Distorted thinking
When we're upset, we often process
incoming information in a consistently biased
and distorted way that maintains our low
mood, angry behaviour or anxious state.
Some of the common distortions (also
known as thinking traps) found in emotional
problems include:
•
•
All-or-nothing thinking: seeing events in
extreme terms that allows for no shades of
grey or middle ground, for example, ‘If I can't
have her, then no one else will do.’ The
antidote to this kind of thinking is balanced,
non-extreme appraisals of a situation that
allow you more options to choose from, such
as, ‘She would have been the ideal partner
but I'm sure that I can be happy with other
women.’
Magnification/minimisation:
exaggerating
the negative and reducing the positive, for
example, ‘I stumbled over a sentence and
turned the talk into a disaster’ and ‘Some
people said they enjoyed the talk but what
do they know?’ What is required from you in
tackling these distortions is a sense of
•
•
proportion, such as thinking ‘Stumbling over
a sentence was just a hiccup and the rest of
the talk proceeded smoothly’ and ‘Some
people enjoyed the talk which indicates that
it went reasonably well.’
Personalisation: taking too much blame for
events you're not totally responsible for, like,
‘I made my wife have an affair.’ With
this distortion, it's important to distinguish
between
your
actual
and
presumed
responsibility for an event – you may have
contributed to marital discord by working
long hours at the office but your wife chose
to have an affair to satisfy her needs.
Emotional reasoning: you believe something
is true because you feel it so strongly. For
example, ‘I feel like a failure, so I must be
one.’ While feelings are important, they're
not facts or reflect objective reality; so it's
important
to
examine
evidence
dispassionately in order to arrive at an
accurate assessment of the situation, with
thoughts such as ‘It's true that I've had some
recent failures but they don't make me a
failure as a person. The part does not define
the whole.’ As Gilbert observes: ‘When we
•
•
use feelings to do the work of our rational
minds, we are liable to get into trouble’
(1997: 93).
Mind-reading: the ability to know the
thoughts of others without using the normal
means of communication, for example, ‘My
boss doesn't say so, but I know he thinks I'm
an idiot.’ Often, negative thoughts such as
these are in your mind and therefore you
imagine they must also be in the minds of
others. Instead of mind-reading, ask the
other person or wait until you have firm
evidence to support your beliefs. If you did
ask your boss and he denied thinking you
were an idiot and you didn't believe him,
you've gone back to mind-reading!
Labelling: you attach a global and negative
label to yourself based on specific
behaviours, for example, ‘I failed to pass the
exam, so that makes me a moron.’ Here
you're assuming your behaviour reflects your
totality as a complex and fallible (imperfect)
human being. As Leahy succinctly asks: ‘Is it
a behavior that fails or the entire person?’
(1996: 99). If you want to use labels, then
attach them to your behaviour instead of
•
•
yourself, for example, ‘I failed the exam but
that certainly doesn't make me a moron.’
Focusing on behaviour change (‘What can I
do to help me pass the exam at the second
attempt?’) is more constructive than
experiencing the consequences of selfcondemnation (‘As I'm a moron, there's
no point whatsoever in attempting the exam
again and bringing more disgrace on
myself’).
Discounting the positive: any positive
experiences or qualities are disregarded, for
example, ‘People say the workshop was a
success but they are just trying to make me
feel better because they know it was a
failure.’ Discounting the positive will make
your life seem relentlessly one-sided and
maintain your low mood. Including the
positive as well as the negative will lead to a
more balanced assessment of your present
difficulties (for example, ‘Certainly the
workshop had its flaws, but I very much
doubt that these people are all banding
together to lie to me’).
Shoulds and musts: these are usually in the
form of rigid rules of living that you impose
•
on yourself, others and/or life, for example,
‘I must never show any weaknesses’; ‘You
should always give me what I want’; ‘I must
not have too much pressure in my life.’ When
these rules are not obeyed, you will often
condemn yourself (thinking, for example,
‘I'm spineless’), others (‘You bastard’) or life
(‘I hate this stinking world’). Rigid musts and
shoulds make you subservient to a
totalitarian
system
of
thinking.
The
alternative to rigid rules are flexible ones
which allow you to acknowledge and act in
accordance with the reality that yourself,
others and/or the world rarely fit with how
things must or should be.
Mental filter: focusing exclusively on one
negative aspect of a situation and thereby
judging the whole situation by it, for
example, ‘I knocked over a glass of wine and
the whole evening was a disaster because of
it.’ Burns memorably likens mental filtering
to ‘the drop of ink that discolors the entire
beaker of water’ (1981: 40). Instead of
dwelling on one aspect of the situation, stand
back and view the whole situation in an
objective way, for example, ‘Spilling the wine
•
did lead to some embarrassment on my part
and some irritation on theirs, but once that
was over, we all seemed to have had a pretty
good time.’
Fortune-telling: believing you can predict the
future in a consistently accurate way. While
you probably do make some accurate
predictions such as ‘This new job is going to
entail a lot of hard work and responsibility’
others will be wide of the mark, particularly
when you're in a pessimistic or negative
frame of mind, for example, ‘I failed my
driving test. I'll never be able to pass it.’ You
may consider that your predictions are
accurate because you act in ways that make
them come true. Say you predict that you will
be unable to give up smoking, and when you
try to quit, you start feeling irritable and
moody – instead of tolerating these feelings
as part of the withdrawal symptoms, you
conclude that you cannot cope with them and
resume smoking. One way to assess how
good a fortune-teller you are is to write down
some of your predictions and review them
objectively in a few months' time to
determine how accurate they are.
•
•
Overgeneralisation:
drawing
sweeping
conclusions based on a single event or
insufficient
information,
for
example,
‘Because my relationship has ended, I'll
never find anyone else and I will always be
unhappy.’ Overgeneralisation can be brought
under control by examining what evidence
you have for your sweeping conclusions and
advancing alternative arguments in the light
of this review, such as ‘My relationship has
ended and it will be hard to find another
partner if all I do is mope about at home, but
I'm more likely to find someone else and
have some happiness if I start to socialise
again.’
Catastrophising: always assuming the worst
and, if it occurs, your inability to cope with it,
for example, ‘I'm sure my boyfriend is going
to dump me because he doesn't phone me as
much as he used to. If he dumps me, I'll
completely fall apart and never get over the
rejection.’ McKay, Davis and Fanning state
that ‘there are no limits to an active
catastrophic
imagination’
(2011:
30).
Challenging catastrophising involves, among
other things, asking what is the probable
outcome versus the possible outcome? In the
above example, the probable outcome might
be that the person is not going to be dumped,
but nonetheless, the relationship is going
through a difficult period. On the other hand,
the possible outcome might be rejection and
therefore the person needs to learn how to
adapt constructively to this grim reality in
order to tolerate rejection and not fall apart
(de-catastrophising). It's important that you
learn to play the odds more accurately: how
many of your catastrophic predictions have
actually occurred? (possible answer: ‘One,
but it wasn't as bad as I thought’). Next time
you catastrophise, remember the odds, that
is, remember that it's highly unlikely that the
dreaded outcome will occur.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment