Ошибки мышления кпт

«Thinking errors» redirects here. For faulty reasoning, see Fallacy.

A cognitive distortion is an exaggerated or irrational thought pattern involved in the onset or perpetuation of psychopathological states, such as depression and anxiety.^[1]

Cognitive distortions are thoughts that cause individuals to perceive reality inaccurately. According to Aaron 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.^[2] 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 experience severe, repeated, or long-duration episodes of depression.^[3]

Challenging and changing cognitive distortions is a key element of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT).

Definition[edit]

Cognitive comes from the Medieval Latin cognitīvus, equivalent to Latin cognit(us), ‘known’.^[4] Distortion means the act of twisting or altering something out of its true, natural, or original state.^[5]

History[edit]

In 1957, American psychologist Albert Ellis, though he did not know it yet, would aid cognitive therapy in correcting cognitive distortions and indirectly helping David D. Burns in writing The Feeling Good Handbook. Ellis created what he called the ABC Technique of rational beliefs. The ABC stands for the activating event, beliefs that are irrational, and 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.^[6] 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.^[7] 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.^[8]

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, experiencing other’s harmless comments as ill-intended, while simultaneously seeing self as inferior. Inevitably cognitions are reflected in their behavior with a reduced desire to care for oneself, 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.^[9] 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.^[10]

In 1972, psychiatrist, psychoanalyst, and cognitive therapy scholar Aaron T. Beck published Depression: Causes and Treatment.^[11] 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.^[11]

Beck’s 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.^[12] When Burns published Feeling Good: The New Mood Therapy, it made Beck’s approach to distorted thinking widely known and popularized.^[13][14] Burns sold over four 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]

Main types[edit]

John C. Gibbs and Granville Bud Potter propose four categories for cognitive distortions: self-centered, blaming others, minimizing-mislabeling, and assuming the worst.^[16] The cognitive distortions listed below^[15] are categories of automatic thinking, and are to be distinguished from logical fallacies.^[17][18]

All-or-nothing thinking[edit]

The «all-or-nothing thinking distortion» is also referred to as «splitting»,^[19] «black-and-white thinking»,^[2] and «polarized thinking.»^[20] 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 woman 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 woman 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]

Jumping to conclusions[edit]

Reaching preliminary conclusions (usually negative) with little (if any) evidence. Three specific subtypes are identified:^{[citation needed]}

Mind reading[edit]

Inferring a person’s possible or probable (usually negative) thoughts from their behavior and nonverbal communication; taking precautions against the worst suspected case without asking the person.

• Example 1: A student assumes that the readers of their paper have already made up their minds concerning its topic, and, therefore, writing the paper is a pointless exercise.^[18]
• 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).^[21]

Fortune-telling[edit]

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?»^[22]

Labeling[edit]

Labeling occurs when someone overgeneralizes characteristics of other people. For example, someone might use an unfavorable term to describe a complex person or event.

Emotional reasoning[edit]

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».^[2] 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.^[23]

Should/shouldn’t and must/mustn’t 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.^[23]
• 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]

Gratitude traps[edit]

A gratitude trap is a type of cognitive distortion that typically arises from misunderstandings regarding the nature or practice of gratitude.^{[citation needed]} The term can refer to one of two related but distinct thought patterns:

• A self-oriented thought process involving feelings of guilt, shame, or frustration related to one’s expectations of how things «should» be.
• An «elusive ugliness in many relationships, a deceptive ‘kindness,’ the main purpose of which is to make others feel indebted», as defined by psychologist Ellen Kenner.^[25]

Blaming others[edit]

Personalization and blaming[edit]

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.^{[2][unreliable source?]} In this cognitive distortion, the facts that oneself has about their surroundings are always right while other people’s opinions and perspectives are wrongly seen.^{[26][unreliable source?]}

Fallacy of change[edit]

Relying on social control to obtain cooperative actions from another person.^[2] 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.^[27]

Minimizing-mislabeling[edit]

Magnification and minimization[edit]

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.

Labeling and mislabeling[edit]

A form of overgeneralization; attributing a person’s actions to their 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.

