Introduction

Constructing classifications and identifying properties that both unite and distinguish various objects (phenomena, mechanisms, modes of activity, etc.) belonging to a single large class is a necessary part of studying this class of objects. The search for what unites and distinguishes various psychotherapeutic methods is becoming increasingly relevant in connection with the task of understanding the common mechanisms that ensure psychotherapeutic effectiveness.

For a number of years, the author has been developing the concept of a single family of process methods of psychotherapy [1,2]. Since the term "process (process-based)" is included in the name of only one of the psychotherapeutic approaches - the Process Work method created by A. Mindell [3,4], many specialists associate the concept of process therapy only with this method. Which, in the author's opinion, significantly impoverishes the understanding of processuality as a methodological principle for constructing psychotherapeutic work. The author believes that, in addition to the above, the family of process methods should include at least five more: Focusing by E. Gendlin [5,6], Hakomi by R. Kurtz [7], Epistemological Metaphor by D. Grove [1,2], Somatic Experience by P. Levine [8] and the hypnotherapeutic approach of E. Rossi [9]. (The author still feels genuine surprise that most specialists working in a certain process method and familiar with the existence of others do not see their “kinship” as obvious!).

In his earlier works, the author has already provided a detailed description of what, in his opinion, allows these six psychotherapeutic methods to be combined into a single group, as well as how three tasks common to all methods are resolved differently in each of the methods. [1,2,10]. Now, the author believes it is useful to describe his current understanding of integrative process methodology as such, without devoting significant attention to the specifics of each of the methods. In this article, the author presents the material in the form of a sequence of abstracts. Each abstract is numbered in bold.

Abstracts on integrative process-based methodology

1. Methods can be called process methods if they satisfy the three characteristics described below.

1) The content of the work in such methods is based on the idea that in order to solve a problem, it is necessary and sufficient to facilitate, to help some important psychological process occur, which "wants", "tries", but cannot happen without psychotherapeutic help. This process can be characterized as "healing." In such work, three interrelated tasks are solved (often sequentially): a) gaining access to the "germ," "core," or "sprout" of this process; b) unfolding a full-fledged healing process from this "sprout"; c) supporting the process until the end of the work.

(Importantly, each process method supports processes of a very different nature unfolding from different "germs")

2) While facilitating the process's unfolding and supporting its progress, these methods avoid planning the outcome and directing its development in a specific direction, but rather follow the logic of its development. Moreover, this feature characterizes the work in process methods both "strategically," at the "macrodynamic" level of the process's development, and at the "microdynamic" level at each specific moment of such work.

3) The "core" of the healing process is found, at a minimum, in the experiences and energy associated with the problem, and at a maximum, in the very tendencies of the "pathological" process. In other words, in process methods, the main, or one of the main, resources for overcoming the problem is found within the problem itself.

2. At the "microdynamic" level, facilitating the further development of the process contains two important aspects, which are often sequential steps. The first aspect involves facilitating the manifestation and awareness of the experience that "wants to arise" at each moment of the process's development. Often, such facilitation is an attentive and fairly continuous observation, allowing both the manifestation of new experiences and their spontaneous deepening, and the inherent dynamics of changes in what is observed. In other words, it represents "pure" process of meditation. Here, too, it is sometimes necessary for the practitioner to build such a relationship with the experience of their current experience that would facilitate maintaining some kind of prolonged contact with it. The second, more active aspect of facilitation includes entirely intentional actions that help the further course of the process, including expanding the field of accessible experience, its deepening and positive transformation. However, the nature of such active facilitation is entirely determined by: a) the "strategic" logic of the process unfolding in each specific method; b) the nature of the experience that "wants" further development; c) something that can hinder the development of the process due to the nature of the experience that has arisen.

3. In describing the family of process methods, it is impossible to avoid two naturally arising questions.

1) How does problem solving occur in them through the unfolding of a process that stems from the experiences, tendencies, and energy relating to the problem itself?

