Cognitive Distortions Overview
Research by RKT
Check my Thinking
At least with myself, it is...
Understanding Cognitive Distortions, identifying Cognitive Distortions and Conquering Cognitive distortions is a key to a positive healthy mental health.
This page consists of a plethora of links and resources to delve into just this.
In the words of the stoic philosopher Epictetus 50 AD-
"We are not disturbed with what happens to us, but by our thoughts on WHAT happens to us."
If indeed this understanding of the human mind and how to deal with stress has been around since 50 AD, it shows that we as humans are always on the quest to understand our selves and our thinking.
May these links and ideas help you and your journey.
Richard Kerry Thompson
What is a Cognitive Distortion
A cognitive distortion is an exaggerated or irrational thought pattern involved in the onset and perpetuation of psychopathological states, especially those more influenced by psychosocial factors, such as depression and anxiety.[1] Psychiatrist Aaron T. Beck laid the groundwork for the study of these distortions, and his student David D. Burns continued research on the topic. In his book Feeling Good: The New Mood Therapy, Burns described personal and professional anecdotes related to cognitive distortions and their elimination.[2]
Cognitive distortions are thoughts that cause individuals to perceive reality inaccurately. According to Beck's cognitive model, a negative outlook on reality, sometimes called negative schemas (or schemata), is a factor in symptoms of emotional dysfunction and poorer subjective well-being. Specifically, negative thinking patterns reinforce negative emotions and thoughts.[3] During difficult circumstances, these distorted thoughts can contribute to an overall negative outlook on the world and a depressive or anxious mental state. According to hopelessness theory and Beck's theory, the meaning or interpretation that people give to their experience importantly influences whether they will become depressed and whether they will suffer severe, repeated, or long-duration episodes of depression.[4]
Challenging and changing cognitive distortions is a key element of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT).
History
History[edit]
In 1957 Albert Ellis, though he did not know it yet, would aid cognitive therapy in correcting Cognitive Distortions and indirectly helping David Burns in writing The Feeling Good Handbook. Ellis created what he called the ABC Technique of rational beliefs. The ABC stand for (A)Activating Event, (B)beliefs that are irrational and (C) the consequences that come from the belief. Ellis wanted to prove that the activating event is not what caused the emotional behavior or the consequences, but the beliefs and how the person irrationally perceive the events that aids the consequences.[7] With this model Ellis attempted to use Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT) with his patients, in order to help them "reframe" or reinterpret the experience in a more rational manner. In this model Ellis explains it all for his clients, while Beck helps his clients figure this out on their own.[8] Beck first started to notice these automatic distorted thought processes when practicing psychoanalysis while his patients followed the rule of saying anything that comes to mind. Aaron realized that his patients had irrational fears, thoughts, and perceptions that were automatic. Beck began noticing his automatic thought processes that he knew his patients had but did not report. Most of the time the thoughts were biased against themselves and very erroneous.[9]
Beck believed that the negative schemas developed and manifested themselves in the perspective and behavior. The distorted thought processes lead to focusing on degrading the self, amplifying minor external setbacks, experiences other's harmless comments as ill-intended, while simultaneously seeing self as inferior. Inevitably cognitions are reflected in their behavior with a reduce desire to care for self, to seek pleasure and give up. These exaggerated perceptions due to cognition feel real and accurate because the schemas after being reinforced through the behavior tend to become automatic and do not allow time for reflection.[10] This cycle is also known as Beck's Cognitive Triad, focused on the theory that the person's negative schema applied to the self, the future, and the environment.[11]
In 1972, psychiatrist, psychoanalyst, and cognitive therapy scholar Aaron T. Beck published Depression: Causes and Treatment.[12] He was dissatisfied with the conventional Freudian treatment of depression, because there was no empirical evidence for the success of Freudian psychoanalysis. Beck's book provided a comprehensive and empirically supported theoretical model for depression—its potential causes, symptoms, and treatments. In Chapter 2, titled "Symptomatology of Depression", he described "cognitive manifestations" of depression, including low self-evaluation, negative expectations, self-blame and self-criticism, indecisiveness, and distortion of the body image.[12]
When Burns published Feeling Good: The New Mood Therapy, it made Aaron T. Beck's approach to distorted thinking widely known and popularized.[13][14] Burns sold over 4 million copies of the book in the United States alone. It was a book commonly "prescribed" for patients who have cognitive distortions that have led to depression. Beck approved of the book, saying that it would help others alter their depressed moods by simplifying the extensive study and research that had taken place since shortly after Beck had started as a student and practitioner of psychoanalytic psychiatry. Nine years later The Feeling Good Handbook was published, which was also built on Beck's work and includes a list of ten specific cognitive distortions that will be discussed throughout this article.[15]
Negative Self Talk
“I have the worst luck in the entire world.“
“I just failed that math test. I’m no good at school, and I might as well quit.“
“She’s late. It’s raining. She has hydroplaned and her car is upside down in a ditch.“
These are all prime examples of cognitive distortions: thought patterns that cause people to view reality in inaccurate — usually negative — ways.
