<h4>Scientific labeling:</h4>
<ul>
<li>If you study arthropods long enough, you will find that many of them have two pairs of antennae. We call these creatures <strong>crustaceans</strong>.</li>
</ul>
<h4>Cognitively distorted labeling:</h4>
<ul>
<li>If you study arthropods long enough, you will find that many of them lack coherent goals in life and generally fail to accomplish anything meaningful. We call these creatures <strong>losers</strong>.</li>
</ul>
<p>Science, as a discipline, uses labeling just as you mention. Biologists label creatures to fit them into categories based on their ancestry and features. Psychologists classify mental health conditions into diagnoses such as depression and schizophrenia to aid research and treatment. Astronomers divide heavenly bodies into classifications such as stars, planets, dwarf planets, moons, comets, and asteroids.</p>
<p>Scientists sometimes disagree on the best classification system, the exact set of labels to use, or exactly what should get each label. In 2006, the International Astronomical Union (IAU) created the new label of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwarf_planet" rel="nofollow noreferrer">dwarf planet</a> and reclassified several worlds into this new category, including the formerly classified as planet Pluto and the formerly classified as asteroid Ceres. The fact that there has been a relabeling or that there is a disagreement does not mean that cognitive distortions are being used if the labeling systems being used are founded on logically and empirically reasonable models.</p>
<h4>Learning about idiots, losers, has-beens, never-wases, stupid people, and uglies.</h4>
<p>Labeling, as a cognitive distortion, is not simply attaching a label to something. It is a pathological process of attaching an <a href="https://essex-behavioural-therapy.co.uk/article.asp?topic=labelling&amp;id=64" rel="nofollow noreferrer">extreme and ambiguous label</a> to something in a manner not warranted by the evidence. Read resources on labeling as a distortion. Nearly all of them give examples such as &quot;loser&quot;, &quot;failure&quot;, &quot;bad&quot;, or &quot;pathetic&quot;. Note a trend here. These are statements of <a href="https://www.bmcc.cuny.edu/wp-content/uploads/ported/lrc/studyskills/factsandopinions.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">opinion, not fact</a>, and they are applied in such a way as to be <em>unfair</em> to the target.</p>
<p>Now, let's consider a scenario. You're a gay Scottish dentist. You have several labels but they are all completely factual and value-neutral. You go to your local singles mixer and identify yourself as such, and maybe even add a nice opinion label like &quot;cute&quot; or &quot;cool&quot; to yourself. There is no distortion here.</p>
<p>Now, you botch a root canal and are in the depths of despair. You call your sister frantically and call yourself a &quot;loser&quot; and a &quot;failure&quot; who should &quot;never be allowed to practice dentistry ever again&quot;. Now we are getting into cognitive distortion territory. Maybe you made a mistake. Maybe you were even reckless. These things don't define <em>who you are as a person</em>. Cognitive distortions are acts of unfair or unreasonable mislabeling that accomplish no good but instead cause psychological distress. Calling a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test" rel="nofollow noreferrer">duck a duck</a> is not distortion, but good science.</p>
<p>Ways to approach this:</p>
<ul>
<li>You are a person who made a mistake. You are not a mistake.</li>
<li>You are a person who screwed up. You are not a screw-up.</li>
<li>You may have failed this time. You are not a failure.</li>
</ul>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-06-22T00:51:19.217Z
Suppose someone habitually made significant mistakes and failed, and was therefore regarded as incompetent (or in colloquial terms: "a failure," "a loser," "worthless," etc.) How could this not define them as a person? The label of incompetence ("failure," "loser," "worthless") seems as legitimate as any other classification. Clearly everyone isn't equal and therefore they're not esteemed and rewarded equally.
h_undatus
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-06-22T12:35:54.987Z
@h_undatus the difference is that cognitively distorted labeling is highly subjective and emotive. For example, "Failed third year exams" is scientific. "A total loser at school" or "complete flunk-out" are cognitive distortions. "Convicted of two class 4 felonies, one class 2 misdemeanor, and a class 6 financial impropriety infraction" is scientific. "Is a completely evil creature and irredeemable career criminal" is distorted.
Robert Columbia
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-06-22T19:47:16.437Z
How so? Depending on the cause of failure the first might be labeled "dumb," "lazy," "a bad student." The second — again, we'd need more information — could reasonably be described as "evil," "incompetent," "irredeemable." Those terms aren't that subjective in a given society, and they'd better have an emotive element to get the point across because labels are shorthand. ("Is he a loser?" "No, because that's labeling." "What's he like then?" "Well, he's unemployed, broke, he never showers or leaves his parents' basement, and he's addicted to hentai, Hot Pockets and Pokémon GO.")
h_undatus
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-06-26T22:18:55.430Z
@h_undatus as in a lot of psychology, it's contextual. "Dumb", in common parlance, is an insult. There are scientific ways to describe someone's intelligence or education (e.g. "High school graduate" or "105 IQ"). "Dumb" is not one of them. "Lazy" is not even a measurable concept - what would its units be? Maybe if you can get the scientific community to agree that "Lazy" means a person with fewer than 150 Responsibilityons, then it wouldn't be, but good luck convincing anyone of that.
