Skip to main content

5 common cognitive distortions- how our thoughts influence our mental health

What’s a 'cognitive distortion' and why do so many people have them? Cognitive distortions are ways that our thought patterns can convince us that something is true or false. These are typically thoughts that occur automatically, and are usually used to reinforce negative thinking or emotions. Our automatic thoughts can feel rational and accurate, and most of all, they can feel factual. But with examination, we can often find evidence that our thoughts are NOT factual, but based on a set of negative thought patterns that have developed based on our feelings, rather than factual evidence.



Cognitive distortions are at the core of what many cognitive-behavioral and other kinds of therapists try and help a person learn to change in psychotherapy. By learning to correctly identify distorted thoughts, a person can then respond to the disorted thoughts by balancing them with thoughts that are more balanced, and based on fact/reality rather than negative feelings. By refuting negative thoughts over and over again, they will slowly diminish overtime and be automatically replaced by more rational, balanced thinking.



Aaron Beck first proposed the theory behind cognitive distortions and David Burns was responsible for popularizing it with common names and examples for the distortions.



1. Filtering.

We take the negative details and magnify them while filtering out all positive aspects of a situation. For instance, a person may pick out a single, unpleasant detail and dwell on it exclusively so that their vision of reality becomes darkened or distorted.



2. Polarized Thinking.

Things are either “black-or-white.” We have to be perfect or we’re a failure–there is no middle ground. You place people or situations in “either/or” categories, with no shades of gray or allowing for the complexity of most people and situations. If your performance falls short of perfect, you see yourself as a total failure.



3. Overgeneralization.

We come to a general conclusion based on a single incident or piece of evidence. If something bad happens once, we expect it to happen over and over again. A person may see a single, unpleasant event as a never-ending pattern of defeat.



4. Jumping to Conclusions.

Without individuals saying so, we know what they are feeling and why they act the way they do. In particular, we are able to determine how people are feeling toward us. For example, a person may conclude that someone is reacting negatively toward them and don’t actually bother to find out if they are correct. Another example is a person may anticipate that things will turn out badly, and will feel convinced that their prediction is already an established fact.



5. Catastrophizing.

We expect disaster to strike, no matter what. This is also referred to as “magnifying or minimizing.” We hear about a problem and use what if questions (e.g., “What if tragedy strikes?” “What if it happens to me?”).



For example, a person might exaggerate the importance of insignificant events (such as their mistake, or someone else’s achievement). Or they may inappropriately shrink the magnitude of significant events until they appear tiny (for example, a person’s own desirable qualities or someone else’s imperfections).



6. Personalization.

Thinking that everything people do or say is some kind of reaction to us. We also compare ourselves to others trying to determine who is smarter, better looking, etc. A person sees themselves as the cause of some negative external event that they were in fact, not resposible for. For example, “We were late to the dinner party and caused the hostess to overcook the meal. If I had only pushed my husband to leave on time, this wouldn’t have happened.”



7. Control Fallacies.

If we feel externally controlled, we see ourselves as helpless a victim of fate. For example, “I can’t help it if the quality of the work is poor, my boss demanded I work overtime on it.” The fallacy of internal control has us assuming responsibility for the pain and happiness of everyone around us. For example, “Why aren’t you happy? Is it because of something I did?”



8. Fallacy of Fairness.

We feel resentful because we think we know what is fair, but other people won’t agree with us. We are convinced that “Life is always fair.” People who go through life applying a measuring ruler against every situation judging its “fairness” will often feel badly and negative because of it.



9. Blaming.

We hold other people responsible for our pain, or take the other track and blame ourselves for every problem. For example, “Stop making me feel bad about myself!” Nobody can “make” us feel any particular way — only we have control over our own emotions and emotional reactions.



10. Shoulds.

We have a list of ironclad rules about how others and we should behave. People who break the rules make us angry, and we feel guilty when we violate these rules. A person may often believe they are trying to motivate themselves with shoulds and shouldn’ts, as if they have to be punished before they can do anything.

For example, “I really should exercise. I shouldn’t be so lazy.” Musts and oughts are also offenders. The emotional consequence is guilt, which does not propel us to change, but only serves to make us feel badly.



