Cognitive Distortions – What Are They and Why Are They Important?
Cognitive distortions are irrational thinking patterns that often occur automatically and create unnecessary suffering. They usually manifest as specific thoughts, such as “I won’t ever be happy!” or “Nobody likes me!” Although cognitive distortions like these can feel right, honest, and authentic, they are not rational and do not conform to the “consensus reality assumed by others” (Dillard, 2012)1. Instead, they can contribute to depression, anxiety, anger, guilt, jealousy, confusion, poor decision-making, misunderstandings, conflicts, and damaged relationships. Consequently, treating cognitive distortions has been associated with improved well-being, mental health, inner peace, and healthier relationships, among other benefits.
How to handle your cognitive distortions
In principle, we can deal with each of these cognitive distortions in a similar manner.
- Make yourself familiar with the cognitive distortions (see list below).
- Practice becoming aware of them—whenever you experience negative emotions, examine the thoughts that preceded them to identify any cognitive distortion.
- Challenge your distortion by looking for counterevidence. You can do this by asking these questions:
- Is there evidence to support this thought?
- Am I focusing too much on the negative aspects?
- Are there alternative explanations for this situation other than my initial interpretation?
- Would I say the same thing to a friend in a similar situation?
- Come up with a more reasonable statement as a substitute for your distortion. If possible, write it down, read it aloud a couple of times, and try to remember it for the next time—you can find examples of such replacements for cognitive distortions with more realistic thoughts in the list below.
In the beginning, recognizing that you have fallen into a cognitive distortion and coming up with a substitute sentence might not feel very effective. After all, your thoughts are there for a reason—usually rooted in strong emotions and individual attributes that you cannot just wish away, right? If you feel unworthy, just telling yourself that you are, in fact, worthy might not do it. However, progress with this is often exponential; the first few times it might not feel like it’s working, but with every practice and every time you experience that you avoided distress by stepping back from a cognitive distortion—even if it’s just a little bit—the easier it will become to avoid them.
List of Common Cognitive Distortions:
Albert Ellis (1962)2 and Aaron Beck (1963, 1964)3 initially described twelve cognitive distortions—each representing a mode of fallacious reasoning—that can play a crucial role in the development of certain mental disorders (Franceschi, 2007)4. These distortions are outlined below, along with additions described by Joseph Dillard (2012). Click on each to learn more about them, and to see examples and possible replacements that can serve as more reasonable alternatives to the distortions. For a more in-depth understanding, consult the sources below.
Common Cognitive Distortions
Jumping to Conclusions
Jumping to Conclusions is making assumptions about the behaviors and words of others without proper evidence, often leading to misunderstandings, conflicts, and unnecessary worry or distrust in relationships. This cognitive distortion often comes in two forms: Mind Reading and Fortune Telling.
Mind Reading:
This distortion involves assuming that we know what others are thinking without sufficient evidence to support it.
Examples:
“They must not like my shirt the way they just looked at me.”
“They didn’t invite me to the party because of what other people told them about me.”
“They don’t listen to me; they must find what I say boring.”
When we tune people out or interrupt them because we “know” what they are saying and what their point is, that too is a form of Mind Reading.
Fortune Telling:
This cognitive distortion involves predicting negative outcomes without proper evidence.
Examples:
“I know I’m going to fail the exam.”
“I will never be successful.”
“I will die alone.”
In the worst case, these negative predictions can become something like self-fulfilling prophecies by fostering self-sabotaging behavior that aims at consolidating one’s worldview and thoughts.
How to Avoid It:
Make it a habit to ask people what they mean or why they did something if they irritated you. Asking them gives them the opportunity to reflect, express themselves, and even readjust their behavior or words. Often, you will find that their actions had nothing to do with you and your idea about what they thought was off. Additionally, you can ask people about their motivations, intentions, or feelings even when they do not upset you, to practice empathy and gain insight into how often you misinterpret what others are thinking.
Additionally, follow this basic script to overcome cognitive distortions by asking yourself:
- Is there evidence to support my thought?
- Are there alternative explanations for this situation other than my initial interpretation?
- Am I focusing too much on the negative aspects?
- Would I say the same thing to a friend in a similar situation?
Possible Replacements:
“The look they just gave me might have nothing to do with my t-shirt; in fact, there could be hundreds of reasons for it.”
“I don’t know why they didn’t invite me to the party.”
“There could be hundreds of reasons why they don’t listen to me; it doesn’t have to be because they find it boring.”
Personalization
Personalization is when we attribute what happens to ourselves or our personal shortcomings even though it’s not about us or lies outside of our control. This can lead to feelings of guilt, shame, self-blame, and increased anxiety and depression.
Example:
Imagine someone who feels insecure about the size of their nose. They notice their coworkers laughing and immediately attribute this to their nose and themselves, even though their coworkers were actually laughing about something else.
“I think my nose is too big; I see my coworkers laughing; they must be laughing at me because of my big nose.”
More examples:
“My friend is in a bad mood; she doesn’t like me anymore.”
“This person rejected me; it’s because I’m not attractive.”
“The people at this party look bored; it’s because I’m boring.”
“People must be noticing how nervous I look; I’m probably making everyone uncomfortable.”
“This person talks down to me; it’s because I come across as stupid.”
“My partner didn’t get the promotion; it’s because I wasn’t more supportive.”
“Children are starving elsewhere because I don’t eat up and waste food.”
“My mother got sick; it’s because I’m causing stress at home.”
“My boss gave feedback to the whole team, but I think it was directed at me.”
“I turned down a friend’s invitation; I think I ruined their day.”
“My child struggled with their homework tonight; it’s because I fail as a parent.”
“A friend didn’t laugh at my joke; it’s because I’m not funny.”
Further Explanation:
Personalization can often be described in three steps (see e.g. Franceschi, 2007):
- Linking two unrelated events – “Coworkers laughing” and “I think my nose is too big.”
- Attributing the situation to oneself, implying a causal relationship – “My coworkers are laughing because they think I have a big nose.”
- Connecting the situational interpretation with a general statement about oneself – “People don’t take me seriously and find me unattractive because of my big nose.”
Personalization goes hand in hand with logical errors such as the post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy, which refers to the mistaken assumption that two events are causally related simply because they follow one another. Just because someone feels they have a big nose and others happen to be laughing, it does not mean the former caused the latter.
Personalization can also be viewed as excessive self-centeredness or a form of grandiosity, in which a person imagines they are more powerful or influential than they really are. It ignores the fact that life goes on without us and that other people are typically more focused on their own struggles than on who we are or what we are doing.
Since cognitive distortions can often be seen as misguided attempts to protect our self-image, personalization can be viewed as the fundamental emotional cognitive distortion—the “parent” from which most others spring (Dillard, 2011). Stopping personalization can help free us from numerous other cognitive distortions.
How to Avoid It
Remember: As a rule of thumb, we can expect that 90% of what people say or do to us is about them not us. What others say or do to you seems to be far more a reflection of their own emotional state, cognitive distortions, and overall personality than a reflection about you. What others say or do reflects them not you—remind yourself of that frequently.
When you feel attacked or hurt by others’ actions or words, ask yourself:
- “Is what they do or say really about me, or is it about them?”
- “Do they even know me?”
- “Wouldn’t they say or do the same thing to someone else as well?”
Additionally, follow this basic script to overcome cognitive distortions by asking yourself:
- Would I say the same thing to a friend in a similar situation?
- Is there evidence to support my thought that this situation is about me?
- Are there alternative explanations for this situation other than my initial interpretation?
- Am I focusing too much on the negative aspects?
Possible Replacements:
“My coworkers are laughing. I don’t know what they’re laughing about; it’s more likely not about me.”
“My friend is in a bad mood. I don’t know the reason; it’s most likely not because of me.”
“This person rejected me; I don’t know why this happened. There could be many reasons—they might be emotionally unavailable, stressed, already in a relationship, or simply have a different ‘type,’ which says nothing about me but only about their preferences. A rejection doesn’t mean someone else won’t like to be with me.”
