Atlas›Domain VIII · Creative & expressive arts therapies›Guide 110
Guide VIII-110

Developmental Transformations

David Read Johnson1982
A 31 · L 30 · M 3914 interventions in the Trinity explorer
Client cardCompare
[source: …] where a claim comes from[uncertain] not confirmed in a primary source[synthesis] the writer's reconstruction

1. Introduction

Version followed: Developmental Transformations (DvT) as developed by David Read Johnson. Johnson's definitions and core terms below were verified through Renee Pitre's 2020 Lesley University dissertation, which cites Johnson's texts with page numbers (Johnson 1982 and 1991 in The Arts in Psychotherapy; Johnson et al. 1996; Johnson's unpublished texts for DvT practitioners of 2005 and 2013). Pitre is Johnson's co-author on the DvT chapter in the current edition of Current Approaches in Drama Therapy (ch. 5, from p. 123). Johnson's own texts are not drawn on directly, so these are second-hand citations, not readings of the originals; most step-by-step sequences remain practitioner accounts or [synthesis]. Where the 2005 and 2013 practitioner texts differ, the 2013 version is followed [source: Pitre 2020].

DvT is an improvisational, embodied drama therapy in which client and therapist play together, in pairs or groups, with the flow of movements, sounds, images and roles that arise from their bodies [source: Doyle, ICM; Landers 2001; Sajnani, Willemsen & Butler 2023 abstract]. Johnson's 2013 practitioner text defines it as "an embodied, aesthetic, relational, developmental process of transformations within a playspace", in which a playor (the therapist) and player(s) (the clients) play in each other's physical presence; he presents it as a method not tied to one therapeutic realm [source: Johnson 2013, p. 38, as cited in Pitre 2020]. A shorter definition attributed to Johnson by a practitioner is "embodied encounter in a playspace" [source: Landers 2001; original location not verified]. The method grew out of Johnson's developmental approach (1982) and his transformations technique (1991); the name Developmental Transformations first appears in Johnson et al. (1996) [source: Pitre 2020]. It puts improvised, embodied interaction ahead of exploring role repertoire or story [source: Sajnani, Edge Hill workshop page 2016]. Its trainers also present it as a meditation practice, a performance form and an approach to social change, not only a psychotherapy [source: Bowtell workshop page].

Core idea of change: Johnson first described the playspace as "an interpersonal field in an imaginal realm", the dramatic equivalent of Winnicott's transitional space, and later simply as a particular state of play [source: Johnson 1991, p. 289; Johnson 2005, p. 13, as cited in Pitre 2020]. Inside it, nothing has real-world consequences, so avoided feelings, images and relationships can be represented, repeated and transformed with the therapist as an embodied playing partner [source: Doyle, ICM; Landers 2001]. In the 2013 text, a person lives in a constructed world built from layers of repeated experience; holding it fixed (static equilibrium) reduces movement and freedom, while dynamic equilibrium masters instability actively and in relationship. DvT aims at dimensionalisation, reached by lowering the fear of instability [source: Johnson 2013, pp. 26–28, 36–37, as cited in Pitre 2020; Pitre notes the concept takes little space in Johnson's text, so treat the details as uncertain]. Johnson et al. (1996) state that the encounter is the basis of healing, drawing on Grotowski, and treat language as secondary to the body [source: Johnson et al. 1996, pp. 296, 298, as cited in Pitre 2020; CSSD "Rehearsing the unrehearsed"; Doyle, ICM].

Professional frame: DvT is a method within drama therapy, not a stand-alone profession. In the US and Canada the relevant credential is the Registered Drama Therapist (RDT) via the North American Drama Therapy Association (NADTA); in the UK, dramatherapist is a protected title requiring HCPC registration, with BADth as the professional body; other countries have their own drama therapy associations [synthesis; professional-body details not drawn on here]. DvT-specific training is run by Johnson's training organisation; trainers link to developmentaltransformations.com [source: Bowtell workshop page]; course levels and certification titles are [uncertain]. As a benchmark of depth, Pitre's 2020 study defined DvT experts as having 10+ years of clinical experience, 5+ years of DvT teaching or training and post-graduate DvT training [source: Pitre 2020]. A 2023 scoping review found that published DvT work reports practitioners' training inconsistently [source: Sajnani, Willemsen & Butler 2023 abstract]. Because DvT relies on close physical proximity, touch and improvised enactment of charged material, do not use it as therapy without drama therapy training plus DvT-specific training and supervision [synthesis].

2. Framework

DvT is not organised as a fixed phase protocol with a set number of sessions. The sources describe a continuous improvisational process, not a staged manual [source: Doyle, ICM; Landers 2001]. Session frequency, format and course length are reported inconsistently across the 51 publications in the scoping review [source: Sajnani, Willemsen & Butler 2023 abstract]. What Johnson does give is developmental: the 1991 paper presents transformations as an improvisational approach using developmental sequences of dramatic forms, and the 1982 developmental approach tracks five dimensions along which play develops: structure, medium of expression, complexity, affect and interpersonal demand. The 2013 text keeps these, with ambiguity replacing structure [source: Johnson 1982, p. 184; Johnson 1991, p. 289; Johnson 2013, as cited in Pitre 2020]. These are dimensions to track and adjust, not phases with entry criteria.

