Karpman drama triangle
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The drama triangle is a psychological and social model of human interaction in transactional analysis first described by Stephen Karpman. The model posits two or three Players in a Game which leads to an unsatisfactory outcome for all participants. Yet this doesn't stop people from repeating their roles.
The game has three roles, which the players may shift between:
- Rescuer
- Victim
- Persecutor
The Rescuer pretends or professes to helping the Victim, a person who may or may not actually need help. Note that the "game" position of Rescuer is distinct from that of a genuine rescuer such as a firefighter who saves a victim from a burning building or a lifeguard who saves a victim from drowning.
There is something dishonest about the Rescuer's attempts, or at best, a mixed motive.
Readers may also like to compare this model with Virginia Satir's model of coping patterns which can be found at "Organisational Coping Patterns"
Contents |
[edit] An example
An example would be a welfare caseworker whose official function to get clients off welfare and to support themselves with jobs. If the caseworker does anything to prolong the dependency relationship, she is not really helping but "Rescuing."
There may be subtle or overt pressure from her agency not to have too many successful clients. Threatening to cut off benefits to obviously lazy or selfish clients would be frowned on -- even if or especially if such tactics resulted in clients suddenly finding gainful employment after years of dependency.
For the drama triangle to come into full flower, one of the players must shift positions. For example, a Victim may become a Persecutor complaining of getting too much help, not enough help, or the wrong kind of help. A Rescuer may become a Persecutor, complaining that the clients don't appreciate her enough.
Officials at the welfare agency may take a role in the game, Rescuing staff and clients as long as they play along quietly but Persecuting any staff who start showing good results.
[edit] Another example
A more familiar example might be this fictitious argument between John and Mary, a married couple. Sometimes the rescuer point seems calm and even reasonable. If the words placate, soothe, calm, explain or justify, it can be considered a Rescuer response--it is an attempt to move the other person from their position.
In order to give a visual of the way the participants move from one point of the triangle to another, the Persecutor position is shown in red, the Rescuer in blue and the Victim in green.
John: I can't believe you burnt dinner! That's the third time this month!
Mary: Well, little Johnny fell and skinned his knee, it burned while I was busy getting him a bandage.
John: You baby that boy too much!
Mary: You wouldn't want him to get an infection, would you? I'd end up having to take care of him while he was sick.
John: He's big enough to get his own bandage.
Mary: I just didn't want him bleeding all over the carpet.
John: You know, that's the problem with these kids! They expect you to do everything!
Mary: That's only natural, honey, they are just young.
John: I work like a dog all day at a job I hate...
Mary: Yes, you do work very hard, dear.
John: And I can't even sit down to a good dinner!
Mary: I can cook something else, it won't take too long.
John: A waste of an expensive steak!
Mary: Well maybe if you could have hauled your ass out of your chair for a minute while I was busy, it wouldn't have gotten burned!
John: You didn't say anything! How was I supposed to know?
Mary: As if you couldn't hear Johnny crying? You always ignore the kids!
John: I do not, I just need time to sit and relax and unwind after working all day! You don't know what it's like...
Mary: Sure, as if taking care of the house and kids isn't WORK!
Anyone reading this article could undoubtedly continue this argument indefinitely.
What is of perhaps more interest is how one can remove oneself from the triangle, which, as the example makes clear, can be exhausting.
The simplest method is the non-defensive response. This works at any point no matter what the role the other person is taking, as it doesn't give a cue as to the next response.
For instance:
Mary: Well maybe if you could have hauled your ass out of your chair for a minute while I was busy, it wouldn't have gotten burned!
John: Yes, that's true.
Although Mary may attempt to restart the cycle by continuing to scold, if John continues in the same vein, Mary will eventually run out of things to say. Unless Mary is actually abusive, in which case care should be used in employing this method, John's calm response invites discussion rather than continued wrangling. She might realize that she didn't ask him for help, and they might well be able to resolve the situation by planning on a course of action should something similar arise in the future.
It works just as well for the victim role:
John: I do not, I just need time to sit and relax and unwind after working all day! You don't know what it's like...
Mary: I'm sorry you're feeling so tired.
This acknowledges any real problem the other person might have without continuing the dance. Again, the other person may attempt to restart the cycle by continuing to complain, but again, with continued non-defensive responses, the other person will run out of things to say.
While the "rescuer" role is seemingly the least problematic of the three points of the triangle, it still is a part of a non-communicative cycle, and thus should be treated in the same manner.
Mary: That's only natural, honey, they are just young.
John: Yes, they are young.
Once again, the cycle is broken, and John has made it clear to Mary that he needs no further placating or assistance.
Other excellent non-defensive responses:
"Oh."
"I see."
"You may be right."