Black-and-White Thinking (Dichotomous Reasoning):
Black-and-white thinking (also known as dichotomous reasoning or all-or-nothing thinking) means seeing the world in extreme, binary terms: things are either perfect or horrible, good or bad, a success or a complete failure. This black-and-white approach does not consider nuances or the middle ground and rejects complexity in favor of a simpler, often more judgmental view. It can lead to stress, anxiety, disappointment, unrealistic standards, and a greater likelihood of depression when those standards are not met.
Examples:
“I ate a piece of cake; I completely failed my diet.”
“You cannot have a good argument or be right about anything if you vote for this political party.”
“I either become a broke hippie who doesn’t care about money, or I become an investment banker who works 80 hours a week.”
How to Avoid It:
Remember: Sometimes the “truth” really can be one of the extremes; it doesn’t always have to lie somewhere in the middle. However, it rarely is one or the other extreme because life is usually too complex for that. The nuances and shades of situations are not only a wonderful display of life’s richness, but they also represent important information and resources that can be crucial for our success and mental and physical well-being. Therefore, reducing life to rigid black-or-white statements is often not beneficial for us.
Additionally, follow this basic script to overcome cognitive distortions by asking yourself:
- Is there evidence to support my thought that it can only be one thing or the other?
- Are there alternative explanations for this situation other than my initial interpretation?
- Am I focusing too much on the negative aspects?
- Would I say the same thing to a friend in a similar situation?
Possible Replacements:
“Eating one piece of cake does not mean all my dieting efforts were wasted.”
“The argument’s validity is about the argument itself, not about who said it; therefore, someone whose values and associations we disagree with or who usually argues irrationally can still be right.”
“I can care a bit about money without making it my main priority in life.”
Overgeneralization
Overgeneralization is when broad conclusions are made based on limited evidence, sometimes even on a single event. It can lead to persistent negativity, low self-esteem, and a pessimistic outlook on life, limiting personal growth and happiness.
Often, overgeneralization is linked to the implicit or explicit usage of “always” or “never” in one’s thinking. Like many cognitive distortions, overgeneralization can result from a failure to ask questions about a situation or person and from not considering nuances and alternatives. For example, we might think of someone as incompetent because they did a poor job on one task, without asking for the reasons behind it. Drawing global conclusions about someone’s personality or a project often results in inaccurate assessments and poor decision-making.
Examples:
“I got negative feedback from my boss; I am bad at my job.”
“I failed at this test; therefore, I will fail the next tests.”
“I had a few bad online dates; online dating doesn’t work.”
“This person rejected me; I won’t find a partner.”
“This person doesn’t listen to me; no one ever listens to me.”
“The presenter for the project was late; the project must turn out a failure.”
How to Avoid It:
Be cautious when using words like never and always. They often go hand in hand with overgeneralizations. Practice questioning generalized statements, especially if they are negative.
Additionally, follow this basic script to overcome cognitive distortions by asking yourself:
- Is there evidence to support my thought?
- Are there alternative explanations for this situation other than my initial interpretation?
- Am I focusing too much on the negative aspects?
- Would I say the same thing to a friend in a similar situation?
Possible Replacements:
“I got this negative feedback; however, I know there are things I do well in my job.”
“I failed at this test; this doesn’t mean I will fail the next tests. Maybe I can prepare differently.”
“I had a few bad online dates, but that’s too few to draw a general conclusion. I know people who found their partners through online dating—maybe I can change the way I approach it.”
“This person might not listen to me; I remember that other people do listen to me.”
“The presenter being late does not necessarily mean they have a sloppy attitude regarding the project.”
Labeling
Labeling is when we put labels on ourselves or others in the form of overgeneralized statements that reduce the complexity of someone or something to an abstract construct such as “Loser,” “Fool,” “Hottie,” “Jerk,” “Piece of Shit,” “Model,” “Nerd,” “Creep,” “Incel,” or “Faggot.” Since humans are generally more than what we observe them doing, reducing them to labels distorts our perception and can alter our behavior. These labels are inaccurate abstractions that can lead to anger, anxiety, frustration, and low self-esteem. When labeling others negatively, it can create feelings of hostility and hopelessness by leaving little room for constructive communication.
Examples:
“I made a mistake; I’m a loser.”