Formats reported:

  • Individual (one-to-one) sessions: therapist and client play together [source: Bowtell workshop page; Doyle, ICM].
  • Groups: for example 5–12 participants with one therapist, about one hour, in a veterans' inpatient setting [source: Landers 2001].
  • Non-clinical uses: training groups, education and performance contexts [source: Bowtell workshop page; Sajnani, Willemsen & Butler 2023 abstract].

Developmental direction within the method [uncertain]: a student's training notes say that less marking of pretence (discrepancy) is needed as practice progresses, so the client gradually plays closer to real feeling and real relationship [source: LeClaire flashcards]. Discrepancy itself is verified as one of Johnson's playspace conditions (section 3), but this developmental claim was not found in the Johnson citations checked; use it as a working heuristic only. Practical reading of the five dimensions above [synthesis]: over a course of work, expect play to tolerate more ambiguity, more media at once, more complexity, stronger affect and more interpersonal demand, and pace the work by changing one dimension at a time.

One practitioner's group sequence (Doyle, describing his own DvT-informed group practice, not a formal protocol) [source: Doyle, ICM]:

  • Early sessions: exercises in which everyone works at once, so no individual is in focus, and general themes to build trust and safety.
  • Later sessions: scene work with set structural elements, then work on personal material.

Practical course arc for a clinician starting out [synthesis]:

  • Preparation (1–2 sessions, out of play): assessment and screening (see section 5), explanation of the method, consent to play and to touch, agreement on a stop signal, and goals. Move on when the client understands the play agreement, has rehearsed stopping, and has no exclusion criteria.
  • Building the playspace (first few sessions): short, low-intensity play with plenty of signs of pretence, mostly sound, movement and light images; more distance and less touch. Move on when the client can enter and leave play on cue, use the stop signal, and recover quickly after intense moments.
  • Working phase (open-ended; often weekly): longer embodied encounters with less marking, where repeated personal themes appear and transform. Regularly review out of play whether the work is helping.
  • Ending (last 2–3 sessions): anticipate the end, reduce intensity, review what the client has gained, close the playspace explicitly.

3. Guiding principles

  • The playspace is a state, not a place. Johnson moved from describing it as an interpersonal field in an imaginal realm (1991) to a particular state of play (2005). In practice: check that the agreement holds, not just that you are in the room's "play area" [source: Johnson 1991, p. 289; Johnson 2005, p. 13, as cited in Pitre 2020; Doyle, ICM; Landers 2001].
  • Restraint against harm. One of Johnson's playspace agreements is to restrain from real harm: everyone intends to represent harm, never to cause it. In practice: you can play a fight, never hit; once real harm becomes possible, play stops [source: Johnson 2013, as cited in Pitre 2020; Landers 2001; Landers papers].
  • Discrepancy. A playspace condition: there is a discrepancy between what is real and what is "as if", so both players can see the play is representation. In practice: exaggerate, slow down or stylise to keep play recognisable as play, and increase this when a client loses the frame [condition: source: Johnson 2013, as cited in Pitre 2020; practical adjustments: LeClaire flashcards and synthesis].
  • Mutual agreement. The first playspace condition is that both parties agree this is play [source: Johnson 2013, as cited in Pitre 2020]. A student's notes add that whatever is in play is equally available to all players [source: LeClaire flashcards; uncertain]. In practice: confirm the agreement openly, and do not hold back a role, object or image for yourself only.
  • Reversibility. The fourth playspace condition: roles and images are reversible, not fixed; Johnson added it after the 2005 text, which listed three agreements. In practice: if you were the powerful one, become the weak one next, and the other way round [source: Johnson 2013, as cited in Pitre 2020; LeClaire flashcards; Boyd 2026 abstract].
  • The therapist plays inside the playspace. Intervening within the playspace is one of the therapist tasks in Johnson et al. (1996): the therapist (the playor) is a partner in play, not a side-coach or observer. In practice: you move, make sound and take roles yourself [source: Johnson et al. 1996, p. 297; Johnson 2013, as cited in Pitre 2020; Doyle, ICM].
  • Embodied encounter. DvT "embraces the body perspective" and treats language as secondary; the encounter is the basis of healing; physical touch is part of the method in the 2005 text; and exuberant physical movement is called essential because it activates the person. In practice: what is happening between the two bodies right now is the material; any touch is consented to (see 4.1 and 4.10) [source: Johnson et al. 1996, pp. 296, 298; Johnson 2005, p. 15; Johnson 2013, p. 46, all as cited in Pitre 2020; consent requirement is synthesis].
  • Follow the client's interest and energy. In practice: track what has energy for the client and build from it, not from your plan [source: Doyle, ICM].
  • No predetermined exercises, projective objects or props. Avoiding projective objects and predetermined exercises is one of the 1996 therapist tasks; DvT uses no props or stage settings, so objects and settings are imagined. In practice: do not bring a scene idea or a box of objects [source: Johnson et al. 1996, p. 297, as cited in Pitre 2020; Landers 2001 on pretend objects].
  • Give up privilege; nothing is held on to. The therapist giving up privilege is a 1996 task, and the 2013 text asks the playor to give up control, linearity, privilege and objectivity. In practice: let a scene dissolve into the next one instead of polishing it, and do not hold on to your own idea of "the" story [source: Johnson et al. 1996, p. 297; Johnson 2013, as cited in Pitre 2020; LeClaire flashcards].
  • Structure from within the flow. The therapist brings in structure from inside the clients' own flow of forms so play stays theirs. In practice: shape what is already happening rather than adding an exercise from outside [source: Landers 2001].
  • Repetition and variation (varielation). Johnson calls varielation the "main engine of transformation"; in Pitre's account it is compared to Stern's purposeful mis-attunement. Johnson also distinguishes full transformations, which clearly signal the new scene, from partial ones, which leave some ambiguity. In practice: alternate between faithfully repeating the client's form and varying it [source: Johnson 2013, p. 50; Johnson 2005, p. 16, as cited in Pitre 2020; LeClaire flashcards; Landers papers].
  • Interruptions reach but do not exceed the shared threshold. Breaking a repeated pattern may deepen the relationship if it stays within what the pair can play with [source: Landers papers, academia listing; stated there as a hypothesis].
  • Other named elements. One recent thesis names five core elements: embodied encounter, prime discrepancy, faithful rendering, emergence or divergence, and reversibility. Embodiment, encounter, discrepancy and reversibility were confirmed in the Johnson citations checked; "prime discrepancy", "faithful rendering" and "emergence or divergence" were not, so do not teach those from this guide [source: Boyd 2026 abstract; Pitre 2020; uncertain].

