Differentiation of Self
This article will cover differentiation of self (DoS). Differentiation of self is an important concept to incorporate into our understanding of being. Learning more about it will not only help your interpersonal relationships, but also your understanding of relating to God.
Definition
Bowen purports that differentiation means that a person can interact with self and the environment independently yet connected without the anxiety of not being true to self.(1) A differentiated person can balance the emotive, feeling, and action systems using cognition—thinking. An undifferentiated person acts out of emotion without incorporating thought. Thus, the focus of undifferentiation is on “acting without thought.”
Feelings vs Thought
As with most propositions to theories, Bowen’s ideas face staunch opposition. Some academics and clinicians are inclined to claim that what Bowen purported is entirely wrong. For example, John and Julie Gottman (marriage researchers and clinicians) state that Bowen’s theory focuses on thought, excluding emotion.(3) Bowen, however, was not suggesting that emotions and feelings are irrelevant. Moreover, Bowen did point out that when people’s behavior is activated solely by emotive reactions—without thoughtfulness and or cognition—it shows the person is less differentiated.
Triangles, Cut-off, Fusion
In response to their anxiety of themselves in relation to others, people use triangles, cut-off, or fusion to make the discomfort tolerable.
Basically, triangles are a system of three, such as three people, with two being the in-group and one being the out-group.
Cut-off is when people disconnect from interpersonal relating. Note though that even though the interpersonal relating is reduced, generally, the intrapersonal relating continues.
Fusion is when a person unwittingly becomes what the other person wants them to be.
Levels of DoS
Bowen illustrated the levels of differentiation on a scale of 1 to 100. The low end of the scale denotes using fusion or cut-off to control anxiety. At the high end is differentiation. Someone who possesses a high level of DoS can experience an instinctual emotional event yet act intellectually or rationally. Jesus is a prime example of this relational posture. Jesus was able to think and respond effectively in complicated situations. DoS is the balancing of emotion and intellect while acting on beliefs or opinions, noted Bowen, and not on instinctual emotion. Jesus had a solid belief system.
Emotive vs Feeling
There are differences between an emotive/instinctual response and a feeling. Bowen conceptualized the feeling system as different from the emotional system. Feelings can be verbalized, while emotions are not verbalized.(4) Feelings are experiences such as being sad, happy, embarrassed, or glum. According to Kerr and Bowen, emotions are more of an innate response to an environmental cue—someone or something does something. An emotive response or emotional reactivity would be jerking away if one were being hit. The movement away requires no conscious thought. Although the emotional response may bring certain feelings, it is an innate construct that one does not feel but simply responds. The feeling system, suggests Bowen, connects the emotional system to the intellectual system and forms a subjective experience.(5) Those who solely respond from emotion, without the assistance of reason, have a reduced level of differentiation.
Thus, for example, I propose that the overwhelming emotional interaction with couples where the wife has experienced childhood sexual abuse (CSA) may not necessarily solely result from the CSA but, additionally, the husband’s interaction with a possibly reduced level of DoS. For example, he may blame her for rejecting, but he may also be emotively reacting to her slightest moving away.
Solid self vs Pseudo-self
Differentiation of self has two essential components: the solid self and the pseudo-self.(6) The solid self is a self that rarely changes and is slowly developed. The solid self is formed by fact-based beliefs and opinions. The solid self knows what they know and does not instinctively have to defend or convince others. Thus, it stands in contrast to the pseudo self.
Stressors or anxieties of and about one’s environment mold the pseudo self. I believe this is where the enneagram hits it out of the park. The enneagram describes the personality as the defenses we use to protect ourselves from the other. As opposed to personality being an innate trait we are born with and endures as some psychologists may purport.
The pseudo self compromises parts of the true self to stay in relationship to others. There is a trading of true self between people to maintain a functioning unit; however, the functioning unit is prone to dysfunction and possibly bizarre behavior, if enough stress is placed upon it. Less differentiated persons develop a pseudo self because they have to, not because they want to.
“Groupthink” is a form of pseudo self dysfunction of a group. Those who can stay within a relationship without unwillingly giving up themselves are said to have high levels of differentiation. Couples with extreme emotional context, such as a couple with CSA influence may not be able to maintain a sense of self. The couple relates emotionally with little reason and creates pseudo selves to manage the emotional distress of the relationship.
In an undifferentiated person, the resentful giving up of true self is an instinctual emotional response to pressures of the relationship. This differs from someone intellectually reaching a compromise, willing to accommodate another person—with full consent—to maintain the relationship.(7) The ability to live as a differentiated self within a group enables the group to support and avoid an unhealthy, dysfunctional style.
Family Support
At the 49th Symposium on Family Theory and Family Psychotherapy, Papero defined support as the “ability of family members to be resources for others.”(8) If a husband thinks he must give up himself, it is reasonable to assume that he truly thinks he has nothing to give or to contribute that would help when issues become too intense. He becomes a nonperson and either fuses or cuts off from his spouse. He gives up.
Can we improve our DoS?
The question then becomes, “Can we improve our differentiation of self?” I believe we can. We can by taking thoughts captive. Examine them and take responsibility for our responses. Meaning believing we are able to thoughtfully respond, even in stressful situations. It’s a process. This is a process that needs tons of grace for self and others.
1. Murray Bowen, Family Therapy in Clinical Practice (New York: Jason Aronson, 1978).
2. David Schnarch, Secrets of a Passionate Marriage: How to Increase Sexual Pleasure and Emotional Fulfillment in Committed Relationships, CD (Boulder, CO: Sounds True, 2003).
3. John M. Gottman and Julie S. Gottman, Bridging the Couple Chasm: Gottman Couple Therapy: A New Research-Based Approach, DVD (United States: The Gottman Institute, 2013).
4. Kerr and Bowen, Family Evaluation, 31.
5. Bowen, Family Therapy in Clinical Practice, 158.
6. Kerr and Bowen, Family Evaluation, 104-106.
7. Ibid.
8. Daniel Papero, “Family Emotional Process and Development” (lecture, The Family and the Brain: An Integrated Circuit. Symposium conducted at the meeting of The Bowen Center for the Study of the Family, Arlington, VA, April 2012).