Cognitive narrative psychotherapy

1. Introduction

Version followed: Óscar F. Gonçalves' five-phase model (recalling, objectifying, subjectifying, metaphorizing, projecting narratives) as set out in Gonçalves (1994a), "Cognitive narrative psychotherapy: The hermeneutic construction of alternative meanings", Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy, 8(2), 105–125, read in its Spanish translation (Revista de Psicoterapia, VI(22/23), 101–122; page numbers below refer to this translation). The brief-therapy manual Psicoterapia cognitiva narrativa: Manual de terapia breve (Gonçalves, 1998) builds on this model but is not drawn on; where a secondary source reports its content (Lahm-Vieira, Boeckel & Rava, 2011) this is stated. Later reframing in terms of narrative coherence, complexity and multiplicity (Gonçalves, Korman & Angus, 2000; Gonçalves, Henriques & Machado, 2004) is noted where relevant.

Sources and status (read first): this guide draws on the primary text. Verified [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans.]: the three founding hypotheses; the five phases and their order; the within-phase structure (attitude goal, modelling, exercises, application to the prototype narrative, homework); the synchronic and diachronic levels; and the named procedures of every phase. These procedures are relaxation and guided imagery with temporal regression, the daily narrative notebook, the year-by-year life review, prototype selection, five-channel sensory cues, emotional activation, focusing and symbolising cues, thought listing and "peeling the onion", the four metaphor cue types, guided-imagery confirmation and historical analysis of the root metaphor, alternative metaphors, five-step projection homework and fixed-role experiments. Not verified: the 1998 manual's session plan and any session counts (the 1994 paper gives none), the 2000–2004 narrative-coding dimensions and some bibliographic details. These remain [uncertain]. Numbered steps without a page citation are this guide's operationalisation [synthesis]. Example language is illustrative unless quoted.

What it is. Cognitive narrative psychotherapy (CNP) is a structured, individual cognitive-constructivist therapy developed by Óscar F. Gonçalves at the University of Minho (Braga, Portugal) in the early 1990s. Its author frames it as hermeneutic and constructivist, in contrast to the rationalist cognitive paradigm. It rests on three hypotheses. First, knowing and existing are inseparable and are organised as narratives. Second, understanding a client means identifying their prototype narratives, which work as root metaphors for making meaning. Third, therapy is a setting for identifying, constructing and deconstructing narratives, in which the client has to acquire a "narrative attitude". [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. pp. 102–104] Psychopathology is linked to inflexible narrative authorship: closed identities that exclude experience that does not fit the prototype. [source: Lahm-Vieira et al. 2011, summarising Gonçalves]

Core idea of change. Change is a change in narrative structure, not a correction of faulty beliefs. Phase by phase, the client learns five narrative attitudes: recalling episodes; objectifying them (sensory detail); subjectifying them (emotions and thoughts); metaphorizing them (condensing their meaning into a root metaphor); and projecting (constructing alternative metaphors and living them out in new narratives, which are then tested). Each attitude is applied both to everyday events and to the central themes of the client's life. The aim is an open-ended movement between construction and deconstruction, oriented to a "world of possibility" and drawing on Markus' idea of possible selves. The paper says the process has no end. [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. pp. 104–105, 116, 119] The title of the companion 1994 paper frames the shift as "from epistemological truth to existential meaning" [source: RC-CPLP record of Gonçalves 1994b]. Later papers frame the outcome as greater narrative coherence, complexity and multiplicity [uncertain: not checked].

2. Framework

Format. Individual talk therapy with a fixed phase sequence. The 1994 paper describes in-session exercise and practice sessions, guided imagery, and homework that applies each attitude to daily events. It treats homework as central to consolidating the work. [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. pp. 105–119] The 1998 manual presents CNP as a brief therapy [source: manual title, cited in Lahm-Vieira et al. 2011]. Session count: the 1994 paper gives no total or per-phase session numbers, and the manual is not drawn on [uncertain]. A practical planning range is roughly 15–20 weekly sessions, about 2–4 per phase [synthesis, not a figure from any source].

Recurring within-phase structure. Each phase has two objectives: developing the phase's attitude, then applying it to the prototype narrative. The work runs in four steps. (1) The therapist models the attitude, typically with excerpts from novelists and other writers or artists. (2) In-session exercises use standard stimulus situations, for example arriving half an hour late and having to face one's boss. (3) Homework applies the attitude to daily events. (4) The attitude is applied to the prototype narrative in session, followed by detailed homework on it. Each attitude works at two levels. The synchronic level covers everyday experiences and addresses the most immediate symptomatic concerns. The diachronic level covers central life themes, through the prototype narrative, which is reviewed throughout therapy. [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. pp. 105–119]

The sequence runs from concrete to abstract (episode → senses → feelings and thoughts → metaphor) and then back to concrete (new narratives lived and tested). The paper treats the phases as sequential: metaphor work begins once the client has completed the prescribed recalling, objectifying and subjectifying tasks. Within objectifying, inner reactions are deliberately held back so the client stays with sensory detail. [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. pp. 109, 113] Do not skip phases: metaphor work on an unelaborated narrative tends to produce intellectual labels [synthesis].

