If you take your clients’ emotional reactions to you too personally, you will probably experience strong emotional reactions. Strong or disproportionate emotional reactions to clients constitute countertransference.

Countertransference

Countertransference is similar to transference, except it happens to interviewers rather than clients. Countertransference, like transference, stems from con?icts, attitudes, and motives not consciously experienced. Countertransference also consists of emotional, attitudinal, and behavioral responses that are inappropriate in terms of their intensity, frequency, and duration. It is important and helpful for professional interviewers to become aware of their own countertransference patterns .

Although countertransference is similar to transference, there are several important differences. Originally, S. Freud identi?ed countertransference as a reac116 Listening and Relationship Developmenttion to client transference. This is certainly the case sometimes. On occasion, clients treat their interviewers with such open hostility or admiration that interviewers ?nd themselves caught up in the transference and behave in ways that are very unusual for them. For example, at a psychiatric hospital, a patient once unleashed an unforgettable accusation against her therapist: “You are the coldest, most computer like person I’ve ever met. You’re like a robot! I talk and you just sit there, nodding your head like some machine. I bet if I cut open your arms, I’d ?nd wires, not veins!” Certainly, this accusation might be considered pure transference. Perhaps the client was responding to her therapist in this manner because, in the past, she experienced males as emotionally unavailable. On the other hand, as the saying goes, it takes two to tango. As interviewers, we need to look at our own contributions to the therapist client dance.

Second, when clients do not know if they should talk about something, they should be encouraged to discuss it, at least so interviewer and client can collaboratively decide whether the information is important. Discussing issues together enhances the collaborative relationship.

Third, although the client is suggesting otherwise, his or her feelings may well be related to the interviewer-the client’s perceptions of the interviewer’s competence or because his or her appearance or personality style reminds the client of someone else. If so, the client needs to know that he or she can express concerns, whether those concerns are based on reality or imagination. These concerns may be signs of transference and should not be ignored .

Fourth, when clients attend their ?rst counseling sessions, they often feel worse because they are focusing on and discussing uncomfortable problems. Consequently, explaining to clients that they may feel hopeless, mixed up, or angry while discussing their problems can prevent premature therapy dropouts.

The following explanations might help if a client has strong negative feelings about being interviewed:

• “If you’re unsure about whether you should talk about something in here, I want

you just to go right ahead and talk about it as much as you can. That way, at least we can decide together whether it’s important.”

• “Sometimes, people develop strong feelings about their counselors or about counseling. Usually, these feelings are important to talk about, even if they’re negative.”

* “You know, it’s not all that unusual to have negative feelings during counseling.

• To a socially anxious client: “When people don’t say hello to you, you think they’re

rejecting you, when it’s probably only because they’re having a bad day or have something else on their minds.” Reframes may be met initially with denial, but having clients view their interactions or problems in a new way can reduce anxiety, anger, or sadness. Reframes promote ?exibility in perceiving or interpreting actions.

Confrontation

The goal of confrontation is to help clients perceive themselves and reality more clearly.

Clients often have a distorted view of others, the world, and themselves. These distortions usually manifest themselves as incongruities or discrepancies. For example, imagine a client with clenched ?sts and a harsh, angry voice saying, “I wish you wouldn’t bring up my ex wife. I’ve told you before, that’s over! I don’t have any feelings toward her. It’s all just water under the bridge.” Obviously, this client still has strong feelings about his ex wife. Perhaps the relationship is over and the client wishes he could put it behind him, but his nonverbal behavior-voice tone, body posture, and facial expression-tells the interviewer that he’s still emotionally involved with his ex wife.

Confrontation works best when you have a working relationship with the client and ample evidence to demonstrate the client’s emotional or behavioral incongruity or discrepancy. In the preceding example, we wouldn’t recommend using confrontation unless there was additional evidence indicating the client’s unresolved feelings about his ex wife. If there was supporting evidence, the following confrontation might be appropriate: “You mentioned last week that every time you think of your ex wife and how the relationship ended, you want revenge. And yet today, you’re saying you don’t have any feelings about her. But judging by your clenched ?sts, voice tone, and what you said last week about her