Assuming the worst[edit]

Overgeneralizing[edit]

Someone who overgeneralizes makes faulty generalizations from insufficient evidence. Such as seeing a «single negative event» as a «never-ending pattern of defeat»,^[15] and as such 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.^[2]

• 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.^[23]

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]

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 include:

• «I will never be as good as Jane»
• «Anyone could have done as well»^[15]
• «They are just congratulating me to be nice»^[28]

Mental 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 find it helpful 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]

Conceptualization[edit]

In a series of publications,^[29][30][31] philosopher Paul Franceschi has proposed a unified conceptual framework for cognitive distortions designed to clarify their relationships and define new ones. This conceptual framework is based on three notions: (i) the reference class (a set of phenomena or objects, e.g. events in the patient’s life); (ii) dualities (positive/negative, qualitative/quantitative, …); (iii) the taxon system (degrees allowing to attribute properties according to a given duality to the elements of a reference class). In this model, «dichotomous reasoning», «minimization», «maximization» and «arbitrary focus» constitute general cognitive distortions (applying to any duality), whereas «disqualification of the positive» and «catastrophism» are specific cognitive distortions, applying to the positive/negative duality. This conceptual framework posits two additional cognitive distortion classifications: the «omission of the neutral» and the «requalification in the other pole».

Cognitive restructuring[edit]

Cognitive restructuring (CR) is a popular form of therapy used to identify and reject maladaptive cognitive distortions,^[32] and is typically used with individuals diagnosed with depression.^[33] 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.^[34] CR is the main component of Beck’s and Burns’s CBT.^[35]

Narcissistic defense[edit]

Those diagnosed with narcissistic personality disorder tend, unrealistically, to view themselves as superior, overemphasizing their strengths and understating their weaknesses.^[34] Narcissists use exaggeration and minimization this way to shield themselves against psychological pain.^[36][37]

Decatastrophizing[edit]

In cognitive therapy, decatastrophizing or decatastrophization is a cognitive restructuring technique that may be used to treat cognitive distortions, such as magnification and catastrophizing,^[38] commonly seen in psychological disorders like anxiety^[33] and psychosis.^[39] 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 their perceptions to render the felt experience as less significant.

Criticism[edit]

Common criticisms of the diagnosis of cognitive distortion relate to epistemology and the theoretical basis. 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. In some cases, depressed subjects appear to be «sadder but wiser».^[40]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

«Thinking errors» redirects here. For faulty reasoning, see Fallacy.

A cognitive distortion is an exaggerated or irrational thought pattern involved in the onset or perpetuation of psychopathological states, such as depression and anxiety.^[1]

Cognitive distortions are thoughts that cause individuals to perceive reality inaccurately. According to Aaron 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.^[2] 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 experience severe, repeated, or long-duration episodes of depression.^[3]

Challenging and changing cognitive distortions is a key element of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT).

Definition[edit]

Cognitive comes from the Medieval Latin cognitīvus, equivalent to Latin cognit(us), ‘known’.^[4] Distortion means the act of twisting or altering something out of its true, natural, or original state.^[5]

History[edit]

In 1957, American psychologist Albert Ellis, though he did not know it yet, would aid cognitive therapy in correcting cognitive distortions and indirectly helping David D. Burns in writing The Feeling Good Handbook. Ellis created what he called the ABC Technique of rational beliefs. The ABC stands for the activating event, beliefs that are irrational, and 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.^[6] 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.^[7] 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.^[8]

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, experiencing other’s harmless comments as ill-intended, while simultaneously seeing self as inferior. Inevitably cognitions are reflected in their behavior with a reduced desire to care for oneself, 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.^[9] 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.^[10]

In 1972, psychiatrist, psychoanalyst, and cognitive therapy scholar Aaron T. Beck published Depression: Causes and Treatment.^[11] 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.^[11]

Beck’s 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.^[12] When Burns published Feeling Good: The New Mood Therapy, it made Beck’s approach to distorted thinking widely known and popularized.^[13][14] Burns sold over four 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]

Main types[edit]

John C. Gibbs and Granville Bud Potter propose four categories for cognitive distortions: self-centered, blaming others, minimizing-mislabeling, and assuming the worst.^[16] The cognitive distortions listed below^[15] are categories of automatic thinking, and are to be distinguished from logical fallacies.^[17][18]

All-or-nothing thinking[edit]

The «all-or-nothing thinking distortion» is also referred to as «splitting»,^[19] «black-and-white thinking»,^[2] and «polarized thinking.»^[20] 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 woman 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 woman 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]

Jumping to conclusions[edit]

Reaching preliminary conclusions (usually negative) with little (if any) evidence. Three specific subtypes are identified:^{[citation needed]}

Mind reading[edit]

Inferring a person’s possible or probable (usually negative) thoughts from their behavior and nonverbal communication; taking precautions against the worst suspected case without asking the person.