Later reframing (2000–2004). Gonçalves and colleagues later described psychopathology and outcome along three narrative dimensions: structural coherence (orientation, sequence, evaluation, integration), process complexity (objectifying, emotional and cognitive subjectifying, metaphorizing) and content multiplicity (variety of themes, events, settings and characters). They developed coding manuals to rate client narratives on these dimensions. Use them as a lens to track progress across phases. [source: Gonçalves, Korman & Angus 2000; Gonçalves, Henriques & Machado 2004 (not drawn on)] A secondary source reports progress being assessed with a wordless-book narrative task (Henriques et al., 2004), analysed for structure, process and content [source: Lahm-Vieira et al. 2011]. [uncertain: the component names within each dimension are recalled, not checked; the coding manuals are not reproduced here]

3. Guiding principles

• The client is narrator, author and protagonist. Ask for stories of episodes rather than beliefs to test; the goal is a lasting "narrative attitude". [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. pp. 102–104]
• Meaning over truth. Do not dispute whether a thought is accurate. Help the client produce more, and richer, meanings. [source: 1994a, p. 102 (constructivist versus rationalist paradigm); 1994b title]
• Psychopathology is a restricted, inflexible narrative. Treat the presenting problem as a prototype story that organises meaning and excludes what does not fit, and aim to open it up. [source: 1994a hypotheses; Lahm-Vieira et al. 2011]
• Concrete before abstract, outside before inside. Anchor work in a specific episode. Elaborate the senses before inner experience: during objectifying, inner reactions are deliberately held back. [source: 1994a, pp. 106–109]
• Model before asking. Show each attitude through literary, film or artistic examples (and, in phase 5, the client's own past changes) before the client practises it. [source: 1994a, pp. 108, 113, 116]
• Work at two levels. Apply each attitude to everyday events (synchronic, for immediate concerns) and to the prototype narrative and life themes (diachronic). [source: 1994a, p. 105]
• No metaphor without history. Ground every root and alternative metaphor in episodes across the life stages: "Ninguna metáfora puede utilizarse sin una base histórica" (1994a, Sp. trans. p. 117).
• Possibility, not a correct new story. Alternatives are tried tentatively as "possible selves", and success means having options rather than a single replacement story. [source: 1994a, p. 116; the multiplicity emphasis in Gonçalves, Henriques & Machado 2004 is uncertain]
• Experiencing, not just reporting. Emotional work uses imaginal cues that bring the sensory experience into the present tense, plus motor cues, so the episode is re-lived rather than summarised. [source: 1994a, pp. 110–111]
• Structure plus collaboration. Use structured cue sequences and give detailed feedback, but the client chooses the prototype and the metaphors. The therapist is an active co-constructor rather than neutral. [source: 1994a; Lahm-Vieira et al. 2011]
• Hermeneutic stance. The therapist is a co-interpreter who invites alternative readings of the client's text. [source: 1994a (title; p. 102)]
• Homework extends the narrative into daily life. Every phase's attitude is practised on daily events between sessions. [source: 1994a, pp. 106–119]
• The future is also a narrative. Projecting means building, rehearsing and enacting alternative scripts "as an actor", then narrating what happened. [source: 1994a, pp. 116–119]
• An open-ended process. There is no fixed endpoint. The goal is a continuing sense of authorship, and the therapy relationship itself eventually becomes part of the client's history. [source: 1994a, p. 119]

4. Intervention inventory

Scope and sourcing: the procedures below are those Gonçalves describes, phase by phase, in the 1994a paper (Sp. trans.). Page-cited steps follow that paper and are paraphrased. Uncited numbered steps are this guide's operationalisation [synthesis]. The 1998 manual is not drawn on and may add or refine procedures [uncertain]. Example language is illustrative unless quoted with a page reference.

4.0 Introducing the narrative rationale (session 1–2)

• Purpose / when: At the start of therapy. Explore the main complaints, the client's global functioning and its history, and give a shared model: the client as narrator, the problem as a story told in a restricted way, and therapy as five steps from remembering to living new stories. [source: early-stage content per Lahm-Vieira et al. 2011, citing Gonçalves 1998; narrative attitude per 1994a; delivery steps synthesis]
• Steps: (1) Take the problem history in episode form: ask for the most recent, the worst and the first time the problem occurred. (2) Point out how the client tells these episodes, for example as brief, summary-like accounts that all end with the same conclusion. (3) Explain the five phases in plain language and the role of homework. (4) Agree goals framed as narrative change, for example being able to see a situation in more than one way and act differently in it. (5) Set the first notebook homework (4.2). [synthesis]
• Example language (illustrative): "We all make sense of our lives by telling stories about what happens to us. When something keeps going wrong, the story often gets very short and always ends the same way. We'll start by remembering episodes in a lot of detail, then work out what they mean to you, and finally try out other ways of telling and living them."
• Watch for: A client who hears "story" as "you're making it up". Make clear that the events are real and that it is the meaning given to them that therapy works on. Signs it is working: the client offers a specific episode unprompted. [synthesis]

4.0a Modelling the phase attitude (every phase)