In short, they’re habitual errors in thinking. When you’re experiencing a cognitive distortion, the way you interpret events is usually negatively biased.
Most people experience cognitive distortions from time to time. But if they’re reinforced often enough, they can increase anxiety, deepen depression, cause relationship difficulties, and lead to a host of other complications.
Where do they come from?
Where do they come from?
Research suggestsTrusted Source that people develop cognitive distortions as a way of coping with adverse life events. The more prolonged and severe those adverse events are, the more likely it is that one or more cognitive distortions will form.
One early theoryTrusted Source even suggests that human beings might have developed cognitive distortions as a kind of evolutionary survival method.
In other words, stress could cause people to adapt their thinking in ways that are useful for their immediate survival. But these thoughts aren’t rational or healthy long-term.
What are the different types of cognitive distortions?
What are the different types of cognitive distortions?
In the 1960s, psychiatrist Aaron Beck pioneered research on cognitive distortions in his development of a treatment method known as cognitive behavioral therapy.
Since then, researchers have identified at least 10 common distorted thinking patterns, which are listed below:
Polarized thinking
Polarized thinking
Sometimes called all-or-nothing, or black and white thinking, this distortion occurs when people habitually think in extremes.
When you’re convinced that you’re either destined for success or doomed to failure, that the people in your life are either angelic or evil, you’re probably engaging in polarized thinking.
This kind of distortion is unrealistic and often unhelpful because most of the time reality exists somewhere between the two extremes.
Overgeneralization
Overgeneralization
When people overgeneralize, they reach a conclusion about one event and then incorrectly apply that conclusion across the board.
For example, you make a low score on one math test and conclude that you’re hopeless at math in general. You have a negative experience in one relationship and develop a belief that you just aren’t good at relationships at all.
Overgeneralization has been associatedTrusted Source with post-traumatic stress disorder and other anxiety disorders.
Catastrophizing
Catastrophizing
This distorted type of thinking leads people to dread or assume the worst when faced with the unknown. When people catastrophize, ordinary worries can quickly escalate.
For instance, an expected check doesn’t arrive in the mail. A person who catastrophizes may begin to fear it will never arrive, and that as a consequence it won’t be possible to pay rent and the whole family will be evicted.
It’s easy to dismiss catastrophizing as a hysterical over-reaction, but people who have developed this cognitive distortion may have experienced repeated adverse events — like chronic pain or childhood trauma — so often that they fear the worst in many situations.
Personalization
Personalization
One of the most common errors in thinking is taking things personally when they’re not connected to or caused by you at all.
You may be engaging in personalization when you blame yourself for circumstances that aren’t your fault, or are beyond your control.
Another example is when you incorrectly assume that you’ve been intentionally excluded or targeted.
Personalization has been associated with heightened anxiety and depression.
Mind reading
Mind reading
When people assume they know what others are thinking, they’re resorting to mind reading.
It can be hard to distinguish between mind reading and empathy — the ability to perceive and understand what others may be feeling.
