{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03116883116883117, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011688311688311689, 'mean_word_length': 5.474789915966387, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 3, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Differential Incongruence Model and its development

The author summarizes the development, content, and scope of his incongruence theory. It differentiates sources, phenomena, and forms of incongruence and congruence. These are operationalized as categories of clients’ experiences. They allow Incongruence Analysis (IA) – a specific form of diagnosis – either by transcript, tape or video-analysis of therapy sessions, or by client self-assessment. This data is the empirical basis of the model. An English translation is given of the 24 test-scales with names, number of items, content, and Cronbach’s α reliabilities of the German standardization of the Regensburg Incongruence Analysis Inventory (RIAI). An empirical study presents the distribution of six RIAI sources of incongruence in 281 German-speaking patients with six ICD-10 diagnoses. Data analysis by SPSS included individual and z-scores of the corresponding RIAI scales. Main results were common qualitative patterns of patients sources of incongruence with concordance coefficients (p < 0.001) for absolute and (p < 0.01) for relative strengths of experiencing the sources of incongruence. Multivariate analyses yielded different quantitative incongruence experiencing between diagnostic groups (p < 0.001). The results prove self-questioning with inner disruption and having lost a positive perspective of the future as qualitatively outstanding sources of incongruence independent of clinical diagnoses. Applications of the DIM and some newer publications are given.