• Purpose / when: At the start of each phase, to show the client what the new attitude looks like before they practise it. The paper uses literary passages (for example from David Lodge) for objectifying; short stories, films, theatre, dance and music for metaphorizing; and literature, film, theatre, well-known people and the client's own earlier changes ("self-modelling") for projecting. [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. pp. 108, 113, 116]
• Steps: (1) Choose a short passage or clip that shows the target attitude: vivid sensory description, rendered inner experience, meaning condensed into a title or image, or a character who reinvents themselves. (2) Read or show it in session. (3) Ask the client what the author is doing, for example which senses are used, or how the meaning is condensed. (4) Link this to the exercise the client will try next. (5) In phase 5, also ask for times the client changed before. [synthesis for steps]
• Example language (illustrative): "Listen to how this writer puts us in the room. What do we see, hear, smell? That's the kind of telling we'll practise this week."
• Watch for: Material that is too literary or culturally distant; take examples from the client's own reading, films or music. It is working when the client can say what the model does and imitate it. [synthesis]

Phase 1: Recalling narratives

4.1 Relaxation and guided imagery with temporal regression

• Purpose / when: Opening exercise of phase 1. Develops a "recalling attitude" and brings up significant episodes from across life. Relaxation is used to move the client into a more sensorimotor, associative mode of experiencing. [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. p. 106]
• Steps: (1) Give a brief relaxation induction. The paper leaves the technique to therapist and client preference. [source: p. 106] (2) Guide imagery backwards in time, asking the client to recall something that happened yesterday, then last year, in primary school and before kindergarten. [source: p. 106, paraphrased] (3) Bring the client back to the room. The client shares the episodes and reactions, and you discuss them. [source: p. 106] (4) If memories come back general, slow down and ask for one specific moment: setting, order of events, people, ending. [synthesis] (5) Set the daily notebook (4.2). [source: p. 106]
• Example language (illustrative): "Let your eyes close if that's comfortable… Try to recall something that happened yesterday, one moment… Now go back to last year… to your first school…"
• Watch for: Overgeneral memory, which is common in depression: use more cueing and shorter time windows [synthesis; general clinical knowledge, not from Gonçalves]. Distress at early memories: agree beforehand that the client can open their eyes and stop, and screen for trauma first (see 5.2). It is working when episodes arrive with time, place and sequence. [synthesis]

4.2 Daily narrative diary (homework)

• Purpose / when: From phase 1 onward. The client keeps a daily notebook of events worth remembering, each briefly described. It extends recall to daily life (the synchronic level) and builds a pool of episodes. [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. p. 106; Lahm-Vieira et al. 2011 (concrete episodes for each day of the week, then discussed)]
• Steps: (1) Each day, the client notes one event worth remembering, with a brief description. [source] (2) Ask for it to be written as a short scene: setting, sequence, people, ending. [synthesis] (3) The client brings the notebook; in session, pick one entry, expand it and discuss it. [source: Lahm-Vieira et al. 2011; expansion synthesis] (4) In each later phase, the daily homework applies that phase's attitude: sensory, then emotional and cognitive, then metaphoric. [source: 1994a, pp. 108–117]
• Example language (illustrative): "Each evening, write down one moment from the day as if you were telling it to someone who wasn't there. Just one, and stick to what happened."
• Watch for: Entries that are lists or evaluations ("bad day, felt useless"). Model one entry together in session. It is working when entries become scene-like. [synthesis]

4.3 Life review: one remembered episode per year of life

• Purpose / when: Phase 1 homework, adapted by Gonçalves from Mahoney's life review project. Gathers episodes from across the life span as material for choosing the prototype and, later, for the historical analysis of root and alternative metaphors. [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. p. 107; reuse pp. 114, 118]
• Steps: (1) The client writes a brief memorial for each year of life, each recording one significant episode. [source: p. 107] (2) The client presents them in session, laid out like a deck of cards (the paper's image). [source: p. 107] (3) Briefly expand a few of them with recall prompts (4.1). [synthesis] (4) Note recurring settings, characters, endings and feelings without interpreting yet. [synthesis] (5) Keep the set for phases 4 and 5. [source: pp. 114, 118]
• Example language (illustrative): "For each year of your life, as far back as you can go, write down one moment that stands out: a particular moment, not a general impression. It's fine to leave years you can't recall blank."
• Watch for: The size of the task; spread it over several weeks. Trauma memories surfacing: let the client choose what to share, do not push for detail on traumatic events in this phase, and assess and stabilise first (see 5.2). It is working when most periods of life are represented. [synthesis]

4.4 Selecting the prototype narrative

• Purpose / when: End of phase 1. From the gathered episodes, client and therapist usually narrow three or four candidates down to one prototype narrative. It is then reviewed throughout therapy (the diachronic level). [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. pp. 105, 107] The paper's case example: a student's first day at university, when a professor shut the door and questioned the students about their choice of course and their entrance grades. [source: p. 107]
• Steps: (1) Lay out the collected episodes (notebook and life review). (2) Ask which ones most capture "what my life or my problem is like". (3) Narrow them to three or four candidates, discuss them, and let the client make the final choice. [source for narrowing from 3–4; discussion synthesis] (4) Have the client write the chosen episode in full as the baseline version, and keep it, because later versions are compared with it. [synthesis]
• Example language (illustrative): "If you had to choose one memory that says most about what you've been struggling with, which would it be?"
• Watch for: Choosing the most dramatic rather than the most representative episode; ask "does this one feel typical?". It is working when the client recognises themselves in it. [synthesis]