Further principles named in Johnson's texts [source: as cited in Pitre 2020; practical glosses are synthesis]:

  • The client is the therapist's text. A 1996 therapist task: the material is the client as they show up in play, not a theory or plan [source: Johnson et al. 1996, p. 297]. In practice: your next move comes from what the client just did.
  • The therapist is the client's playobject. A 1996 therapist task [source: Johnson et al. 1996, p. 297]. Its concrete meaning is not spelled out in the sources; the working reading here is that the therapist makes themselves available to be cast, used, moved and changed by the client in play [synthesis; uncertain]. In practice: let the client direct what you become, within the agreed limits.
  • Present moment and the constructed world. The 2013 text reframes the therapist's tasks as being in the present moment, being in the constructed world, and noticing how one plays with it [source: Johnson 2013]. In practice: attend to what is happening between you now and to the habitual shapes the client's play keeps returning to.
  • Layers of play. Johnson names four layers: power, possessions, passions and presence [source: Johnson 2013, pp. 60–62]. In practice: notice which layer the play is on (who controls, what is owned or taken, what is desired or felt, simply being together) [glosses: synthesis; uncertain].
  • Developmental dimensions. Play varies in ambiguity (structure, in 1982), medium of expression, complexity, affect and interpersonal demand [source: Johnson 1982, p. 184; Johnson 2013]. In practice: make play easier or more demanding by changing one dimension at a time.

4. Intervention inventory

Scope note: DvT is one continuous improvised encounter, not a set of separate exercises; avoiding predetermined exercises is itself one of Johnson's therapist tasks [source: Johnson et al. 1996, p. 297, as cited in Pitre 2020]. The items below are the therapist moves and structures described in the sources, plus clearly marked safety procedures. Johnson's own texts are not drawn on directly; terms follow the page citations in Pitre 2020, and techniques not found there or in practitioner accounts are left out rather than reconstructed [uncertain]. All example language is illustrative.