To tell the difference between the two, it might be helpful to consider all the evidence, not just the evidence that confirms your suspicions or beliefs.
At least one studyTrusted Source has found that mind reading is more common among children than among adolescents or adults and is associated with anxiety.
Mental filtering
Mental filtering
Another distorted thought pattern is the tendency to ignore positives and focus exclusively on negatives.
Interpreting circumstances using a negative mental filter is not only inaccurate, it can worsen anxiety and depression symptoms.
ResearchersTrusted Source have found that having a negative perspective of yourself and your future can cause feelings of hopelessness. These thoughts may become extreme enough to trigger suicidal thoughts.
Discounting the positive
Discounting the positive
Like mental filters, discounting the positive involves a negative bias in thinking.
People who tend to discount the positive don’t ignore or overlook something positive. Instead, they explain it away as a fluke or sheer luck.
Instead of acknowledging that a good outcome is the result of skill, smart choices, or determination, they assume that it must be an accident or some type of anomaly.
When people believe they have no control over their circumstances, it can reduce motivation and cultivate a sense of “learned helplessness.”
“Should” statements
“Should” statements
When people find themselves thinking in terms of what “should” and “ought” to be said or done, it’s possible that a cognitive distortion is at work.
It’s rarely helpful to chastise yourself with what you “should” be able to do in a given situation. “Should” and “ought” statements are often used by the thinker to take on a negative view of their life.
These types of thoughts are often rooted in internalized family or cultural expectations which might not be appropriate for an individual.
Such thoughts can diminish your self-esteem and raise anxiety levels.
Emotional reasoning
Emotional reasoning
Emotional reasoning is the false belief that your emotions are the truth — that the way you feel about a situation is a reliable indicator of reality.
While it’s important to listen to, validate, and express emotion, it’s equally important to judge reality based on rational evidence.
Researchers have foundTrusted Source that emotional reasoning is a common cognitive distortion. It’s a pattern of thinking that’s used by people with and without anxiety or depression.
Labeling
Labeling
Labeling is a cognitive distortion in which people reduce themselves or other people to a single — usually negative — characteristic or descriptor, like “drunk” or “failure.”
When people label, they define themselves and others based on a single event or behavior.
Labeling can cause people to berate themselves. It can also cause the thinker to misunderstand or underestimate others.
This misperception can cause real problems between people. No one wants to be labeled.
How can you change these distortions?
How can you change these distortions?
The good news is that cognitive distortions can be corrected over time.
Here are some steps you can take if you want to change thought patterns that may not be helpful:
Identify the troublesome thought
Identify the troublesome thought
When you realize a thought is causing anxiety or dampening your mood, a good first step is to figure out what kind of distorted thinking is taking place.
To better understand how your thoughts affect your emotions and behavior, you may want to consider reading “Feeling Good: The New Mood Therapy” by clinical psychologist Dr. David Burns. This book is considered by many to be the definitive work on this subject.
Try reframing the situation
Try reframing the situation
Look for shades of gray, alternative explanations, objective evidence, and positive interpretations to expand your thinking.
You might find it helpful to write down your original thought, followed by three or four alternative interpretations.
Perform a cost-benefit analysis
Perform a cost-benefit analysis
People usually repeat behaviors that deliver some benefit.
You might find it helpful to analyze how your thought patterns have helped you cope in the past. Do they give you a sense of control in situations where you feel powerless? Do they allow you to avoid taking responsibility or taking necessary risks?
You can also ask yourself what engaging in cognitive distortion costs you. Weighing the pros and cons of your thought patterns could motivate you to change them.
Consider cognitive behavioral therapy
Consider cognitive behavioral therapy
Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is a widely recognized form of talk therapy in which people learn to identify, interrupt, and change unhealthy thinking patterns.
If you’d like some guidance in identifying and changing distorted thinking, you might find this type of therapy useful.
CBT usually focuses on specific goals. It generally takes place for a predetermined number of sessions and may take a few weeks to a few months to see results.
