Psychotherapy and Applied Psychology

Facilitating Autonomous vs Controlled Motivation: Our Kids to our Clients with Dr. Richard Koestner

• Season 3 • Episode 43

Share episode

In part 2 with Dr. Richard Koestner, we discuss the concept of hyper-parenting, the pressures parents face regarding their children's achievements, and the importance of balancing autonomy and limit-setting in parenting. Dr. Koestner also explores how these principles apply to education, emphasizing the need for fostering autonomous motivation among students. The discussion further delves into the complexities of goal setting, the impact of external rewards on intrinsic motivation, and the role of autonomy in psychotherapy.

Dr. Koestner is a professor of Psychology at McGill University where he has conducted research on human motivation for 25 years.

Special Guest: Dr. Richard Koestner

Self-Determination Resources

Zuroff, D. C., & Koestner, R. (2023). Autonomy support and autonomous motivation: Common factors in counseling and psychotherapy. In R. M. Ryan (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Self-Determination Theory (pp. 801-818). Oxford University Press.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. Guilford Press. 

Rosenfeld, A. A., & Wise, N. (2000). Hyper-Parenting: Are you hurting your child by trying too hard? St. Martin’s Press.  

💬 Click here to text the show!

🎞️ Video version of the show@PsychotherapyAppliedPsychology on YouTube
🛜 Check out the website: Listen to every episode on your podcast player of choice

Connect with Dan
☏ Leave a voice message on Speakpipe
🔗 LinkedIn
📬 TheAppliedPsychologyPodcast@gmail.com

