Select from the following:
Chapter 4: Cognitive Focus
Chapter 5: Inappropriate Negative Thinking
Chapter 6: Cognition as the Trigger
Chapter 7: The ABCs of Motivation
Chapter 8: Motivational Problems and Solutions
A mind is its own place,
And in itself
Can make a heav’n of hell,
A hell of heaven
John Milton (1608-1674)
English poet
Most social scientists agree that affect, behavior, and cognition are all important in describing and managing ourselves. However, they may disagree over which modality is primary in human functioning. At the risk of oversimplifying their positions, it could be said that humanists (Rogers, 1961) favor affect; behaviorists (Skinner, 1974) favor behavior; and cognitivists (Beck, 1976) favor cognition. Even professionals who combine modalities, such as cognitive behaviorists (Meichenbaum, 1977) and rational emotive behavioral psychologists (Ellis, 1996) seem to favor one of the modalities –– usually cognition.
Our position is that the three modalities are all equally important in developing ourselves holistically. The ABC model can be described as a “minimodal” version of the multimodal approach of psychologist Arnold Lazarus (1989). Lazarus describes human functioning in terms of seven modalities. We have reduced them to three. Nevertheless, we devote a more extensive discussion to cognition for the following reasons:
1.
Most of our students over the years have identified cognition as the most important modality in their lives and have asked for a more extensive discussion of it.
2.
College faculty and staff tend to place primary emphasis on knowledge acquisition, intellectual development, and critical thinking. This emphasis is reflected in the fact that students are graded more on how much they know and how well they think, than on how they feel or behave.
3.
Humans are distinctively different from other animals because of their cognitive ability, which therefore plays a more decisive role than affect or behavior in determining their level of functioning.
While every topic in this book is considered within the context of all three ABC modalities, the cognitive modality receives the greatest attention for the reasons above and because of its profound influence on self-management.
From antiquity to present day, philosophers and psychologists have argued that if we are feeling good and behaving appropriately, we are probably thinking positively; and if we are feeling bad and behaving inappropriately, we are probably thinking negatively. It is clear that positive cognitions can produce positive affect and behavior, and that negative cognitions can produce negative affect and behavior. However, the implications of this causal connection for self-management are not so obvious, and even when understood, are ignored by many people.
Thinking positively does not mean being unrealistic about life. Nor does it mean we are oblivious to our limitations, those of others, or the negative aspects of society. Keeping a critical and watchful eye open for potential problems and anticipating setbacks as we pursue our goals enables us to avoid them, or cope better if they do arise. So for positive thinking to be beneficial, it must also be realistic.
People who think negatively about themselves and have little confidence in their ability to achieve are often ill at ease and frequently act in a self-defeating manner. Believing that victory is forever beyond their grasp and that defeat is imminent often results in excess stress and self-defeating behaviors.
In order to feel and act in ways that lead to the accomplishment of our goals, we need to increase positive and decrease negative thinking. And, since we control our thoughts, we are all capable of doing just that.
So why is it that so few of us “accentuate the positive” as a once popular song suggests? Why do we focus on the negative when positive thoughts could motivate us to achieve more? While the answers to these questions are complex, a partial explanation is that we are unaware of our negative thinking and its impact on us. Thinking negatively, over time, can become so ingrained, so much a habit, that it occurs almost automatically as a response to any event.
The most serious result of focusing on the negative is the development and reinforcement of inappropriate negative thinking. By focusing on the negative, we strengthen illogical thought processes and develop irrational beliefs that are the ingredients of inappropriate negative thinking.
Over time, it becomes more and more difficult to think clearly and reason logically. Inappropriate negative thinking takes hold, gains strength, and as a result, we experience inappropriate negative affect and may act in ways that are counterproductive.
Recognizing and refuting the inaccuracies of inappropriate negative thinking are prerequisites for thinking more positively. Therefore, if dissatisfied with our ABCs, we need to beware of negative thinking, particularly inappropriate negative thinking.
The following interpretation of a classroom event illustrates how we can distort reality and upset ourselves as a result.
An instructor, who typically exhibits a professional demeanor, hurries into his English class and slams the door behind him. With an angry-looking scowl on his face, he throws a batch of midterm examinations on the desk. He then picks up his grade book and writes on the board in huge letters, MIDTERM GRADES.
Joe, a student sitting in the second row, watches this scene and thinks that the professor must be enraged about the poor test results. He concludes (C) that it is only a matter of minutes before the professor will begin to berate the class.