4.1 Preparing, screening and consenting to play and to touch

  • Purpose: set up the play agreement on which the whole method depends, and get explicit, revocable consent for embodied work before any session involving proximity or touch. The play agreement ("we are playing") is in the sources; the consent and screening steps here are [synthesis].
  • Steps:
    1. Out of play, in an ordinary seated conversation: explain that you will improvise together, that you will also play, and that whatever happens in play is pretend and will not be acted out for real.
    2. State the restraint rule: we only represent harm, never cause it. No real hitting, pushing hard, restraining, lifting or holding anyone down.
    3. Map touch consent. Ask which touch, if any, is acceptable, for example hands, forearms, shoulders, upper back, and which body areas are always off limits. Never touch genitals, breasts, buttocks or inner thighs, and never sexual touch, in any role or scene. Note cultural, religious, gender and trauma-related preferences (e.g. no touch from an opposite-gender therapist, or no touch at all). Write the agreement in the notes.
    4. Agree a stop signal that works in and out of role (a word and a gesture, e.g. a T-shaped "time out" with the hands), and a "less" signal for reducing intensity or distance without stopping.
    5. Rehearse it: play briefly, have the client use the signal, and show that you stop at once without asking for a reason.
    6. Tell the client they can change the touch agreement at any time, including mid-session, and that refusing touch has no consequences.
    7. Re-check consent at the start of each session and whenever play moves toward closer contact.
  • Example language (illustrative): "In here we play. Anything can be pretended, a fight, a storm, a monster, but nobody gets hurt for real." "Some of the play can get physically close. Where is touch fine for you, where is it never fine, and what would you like me to do if I'm unsure?" "Say 'pause' or make this sign and I stop right away, no questions."
  • Watch for: compliant agreement without real choice (common in people with abuse histories or strong authority deference); hesitation before naming limits; consent given for the therapist's sake. It is working when the client uses the signal freely and play continues afterwards.

4.2 Establishing and entering the playspace

  • Purpose: create the shared state of play (a state, not a marked-off area) in which representation is possible [source: Doyle, ICM; Landers 2001].
  • Steps [synthesis on the specific sequence]:
    1. Move from the chair conversation into open space with a clear transition, for example both standing and beginning with sound and movement.
    2. Start from what is actually present: the client's posture, breathing, a gesture or a sound.
    3. Show your own willingness to play with a small, visible, exaggerated offer that signals pretence.
    4. Wait for the client's answering offer and build on it.
  • Example language (illustrative): "Let's start with whatever your body is doing right now... I'll do it with you... and let it turn into something."
  • Watch for: the client watching you instead of playing (the therapist may be acting as a performer, not a partner); the client acting "properly" instead of playing. Working: offers start coming back spontaneously.

4.3 Joining: the therapist as playing partner

  • Purpose: an encounter needs the therapist inside the playspace, not coaching from outside. In Johnson's terms the therapist is the playor and the clients are the players; intervening within the playspace and being the client's playobject are both listed therapist tasks [source: Johnson et al. 1996, p. 297; Johnson 2013, p. 38, as cited in Pitre 2020; Doyle, ICM]. A student's notes add that the playor plays with full freedom, may take on challenging roles, and supports the client while doing so [source: LeClaire flashcards; uncertain].
  • Steps:
    1. Take on whatever role, sound or shape the client's play invites, including unattractive ones (the villain, the rejecting parent, the bored audience) when the play calls for them.
    2. Stay physically engaged at the client's level; Doyle often works on the floor with clients [source: Doyle, ICM].
    3. Keep a split attention: fully in role, while tracking the client's state and the agreed limits [synthesis].
  • Example language (illustrative): in role, "I am the giant who never listens! What? I can't HEAR you down there!" (said in a deliberately exaggerated voice, which also marks pretence).
  • Watch for: a therapist role that is too convincing (the client loses the sense of pretence); the therapist taking over the story. Working: the client pushes back on the role and starts to vary it.

4.4 Following interest and energy; structuring from within the flow

  • Purpose: keep the play the client's own by tracking where their interest and energy are, and adding structure only from inside the forms already in play [source: Doyle, ICM; Landers 2001].
  • Steps:
    1. Notice which image, sound, rhythm or role brings the client more energy (louder voice, more movement, laughter, faster replies) and which ones fade.
    2. Amplify what has energy, by repeating it, exaggerating it or giving it a role.
    3. If the play needs structure (too chaotic, too thin), give it shape with something already present: repeat the client's line as a refrain, or turn their gesture into a rule of the scene.
    4. Drop what has no energy without comment.
  • Example language (illustrative): echoing the client's phrase as a chorus, "Not again! Not AGAIN!", or turning their shrug into a game: "Every time the king speaks, the whole court shrugs."
  • Watch for: your own preferences steering the play; following energy straight into material the client has not agreed to approach (see section 5). Working: play becomes more fluid and the client brings in new material themselves.

4.4a The recursive cycle: notice, feel, animate, express

  • Purpose: Johnson's 2013 text describes the playor's moment-to-moment process as a recursive cycle: noticing new behaviour in the other, letting a feeling arise, animating it with images, and expressing it outward; the phases overlap and cycle rather than running one way [source: Johnson 2013, p. 72, as cited in Pitre 2020]. Use it throughout play as the way each response is generated.
  • Steps [the four phases are Johnson's; the concrete prompts are synthesis]:
    1. Notice: register something new in what the client just did (a change of tempo, a glance, a word, a shift in distance).
    2. Let a feeling arise in you in response, without choosing it in advance.
    3. Animate it: let the feeling take form as an image, character or situation.
    4. Express it outward in sound, movement or words, then go straight back to noticing the client's response.
  • Example language (illustrative): the client's hand drifts to their chest; the therapist notices, feels a pang, and becomes an old radio: "losing the signal... crackle... someone's heart is coming through..."
  • Watch for: jumping from noticing straight to a planned response (the cycle collapses into technique); cycling only inside your head without expressing anything. Working: your responses feel unforced and the client picks them up and transforms them.