🦋@danielwcox.bsky.social

[Music] If you care about helping people choose well and stick with those choices, this conversation delivers clear frameworks that you can use tomorrow. Today's episode we're digging into how to support autonomy without sliding into permissiveness. We unpack hyperparenting, get practical about autonomy's supportive limit setting, discuss why some grading policies create only an illusion of control, and make sense of why advice giving encyclotherapy often backfires. I'm your host, Dr. Dan Cox, a professor of counseling psychology at the University of British Columbia. Welcome to psychotherapy and applied psychology, where I dive deep with leading researchers to uncover practical insights, pull back the curtain, and hopefully have a little bit of fun along the way. If you're getting something from these discussions, subscribe in your podcast player. Watching on YouTube, click like and subscribe. It meaningfully helps us continue making the show. This episode begins with my guest discussing advice that he gives to parents and teachers when how to support children's interests without making them feel controlled. So without further ado, here's my conversation with Dr. Richard Costner. I really encourage everyone to learn about a concept called hyperparenting, which this is psychiatrist who came up with this term. And Americans are obsessed with success in all different ways. And Americans and Canadians, we become ego involved in our role as parents. We feel like how our kids develop is a reflection on us. And we're high achievers, so we want them to show how highly we're achieving. So I have a feel about this too, which is I was shocked. When you become a parent, oh, there's a joke about this. Like what's the most competitive sport in the US? I think it's probably football, some baseball. Oh, the real answer. No, the real answer is parenting because all parents are competing with their kids against other parents and try to make themselves feel like, oh, I'm doing a really good job. So I noticed that what I would take my little Sophie to the park that'd be like a climbing wall or something. And parents would say, hmm, how old is Sophie? And they were always asking how old and they wanted to know the months. And what I realized is they're trying to compare my little Sophie with their little Bobby and try to see how far my daughter could get up on the climbing wall compared to their kid. And whether that says something about their abilities. And it's the same with some kids talk earlier, some kids can count faster. He used to bug me. Uh, by Sophie would count one, two, seven, eleven. And then there was a little boy, Vulta, who would be on the swing next to her. And he was counting up to like seven hundred eighty eight. And so I've I met Vulta's father. And I said, how the heck does he count? Oh, he said, oh, I'm a mathematician. So we work on that a lot. But basically, I think the message should be to lay off. And don't don't don't let our own sense of. So when you become a parent, I think there's a subculture of high achieving parents. It's it's not true of middle class parents and immigrants. Well, sometimes it's true of immigrants. But high achieving high SES parents tend to see their children as something that has to be cultivated. Whereas that's not the way middle class poor parents think about it. And when you give yourself this idea that the child is for cultivating, unfortunately, that gives you a very active role and an evaluative role and a supervisory role. And I think most of us, oh, I did this too. So when my daughter showed some skill at badminton, like I got, oh, first it was figure skating. And I could see she really loved it. So at a certain point, you have the opportunity of like getting private coaches. And you start going to the rank more often so that. And I found myself, he became more and more self-conscious, more and more worried about what she was eating and how she appeared. And we had to stop it after a couple of years because I could tell it was not a good thing. Then she switched to badminton. And I thought that would be bad. But some of the same problems arose. And my daughter was kind of perfectionistic. And so she would orient her wanted to be the best. I just think in a lot of cases, we have to be watchful of being secretly controlling. Now on the other hand, some of our kids are just lugs and they're abotivated and they don't know what they want to do. And there I think it's a matter of finding what they do like and encouraging them or trying some other things. So if a kid is like a motivated depressed, I don't think the thing to do is just let them be with that. If the kid is interested in different things, I think we should let them stay with that. And just trust that they're going to find new interest and it's all going to end up fine. Yeah, I think one of the, of course, I'm reflecting on my own life and my own kids. And I think one of my challenges is figuring out when they, you know, don't want to do something for the right reasons, you know, where they will say, hey, do you want to sign up and do, you know, swim lessons this time or whatever that they might say, you know, they're first going to say, do I know anybody who's going to be in this swim lesson? You know, and it's like, yeah, yeah. And it's like, I don't know. I don't know. But that you've seen the kid in the swim lessons, you know, every year for their whole life and they always enjoy it. So you know that they're going to enjoy it. But in that moment, they're giving you the, I don't want to do it. I know. And sometimes they need gentle nudging. And, and that this is one of the things, even though self determination theory does talk about autonomy, support, it never means letting the kid make all the decisions. So if, if I'm a Catholic, if you have religious traditions, you want your kid to be exposed to that and to get involved in it. And when they're four or five years old, it's perfectly fine to say, you know, yeah, where a family that goes to church, here are the reasons we think it's good. We'll give you some, you could bring along books, you could decide whether you want to be in the Sunday school or not. But this is something we do. But when the kid is 12, you can't do that anymore because now they're confident to think about whether they care about this or not. So there's always a consideration of the developmental age. And, and then there's negotiations about okay, or in this listening, okay, I see why you don't want to do this swimming, is there