Double Binds – Just contradictory talking or harmful?

Communication is refreshing and sometimes confusing.

In a professional context, you receive assignments with a friendly smile that are tough as nails. You get the impression that the sender knew about the impracticality. In the kitchen, you encounter colleagues who, with downturned mouths, claim they are doing well. Such examples illustrate double binds.

We invite you to explore this phenomenon with us. We approach contradictory conversation situations from various angles: From a rough, initial definition, we mentally take you to Palo Alto. This was the scientific forge for the Double Bind Theory and simultaneously a therapy center for schizophrenics and families. You might be wondering how this is connected.

We also find the question exciting: If double binds occur so often in daily conversations, how can you, as a (future) coach, protect clients from falling into such traps?

Are you interested in joining us and finding answers to these questions together?

Now it begins:

Table of Contents

What is Double Bind?

The Double Bind definition describes a special form of communication between two people. The sender of the message simultaneously conveys two contradictory contents, for example, on the content and relationship levels, to the other person.

The recipient of the information experiences this as paradoxical. You can the dilemma initially not or not at all process. If you often find yourself in this conflict situation, especially when you are in an emotionally dependent relationship with the sender of the message, it can become a health issue for you.

Context of the Double Bind Theory – Palo Alto

A number of psychiatrists, clinical psychologists/social psychologists, social workers, and communication researchers worked in the mid-20th century at the Institute for Mental Research (MRI) at the University of Palo Alto. At the family therapy center there, they sought the cause of communication disorders. A central question was: Is there a connection between communication and mental illnesses like schizophrenia?

The university professor Gregory Bateson (1904-1980) was the initiator of the question. Some of Bateson's students were among the founders of the so-called Palo Alto group. The research group included: the institute's founder and financier Don D. Jackson, John Elderkin Bell, Jay Haley, Paul Watzlawick, Virginia Satir, and John Weakland. In 1956, the Double Bind Theory crystallized as the conclusion of their considerations.

The research pioneers verified their hypothesis: Massive double bind experiences of a child lead to an increased risk of mental illness in adulthood. At that time, physical and physically material thinking approaches were dominant. The Palo Alto group established itself with a theory based on mental-informal actions. That was particularly.

Excursus on Schizophrenia (split consciousness)

This mental illness is so varied that one sometimes speaks of the plural: 'mental illnesses that are summarized under the above name.'

An affected person experiences endogenous (internally originating) psychoses. In these, they have a strongly altered perception of reality: delusional (unrealistic, pathological) ideas. A delusion could, for example, be that aliens want to control the patient's thinking or irradiate them (paranoid delusion and a variant of poisoning delusion). Additionally, there is megalomania and hypochondriacal delusion ('I am seriously ill.').

The Affects of a sick person (strong emotional reactions like anger, rage, or joy) are flattened or do not fit. The language is also altered compared to a healthy person. Hallucinations (for example, hearing voices) and catatonic symptoms can occur (psychomotor oscillation between rigid immobility and agitation). The latter type is called a catatonic split consciousness. If such a state enters an acute phase, there can be a risk to oneself and others.

In an acute episode, a person has no insight into their illness. Besides such phases, this disorder can also run chronically.

Bateson

The personal context within which the Double Bind Theory emerged for the researcher was special:

Bateson thought interdisciplinary and interculturally.

He came from England and lived as a young field researcher under simple conditions with the non-literate Iatmul in New Guinea. He tried to understand this complex society with a researcher's eyes and scientific tools and document certain aspects of their lives. In contrast to his own cultural values, he arrived at a quintessence, his later doctoral thesis.

As a PhD social anthropologist or social scientist, he lived from 1939 with his wife, the renowned anthropologist Margaret Mead, in the USA.

Bateson also applied the following disciplines: communication and system theory, psychology, cybernetics, zoology, and ecology. He contributed to the foundations of system theory through the Macy Conferences held from 1946 to 1953. Additionally, he intellectually exchanged ideas with the later NLP-founders during their precursor project: Meta Model. Richard Bandler and John Grinder were his former research assistant (G.) and student (B.), respectively.

What is the special quality of the Double Bind Theory?

The new quality about it is:

a) its content:

The double bind theory describes the causes and conditions for the emergence of a split in consciousness. Interpersonal contacts with double bind communication were included by the researchers in their hypothesis regarding the cause of pathological behavior. A paradoxical, that is, unexpected reaction for the individual is inherent in the double bind. The researchers assess the paradox as dysfunctional – as illustrated in the following example:

A growing child receives messages that they want to escape from. Unpleasant feelings arise in them (confusion, fear, anger). However, they cannot escape because they are dependent on this person. Initially, this dependency is confirmed by the attentive and loving response of their adult counterpart (for example, their mother). She may have said to them: “That’s sweet,” in response to a childlike behavior. At the same time, she spoke tonelessly, did not look at them, and turned away.

The child hears that it is loved. However, it does not feel the love. It does not feel seen. It notices that another object or person, whom the mother turns to, is more important. For the child, this is a dilemma: What is right?