Phase 2: Objectifying narratives

4.5a Sensory cue exercises on standard stimulus situations

• Purpose / when: Start of phase 2, after modelling (4.0a). Trains the objectifying attitude on a standard scene before moving to the client's own prototype. [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. p. 108]
• Steps: (1) Give a stimulus situation, such as arriving 30 minutes late and being confronted by one's boss. [source: p. 108] (2) Ask the client to imagine it and take the channels in order: what they see, then hear, taste, smell, and feel by touch and movement. [source: p. 108, paraphrased] (3) Keep to sensory detail and set reactions aside for now. [source: p. 109] (4) Repeat with other situations until detail comes easily in every channel. [synthesis]
• Example language (illustrative, following the paper's channel order): "You arrive half an hour late and your boss is waiting. What do you see? … And now, what do you hear? … Any taste in your mouth? … What do you smell? … What do you feel on your skin, in your movements?"
• Watch for: A client who jumps to feelings. Acknowledge them, note them for phase 3, and return to the senses. It is working when detail flows across channels without prompting. [synthesis]

4.5b Objectifying the prototype narrative

• Purpose / when: Core of phase 2. Applies the objectifying attitude to the prototype, so it is re-experienced in its full sensory texture and more material is available for new meanings. [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. pp. 108–110]
• Steps: (1) The client re-enters the prototype scene in imagery, with eyes closed or gaze lowered (their choice), ideally in the present tense. [synthesis for these details] (2) Take the five channels one at a time: sight, hearing, taste, smell, touch and movement. [source: p. 108] (3) Hold back inner reactions (emotions and thoughts), which are the work of phase 3. [source: p. 109] (4) For homework, the client writes a detailed objectified version, helped by supporting materials such as photos, music, letters or films (4.7). [source: p. 110] (5) Compare it with the baseline version to show how much richer it has become. [synthesis]
• Example language (illustrative): "Stay in that lecture room for a moment. What do you see around you? … What can you hear? … Is there any smell?"
• Watch for: Rising emotion during re-experiencing. Allow it, but keep the focus sensory, since emotion is the next phase. Thin channels (smell, taste) are normal; don't force them. It is working when retellings become vivid and specific. [synthesis]

4.6 Objectifying homework on daily episodes

• Purpose / when: Phase 2, between sessions. The client records a sensory memory of one event each day, carrying the objectifying attitude into everyday life (synchronic level). [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. pp. 108–110]
• Steps: (1) Each day, the client writes one episode in sensory detail across as many channels as possible. [source] (2) Optionally, the client pauses during the day for a moment of present-moment sensory noticing. [synthesis] (3) In session, review one or two entries and expand them. [synthesis]
• Example language (illustrative): "This week, when you write your daily moment, add what you saw, heard, smelled and physically felt."
• Watch for: Entries that drift back to evaluation. It is working when entries start with the scene rather than the verdict. [synthesis]

4.7 Supporting materials (photos, music, letters, films)

• Purpose / when: Phase 2 homework. Concrete materials from the time of the prototype, such as photos, music, letters or films, help the client objectify it in detail. [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. p. 110]
• Steps: (1) Invite the client to gather materials linked to the prototype or to life-review episodes. (2) Use them at home, or in session if the client wishes, as cues for the sense-by-sense retelling (4.5b). (3) Let the client control what is shown. [synthesis]
• Example language (illustrative): "If there's a photo, a song or a letter from that time, use it while you write. It can help bring the details back."
• Watch for: Strong grief or trauma reactions to objects; agree beforehand that the client can stop at any point. [synthesis]

Phase 3: Subjectifying narratives

4.8 Emotional subjectification: activation, focusing and symbolising

• Purpose / when: Phase 3a. Develops the subjectifying attitude and brings the emotional side of the episode into awareness, first on standard stimulus situations and then on the prototype. Gonçalves organises it as three sub-processes drawn from Greenberg and Safran: activation, focusing and symbolising. [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. pp. 110–112]
• Steps: (1) Activation. Use imaginal cues that bring the objectified sensory experience into the present tense, and motor cues: ask the client to notice, then exaggerate, gestures and facial expressions. [source: p. 111] (2) Focusing. Use intensifying cues (elaborate the images and reactions) and refocusing cues (attend to the inner experience itself, without needing words yet). [source: p. 111] (3) Symbolising. Use symbolising cues (find a word or symbol for the experience) and resymbolising cues (adjust the symbol until it fits better). [source: p. 111] (4) Track how the feeling changes across the episode, and have the client write an emotionally subjectified version. [synthesis] The paper's case example: tension and a sense of shrinking, symbolised as "terror y pánico". [source: p. 112]
• Example language (illustrative): "Be there again, now, as the door closes. Notice what your hands and face are doing, and let that get a little bigger… Stay with what's happening inside, no words needed yet… Now, what word or image fits? … Does it fit exactly, or is there a better word?"
• Watch for: Flooding or dissociation (glazed look, losing contact): ground the client and step back to sensory description (see 5.2). Over-control ("I felt nothing"): start from motor cues and the body, in small steps. It is working when the emotional vocabulary becomes more differentiated and the client can stay with a feeling and then let it settle. [synthesis]

