Leading experiential exercises can be scary! Check out some tips for ways to start integrating these exercises into therapy.

For many of us who practice ACT, experiential exercises were our entry point into this work. It's not unusual to ask a therapist how they decided to pursue ACT and hear that they fell in love with this therapy during a class, workshop, or training, usually in the middle of an experiential exercise that suddenly shifted how they viewed their own experience.
For me, that moment came when I was nearing the end of my graduate training at UCLA, during an ACT workshop at the Sepulveda VA led by Charlie DeLeeuw. Charlie was leading us through the 'chessboard exercise,' which aims to facilitate self-as-context. After we had spent time adding pieces to a physical chessboard to represent both painful and joyous content in our lives, Charlie drew our attention to the jumbled nature of the board, dark and light pieces mixed up together, and asked if we had any urges to rearrange the pieces. Another workshop participant shifted them into straight lines, dark versus light, the way they would look at the beginning of an actual chess match. I remember immediately thinking, "that's not right." It seemed obvious to me in that moment that pieces representing painful content should be shunted into one corner, circled by the pieces representing joyful experiences - a sort of barrier against the pain that would protect the rest of the board.
I moved the pieces into my preferred position as the other workshop participants watched me. Then, I looked at Charlie. I don't remember exactly what he said, but I remember the immediate, painful revelation I had in that moment. I started crying. I had spent my entire life up until that point trying to tuck painful emotions, thoughts, and memories into the farthest corner of my mind. I relegated everything that needed to be dealt with into a dark corner, hoping that if I could just barricade it off, maybe I could be rid of this pain. The utter futility of this approach hit me at the exact moment I recognized its ubiquity in my life. I had done some version of this every day for years. And here I was, sitting in this workshop, doing it again. Like so many ACT trainees before me, an experiential exercise unlocked the door to something so much bigger in my life, both as a psychologist and a person.
I could tell you that in the years since, I've stopped trying to cordon off my pain, but that would be an obvious lie. The urge to contain and shut away pain is still an ingrained instinct. What has changed is my ability to notice that urge and choose how to respond to painful content as it arises, sometimes in the direction of workable choices and sometimes still in the direction of unhelpful routines. I find that the important thing is that I notice the urge at all, even when I don't always respond exactly how I'd like.
My experience in that workshop took a burgeoning interest in ACT and turned it into a passion, as such exercises have for so many other therapists. The challenge is that once you find a personal connection to this work and seek to pursue it as a clinician, you begin to realize exactly how difficult it is to implement the exercises that you've watched other ACT practitioners so skillfully deploy.
What makes leading experiential exercises so scary, especially at the beginning of your development as an ACT therapist? I'd argue that these activities are often very different from the type of therapeutic interventions many of us are used to, and the pressure to get the exercises 'right' can be enormous. "If I don't lead this client through the exercise properly, they will never understand this concept," is a thought my mind has handed me many times in course of my practice of ACT. Once you've seen how powerful these exercises can be through your own experience, it's easy to feel a particular pressure to do them well. With my own trainees, I've seen exactly how pernicious this pressure can be. Rather than approaching experiential exercises with the same flexibility and workability that we encourage in our clients, buying into thoughts about the high stakes and need for perfection in leading these exercises can lead to rigid, control-oriented behavior that ultimately undermines our goals as ACT therapists.
So, what can you do to facilitate the process of learning and beginning to implement experiential exercises?
An ideal first step is to watch a skilled ACT therapist conduct the exercise. Often, watching the exercise will teach you things you won't get just by reading about it, mostly since written therapy scripts almost always assume that clients immediately engage fully with the exercise and never think to say or do something the therapist did not expect. Real life often includes far more unexpected digressions, questions, and confusion, so seeing how a seasoned therapist handles these issues can be illuminating.
Often, the urge when watching another therapist conduct an experiential exercise is to write down everything they say, and while I personally find it helpful to have a script as a place to start when first learning an exercise, I would encourage you to go beyond the script to consider the function of the exercise. What core process(es) is this exercise attempting to help the client contact? While having some sense of language you can use to facilitate the exercise is often quite helpful, a specific script will never be entirely accurate to the client in front of you because each individual will experience the exercise slightly differently. If you are overly focused on a script, you will not only be modeling an unhelpful control agenda ("I must say this exactly right"), you will also be missing opportunities to help your particular client move closer to the core processes you are targeting.