11. Emotional Reasoning.

We believe that what we feel must be true automatically. If we feel stupid and boring, then we must be stupid and boring. You assume that your unhealthy emotions reflect the way things really are — “I feel it, therefore it must be true.”



12. Fallacy of Change.

We expect that other people will change to suit us if we just pressure or cajole them enough. We need to change people because our hopes for happiness seem to depend entirely on them.



13. Global Labeling.

We generalize one or two qualities into a negative global judgment. These are extreme forms of generalizing, and are also referred to as “labeling” and “mislabeling.” Instead of describing an error in context of a specific situation, a person will attach an unhealthy label to themselves.

For example, they may say, “I’m a loser” in a situation where they failed at a specific task. When someone else’s behavior rubs a person the wrong way, they may attach an unhealthy label to him, such as “He’s a real jerk.” Mislabeling involves describing an event with language that is highly colored and emotionally loaded. For example, instead of saying someone drops her children off at daycare every day, a person who is mislabeling might say that “she abandons her children to strangers.”



14. Always Being Right.

We are continually on trial to prove that our opinions and actions are correct. Being wrong is unthinkable and we will go to any length to demonstrate our rightness. For example, “I don’t care how badly arguing with me makes you feel, I’m going to win this argument no matter what because I’m right.” Being right often is more important than the feelings of others around a person who engages in this cognitive distortion, even loved ones.



15. Heaven’s Reward Fallacy.

We expect our sacrifice and self-denial to pay off, as if someone is keeping score. We feel bitter when the reward doesn’t come.

This article was composed by Dr. Christina Villarreal, Clinical Psychologist in Oakland, CA



References:



Beck, A. T. (1976). Cognitive therapies and emotional disorders. New York: New American Library.



Burns, D. D. (1980). Feeling good: The new mood therapy. New York: New American Library.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Alex Castro, Electronic Arts VP, Is Oakland’s “Fake Joe Tuman”, “Crocker Mom”

Alex Castro, is currently Vice President Of Product Management At Electronic Arts, and a fairly-well-known and legendary tech executive, regularly quoted in a number of industry publications. But Alex Castro’s also an Oakland resident who has the terrible habit of going online, making traceble email accounts from his Electronic Arts office, and posing as someone […] from WordPress http://ift.tt/1fVkWP9 via IFTTT

Event: Jog For Jill San Francisco Run September 12th Golden Gate Park

Cal Women's Rowing Team member Jill Costello passed away from complications due to lung cancer on June 24th 2010 and at the age of 21. A San Francisco event and run called Jog For Jill has been established and will be held this Sunday, September 12th at 5 PM. Two members of the Cal Women's Crew team were at the Cal vs. Davis football game wearing Jog For Jill shirts, and were kind enough to provide the video interview above. Below are the other details from the event website, where you're encouraged to pre-register here CLICK FOR SITE : Pre-Registration: Online/$25 Day of Registration: 4:00 p.m./$30 Shotgun Start: 5:00 p.m. After run/walk celebration: 6:00 p.m.- 8:30 p.m. Event Location: Golden Gate Park Music Concourse Bandshell S Tea Garden Drive San Francisco, California 94118 Participants are encouraged to pre-register. Only pre-registered participants will be guaranteed a walk/run T-shirt. T-shirts will be limited to the first 2500 day of regis

Oakland Mayor's Race: LWV Forum Draws Oakland's Older Folks

Oakland Mayor's Race Forum first take. (Which means, there's going to be more of these posts on last night, because a lot was happening.) This just in: The Oakland Tribune's out of touch with Oakland. A number of attendees of the 450 estimated said they learned of the Oakland League Of Women Voters via "the newspaper." All of the people who made that statement were over 50 years old. Still, the forum, which attracted every candidate except Dr. Terrance Candell, was a success. The auditorium at 300 Lakeside Drive seats 380 people, so if you do the math, it was about 70 over capacity. The crowd was a happy mix of supporters of candidates and long-time observers of the Oakland political scene. The one complaint they had was there wasn't enough time to hear what the candidates were about. That wasn't because there were too many candidates, but due to the format. Either Oakland Tribune Editor Martin Reynolds or the League of Women Voter