When clients say they already know the coping skills, explore barriers, treatment fit and shared goals before deciding what to do next in therapy.
A client describes another difficult week. You suggest a grounding exercise, a breathing strategy or a way to examine the thoughts that came up.
"I already know that."
It is easy to hear this as the end of a conversation. You have offered something that might help, and the client appears to have dismissed it. You might explain the strategy again, suggest more practice or move on to another technique.
Before doing that, it is worth finding out what the client means. They might understand the strategy but struggle to use it. They might have tried it repeatedly without the benefit they were promised. Or they might be wondering why the conversation has moved towards managing their reaction before you have understood what happened.
Each possibility points towards a different next step.
Being able to describe an exercise tells us something about a client's knowledge. It leaves other questions open: can they use it in the relevant situation, do they have the opportunity, and does it serve a purpose they consider worthwhile?
The COM-B framework offers one way to organise these questions. It describes behaviour in terms of capability, opportunity and motivation. Knowledge sits within a wider system that includes a person's abilities and the conditions around them. It is a general behaviour-change framework, rather than a specific explanation for why coping strategies do or do not help in therapy. Michie, van Stralen and West, 2011.
Applied cautiously, that distinction invites a more specific conversation. Can the client remember the steps? Is there somewhere they can use the strategy? What happens when they try? Do they agree with the reason for using it?
The following possibilities are prompts for that conversation. They can overlap, and they are not a validated classification system.
Consider a client who can complete a thought record during a session but cannot face filling one out after an exhausting day. Another understands a grounding exercise but remembers it only after the difficult situation has passed.
In these examples, repeating the explanation would leave the practical obstacle largely untouched.
A useful question is: "Can we walk through the last time you wanted to use it, starting just before things became difficult?"
That gives you something concrete to examine together: when the client noticed the problem, what the task required, what else was happening and where the attempt broke down.
Possible adjustments might include rehearsing one part in the session, reducing the number of steps or changing the format. A written worksheet could become a short spoken reflection if writing is the obstacle. These are options to test with the client, rather than assumptions about what any diagnosis means they need.
For neurodivergent clients, the distinction between unwillingness and unavailable capacity can be especially important. The guide to autistic burnout as a mismatch problem explores how sensory, physical, cognitive and environmental load can make a familiar task inaccessible without making the person unmotivated.
This response deserves an account of what actually happened. Asking whether the client practised enough before asking about their experience can turn the conversation into a defence of the intervention.
What did they try? What changed, if anything? Was there discomfort or another unwanted effect? What had they understood the exercise was supposed to achieve?
There is evidence supporting between-session work in cognitive and behavioural therapies. A meta-analysis found better outcomes for therapy including homework than for the same therapy without it. That supports taking practice seriously; it does not establish that every assignment is appropriate or that an unsuccessful exercise reflects insufficient effort. Kazantzis, Whittington and Dattilio, 2010.
The review might lead to more supported practice. It might also lead to adapting the task, stopping it or reconsidering the treatment plan. The client's report is information that should influence that decision.
A client might want help responding to an unreasonable workload, making a difficult decision or navigating conflict. A strategy for managing distress could have a role, but the connection to their priority needs to be clear.
For example, helping someone settle enough to consider their options has a different purpose from repeatedly suggesting relaxation while leaving those options unexplored.
"What would you most like help with in this situation?" can reveal a mismatch that another technique would miss.
Research on adult psychotherapy finds that agreement about goals and collaboration are associated with better outcomes. The evidence does not establish a simple causal relationship, but it supports paying attention to whether therapist and client are working towards an agreed purpose. Tryon, Birch and Verkuilen, 2018.
A suggested exercise can become an additional obligation. A client may leave intending to complete it, find it unmanageable and return expecting to disappoint the therapist.
Rather than assuming that this is happening, ask how the task fitted into their week and what it was like to come back without completing it.
There may be practical barriers: time, privacy, fatigue, reading demands or competing responsibilities. There may also be uncertainty about whether the task is worth the effort. A client can want change while having good reasons to question a particular route towards it.
