Changing meaning by reframing
NLP describes two basic ways to reframe meaning: Context Reframing and Content Reframing.
Context reframing asks: “Where would this be really useful and valuable?” to find alternative contexts in which the experience could be useful. An example of context reframing would be: “Where could this fear that I have around blocking be useful?” “I sure don’t need that kind of fear when speaking, but if I am in physical danger of losing my life, that fear could save me.”
You might be wondering in which contexts stuttering would be useful. Well, there are some comedians (Michael Palin in the movie, A Fish Called Wanda; Ronnie Barker in the UK sitcom Open All Hours) who have created comedic characters who stutter – though you probably have your own views on whether it is OK to poke fun at stuttering. It is conceivable that stuttering could be a way of buying time to think or delay making a decision. Actually, context reframing is not the one to concentrate on.
Content reframing asks: “What else could thismean?” to find other meanings for the experience or behavior (the three examples above are content reframes). So that while everything remains objectively the same, the meaning of the behavior is interpreted from another point of view and this then offers an alternative strategy for intervening to change things. For example, the behavior of stuttering or blocking could mean:
“I’m just giving myself time to think.”
“I just love certain sounds so much that I repeat them to myself.”
“I like to keep my audience in suspense so that they pay more attention.”
Content reframing changes the belief “If I block, I am weak” to “If I block, that is an opportunity for finding out more about myself and to test my strength and ability to change.” You alter your response to your perception of the conditions in which stuttering used to occur (that’s another way of reframing – treat it as though it happened in the past). A content or meaning reframe is essentially saying, “Although X can mean Y, it can also mean Z, and Z is better in some way.” Reframing the situation
The PWS has already had much practice in identifying the initial conditions, the triggers or cues that let them know, “It’s time to stutter.” The actual external events are going to stay the same; what changes is the way the PWS perceives them. People come to associate a particular meaning to a particular event. They create numerous simple correspondences between what happens and their responses. For example, they meet an authority figure and respond in a certain way. Their story tells them to become apprehensive, to get away, or to feel guilty. No one makes them have that response; it is something they have learned to do. By rewriting the story, they can change those limiting responses, and find new associations that serve them better. In other words, by reframing the situation their behavior changes. So how do they do this?
If you perceive the other person as an “authority figure”, then consider that, for example:
“Your ‘authority’ only resides in a particular area of your life. There are other areas where you see me as an authority. I am an authority figure too – on stuttering! – and many other things besides.”
“If you are in a position of power, then you have the wisdom to know how to treat me with the respect I deserve!”
Other people are not authority figures all of the time. Just imagine them engaging in the mundane activities which everyone does when they are “off-duty”: putting out the garbage, shopping in the supermarket, sitting on the toilet. You are only limited by your imagination.
Alternatively, you could stand back from the whole situation, and observe what is going on. From this witness position you might conclude that:
the stuttering is a message that you have not yet got your ideas sorted, that you’re paying attention to the wrong end of the communication loop; that the way you present yourself, in terms of posture (where you’re looking, how you are standing, breathing, and so on) and your manner of speaking (your voice tonality needs to vary much more, to be brighter …) could do with a makeover.
stuttering is a great way of dominating a conversation. The longer you stutter the more you are the one in control. This changes the value of the PWS’s commonly perceived lowly status.
Those reframes address the initial conditions. Consider your responses:
“What would need to happen to make the stuttering response boring, trivial, or unworthy of your attention?”
“What would happen if you absolutely did not care if you blocked and stuttered?”
The response usually is something like this, “Well, I wouldn’t stutter.” This question simply asks the person to change the meaning of blocking as something bad, feared and to be avoided to something not all that significant. We can say this with certainty – those who overcome blocking cease giving so much negative meanings to those times when they do block or even stumbling with words a little bit. Everyone has those times of stumbling.
Working with reframes can be great fun as well as therapeutic! Most jokes are reframes; the PWS ought to be rolling around on the floor if you do this exercise thoroughly!
Ask the PWS to come up with as many meaning reframes as possible: “What else could this mean that would be useful?” Asking the PWS to use their imagination to find positive reframes usually works better than the clinician providing them. They already have the imagination; they just need to direct it differently. In this way the PWS takes responsibility for their own cure. The presupposition is that
