COGNITIVE RESTRUCTURING. . . . . . . . . . . . .Ch. 8
Chapter 8
OPTIMIZING RATIONAL SELF-TALK
For Health, Happiness and Well-Being
Outline of the chapter
Session 8-1 RATIONAL SELF-TALK IN PSYCHOLOGY
Learning irrational and illogical ideas (Albert Ellis, Ph.D.)
Ellis/Harper list of irrational ideas
Overview of Ellis/Harpers and rationality
The role of cognition and beliefs
Session 8-2 SELF-TALK: MOBILIZING RATIONAL THINKING
Methods and techniques
Emotional re-education
Writing, relaxation and imagery for RET
Therapeutic element in RET
Making posters for reinforcement
Fighting recidivism with self-talk
Re-education with humor and song
Session 8-3 COGNITIVE RESTRUCTURING (Aaron Beck, M.D.)
Cognitive errors, Automatic thoughts
Daily Record of Dysfunctional Thoughts
Refuting irrational behavior, Cognitive rehearsal
Depression testing, Bibliotherapy
Session 8-4 WRITTEN RATIONAL SELF ANALYSIS (Maxie Maultsby)
A-B-C-D-E steps in cognitive restructuring
Growth of rationality
Beliefs determine destiny
Session 8-5 COGNITIVE RESTRUCTURING (Martin Seligman)
A-B-C-D-E steps in cognitive restructuring
Cognitive Restructuring for optimism
Albert Ellis, Aaron T. Beck and Maxie Maultsby, and their cohorts have contributed tomaking life more enjoyable by setting forth a concepts of rational self-talk. A person learns to evaluate the rationality of one’s own ideas and beliefs. Rational self-talk puts rational ideas into the place where irrational (false, untrue, mythic, imaginary) ideas have developed, and have caused unnecessary fears, obsessions and irrational behaviors. Rational self-talk methods are used for personal success, achievement, health, hope and problem-solving of low self-esteem, jealousy and other problematic behaviors.
________________________________________________________
If someone offends you, you need to ask yourself a very rational question: Is that his problem or mine? When you do that, you are being rational. If you do not do that, but simply accept the obnoxious offense as your problem, that is not being rational. Simply accepting all hurts, without being rational, sets one up for higher risk of all manner of fears, self-doubts, lowered self-esteem, and the problems that are associated with them. This chapter is dedicated to making a person more rational.
Better lifestyles are influenced by more rational, factual and truthful beliefs, according to Albert Ellis, Aaron Beck, Maxie Maultsby, and Martin E.P. Seligman. Yet, people have mistaken notions that they are stuck with their personality. They have a certain amount of WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You Get) mentality. Albert Ellis is reminding us with a whole system of Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy(REBT), that change takes place when the mind is taught to dispute some of its previously valued, but slightly irrational beliefs, and replace them.
Let's look at an example. Some people believe that others do not like them. They develop withdrawing social patterns. They evaluate their situation by comparing themselves to their family, and conclude that they have inherited the trait from their family genes. If one believes that shyness and withdrawing behavior is inherited, then nothing will probably change. If, however, one believes that shyness and withdrawing behavior are from a lack of learned skills, then shyness and withdrawal can change. It likely will change because new behaviors can be learned.
Session 8-1 RATIONAL SELF-TALK IN PSYCHOLOGY
Ellis' therapeutic system reversed the “looking back” approach of psychoanalysis, and offered the counselee an existential, here-and-now, approach to problem-solving. Dr. Albert Ellis expanded this rational approach to therapy and problem-solving in the late 1950's, and that has been refined in A New Guide to Rational Living (co-authored with Robert A. Harper, Ph.D., N.Y.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1975: currently, North Hollywood, CA: Wilshire Books). Ellis' concepts have gone through revisions and have been popularized into self-help programs with varieties of " self-talk" methods. The movement understands that simply discovering the connection between current emotional pain and past offenses doesn't necessarily make problems go away.
Irrationality causing problems
People make mistakes when they do not know better. People need to use rational thought processes, to critically evaluate their own belief system and stomp out some of the myths, the irrational ideas that have negative effect on emotions. A series of “put-downs” by others can fester into a full-blown depression. A slight fear, undisclosed, undiscussed, unventilated and undisciplined, can grow into a major anxiety attack, depression or paranoia. Dwelling on negative thoughts is very self-destructive.
For certain problems counselors suggest that people listen very carefully to their feelings, and share them. There is a therapeutic value in talking about hurts, whether disclosure is made to a counselor, to your spouse or to your close friend. Talking about hurts keeps them from being suppressed or even repressed (unconsciously), where they might smolder into a larger mental problem. Ellis suggests that there are times when certain irrational and illogical feelings are only signaling irrational and self-destructive behaviors that must be soaked, stomped and beaten out like a brush fire. If irrational behaviors are creating conflict, then behaviors need to be changed before appropriately good feelings come back. Ventilation of feelings is good, but too much ventilation may alienate people and cause persons problems too. Therefore, talking is good, but sometimes behaviors need to change. Here is that paradox again; ventilating feelings to solve problems, versus changing the behaviors that caused the bad feelings. Ventilation does not solve all problems. Changing behaviors does not solve all problems. Both skills are appropriately necessary, but each for a different problem or a different level in the treatment program.
Learning irrational and illogical (untrue) ideas
We learn good things. We also learn things that are not true. We can also generate false conclusions without enough true facts, or with incorrect thinking. Science has taught us to search for truth. Without facts or truth we appear unintelligent. Albert Ellis has used this model to help people solve problems. Ellis suggests that people have unfortunately not always learned the best way of thinking and behaving. This gets them into trouble, with excessive fears, reduced self-esteem, poor interpersonal relations, and scores of other problems. Ellis does not necessarily say it this way, but he really wants people to become better scientists. He wants hurting persons to become better trained in the art of rational self-examination when they are having problems.
The Ellis and Harper approach
Psychology has tended to take the approach that emotions are more important than thoughts or ideas. Ellis keeps emphasizing that rational mental processes are equally important, if not more important. Emotions are important. Painful emotions stir people to want change. Ellis maintains that the emotions are not likely to change until newer and more rational ideas replace problematic and aged ideas. Older psychoanalytic psychology believed that problems became solved by repeatedly emptying out painful emotions through talking to others. Ellis has brought back the emphasis that certain truthful and factual ideas can redirect behaviors that eventually eliminate the problem (feelings) we started out with. The Ellis and Harper approach returns the pendulum back to that middle ground, giving people the opportunity to resolve problems by other means than psychoanalysis. The Ellis and Harper approach is to change the belief, that changes the behavior, that changes the feelings, that point to the problem (the symptoms).
Ellis and Harper (1975) list 10 of the major irrational-illogical (not true) ideas that people have, which can produce problems. They are listed below.
Ellis/Harper partial list of irrational ideas
1. “That you must have love or approval from all the people you find significant.”
2. “That you must be thoroughly competent, adequate and achieving.”
3. “That when people act obnoxiously and unfairly, you should blame them, and see them as bad, wicked or rotten individuals.”
4. “That you have to view things as awful, terrible horrible and catastrophic when you get seriously frustrated, treated unfairly; rejected.”
5. “That emotional misery comes from external pressures and that you have little ability to control or change your feelings.”
6. “That if something seems dangerous or fearsome, you must preoccupy yourself with it and make yourself anxious about it.”
7. “That you can more easily avoid facing many of life's difficulties and self responsibilities, than understand more rewarding forms of self-discipline.”
8. “That your past remains all-important and that because something once strongly influenced your life, it has to keep determining your feelings and behavior today.”
9. “That people and things should turn out better than they do, and that you must view it as awful and horrible if you do not find good solutions to life's grim realities.”
10. “That you can achieve maximum human happiness by inertia and inaction or by passively and uncommittedly enjoying yourself.”
Ellis and fellow psychologists have developed other lists or irrational ideas; some for school children, some for people in certain kinds of employment, some for certain kinds of problems. It may be important, for starters, to learn the above list of irrational ideas. More importantly, Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT ) teaches a person to learn the attitude and skill of being analytical, developing a moderately self-critical perspective of one's emotions and the behaviors that produce them.