A smaller task is one option. So is agreeing that the proposed exercise does not currently fit. If you change the plan, retain a clear rationale and decide together what you will review next time.
Low-demand practice is not limited to PDA work, but the low-demand communication guide offers useful examples of how reducing pressure can preserve collaboration without abandoning the clinical goal.
Sometimes the response concerns what is happening between client and therapist. The client may experience the suggestion as rushed, repetitive or disconnected from what they were trying to communicate.
"I already know that" does not automatically indicate a rupture in the therapeutic relationship. It can, however, be an opening to ask: "Did that suggestion fit what you needed from me just then?"
A large meta-analysis found a positive association between the therapeutic alliance and psychotherapy outcomes. This does not establish that warmth alone is sufficient treatment, or that specific interventions are unimportant. It does give us reason to take the quality of the working relationship seriously. Fluckiger and colleagues, 2018.
The therapist might need to acknowledge moving too quickly, clarify what they understood and invite correction. Skills work can then proceed within a better shared understanding of its purpose.
Before deciding whether a strategy works, check whether you are evaluating the same outcome.
The client may expect an exercise to remove anxiety. The therapist may intend it to help them pause before responding, or participate in something important while some anxiety remains. Those are different aims, and they need to be discussed in advance.
Depending on the intervention and treatment plan, review questions could include:
This is also an accountability question for the therapist. If an exercise was presented as a way to reduce distress, changing the definition of success afterwards can obscure that it did not deliver the expected benefit.
The following example is fictional.
A client says they are still overwhelmed after work. The therapist suggests a grounding exercise.
"I already know that. Everyone keeps telling me to ground myself."
The therapist asks what happened when they tried it. The client explains that it sometimes helps them settle briefly, but their workload remains unmanageable. Another exercise feels like another responsibility. They had hoped to use the session to work out how to ask their manager for changes.
The therapist acknowledges the mismatch. Together, they examine the workload, what changes the client wants, what makes the conversation difficult and which parts are within the client's control. They agree to rehearse how to raise the issue. Grounding remains available if the client finds it useful, with a limited and explicit purpose.
At the next appointment, the review can be specific: did the rehearsal help, what happened in the conversation, and what support is needed now?
That discussion provides a basis for updating the formulation and treatment plan. The next intervention follows from what they have learned about the problem, the client's circumstances and the effect of the previous attempt. The progress notes guide provides a practical structure for documenting that reasoning without turning the note into a transcript.
For a worked example of making that decision, From Case Formulation to the Next Session follows a fictional case from an initial hypothesis through new contextual information and a revised treatment priority.
"I already know that" is not one clinical problem. It may reflect an implementation barrier, an intervention that has not helped, a mismatch in goals, a task that has become another burden, or a moment of disconnection in the therapeutic relationship.
Those explanations can overlap. None should be assumed from the sentence alone.
The next step is therefore not automatically a better explanation of the same skill. It is a more precise conversation about what the client tried, what happened, what they wanted help with and what the intervention was meant to change.
Sometimes the skill needs more rehearsal. Sometimes it needs adapting. Sometimes it needs a clearer purpose. Sometimes it needs to be set aside.
The client's response helps determine which.
For more practical articles on clinical documentation, formulation, psychoeducation and therapy resources, explore the Therapist Resources hub or browse clinician-designed resources on PsychVault.
Share your thoughts and experiences with this resource.
Sign in to leave a comment
Move from strategy into implementation with templates, handouts, and psychoeducation tools already live on the marketplace.
Publish clinician-grade templates, build trust signals, and start growing an evergreen library under your own brand.
Learn how a working case formulation can guide the next therapy session by linking client priorities, proposed mechanisms, interventions and review points.
A practical clinician guide to video game therapy, including Minecraft, Roblox, telehealth sessions, gaming groups, consent, privacy, and therapeutic intent.
A practical guide to finding psychology resources that actually work in Australian practice: covering templates, handouts, NDIS tools, and what makes a clinical resource worth using.