Thinking about the prospect of hearing bad news, Joe becomes increasingly nervous (A), tense (A), and scared (A) as he glances at the class grades on the board. The professor looks at Joe for a moment. As Joe slumps down (B) in his chair to hide behind the student in front of him, he thinks (C) to himself “What an icy stare. He must be remembering that stupid answer of mine.”
Suddenly, in a loud, bellowing voice, the professor says, “About the midterm grades...” He then proceeds to tell the class that he is pleased with the grade distribution and apologizes for being late.
As he passes back the exams, he explains that he had trouble starting his car, was caught in a traffic jam for over an hour, and got a speeding ticket on his way to class. Joe looks down at the ‘B’ grade on his midterm exam, breathes a hefty sigh of relief, calms down, sits up, and smiles.
In situations like this, most of us only realize after we have calmed down that we merely distorted or misinterpreted the events and that all our fear and tension were unnecessary. However, much can be learned from this simple scenario if we understand how Joe’s thoughts caused his feelings and behaviors. Joe’s mistake was thinking and concluding that the professor’s scowl was related to the test grades. As a result of his interpretation, he upset himself.
This type of distorted thinking is referred to as personalization, a tendency to associate outside events with ourselves. Joe also thought he knew why the professor was upset. Trying to interpret what someone else is thinking is another route to distortion called mind reading.
If, in addition, Joe believed the professor would single him out and fail him for the course, this train of thought could quickly escalate to the conclusion that he would have to retake the course, change majors, or perhaps even drop out of college. This type of distorted thinking is called catastrophizing. It exaggerates the consequences of events and easily leads to panic because it suggests the future is destined for disaster.
Now it is true that on occasion our personalization, mind reading, or catastrophizing may be a correct interpretation, and it could be argued that anticipating the worst softens the blow. More often than not, however, the conclusions we jump to will be erroneous, but we pay an emotional price nonetheless.
A strong case has been made that positive and negative feelings and behaviors stem from positive and negative cognitions. That is to say, internal cognitions rather than external factors are responsible for our affect and behavior. Epictetus, the Stoic philosopher quoted above, observed this over two thousand years ago. Shakespeare's Hamlet echoes the same idea when he says, “Nothing is good or bad but thinking makes it so.”
It is what we choose to think or believe about events, not the events themselves, that make them good or bad and us happy or sad. However, as we shall see, most people do not speak as if this were the case.
If we listen carefully to the language used to describe the source of our feelings and behaviors, we find that people speak as though feelings and behaviors are caused not by internal thoughts, but by external events. Comments like these are familiar to most of us:
Monday mornings bring me down.
Fridays make me feel really good.
Rainy days depress me.
My girlfriend makes me happy.
My husband gets me so angry.
That professor annoys me.
Tests make me nervous.
Public speaking causes tension.
Math stresses me out.
The kids drive me “nuts”!
Such comments imply that emotions and sensations (positive or negative), and possibly related behaviors, are caused and controlled by other people and outside events. However, when we think critically about the situation, we realize that the day of the week, the weather, the girlfriend or husband cannot control our affective response or behavior.
Fridays cannot actually cause our feelings and behaviors because Fridays only exist as a mental concept — a label we associate with a specific time period.
Similarly, rainy days do not depress us because if they did, we would always be depressed on rainy days and that is simply not true. On some rainy days, we are undoubtedly quite happy.
Our everyday language usually ignores the influence of our thoughts on our feelings and behaviors. By making comments such as “this place makes me nervous” or “my roommate drives me crazy,” we disregard our responsibility for our reactions to events and other people.
Although we may see no need to correct inaccuracies in our language, research has found that our speech not only reflects but influences our thinking. Illogical speech can strengthen and perpetuate habits of illogical thought, which in turn can have a negative impact on how we feel and act.
As we have seen, illogical speech and thought can produce inappropriate negative affect and together they can have a major impact on motivation, self-esteem, and other important areas of our lives. If we wanted to be precise and accurate about how our feelings and behaviors stem from our own thinking, we would say things like:
I upset myself on Monday mornings by thinking about the week ahead, and then I avoid everyone.
I excite myself on Fridays by anticipating the weekend, and then I party with friends.
I make myself happy when I am with my girlfriend by imagining the good times ahead and when I am happy, I do more of the things she enjoys.
I allow my thoughts about what my husband has done to get me angry, and then I yell at him.
I become annoyed when I think about the way my professor teaches, and so I skip her class a lot.
When I think about failing, I make myself nervous and shaky so I rush through tests.
I stress myself out when I give a speech by thinking that I am boring the class, and as a result, I end the speech quickly.
When I recall the difficulties I had with algebra and geometry, I stress myself about my math requirement and cut class.