PERSONAL APPLICATION ---- FOLLOW THESE STEPS
Step 1 — Identify the (A) Activating experience that has been very painful or upsetting.
Step 2 — Identify the © Consequences that you believe will exist as a result of A.
Step 3 — Identify what (B) Beliefs you have about A that produces C.
Step 4 — Dispute (D) beliefs, questioning whether they are really factual and rational.
Step 5 — Replace the irrational belief with an (E) Effective Rational Belief.
Step 6 — List the (F) Feeling that should be the final outcome.
|
Albert Ellis, Ph. D.
He was born in Pittsburgh, on September 27, 1913. His Ph.D. is from Columbia University; Free lance writer (1934-38); Personnel Manager (1938-1948); Senior Clinical Psychologist for the New Jersey State Hospital; instructor at Rutgers University (1949 ff); shifted away from psychoanalysis in the 1950's: established the Institute for Rational Living (1958) now The Institute for Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT). Key concept in Ellis comes from Epictetus: “Men (people) are disturbed not by things, but by the view which they take of them.” (Enchiridion).
Overview of Ellis and rationality
Albert Ellis uses A-B-C-D-E-F to initiate students into the understanding of more optimum lifestyles. A is the person's “Activating Experience or event,” such as being fired from a job. C is the “Consequences” or reactions of the person who has been fired. In between is B for the “Belief” or idea about A. D stands for “Disputing” the rationality or irrationality of the Beliefs. E stands for the “Effective rational beliefs” which result from the disputing. F stands for the “Feelings and behaviors” which become the new final outcome. (See next page).
Ellis believes that persons are born as well as reared as philosophers (Ellis, 1962, 1973b), naturally functioning as solution-seeking scientists. He believes, like Victor Frankl, that wise people can create meaning out of meaninglessness.
"He conquers who conquers himself.”
(Vencit qui se vincet.) Latin Proverb
PRACTICE RATIONAL REPLACEMENT with these problems.
USE THE A-B-C-D-E-F STEPS OUTLINED ABOVE FOR EACH ITEM.
I do not feel smart.
My friends are ignoring me.
I like my drug-using friends, but my parents do not..
My boyfriend dropped me.
My girlfriend dropped me.
I get nervous before taking tests.
Evaluate self, as if you might be hurt like the above, by using the form on the next page.
|
The main problem for humans is that they can create self-defeating ideas, irrational myths, out of the information they use or the data other humans give them. Ellis deliberately wishes to teach people to be more self-critical of their problem-generating beliefs. Ellis reminds people to make whatever philosophical changes are needed in order to generate less problematic behaviors.
The role of cognition and beliefs
Cognition is basically learning. Cognitive Therapy enables persons to learn and discover new ideas to solve problems. Ellis and REBT therapists do a lot of teaching, and their clients do a lot of learning. The client or student learns how to eliminate the false beliefs that people give us, and that our minds create. What is in one's mind is both information and beliefs. They are interrelated. Information is more brain and mind-oriented. Beliefs are more emotion-oriented, psyche-oriented, or even value-oriented. Beliefs can be religious or non-religious. Here we focus only on the non-religious dimension of beliefs as Ellis described them.
Dealing with personal guilt
Guilt, both real and imaginary, are still the greatest emotionally and physically self-destructive forces. Anger, especially repressed anger, is similar or a close third. The REBT approach offers major relief from two of these three; imaginary guilt and anger. REBT informs people that if they sense being depressed, (1) they should identify the “A” -Activating event. (2) Then they need to turn on the “B"-Belief which they apparently have, which lead to the “C”-Consequent depression. (3) By “D”-Disputing the rationality of their “B”-Belief, they arrive at a new “E”-Effective Rational Belief (my guilt is not based on the facts), which removes the depression and results in a new “F”-Feeling and behavior. If the guilt is real (the person did steal, e.g.) then one learns to refute the excessive self-condemning (irrationality) of the act. In other words, if the stolen property is not returnable, one can stop self-damning even if the property is not restored.
SELF-TALK REFUTING IRRATIONALLY
Reginald, for example, was the butt of school jokes. Classmates often made fun of him. They teased him about his left-handed writing. If something was written rather illegibly on the chalk board, someone would remark that it was probably written by Reginald. Reginald never seemed to sit up straight enough, read fast enough or follow instructions good enough for friends, who found humor in most things Reginald did.
It was all in fun; even Reginald laughed a lot and seemed to get some enjoyment out of the negative attention. However, deep inside of Reginald, emotional negativity was increasing. His psyche was not able to absorb all the hurt. Reginald began to have nightmares; sudden terrifying feelings about events other than his relationship with his classmates. The negativity in his emotions was going underground (into the unconscious), and coming out in those terrifying nightmares.
What did Reginald believe that was giving him his troubles? This is the basic question for Ellis-onian problem-solving.
THE RATIONAL EMOTIVE BEHAVIOR APPROACH
A (ACTIVATING EVENT(S): Reginald experienced being a victim of another person’s sport of bullying.
B. (BELIEFS ABOUT HIS SITUATION): 1. Reginald believed he could not do anything about it. 2. He believed his problem would get worse if he spoke up. 3. Reginald believed that negative attention was better than none at all. 4. Reginald believed there was no skill to make a solution (a belief based on ignorance). 5. Reginald believed he had to live with life's cruelties.
C. (CONSEQUENCES OF A AND B.): He was having nightmares and would wake up sweating with fear.
D. (DISPUTING OF HIS BELIEFS): Reginald needed to attack, check out, verify whether any or all of these beliefs were true and rational, or whether his BELIEF system was erroneously following some untrue ideas.
1. Reginald DISPUTED the idea that he could not do anything about it. He wrote down his options. (A) Leave these friends. (B)Tell them to stop, and if they didn’t he could go with option 1. (C) Retaliate by putting them down with bully talk, and if that did not work, return to option 1.
2. Reginald DISPUTED (to verify) his idea that his problems might get worse if he spoke up, but he could always revert to 1A and leave. He put a new and rational belief in his mind that leaving might be necessary.
3. Reginald DISPUTED (to verify the truth of his belief that “negative attention was better than none.” He calculated the pain of the nightmares, the pain of speaking up, the pain of leaving. The pain of the nightmares was the one he had to listen to or suffer more. The rational thing to do was leave these friends.
4. Reginald DISPUTED his old notion that there was no skill available to resolve the bullying and keep the friends. He checked out the truth of that belief and found out from a psychologist that if he just said, “Hey, that hurts.” (A description of one’s own feelings), that good friends might quit the bullying. He put a new and rational idea in his head to give it a try.
5. Reginald DISPUTED his idea that h e had to “live with life’s cruelties.” He talked to another person to get some facts. He thought it through, and decided that finding a new job in another town would solve the problem.
E. EFFECTIVE RATIONAL BELIEFS (New beliefs put into action.)
Reginald acted on the idea that saying “Hey, that hurts.”
His friends quit, after Reginald said that phrase 17 times.
He never left the job or town.
F. FEELINGS and BEHAVIORS Reginald gained inner peace, eliminated his nightmares, and moved on with his life.
Combine these steps with some of the following understanding.
TEN CROOKED THINKING PATTERNS
“Crooked Thinking” is irrational thinking. Ellis popularizes his approach with quite picturesque language. “Crooked thinking” is about the same as “irrational” thinking or “distorted” thinking. In 1971 Albert Ellis published ; Growth through Reason (Palo Alto, CA.: Science and Behavior Books, 1971; also North Hollywood, CA: Wilshire). His mental-reasoning approach was filling a gap between the psychoanalysts and behaviorists. Aaron Beck added some of his ideas about irrational thinking, included below.
Ellis' concept of “irrational” or “ crooked” thoughts has stimulated thinking of others. The number of crooked thinking mental processes has grown and multiplied with the help of friends and followers. It is becoming difficult to determine whether to give credit to Ellis or others for some of the following distorted thinking processes.