4.9 Cognitive subjectification: thought listing

• Purpose / when: Phase 3b. Makes the inner dialogue explicit at each moment of the episode. The thoughts are elaborated as part of the story and not disputed. The same stimulus situations used for emotional work serve as cues, followed by the prototype. [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. p. 112; non-disputation consistent with pp. 102–104]
• Steps: (1) The client returns to and re-experiences the situation. (2) The client voices every thought and piece of inner dialogue that comes to mind while doing so. [source: p. 112, paraphrased] (3) Write the thoughts into the narrative alongside senses and feelings. [synthesis] (4) Notice sequences (thought → feeling → action → outcome) without challenging them. [synthesis] (5) Continue with "peeling the onion" (4.9a).
• Example language (illustrative): "As you go back into that moment, say out loud everything that goes through your mind, whatever it is, including what you're saying to yourself."
• Watch for: Slipping into disputation; hold back, because alternatives come in phase 5. Thoughts reported as facts ("he didn't care"): reframe them as "what you were thinking". It is working when the client spontaneously reports inner dialogue in notebook entries. [synthesis]

4.9a "Peeling the onion"

• Purpose / when: Phase 3b, after thought listing. Moves from surface thoughts to the most basic thought in the episode, which feeds the later root-metaphor work. [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. p. 112]
• Steps: (1) The client picks one listed thought. (2) Ask what lies beneath it. (3) Repeat with each answer until the client reaches what feels like their most basic thought. [source: p. 112, paraphrased] (4) Write the chain into the narrative. [synthesis] In the paper's case, the chain ran from fearing he would freeze to labelling himself worthless. [source: p. 112]
• Example language (illustrative): "Take 'I'm going to freeze.' If that happened, what would it mean? … And underneath that?"
• Watch for: Distress as core self-judgements surface; slow down and validate. Treat the chain as material to understand, not to refute. It is working when the client recognises the basic thought as familiar across episodes. [synthesis]

4.10 Subjectifying homework

• Purpose / when: Phase 3, between sessions. The client applies the three-step emotional process (4.8) and the cognitive process (4.9, 4.9a) to daily events. [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. p. 112]
• Steps: (1) The client keeps the daily notebook, adding feelings and body sensations, then thoughts and the chain beneath them. [source] (2) Ask for at least one non-problem episode a week, to widen the emotional range. [synthesis] (3) Review entries in session. [synthesis]
• Example language (illustrative): "Keep writing one moment a day. This week, add what you felt, where in your body, and the word that fits it best."
• Watch for: Homework becoming rumination about the problem. Cap the time spent writing and include neutral or positive episodes. [synthesis]

Phase 4: Metaphorizing narratives

4.11 Metaphor cue exercises and constructing the root metaphor

• Purpose / when: Phase 4. Develops the metaphorizing attitude, then condenses the meaning of the fully elaborated prototype into a root metaphor. The work draws on Lakoff and Johnson's structural, orientational and physical (object or substance) metaphors. [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. pp. 113–115; see also Gonçalves & Craine 1990]
• Steps: (1) Model the attitude (4.0a): discuss how a story's or film's central meaning is condensed in a title or image. [source: p. 113] (2) Practise on standard stimulus situations with four cues: structural (a concept that symbolises the experience as a metaphor), orientational (a metaphor of spatial relation), physical (an object or substance), then summary (which metaphor, or which combination, best symbolises the experience). [source: p. 113, paraphrased] (3) Apply the same cues to the objectified and subjectified prototype. [source: pp. 114–115] (4) Record the summary root metaphor in the client's own words. [synthesis] In the paper's case, the metaphors were a disastrous actor (structural), an outsider (orientational) and a snake (physical), summarised as "a terrible avoidant actor". [source: p. 115]
• Example language (illustrative): "If you had to find one idea that sums up, as an image, what you lived there, what would it be? … Where are you in relation to the others, as a picture in space? … If it were an object or a substance? … Of all of these, which one, or which combination, fits best?"
• Watch for: Abstract labels ("low self-esteem") instead of living images: go back to the scene and ask what it looks like. It is working when the client is moved by the metaphor and recognises it as theirs. [synthesis]

4.11a Confirming the root metaphor through guided imagery

• Purpose / when: Phase 4, immediately after 4.11. Tests whether the metaphor really fits the lived prototype. [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. pp. 115–116]
• Steps: (1) Run guided imagery that re-presents the prototype with its sensory, emotional and cognitive detail. (2) Ask the client to fit the metaphor to the experience as it is re-lived. (3) The client's own judgement is the confirmation; in the paper the client recognised it as the story of his life. [source: pp. 115–116] (4) If it does not fit, return to the cues in 4.11 and revise. [synthesis]
• Example language (illustrative): "Go back into the scene, with all you now know of it… Hold the image of 'the terrible actor' up against it. How well does it fit, right now?"
• Watch for: Polite agreement. Ask for felt fit, not intellectual fit. [synthesis]

4.12 Historical analysis of the root metaphor

• Purpose / when: Phase 4, after confirmation. Traces how the root metaphor operates in current life and across life stages, showing it as a way of constructing meaning with a history rather than a fact about the world. [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. pp. 114–115]
• Steps: (1) In session, find situations in current daily life where the metaphor is at work. [source] (2) Move back through the life stages (childhood, adolescence, adulthood), using the life review (4.3) to find episodes it organised. [source] (3) Explore when it first emerged and what it may have made sense of at the time. [synthesis] (4) Note episodes where it was absent, since these are seeds for phase 5. [synthesis]
• Example language (illustrative): "Where else this month has the 'outsider' shown up? … And as a teenager? … Are there memories where this image doesn't fit at all?"
• Watch for: Self-blame ("I've ruined everything"). Frame the metaphor as once having been a sensible way of coping. It is working when the client calls it "a way I see things". [synthesis]