Because I expect kids to act like adults, I “whack” myself out when they misbehave, and then I am excessive in punishing them.
When I see that it is raining, I let my thoughts get me down, and when I am down, I just go to bed and sleep.
All of these statements, which few of us use in casual conversation, reflect the causal connections among the ABCs. In addition to demonstrating the influence of cognition on affect and behavior, they imply something else very important: We can manage our feelings and behaviors by managing our thoughts.
Data refers to any person, circumstance, or event that is an occasion for a positive or negative emotion.
Interpretation refers to our thoughts or beliefs (C) about the data.
Emotional Response refers to the emotions (A) resulting from our interpretation of the data.
An interpretation based on rational and logical thinking results in appropriate emotions; an interpretation based on irrational and illogical thinking (distortions and dysfunctional beliefs) results in inappropriate emotions. In Chapter 9 we will see how this model can be used to change distortions and dysfunctional beliefs.
The following example of a man who sees his girlfriend with another man outlines the basic components of the DIE Model. It is similar to the case study at the beginning of Chapter 5.
Data
What are the objective facts?
Example:
Last night, I saw my girlfriend with another man in the mall.
Interpretation
What are the subjective thoughts or beliefs about the data?
Example:
She is with another man; therefore, she is cheating on me and it’s all over between us. It’s not fair.
Emotional Response
What emotions result from the interpretation?
Example:
Anger, anxiety, depression.
Note that the man’s interpretation leads him to feel very upset. A different interpretation would undoubtedly result in a different emotional response. For example, the interpretation that his girlfriend is merely talking to a man with whom she has no romantic interest would not result in such an inappropriate emotional response, and his feelings toward his girlfriend would not be negative.
If the man wanted to change his feelings, the DIE Model suggests that he either alter the event (D), his thoughts (I), or both. Obviously, he cannot change the fact that his girlfriend was talking to another man. He may find it equally difficult to prevent her from talking to other men in the future. Yet, if his thoughts were not distorted and dysfunctional in the first place, he would not be upset. If he did not think that because his girlfriend is with a man, she must be cheating, he would not have become angry and depressed about what he saw.
The order in which we experience our interpretations and emotional responses may seem different from the order presented above. In reality, emotions come on so fast it seems as though we experience the emotion before the interpretation.
When we are upset (angry, anxious, sad, etc.), we tend to associate its cause with the data (event or situation). However, finding the situation difficult, if not impossible, to change often leads us to examine our interpretation of the data.
Critically evaluating the experience reveals that our interpretation (self-talk, thoughts, or beliefs) actually caused the emotional response (affect). This simple point has profound implications for all of us. It is usually very difficult to control other people and external events, but when dissatisfied with our response to a situation we can choose to view it differently. Since we produce our thoughts about events, we can control our emotional response by critically examining and altering our interpretations. If our interpretations are distorted or dysfunctional, we can logically dispute them. Once disputed, we can replace these cognitions with a rational or functional interpretation (See Chapter 9, DIE Model).
It is important to be aware that the ‘D’ of the DIE Model is as much under our control as the ‘I’ when the ‘D’ is our own behavior. For example, we may depress (E) ourselves if we interpret (I) our cutting class (D) as evidence that we are irresponsible and a real “loser.” Now, while we could try to manage our depression by changing our interpretation (the global label distortion), we could also address the problem by changing our behavior (going to class, for example). Therefore, when an undesirable emotional response results from an interpretation of our own behavior, we have the option of altering the interpretation (I) or the behavior (D). (See Chapter 10 for ways to change behaviors.)
Even when the ‘D’ is an external event, we should not infer from the DIE Model that there is no benefit in trying to change the event. Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi not only managed their interpretations (I) about the way society functions, they also tried to change society.
The DIE Model focuses most attention on our interpretations because our thinking is always under our control, whereas our control over external events can be quite limited. This is not to suggest that we simply put a positive spin on everything to make ourselves feel better. What it does suggest is that we can save ourselves a lot of emotional turmoil by examining the interpretations, assumptions, and perceptions that trigger our emotional responses.
To this point most students have gained an understanding of the basic principles of self-management and the important role of cognition in the process. However, for all this material to be of practical benefit, it needs to be connected to our self-motivation, a problematic area for many people. In the next two chapters, the general connections will be forged, and in Chapter 18 links to academic motivation will be made explicit.
