Explain why the specific, real-time link between the voice's content and the patient's ongoing behaviour is what defines running commentary voices, rather than simply the voice's third-person phrasing.

A voice could refer to the patient in the third person without being a running commentary — it might comment on the patient's character, past, or worth without any reference to what they are doing at that moment. What makes running commentary voices a specific, recognisable pattern is the tight, real-time coupling between the voice's content and the patient's ongoing action: the voice narrates behaviour essentially as it happens, moment to moment, in a mundane, observational way. This is why the defining test is not simply whether the voice uses third-person language, but whether it is actually tracking and describing what the patient is doing as they do it.