Theoretically, there are ways out of the dilemma. Practically, they are not yet accessible to a child. The child thus grows up in emotional uncertainty. The bond to the caregiver, the self-image, and the reality, which according to Paul Watzlawick is created by itself, are unclear.

‘Dysfunctional’ here means: In a double bind, the function of communication, namely understanding, is not fulfilled. The information that the mother has provided on the factual level is relativized by her physical rejection on the relational level.

According to action theory, communication is the encounter of two actors. Because the child feels inhibited in acting in the predicament, this second function of communication is also not fulfilled. It is just as dysfunctional – impractical.

b) its status:

The concepts summarized by Bateson / Watzlawick have the status of a theory. This research method unites assumptions (hypotheses) about reality. These are based on thinking, in contrast to knowledge gained through experience. The statements made in the double bind theory were scientifically substantiated.

c) Which theory was replaced by this?

Earlier researchers attributed schizophrenia to intrapsychic factors. Intrapsychic here means: independently, without the influence of an outside person. Now, the Palo-Alto group considered interpersonal communication as a cause alongside a genetic predisposition. A cause-effect chain described by them leading to the illness roughly looks like this:

A double bind = as a frequent loser situation = as a disease-causing communication leads to:
>> psychological disorders >> e.g. to the outbreak of an acute illness episode
= i.e. a communication recognized as meaningful by healthy people is assessed by the affected person as meaningless >> and such communication is no longer applied.

The absence of a compensating caregiver (for example, a father) was classified by the researchers as a third category of causes.

Childhood in double binds

In parent-child relationships, the adolescent is in a state of dependency. If a child often experiences such above-characterized double bind conversations, their perception changes. Double binds primarily occur at this level. The child is supposed to adopt the needs and feelings of their authority figure(s). If parents harm their child, the child is still supposed to see only the positive.

This unsettles them in their love for them. Also, in the child's relationship with themselves, more and more distrust creeps in due to the paradoxical Feedback of their caregiver(s). In a developmental phase where it needs the parents as a clear, protective mirror for its actions, this can lead to a lack of . Affirmations help to development.

The child reacts contradictorily. It wants to feel belonging to its parent and experience love (attachment reflex). At the same time, it wants to escape from the situation (flight reflex). Both together trigger freezing or a displacement action. Helm Stierlin found that not only the child is a victim of such double binds. The parents are as well. It is difficult for them to understand their child's reaction correctly. Stierlin referred to it as a “vicious circle.”

A double bind is vital for a child despite the threat. It cannot yet exist without affection. It is not yet independent enough for an escape. It has not yet learned to use the meta-level as an adult theoretically could.

Bateson exemplified that a child feels pressured to show its love to its mother while simultaneously being unable to do so. It is punished in either case: in the first by accusations/criticism, in the second by withdrawal of love.

Double Binds in relationships

Even among adults in partnership contacts, double bind behavior from the counterpart can lead to insecurity and questions. It is like loving and hating at the same time. An affected person questions their perception of which message is valid.

If the self-concept is not positive and clear, a person can behave contradictorily in interpersonal relationships. They can make a partner choice that they unconsciously made with good intentions for themselves. In reality, some people repeat relationship patterns from their childhood, such as double binds.

Below we show you what ways out of double binds exist.

Double Binds in professional contacts

Double binds also exist in business relationships. People apply them openly (consciously) or partially hidden.

A double bind occurs here when the person giving an order or information (the sender) – on the one hand – states a contradiction on the content level and – on the other hand – on another communication level, for example:

“I know we don’t have much time to deliver a result to the client. I want an excellent presentation"

Schulz von Thun distinguished four linguistic levels

A conversation is characterized by its content.
Beyond this information, a you-message (an appeal) is included.
A self-disclosure is also part of it.
A relational level also exists. This means that the content of the (intended and heard) message depends on the relationship between both conversation participants.

According to von Thun's communication square, relativizations can occur through

a second, opposing piece of information, also on the factual level (in the above example, this is the second sentence: “I want an excellent presentation”).
Excellence with little time is hardly realizable as common project conditions. In a positive case, they are everyday professional challenges. Over time, employees can also wear themselves out and become ill (burnout). This also applies to freelancers.
Alternatively, the boss relies on the relational level of his or the and manner of speaking.
For example, he looks at his employee with open, friendly eyes and uses warm language. 'I believe in you' would be a possible interpretation of the body language's second message by the recipient. This sounds positive. Nevertheless, there is a contrast between what is said and what is meant between the lines. The supervisor and employee are closer than in the first example. The pleasant friction in the team and at the same time the recognition of the double bind are more difficult for the employee than in the first example.
As an appeal, the counterpart signals: 'I don't believe in you.' A deep, quiet voice and lack of eye contact would constitute the second, contradictory information here.
A self-disclosure from the boss is when he precedes the first sentence with a slow 'Yes, ...' and speaks calmly. If the employee has trust in himself and his supervisor, he may interpret this as: 'I know what I am asking of you. An outcome 'in time' is hardly possible. But please try your best. I would be happy if you succeed.'

