Dr.Joe's Data Base

Thoughts that Lead to Loneliness

The way you think plays a major role in how you feel and in turn how
you act. Some ways of thinking almost guarantee that a person will be
lonely. Here are eight patterns of distorted thinking, or self-talk,
that limit social choices and enjoyment. While you read through them,
keep an open mind about your own thinking. Could your thinking be
similar to that of the nine people you are about to meet?

Contents

+ Mind Reading
+ Overgeneralizing
+ All-or-None Thinking
+ Confusing Possibility with Probability
+ Filtering
+ Emotional Reasoning
+ Catastrophizing
+ Personalizing
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Mind Reading

Kirk tended to make snap judgments about people and then to react to
his conclusions as if they were fact. His judgments were usually based
on facial expressions. He would, for instance, interpret a grimace on
a man's face as a sure sign of dislike for him.

Kirk saw whatever he wished to see in other people, which was usually
negative. He never considered the range of possibilities behind
others' behavior. The man with the grimace may not have been reacting
to Kirk at all. He could have been fired that day. He might have just
left a painful dental appointment, or he could have simply been
experiencing heartburn. Yet Kirk was sure that he knew what was on the
man's mind.

Mind reading was Kirk's nemesis. He made judgments about people based
on what he thought, although he assumed he knew what they thought.
What's more, his judgments became facts as far as he was concerned. As
a result, Kirk often limited his social possibilities by writing off
someone who might have turned into a good friend or a valuable ally.

People who read minds have no evidence to back up their judgments-only
feelings and conjectures. Yet, they convince themselves that they know
why other people behave as they do. Of course mind readers would never
admit to anyone, least of all themselves, that they know what others
are thinking.

Mind reading is perilous to friendship, because mind readers treat
other people not as they are, but as they are assumed to be. And there
is no factual basis for the assumptions, which sound something like
this:

o She thinks she's too good to be seen with me.
o He's kissing up to me because he wants my support.
o I know she likes me a lot, but she's been hurt too often to get
involved.
o They are ignoring me because they are jealous.

You can see how mind readers cut off social opportunities for
themselves. They know someone dislikes them, so they avoid the person
or treat them with disdain.

Shandra didn't make snap judgments as Kirk did, but she was just as
much a mind reader. She was inclined to blame other people for her
negative emotions. When she felt angry with someone, for instance, she
convinced herself that it was the other person's fault.

Shandra told herself that she was justified in reacting to the anger
that she knew the other person felt. Consequently, she never examined
her anger or tried to solve the conflicts behind it. Instead, she
tended to stomp off in a huff, which often alienated the other person,
who may or may not have actually been angry in the first place.

How can you know if you are reading minds? Ask yourself if you assume
you know what others think. Are you are treating people as if they
think like you do? If, for example, you're hurt when an old friend
forgets your birthday, you might assume that anyone would be
devastated if you forgot his or her birthday. Or, if you believe that
good friends never disagree, you might feel that your friends would
reject you if you expressed an honest opinion that differed from
theirs.

People who read minds don't pay close attention to the words and
actions of others. They are not aware of the vast range of differences
among people. They believe that the people with whom they come in
contact think largely as they do. It never occurs to them that other
people can operate on a very different set of beliefs and assumptions.

Overgeneralizing

Martha, unlike Kirk and Shandra, had actual evidence of being
disliked. She had been rudely snubbed by a small group of
acquaintances when she was a guest at a ritzy country club. Martha's
face burned whenever she thought of the incident, and ever since then
she avoided private clubs, as either a guest or a member.

The illogical aspect of Martha's thinking was that she assumed the
same thing would happen to her again, even though she had been treated
rudely only once years ago. In fact, there was no particular reason
for her to believe such an incident wasn't an isolated occurrence.
Assuming the experience would reoccur seriously limited Martha's
social possibilities.

Martha let overgeneralizing exclude her from a whole range of social
possibilities. Unlike mind readers, people who overgeneralize have
some evidence of what people think. Unfortunately they focus on one or
two instances of negative evidence to the exclusion of many instances
of positive evidence. Martha focused exclusively on the one instance
of being snubbed, but she never considered that she was accepted by
almost everyone in almost every social situation.

Because she was treated badly in a particular place, Martha associated
her discomfort with that place. It didn't occur to her that the group
of people who snubbed her might have done the same thing in any other
setting. Martha associated rejection with the country club, so she
came to feel rejected by the club itself, and then by all such clubs.
Her social life became more restricted, as it usually does with people
who overgeneralize.

People who overgeneralize think such illogical thoughts as these:

o Nobody at school likes me.
o I don't trust anyone.
o Everyone in this church is so snooty.
o They'd never let somebody like me in that club.
o If they really knew what I was like, they couldn't possible
accept me.
o I'll never let anybody hurt me again.

Examine your train of thought when you feel anxious about people or
social occasions. Are you using words like never, always, all, none,
everyone, and anybody. If you tend to use such all-inclusive words in
your thinking, you are probably overgeneralizing.

