Zhang2026a
| Zhang2026a | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Zhang2026a |
| Author(s) | Yuanyuan Zhang, Saul Albert, Elizabeth Peel, Jessica Robles |
| Title | ‘Molecules of personality change’: the interactional structure of Rogerian therapy |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | Conversation analysis, Overall structural organization, Psychotherapy process, Rogerian psychotherapy, Carl Rogers, In Press |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2026 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Person-Centered \& Experiential Psychotherapies |
| Volume | 0 |
| Number | 0 |
| Pages | 1–31 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1080/14779757.2026.2635570 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
Rogerian therapy has shaped person-centered care in many contexts, but its interactional structure has not previously been described systematically. Although Rogers did not specify a fixed structure for person-centered therapy sessions, he did recommend recording and analyzing the psychotherapeutic process. In this paper we use Conversation Analysis (CA) to provide the first systematic interactional account of the structure of person-centered therapy, based on Rogers’ video-recorded psychotherapy sessions from the 1950s to 1980s. Drawing on a detailed sequential and multimodal analysis of all ten publicly available ‘open data’ recordings, we identify the routine interactional phases and structures constituting Rogerian person-centered therapy in practice. The opening phase involves a) co-present recognition, b) greeting and identification, and c) settling in. The ‘telling’ phase involves eliciting and sustaining topical talk, using a core practice: a ‘telling-formulation-iteration’ sequence, which repeats until the session closing phase. Closing is conducted by a) announcing future closing, b) pre-closing, c) making arrangements, then d) a final ‘terminal exchange.’ This interactional structure shows how Rogerian therapy is co-produced as a distinctive institutional interaction, as opposed to everyday troubles-tellings or medical consultations. This study advances CA work on institutional talk and establishes an empirical benchmark for analyzing person-centered interaction across settings.
Notes