Look for a therapist who’s properly certified and licensed in the state where you live. Your therapist should be trained in CBT. Try to find a therapist who has experience treating your type of thinking pattern or issue.
The bottom line
The bottom line
Cognitive distortions are habitual ways of thinking that are often inaccurate and negatively biased.
Cognitive distortions usually develop over time in response to adverse events. There are at least 10 common distorted thinking patterns that have been identified by researchers.
If you’re ready to tackle a cognitive distortion, you may want to try some of the methods found in cognitive behavioral therapy. This type of therapy has been successful in helping people identify cognitive distortions and retrain themselves to look at the world in a clearer, more rational way.
****
10 Proven Methods for Fixing Cognitive Distortions
By John M. Grohol, Psy.D. ~ 7 MIN READ
Last updated: 23 Feb 2020
Cognitive distortions have a way of playing havoc with our lives if we let them. A cognitive distortion takes place in our minds when we experience an upsetting event in our lives — a disagreement at work, an argument with a partner, a poor result in school — and we think about it in a way that reinforces negativity and feeling bad. While some may believe that “feeling bad’ is a necessary component of learning from our mistakes, many get stuck in a repetitive, reinforcing pattern of feeling bad about themselves. This can lead to lower self-esteem and a self-fulfilling prophecy in future interactions.
Cognitive distortions — also known as “stinkin’ thinkin'” — can be undone, but it takes effort and lots of practice, every day. If you want to stop the irrational thinking, you can start by trying out the exercises below.
How to Fix Common Cognitive Distortions
You can use any one or a combination of the methods described below to combat irrational, automatic thoughts and cognitive distortions. Try a few of them out and look for the one that seems to work best for you, because different people respond to different ways of fixing their irrational thoughts.
1. Identify the Cognitive Distortion
The most important step of fixing any problem in your life is identifying exactly what the problem is and how extensive it is in your life. An auto mechanic starts with a diagnostic assessment of your car when it has a problem.
In this same manner, you need to identify and track the cognitive distortions in your daily thinking first, before you start working to change them. You do this by creating a list of the troublesome thoughts throughout the day, as you’re having them. This will allow you to examine them later for matches with a list of cognitive distortions.
An examination of your cognitive distortions allows you to see which distortions that you prefer. Additionally, this process allows you to think about each problem or predicament in a more natural or realistic manner. David Burns called this exercise keeping a daily mood log, but nowadays you can use an app or anything that’s convenient to record your cognitive distortions.
2. Examine the Evidence
Much like a judge overseeing a trial, the next step is to remove yourself from the emotionality of the upsetting event or episode of irrational thinking in order to examine the evidence more objectively. A thorough examination of an experience allows you to identify the basis for your distorted thoughts. If you are overly self-critical, you should identify a number of experiences and situations where you had success.
One effective method for examining the evidence is to look at individual thoughts connected to the event, and objectively decide whether those statements reflect an opinion or stone cold fact. For example, statements such as “I’m selfish” and “There’s something wrong with me” are opinions. “My co-worker spoke in angry voice toward me” and “I forgot to take out the trash” are facts. Segregating facts from opinions can help you determine which are likely to be a component of a cognitive distortion (the opinions) and therefore need your focus and efforts to undo.
Download now: Fixing Cognitive Distortions Worksheet
3. Double Standard Method
An alternative to “self-talk” that is harsh and demeaning is to talk to ourselves in the same compassionate and caring way that we would talk with a friend in a similar situation. We are frequently much harder on ourselves than the people we care about in our lives, whether it be a friend or family member. We would never think of speaking to a close friend in the way we speak to ourselves in our own mind.
Instead of treating yourself with a different standard than what you hold everyone else to, why not use one single standard for everyone including yourself? Isn’t that more fair than using a double-standard? Give yourself the same encouragement that you would a trusted friend.
Imagine studying for an exam and telling a friend, “You’re going to screw this up, just like you screw everything else up!” Yet these are the same kinds of thoughts that run through many students’ minds before an exam. Can you answer such automatic, negative thoughts back with a rational response? For example, “You’re going to do well on this exam, I just know it. You studied hard for it and did your best to memorize the material. I believe in you.”
