Fundamentals of Motivational Interviewing

Collaborative versus confrontational spirit

Motivational Interviewing (MI) represents a paradigm shift in the way resistance to change is addressed.

Unlike traditional paternalistic models, where the expert imposes a solution and confronts the individual for non-adherence, MI is based on a collaborative partnership.

The therapist does not act as a dictator who prescribes behaviors, but as a guide who accompanies the exploration.

The goal is to avoid a power struggle; if an attempt is made to force change from the outside, the natural reaction is resistance.

Instead, an atmosphere of acceptance and compassion is created where the individual feels safe to explore his or her own barriers without fear of judgment.

One seeks to dance with discordance rather than fight against it, understanding that ambivalence is a normal part of the human process and not a pathology to be extirpated by logical argumentation or authority.

The evocation of intrinsic motivation

The operational core of this approach lies in the premise that enduring motivation must arise from within the individual, not from external sources.

The practitioner's role is to evoke, or "bring to light," the individual's own reasons for change, rather than implanting extraneous reasons.

For example, instead of telling someone that they should quit smoking because it is bad for their health (external motivation), they are asked how smoking conflicts with their personal values of freedom or vitality.

When the individual verbalizes his or her own arguments in favor of change, the likelihood that change will occur increases exponentially.

It is about connecting the target behavior with the person's deepest aspirations, values and goals, transforming "I have to change" into "I want to change".

Self-Determination Theory: The three pillars

The effectiveness of MS is theoretically underpinned by self-determination, which postulates that human beings thrive and change when three basic psychological needs are satisfied.

The first is autonomy: the need to feel that one is the source of one's own actions and has the capacity to make choices.

The second is competence or mastery: the feeling that one has the necessary skills to achieve the proposed objective.

The third is relatedness: feeling connected and supported by significant others, including the therapist.

If an intervention threatens autonomy (saying "you must do this"), motivation collapses.

Therefore, the professional must actively support the individual's capacity for choice an