Defining_Self_Defeating_Behaviour_

Defining Self Defeating Behaviour: Self-defeating behaviour is the idea that sometimes people knowingly do things that will cause them to fail or bring them trouble. It is defined as “any deliberate or intentional behaviour that has clear, definitely or probably negative effects on the self or on the self’s projects” (Scher & Baumeister 1988). Many theories as to why humans sometimes behave in a self destructive ways have been examined by many psychologists. One proposed theory that answers this question is the Freudian argument, which states that “people have an innate death drive that impels them to pursue their own downfall and death”. This argument also concludes that people do harm themselves deliberately, even though they sometimes are not conscious of this. “Self defeating behaviours are especially common when people feel that others less favourably than the people desire” Psychologists have constructed three models that explain different types of self-defeating behaviours, which are “distinguished by their varying degrees of intentionality”. (Beaumeister 2008). Three Models of Self-Destructiveness: There are three models that represent self-defeating behaviours on the basis of “intentionality.” The first model is called, “primary self destruction.” This model includes those human beings who deliberately and intentionally hurt themselves. Those in this group, usually intentionally choose an action that they know will bring harm to them. “One example of this type of behaviour is called, “masochism” (Beaumeister & Scher 1988). A second “conceptual model” of self-defeating behaviour is called, “tradeoff”. This behaviour is done when a person literally and knowingly makes a trade-off in a situation. It is when a person chooses a certain option that has some benefit but also has the potential to cause harm to the person as well. A good example of this would be when a person chooses to take up smoking. In a tradeoff, the “harm or risk to the self is accepted as a necessary accompaniment to achieving some other goal” (Beaumeister and Scher 1988). In this tradeoff model, “the individual has multiple goals and desires, but the situation sets two of them in opposition. One type of tradeoff is known as, “self-handicapping”. In the tradeoff, people will deliberately choose to do something that they know will harm them, so that if they fail later they are able to blame their failure on the bad choice they previously made. The third category of self-destructiveness includes “counterproductive strategies.” This type involves self defeating behaviours is one in which “the person neither desires nor foresees the harm to self. In this instance a person is pursuing a desirable outcome but chooses a strategy or approach that backfires and produces the opposite of the desired result. Thus, the person is pursuing a positive goal, but the person’s method of pursuing.” This type of behaviour is very common among young adults and usually results in some kind of “self-harmful outcomes” (Beaumeister & Scher 1988). Reasons for Self Defeating Behaviour: People are more likely to behave in a self-defeating or destructive manner when either there are threats made to their ego or when they have low self-esteem. When a person has a low self-esteem, they are more likely to be susceptible to having depression, anxiety and, emotional distress, which are problems that are usually directly related to a less favourable self-appraisal. (Beaumeister, 1997) “Emotional stress has also had a link to self-defeating behaviour. Anecdotal observations have long suggested that highly distraught people are more likely than others to do self destructive things.” (Beaumeister, 1997) Also, self-regulation failure is yet another supposed cause of self-defeating behaviours. One’s self regulation is related mostly to one’s self-control. Self-regulation allows a person to prepare themselves to a certain situation and adapt to that situation. With self-regulation a person can either make sure they succeed or fail in a certain situation. “Self regulation is presumably one of the major capacities that the human self has evolved in order to help bring about positive outcomes. When the self brings about negative outcomes, therefore, one could readily suspect that self-regulation has failed in some crucial way. Ultimately, self-defeating behaviour may often result from the failure of the self to regulate its behaviours properly” (Beaumeister, 1997). Characteristics of Self-Defeating Behaviour: 1. Don't Finish Tasks that You Start. The over all efforts of self sabotage is to talk yourself out of completing, ore even starting a task; complete with excuses for why you feel you CAN'T do the task (negative thinking and self defeating) over the reality of how you CAN do the task (positive thinking and problem solving). 