4.13 Metaphor in daily narratives (homework)

• Purpose / when: Phase 4, between sessions. The client metaphorizes everyday events daily, and writes a narrative for each life stage in which the root metaphor appears, elaborated with objectifying and subjectifying. [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. pp. 114–115]
• Steps: (1) For each daily notebook episode, the client finds a metaphor and notes whether the root metaphor is present and how it shapes what they notice, feel, think and do. (2) The client writes one fully elaborated life-stage narrative per week or so. [pacing synthesis] (3) Review frequency and triggers in session. [synthesis]
• Example language (illustrative): "After writing each moment, ask yourself what image fits it, and whether the old image showed up there."
• Watch for: The metaphor becoming a new stick to beat oneself with. Keep the stance curious. [synthesis]

Phase 5: Projecting narratives

4.14 Constructing alternative metaphors

• Purpose / when: Start of phase 5. Develops the projecting attitude and builds alternative root metaphors that could organise experience differently, framed through Markus' possible selves. [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. pp. 116–117]
• Steps: (1) Model with examples from literature, film, theatre and well-known people, and with the client's own previous changes (self-modelling, 4.0a). [source: p. 116] (2) Use the same four metaphor cues as in 4.11 (structural, orientational, physical, summary), now framed as alternatives to the current root metaphor. [source: p. 117] (3) Let the client play with several small alternative narratives before settling on one or two to try. [source: case description, pp. 117–118; "several" is synthesis] In the paper's case, the client settled on "private investigator", linked to Sherlock Holmes. [source: p. 118]
• Example language (illustrative): "Your old image was 'the outsider'. If you could find another concept for who you might be in that same room, what would it be? … Where would you stand? … What object would you be?"
• Watch for: Glib positive slogans: test whether the metaphor fits felt experience, as in 4.11a. It is working when the client generates alternatives themselves. [synthesis]

4.15 Objectifying and subjectifying an alternative narrative

• Purpose / when: Phase 5, after an alternative metaphor is chosen. This is the second and third steps of Gonçalves' three-strategy sequence: a narrative built on the alternative metaphor is objectified, then subjectified emotionally and cognitively, so it becomes as lived as the old one. [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. p. 117]
• Steps: (1) Construct a narrative (past episode or imagined scene) organised by the alternative metaphor. (2) Objectify it through the five channels (as 4.5b). (3) Subjectify it with emotional (4.8) and cognitive (4.9) cues. [source: p. 117] (4) Compare it with the baseline and elaborated prototype versions, and note what feels possible and what doesn't. [synthesis]
• Example language (illustrative): "Let's go back to that lecture room as the investigator. What do you notice now? … What do you feel, and what are you saying to yourself?"
• Watch for: The client feeling the original story is being denied. Make clear that the old version remains one valid reading. It is working when the client can hold both versions. [synthesis]

4.15a Historical analysis of the alternative metaphor

• Purpose / when: Phase 5. Grounds the alternative metaphor in the client's own history, following the principle that no metaphor can be used without a historical base. [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. pp. 117–118]
• Steps: (1) In session, find situations in current daily life where the alternative metaphor already operates. (2) Move through the life stages (childhood, adolescence, adulthood) to find episodes that illustrate it, using the life review (4.3) and the exceptions noted in 4.12. (3) For intensive homework, the client develops a narrative for each stage, using the objectifying and subjectifying tasks. [source: p. 118]
• Example language (illustrative): "When have you already been the investigator, even briefly? As a child? As a teenager?"
• Watch for: "It's never been like that": shrink the unit to small moments and partial instances. It is working when the client finds real episodes that fit. [synthesis]

4.16 Projecting alternative narratives into daily life

• Purpose / when: Phase 5, main homework. A five-step sequence for projecting the alternative metaphor into a real upcoming event. [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. pp. 117–118]
• Steps: (1) Build an alternative metaphor for a specific upcoming event. The paper's example is a dinner with an ex-spouse approached through the image of a Buddhist teacher. (2) Objectify the scene in detail in advance. (3) Subjectify it, anticipating the emotional and cognitive processes. (4) Carry out the scene, improvising within the chosen role. (5) Evaluate it by objectifying and subjectifying what actually happened. [source: pp. 117–118, paraphrased] (6) Review in session and plan the next event. [synthesis]
• Example language (illustrative): "Pick one situation this week. Which image will you go in with? Write how it would look, sound and feel from inside that image, then go and play it, and afterwards write what really happened in the same detail."
• Watch for: All-or-nothing judgements of experiments. Frame each attempt as new material whatever the outcome. It is working when projected episodes become frequent and the client reports acting differently. [synthesis]

4.16a Fixed-role experiments

• Purpose / when: Phase 5, adapted from Kelly's fixed-role therapy, to rehearse and test the alternative narrative across life situations. [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. pp. 118–119]
• Steps: (1) Select stimulus situations from the client's life. (2) The client objectifies and subjectifies a narrative based on the alternative root metaphor, usually at home. (3) Rehearse it in session, with the therapist giving feedback on behavioural, cognitive and emotional aspects while the client adjusts. (4) The client takes "the attitude of an actor" and performs the narrative in real life. (5) The client monitors it with objectifying and subjectifying and discusses it with the therapist. (6) Plan new scripts from the results. [source: pp. 118–119, paraphrased]
• Example language (illustrative): "Let's rehearse it here. I'll be your colleague; you're the investigator. … What did you notice in your body just then? Let's run it again."
• Watch for: The client feeling fake. Frame it as an experiment and an actor's role, not a new identity. Watch for avoidance of the in-vivo step. [synthesis]