2) Why, when something "freely grows" from the energy, experiences, and dynamic tendencies associated with a problem, does it not lead to an intensification of the problem?

The answer to the first question lies in the understanding that process methods either restart the very specific process whose interruption or lack of activation led to the problem (and, accordingly, its restart leads to its solution), or they activate a rather general mechanism designed to prevent the formation of problems. Moreover, in the second case, this mechanism, in one way or another, uses the experiences of the problem or the energy associated with it for its activation (and subsequent development). (Specific illustrations of this can be found in the following abstract.)

Answering the second of the questions raised, we note two important features of the work in process methods, which together solve the issue of client safety. First, the primary work often occurs not with the problematic experiences themselves, which, if they develop and, especially, if they intensify, can lead to a worsening of the problem. Through contact with problematic experiences, one gains access to deeper experiences, through the development of which the healing process often unfolds. Second, the tendencies of a negative, problematic process are often realized during work in process methods under conditions different from those that lead to the development of the problem (for example, in a certain kind of trance state that ensures safety). The therapist themselves also ensures the client's safety, if necessary.

4. As mentioned above, in each of the process methods, rather different processes, unfolding from different “germs”, “want to happen”.

Without going into details described in earlier works [1,2], we will briefly outline the processes that “want to happen” and which unfold in various process methods.

In E. Gendlin's Focusing [5,6], the process is born from experiences of “felt sense”, reflecting the situation in which a person is now (often the one that creates a problem for them), quite holistically, but in the language of “vague” bodily sensations. Moreover, in order to gain access to the latter, it is often necessary at the beginning to come into contact with quite clear emotions or sensations, by the way, whose “unclear edges” of the experience of felt sense (according to E. Gendlin) they often are. This felt meaning “strives” to become an understood meaning. In cases where this transformation does not occur naturally, Gendlin's Focusing can facilitate it. Thus, Focusing facilitates the work of a mechanism (process) of conscious-unconscious interaction that is quite universal in relation to various types of tasks. (Note that Focusing was the first process method created.)

In the hypnotherapy method of E. Rossi [9] (a student and follower of the creator of modern non-directive hypnotherapy M. Erickson), the experience of emotions and energy associated with a problem activates the “higher floors” of the unconscious, their ability to creatively find a way to solve problems and positively transform what can be defined as negative. This thus launched trance process is also fuelled in its further course by the energy emanating from the practitioner’s perception of their problem situation. It is clear that, so to speak, normally, the process of receiving help from the unconscious could well occur naturally when life difficulties arise that require some kind of creative approach for their resolution, in a naturally occurring trance functioning. In the absence of such a skill, this process is initiated and often intensified compared to the “natural” process in a given hypnotherapy method.

The Process Work of A. Mindell [3,4] helps the “secondary process” - signals from those parts of the psychics that have been repressed into the unconscious or newly formed in it, and which “want” and are “ready” to become part of the conscious self-identity, in the terminology of Mindell himself - the “primary process”. However, until they overcome the “edge” (the limiting barrier of self-identity), the “secondary process” is expressed through bodily symptoms, similar conflicts with other people and other phenomena, some of which represent very pronounced problems.

In Hakomi, R. Kurtz’s method [7], according to its author, “experiences that want to happen” are helped. We are talking about those important experiences of a child, in the absence of which, he or she develops absolutized beliefs and character strategies that limit the freedom of his or her decisions, which from life-saving adaptations turn into a source of problems with age. According to R. Kurtz, from the moment of obtaining the experience of necessary experiences in the course of psychotherapeutic work an individual enters a phase of the "healing process".

The Epistemological Metaphor method of D. Grove [1,2] is dedicated to working with the consequences of childhood psychotrauma. Fragments of the child's psychics detached by trauma, which during the traumatic episode embodied the child's desire to protect themselves, escape or purify themselves, could not then realize their goal. But they continue to try to do this, creating destructive behaviours and bodily diseases. In this method, conditions are created to complete the process of realizing the goals of these children's fragments. This, in turn, leads to subsequent positive transformation of these parts of the psychics and, ultimately, allows the integration process to occur.