1. Personalization
You've heard people say, “S/he takes things too personally.” The personalization response creates problems when a person hears, sees, or observes something, and then feels personally guilty for it. A worker sees a grumpy boss and mentally calculates that the grump is due to his behavior. Actually, the boss may have indigestion, diarrhea, or a headache. A shy person waits for someone to greet him or her before greeting, and then when the other doesn't greet, the shy person calculates that s/he must not be liked. A person with low self esteem isn't chosen first in a school sport, and that person calculates that s/he must not be very well liked. In personalization the ego is bent inward and not outward. The person seems to be magnetized to the internal negative processes. Rational beliefs are more in line with the truth. So the truthful and more rational style is, “If I take initiative, ask the boss how he's feeling because he looks rather sad, then I'll know if its my problem or his problem.” The shy person who feels left out, eliminates crooked thinking by accepting the more truthful and rational approach, which is, “I will greet and compliment people so they like me and choose me.”
2. Overgeneralization (Beck, 1979)
Generalization is crooked thinking. Generalization occurs when you say; “I got sick riding in a bus once, so I'm never going to ride a bus again.” — “That restaurant was so slow, I'm never going back again.” — “I tried to fix the water faucet, but I'm no good at fixing.” A person can fail once or twice, and not try again. That's overgeneralization. Suppose a young lady goes to a dance, but does not get an invitation to dance. Then she avoids future dances, believing, “I am a disliked or unattractive person.” That is over-generalization, but it also shows a person who is possibly unskilled in conversation and social skills. To quit attending dances is crooked thinking and irrational. The irrational thinking (“I'm unattractive.”) leads to the irrational conclusion (staying home), based on the irrational belief (there is no hope or nothing I can learn will help). In rational thinking, you challenge the very core of your belief. You attack the irrational belief. You see a counselor. You read a book. If neither help you, see a second counselor and a second book. You challenge, challenge, challenge. Looking for a more rational approach is more rewarding than crooked and irrational thinking which generates problems and unhappiness.
3. Awfulizing (Ellis, 1975)
Awfulizing is crooked thinking. Awfulizing is when one frequently says; “Isn't it awful that I can't spell very well.” “Isn't it awful that I'm so short (too tall).” “Isn't it awful that I am not good in sports.” — These kinds of statements come from persons specializing in negative thinking. They count curses rather than blessings. This is a learned pattern. Television programs and movies capitalize on horror stories, because some people are drawn to the negative side of life. Certain persons will flip past a dozen TV game shows, sports programs, comedy, news, movies, etc., and stop on the awfulizing programs whenever they can. The NEWS programs are probably the most awfulizing. The programs will probably not hurt any older person, but they reinforce the internal awfulizing tendencies. “Isn't it awful that this happens!” (Ha!). Sure, we all do it a little. The consequences of awfulizing is that people with whom you work and socialize may not like it. Avoided persons need to evaluate how much awfulizing they do. Has their awfulizing reached irrational (unacceptable) limits?
4. Catastrophizing (Ellis, 1975)
Catastrophizing is crooked thinking. Catastrophizing is when one often says; “I can't go skiing. What if I break my leg.” “I can't get up in front of those people. What if I have a mental block.” “What if the plane crashes......!” “What if.......!” Notice how much anxiety is behind these expressions, and that the person is not attacking the soundness of one's own thought processes. People who do a lot of catastrophizing have been practicing it, unintentionally. Emotional anxiety grabs the thought and inflates it, before the brain is engaged to evaluate the truth of the belief the person holds. Catastrophizing eventually immobilizes people little by little. It put people in bondage to self-created myths that have only small percentages of truth. Most people start early squelching the anxiety that dominates reason and rationality. Persons who have learned how to force anxiety back to normal levels have used mental rational processes to beat down inappropriate anxiety.
5. Mind Reading (Beck, 1979)
Mind reading is crooked thinking. Mind reading when one says; “You think you are so smart!” “You are just acting that way because you are jealous.” This distortion is a disguised attack, based on how smart a person thinks s/he is. The irrationality is to believe that you can know what another person is thinking. It is a closed-mind judgmental evaluation that is a put-down. Mind Reading is the opposite of active listening, generally considered a more optimum lifestyle. The practice of Mind Reading is sometimes an art which people like to practice in private when they are seeking to make some strategic sales pitches or before making political statements. When anger and anxiety are absent Mind Reading may not become a problem. Suppressed anger and anxiety contaminate the process and turn it into irrational thinking. One needs to attack this type of crooked or distorted thinking at its roots, where the anger and anxiety are. One needs to self-talk like, “Don't attack, just ask the person a question.” It's more rational to believe that you can't know what a person is thinking.
6. Should-izing (Ellis, 1975)
Should-izing is crooked thinking. “I should be the best teacher!” — “I should never feel hurt or show it! — “I should always work at peak efficiency!” — “I should be able to find a solution to all problems!” — “I should please everyone !” — Albert Ellis calls this, “mustubatory thinking.” People feel they “must” do certain impossible things. The irrationality of living by an excessive amount of “shoulds” is that you drive yourself to irritability and frustration. The erroneous belief inside should-izing is that you are capable of being a god, who can do it all perfectly. The more rational person takes time to mentally evaluate his or her capabilities and expectations. Then with that truth in hand, the person makes a reasonable set of expectations and discards the excesses. The myth of god-likeness is irrational. It is subdued or eliminated by an appeal to reason, and an attack on distorted and crooked thinking.
8. Fairness-izing (Ellis, 1975)
Fairnessizing is crooked thinking. Fairnessizing is the pattern of saying; “It isn't fair that some people get better jobs!” — “It isn't fair that I get that grade after all the studying I did!” — “It isn't fair that s/he is more attractive! — Ellis sees unfairness as natural, not unnatural. Ellis has refreshed our memory, that unfairness is everywhere. That is truth. That is the rational way to look at the real world. We would all like to see more fairness but it probably will never happen. Look at it this way. While there is some unfairness, there is also some justice. Everyone has abilities and talents. Everyone has hope. Everyone has energy. Everyone has a mind. Everyone has a heart and can love. Everyone can be outgoing and helpful. Everyone can work at something. There is some justice in that. Fairness-izing is irrational. It generates and supports a poor-me attitude. Justice-izing is more rational, more truthful, and more reality based. If you believe in fairness-izing you wind up with an irrational “Poor Me!.” If you believe in justice-izing you turn rational and use your mind to think rationally. Thinking about justice gives one the ability to attack the “fallacy of fairness.”
8. Emotional Reasoning (Burns, 1980)
Emotional reasoning is crooked thinking. Emotional reasoning multiples the facts like; “You S.O.B. I told you to do that 4000 times!” — “I'm the dumbest one; I'll always be on the bottom!” — “Someone's always taking advantage of me!” — “I feel so down, I must be guilty of something!” — This type of distorted thinking takes it cue from the feelings, and makes a conclusion based on a feeling of the moment. In this process the emotional cues trigger only those thoughts which are on the same emotional frequency. Like in radio signals, in Emotional Reasoning the dial of the emotional frequency is set to allow only the brain memory messages that are on the same frequency. In Emotional Reasoning, the rest of the memory in the brain is not consulted. This is very poor thinking, when a person doesn't scan the dial of other frequencies in the brain to see what other messages are available. To combat Emotional Reasoning a person does not avoid the messages of the feelings, but the person deliberately “disputes” and “attacks” the irrational link between the original feeling and the consequent behavior. For example, if a person feels depressed because of a criticism, s/he needs to “dispute” whether the criticism was the critics problem or one's own problem, or how much of the problem belongs to each.
“He who conquers others is strong; He who
conquers himself is mighty.” Laotse, The Character of Tao, 6th century B.C.
9. Inflating (multiplying), (Global judging) (Ellis, 1975)
Inflating is crooked thinking. Inflating is done by persons who say (with wind!); “Everyone in that company is a crook! — “Every word you say is a lie!” — “You are the laziest person in the whole world!” — The irrationality of these sentences lies in taking a piece of truth that is the size of fingernail and hitting the offending person with an inflated quantity of disproportionate anger. Such a mind is distorted and doing terribly crooked thinking. In this Globalizing-judging tendency the mind erroneously inflates the size of the intended hostile response, multiplies the anger beyond rational believability, and dumps a put-down that is grossly exaggerated by anyone's rational calculation. The words “always” and “never” fit into this person's vocabulary. Unfortunately, such a person does not always realize what they are doing. When confronted, it is possible for this person to use a number of other unconscious defense mechanisms (Chapter 4) to avoid becoming aware.
