Hi Robert :-) """Any feeling will habitate unless there are small changes continiously. One thing when having a circle of a "problem context" then its not solution based. Adding the solution are to change the variable of decisions the person is making. When the patterns like that work with games proposed in whispering and such you actually change the decision stuck states.""" I agree, if one has a circle of the context where one wants to enrich ones behavioral choices, and one chooses such a context because it is a problem, then what one does is not solution based - at least not at the outset, however as a result of the game one may well become plenty more oriented towards solutions than problems. This may even constitute the solution. Of course one need not apply the gamestate to a "problem context" - it is perfectly workable to apply it somewhere where one already is satisfied with ones performance, yet still wants to upgrade. """Thats why people have trouble selfmonitoring since the desicion strategy are based on having the problem in the first place ie: the person hasnt been able to solve the problem with current strategies.""" If you are referring to the keeping track of ones state during the change process I think the prime cause is that one posesses a certain amount of attention. And when one wants to focus all attention on solving a problem ... well, then the spare attention for statetracking isn't there. """If using the gameprocess outlined i would add into the game this structure, which i teach in my prac classes, 1. Make circle of problem. 2. Make circle of trying to solve the problem to current date.""" Sounds like a good strategy of chunking down. Sometimes the solution is the problem. However, if one takes care of 1 -> 2 will ususally transform spontaneously. """3. Add resource from third perspective ie the scope outside the context involved. This can be the game propsed in whispering or any high quality state from any other area that outside the context of the the 2 circles.""" I don't know if I understand what you are suggesting here. Do you propose that one should find the appropriate resources from third and beam them over to first? """4. Add the third scope to the decision circle. 5. Add the change to the decision circle to the problem circle and presto solved. Doing the above make sure that when changing you also automatically respond with new ways of making decisions. Ie: it makes for a generative or even evolutinary approach.""" I would say that the new code game applied within the change format presented in whispering automatically accomplishes this. Doesn't change imply a change in ones decisions (the unconscious decision prosesses)? """Just changing with games isnt nuff..""" Of course it is. nuff nuff :-) Seriously: changing with a game need not 'just' be a matter of removing a problem. """Its more useful to change the variable of descions and those states involved into that then to change the problem... (the level of intervention) The above make sure you step outside your own model of the world (selfmonitering needs meta) and then adds a new perspective of a high quality context. Why its hard to measure what you doing while you are doing things are beacuse your inside your own world model...""" Yea, but what kind of meta-relationship is it? It certainly doesn't imply that one has to go to third. One may very well be able to monitor ones state by splitting ones attention in first. One part of attention deals with the relevant context, and another part pays attention to ones kinestetics - when the kinestetics change that's an indication of statechange. Or maybe you are refering to another kind of selfmonitoring than I am thinking about. """The above pattern will make the process-content and form more xplicit regarding change.""" CU and all the best Thomas P.S. Where? ---------------------------- /Robert SwedishNLP Change your mind There is a rabbit here