2. Feel Helpless and Overwhelmed by Tasks, Activities & Interactions. Set yourself up for self defeat by becoming overly excited about a project, an interaction, or an idea and then quickly find yourself feeling overwhelmed by it all, which then leads to feelings of helplessness. These feelings of helplessness then tend to lead to you quitting the task. 3. Deny any other Possible Solutions. Set yourself up for self sabotage by stubbornly denying routes, advice, and help that would benefit you in achieving your desired outcome. You may tend to feel that it must done within your current abilities and knowledge only. When your abilities fall short from your desired outcome, you may end up feeling defeated; when all along learning a new approach could provide you with what you need to overcome obstacles and succeed at the task. 4. Talk negatively to self. Set yourself up for self defeat through a negative behaviour of talking yourself down and holding yourself back from even trying. You may use self-defeating terms like: "I'm not good enough to do that," "people like me can't have things like that," "it would be too much work and I don't want to work that hard," and so forth. 5. Be a procrastinator. Start a project or task only to procrastinate it's completion to the point of self sabotage and defeat. Some people have masses of unfinished projects, as they leave one project unfinished then start another, only to leave that one unfinished as well. Self defeat through procrastination may be a cognitive behaviour developed from fear that achieving this would lead to an overwhelming workload for you; or because you may set to high of expectations on yourself; or maybe, because it takes to much time away from other interests. However, rather than find ways to complete the task at hand in a proficient manner, you create self-sabotage by putting off the possibility to succeed. 6. Have stagnate, bad habits. Create self defeat by having poor attendance, performance, and punctuality. These can be self-defeating for career success and create self sabotage gaining a poor reputation, relationship problems and even job loss. You suffer from such negative behavior because you may find comfort settling for average expectations of yourself and you do not press to find the limits of your true potential or strive higher to achieve what you truly desire. The thought of taking such a risk is to scary to you as you fear that you will only fail. However, failure is truly only achieved by not trying at all. 7. Delve into addictions. Develop a negative behaviour that leads to self sabotage by getting trapped into addictions and substance abuse. Substance addictions may include caffeine, tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, narcotics, depressants, stimulants, hallucinogens, and designer drugs. Uncontrolled habits, such as sex addiction, compulsive spending/gambling, anger, eating disorders, and internet addiction can also become addictions that can lead to self defeat and create interference with making positive progress. Two approaches to the treatment of self-defeating behaviour: existential versus cognitive therapy: Existential therapy adopts a philosophical approach concerned with understanding peoples’ positions in the world and clarification of what it means to them to be alive. Exploring both with a receptive attitude with the aim to search for truth, open mindedness and with an attitude of wonder rather than fitting client into frameworks of interpretation. The aim is to uncover the basic dimensions of ‘being’ that underpin everyday life, in doing so being better equipped to live an authentic life (Van Deurzen as cited in Dryden, 2007). The main focus of existential analysis is towards the way of being and the content of a persons’ relationship with self (Eigenwelt), others (Mitwelt) and the physical world (Unwelt). Existentialists’ image of the person is that they are striving to be. Existentialists seek a balance between recognising the limits and dimensions of human existence alongside the possibilities and opportunities of human life. It focuses on the individuals being in the world alone and facing the anxiety of isolation, with the notion that the significance of human existence is never set, but continually recreating oneself through experience, being in a constant state of transition (Corey, 2009). Existentialists do not categorize or label individuals but instead look at the different levels of experience and existence that they face. Van Deurzen ( as cited in Dryden, 2007) stated that existentialists distinguish four dimensions of human existence in which individuals are pulled between positive aspirations and negative fears within each dimension. These dimensions are: 1. The physical dimension (Umwelt) where a person relates to the environment and the natural world around them. 2. Social dimension (Mitwelt) where an individual relates to others with whom they interact in the world, including attitudes towards love/hate, co-operation/competition, acceptance/rejection and belonging/isolation. 