Games People Play

CHAPTER TWO 
Transactional Analysis 
THE unit of social intercourse is called a transaction. If two or more people encounter each other in 
a social aggregation, sooner or later one of them will speak, or give some other indication of 
acknowledging the presence of the others. This is called the transactional stimulus. Another person 
will then say or do something which is in some way related to this stimulus, and that is called the 
transactions/ response. Simple transactional analysis is concerned with diagnosing which ego state 
implemented the transactional stimulus, and which one executed the transactional response. The 
simplest transactions are those in which both stimulus and response arise from the Adults of the 
parties concerned. The agent, estimating from the data before him that a scalpel is now the 
instrument of choice, holds out his hand. The respondent appraises this gesture correctly, estimates 
the forces and distances involved, and places the handle of the scalpel exactly where the surgeon 
expects it. Next in simplicity are Child-Parent transactions. The fevered Child asks for a glass of 
water, and the nurturing mother brings it. 
Both these transactions are complementary; that is, the response is appropriate and expected and 
follows the natural order of healthy human relationships. The first, which is classified as 
Complementary Transaction Type I, is represented in Figure 2A. The second, Complementary 
Transaction Type II, is shown in Figure 2B. It is evident, however, that transactions tend to proceed 
in chains, so that each response is in mm a stimulus. The first rule of communication is that 
communication will proceed smoothly as long as transactions are complementary, and its corollary 
is that as long as transactions are complementary, communication can, in principle, proceed 
indefinitely. These rules are independent of the nature and content of the transactions; they are 
based entirely on the direction of the vectors involved. As long as the transactions are 
10

---

complementary, it is irrelevant to the rule whether two people are engaging in critical gossip 
(Parent-Parent), solving a problem (Adult-Adult), or playing together (Child-Child or Parent-Child). 
Parent 
Parent 
Parent 
Parent 
Stimulus 
Stimulus
< FIGURE 2 > Complementary Transactions 
The converse rule is that communication is broken off when a crossed transaction occurs. The most 
common crossed transaction and the one which causes and always has caused most of the social 
difficulties in the world, whether in marriage, love, friendship, or work is represented in Figure 3A 
as Crossed Transaction Type I. This type of transaction is the principal concern of psychotherapists 
and is typified by the classical transference reaction of psychoanalysis. The stimulus is Adult-Adult: 
e.g., "Maybe we should find out why you've been drinking more lately," or, "Do you know where 
my cuff links are?" The appropriate Adult-Adult response in each case would be: "Maybe we 
should. I'd certainly like to know!" or, “On the desk.” If the respondent flares up, however, the 
responses will be something like "You're always criticizing me, just like my father did," or, "You 
always blame me for everything." These are both Child-Parent responses, and as the transactional 
diagram shows, the vectors cross. In such cases the Adult problems about drinking or cuff links 
must be suspended until the vectors can be realigned. This may take anywhere from several months 
in the drinking example to a few seconds in the case of cuff links. Either the agent must become 
Parental as a complement to the respondent's suddenly activated Child, or the respondent's Adult 
must be reactivated as a complement to the agent's Adult. If the maid rebels during a discussion of 
dishwashing, the Adult-Adult conversation about dishes is finished; there can only ensue either a 
Child-Parent discourse, or a discussion of a different Adult subject, namely her continued 
employment. 
Agent 
Respondent 
Respondent
Agent 
Adult 
Adult 
Adult 
Adult 
Response
Response 
Child 
Child 
Child 
Child 
Type 2 
Type 1 
11

---

Parent 
Parent 
Parent 
Parent 
Response
Response
< FIGURE 3 > Crossed transactions 
< FIGURE 4 > A Relationship Diagram
The converse of Crossed Transaction Type I is illustrated in Figure 3B. This is the counter-
transference reaction familiar to psychotherapists, in which the patient makes an objective, Adult 
observation, and the therapist crosses the vectors by responding like a parent talking to a child. This 
is Crossed Transaction Type II. In everyday life, "Do you know where my cuff links are?" may 
elicit: "Why don't you keep track of your own things? You're not a child any more." 
The relationship diagram in Figure 4, showing the nine possible vectors of social action between an 
agent and a respondent, has some interesting geometrical (topological) qualities. Complementary 
transactions between "psychological equals" are represented by (1 —I)
2
, (5—5)
2
and (9—9)
2
. There 
are three other complementary transactions: (2-4) (4-2), (3-7) (7-3) and (6-8) (8-6). All other 
combinations form crossed transactions, and in most cases these show up as crossings in the 
diagram: e.g., (3—7) (3—7), which results in two speechless people glaring at each other. If neither 
of them gives way, communication is finished and they must part. The most common solutions are 
Stimulus
Stimulus 
Adult 
Adult 
Adult 
Adult 
Respondent 
Agent 
Child 
Child 
Type 1 
Respondent 
Child 
Child 
Agent 
Type 2 
1 
1 
Respondent
Agent 
2 
2 
3
3
4 
4 
5 
5 
6
6
7 
7 
8 
8 
9
9
12

---

for one to yield and take (7—3), which results in a game of "Uproar"; or better, (5—5)
2
, in which 
case they both burst out laughing or shake hands. Simple complementary transactions most 
commonly occur in superficial working and social relationships, and these are easily disturbed by 
simple crossed transactions. In fact a superficial relationship may be defined as one which is 
confined to simple complementary transactions. Such relationships occur in activities, rituals and 
pastimes. More complex are ulterior transactions—those involving the activity of more than two 
ego states simultaneously—and this category is the basis for games. Salesmen are particularly adept 
at angular transactions, those involving three ego states. A crude but dramatic example of a sales 
game is illustrated in the following exchange: 
Salesman: "This one is better, but you can't afford it."
Housewife: "That's the one I'll take." 
The analysis of this transaction is shown in Figure 5A. The salesman, as Adult, states two objective 
facts: "This one is better" and "You can't afford it." At the ostensible, or social, level these are 
directed to the Adult of the housewife, whose Adult reply would be: "You are correct on both 
counts." However, the ulterior, or -psychological, vector is directed by the well-trained and 
experienced Adult of the salesman to the housewife's Child. The correctness of his judgment is 
demonstrated by the Child's reply, which says in effect: "Regardless of the financial consequences, 
I'll show that arrogant fellow I'm as good as any of his customers." At both levels the transaction is 
complementary, since her reply is accepted at face value as an Adult purchasing contract. 
A duplex ulterior transaction involves four ego states, and is commonly seen in flirtation games. 
Cowboy: "Come and see the barn." 
Visitor: "I've loved barns ever since I was a little girl." 
Parent 
Parent 
Parent 
Parent 
< FIGURE 5 > Ulterior Transactions 
As shown in Figure 5B, at the social level this is an Adult conversation about barns, and at the 
psychological level it is a Child conversation about sex play. On the surface the Adult seems to 
have the initiative, but as in most games, the outcome is determined by the Child, and the