A presentation from the Orienting Solutions event.

1. S
The Psychology of
Solution Focused Practice
Ian C. Smith
Lancaster University
i.smith@lancaster.ac.uk

2. S
“Psychology is the
science of thinking of
names for things that
do not exist”
- Brian Herbert

3. The 3 types of SF question:
S Resource questions
S Exception questions
S Preferred future questions

4. S
Resources

5. Resource questions - definition
...ask people to identify their skills and other
positive attributes. It may also involving
asking how these can be used.

6. Resource questions
Does it work?
Seligman et al (2005) measured depression
and happiness while asking people to do
different tasks, including:
S placebo condition
S identifying their ‘signature strengths’

7. Seligman et al Findings
S Comparing the ‘placebo’ group and the
‘Identify a signature strength’ group found..
S Immediately after task - significant
improvement in depression and happiness
for the ‘strength’ group. BUT...
S After 1 week, 1 month, 3 months & 6
months - no significant difference!

8. Seligman et al Findings
However, there was another condition –
“identifying strengths and using them in a new
way”. For this group....
S There was a significant improvement in
depression immediately after task but no
difference later, BUT
S HAPPINESS significantly improved at ALL
time points to six months.

9. What is the implication?
S It would seem that simply asking people
about their resources isn’t helpful in the
long run unless there is also a focus on
applying them in new ways.

10. S
Exceptions

11. Exception seeking - definition
...is asking people to draw distinctions
between two occurrences of a similar event
which happened to them in the past.

12. Autobiographical Memory (ABM)
S There are different styles of retrieving ABMs –
extended, specific & categoric.
S Specific ABMs are the key to good social
problem solving (e.g. Beaman et al, 2007)
S People who are depressed tend to be less
specific in ABMs (Williams, 1995)
S Requests that are highly concrete or prompt
visualising prompt the most specific memories.

13. Implication:
S Asking people about past times in a highly
concrete way or a way that helps them
visualise the situation can help them locate
specific exceptions.

14. Selecting a comparison event
S http://www.youtube.com/watch?annotatio
n_id=annotation_262395&feature=iv&src_vi
d=voAntzB7EwE&v=v3iPrBrGSJM
S It’s really hard to identify times when
something you don’t expect changes:

15. Implications:
S Don’t ask about the ABSENCE of a problem,
instead get people to look for other
unusual positive experiences
S Asking people about past times in a highly
concrete way or a way that helps them
visualise...

16. S
Preferred Futures

17. Preferred future questions -
definition
S Asking people about what they would like to
have happen in the future

18. Preferred future questions
In other words asking people to:
1. Predict what things will make them happy
in the future (affective forecasting)
2. Choose goals from these possible futures

19. 1. Affective Forecasting
S Food shopping is future prediction!
S (Gilbert et al, 2002)

20. 1. Affective Forecasting

21. What can help?
S Wilson et al (2000) asked football fans how much
of an effect their team winning a game would
have on their happiness
S At the same time they asked half of them to think
through the following week in detail
S The ‘thinkers’ were more realistic’
S The ‘non-thinkers’ significantly over-estimated
how happy they would feel
WHY?

22. How we think about distant and
near future events (Trope &
Lieberman, 2003)
High-level construals
S Abstract
S Simple
S Coherent
S Decontextualized
S Goal relevant
Low-Level construals
S Concrete
S Complex
S incoherent
S Contextualized
S Goal irrelevant

23. Implication:
S Preferred future questions are likely to
result in more accurate answers if you talk
through all the details (as in the Miracle
Question)

24. 3. Choosing
S Choosing doesn’t happen in a vacuum
S Most people don’t know what they want
unless they see it in context

25. Preferred Future Times
Pick the type of subscription you want:
S Web subscription: one year subscription
includes online access to new issues this year
(12) plus all issues since 2005 - £39
S Print subscription: one year subscription to the
print edition (12 issues) - £69
S Print & Web subscription: one year subscription
to the print edition (12 issues) and online
access to all issues since 2005 - £69

26. Economist subscription
(Ariely, 2008)
68
32
16
84
0
20
40
60
80
100
Web only ($59) Print & Web ($125)
Percentageofstudents
Subscription type
NOT offered print
only
OFFERED print only

27. Implication
S People NEED and LIKE comparisons. Offering
comparisons for every possibility may help.

28. Choose a holiday... (Shafir, 1993)
You can go to Moderacia
S Average weather
S Average hotels
S Average beaches
S Average nightlife
You can go to Extremia
S Brilliant Weather
S Awful hotels
S Fantastic beaches
S Terrible nightlife
Most people choose
Extremia
So choosing doesn’t
work the same way as
rejecting!
Most people reject
Extremia
Reject

29. Implication:
S Balance conversations about choosing and
rejecting
S Be aware of the difference!

30. So in summary...
S The message from research tells us that the way
we ask about the future and memories and how
we present choices can have a huge impact on the
response we get.
S Certain thought exercises seem to help people
find better goals and solutions for reaching them
S Social sciences research has a lot to offer
solution focused practice

31. References
S Ariely, D. (2008). Predictably Irrational. New York: Harper Collins
S Beaman, A., Pushkar, D., Etezadi, S., Bye, D., Conway, M. (2007) Autobiographical memory specificity
predicts social problem-solving ability in old and young adults. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental
Psychology, 60:9, 1275-1288, DOI: 10.1080/17470210600943450
S Gilbert, D. T., Gill, M. J., Wilson, T. D. (2002) The Future is Now: Temporal Correction After Affective
Forecasting. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 88 (1), 430-444.
S MacLeod, A., Byrne, A. (1996) . Anxiety, Depression, and the Anticipation of Future Positive and Negative
Experiences. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 105 (2), 286-289.
S Msetfi, R., Murphy, R. A., Simpson, J., Kornbrot, D. E. (2005). Depressive Realism and Outcome Density
Bias in Contingency Judgments: The Effect of the Context and Intertrial Interval. Journal of Experimental
Psychology: General 134 (1), 10-22.
S Seligman, M. E. P., Steen, T. A., Park, N., Peterson, C. (2005) Positive Psychology Progress – Empirical
Validation of Interventions. American Psychologist 60 (5), 410-421.
S Shafir, E. (1993). Choosing versus rejecting: Why some options are better and worse than others.
Memory & Cognition 21 (4), 546-556.
S Trop, Y., Liberman, N. (2003). Temporal Construal. Psychological Review 110 (3), 403-421.
S Williams, J. M. G. (1995) Depression and Specificity of Autobiographical Memory. In D. Rubin (Ed.)
Remembering Our Past: Studies in Autobiographical Memory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
S Wilson, T. D., Wheatley, T., Meyers, J. M., Gilbert, D. T., Axsom, D. (2000). Focalism: A Source of
Durability Bias in Affective Forecasting. Attitudes and Social Cognition 78 (5), 821-836.

32. S
Thank-you.
Please choose to ask questions.
i.smith@lancaster.ac.uk