something we can do that would make it easier for you? Would you like to ask your friends, if they want to do this swimming too? And then you could both do it together. So there's a lot of, you know, negotiating, negotiating, see what ideas they have. But sometimes you can't make the kid do even something that has such a rival value as swimming. Yeah. And, uh, uh, oh, parenting so tough because if you use this theory, I also was trained as a child clinical psychologist. And, Hamgenot was my hero. I did ganadi in play therapy. And it's actually a beautiful, it captures the basic ideas of self-determination theory. But Hamgenot believed it was all about limit setting. The reason we have to set limits and figure out an empathic way to do it, is so that the kids aren't going to drive us crazy. And we're not going to be angry with them all the time. So, uh, autonomy, supportive limit setting was developed by Hamgenot. Who, when you say limit setting, what do you mean? Oh, uh, so, uh, classic is two-year-old child at the park. You say, okay, it's, we gotta go home now. No, I don't want to go home. I'm having fun. My friends are here. So, you have to find a way, first of all, you prepare them. And then the ganadi in limit setting is, uh, oh, I, uh, yeah, it's time to go. The rule is we have to be home at six because mom's making the dinner or dad's making the dinner. And I know you don't like this rule. You wish you could stay here as long as all your friends were here, but now's the time for going. And, uh, then if they resist that rule, there's other things to say, like, I'm not sure, I haven't done this in 30 years, but it's something like, well, you have a choice. Uh, we can go now, uh, and you could walk with me and then maybe you could do something fun at home or I can pick you up and carry you, uh, something of that sort. Uh, that's probably not what good not what to do. He has a more artful way of doing it. But, uh, his theory was that the empathic limit setting lets the child internalize the limit. And it teaches the child to sublimate and manage their desires in in more constructive ways. But even more fundamental than that, it allows us not to be upset with our kids all the time because we're setting necessary limits so that we could get through the day. Another example is like kids sleeping and, uh, they'd like to stay up all night if they could, but you have to say, well, you know, we have a routine. Uh, here's how the routine works. We could change a little bit, but nine o'clock is the time for sleeping. Uh, I can't make your your your your brain stop working and you could lay on your bed and read something if you want, but this is this is the rule. And I know you hate the rule and you wish you you can't wait, can't help but wait for the time when you're a judge. Uh, so, uh, that's the other common mistake. People think that autonomy support is permissiveness. It's it's not there has to be structures. And, uh, otherwise kids will feel incompetent and otherwise kids will feel like you have no idea what you're doing as a parent. If there are no structures, uh, and it's scary for them to have all of that authority. So another area I was thinking about that you have obvious expertise in is being an instructor. Right. And so typically at universities when we teach courses, it is very top down. Here's a syllabus, here's the readings, here's the are there ways that you've figured out how to facilitate autonomous motivation among students in classroom. So not your graduate students. It's kind of a bit of a different kind of. Oh, no, for sure. Sure. Yeah. No, my favorite teaching is undergraduate teaching. I'm, I'm an introvert, a shy guy, but I love having people listen to me and oh my gosh, if I could get them to laugh, that makes my day. Actually, if I could get them to cry, it kind of makes my day too, but just to see that you could have an impact on them. And, uh, I think it's very hard. My classes have 400 students in it. So how do you give? How do you give a group of 400 a sense of being autonomous and actively involved? How do you give them a sense of connection and relatedness? How do you give them careful feedback that allows them to see that they're becoming more competent? And it's very hard with large classes like that. I didn't know what I was doing, but 10 years later, 10 years after I started teaching, a colleague of mine told me that their honest student was in my class and they really liked it. And it was like the best class they taken and he said, oh, why? And the girl said, because he's a human, he's a human being. And he relates to us like a human being. So I didn't realize I was doing it, but I always try to find, well, I always explain why I'm teaching every lecture I give, try to answer a question. And I try to explain why I think this is an interesting and useful question. One question would be, why do we lose our intrinsic motivation for reading? So I try to answer something that's interesting and useful. I use personal examples and family examples because the kids feel related to me when I'm using examples. The competence, I try to be flexible so that it's not all multiple choice and so there's optional papers. I become very laks about, okay, if you failed your midterm, you could drop that and replace it with the final exam. I was afraid that that would bust my distributions. It turns out people who do bad on the midterm are very likely to do bad on the final two. And here's the other thing I really learned, people who like want special makeup exams, it's separate, they do bad too. So you really don't have to worry about finding people who are going to do bad. The people who don't have the self-regulatory capacities to study effectively, that's going to take care of the, I mean, a Miguel student, the average grade is like a B plus, so no one does too bad. But no, I find acting like a human being is a good way to satisfy student's needs. And part of acting like a human being is also like being aware of when you've assigned too much material when an exam was too, wasn't fair. Not blaming students for things they're not understanding and figuring, you know, I probably messed up and how I taught that. It does sound like you've given more, over the years, you've come to give more control to students and that some of your anxieties about doing that. Well, I tell you, okay, so you say give more control and it's interesting. I think I do. I don't like the word control so much. There's something called illusion of control. And there was some clever social