4.17 Consolidation and ending

• Purpose / when: Final sessions. The 1994 paper sets no fixed endpoint: therapy ends when client and therapist agree that the narrative attitude is under way, and the therapy relationship itself then becomes "historia". [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. p. 119] A secondary account of the 1998 manual says later sessions address the alliance, the client's projects for future narratives and generalising gains, and that therapy closes with the client's own assessment of the therapy narrative, which is then explored and discussed. [source: Lahm-Vieira et al. 2011]
• Steps: (1) Re-read the baseline and latest versions of the prototype side by side. [synthesis] (2) Ask the client to tell, and then evaluate, the story of their therapy; explore and discuss it. [source: Lahm-Vieira et al. 2011] (3) Plan how the five attitudes will be used on future episodes. [source: generalising, Lahm-Vieira et al. 2011; specifics synthesis] (4) Identify early signs of the old metaphor returning and the client's plan for each. [synthesis]
• Example language (illustrative): "If you were to tell the story of these months here, how would it go? What would you say about it now?"
• Watch for: Ending anxiety; consider spacing the final sessions. [synthesis]

4.18 Narrative assessment of coherence, complexity and multiplicity (monitoring)

• Purpose / when: Before, during and after treatment, to track change in the narratives themselves. A secondary source reports a wordless-book narrative task (Henriques et al., 2004), analysed for structure, process and content, with progress linked to rising narrative coherence and more emotional, causal, insight and reflective words. [source: Lahm-Vieira et al. 2011; Gonçalves, Korman & Angus 2000 and Gonçalves, Henriques & Machado 2004 (not drawn on)] [uncertain: the coding manuals' items and scoring are not reproduced]
• Steps: (1) Collect a written or transcribed episode at baseline, mid-treatment and end. (2) Rate it informally on coherence (is it oriented, sequenced, evaluated, integrated?), complexity (sensory, emotional, cognitive and metaphoric richness) and multiplicity (variety of themes, settings and people). (3) Share the change with the client. For research use, obtain the authors' coding manuals. [synthesis]
• Watch for: Over-reliance on informal ratings; supplement them with standard symptom measures. [synthesis]

5. Handling problems

The 1994 primary text does not set out problem-management procedures. Its only built-in safeguards are grading (sensory detail is elaborated before inner experience, with inner reactions held back during objectifying), modelling before each task, and detailed therapist feedback during rehearsal [source: Gonçalves 1994a, Sp. trans. pp. 108–119]. Everything else in this section is my synthesis, built on the model's logic and general psychotherapy practice [synthesis, throughout]. [uncertain: the 1998 manual may contain guidance not reflected here]

5.1 Stuck client: thin, generalised or absent episodes

• Signs: "Nothing happened this week", summaries instead of scenes, the same brief story every time.
• Response: Shrink the unit to a single minute ("the moment you woke up"). Use cue words or objects (4.7). Accept ordinary episodes. Model a diary entry about your own neutral example only if that fits your practice. In depression with overgeneral memory, give extra practice in phase 1 before moving on. [synthesis]

5.2 Emotional overwhelm or dissociation during objectifying or subjectifying

• Signs: Rapid escalation, tears that do not settle, glazed look, loss of contact, panic.
• Response: Stop the re-living. Open the eyes and orient to the room (name objects, feel the feet on the floor, slow the breathing). Switch to past tense and an observer's view ("as if watching it on a screen"). Next time, use a less loaded episode and shorter immersions. Before starting phases 2–3 on trauma-linked material, screen for PTSD and dissociation and get explicit consent to re-experience. If trauma symptoms dominate, consider a trauma-focused protocol first or alongside. [synthesis]

5.3 Intellectualisation and over-control

• Signs: Fluent analysis, abstract metaphors, "I know why I do it", no felt sense.
• Response: Slow down and go back to the senses (4.5) and the body (4.8). Ask "what does it look like?" rather than "why?". Treat the over-controlled style itself as part of the narrative, and possibly as material for the root metaphor. [synthesis]

5.4 Resistance to the narrative frame

• Signs: "This is just storytelling", wanting symptom techniques, scepticism about metaphors.
• Response: Link each phase explicitly to the presenting goal (for example, richer detail lets us find what actually triggers the panic). Offer a brief trial of two or three sessions with a review. If symptom relief is urgent (severe panic, suicidality), prioritise stabilisation or a different evidence-based protocol and return to narrative work later. [synthesis]

5.5 Homework non-adherence

• Signs: Diary not done, done the night before, or very brief.
• Response: Explore the obstacles: literacy, time, privacy, perfectionism, shame. Offer alternatives such as voice notes, phone notes, bullet points or drawing. Reduce the task to one episode every other day. Do the first entry together at the end of the session. Always review whatever was brought, since unreviewed homework stops being done. [synthesis]

