How to Choose Metaphorical Associative Cards: Images, Purpose and Safety

Choose metaphorical associative cards by starting with the task and the people who will use them, not with the prettiest box. Look for images that allow more than one story, fit the intended age group, disclose potentially distressing content, represent more than one kind of person and life, explain consent and the right to reject a card, and come with licensing terms that match your format. A broad, versatile deck is usually easier as a first purchase; a themed deck works better when the question is already specific. Before buying, review a meaningful sample rather than three promotional images and run the short test and checklist below.

One of the first decks I bought was visually immaculate: muted colours, expressive faces and heavy stock. I enjoyed looking at it before I ever used it. Then I noticed the problem. Nearly every face told the viewer exactly what to feel. Sadness was unmistakable, fear was theatrical, joy had no ambiguity. People could identify the illustrator’s mood, yet they rarely found their own story. Since then I have stopped asking only, “Do I like the art?” I also ask, “Does the art leave room for the person?”

Define the job before choosing the deck

Write down three things:

1. Who will choose the cards: you alone, adult clients, teenagers, a family or a group.
2. What questions you expect: self-perception, relationships, work, resources, conflict or transition.
3. How you will use them: journalling, a one-to-one conversation, a group, an online session or a public workshop.

A deck for private journalling may be demanding and highly personal. A group deck needs a wider visual vocabulary, a clear opt-out and enough ambiguity that the facilitator does not have to explain the image for the participant. If your goal is “one deck for everything,” narrow it to the work you are realistically likely to do during the next three months.

General-purpose or themed?

General-purpose decks contain varied people, places, objects and situations. They are useful at the beginning because the same image may connect with work, intimacy, fatigue or choice. Their weakness is vagueness: if every card fits every question equally well, the image may create too little useful tension.

Themed decks focus on relationships, boundaries, resources, work, family, loss, body image or another area. They enter the subject quickly but may narrow it before the user has formed their own meaning. A relationship deck can make someone look for a couple when the actual issue is duty, solitude or conflict avoidance.

A practical rule: choose a broad deck first if you are still exploring different questions. Choose a themed deck when you can finish the sentence, “I need this mainly for…”

Four common image families

None of these is automatically superior. A portrait deck may be excellent for exploring interpersonal distance and uncomfortable for someone who feels watched by faces. Abstraction can release the user from a ready-made plot or leave them without an entry point. Those are two plausible readings of the same response, and a question is more useful than an assumption.

Age and setting matter more than the label on the box

An age mark is only the start. Review the images yourself and ask:

• Are there depictions of violence, illness, grief, nudity, confinement or humiliation?
• Is the visual language understandable for the intended users?
• Does the method require skills they have not learned yet?
• Can a card be replaced without explanation?
• Can the deck be used face up so users see what they are choosing?

When working with minors, consent, a clear purpose, the right not to answer and the rules of the relevant organisation matter. A card must not become a device for extracting information a young person is not ready to share. In groups, state the boundary before the first choice: “You may put any card aside without telling us why.”

Sensitive content: see it before it surprises someone

Difficult images do not make a deck bad. They may help someone name an experience that had no words. The problem is not difficulty; it is unprepared exposure and pressure to continue. Check for:

• physical or symbolic violence;
• pursuit, locking, falling or entrapment;
• medical imagery, blood or death;
• sexualised or degrading scenes;
• religious or military symbols;
• loss of a child, home or close person.

Do not diagnose the reaction. Notice what is observable: the person becomes silent, moves the card away, asks for another image or no longer feels safe. At that point, stopping is more responsible than forcing a “deep association.”

Representation is part of usability

Spread twenty or thirty cards and look at the deck as a small world. Are there different ages, bodies, appearances and ways of moving through life? Are care, authority, vulnerability and competence attached to more than one type of person? Does the deck repeatedly assign one group the role of victim, helper, leader or threat?

Representation is not a decorative score. If users never recognise any part of their lived context, they first have to work around someone else’s norm before they can work with their question. No single deck can show everyone. The practical response is to know the limits and, when needed, combine sets rather than claim universality.

A useful guide explains a process, not a dictionary of truths

Look for instructions that cover:

• face-up and face-down choice;
• forming a workable question;
• describing before interpreting;
• returning ownership of meaning to the user;
• responding to refusal or strong emotion;
• moving from an association to a small action;
• knowing when to stop.