Robert Columbia
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-06-26T22:21:05.507Z
@h_undatus instead of describing someone as "lazy" (unscientific), you could describe what it was that they are unwilling to do that makes you feel they are lazy, such as "high school student who has not done their homework for five school days in a row".
Robert Columbia
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-06-27T02:03:47.707Z
You’re still labeling. You’re just using more words. No one says, “She’s got a 105 IQ.” They say, “She’s smart.” (The opposite of which is “She’s dumb,” just as the opposite of lazy is “hard-working.”) These labels refer to the defining qualities of a person, and yet you say otherwise (“These things don't define who you are as a person.”)
h_undatus
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-05-17T19:45:04.147Z
2022-08-20T23:30:32.937Z
2022-08-20T23:30:32.937Z
Robert Columbia
<p>As Bryan Krause suggested (above), talking with your psychotherapist is likely the <strong>most important</strong> next step for you to take.</p>
<p>Also, please note that what I write below is simply general <em>information</em> about cognitive behavioral therapy. I do not know your situation. What I share with you here is not personal advice. It is information only.</p>
<p>You might find it helpful to read more about cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) because it might answer at least one of your questions, which I will paraphrase as: <em>Why are cognitive distortions potentially harmful?</em></p>
<h3>Brief answer with an example</h3>
<p>What you <em>think</em> (assumptions, beliefs) about yourself and the world greatly influences what you <em>do</em> (behavior) and how you <em>feel</em> (emotions). Our minds often distort reality by &quot;telling&quot; us untruths, which in turn lead us to feel and act differently.</p>
<p>Example: I'm a college student majoring in psychology. I studied reasonably well for a statistics test, but I received a &quot;B-&quot; grade. My friend received an &quot;A&quot;. I immediately think, &quot;I'm not smart enough to be a psychologist.&quot; I subsequently don't study as hard and I start thinking about changing to an &quot;easy&quot; major. I feel down and start to smoke weed every day to feel better, which causes me to feel even less motivated.</p>
<p>Thus, according to cognitive behavioral theory, my negative (distorted) thoughts about the &quot;B-&quot; grade led to a downward spiral of maladaptive behaviors and depressed mood.</p>
<h3>Very brief history</h3>
<p>[<strong>Edit of 17 Dec 2020</strong>: Thank you to <a href="https://psychology.stackexchange.com/users/11556/tale852150">tale852150</a> for calling attention to my egregious and baffling omission (see the Comments, below). I added this section about Albert Ellis because Ellis was indeed the first cognitive-behavioral theorist and clinician.]</p>
<p><strong>Albert Ellis (1913–2007)</strong></p>
<p>In the mid-1950s, Albert E. Ellis, Ph.D., developed the first systematic cognitive therapy, which he originally called &quot;rational therapy&quot;, with the therapy approach evolving, the name changed to &quot;rational-emotive therapy&quot; (RET), and finally, &quot;rational-emotive behavior therapy&quot; (REBT). This book chapter provides a concise, yet complete overview of REBT:</p>
<p>Dryden, Windy, Daniel David, and Albert Ellis. &quot;<a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Windy-Dryden/publication/227153297_Rational_Emotive_Behavior_Therapy/links/563200b808ae3de9381d893e/Rational-Emotive-Behavior-Therapy.pdf#page=241" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy</a>.&quot; In <em>Handbook of Cognitive Behavioral Therapies</em>, 3rd ed., edited by Keith S. Dobson, 226–276. New York: Guilford, 2010.</p>
<p>And here are few representative samples of Ellis' publications:</p>
<p>Ellis, Albert. &quot;Rational Psychotherapy and Individual Psychology.&quot; <em>Journal of Individual Psychology</em> 13, no. 1 (1957): 38-44.</p>
<p>Ellis, Albert, and Robert A. Harper. <em>A New Guide to Rational Living</em>. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1961.</p>
<p>Ellis, A. (1962). <em>Reason and Emotion in Psychotherapy</em>. Secaucus, NJ: Lyle Stuart.</p>
<p>Ellis, Albert. &quot;Rational-Emotive Therapy and Cognitive Behavior Therapy: Similarities and Differences.&quot; <em>Cognitive Therapy and Research</em> 4, no. 4 (1980): 325-340.</p>
<p>Ellis, Albert. &quot;Changing Rational-Emotive Therapy (RET) to Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT).&quot; <em>Journal of Rational-Emotive and Cognitive-Behavior Therapy</em> 13, no. 2 (1995): 85-89.</p>
<p><strong>Aaron Beck (1921– )</strong></p>
<p>Aaron Beck, M.D. developed &quot;cognitive therapy&quot; in the early 1960s. One of his first breakthrough articles was:</p>
<p>Beck, Aaron T. &quot;Thinking and Depression: I. Idiosyncratic Content and Cognitive Distortions.&quot; <em>Archives of General Psychiatry</em> 9, No. 4 (1963): 324–333. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1963.01720160014002</p>
<h3>Helpful articles</h3>
<p>John M. Grohol, &quot;<a href="https://psychcentral.com/lib/15-common-cognitive-distortions/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">15 Common Cognitive Distortions</a>&quot;, <em>PsychCentral</em> (24 Jun 2019). Here is a quote from Dr. Grohol's article:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>What’s a <em>cognitive distortion</em> and why do so many people have them?