3. Psychological dimension (Eigenwelt) where one relates to oneself and creates a personal world, including views regarding, past experiences and future possibilities. 4 Spiritual dimension (Uberwelt) where an individual relates to the unknown and creates an ideal world. It is in this dimension that one finds meaning by fitting the puzzle pieces together for oneself. The general goals of existential therapy are to enable individuals to consider their situation, values and beliefs; successfully come to terms with past, present and future negative events; become more honest with themselves; broaden their perception of themselves and their surroundings; find clarity on their purpose in life and how they can learn from their past to create something valuable and meaningful to live for; understand both themselves and others and find ways in effectively communicating and being with others; make sense of the inconsistencies, conflicts and dilemmas of their everyday life. Increased awareness is an essential goal of existential therapy which allows individuals to discover that alternative possibilities exist where none were recognised before (Corey 2009). Individuals in turn realise through therapy that they are capable of making changes to their way of being in the world. It is a gradual process of self-understanding, enabling them to respond with mastery rather than being in its mercy, facing humans’ limitations and possibilities (Van Deurzen, 2007). The therapist aids the client in finding their own perspective and position in the world in relation to the limits and possibilities of human existence. This may be done through relative passivity and silent intervention or active dialogue and debate whereby the therapist may point out contradictions or implications of the client’s point of view. The therapist only follows a didactic line when reminding the client areas of a problem they may have overlooked. The existential therapy has a conversational style where issues and are explored and considered through dialogue with the rhythm of the session changing with the clients preoccupations. Therapists allow the client to take the time and space during conversations to proceed at their own pace allowing the client to feel that they can unfold their problems. The human dilemmas expressed by the clients are as relevant to the therapist and therefore enables the client and therapist to work together in a co-operative effort to shed light on the human existence. The existential approach maintains an anti-technique orientation and gives priority to understanding the clients’ world. It favours description, understanding and exploration of reality to diagnosis, treatment and prognosis, using a specific philosophical method of enquiry rather than techniques, strategies or skills. Existential therapists may draw from techniques that come from other orientations but they do not employ un-integrated techniques instead they have a set of assumptions and attitudes as described previously that guide their interventions with clients (Corey, 2009). Cognitive Therapy was developed by Aaron Beck in 1963 (as cited in Corey, 2009) as a result of his research on depression. His observations of depressed client’s uncovered a negative bias in their interpretation of life events, which added to their cognitive distortions. Cognitive therapy is active, directive, time-limited, present-cantered, problem-orientated, collaborative, structured, and empirical, uses homework and requires clear identification of problems and situations in which they occur. Cognitive therapy sees psychological problems as developing from commonplace processes such as faulty thinking, incorrect or inadequate information leading to incorrect inferences and failing to distinguish between fantasy and reality. It is an in-sight focused therapy that emphasizes first recognizing and then changing negative thoughts and maladaptive beliefs and the rationale that the way in which people feel and behave determined by how they perceive and structure their experience (Corey, 2009). Beck suggested systematic errors which lead to faulty assumptions and misconceptions as cognitive distortions. They are arbitrary inferences, making conclusions without evidence; selective abstraction, forming conclusions on isolated details of the event; over-generalization, holding extreme beliefs on the basis of a single incident and relating them in incorrectly to dissimilar events; magnification and minimization, perceiving a case or event as greater or lesser light than it really deserves; personalization, relating external events to themselves, even when there is no basis for doing so; labelling and mislabelling, portraying own identity on the basis of imperfections and mistakes made in the past and