Keeping the function of the exercise in mind will allow you to generate language in the moment that directly addresses the unique way your client is experiencing it. Pausing to think about what to say next or how best to approach the task of moving your client toward the identified core processes is totally fine - every moment of the exercise does not need to be smooth. I've often observed that fellow therapists are most impressed when an ACT trainer seems to know exactly what to say and do in an exercise, but when in the room with clients, I find that sessions in which we are grappling with the experience and implications of an exercise together are often the most productive. The sense that you are down 'in it' with the client, that both of you are trying to sit with the lived experience of this activity and considering how it applies to the client's life, is usually a sign that the session is going well. That process does not necessarily look smooth, but it means that rather than leading a generic exercise, you are working to fully integrate this activity into the myriad unique considerations that exist for your particular client at this moment in their life.
This point also touches on a common challenge for therapists who are new to ACT: believing that there is a 'right answer' to a given exercise. I've heard many therapists leave sessions in which they led a client through an experiential exercise for the first time say something like, "I don't think he got the answer though." This sort of comment suggests that there is only one experience that someone can have in an exercise and if they do not have that experience, the exercise has failed. Even though an activity like 'take your mind for a walk' is generally thought of as an exercise intended to facilitate cognitive defusion, clients can have all kinds of experiences, which is true of most experiential exercises in ACT. Your client could come away with a greater sense of their own cognitive fusion and their options around how to choose other ways of responding to thoughts, but there are many (many!) other ways that someone might experience this activity. Perhaps they will recognize their tendency to follow orders given by authority figures without question. Maybe they will notice the general speed or overwhelming nature of their thoughts. Perhaps they will observe a sense of connection with the therapist after realizing that the therapist's ability to narrate their thoughts suggests that all of our minds are often giving us similar, harsh content. Your job as the therapist is to create space for the client to have some kind of experience and to observe that experience in session, not necessarily to lead them toward a single 'right answer.'
This can feel contradictory or confusing when considering that experiential exercises are generally intended to move toward one or more core ACT processes. But even though engaging with a specific core process many be your intention, I would argue that an experiential exercise is only ever unsuccessful if you don't help the client engage with any of the core processes. Even if they end up having an experience that is different from the one you intended (or, very importantly, the experience you had while doing this exercise yourself), as long as you can help the client move toward at least one of the core processes, then you have not failed.
Take the above example. Imagine that a client comes out of the take your mind for a walk exercise and tells you that they have observed their tendency to follow others' directions without question. (I once had a trainee try to lay down in the middle of a busy street when I, playing the part of their mind, told them to do so during take your mind for a walk. I assumed they would never attempt it - cars were whizzing by! - and it would be an opportunity for them to experience that they have a choice about whether to buy their thoughts. Instead, I had to quickly stop the exercise right there.) If a client were to provide such an observation, then you have an opportunity to connect to several core processes and other principles of ACT, depending on what feels most helpful for your particular client. What emotions and thoughts show up for them when they receive instructions from others or when they consider disobeying? What shows up when their mind issues orders to them? (Present-moment awareness) What, if anything, is blindly following external or internal orders helping them to avoid? How helpful has it been in their life to follow orders in this way? Are there any costs to that? (Creative hopelessness) What does this tendency reveal about the ways in which they take thoughts literally? (Cognitive fusion) How does the notion of themselves as 'someone who follows commands' or 'obedient' contribute to a self-as-content perspective? (Self-as-context) How does this tendency contribute to their ability to move toward or away from values? (Values and committed action) Clearly, there are many ways to connect any given experience to ACT processes and ensure that the exercise is workable within the therapy, even if it doesn't go exactly the way you expect or hit on the 'right answer.'
Don't lose sight of the client's particular experience in the service of doing the exercise 'right.'
Now, here's a thought that may seem contradictory to everything stated above (don't you love ACT and its many paradoxes?!). While we should aim to move away from implementing experiential exercises in a rigid fashion that prioritizes only one 'right' way of engaging with the activity, it is still important to try to move toward the relevant core process(es) and to lead the client through the exercise. In other words, recognize that even though the client may respond differently to the exercise than you expect or had planned for, you are in control of the exercise. If you need the client to engage a certain behavior in order to facilitate movement toward your desired core process(es), ask for that behavior. Some aspects of these exercises benefit from specific choices within the exercise that not all clients will initially choose.