All-or-None Thinking

Francine either loved someone or hated them, and she believed that
people reacted to her in the same way. There was no middle ground for
her. As a result, Francine had a very small circle of good friends, a
large number of enemies, and few social acquaintances.

All-or-none thinking was Francine's problem. For her, everything was
black or white with no shades of gray. In fact, she tended to think in
absolute terms in most areas of her life. She was, for example, never
able to eat in moderation. It was either feast when she was not on a
diet or famine when she was.

Francine approached people in much the same way. They were wonderful
or terrible, angelic or evil. She had little tolerance for human
frailties. Let a friend hurt her once and that person was shifted from
the friend side of her mental ledger to the foe column. The ex-friend
was given no chance to explain, and there was no possibility of
forgiveness.

Similarly, Francine never gave an acquaintance the opportunity to
become a friend unless he or she matched perfectly Francine's idea of
what a friend should be. Needless to say, Francine was friendless more
often than not. People in her circle were aware of her penchant for
discarding and trashing friends, so not too many of her acquaintances
tried to get close to her.

Perhaps equally as limiting for her, Francine also judged herself in
all-or-none terms. She could not abide her own mistakes any more than
she could endure the mistakes of others. One error on her part and she
became an incompetent wretch who could do nothing right. As a result,
she was prone to frequent mood swings, and people avoided her when she
was in one of her dark moods.

If your friends tend to move in and out of favor, ask yourself if you
are inclined toward all-or-nothing thinking. Ask yourself whether you
have more enemies than friends. Be especially vigilant for this type
of illogical thinking if you often come down hard on yourself. Look
within yourself for difficulty forgiving, not only other people, but
also yourself.

Confusing Possibility with Probability

Despite never having hosted a social disaster, Merrill always felt one
was imminent. Of course, not every party he threw had gone perfectly,
but all of them had been at least acceptable. Some of them had, in
fact, been outstanding. All the same, he was always on the lookout for
failure and was thus tense and constrained when people were in his
home.

Although Merrill was not aware of it, his tension put a damper on his
parties, so that his illogical thinking sometimes became a
self-fulfilling prophecy. Because of his discomfort Merrill
entertained less and less over the years. In effect, he punished
himself for having parties, and, as we all do, he avoided situations
that were punishing for him.

Merrill's social opportunities grew more limited because of confusing
possibility with probability. Sure, it was possible for any party that
he hosted to be a disaster. With proper planning and preparation,
though, it was not very probable. However, Merrill did not
differentiate between low probability and high probability. His
distorted thinking led him to believe that bad things would happen
just because they could happen.

This is the type of thinking that is behind many fears, not just
social ones. People who are phobic about dying in a plane crash, for
instance, believe the probability of being killed in an aircraft
accident is very high. They disregard the fact that very few people
die in plane crashes, as compared with automobile accidents.

Merrill not only overestimated the odds of calamity, he didn't
consider that he had the power to lower the probability of a bad
outcome. He couldn't see that a little attention to food, drink,
music, and guest list was very likely to avert any social disaster.

Do you dwell on negative possibilities? Do you usually anticipate the
worst? Are you are worrier? If your answer to these questions is
"yes," you may also confuse probability with possibility.

Filtering

Miranda didn't enjoy entertaining any more than Merrill did. For much
of her adult life she had been able to see only the negative-about her
parties, her appearance, her behavior-so that she could rarely focus
on having fun.

She not only gradually ceased entertaining, but she became more likely
to turn down invitations than to accept them. The eventual result was
a nonexistent social life.

Miranda was similar to Merrill in that she expected social failure.
Her thinking was distorted by filtering. When she was entertaining,
she focused on every little sign of potential trouble, but she paid
scant attention to signs of success.

Miranda saw only the disgruntled man sitting alone at her party, not
the throng of happy people around him. She saw the one plate of
uneaten hors d'oeuvres but disregarded the compliments about her food.
She agonized about the two or three people who left early, never
thinking about those who enjoyed her hospitality until midnight.

Because she filtered out the positive and concentrated only on the
negative aspects on her social life, Miranda dreaded entertaining and
avoided it when she could. She also avoided being a guest, because she
was always uncomfortable about her appearance and her actions. Miranda
only thought about her negative qualities and magnified them out of
proportion to reality.

Because her thinking was out of balance-almost exclusively negative
with very little positive-it was punctuated with extremely negative
words. Her thinking was peppered with hopeless, awful, stupid,
worthless, and other pejorative words. If you use these kinds of words
in your self-talk, you too are at risk for filtered thinking. The
words you use in your thinking both reflect how you see the world and
reinforce your vision of it. If the image in the mirror is distorted,
then your world view is distorted. You believe what you tell yourself
and you shape your behavior accordingly.

Emotional Reasoning

A successful investor, Len was objective and clearheaded in his work,
which primarily involved analyzing data using a personal computer.
Except when his wife intervened, Len had an almost nonexistent social
life. He was uncomfortable with people face-to-face.

