58 Transactional Analysis Journal Metacommunicative Transactions Mark Widdowson Abstract This article presents metacommunicative transactions as a collaborative relational therapeutic method for exploring the un- folding of the therapeutic relationship in the here and now. The theoretical basis of meta- communicative transactions and their simi- larity to and difference from empathic trans- actions (Clark, 1991; Hargaden & Sills, 2002) is discussed. Metacommunicative trans- actions are firmly located within a frame- work of transactional analysis psychother- apy, and the article describes how they re- late to Woollams and Brown’s (1979) four rules of therapy. The use of metacommuni- cative transactions to promote insight into ego states, transactions, games, scripts, and impasses is illustrated along with ways they can be used to invite both client and thera- pist into autonomous relating. The article concludes with practical guidance for thera- pists in design and use of metacommunica- tive transactions in therapeutic practice. ______ Background to This Concept Metacommunicative transactions are not new: Many therapists already use them to great ef- fect in their work. What is new in this article is categorizing such transactions as a specific in- tervention and providing a systematic frame- work for using them within transactional analy- sis psychotherapy. I began exploring metacommunicative trans- actions after reading Yalom’s (2001) excellent book The Gift of Therapy. In it he offers num- erous examples of how he uses the here and now of the therapy encounter to productive ends. Safran and Muran (2001) discuss meta- communication in their book Negotiating the Therapeutic Alliance, and it is from their work —which is, in itself, developed from the work of Kiesler (1996)—that I draw the term “meta- communication.” I also draw on the work of Maroda (1994/2004) and, from within a trans- actional analysis framework, on the work of Ohlsson (1998), Hargaden and Sills (2002), and Little (2005, 2006). This article is also based on my experience as a trainer and supervisor following numerous discussions with trainees and more experienced practitioners who are interested in working re- lationally and who struggle to translate theory into practice. It is my hope that this article of- fers a way to explain a practical method of working relationally, one that is firmly ground- ed in transactional analysis theory. Introduction and Definitions The prefix “meta” originates in a Greek word meaning “beyond.” Webster’s New Millennium Dictionary of English (Kipfer, 2005) cites “meta” as a prefix meaning “self-referential; referring to itself or its characteristics.” The concept of metacommunication has wider cur- rency in the field of communications, neuro- linguistic programming (NLP), and anthropol- ogy, where its uses include: “to mean different things at different levels,” “an act of communi- cation that communicates something about the communication itself, and “a concept which is an abstraction” (Metacommunication, 2004). I have developed a working definition of a metacommunicative transaction and use it throughout this article: A metacommunication is an intervention that utilizes the therapist’s countertransference in the here and now of the therapy together with exploration of the here- and-now process of the therapy in a collabora- tive engagement with the client so as to explore the relational significance for the client of what is occurring in the therapy. As I refer to it in this article, countertransference is defined as the affective responses of the therapist toward the client. Metacommunicative transactions usually con- tain a process observation, that is, an observa- tion about the unfolding process, or the many unfolding processes, that are happening be- tween the therapist and client. In this sense, the