Somatic Experiencing by P. Levine [8] is also dedicated to working with the consequences of shock trauma. It helps to realize the psychophysiological process of emerging from a traumatic stupor. There is a need for such help because in humans, unlike all other animals, this ancient psychophysiological process often “wants” but cannot occur. (The frontal cortex of the person who is frightened by the horror that emerges upon exiting the stupor helps the process “wrap up” back into the stupor.) Note that here, as in the previous method, the process unfolds from post-trauma symptoms, which often manifest themselves in the form of painful experiences and destructive strategies.

Note. A detailed description of meta-techniques and methods of unfolding and further support of processes characteristic of each method was given by the author in his earlier works [1,2,10]. In this article, the author deliberately refrained from attempting to describe them in order to avoid a significant increase in its volume. A more modern description of both the meta-techniques characteristic of several process methods, and the set of specific techniques in which these meta-techniques are turned in each of the methods, could become a topic for a separate article.

5. Process methods, as the "pole" of psychotherapy, are opposed to methods in which both the outcome and the process itself can be planned, and where the work can be likened to the targeted repair of a previously identified breakdown. Such methods are usually heavily based on theories of personal health and personality pathology.

A method can be considered a process method if the processuality principle described in the first abstract is the essence of this psychotherapeutic method. But if following a specific process is not the main aspect of the method's work or it is only a possible stage within it, then such a method can be considered only kindred to process methods. In this context, the following methods can be considered kindred to process methods: Ericksonian hypnotherapy, those methods of body-oriented psychotherapy in which, along with work based on structure, work based on process is also used, an also Client-centred therapy. The author believes that Gestalt therapy could completely "follow the path" of processuality, if its development had taken a different course.

It is important to understand that process methods emphasize the need to distinguish between: a) following the client, their desires and needs, and b) following the client's process. In some cases, these can even be oppositely directed processes!

6. The relationship between process methods and meditation practices is so important and so specific that it deserves separate consideration. The author believes that, in a certain sense, one can speak of a generalized Meditative-Process Paradigm. Moments of meditation are part of the work in almost all, if not all, process methods. Meditative practices often initiate a healing process. However, in facilitating the process in meditation, only the first aspect of facilitation is used - allowing the flow of experiences to emerge and change according to their own logic.

Meditations are typically characterized by a certain distancing, dissociation from the object of observation, and disidentification with it. Meanwhile, process methods are also characterized by involvement in this object and identification with it.

In process methods, the very content of the process must be considered to explain the healing effect. Meanwhile, the primary explanation for how meditation heals is seen in the way the process of inactive, detached observation transforms the meditator, in the psychophysiological processes that correspond to or are triggered by this process of interaction with the observed [11].

7. Since precise adherence to the work instructions in each process method facilitates only what "wants to happen," that is, only fully prepared development, and does not presuppose interventions in directions and volumes that go beyond this preparedness, the author believes that process methods of psychotherapy can be fully characterized as ideal means of personal development.

8. Considering the quality of process methods described in the previous abstract in the context of the Evolutionary Concept of Psychosomatogenesis developed by the author, in earlier works he characterized process methods as very useful tools for the psychological treatment of somatic diseases [12,13]. The widespread use of process methods in such work is also facilitated by the unfolding of the healing process from the experience of the painful symptoms themselves.

9. The author believes that the principle of processuality should be expanded beyond the context of psychotherapy and self-regulation practices. In presenting this abstract, the author deems it appropriate to break the concise narrative style of this article by illustrating several massage techniques and subtle manual interventions developed by him in a purely process style.

In the previously described practice of Process Osteopathy [14], the therapist places their hands on the client's head, attempting to sense subtle impulses to turn the client's head when he or she experiences a problem, and assists in realizing these impulses with their own careful movements. Clearly, in this way, the therapist enables the client's inner tendency to be realized. (This practice has become a kind of development in the process context of the well-known technique of Trance Induction by Kinesthetic Uncertainty.)

