Hello, Lager. In the post that this post replies to, you wrote: "My situation is the following, I have a lot of imaginary interactions with relatives and significant others in my head. I see their faces in front of me, and hear their voices and engage in an internal dialogue with them. I do not consider this to be a problem in itself, but many of these imaginary interactions make me angry, sad or frustrated. My phantasy relations are often resembling my real relationsships. If I have a brief quarrel with my significant other, let us say it lasts for a minute or two, then I may spend hours, days, weeks continuing that quarrel in my head. Trying to figure out what to say and feeling the pain of things the other person may not even ever say in real life. My question is if it is a good idea to treat this imaginary other person as if she or he is a 'part' to be reframed. " Lager, from reading what you wrote, I produce the interpretation that you have evidence for your problems that exist in your external experience.  You can find that evidence in the quarrels you had.  Your quarrels are times when you experience problems, while your imaginations are internal experience. If you try for solutions, try for ones that help your relationships, solutions that must be tested through external, actual experience. Also, keep track of how much time you spend relating to other people, to be sure you're relating daily and for lengthy cumulative times. Four or more hours is lengthy. If you work in a solitary job, consider changing career to one that requires you to exercise your people skills. Here is one criterial equivalent for relating: "relating='being engaged in face-to-face, interactive, verbal communication with one or more people.'"  The communicating is interactive because: 1. you and the other participants reply to other's speech or start new conversations. 2. all participants can and do change the conversation topic and others follow the topic change. 3. the topic of conversation, or the verbal content of the communications, requires you to have one or more emotions and to sequentially express those emotions with your voice, along with your face and body. 4. emotions you express with your voice, face, and body are congruent with the verbal content of your speech. Relating that way requires particular contexts, and resources you can't produce with just anyone anytime you're facing them. Below is a list of communication contexts in which the above criterion may not be met: 1. talking while hiding your feelings 2. consistently responding to less than all four of face, body, voice,verbal communication content 3. working side-by-side 4. using the phone 5. reading or writing communications 6. participating in a mob 7. formally teaching 8. talking or listening to a housepet 9. performing onstage 10.being in 3rd position 11.being in 2nd position The contexts 1-11 listed above are not of the logical type required by my "relating" criterion. Beware the prescriptions of anyone who prescribes behaviors to you, apply your critical thinking skills, or learn some.  I prescribe that you spend as much time as you can relating, whether your imaginings change or not. -nj