4.5 Repetition and variation ("varielation")

  • Purpose: produce transformation by moving back and forth between repeating a form and varying it; Johnson calls varielation the "main engine of transformation" [source: Johnson 2013, p. 50, as cited in Pitre 2020; LeClaire flashcards; Landers papers]. Johnson also distinguishes full transformations (the new scene is clearly signalled) from partial ones (some ambiguity is left) [source: Johnson 2005, p. 16, as cited in Pitre 2020]. When to use each [synthesis]: full transformations when the client needs clarity and safety, partial ones to invite the client to decide what the scene becomes.
  • Steps: the student notes describe three choices for the therapist in each response [source: LeClaire flashcards; uncertain]:
    1. How far to depart from the repeating form: a slight variation, or a big jump.
    2. Whether to play different responses one after another (sequentially).
    3. Whether to represent several feelings, images or roles at the same moment (simultaneously), e.g. comforting and threatening in one gesture. Clinical pacing [synthesis]: start with small departures; make bigger leaps once the client tolerates change; return to the familiar form if the client becomes unsettled.
  • Example language (illustrative): the client repeats "Go away"; the therapist goes away... and comes back as a different character; then goes away sadly; then goes away singing.
  • Watch for: play stuck in one form for a long time (see 5.1); variations that are too large and break the client's thread. Working: the client starts producing variations, and repeated themes change in feel across sessions.

4.6 Interrupting a repeated pattern

  • Purpose: in Landers' single-case study, breaks in repeated play patterns (started by either player) seemed to strengthen the relationship when they reached, but did not exceed, the pair's shared threshold for play. He also suggests that alternating repetition and transformation may help reduce violent behaviour. Both are hypotheses, not established findings [source: Landers papers, academia listing].
  • Steps [synthesis]:
    1. Notice a pattern that has repeated several times without change.
    2. Introduce a break within the play, for example a sudden freeze, a change of tempo, a new character entering, or the setting changing.
    3. Watch the client's reaction: re-engagement means you were within the threshold; withdrawal, confusion or a dropped frame means you went beyond it, so go back toward the familiar pattern.
  • Example language (illustrative): "Freeze! ...The floor has turned to ice. Keep arguing, but carefully!"
  • Watch for: interruptions used to avoid uncomfortable material (the therapist's, not the client's). Working: after the break the client picks up the thread with new energy.

4.7 Marking and titrating discrepancy

  • Purpose: keep the play recognisable as play by maintaining the discrepancy between real and "as if" that Johnson lists as a playspace condition [source: Johnson 2013, as cited in Pitre 2020]. A student's notes add that the signs of pretence can be reduced as the client becomes able to play closer to real feeling [source: LeClaire flashcards; uncertain, not found in the Johnson citations checked].
  • Steps [synthesis on the specific markers]:
    1. Add signs of pretence when needed: exaggeration, slow motion, a cartoon voice, an obviously imaginary object, a narrator's aside.
    2. When the client is steady, reduce the markers: a quieter, more ordinary voice, a realistic pace, real eye contact.
    3. As soon as the client loses the frame (looks frightened, starts treating you as the real person), add markers back at once.
  • Example language (illustrative): in an exaggerated announcer voice, "And now... the scariest boss in the HISTORY of bosses!"
  • Watch for: play so heavily marked that it never touches anything (all clowning); play so lightly marked that it feels like a real confrontation. Working: the client can move along this range without losing the frame.

4.8 Reversing roles and power

  • Purpose: apply reversibility, the playspace condition that roles and images are reversible, so no division of power or role stays fixed [source: Johnson 2013, as cited in Pitre 2020; LeClaire flashcards; Boyd 2026 abstract]. Power is also the first of Johnson's four layers of play (section 3).
  • Steps:
    1. Once a power relationship has formed in the play (chaser and chased, boss and worker, giant and small one), let it play out briefly.
    2. Swap it: the therapist hands over power or takes the lower position, or the scene flips (the prisoner becomes the guard).
    3. Keep transforming, so neither position becomes the "true" one.
  • Example language (illustrative): "Oh no... the giant has shrunk. Now YOU are the giant. What do you want from me?"
  • Watch for: a client who will only take one side (always victim, or always aggressor); go back to that side and offer small reversals. Working: the client can occupy both sides with some ease.