Len felt like a social outcast; therefore he assumed he was a social
outcast. He felt dull and boring, so he assumed he was dull and
boring. His wife's best friend seemed to dislike him; therefore, she
must dislike him. Len essentially believed that what he felt was true.
It didn't occur to him that feelings aren't necessarily true just
because they feel true.

Len's thinking was based on emotional reasoning. His judgments about
the motivations and actions of himself and others stemmed from his
feelings, not from objective reality. And it was this emotional
reasoning that kept him from socializing with other people. He didn't
believe his wife when she pointed out that his wide-ranging knowledge
made him an exceptional conversationalist.

If Len's thinking had been perfectly clear and logical, his feelings
might have reflected reality. As with most of us, though, there was
some distortion in his thinking. Thus, his feelings were sometimes
distorted, which resulted in distorted judgments about himself and
others.

Do you tend to let your feelings make your decisions? Do you give more
weight to emotions than to facts? If so, you may also suffer the
consequences of emotional reasoning. This kind of thinking may have
compromised your ability to feel content with other people.

Catastrophizing

Patricia had begun her married life going out with her fun-loving
husband. She also had people in her home every week or two, mostly at
her husband's behest. As time went by, however, she began first to
dread, then to avoid, going out, though she still invited a few people
to her home and occasionally visited a few friends. When her husband
asked why she didn't want to come out with him, she laughed it off,
saying he would be better off without her, since she was so clumsy and
nervous in groups.

Catastrophizing is the kind of thinking, or self-talk, that kept
Patricia from enjoying a social life. Patricia continually told
herself to expect disaster. She always expected the worst and focused
her thinking on "terrible" and "horrible" outcomes. Not only did she
foresee catastrophe, she believed that she would be unable to handle
it when it occurred.

Patricia believed her thinking, so she avoided places and situations
where she could be caught up in disaster. She avoided dinner parties
because she was sure to spill something and everyone at the table
would think her a clumsy fool.

Thinking about large parties made her too nervous. She hated feeling
confined by crowds of people. She knew she would grow all sweaty and
twitchy, and everybody could see what a twit she was. How could they
possible respect her after that? She wouldn't have a friend left, and
that would be unbearable!

Catastrophic thinking of this type is often linked to confusion of
probability with possibility. If, like Patricia, you consistently
overestimate the odds of calamity, you may also be catastrophizing.
You may not only expect the worst, but also believe that you would be
helpless in the face of calamity. Do you use such words as terrible,
unbearable, horrible, and insufferable in your thinking? These are
fairly reliable indicates of catastrophic thinking.

Personalizing

William avoided socializing with people whenever possible. He was
constantly comparing himself to those around him, and consequently he
never felt relaxed with them because he never felt that he could
measure up.

The fallacy in William's thinking was a belief that his self-worth
derived from events outside himself. He looked to others as measures
of his value. If his wife seemed angry or depressed, William wondered
what he had done wrong. If one of his children behaved badly, William
questioned his parenting skills. If his mother complained, he
automatically felt guilty.

Personalizing was William's bane. Because of his tendency to relate
everyone and everything in his environment to himself, he felt
uncomfortable in many situations. He couldn't appreciate the talents
and accomplishments of other people, because in comparison he always
fell short. If a person were witty, William felt bad that he couldn't
make people laugh. Being around an athlete made him feel oafish, while
a well-read person made him feel stupid.

If you find yourself carefully weighing the reactions of others-their
comments, their opinions, their facial expressions-you may also be
personalizing. Do you look to others to set your worth? Are you
inclined to compare yourself with friends, acquaintances, and
co-workers?

It's draining to look to every conversation for a clue as to your
value.

Anyone who does so is likely to be tense around others. Tense people
are inclined to avoid situations that make them tense. People who are
prone to personalization, then, are not likely to seek out the company
of other people.

William, Len, Francine, and the others have one thing in common: it's
their thinking that keeps them from enjoying other people. They don't
belong with other people because they tell themselves they don't
belong. Their negative thinking shapes the way they feel about
themselves, and their negative feelings determine how they interact
with other people. Ultimately, loneliness is a state of mind brought
on by the illogical way people talk to themselves. Here, in summary,
are eight distorted thought patterns that can lead to social
isolation:

o Mind Reading

Making judgments based on

assumptions of what other

people are thinking.

o Overgeneralizing

Assuming that a single bad

experience or a few isolated

experiences will recur in other

situations or circumstances.

o All-or-None Thinking

Thinking in extremes (good or

bad, friend or enemy, success or

failure) with no middle ground.

o Confusing Probability with Possibility

Vastly overestimating the odds of

a bad outcome.

o Filtering

Focusing on the negative aspects

of a situation while overlooking

the positive aspects.

o Emotional Reasoning

Making judgments based on

while disregarding facts.

o Catastrophizing

Foreseeing the worst possible

outcome in a given situation and

feeling helpless to cope with it.

o Personalizing

Making judgments about self-

based on the actions of

other people, which results in

constant comparison with others.

Back to the Homepage

Send E-Mail to W. R. Brassell