5.6 Alliance ruptures

• Signs: The client feels the therapist is "rewriting my life", or feels their suffering is being minimised by the talk of alternative meanings. Withdrawal, lateness, sudden agreement.
• Response: Name it openly and invite criticism. Acknowledge that the old story was real and painful and that nothing is being taken away. Return choice of episodes and metaphors to the client. Slow the move to phase 5 if it was rushed. [synthesis]

5.7 Modality-specific difficulties

• Wrong prototype chosen: Phase 2–3 work feels flat or irrelevant. Go back to 4.4 and choose again; the elaborations already done can carry over. [synthesis]
• Metaphor too abstract or imposed: If the therapist suggested it, return ownership to the client. Use "does this fit in your body?" as the test, and produce several candidates rather than one. [synthesis]
• The alternative metaphor becomes a new rigid story: This defeats the aim of multiplicity. Deliberately build two or three alternatives, and in 4.15 practise switching between readings. [synthesis, consistent with the multiplicity principle in Gonçalves, Henriques & Machado 2004]
• Grief and trauma prototypes: Re-living a loss or trauma in sensory detail can retraumatise. Pace the work, use the grounding in 5.2, and consider choosing a less central prototype first. [synthesis]
• Risk: If suicidal ideation emerges, especially when the root metaphor carries hopelessness ("a dead end"), pause the phase work. Carry out a standard risk assessment, make a collaborative safety plan, and give lethal-means counselling (safe storage or removal) as indicated. Resume narrative work only when it is safe. [synthesis; standard practice]
• Cultural and linguistic fit: Metaphor work depends on language. Invite metaphors in the client's first language and from their cultural repertoire, and don't impose the therapist's images. [synthesis]

Sources

Sources:

• Psicoterapia cognitivo-narrativa: la construcción hermenéutica de los significados alternativos (Revista de Psicoterapia, UNED; Spanish translation of Gonçalves 1994a)
• From epistemological truth to existential meaning in cognitive narrative psychotherapy (RC-CPLP record)
• Revisando intervenções narrativas: ferramentas para o contexto terapêutico (Nova Perspectiva Sistêmica, 2011)
• PubMed search results: Gonçalves, cognitive narrative psychotherapy (used to confirm citations only)

Further reading (not drawn on): the OasisBR record of the hermeneutic-construction paper, the University of Coimbra Estudo Geral full-text handle for Gonçalves 1994b (hdl.handle.net/10316/94189), and the PubMed abstract pages for Gonçalves & Machado 1999 and Moreira, Beutler & Gonçalves 2008.

Works cited. Details checked against the pages above are marked; the rest are from the 1994a reference list. [uncertain where noted]

• Gonçalves, Ó. F. (1994a). Cognitive narrative psychotherapy: The hermeneutic construction of alternative meanings. Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy, 8(2), 105–125 (verified via the editorial note in the Spanish translation). Spanish translation by A. Villegas Torras: Psicoterapia cognitivo-narrativa: la construcción hermenéutica de los significados alternativos. Revista de Psicoterapia, VI(22/23), 101–122. [uncertain: reprint in Mahoney (Ed.) (1995), Cognitive and constructive psychotherapies, Springer]
• Gonçalves, Ó. F. (1994b). From epistemological truth to existential meaning in cognitive narrative psychotherapy (title, author and year verified in the RC-CPLP record). [uncertain: Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 7(2), 107–118]
• Gonçalves, Ó. F. (1995). Hermeneutics, constructivism, and cognitive-behavioral therapies: From the object to the project. In R. A. Neimeyer & M. J. Mahoney (Eds.), Constructivism in psychotherapy. APA. (Listed as in press in 1994a.)
• Gonçalves, Ó. F. (1998). Psicoterapia cognitiva narrativa: Manual de terapia breve. Campinas: Editorial Psy. (The primary manual; cited by Lahm-Vieira et al. 2011.)
• Gonçalves, Ó. F., & Craine, M. H. (1990). The use of metaphors in cognitive therapy. Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy, 4, 135–150. (Volume and pages from the 1994a reference list, where the journal is given as Journal of Cognitive Therapy.) [uncertain: second author's initials]
• Gonçalves, Ó. F., & Machado, P. P. P. (1999). Cognitive narrative psychotherapy: Research foundations. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 55(10), 1179–1191 (verified in PubMed listing).
• Gonçalves, Ó. F., Korman, Y., & Angus, L. (2000). Constructing psychopathology from a cognitive narrative perspective. In R. A. Neimeyer & J. D. Raskin (Eds.), Constructions of disorder. APA. [uncertain]
• Gonçalves, Ó. F., Henriques, M. R., & Machado, P. P. P. (2004). Nurturing nature: Cognitive narrative strategies. In L. E. Angus & J. McLeod (Eds.), The handbook of narrative and psychotherapy. Sage. [uncertain]
• Lahm-Vieira, C. R., Boeckel, M. G., & Rava, P. G. (2011). Revisando intervenções narrativas: ferramentas para o contexto terapêutico. Nova Perspectiva Sistêmica, 40, 99–114 (secondary source).
• Moreira, P., Beutler, L. E., & Gonçalves, Ó. F. (2008). Narrative change in psychotherapy: Differences between good and bad outcome cases in cognitive, narrative, and prototypical narrative psychotherapies. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 64(10), 1181–1194 (title from the PubMed listing).

Note: Óscar F. Gonçalves (CNP) is a different person from Miguel M. Gonçalves (innovative moments in narrative therapy), whose work is not covered here.