SUNDAY'S FOOD FOR THOUGHT- COMBATING DISTORTIONS

Welcome ladies and gentlemen to our today’s Sunday Food for thought where we share inspirational and motivational posts and discuss on matters that can help shape our communities and more importantly making the world a better place than how we found it. Today is about how to combat the cognitive distortions we discussed last week for which they are the greatest killers of our self-esteem.  Last week I received comments that people liked the post and some said it was too long, am impressed that people get to read and it is through that we can enhance and develop our mental dexterity. So considering the comments that it was too long, today I will start with ways to combat the first two cognitive distortions (Overgeneralization and Global labeling) and we will go further until we are done with the distortions. Please remember, for these ways to work needs your commitment and following the guidelines given. 

 

COMBATING DISTORTIONS

The most important single skill to master is vigilance. You must constantly listen to what you’re telling yourself. You must not give in to depression, but persevere in analyzing the thoughts that arouse your painful emotions.

It helps to remember that low self-esteem involves some short-term gains. When you begin to thwart the pathological critic and refute the distorted thinking styles that are his weapons, you are cutting yourself off from these short-term gains. You’re taking a chance. You’re betting your current discomfort against future gain. This risk will feel scary at times, boring at others. The process will seem hopeless, or just like too much trouble. You will come up with a series of rationalizations for why it won’t work, why it isn’t working, and how silly the whole thing is anyway. These are the death struggles of the pathological critic.

Combating distorted thinking involves a commitment. You must commit yourself to being constantly on guard, even when you don’t feel like it. This commitment is more important than your commitment to your family, or your ideals, because it is a commitment to yourself.

THE THREE-COLUMN TECHNIQUE

This technique for rebutting cognitive distortions is as simple as the commitment to use the technique is difficult. At first, write all your responses down on paper. Later, when the technique becomes a habit, you may be able to do it in your head.

When you’re in a situation that makes you feel depressed or discouraged, when your opinion of yourself is low, take time out to get a pencil and a piece of paper. Make three columns like this;

Self-statement                                       Distortion                                             Rebuttal

   In the first column, write down what your pathological critic is saying to you about the situation. Even if nothing immediately comes to mind, keep reliving the situation until you get a word or two. Your self-statements may be extremely fast or condensed, so that you will have to slow them down and write them out in full.

Then examine your self-statements for the distortions that murder your self-esteem. Here is a summary of the nine most common distortions for your quick reference;

1.       Overgeneralization: From one isolated event you make a general, universal rule. If you failed once, you’ll always fail.

2.       Global labeling: You automatically use pejorative labels to describe yourself, rather than accurately describing your qualities.

3.       Filtering: You selectively pay attention to the negative and disregard the positive.

4.       Polarized thinking: You lump things into absolute, black-and-white categories, with no middle ground. You have to be perfect or you’re worthless.

5.       Self-blame: You consistently blame yourself for things that may not really be your fault.

6.       Personalization: You assume that everything has something to do with you, and you negatively compare yourself to everyone else.

7.       Mind reading: You assume that others don’t like you, are angry with you, don’t care about you, and so on, without any real evidence that your assumptions are correct.

8.       Control fallacies: You either feel that you have total responsibility for everybody and everything, or feel that you have no control, that you’re a helpless victim.

9.       Emotional reasoning: You assume that things are the way you feel about them.

In the last column, write rebuttals to your self-statements, specifically attacking each distortion in turn.

Example: Joan had trouble joining in at work. Others would gather in the employee’s lounge for coffee and go out to lunch together. Joan stayed at her desk or took walks alone at lunch time. She liked and admired many of her co-workers, but felt awkward about joining them. One day at lunch she stayed at her desk and tried the three-column technique. This is what she wrote:

Self-statements                                   Distortions                                          Rebuttal

They’ll reject me                                   Mind reading                                     I have no way of knowing

They’ll see how nervous                                                                                   what they’ll think. That’s

and awkward I am. They                                                                                   up to them.

already think am weird. I’ll   

be tongue-tied, nothing to                  Overgeneralization                        Not so! Sometimes I’m

say. I’m always like that.                                                                                 quite articulate.

I’m such a dud                                         Global labeling                               No, I’m not a dud. I’m

                                                                                                                             just quiet.

They’ll all be looking                                Mind reading                                They couldn’t care how I

at me, at my weird clothes                                                                              look. That’s all in my head.

that don’t fit, my dishrag hair.

It’s hopeless. There’s nothing                 Control fallacy                      Nothing is ever totally

I can do about it.                                                                           Hopeless. Enough defeatism.

 

REBUTTALS

At the beginning, you can use the rebuttals suggested in this post word for word. Later you will find that the rebuttals you compose yourself will be the most effective.

1.       Overgeneralization: To fight overgeneralizations, first get rid of absolute terms such as all, every, none, nobody, everybody, never, always, and so on. Pay special attention to the rules about being specific and balanced. Finally, avoid statements about the future- you have no way of predicting the future. Here are some examples:

·         What evidence have I got for that conclusion?

·         Do I really have enough data to make a rule?