4. Thinking in Shades of Gray
Learning to undo black-and-white (or polarized) thinking can be challenging, because our minds take cognitive shortcuts to simplify processing of stimuli in order to hurry our ability to make a decision or choose a response. Black-and-white thinking can sometimes serve a good purpose, but it often leads a person down a path of irrational belief too.
Instead of thinking about a problem or predicament in an either-or polarity, thinking in shades of gray requires us to evaluate things on a scale of 0 through 100. When a plan or goal is not fully realized, think about and evaluate the experience as a partial success on this kind of scale.
For example, someone might think, “You can’t do anything right. You just blew your diet by having that second bite of ice cream.” What is the likelihood that a person’s entire dieting routine — that they’ve been following rigorously for months — is now made worthless by a single additional bite of ice cream? On our scale of 0 through 100, it might be about 1 percent likelihood.
5. Experimental Method
Can you test whether your irrational thoughts have any basis in fact outside of a trial? You sure can, by using the same kinds of methods that science uses in order to test a hypothesis.
For example, let’s say you’ve been putting off organizing your digital photos because it’ll be “too hard” or “I just can’t do it.” What if the task was broken down into smaller parts, such as tackling just a single month at a time in one sitting? Is the thought that it’s just “too hard” still true, now that you’ve broken the task into smaller, attainable components?
In another example, imagine a person who believes over time that she is no longer liked by her friends because they never connect with her on social media or call. Could that person test whether it was true that her friends no longer like her? What if she reached out to them and asked them out to lunch or for drinks one day? While it’s not likely all of her friends will accept an invitation, it’s likely at least one or two of them will, providing clear evidence in support of the fact that her friends still like her.
6. Survey Method
Similar to the experimental method, the survey method is focused on asking others in a similar situation about their experiences to determine how irrational our thoughts might be. Using this method, a person seeks the opinions of others regarding whether their thoughts and attitudes are realistic.
For example, a person might believe, “Romantic partners should never fight. And if they do fight, they should never go to bed angry at one another.” Who could they survey to see whether this is true or not? A few friends who appear to be in happy relationships might be a good start. That person would soon realize that all couples fight, and while it may be a good idea not to go to bed angry, plenty of people do and their relationship is just fine despite that.
If you want to double-check on the rationality of your thought, check in with a few trusted friends to see what their opinions and experiences are.
7. The Semantic Method
When a person engages in a series of should statements (“I should do this” or “I shouldn’t do that”), they are applying a set of unwritten rules to their behavior that may make little sense to others. Should statements imply a judgment about your or another person’s behavior — one that may be unhelpful and even hurtful.
Every time you find yourself using a should statement, try substituting “It would be nice if…” instead. This semantic difference can work wonders in your own mind, as you stop “should-ing” yourself to death and start looking at the world in a different, more positive manner. Shoulds make a person feel bad and guilty about themselves. “Wouldn’t it be nice and more healthy if I started watching what I ate more?” puts the thought into a more curious, inquisitive phrasing — one where the answer might be yes, but might also be no (for instance, if you’ve just started cancer treatment, now’s not a good time to change your eating habits).
8. Definitions
For people who are more intellectual and like to argue about minutiae, this method of arguing with your cognitive distortions might come in handy. What does it mean to define ourselves as “inferior,” “a loser,” “a fool,” or “abnormal.” An examination of these and other global labels may reveal that they more closely represent specific behaviors, or an identifiable behavior pattern, instead of the total person.
When a person starts delving into the definition of a label and asking questions about those definitions, the results can be surprising. For instance, what it does it mean to think of yourself as “inferior”? Inferior to who? Others at your workplace? What are their specific work experiences and backgrounds? Aren’t they all inferior to someone else too? The more questions you ask when challenging a definition or label, the more you may come to realize the uselessness of such labels — especially when applied to ourselves.