4.9 Playing harm, power and loss in representation

  • Purpose: let charged themes such as violence, power, loss and connection be represented under the restraint against harm. Landers proposes that acting out violent acts inside the playspace may reduce the urge to do so outside, through restraint against harm, shared improvisation and role transformation. This was studied in Vietnam combat veterans with PTSD and violent histories and remains a hypothesis [source: Landers papers, academia listing; Landers 2001; Doyle, ICM].
  • Steps:
    1. Confirm the restraint rule and the stop signal before any combative or threatening theme.
    2. Represent aggression at a distance or in slow motion: an imaginary sword, a fight a metre apart, an exaggerated fall. No real impact or grappling [synthesis].
    3. Keep transforming the scene so the aggression does not become a fixed, escalating loop.
    4. If restraint wavers (real force, real anger at you as yourself), stop and step out of play (see 5.3).
  • Example language (illustrative): "Slow-motion battle! The punch takes ten seconds to arrive... and turns into a handshake."
  • Watch for: physical arousal that keeps rising instead of moving; real contact. Clients with current violence risk need a risk assessment and a team decision before this work [synthesis]. Working: aggressive themes come and go and the client stays in contact with you.

4.10 Embodiment: proximity, touch and movement

  • Purpose: embodiment in DvT covers physical proximity, touch and movement between players. Johnson treats the body as primary and language as secondary, includes physical touch in the method, and calls exuberant physical movement essential because it activates the person [source: Johnson et al. 1996, p. 298; Johnson 2005, p. 15; Johnson 2013, p. 46, as cited in Pitre 2020; LeClaire flashcards]. That increased proximity is one of the stimuli in play comes only from a student's notes [source: LeClaire flashcards; uncertain]. The consent procedures below are [synthesis].
  • Steps:
    1. Change one variable at a time: distance first, then movement in contact (e.g. palm to palm), then other agreed touch.
    2. Before moving closer, give a visible offer the client can accept or decline in play (holding out a hand rather than taking theirs).
    3. Use only the body areas agreed in 4.1. Never genital, breast, buttock or inner-thigh contact, and never sexual touch, whatever the role or scene. No restraint holds, lifting or weight-bearing unless you are trained in it and it has been specifically agreed.
    4. If the client stiffens, holds their breath, goes still or looks away, increase distance without comment and check in after the play.
    5. Avoid touch completely with clients for whom it is clinically contraindicated (see 5.4), and in settings with no-touch policies.
  • Example language (illustrative): "(holding a hand out, palm up) A bridge... cross it if you want." Out of role: "I came quite close today. How was that for you? What should I do differently next time?"
  • Watch for: freezing, compliance, dissociation, sexualised responses, and boundary-testing. Working: the client actively shapes the distance, approaching and withdrawing as they choose.

4.11 Group warm-up with everyone working at once

  • Purpose: in groups, begin with exercises in which all participants work simultaneously so no one is in focus, building trust and safety before any personal material [source: Doyle, ICM; his DvT-informed practice].
  • Steps:
    1. Everyone moves and makes sound at the same time, for example walking, then joining sounds, then making shared shapes [synthesis on the specific exercises].
    2. Use general themes (weather, journeys, machines) in early sessions, not personal ones.
    3. Gradually allow pairs and small clusters to form inside the group flow.
  • Example language (illustrative): "Everyone at once, no one watching... let the walk turn into a sound."
  • Watch for: members on the edge who never join (invite them to witness first); pairs who become rough with each other. Working: spontaneous offers start passing between members.

4.12 Structured group scene work

  • Purpose: Doyle sometimes gives group scenes required elements, such as one line of dialogue repeated by every actor, a set number of entrances and exits, or a required shift in a relationship. This is one practitioner's blend with other theatre methods, not core DvT [source: Doyle, ICM].
  • Steps:
    1. Give the structural requirement only, not the content.
    2. Let the group improvise inside it.
    3. Move back toward open, unstructured play as the group becomes able.
  • Example language (illustrative): "Every character must say 'I'm still here' once, and the scene ends when two people have swapped places."
  • Watch for: structure used to avoid encounter. Working: the group uses the structure as a launch point and then plays freely.

4.13 Leaving the playspace: closure and de-roling

  • Purpose: the sources do not describe how a DvT session ends; the steps below are general drama therapy closure practice [synthesis; uncertain whether this matches Johnson's ending procedures].
  • Steps:
    1. Give a warning a few minutes before the end, and reduce intensity and proximity.
    2. End with a clear, shared marker (e.g. both stop, step back, and sit down in chairs out of the play area).
    3. De-role: say your own name and the client's, and drop any role the client gave you ("I'm not the giant; I'm [name], your therapist"). In groups, each person names a role they are leaving behind and something of their own they are taking back.
    4. Check the client's state: grounding, breathing, orientation to the room and time.
    5. Briefly reflect out of role if the client wants to; do not force interpretation of the play [synthesis; uncertain how much verbal processing Johnson's model uses].
    6. Do not let the client leave while still distressed or dissociated (see 5.3).
  • Example language (illustrative): "Let's let the play go... chairs... I'm [name] again. What do you notice in your body right now?"
  • Watch for: lingering roles (still treating you as the villain), agitation, spaciness. Working: the client is oriented, calm and can say how they will get home and what they will do next.

5. Handling problems

The sources say very little about problem management, apart from the restraint against harm and the threshold idea. Unless tagged otherwise, everything in this section is [synthesis] from general drama therapy and trauma-informed practice.

