Step 1. Express Empathy
In motivational interviewing, clinicians express empathy through careful listening and nonjudgmental curiosity about the client’s presenting problem. This is different from empathy in other therapeutic approaches, which focus more on verbal expressions of empathy. Instead, MI requires the creation of a context of empathy, which is done through the distinctive listening style on which MI is based (Miller & Rollnick, 2013).
Almost everyone experiences some ambivalence when making a big change. Many clients feel shame about the part of themselves that does not want to change or even enjoys the behavior, even though they know it is harmful. In these cases, the clinician expresses empathy by being willing to explore both sides of an issue.
In MI, empathy means nonjudgmentally helping the client explore both sides of their ambivalence, especially the side that others would deem “unhealthy.”
Accurate empathy
The MI term accurate empathy gets to the root of this principle. Accurate empathy refers to the clinician’s sincere desire to understand the client’s experience and motivations, as they relate to the problem (Schumacher & Madson, 2014). This is very different from expressing sympathy or identifying with the client, both of which are much less likely to empower the client or lead to change.
This is a relatively straightforward concept. If you are going to be empathic, make sure that you understand where the person is coming from first. This is actually what empathy means: understanding where someone is coming from, feeling some fraction of that feeling yourself, and expressing that understanding to the person that you are sitting with.
There is another, more dramatic term for inaccurate empathy: empathic failure. An empathic failure is when someone has a lack of understanding for another person’s thoughts, perceptions, or feelings (American Psychological Association, 2020). This is why MI places such heavy emphasis on deep listening; unless you have a good understanding of the person you are sitting with, your empathy is likely to fall flat.
Guide vs. expert
When used correctly, empathy is inherent in the MI process because of the role that the clinician plays in their work. This approach is best defined as being a “guide,” rather than being an “expert.”
A “guide” helps the person to get where they need to go, whereas an “expert” tells the person what they need to do. Being an MI clinician means that you are guiding the conversation toward change talk, or arguments for change, and away from sustain talk, or arguments against change (Miller & Rollnick, 2013).
Although the clinician avoids acting as an expert, they are still the expert in the room when it comes to clinical issues and human behavior. MI-consistent treatment allows the clinician to offer information and their point of view, but only when it has been solicited or if the clinician first asks for permission.
This approach ensures respect for the client’s autonomy and intelligence. It gives them a chance to convince themselves of the reasons for change and to solve their problems.
For much of MI treatment, the roles may seem a bit backward. The client is treated as the expert on themselves, while the clinician’s job is to empower them to develop and implement their own plan for change. The MI clinician’s real expertise is in evoking the intrinsic motivation of the person sitting before them.
Step 2. Develop Discrepancy
People are more likely to change when they can see that their actions are not in line with their values.
To help clients see this, clinicians “develop discrepancy” between what the client says they want and what they are doing.
Discrepancy as a tool
As a first step, the client must become conscious of their values. The clinician helps accomplish this through careful questioning to elicit change talk. Change talk includes the client revealing consideration, motivation, or commitment to change (Schumacher & Madson, 2014).
The most direct way to elicit the client’s motivations for change is to ask about them.
For example, asking “why would you want to make a change like this?” encourages the client to start talking about change. In MI, the client should be the one talking about change, not the clinician (Rollnick, Miller, & Butler, 2008). Clinicians should spend more time listening and asking open-ended questions than describing the reasons for change.
Open-ended questions allow the client to explore their values, and by talking about them in session, these values become more clearly defined. Once these values are defined, discrepancy can be used as a tool to increase client motivation for change. Clients will be more likely to change if they can see for themselves the discrepancy between their actions and underlying values.
Listening as an art form
Developing discrepancy can be done quickly by asking direct questions, but it is also a process that takes place throughout treatment. In therapy, active listening is an art form, in which the clinician picks up subtle hints about the client’s values over time, sometimes without even realizing it.
For example, a mother who struggles with obesity and overeating may complain about low energy and struggle to maintain a consistent exercise routine. At the same time, she may talk about her children and wish for more energy to play with them.
This client may offer subtle hints about her values over time. She may complain about her fatigue, or she may become tearful when talking about her children. It is the therapist’s job to listen for these emotional moments and comment on them, allowing the client to speak about these values and define them more clearly.
Helping this client to connect her values (being an involved and energetic parent) to her behavior (overeating and not exercising) will help create motivation. However, MI is based on the idea that change is more likely if the client can make these connections themselves, rather than being informed of them by the clinician (Schumacher & Madson, 2014).
What our readers think
I found these exercises very helpful. I wrote down all the acroymns and the questions so that I would be able to look them over again when needed.
Thank you for the article. It appears to me that in the 3rd edition Miller and Rollnick changed emphasis from the four principles as mentioned in the article to the four fundamental processes of Engaging, Focusing, Evoking and Planning.
Maybe something to take into the article for more clarity.
Hi Maria,
Thank you for your thoughtful comment! You are absolutely right, and I really appreciate your careful reading. The 3rd edition of Miller and Rollnick’s work indeed shifted focus from the original four principles to the four fundamental processes: Engaging, Focusing, Evoking, and Planning. This evolution reflects a more dynamic and client-centered approach in motivational interviewing.
We will certainly consider adding this distinction to the article for greater clarity. Your feedback helps us keep our content accurate and up-to-date!
Warm regards,
Julia | Community Manager
Absolutely loved this entire article and the accompanying resources. Thank you so much for taking the time to share all of this, Joshua! It is truly inspiring and so much of it immediately actionable even in my personal life with friends and family, but certainly with clients and coworkers. Much appreciated
Highly informative, I will be able to offer psycho social support for my clients in a better way with help of these principals.