• Example 1: A student assumes that the readers of their paper have already made up their minds concerning its topic, and, therefore, writing the paper is a pointless exercise.^[18]
• 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).^[21]

Fortune-telling[edit]

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?»^[22]

Labeling[edit]

Labeling occurs when someone overgeneralizes characteristics of other people. For example, someone might use an unfavorable term to describe a complex person or event.

Emotional reasoning[edit]

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».^[2] 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.^[23]

Should/shouldn’t and must/mustn’t 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.^[23]
• 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]

Gratitude traps[edit]

A gratitude trap is a type of cognitive distortion that typically arises from misunderstandings regarding the nature or practice of gratitude.^{[citation needed]} The term can refer to one of two related but distinct thought patterns:

• A self-oriented thought process involving feelings of guilt, shame, or frustration related to one’s expectations of how things «should» be.
• An «elusive ugliness in many relationships, a deceptive ‘kindness,’ the main purpose of which is to make others feel indebted», as defined by psychologist Ellen Kenner.^[25]

Blaming others[edit]

Personalization and blaming[edit]

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.^{[2][unreliable source?]} In this cognitive distortion, the facts that oneself has about their surroundings are always right while other people’s opinions and perspectives are wrongly seen.^{[26][unreliable source?]}

Fallacy of change[edit]

Relying on social control to obtain cooperative actions from another person.^[2] 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.^[27]

Minimizing-mislabeling[edit]

Magnification and minimization[edit]

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.

Labeling and mislabeling[edit]

A form of overgeneralization; attributing a person’s actions to their 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.

Assuming the worst[edit]

Overgeneralizing[edit]

Someone who overgeneralizes makes faulty generalizations from insufficient evidence. Such as seeing a «single negative event» as a «never-ending pattern of defeat»,^[15] and as such 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.^[2]

• 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.^[23]

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]

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 include:

• «I will never be as good as Jane»
• «Anyone could have done as well»^[15]
• «They are just congratulating me to be nice»^[28]

Mental 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 find it helpful 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]

Conceptualization[edit]

In a series of publications,^[29][30][31] philosopher Paul Franceschi has proposed a unified conceptual framework for cognitive distortions designed to clarify their relationships and define new ones. This conceptual framework is based on three notions: (i) the reference class (a set of phenomena or objects, e.g. events in the patient’s life); (ii) dualities (positive/negative, qualitative/quantitative, …); (iii) the taxon system (degrees allowing to attribute properties according to a given duality to the elements of a reference class). In this model, «dichotomous reasoning», «minimization», «maximization» and «arbitrary focus» constitute general cognitive distortions (applying to any duality), whereas «disqualification of the positive» and «catastrophism» are specific cognitive distortions, applying to the positive/negative duality. This conceptual framework posits two additional cognitive distortion classifications: the «omission of the neutral» and the «requalification in the other pole».

Cognitive restructuring[edit]

Cognitive restructuring (CR) is a popular form of therapy used to identify and reject maladaptive cognitive distortions,^[32] and is typically used with individuals diagnosed with depression.^[33] 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.^[34] CR is the main component of Beck’s and Burns’s CBT.^[35]

Narcissistic defense[edit]

Those diagnosed with narcissistic personality disorder tend, unrealistically, to view themselves as superior, overemphasizing their strengths and understating their weaknesses.^[34] Narcissists use exaggeration and minimization this way to shield themselves against psychological pain.^[36][37]

Decatastrophizing[edit]

In cognitive therapy, decatastrophizing or decatastrophization is a cognitive restructuring technique that may be used to treat cognitive distortions, such as magnification and catastrophizing,^[38] commonly seen in psychological disorders like anxiety^[33] and psychosis.^[39] 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 their perceptions to render the felt experience as less significant.