9. Re-attribution
In personalization and blaming cognitive distortions, a person will point the finger to themselves for all of the negative things they experience, no matter what the actual cause.
In re-attribution, a person identifies external factors and other individuals that contributed to the problem or event. Regardless of the degree of responsibility a person assumes, a person’s energy is best utilized in the pursuit of resolutions to problems or identifying ways to cope with predicaments. By assigning responsibility accordingly, you’re not trying to deflect blame, but ensure you’re not blaming yourself entirely for something that wasn’t entirely your fault.
For example, if a project at work failed to get done on time and you were one of the members of the 5-member team, you’re one-fifth to blame for the project missing its deadline. From an objective perspective, you are not entirely to blame for the missed deadline.
10. Cost-Benefit Analysis
This method for answering an irrational belief relies on motivation rather than facts to help a person undo the cognitive distortion. In this technique, it is helpful to list the advantages and disadvantages of feelings, thoughts, and behaviors. A cost-benefit analysis will help to figure out what a person is gaining from feeling bad, distorted thinking, and inappropriate behavior.
“How will it help me to believe this negative, irrational thought, and how will it hurt me?” If you find the disadvantages of believing a thought outweigh the advantages, you’ll find it easier to talk back and refute the irrational belief.
Download now: Cost Benefit Analysis Worksheet
****
The cognitive distortions listed below[15] are categories of automatic thinking, and are to be distinguished from logical fallacies.[16]
All-or-nothing thinking[edit]
Main article: Splitting (psychology)
This is also referred to as “Splitting,"[17] “Black-and-White Thinking,"[3] and "Polarized Thinking."[18] Someone with the All-or-Nothing Thinking distortion looks at life in black and white categories.[15] Either they are a success or a failure; either they are good or bad; there is no in-between. According to one article, “Because there is always someone who is willing to criticize, this tends to collapse into a tendency for polarized people to view themselves as a total failure. Polarized thinkers have difficulty with the notion of being ‘good enough’ or a partial success."[19]
- Example (from The Feeling Good Handbook): A girl eats a spoonful of ice cream. She thinks she is a complete failure for breaking her diet. She becomes so depressed that she ends up eating the whole quart of ice cream.[15]
This example captures the polarized nature of this distortion--the person believes they are totally inadequate if they fall short of perfection. In order to combat this distortion, Burns suggests thinking of the world in terms of shades of gray.[15] Rather than viewing herself as a complete failure for eating a spoonful of ice cream, the girl in the example could still recognize her overall effort to diet as at least a partial success.
This distortion is commonly found in perfectionists.[13]
Overgeneralizing[edit]
Making hasty generalizations from insufficient evidence. Seeing a “single negative event” as a “never-ending pattern of defeat."[15] Drawing a very broad conclusion from a single incident or a single piece of evidence. Even if something bad happens only once, it is expected to happen over and over again.[3]
- Example 1: A young woman is asked out on a first date, but not a second one. She is distraught as she tells her friend, “This always happens to me! I’ll never find love!”
- Example 2: A woman is lonely and often spends most of her time at home. Her friends sometimes ask her to dinner and to meet new people. She feels it is useless to even try. No one really could like her. And anyway, all people are the same; petty and selfish.[20]
One suggestion to combat this distortion is to “Examine the Evidence” by performing an accurate analysis of one’s situation. This aids in avoiding exaggerating one’s circumstances.[15]
Filtering[edit]
Filtering distortions occur when an individual dwells only on the negative details of a situation and filters out the positive aspects.[15]
- Example: Andy gets mostly compliments and positive feedback about a presentation he has done at work, but he also has received a small piece of criticism. For several days following his presentation, Andy dwells on this one negative reaction, forgetting all of the positive reactions that he had also been given.[15]
The Feeling Good Handbook notes that filtering is like a “drop of ink that discolors a beaker of water."[15] One suggestion to combat filtering is a cost-benefit analysis. A person with this distortion may want to sit down and assess whether filtering out the positive and focusing on the negative is helping or hurting them in the long run.[15]
Disqualifying the positive[edit]
Disqualifying the positive refers to rejecting positive experiences by insisting they "don't count" for some reason or other. Negative belief is maintained despite contradiction by everyday experiences. Disqualifying the positive may be the most common fallacy in the cognitive distortion range; it is often analyzed with "always being right", a type of distortion where a person is in an all-or-nothing self-judgment. People in this situation show signs of depression.