·         What other conclusion could this evidence support? What else could it mean?

·         How can I check this conclusion?

·         No absolutes- quantify exactly

·         I can’t predict the future.

Here’s an example of how a plumber named Harold fought against some powerful negative self-statements. He habitually told himself, via his pathological critic:

·         Nobody likes me.

·         Nobody ever invites me anywhere.

·         Everybody looks down on me.

·         I’m just a dumb plumber.

·         I haven’t got a friend in the whole world.

·         I’ll never have any friends.

The first thing that Harold noticed after writing down these self-statements was the number of absolutes: “Nobody……anywhere……everybody…..whole world…..never.” He asked himself, “What evidence do I have for these absolute conclusions?” He found he could be more accurate and take the sting out of the statements by substituting less general words: “Few people….some places…some people….few friends”

Harold applied the rule about being specific by listing the people he felt looked down on him, and those he wished would include him in social functions. He applied the balance rule by listing the people who did like him and spent time with him. He made his rebuttal strong by prefacing it with “Stop it!” shouted loudly in his mind.

Finally, Harold deleted the judgmental label “dumb plumber,” balanced it with his good points, and warned himself against predicting the future. Here is Harold’s full rebuttal:

·         Stop it!*

·         What evidence do I have for these absolute conclusions?

·         I haven’t met everybody in the world.

·         I haven’t been everywhere in the world.

·         Some people like Bob seem to dislike me.

·         But others like Gordon like me a lot.

·         Ralph and Sally didn’t invite me to their picnic.

·         But my Dad, Molly, and Mr. Henderson often invite me  over.

·         So I do have some friends. *

·         I probably will have friends in the future.

·         So stop it! Stop predicting loneliness.

·         I’m a good plumber.*

·         Plumbing is a respectable trade.

The statements marked with an asterisk are the parts of the rebuttal that Harold found most powerful. These are the parts that he memorized and remembered to use whenever his pathological critic started telling him that he was “friendless” and “dumb.” 

2.       Global labeling: When you write your negative self-statements down on paper, look for nouns, adjectives and verbs that are judgmental global labels. Look for nouns such as slob, failure, bum, ingrate, coward. Adjectives can be the worst: lazy, stupid, ugly, weak, clumsy, hopeless. Even verbs can function as global labels: to lose, to err, to fail, to waste, to disgust.

When fighting global labels, being specific means realizing that your label is referring only to a part of yourself or of an experience. Be specific by replacing the label with an accurate definition of what you don’t like. For example, instead of “I’m fat,” say “I’m fifteen- and- a- half pounds over my ideal weight.” Instead of saying to yourself, “I acted like a jerk,” say, “I stammered when she asked me about my old girlfriend.”

Being balanced involves describing some of the many parts of yourself to which your label does not apply: “I’m fifteen-and-a-half pounds overweight, but I carry it well and look good in my new clothes.” “I stammered when she asked me about my old girlfriend, but I told the story about the old doctor well.”

Here are some self-statements to get you started in rebutting global labels:

·         Stop! That’s just a label.

·         That’s not me, that’s just a label.

·         Labels exaggerate a tiny part of me.

·         No more labels- be specific.

·         I refuse to call myself names.

·         Exactly what do I mean by ……….?

·         My experience is too limited for global labels ever to be true.

·         Labels are mistaken opinions based on limited experience.

·         I have far more good points than bad.

                    Here’s an example of a global labeler who broke the habit. Peg was a mother of four whose     critic whose critic typically assaulted her with a barrage of labels:

·         Call yourself a mother? You’re the Wicked Witch to your kids

·         You’ve failed Billy. He’s backward.

·         You ignore the older kids. They’re running wild.

Peg wrote these self-statements down and underlined all the global labels: “Wicked Witch…..failed…backward…..ignore……wild.” She began her rebuttal by replacing the labels with the facts: she sometimes raises her voice to her kids, she worries about Billy because at two years old he doesn’t talk much. She spends her available time with Billy and Susan, her youngest kids, and thus has little time for her older children.

To balance her shortcomings, Peg included her good points: maintaining consistent rules for her kids, providing them with good clothes and nutritious food, and taking interest in their educations. Here is Peg’s complete rebuttal:

·         Enough already!*

·         These are harsh, distorted labels.*

·         Sometimes I yell at my kids

·         I do provide my kids with consistent rules and enforce them fairly.*

·         I worry about Billy not talking, but that’s just his way.

·         It’s not my fault Billy doesn’t talk much.

·         Billy will talk when he is ready.*

·         I wish I had more time for Jim and Andrea, but they actually do fine with what time I can give them.

·         They will benefit from the freedom.

·         I refuse to call myself names anymore.*

·         I’ve always done my best, and will keep trying.

Peg marked the strongest rebuttals with an asterisk and used them whenever she started criticizing herself for being a poor mother.

Let’s end there for today, join me next week for more ways to combat the remaining habits that seriously damage our sense of self-worth. Also, if anyone has something inspirational or that can help our world please check me via bashworker@gmail.com. ENJOY YOUR SUNDAY. GOD BLESS YOU ALL.