I got a great question the other day via email (you can send your questions to Jacob@TheACTmatrix.com), and it’s the perfect welcome back from the haze of the ACBS conference. I’m still filtering through the conference recordings, and will feature some great ones in later posts.
Here’s the question:
Hello Jacob,
It’s me again from Adelaide.
Only this morning I came across this article from Sarah McKay, debunkung the whole triune brain theory!!
It got me a bit alarmed as I had really been enjoying all these evolution psychology models and principles.
I even wondered how this would fit with your horizontal line vitality - survival. That might still be valid.
I would welcome your take on this as I value all your wonderful matrix work and insights!
https://drsarahmckay.com/rethinking-the-reptilian-brain/
Best wishes
And my answer:
What a wonderful article, thank you for sharing.
Yes the Triune model has been just a metaphor for a while, and CFT acknowledges as much (at least Paul Gilbert does).
I'm doing a section on evolution and the matrix in my new ACT Matrix Course, so I've been thinking about this a lot lately.
As for your question regarding the horizontal line: when thinking about evolution and the application of it to psychological processes the emphasis should always be on function (and I don't mean that in the usual ACT/Functional Contextual sense), for example, birds, lizards, insects, and mammals all have evolved wings, eyes, ears, legs, etc. Animals with legs all have an even number, and so forth.
While the evolutionary roots are varied and not linearly connected, the function of similar adaptations are shaped by similar contexts/evolutionary pressures.
The traditional ACT Matrix horizontal line, and my Survival–Vital version of the Matrix both correspond to functional classes of behavior. The traditional matrix is behavior under appetitive and aversive control, and my S–V matrix extends that out into broader categories of behavior that helps/is related to survival, and behavior that (seeks to) add a sense of vitality. Within both Survival and Vital there are many instances of behavior under appetitive and aversive control.
Kevin Polk's new matrix with Relief and Satisfaction as the horizontal line is the same in terms of focus on function.
In any case, evolutionary theory is best used therapeutically not by looking into the past and trying to figure out "why we are the way we are now", but instead as a set of very simple processes that apply to all living organisms: Variation, Selection, and Retention.
Variation of behavior means a broader repertoire from which to Select what works best in terms of our values, and through reinforcement behavior is Retained, or kept.
We get stuck when our behavioral repertoires are inflexible, or narrow.
In the Survival–Vital Matrix we apply these processes intentionally to both sides:
A survival move is something that we do to help us "survive the moment". Many of the behaviors we engage in may have worked once but are no longer helpful.
We help clients expand (vary) the survival behaviors they engage in and choose and maintain the behaviors that are workable and guided by values (selection & retention).
The same goes for the Vital end of the spectrum. We shape behavior that adds a sense of vitality to life, in a way that is healthy and guided by values.
Thank you for the great question, made me think!
Do you mind if I share your question and my answer on my blog?
Jacob
Let me know what presentations were your favorite from the ACBS conference and what your experience was like more generally.
Respectfully submitted,
Jacob Martinez // Through the ACT Matrix
P.S.
My ACT Matrix course goes live August 1st, but you can register today. I can’t wait for you to be a part of it.