We discuss each of these steps in turn. The process most typically begins when some person in the family communicates incongruently; for example:

Mildred: ... I just wanted to help you out . . . (voice tone harsh, feet spread apart, standing, left arm extended with index finger pointing, shoulders hunched and tensed, breathing shallow, right hand balled into a fist placed on right hip,. . .

In the example given, the messages carried by the body posture and movements and the voice tonality match with each other but not with the words and syntax of the verbal communication — a classic case of incongruity. When faced with a communication such as this, the person (receiver) typically responds by deciding

(step 2 in the process) whether he will respond to the verbal message or the analogue messages.

…

George: (reducing his breathing, extending his hands toward Mildred, palms turned up, whining tonality) . . . I'm sorry, Mildred, I don't understand . . .

The other person in this family system decides to respond to the analogue portion of Mildred's incongruent communication. In this case, the decision is to give priority to the analogue messages arriving primarily through the visual channel rather than the auditory (verbal) channel. Now the process of generalization occurs; in this transcript, the person (George) becomes aware that he feels bad, and this is associated (consciously or not) with an entire set of experiences from the past, when Mildred has been angry with him and he has felt bad.

…

Therapist: . .. George, what are you aware of right now?

George: Well, my stomach's tight — I feel right bad. (turning to Mildred) Mildred, honey, I know that you are angry and . . .

The next step in the creation of a calibrated communication loop is the Complex Equivalence. The analogue signals or messages which George is attending to are accepted as being equivalent to the inner state labeled "anger" in Mildred. The process is completed with the next step, as George accepts the generalization of the Complex Equivalence itself — that is, anytime in the future that George detects the analogue messages described above from Mildred, he will "know" that she is angry. When this loop has been run often enough, the number of analogue cues which George will need to fire off this Complex Equivalence will be reduced. For example, we have encountered cases of calibrated communication in which the shrug of a shoulder, the change of a breathing pattern, or the shift of weight from one leg to another are messages sufficient to initiate a Complex Equivalence, with the accompanying Mind Reading and a calibrated loop. In each of these cases, the person doing the Mind Reading was wholly unaware of the observable portion of the Complex Equivalence — that is, the cue or signal which "gave" him the information was totally outside of his consciousness.

Another effective way of gathering information sufficient to understand the present state of the family system is to use as leads the nominalizations which the family members claim they want for themselves in the desired state. When a family member identifies the nominalization he wants for himself, he is, in effect, stating that he is not satisfied with what he is presently getting from the family in regard to this nominalization. Thus, as the therapist employs his skills to de-nominalize the family members' nominalizations into some set of Complex Equivalences which will identify actual, observable behavior, he can have the family member give (verbally or by acting out) an example of how what happens in his or her present experiences in the family stops him from getting what he wants. Almost invariably, in our experience, the family member presents a case of calibrated communication which is at the center of much pain and dissatisfaction in the family system.

The two strategies which we have just presented for gathering information necessary to understand the present state of the family system have in common the fact that they identify the patterns of calibrated communication. In our work, we have found that the therapist has information sufficient to understand the present state of the family system when he has identified the major ways in which the family members communicate in a calibrated fashion — the places in the family communication patterns in which there is little or no feedback. The set of calibrated loops in a family system is the set of rules for that system which the therapist needs to know about to understand the way in which the family is failing to cope. Rules or calibrated communication loops are what researchers in cybernetics called homeostatic mechanisms. Home-ostatic mechanisms are the processes by which a system, whether it is a simple system, such as one for temperature control, or a complex system such as that of a family, maintains itself in the same patterns of functioning and behavior. To change a system, it is necessary to change the homeostatic processes; that is, when the therapist in a family therapy session has identified the calibrated communication loops or rules, he has sufficient information about the present state of the system to effectively begin the process of creating with the family members the experience which they have identified as an example of the desired state for them.

There are three major parts of Phase I of family therapy, Gathering Information. These are:

1. Preparation of family members for creating an experience which will serve as a model for their future behavior;

2. Determining the desired state for the family system;

3. Determining the present state of the family system.

The therapist can effectively accomplish the first of these by working to create confidence and trust in him in the family members and by sharing the information he gathers, especially making sure that each of the family members comes to appreciate the process by which they have come to the situation in which they now find themselves and, thus, allowing them to understand that the change they will make is simply the next step in an ongoing process over which they can learn to exercise control. The main feature of the second part, that of determining the desired state for the family, is the connecting of words with specific experiences (de-nominalization of the nominalizations) which each of the family members brings to the session as his need or hope for himself and his family. The third part is achieved when the therapist has identified the calibrated communication loops which prevent the family from getting what they want for themselves. The therapist and the family members will have a clear direction, once they have determined the present and future states of the family system. This information, plus the family members' preparedness to accept risk, signals to the therapist that the first phase is complete and he may begin to create the explicit experience which will serve as a model for the future of the family system.

The description of Phase I above is an idealized version of our experience, as is any model; it is the minimum effective set of patterns which we have come to distill from our work in family therapy as adequate for Phase I. We have found it extremely useful in organizing our experiences in family therapy. We invite you to try it, change it, modify it in any way which makes it work for you, for your own personal style.