“I scored lower than others on the test; I’m a fool.”
“He cries; he’s a pussy.”
“She screams; she’s choleric.”
“They are not left-wing; they are fascists.”
“They are not right-wing; they are communists.”
How to Avoid It:
Remember: If you catch yourself (or others) using labels, it’s unwise to do so because these expressions do not accurately describe reality.
Ask yourself: What does this labeling expression even mean? If it applies at all, is that all I am/ all they are?
Additionally, follow this basic script to overcome cognitive distortions by asking yourself:
- Is there evidence to support my thought?
- Are there alternative explanations for this situation other than my initial interpretation?
- Am I focusing too much on the negative aspects?
- Would I say the same thing to a friend in a similar situation?
Possible Replacements:
“I made a mistake; next time I might do better.”
“I scored lower than others on the test; that doesn’t mean I’m stupid in every topic.”
“They don’t seem left-wing; they could be in the center.”
“They don’t seem right-wing; they could be in the center.”
Emotional Reasoning:
Emotional reasoning means basing one’s interpretations and decisions on emotions rather than on balanced reasoning that would include logic and empiricism for example. It is based on the notion that one’s emotions must reflect the objective reality. Emotional reasoning can lead to impulsive or irrational behavior, as you may act on exaggerated or distorted perceptions of reality.
Examples:
“I feel anxious; there must be something dangerous happening.”
“I feel guilty; I must have done something wrong.”
“I feel angry; this means they are definitely treating me unfairly.”
“I feel inferior; this means I’m not as good as they are.”
In a sense, all emotional cognitive distortions are varieties of emotional reasoning, because they use thoughts to validate some underlying feeling rather than using thought to observe, objectify, and consider the legitimacy and appropriateness of our feelings (Dillard, 2012).
How to Avoid It:
Remember: Just because something feels right, it doesn’t mean it has to be right.
Additionally, follow this basic script to overcome cognitive distortions by asking yourself:
- Is there evidence to support my thought?
- Are there alternative explanations for this situation other than my initial interpretation?
- Am I focusing too much on the negative aspects?
- Would I say the same thing to a friend in a similar situation?
Possible Replacements:
“I feel anxious; that does not necessarily mean I’m in danger; let’s try to look at it objectively.”
“I feel guilty; that does not necessarily mean I did something wrong. How would an objective outsider see it?”
“I feel angry; that does not necessarily mean I was being treated unfairly. How would an objective outsider see it?”
“I feel inferior; this does not mean I am inferior.”
Maximization and Minimization
Maximization is when we perceive negative events or flaws as more significant than they really are. Minimization is when we downplay the significance of positive events or personal strengths.
Examples:
“My girlfriend and I had our first argument; that means our relationship is doomed.”
“The terrorist attacks destroyed our national security.”
“Yes, I’m a good violinist, but it’s basically just talent and has nothing to do with me practicing every day.”
How to Avoid It:
Ask yourself: Am I downplaying positive things or magnifying negative things out of proportion? Do I have a balanced view of the matter, and have I considered other perspectives as equally valid? Is there evidence to support my thought? Am I focusing too much on the negative aspects? Would I say the same thing to a friend in a similar situation?
Possible Replacements:
“Having arguments doesn’t mean the relationship is eroding or not meant to be; it can even be healthy.”
“Even though the terror attacks were horrible, there is still a lot of safety in this country.”
“Even though talent contributed significantly to my success as a violinist, without my disciplined practice I wouldn’t be as good as I am now.”
Disqualifying the Positive:
Disqualifying the positive occurs when we dismiss positive experiences, accomplishments, or feedback as if they “don’t count.” It can contribute to low self-esteem, persistent dissatisfaction, feelings of inadequacy, and depression. (It can be viewed as a specific form of minimisation.)
Examples:
“Everyone could have done that.”
“That’s not worth the praise.”
“That goes without saying.”
“That doesn’t count.”
“That might have been good, but look at all my flaws.”
“They’re just saying that to be nice.”
“They did something good, but it doesn’t matter since they did so many bad things.”
How to avoid it:
Simply saying “Thank you” to positive feedback can be a good way to confidently accept compliments and praise—give it a try and notice how it feels and how others react.