Professional situations are characterized by the contractual relationship between employer and employee. Employees have fundamentally committed themselves to follow instructions in the future upon entering the employment relationship.

Employees receiving tasks, who are lower or equal in the hierarchy, are exposed to a risk of abuse regarding their work capacity and commitment due to double binds. Double binds can also play a role in bullying Such a dilemma may not be recognizable for the affected person.

A corporate culture is problematic when double binds are systematically used by supervisors

to 'sell' the ambivalent friction felt by the employee as positive (for example, as a challenge or aspect of teamwork)
so that an employee does not trust his own discomfort and remains inactive (does not seek a way out)
where exhaustion states/burnouts as reaction patterns of particularly engaged employees emerge. This is about power, more precisely: about abuse of power.

Other communication purposes for which people use double binds in the workplace are

to shape and modify one's own opinion through a counterpart
for persuasion
for lying/cheating

Double Bind solution

The solution should be preceded by sharpened perception and recognition.

Way out 1 - Metacommunication
Address your counterpart about the ambiguously perceived message. Ask how that person meant it, what they said. If necessary, repeat what was said and ask back if the understood is correct. If you receive two instructions at work that you cannot fulfill simultaneously, ask for the priority.
Way out 2 – Humor
Articulate your dilemma with humor.
Way out 3 – Change priorities
Evaluate the priority of a task from your perspective or experience. Communicate the changed time horizon. Ask for feedback. Alternatively, formulate a proposal before making a risky change. Both depend on your professional position and your decision-making scope.
Way out 4 – Objectify
Execute the verbally communicated message. Note this factual information. Do not react to the second, non-verbal message.
Way out 5 – External support
Seek help. (As a coach: Provide help.) An external, professionally trained person can serve as a clarifying counterpart (mirror) for someone affected by double binds. That double binds can be a cause of problematic relationships at work or privately is often not clear to the client in advance. The presence and attention of the coach help the seeker of help to perceive themselves, their evaluations, and emotions more strongly and positively again.
Way out 6 – End of relationship/termination
If double binds cannot be clarified with the colleague or boss, termination can be a solution. This makes sense if an organizational management uses such communication manipulatively. In the aftermath of contract termination or end of relationship, a processing is advisable.

Double bind in therapy and coaching

The positive side of double binds is: They can be used as a therapeutic tool. In the so-called paradoxical intervention the client is given the task of doing exactly what their problem is.

In the case of double binds, they should react to them and communicate consciously in this way.

Increased attention and control can be the success experience.

Further examples of double binds

The following sentences can contain double binds, depending on the situation:

Of course, we are a team. But you can handle this on your own, right?
Well, you can brew a hot coffee, can't you?
I'll be right with you.
Love me, but not now.
I love your hug, but now I want to go online.
I did this just for you.
I think your gift is great.

Criticism of the Double Bind Theory

A core of this conflict theory, namely that double binds lead to schizophrenia, did not withstand later empirical verification.

Paul Watzlawick (1921-2007), who was a teacher with Bateson in Palo Alto, later differentiated and refuted the theses of the working group of which he had been a member. Paradoxical behavior, as in double binds, is widespread, as the communication and language scientist, psychotherapist, and philosopher demonstrated.

Only if double binds are the most frequent communication pattern in a person's relationships could one observe such psychological symptoms of illness in them. In this one context, it is disease-causing, as one of several conditions.

Watzlawick, who was a radical Constructivist discussed in research circles with "How real is reality?" is known through the non-fiction book "Guide to Unhappiness."

Schizophrenia – current state of knowledge

25 percent of those affected simultaneously have childhood experiences with double binds.

Another cause of mental illness can be an excess of the neurotransmitters dopamine and serotonin in the brain.

Birth complications resulting in delayed brain development and brain diseases can also contribute to this mental disorder. Additionally, there is a family predisposition. Psychosocial influences/increased emotional vulnerability and stress can be additional causes. Each patient has a different combination of causes that led to the illness and a new episode. Scientists are continuing to unravel their exact interplay.

Double Binds and Borderline

Borderline is a mental illness.
Those affected are emotionally unstable (impulsive). They find it difficult to maintain relationships and have a fear of attachment. Self-esteem is either too high or too low.

Scientists are researching Borderline in the aftermath of emotional traumas (separations, bullying, rejection, and violence). They also discuss genetic and characterological prerequisites as causes. What is certain is that the possible sources encompass a wide spectrum.

A double message as a release from a decision-making situation – this is how patients sometimes use a double bind for their protection. It is a way out of inner ambivalences. Often learned in childhood, those affected communicate exactly what they have inside. This includes, for example, the need for attachment and at the same time the fear of being rejected again:

"What is your topic today?" (Therapist/Coach)
"Actually, I don't want to be here today." (Client, looking for help)

The answers to questions in this text raise new questions, for example:
Is love, conditioned, a double bind?
What do you think?