A printed meaning for every card does not make the deck unusable, but it changes the method. I treat the creator’s caption as one possible prompt, not the correct answer.

Check licensing before public or commercial use

Buying a physical deck does not necessarily grant permission to scan the cards, show them in a recorded class, publish them online or include them in a paid course. Terms differ by creator and publisher. Check the box, manual or official product page for:

• public display rights;
• use in online sessions;
• recording and later publication;
• handouts or reproduced images;
• separate permission for commercial teaching.

When the wording is unclear, ask the rights holder in writing. This is not legal advice; it is a basic operational distinction between owning a deck and reproducing its artwork.

A ten-minute pre-purchase test

If sample cards are available, choose five to seven varied images.

1. Describe one card using observable facts only.
2. Tell two different stories that could be happening in the scene.
3. Check whether opposite emotional responses are possible.
4. Imagine a user unlike you. Is there room for them?
5. Notice one image you want to remove. Is it clear why, and is opting out supported?
6. Connect one card with two domains, such as work and relationships.
7. Write one question the image raises without answering it for the user.

If the artist has already supplied almost every answer, the deck may be a good illustration set and a limited tool for open association.

Worked example: two decks, two possible decisions

Consider a composite case. Marina wants her first deck for personal journalling and occasional small gatherings with adult friends.

Deck A contains cinematic scenes: stations, kitchens, windows, roads and people in motion. Ages vary. Some cards show loneliness and conflict. The guide clearly explains the right to reject a card. The licence permits personal and in-person facilitation but not posting scans.

Deck B consists of polished portraits with strongly coded emotions. Most people are young, and a feeling word is printed beneath each image. The booklet offers fixed meanings but says nothing about consent or boundaries.

The first reading is that A fits Marina better because the scenes support several plots and the method is clear. The second reading is that B may help her begin if she is afraid of “getting it wrong” and plans to work only by herself. Instead of deciding theoretically, she tests seven cards from each. With A, she can usually tell two stories. With B, she mostly repeats the printed label. She chooses A and sets a four-week review: has she used at least eight different cards, and have her notes contained language that was genuinely her own?

Common selection mistakes

Buying the cover. The cover shows style, not the range of the whole deck.

Assuming a themed deck is more professional. Specificity is useful only when it matches the question.

Ignoring the difficult cards. One unexpected image can change the safety of a group session.

Searching for completely neutral imagery. Neutrality is unrealistic. The task is to see the frame and protect the right to refuse.

Choosing only for yourself. Your associations do not describe your audience.

Skipping the licence. This matters particularly online, in recordings and in published materials.

Final checklist

Give one point for every “yes”:

• I can name the deck’s main job.
• I have seen a substantial sample, not only advertising images.
• The images support more than one story.
• The balance of portraits, scenes, resources and abstraction suits my work.
• The age and complexity fit the users.
• Sensitive content has been reviewed in advance.
• A user may reject a card without explanation.
• The deck does not present one narrow life as the only norm.
• The guide explains process and boundaries.
• The licence matches my format.
• I can turn an association into a small action.
• I have set a review date after real use.

A high score does not guarantee affection. It shows that the decision rests on more than beautiful packaging.

Questions people often ask

How many decks does a beginner need?

One is enough if it matches the task and you actually use its range. A second deck becomes useful when you can name a specific limitation of the first.

Is it reasonable to buy without seeing every card?

Yes, but the uncertainty is higher. Look for an official walkthrough, sample images and a content note. Do not rely on pirated scans.

Are captions helpful?

They can provide an entry point and can also become a ready-made answer. Try looking at the image first and reading the caption later.

What matters more, print quality or content?

Both affect use. Poor printing hides details, but expensive stock cannot compensate for a narrow or unsafe visual system.

Action, criterion and review date

Shortlist two decks rather than declaring an immediate winner. For each, complete one page: purpose, audience, strength, risk, licence and one sample card with two readings. Use the chosen deck for four weeks. The criterion is practical: you have worked with at least eight different images without merely copying a printed meaning. On the review date, decide what is genuinely missing—a new deck, or more attentive use of the one you already own.

In Reflecta you can save the question, two readings, the chosen action and a review date. A deck is useful not when it claims to speak for a person, but when it leaves enough space for that person to form a clearer sentence and test it against real life.

— Sofia Rowan, Official Metaphorical Associative Cards Practitioner at Reflecta