10. Blaming (self and/or others)
Blaming is crooked thinking. Blaming is a narcissistic defense mechanism and comes out; “I didn't do it. S/he did!” — “I know I'm right!” — “Yah but.... You ought to know how tired I am of your.....!” — These are illustrations of a “neurotic defense mechanism” at work to free us from our self-destructive guilt (Kaplan & Sadock, 1985). Rational Emotive therapists see this as an irrational behavior, based on a false assumption, that fosters self-destructive tendencies. The false assumption is that a “blamer” believes s/he is getting away with something, but the victim knows. The victim may not have the intestinal fortitude and power to convince the “blamer” that s/he is attempting to escape self-guilt through blaming. The victim may only get shot down verbally for trying to defend himself or herself, so eventually s/he avoids, leaves or divorces. The “blamer” is irrational. Almost nothing a person says can outsmart a practicing “blamer.” The more you try to explain yourself to a “blamer” the more of these distorted and crooked thinking patterns s/he will use. To correct one's tendency to “blame” someone else, a person needs to be aware of the defect. Curing irrational “blaming” will require an attitude of some humility and a strong commitment to truth.
There are a few other variations of crooked, distorted and irrational thinking, that can be illustrated in the following way.
1. Personalizing
“I would have enjoyed the party if (name of someone) wasn't there.”
2. Over- (The microwave quits working)
generalization “It happens every time you need it.”
3. Awfulizing
“I never get a break. I lose my job. The bank takes my house.
They repossess my car.”
4. Catastrophizing
“When you didn't come home on time, I thought you'd been in a car accident.”
5. Mind Reading
“You always think you are so smart, but I know what you really think.”
6. Should-izing
“I should always be able to know what to say when I talk with people.”
7. Fairness-izing
“It isn't fair that I was treated so badly as a child.”
8. Emotional reason
“I feel depressed. I better stay home from work today.”
9. Inflating
“Well if you can call me a bad name like that, I'll call you a bigger one or several other worse names.” also called Globalizing.
10. Blaming
“I don't care what you say, if you would have been prompt, we wouldn't have been so behind that I drove fast and got into the accident.”
Ask one of your friends which one of the above crooked thinking patterns you do that bothers them more than the others.
15
Styles of
Distorted Thinking
1. FILTERING
(keeping the negatives)
2. POLARIZED THINKING
(either black or white)
3. OVERGENERALIZATION
4. MIND READING
5. CATASTROPHIZING
6. PERSONALIZATION
7. CONTROL FALLACIES
(that I must control)
8. FALLACY OF FAIRNESS
9. BLAMING
10. SHOULDS
11. EMOTIONAL REASONING
12. FALLACY OF CHANGE
(expect other to change)
13. GLOBAL LABELING
14. BEING RIGHT
(no one is always right)
15. HEAVEN'S REWARD
FALLACY (bitter if
one is not rewarded for
all the good done)
Matthew McKay, Martha Davis, Patrick Fanning
Thoughts and Feelings, 1981
|
Session 8-2 SELF-TALK: Mobilizing Rational Thinking
Self-Talk is not just a lone skill to attack a group of problems. Self-Talk is somewhat of a theme running through A-B-C-D-E-F. Self-Talk combines with others to do battle with a concentrated hurt, disputing and replacing the belief(s) that are causing it.
Methods and techniques
Methods and techniques for REBT are shared with other therapeutic approaches. Besides “rational thinking,” “self-disputing” needs to be learned. To do more self-disputing a person is encouraged to employ a repetition of self-statements reinforce the more rational ideas. Self-disputing is also improved by “distracting” oneself when irrational thoughts arise. Self-disputing is improved through thought-stopping and the use of imagery (Ellis, 1969, 1976; Ellis and Grieger, 1977) . REBT employs the use of humor, wit and witty songs (Ellis, 1977). Relaxation training, with the use of the Jacobson Relaxation exercises is one of REBT's distraction methods. Problem-solving cuts through the paralyzing effect of “Awfulizing.” Problem-solving helps people turn a global-sized personal problem into a manageable set of procedures. REBT employs the skills of assertiveness training and communication training. These, and other skills, are employed to replace “crooked thinking,” which, according to Ellis, people “invent” sometimes incorrectly, or “acquire” mistakenly, from others and cultural.
REBT claims for itself a more conscious attempt to “help clients acquire a basic philosophical outlook that makes them maximally non-dependent, individualistic and nonconformist” (Ellis, 1986, p. 41). REBT therapists positively affirm their client's successes. It thus uses a technique of “ operant conditioning“ from behavior modification; a self-help system that uses rewards and penalization for self to make changes. While therapeutic success in behavior modification relies on the therapists affirming the client, REBT teaches persons to do their own self-doubting, self-affirming, and find their own successful lifestyles. That, believes Ellis, is eventually more liberating.
Emotional re-education by skill training
The structure of Rational Emotive Behavior therapy rests on a foundation that people can reeducate themselves to more optimum emotions, just like they can reeducate themselves to learn a new language.
There are 5 basic stages to emotional re-education (Maultsby, 1986): (1) intellectual insight; learning what you need to practice to gain an end result, (2) converting practice; meaning to act on one's new intellectual insights, (3) cognitive-emotive dissonance; sensing that the new behavior isn't automatically and harmoniously functioning yet, (4) emotional insight; the new way of thinking is becoming comfortable, (5) personality trait formation; the new habit is in place and people realize it. Education does the job of redirecting people to healthier and happier lifestyles.
Writing, relaxation, and imagery in REBT
Add writing, relaxation and imagery to self-talk and those other skills mentioned above. Self-talk does not work alone. Habits are hard to break. Phobias, addictions, anxieties and obsessions are largely habitual. Thus reeducation, with reinforcing practice sessions is required of persons who want to become free of problems. Persons who want to be rid of problem behaviors are asked to write their A-B-C-D-E-F analysis (see above) of certain specific situations. After they finish the D (disputing) their previously valued B (beliefs), the person is asked to write out a statement of what belief s/he might have after s/he self-disputes and thinks through rationally, the earlier irrational Belief. Once the old irrational belief is identified, along with the planned new one, the person learns the skill of relaxation. The person learns to breath-in while slowly counting to 4, hold the breath for a count of 4 and then breath out for a count of 4. Then wait until it feels natural to breath again. This should be practiced 3-4 minutes or until the person feels calm. Then, during the holding action between breathing-in and breathing-out, the person pictures first the old irrational pattern. After breath is out, the person pictures the new image of the new emotion and the new behavior to accompany this. This relaxation and the new image needs to be paired for 10 to 30 minutes, daily or oftener, for several days or longer. Maxie Maultsby, Jr. (1986) is convinced that ineffectiveness of this treatment is caused by “vague images” and persons more programmed to concept-processing than image-processing. “Progressive rational self-mastery is the invariable result” (Maultsby, 1986).
Therapy elements in REBT
The Ellis model works post-hypnotically without the trance state to precede it. If a person adopts a new and more rational belief, spends time in relaxation and visually images that new belief into daily behavior, that person is practicing a form of non-trance post-hypnotic suggestion. The research behind this understanding is based on work by Barber and associates (Barber, 1979; Barber, Spanos & Chaves, 1974). They have demonstrated that learning lies more in motivation, cooperation, attitudes, expectations and involvement in the process. The relaxation exercises provide the release of resistance and the entrance into the unconscious processes. Once a person is willing to adopt a new and more rational idea, it will find entrance into the unconscious processes more quickly when a person is relaxed, both physically and mentally.
A few REBT (Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy) therapists combine self-hypnosis (Golden, 1986) with the use of rational processes. Ellis says he rarely uses self-hypnosis processes.
Ellis is more convinced that discovering and correcting erroneous or self-defeating beliefs are more effective. This process requires a certain amount of self-affirmation, or affirmation of a new idea or belief.