Another quite effective and, importantly, painless method of massage practice is the use of one of the meta-techniques for facilitating the process – supporting what is already happening. (This technique often opens access to deeper experiences.) If the "tension pattern" allows, the massage therapist doesn't try to relax the tension, but rather applies very gentle efforts directed along the tension vector (as if helping this tension do its work), rather than against it, as is typically done in traditional massage practice.

It is also possible, in a sense similar to what is prescribed in A. Mindell's Process Work, to follow the "flirtations" (attention-grabbing) from the secondary process. Attuned to the client, the therapist tries to see or sense, for example, what type of hand contact and in which part of the client's back "wants to occur" at any given moment and consistently realizes these touches, pressures, and strokes in accordance with the observed tendency. Of course, such subtle work requires sufficient sensitivity on the part of the therapist. However, if the therapist does not match with the client's process, the therapist will simply reproduce the well-known practice of Theatre of Touch (from which the author, in fact, developed this technique).

10. An important advantage of process methods is the possibility of their technological combination and, therefore, their consistent application in a single psychotherapeutic session.

11. The possibility of using the practices of a particular psychotherapeutic method to the client's independent work as self-regulation and self-therapy techniques is also a specific characteristic of this method. Three of the six process methods, namely, Epistemological Metaphor, Somatic Experiencing, and Hakomi, necessarily require the client's support by a therapist. Moreover, this is not only about ensuring the client's safety. The therapist's participation in the work of these three methods is essential. In Focusing, Process Work, and the Rossi method, independent work is possible, but with a noticeable loss of effectiveness. This circumstance motivated the author to create Recoding – the method of emotional self-regulation and somatic self-therapy (previously called Stress-Aikido) [15, 16], which relies heavily on meditative and process principles.

12. The author believes that his conceptual model of an integrative process methodology is generally well-developed; however, a number of issues still require further refinement.

1) The author has combined six known process methods into a family of process methods, without limiting the list to those already existing. It is necessary to explore the possible existence of other methods whose work meets the criteria described in the first abstract.

2) It is necessary to deepen the understanding of the relationship between the "strategic" essence of the healing process unfolding in each process method (its "macrodynamics") and the flow of its external manifestations (its "microdynamics").

3) The task of creating a comprehensive inventory of both meta-techniques for unfolding and maintaining the healing process, common to all process methods, which are transformed into specific techniques in each process method, and process-facilitating techniques specific to each method, remains relevant.

4) It is necessary to continue research into the general patterns and conditions underlying the formation of a healing process from the tendencies of the process that creates and maintains the problem.

5) The healing effect in treating somatic illnesses in the aforementioned process psychotherapy methods can be explained by working through the psychological causes of these diseases (i.e., psychosomatic work). The experience of using both the author's Recoding and Rossi's methods in the context of work with bodily diseases demonstrates that process methods can also be effective in another area of psychological treatment for bodily diseases - the psychological activation of physiological healing processes. However, this requires research into the mechanisms underlying this effect. Importantly, this requires not only conceptual but also empirical research.

6) The author's experience developing his Recoding method, which is largely based on a meditative-process paradigm, has raised the question of deepening the understanding of the interaction between process principles and the principles of intentional transformation within a single method.

Conclusion

1) The integrative methodology of the generalized process approach to psychotherapy has been conceptually developed.

2) The concept of a unified family of process methods may be useful: a) for practitioners, who gain the ability to flexibly "manoeuvre" various means of unfolding the healing process depending on the dynamics of a specific situation during a psychotherapeutic session; b) for developers of new process methods; c) for researchers of general mechanisms of psychotherapy.

3) Process methods are effective tools in the psychological approach to the treatment of somatic diseases.

4) There are a number of issues in the methodology of the generalized process approach that require further development.