Ask yourself: Am I rejecting genuine positive feedback and disregarding positive events? Am I focusing too much on the negative aspects? Would I say the same thing that I’m telling myself to a friend in a similar situation?
Remember: Recognizing your strengths doesn’t have to involve arrogance, bragging, or pride. It seems unwise to over-personalize your strengths, yet there is also no sense in discounting positive facts, since doing so distorts your perception and limits your potential for understanding and navigating your way in the world.
Possible replacements:
“Not everybody has done that.”
“It is okay that someone acknowledges what I did.”
“I have flaws, but I also do good things like this.”
“Maybe they’re not just saying that to be nice.”
“They did something good. That might not outweigh all the bad things they did, but it is still good.”
Selective Abstraction (Mental Filter)
This distortion occurs when people focus on one detail and dwell on it while ignoring other aspects of the situation. It often overlaps with other cognitive distortions such as personalization, discounting the positive, and overgeneralization.
Examples:
“The scar on my forehead doesn’t look nice; I am not attractive.”
“I got a C in math. My good grades in other classes don’t matter; it means I’m not smart enough.”
“I missed that penalty. I’m bad at playing soccer, and I let my whole team down.”
“Everyone praised my presentation except for this one woman; that upsets me.”
“Everyone in the group likes me except for these two men; that upsets me.”
How to Avoid It:
Follow this basic script to overcome cognitive distortions by asking yourself:
- Is there evidence to support my thought?
- Are there alternative explanations for this situation other than my initial interpretation?
- Am I focusing too much on the negative aspects?
- Would I say the same thing to a friend in a similar situation?
Possible Replacements:
“Just because I or others don’t like some parts of my physique, it doesn’t mean I’m not attractive overall.”
“If I have good grades in most of my classes, this outweighs a few not-so-good ones.”
“Just because I missed that penalty doesn’t mean I’m bad at playing soccer or that I haven’t contributed to my team. Everyone makes mistakes.”
“Everyone else’s positive feedback outweighs a few negative comments.”
Catastrophizing (Magnification or Minimization)
Catastrophizing can be seen as a mix of other cognitive distortions such as overgeneralization and discounting the positive. It typically involves exaggerating the consequences of negative events while minimizing or ignoring positive aspects. Catastrophizing can intensify anxiety and lead to avoidance behaviors or irrational decisions.
Examples:
“I made a mistake at work; I’m going to get fired and ruin my career.”
“I feel a swollen lymph node; it must be cancer.”
“When this party is elected, it will ruin the entire world.”
How to Avoid It
Ask yourself: Am I making this worse than it is? Am I catastrophizing? What evidence do I really have that things will turn out as badly as I imagine? Am I focusing too much on the negative aspects? Would I say the same thing to a friend in a similar situation?
Possible Replacements:
“I made a mistake at work; it doesn’t necessarily mean I’ll get fired. And if I do, I can find another job.”
“I feel a swollen lymph node; it’s most likely a common cold. If it doesn’t go away in a few days, I’ll see a doctor.”
“When this party gets elected, I can’t know for sure what the final consequences will be.”
Should Statements and “Musterbation”
When we use words like “should,” “must,” “ought,” “have to” (and sometimes even “can’t” or “need”) in our thoughts or spoken words, we can run into problems. When we try to force our ideology—our intellectual ideas—onto ourselves or others and imply that we know for sure what is the right thing to do, it can become a form of aggression, especially when it conflicts with personal freedoms and healthy needs and boundaries. Using these words can lead to unrealistic expectations, guilt, shame, anger, resistance, disappointment, conflict, and resentment.
Examples:
“I should clean my room.”
“I have to change my life.”
“They shouldn’t protest.”
“You ought to care about politics.”
“I shouldn’t have made this mistake.”
“You can’t say this.”
“They must stop.”
How to Avoid
Whenever you catch yourself about to use “should,” “must,” “ought,” “have to,” or “can’t,” ask yourself:
“Is this a choice or a command? Where is this command coming from?”
“How do I (or they) know that something must be done?”
“Why should I do this? Do I really have to do it?”