Rational self-talk still has limits to its effectiveness. For example, if a person's problems come from being beaten by a drunken spouse, probably only one of the skills of REBT will be helpful; self-dispute the irrationality of staying there, and then, get out.
Making posters for reinforcement
Let your posters do the talking. With big letters, tell yourself what is so irrational about what you have believed, and what rational belief you are adopting. If you don't like to think of relaxation, use of imagery and self-talk, instead make posters, write songs (to familiar tunes), make tape recordings. The person who is determined, acts determined. Too many people seek the help of counselors and expect change without effort. That is the medical model, and it is irrational to think that the medical model has answers for the psychological part of a person, at least at present.
Fighting recidivism (going back to old behavior) with Self-Talk
Recidivism is the natural tendency to go back to where you started. If a person doesn't fight back or establish a defensive strategy the enemy tends to come back. Old behaviors tends to come back a little. It might be wise to keep the posters up for longer than you planned originally. Better yet, make new posters from time to time to catch your attention. The fact that some persons go to support groups for years, indicates that certain self-defeating behaviors are hard to change.
Session 8-3 AARON BECK, M.D. — Cognitive Restructuring
Types of Cognitive Errors (Beck, et al., 1979)
1. Arbitrary inference refers to the process of drawing a specific conclusion in the absence of evidence to support the conclusion or when the evidence is contrary to the conclusion.
2. Selective abstraction consists of focusing on a detail taken out of context, ignoring other more salient [relevant] features of the situation and conceptualizing the whole experience on the basis of this fragment.
3. Overgeneralization refers to the pattern of drawing a general rule or conclusion on the basis of one or more isolated incidents and applying the concept across the board to related and unrelated situations.
4. Magnification and minimization are reflected in errors in evaluating the significance or magnitude of an event that are so gross as to constitute a distortion.
5. Personalization refers to the client’s proclivity to relate events to him or herself when there is no basis for making such a connection.
6. Dichotomous thinking is manifested in the tendency to place experiences in one of two opposite categories; for example, flawless or defective, immaculate or filthy, saint or sinner. In describing him or herself, the client selects the extreme negative categorization.
Reprinted with permission by Aaron T. Beck, M.D.
|
Aaron T. Beck, M.D., (b. 1921), College of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, has been a major force in the development of cognitive (teaching and learning) approaches to growth and problem-solving. While a number of Cognitive Behavior Therapies (CBT) have appeared over the past two to three decades, the most prominent have been those of Albert Ellis and Aaron Beck. Like Ellis, Beck was trained in the environment of psychoanalysis, but moved beyond it. CBT is a more structured approach and follows conscious versus unconscious processes like what was seen in psychoanalytic views.
Cognitive errors: Beck observed that many persons have problems that come from non-factual information they have learned, and from errors in the way a person processes this information. Beck’s list of cognitive errors is somewhat related to the Defense Mechanisms (found in the Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry, 1975, 1985) that were described in Chapter 3; denial, blame, rationalization, etc. The Cognitive errors, like the Defense Mechanisms, create many problems for people who are not trained to avoid them, and use healthier, more rational and factual thought patterns. The following types of erroneous thinking form some of, or all of the problem that creates the dysfunctional (less than optimal) behavior.
Automatic thoughts: These are the thoughts and thought processes that happen when a person is not rationally in control. These thoughts are often illogical and produce both wrong conclusions and problem behaviors.
Personal initiative — function like a scientist: Finding and changing the obstacles to growth, and/or resolving one’s own problems requires that the person see himself or herself as a personal scientist. The task is a personal one. The person, like a scientist, raises questions about the rationality of the idea or belief that is an obstacle, or the rationality of the idea that produced the undesirable and unwanted behavior. Beck believes that people in general want to know about themselves and their world so they can predict and control their environment for their own advantage. Troubled persons are considered by Beck to "poorly functioning scientists who could help themselves by testing their hypotheses more effectively and discarding ones that do not fit data in favor of ones that fit better.”
Daily Record of Dysfunctional Thoughts: There is homework to do in Cognitive Behavior Therapy (CBT). The person who is growth-oriented or wishes to alter some unwanted behavior is in for a struggle. Habits of one’s past behavior form huge resistance to change. The following is a structured pattern for identifying the erroneous thinking pattern and making changes.
Refuting irrational behavior: If some idea or belief is giving trouble, the person first needs to become aware of its irrationality. However, more importantly, that erroneous idea or belief must be overthrown, exterminated, "refuted" (discredited, contradicted).
Cognitive Restructuring: Beck’s processes are neatly encompassed by the words " Cognitive Restructuring.” Beck and Cognitive Restructuring were synonymous earlier. The term is now used broadly and generally to apply to a variety of Cognitive Behavioral Therapies.
Cognitive rehearsal: This is a process by which a person visualizes, with imagery, those new ideas, beliefs and processes that are being required for change. By rehearsal, the new idea or belief is implanted, watered, nurtured and protected until it bears the fruit of renewed behavior. Self-made tape recordings and self-made posters can enhance the process. Other skills (from other chapters) may also be employed in the process. Behavior Modification (Chapter 13) has many skills it can offer. One of them is " thought stopping,” a simple and straight-forward telling yourself to quit going down some track of erroneous automatic thinking. Cognitive restructuring and cognitive rehearsal involve a process of reorienting one’s thought processes to reality; of requiring of one’s mind that it think truthfully, factually, and logically. Beck is not known to use the term "Self-Talk.” However, some of what he advocates resembles that concept. Beck is more specific about the use of book-reading, imagery and daily written practice, as skills for more optimum lifestyle behaviors.
Beck and depression testing: Cognitive therapy has its earliest roots in Beck’s interest in depression. Beck challenged some of the early ideas that anger turned inward, producing depression. Beck saw clients who were not thinking rationally and had ideas that got them into disturbing troubles. He became widely known for his creation of the Beck Depression Test (1961).
Bibliotherapy: Many persons could multiply the benefits of therapy by reading something that is directed toward their particular problem If Beck’ patients suffers from depression, Beck asks his client to read his book Coping with Depression (Beck and Greenberg, 1974). Many people have learned to break thinking errors and problem behaviors by going to a library and looking for books to read on their particular concern.
Session 8- MAXIE MAULTSBY ON WRSA
The following skill is Written Rational Self Analysis (WRSA) by Maxie Maultsby. This skill guides us to function by optimum rational beliefs. Each of us needs to pursue the most truthful, rational and social values there are to promote a harmonious society and good personal relationships. The skill is cognitive restructuring. This means that we need to use our minds to learn and practice that which is most beneficial to us and to our society. The following skill functions best to keep us out of a lot of trouble. It is a way to fight back against the forces of depression, that tend to destroy our sense of autonomy, freedom and self-determination. It is a needed skill in the repertoire of optimum human functioning.
Written Rational Self Analysis (Maxie Maultsby)
Persons who are seriously interested in emotional growth and problem-solving need to know about Rational Self Analysis (RSA) and more particularly about Written Rational Self Analysis. They are a type of structured skill programs developed by Maxie C. Maultsby, Jr. M.D., Howard University, Washington D.C. Dr. Maultsby is a friend and cohort of Albert Ellis, founder of Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy. Both of these persons, along with Aaron T. Beck and Martin E.P. Seligman (both of the University of Pennsylvania) are strong leaders in the area of cognitive (learned: mind-directed) behavior changes to sustain optimum lifestyles and to solve certain kinds of problems.
Maultsby and the growth of rationality
In the first half of the 20th century problem-solving therapy focused on discovering past, suppressed and unconscious motivations and traumas that prompted emotional instability. The field of psychology was heavily influenced by the psychoanalytic idea that if you looked back and discovered the reason for the emotional instability, that new awareness would contribute to more emotional stability. Many counselors used this concept and they did help a sizeable percentage of persons. However, many persons did not respond to this treatment. Many emotionally disturbed persons failed to make any changes. Therapists began to ask questions and researchers began to look for other skills that could bring about healthy behaviors.
The second half of the 20th century saw a large number of persons become interested in teaching a person how to think more rationally. Ellis, Beck, Maultsby, and their many followers, have been in this group for most of the last half of the 20th century.
