Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 31 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.Sign up
WIP Add layout of cognitive distortion screen #37
Adds a screen that explains cognitive distortions in depth.
The general format is:
All or Nothing Thinking
This distortion happens when we have no room for a middle ground. If we think that a small fault in ourselves means we’re fundamentally rotten or otherwise terrible, we’re likely engaging in all or nothing thinking.
If we’re taking a small problem and blowing it way out of proportion, we’re catastrophizing. Did you make a small mistake at work and are dreading if someone found out even though it’s nothing serious? You’re probably catastrophizing.
“I feel it, therefore it must be true.” If you find yourself justifying the “danger” of something innocuous because you’re afraid of it, then you’re likely engaging in emotional reasoning. Things aren’t dangerous because we’re afraid of them and we’re not awful just because we may think we are.
This one is often hard to recognize. It takes some effort to recognize when your emotional mind is taking the logical reins.
This distortion happens when we predict the future. We often overestimate our abilities to predict what will happen. Frequently we'll start at something we're worried might happen and then look for evidence that it will occur.
If we're taking one characteristic of a person and applying it to the whole person, we're labeling. If someone brushed us off, they might not be a "jerk," maybe they're just in a hurry. This applies to ourselves as well; just because we make a mistake doesn't mean we're a "failure."
Magnification of the Negative
If you’re judging a situation based entirely on the negative parts and not considering the positive parts, you’re likely magnifying the negative. If you’re constantly berating yourself for bombing a job interview, you’re probably filtering out all the experience you gained from that interview.
If we're worried about what someone else is thinking about us, we're attempting to read minds. Unless someone tells you what they're thinking, you have absolutely no way of knowing. So why assume the worst?
Minimization of the Positive
If we downplay the good things that are happening to us, we're minimizing the positive. Even if our day didn't go 100% as planned, it doesn't mean that the 60% that did go right should be ignored.
If a bad situation must be the fault of someone, we're other-blaming. If you failed an exam and you're blaming the teacher, you're directing your energy to the wrong place. Someone cut you off on the highway? If you honk your horn, flip them off, and stew, how is that helping? Now you're cut off and mad!
This doesn't mean you have to blame yourself for every negative situation. You don't have to blame anyone. No one has to be at fault if you let the situation pass without attaching blame.
If we draw conclusions based on just one example, we're over generalizing. If you bombed a presentation and assume that means you're "bad" at presenting, you're over-generalizing.
If you're attributing a negative situation entirely to yourself, you're self-blaming. You don't have to be responsible for every bad thing that happens. If you're getting caught in traffic and you're berating yourself for not leaving earlier, you're self-blaming. Would you treat someone else this way?
If you're assigning someone abilities they don't have, you're using faulty "should" statements. For example, if you have a fear of flying and are telling yourself "I shouldn't be afraid of this, there's nothing wrong with the airplane!" you're putting an undue burden on yourself. You have a fear of flying! It's normal for people who have a fear of flying to be afraid flying!
Should statements can seem nonsensical when you say it out loud; that's the point! They're illogical!