Criticism[edit]

Common criticisms of the diagnosis of cognitive distortion relate to epistemology and the theoretical basis. 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. In some cases, depressed subjects appear to be «sadder but wiser».^[40]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

«Я знаю, ты не позвонил мне, потому что не хотел со мной разговаривать. И не надо все списывать на то, что у тебя не было времени». Даже, если человек действительно был занят, собеседника будет трудно в этом убедить, потому что у него возникло когнитивное искажение. Что это, как работает и для чего нам нужны когнитивные искажения?

Что такое когнитивное искажение в психологии

Термин когнитивные искажения пришел в когнитивную психотерапию из области поведенческой экономики и означает отклонения в восприятии, мышлении и поведении, обусловленные предубеждениями и стереотипами.

Понятие впервые встречается в работах Дэниэля Канемана и Амоса Тверски 1972 года, где они предположили, что когда дело касается выгод и рисков, люди склонны мыслить иррационально.

Таким образом, когнитивные искажения — ошибки мышления, которые провоцируют нас делать несправедливые выводы о нас самих, происходящих событиях и людях вокруг.

За счет подобных ловушек наш разум убеждает нас в чем-то, что на самом деле не является истиной

Как возникают когнитивные искажения

Когнитивные искажения — это вполне естественная реакция нашего мозга на бесконечный поток входящей информации. Они как бы структурируют эту информацию, упрощают ее и помогают быстро принимать решения.

Кроме того, когнитивные искажения могут возникнуть из-за влияния моральных и социальных норм. Человек — это социальное существо, и он неизменно стремится быть «в стае», а когнитивные искажения как некие стереотипы мышления помогают адаптироваться к условиям общества в целях безопасности и комфорта.

Ярким примером может служить так называемое черно-белое мышление. Когда от человека требуется высокая скорость принятия решения (а не его эффективность), и от этого зависит принадлежность к значимой для него группе людей. Условно «Ты за белых или за красных?» — нужно скорее отвечать, времени на анализ полутонов нет.

Виды когнитивных искажений

Единственной и четко систематизированной классификации когнитивных искажений не существует, поскольку исследования в этой области продолжаются до сих пор, и список видов когнитивных искажений только растет.

Один из основателей когнитивной терапии Аарон Бек утверждал, что когнитивные искажения являются причиной ошибочных представлений о себе, людях и мире вокруг и, следовательно, неадекватных эмоциональных реакций. Опираясь на его мнение, можно выделить следующие ошибки мышления:

Сверхобобщение

Заключение выводов на основании единичного прецедента. Например, человек опоздал на работу из-за того, что застрял в лифте, причем первый раз за два года, а его новый начальник решил, что подчиненный «безответственный и ненадежный».

Черно-белое мышление

Категоричные рассуждения в духе «все или ничего», игнорирование любых оттенков и полутонов. Например, родители недовольны тем, что их сын получил «четверку». Единственный приемлемый для них результат – оценка «пять».

Чтение мыслей

Уверенность человека в том, что он достоверно знает, что думают другие люди, и отказ принимать другие объяснения их поступков. Здесь в качестве примера можно привести ситуацию, которую мы описали в начале: «Я знаю, ты не позвонил мне, потому что не хотел со мной разговаривать. И не надо все списывать на то, что у тебя не было времени». Правда, иногда люди не звонят, потому что действительно не хотят.

Катастрофизация

Склонность видеть перспективы исключительно в мрачных тонах. Например, девушка собирается на собеседование и настолько сильно переживает, что в голове у нее проносятся такие мысли: «Если я оговорюсь или буду слишком сильно нервничать, то меня высмеют. А еще они расскажут своим партнерам обо мне, и тогда я точно не найду работу. Все будут знать, что я неудачница».

Негативный фильтр

Игнорирование позитивных аспектов ситуации, склонность заострять внимание лишь на негативных сторонах происходящего. Возьмем тех же родителей, которые недовольны «четверкой» сына. Помимо нее он получил еще две пятерки по биологии и химии, но родители заметили только плохую, по их мнению, оценку.

Тирания долженствования

Уверенность в том, что сам человек и люди вокруг должны вести себя определенным образом. При несоответствии ожиданиям могут проявляться разочарование, гнев или стыд. Например, девушка считает, что злиться – это неправильно, поэтому старается быть мягкой и неконфликтной. И когда она разозлится, например, из-за того, что ее оскорбили, то ей может стать стыдно за свою злость и агрессию.

