{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.028708133971291867, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0019138755980861245, 'mean_word_length': 5.33939393939394, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?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}}
Commentary on ‘His master’s voice’: an existential-interpersonal perspective

ABSTRACT Though I regard Germain Lietaer and Monica Gundrum’s article (His master’s voice: Carl Rogers’ verbal response modes in therapy and demonstration sessions throughout his career) as a very valuable piece giving insight into the therapeutic factory of the founder of PCT I caution against taking ‘the master’s voice’ as a model. From an interpersonal and existential point of view there is a broader range of responses, interactions and inputs to be exploited than shown in the study – with an average of appr. 90% of empathic understanding responses. Depending on each client, the therapeutic relationship that evolves from the ‘joint venture’, and an authentic personal and working style of the therapist the person-centered theory of therapy allows for a great variety of therapist communication and even non-standardized techniques or means and avenues. My concern is to encourage younger colleagues to feel free to practice with ‘disciplined spontaneity’.