psychology experiments where they show people feel better when they have control. But they actually feel just as good if you give them illusion of control. So I think some of the things I do, like saying, oh, if you do badly, you could retake it at the final exam or, oh, you could, you could write an optional paper and that can count for 20% of your grade. I think it does give them the opportunity to recover and to show what they can do. But in many cases, I think it's an illusion because many of the students don't have, like I said, the structures and the self-regulatory capacities that will actually allow them to study differently for the final, or that will allow them to prepare and work consistently on their papers. So it's a tricky kind of thing and I struggle with whether my changes are like sincere and genuine versus whether they're expedient and kind of illusions of, so an illusion of autonomy support. And then the challenge would be to provide some structures and some guidance so that the people who did badly on the midterm would have some new strategies and some new ways of actually developing the competencies to do better. So yeah, so I could do better at that too, but I've definitely changed and I've totally changed the way I work with my graduate. We are a team now and I did, I used to be a collection of diets and it's been wonderful for myself and for all the students and the level of productivity has gone way up and the level of feeling good about things. Maybe I should do more team stuff with my undergraduates. Do you think that that's partially because you're facilitating the need of relatedness? Yeah, yeah, no, that's right. And I actually think relatedness and competence, believe it or not, or relatedness and autonomy, people used to think of that as opposed, like if you pursue one, you can't pursue the other, but the two work together. And so I think this having a collaborative notion of autonomy, like one of the things I learned even with the honest students, I would work one at a time with them. But what I eventually realized is they were stressed and nervous most of the time they'd be meeting with me because I'm higher status, they're lower status. So now I work with like a group of three in myself and sometimes they work with my graduate students and they like it a lot better. So yeah, I think always asking yourself, is there a better way to do this? And I think remembering that it's helpful if people feel autonomous rather than controlled and remembering that we have a role to play in terms of supporting autonomy. And that doesn't mean being permissive and ignoring them. That means thinking about how do the students feel like they're participating in an active way and that they're having some input into what we're studying or how they're studying. Some of this I'm just making up as we talked out, but it's good. I have to listen to it. See whether it's consistent with self-determination theory. But no, I think it's a theory that you could spend a lot of time thinking about and thinking about whether you're doing it in a sincere true way or whether it's like you're going through the motions or and who are you really reaching? But I do think there's a lot of empirical support. There's a self-determination theory website. You can become a member. They have all of the original articles. They have films. They have videos. If people, your audience will be most interested in psychotherapy. There's an Oxford handbook of self-determination theory that came out in 2023. And Dave Zuroff, who's an expert on psychotherapy outcomes, wrote a chapter with me there. He did all the work. And in that chapter, he proposes that autonomous motivation and autonomy support should be considered common common factor variables that influence all psychotherapy and counseling outcomes in the same way that the therapeutic alliance does. So his approach, and I think a lot of people's approaches that you know, there's a lot of evidence that no one therapy is better than another therapy. A lot depends on the patient. A lot depends on the therapist. And he and I together, he and with another colleague named Ted Powers, we've done a lot of studies that show if you assess motivation for therapy and if you assess whether the therapist is providing autonomy support, you'll learn a lot about whether that therapy will be effective in reaching the goals it was intended to reach. And so it's valuable to think about why your clients are engaging in this process with you. And it's valuable to think about how you are supporting them as they do that. So that's a great chapter that Oxford Handbook of self-determination theory. It's available at most university libraries. It is an e-book. And you could just download the chapters that you're interested in and there are some good ones. There's also a 2017 book by Rich Ryan, first author and Ed DC second author. I think it's called self-determination theory, something like that. And most of us in the field consider that like the New Testament of the Bible. That is, these guys are at such a high level. And it's authoritative. And the handbook is good too, but you want to go to the original source. Because this theory really is, it was Rich Ryan and Ed DC. It was there. They spent 50 years, like 10, 15 hours a day putting this theory together, guiding an international collection of researchers. It's just amazing how they put this together. I'm just hoping that it continues after like Rich Ryan, Ed DC is retired. But if Rich Ryan retires, I don't know what we're all going to do. So I wanted to ask you a question about and you've sort of alluded to this, but autonomous goals, becoming or at least becoming experienced as controlled goals or autonomous motivated. So let me throw out this example to you, which is the obvious, which is an obvious example, which is there's something you love, there's something you're really good at. And you do it because you really like it. So for example, being a researcher, you go to graduate school. In that case, you might even be paying to do it. And you're doing it and you're loving it and you're in it. And then eventually you find yourself in a job. And then all of a sudden you're getting paid for doing that thing. So then they're all of a sudden publishing the papers, do it. What it right? It becomes in some ways externally, I'm sorry, not externally, but the goal or the motivation becomes controlled. So how do you think about that? And then? Yeah, so Ed DC's asked that all the time. And he doesn't think it's a problem at