Как когнитивные искажения могут влиять на жизнь

В большинстве случаев когнитивные искажения, действительно, мешают нам реалистично смотреть на мир, ведут к эмоциональному дискомфорту и провоцируют нас на действия, о которых мы можем жалеть. Но в некоторых случаях когнитивные искажения могут играть роль психологических защит, которые активизируются, чтобы снизить уровень тревоги, помочь выдерживать стрессовую ситуацию, сохранить чувство самоуважения.

Некоторые когнитивные искажения помогают увеличить скорость принятия решений в экстренных ситуациях

Происходящие в мире события находят отражение в эмоциях и поведении людей – это прослеживается по волне постов в соцсетях. Очень часто в этих текстах можно заметить эффект «черно-белого» мышления – когда мы делим людей или события на две полярные категории, игнорируя многообразие промежуточных вариантов. Такое искажение может превратить разноцветный, противоречивый и объемный мир в бесцветную плоскую картинку.

Но у подобного искажения есть свои предпосылки и основания – «черно-белое» мышление провоцирует у нас сильную эмоциональную реакцию и в стрессовой ситуации, когда у нас нет времени разбираться в многообразии оттенков, помогает почти молниеносно принять решение.

«Черно-белое» мышление также значительно снижает уровень тревоги, так как не оставляет места неопределенности, которая обычно пугает больше всего

В текущих обстоятельствах стоит реалистично оценивать происходящее: если есть ситуация реальной угрозы, потерь, лишений, то не следует списывать подобное восприятие на когнитивные искажения.

Можно ли контролировать когнитивные искажения

Когнитивные искажения являются естественным механизмом нашей психики, который служит самым разным целям. Это значит, что задача полностью их искоренить не совсем корректна – скорее, нам стоит учиться распознавать когнитивные искажения и не поддаваться им в полной мере.

Сначала нужно признать, что это универсальный механизм и мы все ему подвержены. Не существует самого объективного и беспристрастного человека в мире – и это нормально. После того, как мы приняли сам факт существования когнитивных искажений, наша задача – научиться их замечать у себя (а уже потом у других). Следующий шаг – работа над гибкостью мышления в целом: взвешивать все «за» и «против» принятых решений, проявлять базовое уважение к окружающим, иногда играть в «адвоката» людей с противоположной точкой зрения, то есть пытаться аргументировать позицию другого человека, чтобы посмотреть на ситуацию как бы с его стороны. Вероятно, это позволит принять иную точку зрения или хотя бы признать возможность ее существования.

Как психотерапия работает с когнитивными искажениями

В зависимости от вида когнитивного искажения психотерапевты применяют разные инструменты, но их базовые принципы схожи:

Разделение

Прием, который поможет разделиться с возникшим убеждением. Например, не «все психологи – шарлатаны», а «у меня появилась мысль, что все психологи – шарлатаны».

Конкретизация

Попробуйте конкретизировать свою мысль:  что значит «все», что вы вкладываете в понятие «шарлатан»?

Гипотеза, а не аксиома

Оцените реалистичность появившейся мысли. Если представить, что вы вынесите эту идею на суд присяжных, удастся ли вам убедить их в ее неоспоримой истинности?

Выгода

Попробуйте оценить, полезно ли для вас это убеждение. Чему оно помогает? Улучшает ли оно вашу жизнь?

Представьте, что на происходящую ситуацию вы смотрите как бы со стороны, например, на экране телевизора. Какие альтернативные варианты происходящего вы можете предположить? Постарайтесь давать безоценочные описания.

В основе работы с ошибками мышления всегда лежит так называемая когнитивная реструктуризация, то есть переформулирование мыслей. Здесь важно подчеркнуть, что у психотерапевта нет задачи надеть на клиента розовые очки, но он поможет взглянуть на ситуацию беспристрастно и реалистично.

Статья оказалась для вас полезной? Поставьте ей ниже лайк. А если кажется, что автор текста может помочь с вашей проблемой, запишитесь к нему на первую сессию со скидкой 25% по промокоду AOLT 🙏🏼