For example, in a common exercise used to illustrate several of the core ACT processes, clients are asked to imagine that all of their pain is held within a trash can. The therapist then hands that trash can to the client to hold. When asked how they would like to hold the can, the most typical response that people offer is to try to move it away from their body; this position tends to facilitate relevant experiences around the targeted core processes. However, many clients don't do anything like what you expect: I've seen people hold the trash can near their knees, try to hide it behind their back, hug it with one arm, etc. In those moments, it can be helpful to slow down and explore their experience (again, unique experiences aren't a problem when leading experiential exercises in ACT - just more grist for the mill). However, in order to proceed with the exercise, I eventually want them to try holding it out. If I can't get them to do that more indirectly ("any other way you could imagine holding that?"), then it's time to just direct them to do so ("try holding it out in front of you for a moment"). Don't be afraid to direct clients as needed.
The image that comes to my mind in this moment is a straight line with loops emanating from it, sort of like the exit ramps on major highways that allow you to circle back to the highway if you take a wrong turn. So much of our work as therapists involves keeping the straight line (our intentions and goals for each session and the overall treatment) in mind while allowing the course of the session to loop off for a bit. The secret is to make sure you return to the through line eventually and don't let the client drive the session down a road that moves in a direction totally inconsistent with treatment goals. The same is true when leading experiential exercises: you can allow space for digressions, but it is your role as the therapist to loop the activity back around to try to meet its intended function. This may seem like a paradox given the points made earlier about client's being allowed to have their own unique experience, but I would argue it's more like a dialectic in which two seemingly opposing ideas are true at the same time: let the client have their unique experience and make sure that you are leading the exercise with intention rather than letting the client totally take it over.
As you are hopefully observing, the ideal balance for an experiential exercise is one in which you as the therapist have a sense of where the exercise is going while also allowing space to respond flexibly based on the needs of the moment. The only way to truly achieve this balance is practice, both outside of therapy and with real clients. The challenges of leading an exercise are all theoretical until you are in the therapy room. It may feel like you need to have the exercise down 'perfectly' before implementing it, but I would argue that it's usually more productive to plunge into leading it before you feel totally ready. When practicing, aim to rehearse your script/agenda alongside the relevant physical behaviors on your own first. Then, try to rope unsuspecting colleagues and loved ones into practicing with you, leading them through the exercise just as you would a client. Expect to feel stumped and/or very nervous at various places throughout these practice runs - people rarely respond exactly how you expect. Practice showing up to those moments when the exercise doesn't go exactly as you've read or observed others demonstrate. Even if the only thought you are having about what to do next is, "I don't know," try to just slow down and remain in the moment. Pause, think through possible options for what you might say or do next, and then try something. This sort of practice will only help you when you are implementing the exercise with a client.
When implementing the exercise for the first time in a session, I would strongly suggest not bringing any sort of full script into the therapy room with you. If it feels helpful, you could write a few bullet points on a Post-it that you might glance at occasionally, although even this is often functioning more as a safety signal than a helpful tool. Remind yourself of the core process(es) you are targeting as you begin the exercise, and remember that there is no expectation you have memorized the 'right' words or that you will engage 'perfectly' with all parts of the exercise. When you feel stymied by something the client says or does, slow down. Consider how to respond and choose your next steps, keeping the core process(es) in mind, rather than just reacting immediately. Again, it's okay for this to go slowly, jerkily, or awkwardly at times - all of these are experiences both you and the client can practice showing up to with willingness. If you notice lots of anxiety or shame around what your supervisor or the client will think, you might even consider commenting on that experience to the client in the moment as a way to model present-moment awareness. Remember that the first few times you conduct experiential exercises, the willingness to plunge in and try them is far more important than their outcome. Even if they don't go exactly how you expect or how you've seen them go for more experienced ACT therapists, keep in mind that clients don't actually know how the exercise is 'supposed' to go and often get a lot out of it anyway, including when we think we've messed up. Go back to your supervisor or consultant, process how the exercise went and what the experience was like for you, and then try again.
Leading exercises often does get easier with practice, and at the same time I have never completely lost the sense of thrill (some might call it anxiety) of leading an experiential exercise with a client or in a training. I hope never to lose that feeling, as it is part of what I love the most about ACT: the sense of being fully engaged in something vital and meaningful in the service of helping people move toward more fulfilling lives. If you've yet to lead an experiential exercise in ACT, take the plunge and see how it goes!
Comments