- Examples:
- "I will never be as good as Jane"
- "Anyone could have done as well"[15]
- "They are just congratulating me to be nice"[21]
Jumping to conclusions[edit]
Main article: Jumping to conclusions
Reaching preliminary conclusions (usually negative) with little (if any) evidence. Two specific subtypes are identified:
- Mind reading: Inferring a person's possible or probable (usually negative) thoughts from his or her behavior and nonverbal communication; taking precautions against the worst suspected case without asking the person.
- Example 1: A student assumes that the readers of his or her paper have already made up their minds concerning its topic, and, therefore, writing the paper is a pointless exercise.[16]
- Example 2: Kevin assumes that because he sits alone at lunch, everyone else must think he is a loser. (This can encourage self-fulfilling prophecy; Kevin may not initiate social contact because of his fear that those around him already perceive him negatively).[22]
- Fortune-telling: predicting outcomes (usually negative) of events
- Example : A depressed person tells themselves they will never improve; they will continue to be depressed for their whole life.[15]
One way to combat this distortion is to ask, “If this is true, does it say more about me or them?[23]”
Magnification and minimization[edit]
Main articles: Exaggeration and Minimisation (psychology)
Giving proportionally greater weight to a perceived failure, weakness or threat, or lesser weight to a perceived success, strength or opportunity, so that the weight differs from that assigned by others, such as "making a mountain out of a molehill". In depressed clients, often the positive characteristics of other people are exaggerated and their negative characteristics are understated.
- Catastrophizing – Giving greater weight to the worst possible outcome, however unlikely, or experiencing a situation as unbearable or impossible when it is just uncomfortable
Emotional reasoning[edit]
Main article: Emotional reasoning
In the emotional reasoning distortion, it is assumed that feelings expose the true nature of things and experience reality as a reflection of emotionally linked thoughts; something is believed true solely based on a feeling.
- Examples: "I feel stupid, therefore I must be stupid".[3] Feeling fear of flying in planes, and then concluding that planes must be a dangerous way to travel.[15] Feeling overwhelmed by the prospect of cleaning one's house, therefore concluding that it's hopeless to even start cleaning.[20]
Making "must" or "should" statements[edit]
Making "must" or "should" statements was included by Albert Ellis in his rational emotive behavior therapy (REBT), an early form of CBT; he termed it "musturbation". Michael C. Graham called it "expecting the world to be different than it is".[24] It can be seen as demanding particular achievements or behaviors regardless of the realistic circumstances of the situation.
- Example: After a performance, a concert pianist believes he or she should not have made so many mistakes.[20]
- In Feeling Good: The New Mood Therapy, David Burns clearly distinguished between pathological "should statements", moral imperatives, and social norms.
A related cognitive distortion, also present in Ellis' REBT, is a tendency to "awfulize"; to say a future scenario will be awful, rather than to realistically appraise the various negative and positive characteristics of that scenario. According to Burns, “must’ and “should” statements are negative because they cause the person to feel guilty and upset at themselves. Some people also direct this distortion at other people, which can cause feelings of anger and frustration when that other person does not do what they should have done. He also mentions how this type of thinking can lead to rebellious thoughts. In other words, trying to whip oneself into doing something with “shoulds” may cause one to desire just the opposite.[15]
Personalization and blaming[edit]
Main article: Blame
Personalization is assigning personal blame disproportionate to the level of control a person realistically has in a given situation.
- Example 1: A foster child assumes that he/she has not been adopted because he/she is not “loveable enough.”