Maultsby and the paradigm shift
A paradigm is basically a model with dynamic movement. Coming out of earlier psychoanalytic thinking, it was believed that eliciting feelings from their remote hiding places in the unconscious resolved a certain number of emotional problems. The emphasis was on feelings. In the last half century there is a growing awareness of the power of putting something into (the mind) rather than letting something out (emotions). Neither rules out the other. There are appropriate times when each is therapeutic for the appropriate goal.
Maultsby - Beliefs determine destiny
The newcomer psychologists in the second half of the 20th century made a major shift in thinking. While previous psychoanalysts believed problems were solved by having people unload their feelings, the new breed saw problems solved by training persons to think more rationally. Ellis, Beck, Maultsby and their cohorts trained persons to question the beliefs that were behind and beneath the behavior, whether these beliefs were rational (truthful) or misguided (untruthful). They have been demonstrating for over 40 years that many problems are the result of some mis-information, some false notion, and some ignorance, all of which was called "irrational.” Ultimately, the skill of problem-solving (in their view) is enhanced by a mental process that replaces irrational ideas and beliefs with more rational (truthful, helpful, productive) beliefs.
Maxie C. Maultsby, Jr. M. D.
Dr Maultsby is a teacher and supervisor of therapists. He spelled out his perspectives in a book entitled, Rational Behavior Therapy, by Maxie C. Maultsby, Jr. (1984). Fortunately, Dr. Maultsby has spelled out his ideas in a chapter for people in general. "Our research in teaching Rational Self-Counseling as a regular classroom course (Maultsby, Costello, and Carpenter 1976) indicates that it is an ideal way to help normal people help themselves to happiness (Maultsby, 1984). ” Maultsby’s system of teaching people certain steps in how to become more rational, is very fitting for this textbook. In a lot of previously written psychology, the focus was on the factors that produced either helpful or problematic behavior. Maultsby understands those factors as well as anyone. His commitment to the resolution of problems is very admirable.
You will see a similar A-B-C-D-E system used and taught by Maultsby.
See sample use of the A-B-C-D-E in dealing with the problem generated by an irrational (not true) idea.
The A - B - C ‘s of rational self analysis (RSA): In the chapter entitled “Written Rational Self-Analysis” Chapter 14) Maultsby describes “The Standard Rational Self-Analysis (RSA) format.”
Step 1 is to describe the (A) activating event. (Write down a video camera report.)
My wife is going to divorce me because I have a temper and get violent.
Step 2 is to describe one's (B) beliefs about Step 1.
I believe I was born with a temper.
I believe my wife deserves some of violence.
I believe I can not change.
I do not believe my drinking alcohol has anything to do with it.
I believe the situation is almost hopeless.
Step 3 is to describe the © consequences (in terms of behaviors and feelings) of one's Step 2 beliefs.
I will be divorced, lose my home, lose the love of my children.
Step 4 Here one writes down the Five Rational Questions, and evaluates whether beliefs and evaluations are rational.
"1. Is my thinking based on obvious facts? ” __ No
"2. Will my thinking here help me protect my life and health? ” __ No
"3 .Will my thinking here help me achieve my short-term
and long-term goals? ” __ No
"4. Will my thinking here best help me avoid my most
unwanted conflict with others? ” __ No
"5. Will my thinking here best help me habitually feel
the emotions I want to feel? ” __ No
(Majority of 3 no answers motivates one to replace irrational beliefs.)
Step 5 is the process of listing rational replacements for irrational ideas.
If my belief that I was born with a temper is wrong, then my new belief must be that if I learned it, I can unlearn it.
If my belief that my wife deserves it is wrong, then I better not hit her even if I feel inside that she deserves it.
|
The process is rather straight-forward. The person is taught how to question the problem phobia, the problem obsessive-compulsive behavior, the problem addiction, the problem whatever, etc., until the person discovers an erroneous belief(s) that is distorting thinking. The erroneous belief may be an irrational one, a non-true one. Upon investigating, asking others, rething the belief and/or seeing the irrational idea, the person proceeds to use the RSA skill with each occurrence. Refuting the irrational belief unblocks the person to self-talk a new belief which resolves self-destructive behaviors. RSA is fascinating. RSA works.
Cognitive-Emotive Dissonance” resistance: This means that when your head (cognition) tells you to do something, but your do not feel emotionally (emotive) like doing it, there is an inner clash (dissonance) that shuts down your will power. Maultsby says that, "Cognitive-emotive dissonance is the main reason people who do not know their ABCs (action, belief, consequence) refuse to make what they admit would be desirable behavioral changes” (Maultsby, 1984, p. 163).
Rational Behavior Therapy (RBT) and Written Rational Self Analysis (WRSA) believe that the brain and its belief system run into a lot of resistance from feelings. While first-half twentieth century psychoanalytic psychology has advocated listening to feelings, second-half twentieth century cognitive psychology is saying we may need to ignore our feelings (during behavior change) if the behavior is rational enough. The two perspectives are not fighting. They are filling the niches the other systems can not help.
Rational Emotive Imagery: Once a person has written a new rational belief, it needs to be focused on to be of help. Imagery helps. Maultsby uses the term "Rational Emotive Imagery.” Holding an image of the new rational belief and practicing that belief, helps to install that belief more permanently. That new image of the new belief becomes the key to the behavior change that resolves the original problem.
Rational Bibliotherapy: This is book reading therapy. ( A biblio - graphy is a list of book titles, authors, publishing companys and dates.) Dr. Maultsby is so interested in getting persons to become free from their dependencies, that he makes READING a part of therapy. He has a standard routine of giving one of his books to his clients and asking them to do some reading and writing each day. The person is required to find agreements and disagreements, as well as personal applications of the material. The notes and questions are discussed in the next therapy session. Placing the tools of rational thinking, such as reading, enables persons to get beyond their dependencies on the therapist, and finally achieve a greater amount of autonomy.
Summary
Maxie C. Maultsby, M.D., has translated his Rational Behavior Therapy (RBT), which is for therapists, into Written Rational Self Analysis (RSA), so the average person can use it. That makes it exceptionally appropriate for inclusion in this textbook. In doing that Maultsby substantiates the validity and usefulness of this kind of psychology course and textbook. Maultsby’s system (skills) is somewhat more complex as it encompasses a wider range of problems, but that is left for more advanced students.
Session 8-5 MARTIN SELIGMAN and POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY
Martin E.P. Seligman, of the University of Pennsylvania, has a long history of research and discovery of how “learned optimism”helps people live a more optimum set of lifestyle factors. He started out looking for the causes of personal problems. He spent ten years doing that. He researched in the context of his teaching profession. About 30 years later he spent more of his energies identifying other positive psychological values and lifeskills besides “optimism.”
Seligman’s contribution fits in this chapter, as well as in later chapters. Seligman is essentially in the same camp as Ellis or Beck. Ellis developed his system which is now identified as Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT). Beck set up quite a similar system and called it Cognitive Behavior Therapy (CBT). Seligman identifies himself more closely with just the Behavior Therapy (BT) title, but Seligman stays close to the rational and the cognitive. Current practitioners of BT also include: J. Wolpe, M. D., D. Barlow, Ph. D., E. Foa, Ph.D. and many others.
Seligman’s research contributes substantially to rational thinking. He has been demonstrating with research that certain false beliefs and learned information generates trouble like increased headaches, increased depression and more frequent health problems. He also understands that there are some values, beliefs and mental processes that enable people to prevent and resolve problems. Above all he places confidence in the learning capacity of a person’s mental processes. The mind that can learn misinformation which causes problems, can be enlisted to learn truthful, rational, reasonable information which prevents and resolves problems.
“Learned optimism is not a rediscovery of the power of positive thinking. The skills of optimism do not emerge from the pink Sunday school world of happy events. They do not consist in learning to say positive things to yourself. We have found over the years that positive statements you make to yourself have little if any effect. What is crucial is what you think when you fail, using the power of non-negative thinking. Changing the destructive things you say to yourself when you experience the setbacks that life deals all of us is the central skill of optimism.”
