# Reciprocal Determinism Analysis > Map the three-way interaction between person (cognitive/affective states), behavior, and environment to identify feedback loops and leverage points for intervention. - Skill: `sethmblack/reciprocal-determinism-analysis` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds add sethmblack/reciprocal-determinism-analysis` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/sethmblack/reciprocal-determinism-analysis/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Coding & Dev Tools - License: MIT - Author: sethmblack (https://skillmd.com/u/sethmblack) - Updated: 2026-09-08 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/sethmblack/reciprocal-determinism-analysis --- # Reciprocal Determinism Analysis Map the three-way interaction between person (cognitive/affective states), behavior, and environment to identify feedback loops and leverage points for intervention. **Source Expert:** Albert Bandura **Token Budget:** ~700 tokens --- ## Constitutional Constraints - Never suggest people are helpless products of environment or history - Always identify agentic capacity and possibility for change - Never oversimplify complex dynamics into single-cause explanations - Use this for understanding and intervention, not for excusing harmful behavior --- ## When to Use - A behavioral pattern keeps repeating despite attempts to change - Understanding why an intervention isn't working - Designing comprehensive change strategies - Analyzing team or organizational dynamics - Breaking vicious cycles or reinforcing virtuous ones **Trigger Phrases:** - "Why does this pattern keep repeating?" - "Map the feedback loops" - "Where's the leverage point?" - "Why isn't this intervention working?" - "Analyze the system dynamics" --- ## Inputs | Input | Required | Description | |-------|----------|-------------| | `pattern` | Yes | The behavioral pattern or dynamic to analyze | | `context` | Yes | Individual, team, or organizational context | | `interventions_tried` | No | Previous change attempts and their results | --- ## Core Framework: Triadic Reciprocal Causation Three components interact bidirectionally and simultaneously: ``` PERSON (P) / \ ↕ ↕ BEHAVIOR (B) ←→ ENVIRONMENT (E) ``` ### The Components | Component | Includes | Examples | |-----------|----------|----------| | **Person (P)** | Beliefs, expectations, self-efficacy, emotions, knowledge, goals | "I'm not good at this," anxiety, learned skills | | **Behavior (B)** | Actions, responses, habits, practices | Avoidance, defensive responses, work output | | **Environment (E)** | Physical setting, social context, rewards/punishments, others' behaviors | Office layout, team norms, feedback systems | ### The Six Causal Paths | Path | Direction | Mechanism | |------|-----------|-----------| | P → B | Person shapes behavior | Beliefs determine what actions are taken | | B → P | Behavior shapes person | Actions create experiences that change beliefs | | P → E | Person shapes environment | Beliefs influence how environments are selected/created | | E → P | Environment shapes person | Context affects beliefs and emotional states | | B → E | Behavior shapes environment | Actions change circumstances and others' responses | | E → B | Environment shapes behavior | Context prompts or constrains actions | --- ## Workflow ### Step 1: Identify the Pattern Clearly describe the behavioral pattern being analyzed. What keeps happening? ### Step 2: Map Person Factors **Ask:** - What beliefs are involved? (especially self-efficacy beliefs) - What emotional states are present? - What expectations exist about outcomes? - What knowledge or skills are relevant? ### Step 3: Map Behavior Factors **Ask:** - What specific actions are being taken? - What is being avoided? - How does the behavior unfold over time? - What is the immediate effect of the behavior? ### Step 4: Map Environment Factors **Ask:** - What is the physical/social context? - What rewards or punishments are present? - How do others respond? - What systems, structures, or norms are relevant? ### Step 5: Trace the Causal Loops Map how each component influences the others. Look for: - **Vicious cycles:** Self-reinforcing negative patterns - **Virtuous cycles:** Self-reinforcing positive patterns - **Blocks:** Where desired change is being prevented ### Step 6: Identify Leverage Points Determine where intervention would be most effective: - Which component is most malleable? - Which causal path is strongest? - Where would a small change create the biggest ripple effect? ### Step 7: Design Multi-Point Interventions The most effective changes address multiple components simultaneously. --- ## Output Format ```markdown ## Reciprocal Determinism Analysis: [Pattern Name] ### Pattern Description [Clear statement of what keeps happening] ### Component Mapping **Person (P):** - Beliefs: [List] - Emotions: [List] - Self-efficacy: [Assessment] **Behavior (B):** - Actions taken: [List] - Actions avoided: [List] - Immediate effects: [Description] **Environment (E):** - Physical context: [Description] - Social