allowing them to define true identity; dichotomous thinking, categorizing experiences in either-or extremes, labelling events as black or white, giving oneself no leeway for being imperfect. The therapist works on the assumption that the direct way to change dysfunctional emotions and behaviours is to modify inaccurate and dysfunctional thinking (Corey, 2009). The client is taught how to identify the distorted and dysfunctional cognitions through process of evaluation and learn more realistic thinking. Once aware of these thoughts clients are trained to test these automatic thoughts against reality by exploring and weighing the evidence for and against them. This process of evaluating their core beliefs means empirically testing them by actively engaging in a Socratic dialogue with therapist (Corey, 2009), carrying out homework assignments, giving data on assumptions they make, keeping a record of activities, and forming alternative interpretations Dattilio, 2000 ( as cited in Corey, 2009). Clients form hypotheses regarding their behaviour and learn to use scientific problem solving and coping skills. Learning about the connection between their thinking and the ways they act and feel. Cognitive therapy focuses on current problems the past will only be brought onto therapy when the therapist feels it is needed to understand how and when certain core beliefs originated and how they have affect on current issues (Corey, 2009). The goals of therapy are to assist client in resolving their pressing problems and teaching them relapse prevention strategies. The therapist may ask the client to describe his thoughts and feelings when going through the stressful event of the death of his child and may explain to him what negative automatic thoughts are and how they relate to the client’s issue. The therapist may also ask the client to provide evidence and relevant information to for thinking this way and in doing so will allow the client to see that his cognitive thoughts are natural but not accurate. A cognitive therapist may also ask the client to list things that need to be done, set priorities, check off tasks that have been accomplished and break down external problems into manageable tasks. Through discussing problems as they are broken down the client will become aware of how she maybe magnifying the importance of the difficulties she feels she has. However these tasks can often lead to self-defeating thoughts so the cognitive therapist may use cognitive rehearsal techniques in identifying and changing these negative thoughts. If the client can learn to combat their self-doubt during therapy she may be able to apply new cognitive skills in real-life situations. Both existential therapy and cognitive therapy have a philosophical emphasis and believe in a collaborative relationship with the client; however they differ on their assumptions and techniques in regards to client’s issues. Both therapies are regarded highly in counselling and neither claim to be right or wrong in their therapeutic role. The success of therapy lies with people’s individual personalities and differences, these will be affect how the person responds to counselling and which counselling technique works best for them and their needs. References: Baumeister, R.F. (1997). Esteem threat, self-regulatory breakdown, and emotional distress as factors in self-defeating behavior. Review of General Psychology, 1, 145-174 Baumeister, R.F. Scher, Stephen (1988). Self-Defeating Behavior Patterns among Normal Individuals: Review and Analysis of Common Self-Destructive Tendencies. American Psychological Association, 1-22 Baumeister, R.F. (1995). The Psychology of Irrationality: Why People Make Foolis. Self-Defeating Choices. Cae Western Reserve University, 1-17 Baumeister, R.F. Twenge, Jean. Catanese, Kathleen (2002). Social Exclusion Causes.Self-Defeating Behavior. American Psychological Association, 606-614 Baumeister, R.F. Bushman, Brad (2008). Social Psychology and Human Nature. Thompson Learning Inc. 3-4, 136-137 Corey, G. 2009, Existential Therapy, Theory & Practice of Counselling and Psychotherapy 8th Edition 131-163 USA: Thomson Dryden, W. 2007 Handbook of Individual Therapy 5th Edition 195-255 London: Sage McLeod, J. 2008 Philosophical Counselling in An Introduction to Counselling 3rd Edition 170-291 Berkshire: Open University Press Nanda, J. 2010, Embodied Integration, Journal of the Society for Existential Analysis 21:2 Polkinghorne, D. 2009 An Existential Therapist Perspective on Ruth, Case Approach to Existential Therapy in Corey, G. 2005 Case Approach to Counselling and Psychotherapy 82-102 USA: Thomson Brooks/Cole Russell, J. M. 2007, Existential Psychotherapy in Corey, G., Theory and Practice of counselling and Psychotherapy, 8th Edition USA: Thomson Van Deurzen, E. 2007 Existential Therapy in Dryden, W. 2007 Handbook of Individual Therapy 5th Edition 195-226 London: Sage