing with modelling. Chapter 4 in Cairns-Lee H., Lawley J. & Tosey P. (2022) (Eds.) Clean Language Interviewing: Principles and applications for researchers and practitioners, Emerald Publishing pp. 45-59. [https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-80117-330-820221004 doi.org/10.1108/978-1-80117-330-820221004]
• Lawley, J & Tompkins, P (2000). Metaphors in Mind: Transformation through Symbolic Modelling: London: The Developing Company Press {{ISBN|9780953875108}}
• Martin, J. N.T. (2007). Book Review: Metaphors in Mind: Transformation Through Symbolic Modelling, Metaphor and Symbol, 22(2):201-211. [https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10926480701235510 doi:10.1080/10926480701235510]
• Needham-Didsbury, I (2012). The Use of Figurative Language in Psychotherapy, University College London, Working Papers in Linguistics 2012, pp. 75–93. [http://psychlangsci/research/linguistics/publications/wpl/12papers/needham /psychlangsci/research/linguistics/publications/wpl/12papers/needham]
• Nehyba, J. & Lanc, J. (2013). Koncept čistého jazyka v psychoterapii (The Concept of Clean Language in Psychotherapy), Psychoterapie: praxe – inspirace – konfrontace, 7(2):123-133 Brno: Masaryk university. http://psychoterapie.fss.muni.cz/clanky/koncept-cisteho-jazyka-v-psychoterapii
• Rees, J. & Manea, A.I. (2016). The Use of Clean Language and Metaphor in Helping Clients Overcoming Procrastination. Journal of Experiential Psychotherapy 19(3): 30-36. [http://jep.ro/images/pdf/cuprins_reviste/75_art_5.pdf jep.ro/images/pdf/cuprins_reviste/75_art_5.pdf]
• Robinson, F. (2012/2013). How does exploring metaphorical representations of organisational change at its best affect levels of well-being in an ambiguous and rapidly changing public sector work environment? Paper presented to The Third International Neuro-Linguistic Programming Research Conference, Hertfordshire University, 6–7 July 2012. A precised version appeared in Acuity No. 4, 2013. [https://cleanlanguage.com/exploring-metaphorical-representations-of-organisational-change/ cleanlanguage.com/exploring-metaphorical-representations-of-organisational-change/]
• Rusch, D. C. (2017). Making Deep Games – Designing Games with Meaning and Purpose. CRC Press Taylor & Francis Group.{{ISBN|9781138812130}}
• Tosey, P., Lawley, J. & Meese, R. (2014). Eliciting Metaphor through Clean Language: An Innovation in Qualitative Research. British Journal of Management, 25: 629–646. {{doi|10.1111/1467-8551.12042}}
• van Helsdingen, A. & Lawley, J. (2012). Modelling Shared Reality: avoiding unintended influence in qualitative research, Kwalon: Journal of the Netherlands Association for Qualitative Research. Vol 3, October. [https://academia.edu/attachments/30371322/download_file academia.edu/attachments/30371322/] translated from the original Dutch version [https://www.aup-online.com/content/journals/10.5117/2012.017.003.043 aup-online.com/content/journals/10.5117/2012.017.003.043]

Category:Psychotherapy

Category:Coaching