Examine who or what is really benefiting from following these statements. Is the demanded action good for anyone? Does it reduce suffering for anyone? If not, maybe you don’t ‘need’ to do it.
Possible Replacements:
“I choose to clean my room.”
“It might benefit me to change some aspects of my life.”
“I don’t like that they are protesting.”
“I think it’s important to care about politics.”
“Everyone makes mistakes; I’ll try to avoid this mistake in the future.”
“I don’t like what they are saying.”
“I think it would be better if they stopped.”
Fairness and Heaven’s Reward Fallacies
The claim can be made that the Fairness Fallacy and the Heaven’s Reward Fallacy are two common variants of the “Should-Distortion.”
The Fairness Fallacy describes the expectation that things must turn out in a way that seems fair to us. First of all, it is not clear that our understanding of what is fair is objectively fair for everyone. And secondly, it’s not clear that life has to follow concepts like “fairness”; in fact, it often does not.
Examples:
“The other football team should have won; they only lost because of an offside goal.”
“This actor should not be famous; he’s just good-looking.”
“Those people shouldn’t get rich; they were born into wealthy families.”
How to Avoid It:
Remember: Life doesn’t always follow our idea of fairness. It seems unreasonable to dwell on the unfairness of certain things rather than, for example, proactively doing something to reduce suffering.
Possible Replacements:
“I’m disappointed the other football team lost because of an offside goal. It feels unfair to me. However, sometimes my team gets an unfair win too. Football is not always fair, and it doesn’t have to be in order to remain a great sport.”
“I feel like this actor is famous because he’s good-looking. I’m glad his career worked out for him. It seems unfair to me since his looks are largely genetically determined and not the result of conscious effort, and less good-looking people might have a harder time in the film industry just because of their appearance. However, I still know many examples of not-so-good-looking actors who made it, and life doesn’t need to be fair. Maybe there are other things he isn’t so fortunate with.”
“It upsets me that people born into wealthier families seem to have it easier to accumulate even more wealth. I believe everyone should have the same opportunities, and therefore, I engage politically to help less fortunate people. However, I also recognize that just because people are born into wealth and have an easier time getting wealthier, they might be disadvantaged in other ways. Life is not always fair.”
The Heaven’s Reward Fallacy describes the conclusion that hard work will surely be rewarded. The issue is the same as with the Should-Distortion and the Fairness Fallacy: it seems we can’t dictate how life should be; it is how it is, and sometimes it does not seem fair or reasonable to us at all.
Examples:
“After meditating an hour a day for a year, I should be enlightened by now.”
“I studied more than my peers; I have to get the best grades.”
“I worked harder than my coworkers; I have to get the promotion.”
How to Avoid It:
Remember: Hard work doesn’t have to guarantee you the result you desire—even though it certainly makes it more likely and often comes with favorable outcomes. No specific outcome is granted with certainty, since there are many influences in our lives that are not in our control, such as randomness, luck, or even global events like natural catastrophes, economic crises, war, and climate change.
Possible Replacements:
“After meditating an hour a day for a year, I hoped I would be enlightened by now. However, there are things outside of my control, and it’s still a journey—one that brings me peace and happiness regardless of not being enlightened yet.”
“I studied more than my peers. However, maybe I missed an important topic, or someone else has more background knowledge than I do, or I might get sick before the exam. So it’s not certain I have to get the best grades.”
“I worked harder than my coworkers. Maybe someone else did a better job than I did, or the boss favors someone else for different reasons, or the company doesn’t have enough money for promotions. So it’s not certain I have to get the promotion.”
Sources
- Dillard, J. (2012). Getting Rid of Your Cognitive Distortions. In Waking up: Using integral deep listening to transform your life. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform. ↩︎
- Ellis, A. (1962). Reason and emotion in psychotherapy. Lyle Stuart, 442. ↩︎
- Beck, A. T. (1964). Thinking and depression: II. Theory and therapy. Archives of general psychiatry, 10(6), 561-571. ↩︎
- Franceschi, Paul (2007). Complements to a Theory of Cognitive Distortions. Journal de Thérapie Comportementale Et Cognitive 17 (2):1-6. ↩︎