Rupture Repair

Practise noticing when the working relationship strains — including the quiet signs that look like cooperation — and repairing it. Two families of rupture: one patient withdraws behind agreement and apology (conflict-avoidant), the other confronts, openly or with a polite smile. Useful in any therapy and in any clinical conversation.

What you practise

• Detect withdrawal and confrontation ruptures, including the quiet markers that resemble cooperation
• Distinguish a rupture from honest disagreement, real humour, and straightforward self-assertion
• Pause the clinical agenda and make the here-and-now relationship the subject of the conversation
• Invite the patient's experience of the strain, and follow a thin first answer with a second invitation
• Receive criticism without defending, counter-attacking, or collapsing into appeasement
• Acknowledge your own contribution concretely and proportionately

Who you can meet

• Linnea, 34 — A 34-year-old preschool teacher who agrees with everything and leaves the room without moving. She carries an unspoken grievance from the last session and will not raise it. Useful focus: notice withdrawal that looks like cooperation, and make it safe enough to be disagreed with.
• Håkan, 52 — A 52-year-old electrical contractor who arrives with a rebuttal he has spent two weeks composing. He tests every repair and treats a technique as evidence against the whole enterprise. Useful focus: receive criticism without defending or folding, and own your part concretely.
• Staffan, 58 — Licensed psychologist and psychotherapist, close to thirty years in the room and many of them spent supervising other therapists on what happens between two people. He says the strain out loud and lets your objection stand. Useful focus: notice what it is like to have the friction named rather than smoothed over, and whether the repair reaches you as a person.
• Joakim, 38 — A 38-year-old project lead at an IT consultancy who hears criticism where none was made, and says so — sometimes with a smile. The misreading is the rupture, and the task is repairing it without arguing about what you meant. Useful focus: own how it sounded rather than defending what you said, and validate a reading that is factually wrong and emotionally exact.

What the feedback looks at

• Noticing the rupture
• Pausing the agenda
• Inviting the patient's experience
• Receiving criticism without defending
• Owning your part
• Validating the position
• Renegotiating the work
• Staying until re-engagement

Rated against: Adapted from the therapist resolution-strategy taxonomy of the Rupture Resolution Rating System (3RS): Eubanks, C. F., Muran, J. C., & Safran, J. D. (2015), unpublished manuscript, Mount Sinai-Beth Israel Medical Center. The dimensions below recast that taxonomy as clinician competences; the wording of every anchor is PsychBase's own, since the manual's anchor text is copyrighted. The 3RS is an observational coding system applied to video by raters trained to reliability, and it codes patient behaviour segment by segment rather than rating a clinician. These scores are generated by an AI supervisor from a text transcript and are not equivalent to coding by a trained human rater. No endorsement by the instrument's authors is implied. Wider evidence for rupture repair is cited in the information panel. Scores are educational feedback and never gate progression.

This lab is for clinical training. The patient is generated by an AI language model from a written case; no real patient and no patient data are involved. Browsing is open; starting a session needs a free account.