CDT • MSP • Awareness

Mapping Lucas Derks’ Social Panorama to CDT’s Awareness Levels (AQ4–AQ9)

TL;DR: Lucas Derks’ Social Panorama Model (and the broader Mental Space Psychology) show how we unconsciously “place” people in mental space (relation = location). Constructed Development Theory (CDT) adds a meta-layer: how aware are you that you’re constructing that space in the first place—and how at-choice are you in changing it? Result: MSP is powerful at AQ4–AQ5; CDT progressively subsumes and dissolves it from AQ6 upward.

What is the Social Panorama Model (in one paragraph)?

Dr. Lucas Derks proposes that we map relationships in an inner 3D space: powerful people often appear “above,” close friends “near,” adversaries “far,” etc. The coordinates (distance, direction, height, size, brightness) shape how we feel and act. Therapeutically, changing the coordinates (e.g., moving a domineering figure from “above” to “beside”) often shifts emotion and behaviour quickly.

CDT’s Reframe: From Space to the Construction of Space

CDT treats that inner space as constructed moment-to-moment by Cognitive Intentions (CIs). The pivotal variable isn’t the map—it’s your Awareness Quotient (AQ) of being the mapper. As Dynamic Intelligence (DI) grows, you move from rearranging furniture in a given room to realising you built the room, can redesign it—or step outside it entirely.

The Developmental Ladder: Social Panorama Across AQ4–AQ9

AQ4 — Taken-as-Real (Concrete)

Experience: The social panorama feels literal and fixed.
Inner narrative: “My boss is above me. That’s just how it is.”
Change lever: Rearranging figures works, but feels like “magic.”
Risk: Reifies hierarchies; little reflection on why things feel placed as they do.

AQ5 — Adjustable Representations (Multiplicity)

Experience: Recognises the panorama is flexible.
Inner narrative: “If I move my inner critic behind me, I relax.”
Change lever: MSP at maximum utility: reposition, resize, brighten/dim.
Risk: Sophisticated tinkering without questioning the premises of the map.

AQ6 — Self-as-Cartographer (Reflexive)

Experience: Notices construction rules (e.g., “authority = up,” “threat = far”).
Inner narrative: “I’m the one mapping people this way; why?”
Change lever: Shift from coordinates to metacognition and CI patterns (e.g., Hierarchy, External, Influence).
Gain: Agency emerges from seeing how one constructs the panorama.

AQ7 — Systemic Choice (Meta-Representational)

Experience: The social panorama is one representational system among many.
Inner narrative: “I can use, swap, or discard spatial mapping on purpose.”
Change lever: Choice becomes the default. MSP becomes optional rather than necessary.
Gain: Contextual flexibility; designs representations that fit intention.

AQ8 — Meta-Systemic Play (Absurdist Awareness)

Experience: Sees the constructed futility of any single mapping.
Inner narrative: “Placement is a story device—I’ll play with it when useful.”
Change lever: Ironic, playful use of MSP as a teaching toy.
Gain: Lightness; no compulsion to defend any mapping.

AQ9 — Anesis / Release (Non-Attachment)

Experience: No default panorama. Self/other experienced as fluid process.
Inner narrative: “I am both the space and the figures; neither binds me.”
Change lever: Effortless re-entry into maps for communication, then release.
Gain: Deep freedom with full capability to use or not use representational scaffolds.

Quick Table: “Relation = Location” vs “Relation = Construction”

AQ	Lived sense of social space	Primary lever of change
AQ4	Space is real, fixed	Move figures (MSP)
AQ5	Space is flexible	Curate coordinates (MSP mastery)
AQ6	I construct space	Expose construction rules (CIs)
AQ7	Space is optional	Choose representational system
AQ8	Space is a game	Play / ironic deployment
AQ9	No default space	Release; re-enter on purpose

Practical: Two Ways to Work with Clients

A. MSP-Style (Great for AQ4–AQ5)

Elicit the map: “Where is X relative to you? Above? Near? Behind?”
Test & shift submodalities: Move, resize, change angle/brightness; test affect.
Stabilise: Anchor the more resourceful placement.

B. CDT-Style (AQ6+)

Expose the builder: “What rule led you to place X there (e.g., ‘power = above’)?”
Name the CIs: Hierarchy, External, Influence, Observer, etc.
Install choice: “Given your Intention, what construction best serves your Response?”
Release need: Encourage non-attachment to any single map.

Pitfalls & Ethical Notes

Technique addiction (AQ5 trap): Constantly “moving figures” without addressing the assumptions that generate them.
Premature transcendence: Dismissing MSP as “just constructs” when the client still benefits from concrete spatial shifts.
Reification of power: Spatial metaphors can reinforce unhelpful hierarchies if not surfaced and examined.

How CDT, DI, and MSP Interlock

MSP contributes a rich content domain (how relations feel when “placed”).
CDT contributes a process meta-framework (how Intention→Awareness→Choice→Response shapes any representation).
Dynamic Intelligence (DI) is the real-time skill of noticing construction, selecting a fit-for-purpose mapping (or none), and responding deliberately.

Try It Yourself (mini-exercise)

Pick a challenging person. Close your eyes: where are they?
Adjust one dimension (distance, height, angle). What changes in feeling?
Now ask: What rule put them there? (e.g., “authority should be above”).
If your Intention is calm assertiveness, what representation best serves it?
Hold lightly. Return to default awareness without clinging to the map.

Closing Thought

MSP maps the furniture. CDT trains the architect.
As awareness deepens, you’re no longer trapped by where figures “are”—you’re free to construct (or not) whatever space best serves your intention in the moment.