all getting well paid for your job. It's just a sense of equity. The way our system works is if you're productive, if it's valued, you get paid. And if you think that you're improving and doing better, it's fine to ask for more pay. The issue is whether at some deep psychological level your work just becomes about making more money or gaining more status. And to the extent your work is no longer about whatever intrinsic things originally turned you on. Like maybe the detective story of learning about people's lives or the nuances of listening and communicating in a way that really unlocks something for someone. If that falls to the wayside and it becomes mostly about how much am I getting paid for my psychotherapy and how large can my practice be? And that will have tangible effects on the quality of your life and probably the quality of your work. So self-determination theory isn't against capitalism. It's against the muted form of capitalism that we see at the United States now. It's against zero-sum capitalism. But no, it's just equitable if we get paid for our contributions. The thing we have to watch out for is that there's a tendency in our culture to make it all about the money and the purchasing power and the things you can buy. And you know, we're really lucky being academics and it's very flexible and it's very interesting. I just returned from a sabbatical and I, people used to tell me that there's something called post sabbatical depression. I get my depression during my sabbatical because I forget sometimes how rewarding and needful-filling the role of being a research director and a teacher can be. And I'm not so good at providing structures for myself when I'm outside of this role. So I don't know. I think it's always good to be taking stock and thinking about have I gone off the right track, have I gone off the track that I was on and I might now into something like new crazy stuff that I don't want to be in. It's hard though because you seem like a really nice thoughtful person and when you get a little bit older people in your department might think hey, he would make a good chair of the department. My feeling was that it's the last thing in the world I would ever want to do it. I would be a disaster. Now here's the interesting thing though. Based on what I was saying, you might think oh well you should certainly feel good about saying no I'm not going to do that. It's tricky though because you belong to the group of people who put this department together. And you might know that there's a tradition of like the responsible solid people are the one who step up. So I've seen five of my best friends who did not want to be the chair. They autonomously chose to accept the championship. Even though they love being a professor, they love the teaching and the last thing they wanted to do was administer and most professors don't want to administer. But that can still be an autonomous choice. And it's not because it's interesting. It's because it's meaningful. And you know you're going to be making a contribution. And probably when people like you do it, you're going to try to do it in a somewhat different way that might make it more collaborative. So yeah, no, I think it's, I recommend to people to learn about the theory. Read the Ryan and DC book from 2017. Read some chapters from the 23-hand book. And you'll find that it has a lot of relevance to your life, your kids' life, understanding kind of how things are impacting us. I love the theory. So let me ask sort of if you have any thoughts about this. So one of the things that you know, you have a goal, something that's sort of an autonomously motivated goal. And then you create a, okay, so in order to accomplish this thing, here are the things that here's my tasks, right? Here's the stuff that I need to do. An implementation plan. Sure. And that I don't know if this would be an implementation plan. You can tell me. But that I think I have an experience, which a lot of people have, not always, but often, which is, yes, there is this thing that I really want to do. And it is interesting and whatever. And then I look at my task list. And I curse that asshole who made that task list for me, which was course it was me two days ago. And so like it becomes this experience of, like, or I have to sort of like, fight this experience of like a controlled, you know, we control ourselves with our list of goals. Right. Which is it this whole total psychological, you know, weird thing that happens when it's like you lose, I mean, I can speak for myself, but I think this is a pretty, you know, for most of us, a pretty ubiquitous experience, which is you lose track of the actual, you know, that no, no, wait, I do care about this. Yeah. But then I'm fighting. I'll be honest with you. I never thought you put that really well as long as you as soon as you put it on your list of goals, it may feel like something that someone else made for you. It's like this is what the boss wants to do. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So the first thing I would say that most of our, you know, autonomous goals, they're not autonomous. So that most of the goals, like I began by studying New Year's resolutions. And when we ask people, why are you doing this, is it interesting? Is it meaningful? Or is it because other people want you to do it? Or you feel you should do it? It was more on the control side. So even though with the ones who are initiating these things, we don't feel autonomous about it. And so a lot of work has to be done. It how we put together that list. And the other classic mistake is to have a list that's too long. And then you're going to be overburdened by it. And I came up with something because I often feel bad. At the end of a sabbatical, I didn't accomplish many of the things I wanted to do. And at the end of the summer, I didn't do all the writing I wanted to do. And with a friend of mine, what we realized is that, well, I actually, my friend was feeling bad that he didn't accomplish everything during his sabbatical year. And his wife had cancer and she had to recover from that. I had a depression and he helped me recover from that. And so when he looks at his list of things that he had put on paper, it seems like he did nothing. And I said, but you know, you helped your wife, you helped me, you helped these other people. So we came up with this idea of post-tocles. So you could think of what you didn't accomplish this summer. But then ask yourself, okay, what did you? And you may have done some wonderful social