Martin. E. P. Seligman
Learned Optimism
1990
|
Seligman’s research with helplessness in dogs
Seligman’s research with dogs helped him learn about helplessness. Mankind will be forever blessed by what those dear animals learned. At first they learned to become helpless. They learned that when stress is overwhelming it was necessary to give up easily. Having learned to give up the animals had lower expectations about coping with future obstacles. That is just like people. Then those dogs learned to be optimistic. They didn’t approach stress with pessimism but optimism, just like people. With research, Seligman demonstrated that people prevent and solve problems better when the mind is put to work to think optimistically. Prevention and therapy is most effective when the therapist or the teacher has a system (like the ABC system of Ellis and Beck) that puts the rational mind back in control.
“Most psychologists spdnd their lives working within traditional categories of problems: depression, achidvement, health, political upsets, parenting, business organizations, and the like. I have spent my life trying to create a new category, which cuts across many of the traditional ones. I see events as success or failures of personal control.”
Martin. E. P. Seligman
Learned Optimism
1990
|
“The Stuff of Hope”
“Hope has largely been the province of preachers, of politicians, and of hucksters.”
“Finding temporary and specific causes for misfortune is the art of hope: Temporary causes limit helplessness in time, and specific causes limit helplessness to the original situation.”
(For example: from a complaining wife – “My husband is in a bad mood.” – It’s temporary and specific – suggests “hopeful”)
“On the other hand, permanent causes produce helplessness far into the future, and universal causes spread helplessness through all your endeavors. Finding permanent and universal causes for misfortune is the practice of despair.”
(For example: from a complaining wife – “Men are tyrants.” – It’s permanent and universal. – suggests “hopeless.”
Martin. E. P. Seligman
Learned Optimism
1990 (pp.48-49)
|
The story of Martin Seligman’s very early experiments with dogs is extremely fascinating. It’s the kind of story that makes it easy to remember Seligman. In 1964, at age 21 Seligman went to graduate school at the University of Pennsylvania. In due time he arrived at the laboratory of Dr. Richard L. Solomon. He and graduate assistants were doing experiments with dogs to learn about mental processes and mental illness. The dogs had been subjected to varying stimuli over a period of time and were now quite listless and passive. Seligman observed something there that would occupy his efforts for the next 35 years or more.
Seligman sensed that the dogs has been conditioned into a state of helplessness by all the previous stimuli. He put that together with his vision of his future profession, psychology, helping people who felt helpless. He saw helplessness all around. Helplessness drove people to counselors. Helplessness made people steal. Helplessness turned people into Poor Me attitudes and behaviors. Helplessness was in the depressed person. Helplessness was in the mentally disturbed person.
Martin Seligman, Don Overmie r and Steve Maier started more experiments with the dogs. They used the most scientific research processes known. They used a shuttle cage with a partition in the middle. They gave mild and very humane electrical shocks to the dogs. The dogs would jump around inside one half of the shuttle cage and finally escape the shock by leaping over the partition. If a dog did not perform that way the electrical impulses would cease in sixty seconds. A few dogs never escaped the electrical impulses and became extremely passive and helpless. Most of the dogs learned to escape. With continued trials the majority of dogs took less and less time to get over the partition.
The research went on for 4 years, using 150 dogs. Various sizes and breeds of dogs were used. Different graduate assistants were enlisted to replicate the procedures and substantiate the results. Up to this time most research was based on B.F. Skinner’s behavioristic idea. Behaviorism was the most respected science for 60-70 or more years by then. Behaviorism believed that learning was based on reward. Now Seligman, Overmier and Maier were demonstrating that there is an internal intelligence, even in animals, that can learn, unlearn and relearn.
That man and beast can learn doesn’t need to be proven to most of us. However, for psychologists, this was important. It dealt a blow (not lethal) to Sigmund Freud’s half-century reign of psychoanalysis, which believed that emotional problems are solved with bringing unconscious painful feelings to the surface. It dealt a blow (not lethal) to Behaviorism which had very little to offer professional counselors trying to help emotionally disturbed persons.
The more optimistic you are the better grades you get.
When a dog becomes more and more helpless it is harder and harder to teach it anything. The reason lies in the dog’s sense of personal control. “Uncontrollable events undermine the motivation to initiate voluntary responses that control other events. . . Uncontrolability distorts the perception of control. . . This phenomenon appears in helpless dogs, rats, and men [persons]. . . Once a naive dog makes one response that produces relief, he catches on; on all further trials he responds vigorously and learns to avoid shock altogether. But dogs who first received inescapable shock are different in this respect also. About one-third of them go through a similar pattern -- sitting through shock on the first three or four trials, then escaping successfully on the next. These dogs, however, then revert to taking the shock and they fail to escape on future trials. It looks as if one success is just not enough to make a helpless dog learn that his responding now works” (Seligman, 1975, p. 37). — In a practical equivalent, if you as a student tend to be pessimistic about friendship, success, well-being, happiness, etc., it may have an effect on how much of this course is helping you. Don’t become overly concerned, but find what ever you need to spur on a larger amount of optimism.
Helplessness producing emotional disturbance
When catastrophe strikes, people are stunned. That is quite natural. Seligman discovered that a dog having experienced a strong electrical impulse might retain the state of helplessness in the shuttle box for 24 hours. Wait 3 days and the dog will quickly escape over the partition. If a dog is given an inescapable shock 4 times in one week it will last for weeks. The effect of traumatic experiences will dissipate over time. However, suffering the same traumatic experience over time makes it more difficult for the traumatic experience to dissipate. Also repeated and intensive traumatic experiences often produce both mental and physical illnesses. — There is a practical lesson from this. Learn Ellis’, Beck’s, Seligman’s ABC system to keep Moving Up.
Helplessness contributing to depression
Helplessness was shown to be a factor in depression. Depressed persons, with high scores on Beck’s Depression Test, become fatigued and unmotivated. Persons who can identify the low-blow or trauma that happened, bounce back quickly. Other depressed persons do not think accurately. They scan their lives and attribute a good deal of the blame to themselves. They make comparisons and the emotionally tone of their being makes them consider themselves as failures, victims, and feeling worthless or guilty. Reasonableness, truth and seeing the bigger picture are distorted. Pessimists do that more than optimists. Depression has many causes and manifestations. Some forms require medication. Most depressed persons can benefit from REBT, or CBT or CT (See above.) These forms of attacking the depressed feelings use Seligman’s belief that treatment and recovery depends on learning to make the mind discard misinformation one generates in oneself, and learn real, true, helpful ways of thinking and believing.
“Depression can be cured by straightforward changes in
conscious thinking or helped by medication.”
Martin E. P. Seligman
Moving Up from helplessness to hopefulness
Moving up from helplessness to hopefulness, becomes similar to moving from pessimism to optimism. Here is what Martin Seligman and fellow researchers did to cure and prevent the continuation of the pessimism they had created in the dogs.
“My colleagues and I worked for a long time without success on the problem: First, we took the barrier out of the shuttle box, so the dog could lick the safe side if he chose, but he just lay there. Then I got into the other side of the shuttle box and called to the dog, but he just lay there. We made the dogs hungry and dropped Hebrew National salami onto the safe side, but still the dog just lay there. . . Finally. . . we put long leashes around the necks of the dogs and began to drag them back and forth across the shuttle box during the CS and shock, with the barrier removed. Getting to the other side turned off the shock. . . After 25 to 200 draggings all dogs began to respond on their own (Seligman, 1975).
“The cure was one hundred percent reliable and permanent.” The rational faculties of the dog needed to unlearn and relearn. Its brain needed to process and reprocess, learning a new belief, a rational, reasonable, beneficial fact. REBT and CBT and CT require a process that puts the mind in possession of control of one’s rational processes, thus removing the “ awfulizing” tendencies, the “exaggeration” tendencies, the “filtering tendencies” and the ( musterbation” tendencies (See Ellis and Beck.)
DEPRESSION
“When we looked at the upsurge of depression we could view it as an epidemic of learned helplessness. We knew the cause of learned helplessness, and now we could see it as the cause of depression: the belief that your actions will be futile. This belief was engendered by defeat and failure as well as by uncontrollable situations. Depression could be cvaused by defeat, filure and loss and the consequent belife that any actions taken will be futile. I think this belief is at the heart of our national epidemic of depression.”