Psychologists such as Abraham Maslow (1970) and B. F. Skinner (1974) have researched the topic of motivation in depth. While Maslow contends we are motivated internally by personal needs yet to be fulfilled, Skinner claims we are motivated by external rewards and punishments. Each theorist attempts to ascertain the basic factors that motivate people, and practical experience suggests that both of them are correct. At times, we seem to push ourselves in a given direction, and at other times we seem to be pulled. For this reason, motivation is popularly described as those forces acting on or within us that initiate behavior and give it direction.
The point can be made that while we are influenced by external rewards and penalties, we are motivated by these external factors only when they are internalized. That is, we only move when we “feel” (A) like moving and “decide” (C) to move.
In terms of self-management, therefore, motivation is an inner state (A and C) that initiates behavior (B) and gives it direction. Since this inner state is an interaction between affect and cognition, motivation can be represented symbolically as A x C = B.
Affect and cognition make distinct contributions to motivated behavior. Yet, as we will see, our behavior can impact our feelings and thoughts as well, and thereby indirectly influence our motivation. Before discussing the role of affect and cognition, however, it is first necessary to distinguish between positive and negative motivation.
We are experiencing negative motivation when we move away from something because we associate it with negative affect and cognition. Using a similar example, we might go to a party with someone only to avoid staying home and thinking about an old boy- or girlfriend and feeling lonely.
Negative motivation can only be understood through its relationship with something else — the “something else” that we are trying to escape from or avoid. The motivation for getting a flu shot is to avoid the flu. Identifying what we are moving away from is very helpful in understanding our actions.
Often our actions result from a combination of positive and negative motivation. For example, some students’ motivation for attending college is as much a desire to get away from home as it is to pursue learning.
In any given instance, one form of motivation may be dominant, but only we can determine which type of motivation is primary for us by understanding the internal factors at work. This distinction between positive and negative motivation is important in managing our motivation because it clarifies what gets us moving.
When applied to motivation, the terms positive and negative do not mean good or bad, right or wrong, ethical or unethical. They describe the direction of our movement, not its value. On the one hand, a student may be positively motivated to use an illegal drug such as LSD because he feels excited about getting high and believes it will expand his consciousness. Like the moth attracted to the flame, his positive motivation does not necessarily produce a positive outcome.
On the other hand, a student may be annoyed while going to a required philosophy lecture, believe it will be a meaningless experience, and yet unexpectedly learn something quite useful. Like a child reluctantly eating spinach, a student’s negative motivation does not necessarily produce a negative outcome.
As these examples imply, positive motivation can result in personal harm just as negative motivation can result in personal benefit.
We are always motivated to some degree, in some direction, or we would not be alive. Having motivational problems does not mean we are without motivation. It may mean we are dissatisfied with the level of our motivation, the values reflected in our motivated behavior, or the direction of our motivation.
Often these two types of motivation occur in combination. Low motivation for movement in one direction (work, for example) is frequently accompanied by high motivation for movement in some other direction (partying perhaps).
If we are dissatisfied with our level of motivation (high or low), knowing what affect and cognition need to change can help address the problem. If our energy level is low due to fatigue or illness, then rest or seeing a physician may be the answer.
Some people address the problem by using stimulant drugs such as caffeine, cocaine, or amphetamines. While these drugs may energize the individual in the short term, the long-term effects can be quite debilitating. The “high” motivation achieved from substance abuse is short-lived.
Negative motivation can explain why we continue to do things we do not value. We may not value the activity, but probably value the role it plays in helping us to escape or avoid something else. We may not really value partying, but instead value the fact that it keeps us from thinking about all the work we have to do. Similarly, watching TV may provide a distraction from doing something viewed as unpleasant (revising a paper perhaps).
In these instances, negative motivation has “practical value.” Thus, understanding the practical value of our negative motivation can help us clarify our values (C), which sets the stage for managing our motivation.
We may really enjoy an activity, see value in it, and be quite proficient at it, but wish we were not so highly motivated in this regard. Our dissatisfaction could stem from a suspicion that more worthwhile activities and goals could be occupying our time. If we knew what they were, we might be more highly motivated toward them than the ones we currently pursue.
At the risk of oversimplification, the solution to this problem lies in educating ourselves –– learning what people have discovered to be of lasting value since they first reflected on the meaning and purpose of life. In educating ourselves, we clarify our values, change old ones, and acquire new ones.
This can happen with anything we label “work,” particularly if it becomes associated with negative thoughts and feelings. For example, we may be highly motivated to achieve at work, but if we become bored and disinterested, the motivation may shift from positive to negative. We then stay on the job not because we enjoy and value it, but because we value what it keeps away (unemployment or threats to our self-esteem, for example). If we wish to experience all the benefits of positive motivation, we need to rekindle excitement and interest by finding value in what we are doing.