context: [Description] - Reward/punishment structure: [Description] ### Causal Loop Diagram [Show the specific P ↔ B ↔ E relationships for this pattern] ### Primary Cycle Identified [Vicious/Virtuous] cycle: [Description of the self-reinforcing loop] ### Leverage Points 1. **[Component]:** [Why this is a high-leverage intervention point] 2. **[Component]:** [Secondary intervention point] ### Intervention Design - **Person-level:** [Intervention] - **Behavior-level:** [Intervention] - **Environment-level:** [Intervention] ### Expected Cascade [How changes at one point should ripple through the system] ``` --- ## Outputs **Primary Output:** A structured analysis document that identifies and articulates patterns, insights, and actionable recommendations based on the input data. **Format:** ```markdown ## Analysis: [Topic] ### Key Findings - [Finding 1] - [Finding 2] - [Finding 3] ### Recommendations 1. [Action 1] 2. [Action 2] 3. [Action 3] ``` **Example output:** See the Example section below for a complete demonstration. ## Example **Input:** "Our team lead gives harsh feedback, people get defensive, then she gets frustrated and gives even harsher feedback. How do we break this cycle?" **Analysis:** **Why this works:** This example demonstrates the key principles of the skill in action. The approach is effective because: - It follows the systematic workflow outlined above - It shows concrete application of the framework - It produces actionable, specific outputs rather than vague generalizations - The analysis is grounded in observable details - The recommendations are prioritized and implementable **Alternative applications:** This same approach can be applied to: - Different contexts within the same domain - Related but distinct problem types - Scaled up or down depending on scope - Combined with complementary analytical frameworks ## Reciprocal Determinism Analysis: Feedback-Defense Spiral ### Pattern Description Team lead provides critical feedback, team members become defensive, lead escalates criticism, defensiveness increases. Cycle repeats and intensifies. ### Component Mapping **Person (P) - Team Lead:** - Beliefs: "They don't care about quality," "I have to push harder" - Emotions: Frustration, disappointment - Self-efficacy: Low belief in ability to communicate constructively **Person (P) - Team Members:** - Beliefs: "She thinks I'm incompetent," "Nothing I do is good enough" - Emotions: Anxiety, shame, resentment - Self-efficacy: Decreasing confidence in work quality **Behavior (B):** - Lead: Harsh tone, focus on negatives, public criticism - Team: Defensive explanations, avoidance of feedback sessions, hiding mistakes **Environment (E):** - Public feedback setting (increases shame) - No structure for constructive feedback - High pressure, deadline-driven culture - No positive feedback rituals ### Causal Loop Diagram ``` Lead believes team doesn't care (P) ↓ Lead gives harsh feedback (B) ↓ Team feels attacked (P) ← Environment: public, high-pressure (E) ↓ Team becomes defensive (B) ↓ Environment becomes hostile (E) ↓ Lead believes team doesn't care (P) [LOOP REINFORCED] ``` ### Primary Cycle Identified **Vicious cycle:** Harsh feedback → Defensiveness → Frustration → Harsher feedback ### Leverage Points 1. **Environment:** Highest leverage. Restructure feedback context (private, structured, mixed positive/negative) 2. **Lead's Behavior:** Train specific feedback techniques 3. **Lead's Beliefs:** Help her see defensive responses as predictable human reactions, not character flaws ### Intervention Design - **Person-level (Lead):** Coaching on efficacy beliefs about feedback; reframe defensiveness as information, not opposition - **Person-level (Team):** Build psychological safety; normalize that feedback is about work, not worth - **Behavior-level:** Structured feedback protocol (specific, private, balanced); lead models receiving feedback - **Environment-level:** Create 1:1 feedback sessions; establish team norms for psychological safety; add positive recognition rituals ### Expected Cascade Changing the environment (private + structured) reduces defensive triggers. This changes the behavior (less defensive responses). Lead sees different reactions, changing her beliefs about the team. New beliefs produce softer delivery. Virtuous cycle can begin. --- ## Constraints - Avoid single-cause explanations; always map the full triad - Remember humans are agents, not just products of environment - Recognize that the "same" environment affects different people differently - Interventions are most effective when they address multiple components --- ## Integration This skill integrates with: - **self-efficacy-assessment** - Efficacy beliefs are key Person component - **modeling-influence-analysis** - Models are part of Environment - **moral-disengagement-diagnosis** - Disengagement involves all three components --- ## Source Expert Based on Albert Bandura's triadic reciprocal causation model as developed in *Social Foundations of Thought and Action* (1986) and subsequent work on social cognitive theory.