- Example 2: A child has bad grades. His/her mother believes it is because she is not a good enough parent.[15]
Blaming is the opposite of personalization. In the blaming distortion, the disproportionate level of blame is placed upon other people, rather than oneself.[15] In this way, the person avoids taking personal responsibility, making way for a “victim mentality.”
- Example: Placing blame for marital problems entirely on one’s spouse.[15]
Always being right[edit]
In this cognitive distortion, being wrong is unthinkable. This distortion is characterized by actively trying to prove one's actions or thoughts to be correct, and sometimes prioritizing self-interest over the feelings of another person.[3]. In this Cognitive Distortion, the facts that oneself has about their surroundings are always right while other people opinions and perspectives are wrongly seen [25]
Fallacy of change[edit]
Relying on social control to obtain cooperative actions from another person[3] The underlying assumption of this thinking style is that one's happiness depends on the actions of others. The fallacy of change also assumes that other people should change to suit one's own interests automatically and/or that it is fair to pressure them to change. It may be present in most abusive relationships in which partners' "visions" of each other are tied into the belief that happiness, love, trust, and perfection would just occur once they or the other person change aspects of their beings.[26]
Fallacy of fairness[edit]
Fallacy of fairness is the belief that life should be fair. When life is perceived to be unfair, an angry emotional state is produced which may lead to attempts to correct the situation.[3] There are few situations in which "universal justice" can be applied or excluded. Justice comes from the late Old English justice ‘administration of the law’, fairness and justice vary between culture, people, or country, it is seen that they need to be attributed in any situation.[27]
Labeling and mislabeling[edit]
Main article: Labeling theory
A form of overgeneralization; attributing a person's actions to his or her character instead of to an attribute. Rather than assuming the behaviour to be accidental or otherwise extrinsic, one assigns a label to someone or something that is based on the inferred character of that person or thing.
Cognitive restructuring[edit]
Cognitive restructuring (CR) is a popular form of therapy used to identify and reject maladaptive cognitive distortions[28] and is typically used with individuals diagnosed with depression.[29] In CR, the therapist and client first examine a stressful event or situation reported by the client. For example, a depressed male college student who experiences difficulty in dating might believe that his "worthlessness" causes women to reject him. Together, therapist and client might then create a more realistic cognition, e.g., "It is within my control to ask girls on dates. However, even though there are some things I can do to influence their decisions, whether or not they say yes is largely out of my control. Thus, I am not responsible if they decline my invitation." CR therapies are designed to eliminate "automatic thoughts" that include clients' dysfunctional or negative views. According to Beck, doing so reduces feelings of worthlessness, anxiety, and anhedonia that are symptomatic of several forms of mental illness.[30] CR is the main component of Beck's and Burns's cognitive behavioral therapy.[31]
Narcissistic defense[edit]
Main article: Narcissistic defences
Those diagnosed with narcissistic personality disorder tend to view themselves as unrealistically superior and overemphasize their strengths but understate their weaknesses.[30] As such, narcissists use exaggeration and minimization to defend against psychic pain.[32][33]
Decatastrophizing[edit]
Main article: Decatastrophizing
In cognitive therapy, decatastrophizing or decatastrophization is a cognitive restructuring technique that may be used to treat cognitive distortions, such as magnification and catastrophizing,[34] commonly seen in psychological disorders like anxiety[29] and psychosis.[35] Major features of these disorders are the subjective report of being overwhelmed by life circumstances and the incapability of affecting them.
The goal of CR is to help the client change his or her perceptions to render the felt experience as less significant.
Criticism[edit]
Main article: Cognitive behavioral therapy § Criticisms
Common criticisms of the diagnosis of cognitive distortion relate to epistemology and the theoretical basis. The implicit assumption behind the diagnosis is that the therapist is infallible and that only the world view of the therapist is correct. If the perceptions of the patient differ from those of the therapist, it may not be because of intellectual malfunctions but because the patient has different experiences. Critics claim that there is no evidence that patients suffering from e.g. depression have dysfunctional cognitive abilities. Actually, some depressed subjects appear to be “sadder but wiser”.[36]