things, or community things, or caring things. And just because it's not an achievement task, we don't give ourselves any credit for that. And we feel bad. John Lennon, he had this quote about life is what happens while you're pursuing your goals. So it's like, what we put on our list of goals is really just a very small part of our whole lives. The other thing that we're now looking at is we look at pop-up goals. So we always ask the undergraduate, what are your three most important goals for the year? And they do care about that. But then we ask in January, was there any goal that you hadn't anticipated, but that became important to you and that you're now pursuing? We call it an emergent goal or a pop-up goal. And only about half the people have something like this. And but those goals that pop up are actually more autonomous and people are better reaching them than they are with the original set of three. And the even more interesting, the half of the people who have these pop-up emergent goals that turn out to be really nice opportunities, they're the people who are less controlled with themselves, who who had an original set of goals that were more about interest and value rather than feeling, I got to do this otherwise I'll never get where I want to go. So as a goal research, I think it's important to step back and realize, you know, it's maybe 10 percent of what we do is about the goals we're setting for ourselves. And a lot of things are, you know, we react to circumstances in our lives or we try to help other people with their goals. So we're always trying to add more types of goal variables. So we have these emergent goals. It turns out another big issue in this area is disengaging from goals. There are some goals that were kind of haunted by and that, you know, for a long time we can't give them up because, you know, I always wanted to be a basketball player or I always wanted to have a relationship with this person for the rest of my life or I always wanted to be a medical student. And there's really nice health psychology research which suggests if you can't disengage from your important goals that are unattainable, you will become depressed and you will become sick. And disengagement isn't something that just happens. It's a process we have to commit to. So while we're trying to pursue our new goals, we also have to canvas our old goals and see if there's some we haven't fully disengaged from. And we have to come up with a good reason for why we wanted disengaged. And then we have to stay open to pop up goals. There could be, you know, you may have decided this was the year you're going to do more studying and get better grades than ever. And maybe like the ideal person for you to have a friendship with or fall in love with comes along and consider how stupid Betheen is saying, oh, she is really something or he is really something but this is my year for work. And I mean, it's just patently dumb. So there's a flexibility and there's multiple types of goals. And, you know, you have to be open and aware and thinking about what your interests are and who's in your life. And it's a complicated business. And we are way too tough on ourselves about not reaching out new year's resolutions. I got news for you. Failure at new year's resolutions is normative. Almost everyone fails. And I actually think failure at the kinds of goals you're talking about is normative too. It's just that we don't keep track of them. It's like we do at our deers' resolution. So if you look back at all of my summer goals and how many of them I achieve, it's probably pretty sad. But you have to forgive yourself and then just take stock of did I do some good stuff? And most of us have done some good stuff. Let me ask you one specific psychotherapy question, which is actually kind of a hypothesis that I have that based on your background and experience, I would just be curious your opinion about. So, you know, psychotherapists tend to not give advice regardless. I mean, there are exceptions to this, of course. But you know, oftentimes or sometimes you might have a client who comes in your office and right off the get they're trying to, they're pushing you. I remember it. I remember it. Yes. And I think that one of the reasons that psychotherapists don't do this is because they tried and it didn't work. And that, you know, that's just yeah. But I think the explanation for why it didn't work is because it's a controlled motivation that or I'm sorry, a controlled autonomy where if like it's important for us to help clients reach their own decisions come to their own conclusions, identify their own ways of problems or whatever it is because it facilitates because yeah, that is supporting autonomous motivation. Your thoughts? No, for sure. And it's, I think that's a classic trap. And when you're when I was a young clinician and I didn't practice very long, so I was always pretty young. And I mean, in insight oriented relationship therapy, the question is why are they asking us and to have them talk about what they could imagine us saying? Although as a hard and fast rule, I think it does get frustrating to clients if you will never answer a question directly. And I think sometimes if it's not done so often, it could be useful again to show that you're a human too. But being a teacher is different from being a clinician and depends on what system you're working in. And we need structures when we're doing therapy and things that we trust. So, yeah, I, uh, and you know, you're understanding of what the clients problems are and whether they are someone who's always trying to get someone else just to give them a quick answer is important. So, when I was in counseling myself with my depression, a couple times the therapist did kind of say something that was not more personal, nothing like, oh, this was, and I found it, you know, oddly refreshing. So, my hunch is that, you know, different therapists, this is, this is a question that comes up and they're trying to find, you know, the right balance of staying true to your process and your theory, and also acknowledging that you're being asked the question by another person. And in most relationships, we would feel like, yeah, it's the human thing is to give an answer. Ladies and gentlemen, Dr. Richard Kostner. That's a wrap on our conversation. As I noted at the top of the show, be much appreciated if you spread the word to anyone else who you think might enjoy it. Until next time.[Music]

Head Shot

Dr. Dan Cox

Host
Head Shot

Dr. Richard Koestner

Guest