Martin E. P. Seligman
Learned Optimism
1990
|
She blew her diet and called herself a loser
How one thinks about what one does or didn’t do is where the mind becomes faulty. How and why does the mind become distorted? It’s partly the “self-explanations” one thinks up to neutralize fear, anxiety, shame and guilt. In a previous chapter on the conscience, you learned about neurotic defense mechanisms like denial, blame, rationalization, suppression, and others. Human beings have a conscience. That conscience sends such signals of fear, anxiety, shame and guilt to alert us to do something about our wrong thoughts or bad behaviors. Defense mechanisms only neutralize the signals of fear, anxiety, shame and guilt. They make it so the person does not need to feel guilty and change. The person can go on doing the pleasurably wrong or pleasurably bad things now that the conscience is silenced by neurotic defenses. The rationality of the mind is distorted or silenced. Self-explanations as “automatic thoughts” are like that.
“Mary has been on a strict diet for two weeks. Tonight after work she goes out for drinks with some friends and eats some of the nachos and chicken wings the others ordered. Immediately afterward she feels she has ‘ruined’ her diet. — She thinks to herself, ‘Way to go, Katie. You sure blew your diet tonight. I am so unbelievably weak. I can’t even go to a bar with some friends without making a total glutton of myself. They must think I’m such a fool. Well, all my dieting over the last two weeks is blown now, so I might as well really make a pig of myself and eat the cake in the freezer.” — Katie breaks out the Sara Lee and eats a whole chocolate fudge brownie delight. Her diet, followed scrupulously until tonight, begins to unravel. — The connection between Katie’s eating some nachos and chicken wings and then really overindulging is not a necessary one. What links the two is how she explains to herself why she ate the nachos. Her explanation is very pessimistic: ‘I am so weak.’ So is the conclusion she drew: ‘All my dieting is blown.’ In fact her diet wasn’t blown until she came up with a permanent, pervasive and personal explanation. Then she gave up. — The consequences of the nacho episode would have been very different if Katie had merely disputed her own automatic first explanation.”
How does one eliminate such non-rational “self-explanations”? Seligman’s researchers discovered they needed to drag a dog, being given the electrical impulse, across the threshold barrier in the shuttle box. They discovered that it took from 25 to 200 times. The electrically-impulsed dog had to learn that the electrical impulse would stop when the dog would be at the other end of the shuttle box. — As a practical personal application, you might need to force your mind somewhere between 25 and 200 times to learn to have your non-rational “automatic thoughts” become more true to the facts of life.
SOME PESSIMISM
IS NEEDED
“Pessimism is all around us. Some people are continually afflicted with it. All but the most optimistic among us have bouts of it. Is pessimism one of nature’s colossal mistakes, or does it have a valuable place in the scheme of things? Pessimism may support the realism we so often need. In many arenas of life, optimism is unwarranted.” (Later he acknowledges that some pessimism holds people and companies in a more stable balance.) “Someone has to dampen overly enthusiastic plans.”
Martin E.P. Seligman
Learned Optimism
1990
|
OPTIMISM AND HEALTH
“The first systematic study of pessimism’s role in causing sickness was carried out by Chris Peterson. In the mid-1980's, when he was teaching abnormal psychology at Virginia Tech, Christ got his class of 150 students to fill out the ASQ (Attribution Style Questionnaire). They also reported their health and the number of visits they’d made to doctors in the recent past. Christ then followed the health of his students for the next year. He found that the pessimists went on to have twice as many infectious illness and make twice as many visits to doctors as the optimists did.”
Martin E. P. Seligman
Learned Optimism
1990
|
OPTIMISM’S BENEFITS
“My subsequent research showed repeatedly that optimists do better in school, win more elections, succeed more at work than pessimists do. They even seem to lead longer and healthier lives. I found that pessimism can be changed into optimism, not just in depressed people but in normal people as well.”
Martin E. P. Seligman
Learned Optimism
1990
|
Seligman’s A B C D E program to get smart about getting wise
A program for dealing with problems like phobias, depression, obsessive-compulsiveness, eating disorders, neurotic defenses, etc., requires some dedication and a recording worksheet. The worksheet(s) are for recording those situations when your have experiences you do not like. That worksheet should have three basic lines for A and B and C, plus two other practical lines for dealing with ABC. There are 3 basic steps to deal with an irrational belief system. Seligman takes credit with Dr. Steven Hollon and Dr. Arthur Freeman, for working these three steps out. He also gives credit to Albert Ellis for his pioneering work and this structure.
A-DVERSITY: Record your concern, your embarrassment, your frustration that keeps appearing. (Sample)
“I threw a dinner party for a group of friends, and theperson I was trying to impress barely touched her food.”
B-ELIEFS ABOUT YOURSELF: (What’s in your mind.) Record what you remember saying to yourself when that experience takes place. Observe the pessimism in them.
“The food tastes putrid. I am such a lousy cook. I might as well forget getting to know her any better. I’m lucky she didn’t get up and leave in the middle of dinner.”
C-ONSEQUENCES: (How you feel) Record what the consequences are, how you felt, what physical or biological effect it had on you, what emotional effect it has on you.
“I felt really disappointed and angry at myself. I was so embarrassed about my cooking that I wanted to avoid her for the rest of the night. Obviously, things weren’t going as I had hoped.”
D-ISPUTING: (Sometimes a person simply “distracts” his or her attention away from to discomforting experiences, but....) It takes effort, and some help perhaps, to discover which erroneous belief has produced which problematic consequence. That’s disputing.
“This is ridiculous. I know the food doesn’t taste putrid [evidence]. She may not have eaten very much but everyone else did [evidence]. There could be a hundred reasons why she didn’t eat much [alternatives]. She could be on a diet, she might not have been feeling great, she might just have a small appetite [alternatives]. Even though she didn’t each much, she did seem to enjoy the dinner [evidence]. She told funny stories, and she seemed relaxed [evidence]. She even offered to help me with the dishes [evidence]. She wouldn’t have done that if she was repulsed by me [alternative].”
E-NERGIZATION: The evidence that the mind has regained control over the emotions.
“I didn’t feel nearly as embarrassed or angry, and I realized that if I avoided [let my emotions dominate] her, then I really would hurt my chances of getting to know her better. Basically, I was able to relax and not let my imagination ruin the evening for me.” (Seligman, 1990)
This process is for the Moving Up person. It an “arguing with yourself” process, to discover “evidence,” “alternatives,” “implications” and “usefulness” of the belief brings unwanted “consequences.”
Immunization: against learning helplessness
Puppies which were taught to master their learned helplessness remained permanently immunized against future helplessness (Seligman, 1990). An entire chapter by Seligman is devoted to teaching children the ABC’s of escaping pessimism and helplessness that may increase with it. Seligman’s illustrations describe it.
“ADVERSITY: My teacher, Mr. Minner, yelled at me in front of the whole class, and everybody laughed.”
“BELIEF: He hates me and now the whole class thinks I’m a jerk.”
“CONSEQUENCES: I felt really sad and I wished that I could just disappear under my desk.”
PARENT HELPS CHILD DISPUTE: “Ask . . . Why did [you] want to disappear?” — Is it true that the teacher really hates you? Is that in your imagination? Is it a fact? You said you believe the class thinks you are a jerk? Do class members in fact think that way? How do you know? Are you believing something that is not true? Could the class have laughed for any other reason? Etc.
Seligman offers an A-dversity, B-elief, C-onsequences worksheet to be given to the child. Ask the child to think of other A’s, or B’s or C’s and work through the process of D-isputing so that the child may be E-nergized. A Moving Up from frustrations to well-being.
Building character with REBT, CBT and CT
REBT, CBT, and CT were primarily designed to correct mental, emotional and personality disorders. It is quite easy to take most “therapy” models and extract a character-building model from them. If psychology wishes to help train persons to be better citizens, than better psychologists, we have a good start at knowing what those persons need to learn.
The therapy models in this chapter already help the replacement of i