Circling: Intersubjective Group Inquiry

Circling, also called intersubjective inquiry and developed by Guy Sengstock, Decker Cunov and Robert MacNaughton, is a relational group practice. Members attend to what is happening between them in the present moment and explore it together. The name points to the intersubjective turn in psychoanalysis during the 1980s, which the group-analytic literature has linked to relational ideas such as mutuality and self-disclosure. A search on 2026-10-14 found no outcome study of this group practice itself. The closest evidence concerns closeness built through self-disclosure and group cohesion, and it supports those general ideas rather than the practice.

What it is

General outline, not checked against the originators' own materials: the practice gathers a small group and keeps attention on what people notice in themselves, and between themselves, in the moment. Members speak from their own present experience, and others reflect back what they notice rather than offering advice.

The word intersubjective refers to the intersubjective turn in psychoanalysis, which Potthoff (2017) describes as having opened common ground between psychoanalysis and group analysis. Group practices drawn from that tradition treat the group as a place where relational ideas can be explored.

Where it comes from

Guy Sengstock, Decker Cunov and Robert MacNaughton are named as the originators of the practice.

Potthoff (2017) sets out how relational concepts from psychoanalysis overlap with group analysis, the setting in which group practices like this one sit.

The principles underneath

Presence

In the general outline above, the practice keeps attention on the present moment in the group rather than on events from the past.

Mutuality

Relational thinking treats the people in a group as influencing one another, so what happens between members is information. Potthoff (2017) lists mutuality and self-disclosure among relational concepts that group analysis might integrate.

Self-disclosure can build closeness

In one experiment, tasks of escalating self-disclosure produced more closeness than small talk, but three other manipulations did not add to closeness (Aron et al., 1997).

Cohesion in the group

How connected members feel to a group is a central topic of group therapy research, and a 2018 meta-analysis examined cohesion in group therapy (Burlingame et al., 2018).

How a session runs

General outline, not checked against the originators' own materials: a small group meets, and each member is invited to say what they are noticing in themselves right now.
Others listen and reflect back what they notice, paying attention to what passes between people as well as to what is said.
The facilitator keeps attention on the present, including any tension or closeness that appears in the room.
Members check what they heard and what landed, and name where they felt closer or further from one another.
The group closes by noticing what changed in the room and what each person is taking away.

When it tends to fit

You want to understand how you come across to people, and not only what you intend.
A group keeps returning to the same unspoken tension, and you want a slower way to look at it together.
You are curious about closeness with people you already know, and you have time for a longer, slower group conversation.

What the research shows

Evidence: Practitioner tradition — little or no outcome research

A search on 2026-10-14 found no outcome study of this group practice itself. The nearest research looks at related ideas. In one experiment, structured tasks of escalating self-disclosure produced more closeness between pairs of participants than small-talk tasks, while three other manipulations did not add to closeness (Aron et al., 1997). A 2018 meta-analysis examined cohesion in group therapy (Burlingame et al., 2018). The title of a 2026 study describes the effects of a relational group intervention on emotion regulation (Mackali et al., 2026); this page reports only what that title says, because its abstract was not available here.

Where the evidence is thin: The evidence here concerns closeness, cohesion and relational group work in general, not this practice. A search on 2026-10-14 found no published description of this practice's session steps, so the steps on this page are a general outline, not checked against the originators' own materials, and need checking before the page is relied on.

Sources

Where it stops

Group work can expose people to comparison, judgement or hurt from other people's reactions. Anyone who feels unsafe should be able to pause, and a trained facilitator should hold the room.

The practice works with feelings in the moment, which can be intense. People in crisis, with severe depression, or with trauma that is being actively triggered need a qualified clinician first.

Without an outcome study of the practice, it is not known whether it helps people beyond the closeness and support that any group can give.

Practices for this approach

Practice this with IX Coach

Try this practice