5.1 Screening and contraindications before starting

  • Screen for: acute psychosis or mania with poor reality testing (the play and not-play boundary may not hold); current violence risk; acute suicidality; active substance intoxication; recent trauma with high current arousal or frequent dissociation; sexual trauma where closeness or touch is a known trigger; medical or mobility limits (falls, cardiac or respiratory conditions, pregnancy, recent surgery); and legal or safeguarding situations where enacted material could be misread [synthesis].
  • Response: these are reasons to adapt (more distance, no touch, shorter play, more discrepancy, individual rather than group), to defer, or to choose a non-embodied method. They are not automatic exclusions, except for intoxication in session and acute risk. Landers' veteran groups show DvT used with a high-risk population in an inpatient team setting with supervision [source: Landers 2001; Landers papers]. Do not take that as permission for such work in solo private practice [synthesis].
  • Groups: hold an individual pre-group interview; check group composition (e.g. do not mix survivors and perpetrators of the same kind of violence without a specific rationale); explain that nobody has to take any role or touch anyone [synthesis].

5.2 Stuck or endlessly repetitive play

  • Signs: the same scene or gesture over many minutes or sessions with no variation; the therapist feels bored or numb.
  • Responses: first play the repetition fully, and faithfully, with no hurry; then make a small variation (4.5); then interrupt within threshold (4.6) [source: Landers papers for the threshold idea; specifics synthesis]. If it is still stuck across sessions, reflect out of role on what the repetition might be protecting, and review in supervision whether you are avoiding something.

5.3 Overwhelm, dissociation and retraumatisation

  • Signs: frozen posture, glazed eyes, rapid breathing, flashback language in the present tense, collapse, sudden rage directed at you as yourself, or the client treating the scene as real.
  • In the moment: step out of play at once with a clear marker; drop your role verbally ("I'm [name], not the soldier"); increase distance; slow your voice; orient to the present (name the date, place, objects in the room; feet on the floor); offer water; do not touch to comfort unless this specific touch was agreed earlier.
  • Afterwards: go back to lower intensity next session (more discrepancy, more distance, shorter play); review the triggers together; revise the touch and theme agreements; tell the referrer or team as appropriate. Do not end the session until the client is oriented; if a risk to self or others emerges, carry out a standard risk assessment and safety plan following your service's procedures.
  • Prevention: pace by titrating discrepancy (4.7) and proximity (4.10); never push play toward known trauma material the client has not chosen; in trauma work, ensure stabilisation comes first [synthesis].

5.4 Touch boundary problems and sexualised play

  • Signs: the client initiates touch outside the agreed areas; sexual content or innuendo in play; the client seeks touch as a relationship outside play; the therapist notices attraction or discomfort.
  • Responses: pause play; restate the boundary plainly and without shaming ("In here we can pretend almost anything, but no sexual touch and no touch here, ever"); continue at greater distance or switch to a no-touch medium (voice, imaginary objects). Record it and take it to supervision. Persistent boundary-testing or sexualised behaviour by a child is a safeguarding signal to assess, not a play theme to explore. The therapist must never initiate sexual touch or touch of genitals, breasts or buttocks, in any role or game.

5.5 Breaches of the restraint against harm

  • Signs: real force, hurting, damaging the room, or threats directed at the therapist as themselves [restraint concept: source: Landers 2001; LeClaire flashcards].
  • Responses: stop play immediately; ensure physical safety (distance, exit route, call for help if in a service); name what happened ("That was real, not play"); restate the restraint rule; decide out of play whether and how to continue. Escalating aggression or repeated breaches mean stopping DvT with this client for now and reviewing risk with the team [synthesis].

5.6 Refusal, embarrassment and "I can't act"

  • Responses: honour refusal; start with very small, simultaneous or mirrored movement; play alongside rather than face to face; let the client witness you playing first; normalise awkwardness inside the play (play a scene about not wanting to play). In groups, early simultaneous work removes the spotlight [source: Doyle, ICM for simultaneous group work; rest synthesis].

5.7 Ruptures and roles carried out of play

  • Signs: the client stays hurt or angry at you after a scene in which you played a rejecting or attacking role; missed sessions after an intense session.
  • Responses: de-role explicitly (4.13); acknowledge the impact without defending the role ("Playing that may have felt real, and I'm sorry it hurt"); invite the client to say what they need next time; offer reversal (they play the role toward you) only if they want it. Supervision is essential, because the therapist's own reactions show up in the play.

5.8 Non-attendance and drop-out

  • Responses: review whether intensity is too high or too low; agree a session structure that includes a predictable start and end; for groups, keep a regular time and contact members who miss sessions; consider individual sessions for members who cannot tolerate the group.

5.9 Group-specific difficulties

  • Problems: one member dominates the play; a sub-group targets another member; physical play gets rough between members; a member discloses trauma in role.
  • Responses: in play, introduce a transformation that redistributes focus (new scene, everyone becomes one machine); out of play, restate rules; separate rough pairs; after any disclosure, step out of play, acknowledge it, contain it in the group, and follow up individually after the session. Two facilitators are safer for groups with high arousal or risk.

5.10 Children and young people

  • Get parental or carer consent where the law requires it, and the child's own assent, which is re-checked in each session. Explain touch rules in age-appropriate words and include them in the information given to carers. Follow local safeguarding and mandatory reporting procedures for any disclosure or concern.
  • Play content, including violent or sexualised play, is not evidence of abuse or disorder; respond to concerns through the safeguarding process, not through interpretation of the play. DvT is not a validated assessment instrument [synthesis; no validated DvT assessment is cited in the sources].
  • A school-based DvT-related programme (the Miss Kendra Program) is described in Current Approaches in Drama Therapy; the chapter is not drawn on here [source: Current Approaches TOC; uncertain].
  • Prefer rooms with windows in doors or an open-door policy, keep session records, and follow the organisation's policy on one-to-one physical contact with minors.

5.11 Physical safety of the space

  • Clear the floor of furniture edges and trip hazards; use a non-slip, clean floor or mats if working on the floor; work in comfortable clothing, without jewellery that could catch; no lifting, carrying or acrobatics; adapt for wheelchair users and people with limited mobility (seated play is fully possible); keep water available; never block the exit; keep noise at a level that is acceptable for neighbouring rooms and for clients sensitive to loud sound.

5.12 Cultural and personal sensitivities

  • Check norms about touch, gender, eye contact, physical play by adults and themes such as religion or death before including them; offer no-touch and same-gender options; invite clients to veto any theme. Monitor your own power position in role reversals, especially across race, gender and class differences.

5.13 Therapist strain

  • Embodied improvisation with charged material is tiring and involves strong countertransference. Use regular supervision with a DvT-trained supervisor, and limit the number of intense sessions per day.

Sources

Sources:

Further reading (not drawn on) [uncertain on details]:

  • Johnson, D. R., & Pitre, R. Developmental Transformations. In Current Approaches in Drama Therapy (current edition, ch. 5, from p. 123; table of contents verified, edition year and editors not shown on that page). Charles C Thomas.
  • Johnson, D. R. (2000). Developmental Transformations: Toward the body as presence. In P. Lewis & D. R. Johnson (Eds.), Current Approaches in Drama Therapy (1st ed.). Charles C Thomas (as cited by Landers 2001). Revised in D. R. Johnson & R. Emunah (Eds.), Current Approaches in Drama Therapy (2nd ed., pp. 89–116), dated 2009 in the AUBG catalogue and 2010 in the NADTA bibliography.
  • Johnson, D. R., Forrester, A., Dintino, C., James, M., & Schnee, G. (1996). Towards a poor drama therapy. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 23(4), 293–306 (pages per NADTA bibliography; Landers 2001 gives 293–308; cited by Landers 2001, the CSSD paper and Pitre 2020).
  • Johnson, D. R. (1982). Developmental approaches in drama therapy. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 9(3), 183–189 (details per NADTA bibliography; cited by Pitre 2020).
  • Johnson, D. R. (1991). The theory and technique of transformations in drama therapy. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 18(4), 285–300 (details per NADTA bibliography; cited by Pitre 2020).
  • Johnson, D. R. (2005; 2013). Unpublished texts for DvT practitioners (the 2013 text is the second), as cited by Pitre 2020.
  • Johnson, D. R. (2007). British influences on developmental transformations. Journal of the British Dramatherapy Association, 29, 3–10 (as listed by NADTA).
  • Johnson, D. R. (2014). Trauma-centered developmental transformations. In N. Sajnani & D. R. Johnson (Eds.), Trauma-Informed Drama Therapy (pp. 68–92). Charles C Thomas (as listed by NADTA).
  • Johnson, D. R., Smith, A., & James, M. (2003). Developmental transformations in group therapy with the elderly. In C. Schaefer (Ed.), Play Therapy with Adults (pp. 78–106). Wiley (as listed by NADTA).
  • Galway, K. C., Hurd, K., & Johnson, D. (2003). Developmental transformations in group therapy with homeless people with a mental illness. In D. Wiener & L. Oxford (Eds.), Action Therapy with Families and Groups (pp. 135–162). APA (as listed by NADTA).
  • Johnson, D. R. (1992). The dramatherapist in role. In S. Jennings (Ed.), Dramatherapy: Theory and Practice (Vol. 2, pp. 112–136). Routledge (as cited by Doyle).
  • Landers, F. (2002). Dismantling violent forms of masculinity through Developmental Transformations. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 29(1), 19–29 (details per NADTA bibliography).
  • Grotowski, J. (1968). Towards a Poor Theatre (background influence, as cited by Doyle).
← Previous · VIII-109Self-revelatory performanceNext · VIII-111 →Sesame approach (Lindkvist)