Cognitive distortions are simply ways that our mind convinces us of
something that isn’t really true. These inaccurate thoughts are
usually used to reinforce negative thinking or emotions — telling
ourselves things that sound rational and accurate, but really only
serve to keep us feeling bad about ourselves.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Cherry, Kendra. &quot;<a href="https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-cognitive-behavior-therapy-2795747" rel="nofollow noreferrer">What Is Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT)?</a>&quot; <em>verywellmind</em> (13 June 2020). This is a quote from the article:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Cognitive behavioral therapy focuses on changing the automatic
negative thoughts that can contribute to and worsen emotional
difficulties, depression, and anxiety. These spontaneous negative
thoughts have a detrimental influence on mood.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Note that &quot;automatic negative thoughts&quot; and &quot;cognitive distortions&quot;, as used by most psychotherapists, have very similar if not identical meanings.</p>
<h3>Best-selling book</h3>
<p>The top-selling cognitive behavioral therapy book on Amazon.com currently is:</p>
<p>Gillihan, Seth J. <em>Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Made Simple: 10 Strategies for Managing Anxiety, Depression, Anger, Panic, and Worry</em>. Emeryville, CA: Althea Press (Callisto Media), 2018. (Amazon rating/reviews: 4.6 stars; <a href="https://reviewmeta.com/amazon/1939754852" rel="nofollow noreferrer">ReviewMeta: 4.6 stars</a>)</p>
<p>I haven't read Gillihan's book, but a ReviewMeta rating of 4.6 based on 97 reviews suggests it's been helpful to most people.</p>
<p>Of course, there are scores of good online articles and books about cognitive behavioral therapy. The ones I mentioned are just a select sample to (hopefully) get you started learning more.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-17T05:20:01.260Z
Can’t believe you didn’t mention Albert Ellis here as equally useful and informative
tale852150
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-17T17:22:59.717Z
This is more of a comment than an answer. Or do you mean that by labeling the (OP's) therapist actually mean cognitive distortion?
Ooker
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-18T06:05:54.730Z
@tale852150 Albert Ellis was the father of REBT not CBT. See https://psychology.stackexchange.com/q/1977/7604
Chris Rogers
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-18T12:49:37.017Z
@ChrisRogers yes, and REBT (or RT as it was called then) was the first CBT, circa 1957.  Albert Ellis is known as the grandfather of CBT.
tale852150
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-12-17T22:14:24.357Z
@tale852150 - I can't believe it myself! You are, of course, absolutely correct. I edited my answer today. // I suspect I have been influenced by the overemphasis on Beck as the "father of CBT", and I was previously not aware of the bias that had developed in my mind. I appreciate you identifying my error.
Mark D Worthen PsyD
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-12-17T22:16:04.737Z
@Ooker - Yes, I assumed that OP's therapist was referring to cognitive distortions.
Mark D Worthen PsyD
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-17T04:30:11.657Z
2020-12-17T22:07:17.250Z
2020-12-17T22:07:17.250Z
Mark D Worthen PsyD
<p>Is there any difference between label and category? We use categories everyday. Psychiatrists use it too. Aren't psychiatric disorders like schizophrenia or bipolar disorder just labels that are assigned to specific disorder cases that patients have?</p>
<p>Isn't &quot;labeling&quot; itself a label? People have some thoughts, but some of them are labeled as &quot;labeling&quot;.</p>
<p>If I say that the bird I see is a pigeon, this is labeling as well. But I don't think that saying that the pigeon is a pigeon is a cognitive distortion.</p>
<p>Sorry, I am not a psychologist. But my psychotherapist said me that I assign labels to person and their actions. But I don't understand what it means and why it is bad.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-16T15:25:59.687Z
Have you asked your psychotherapist and listened carefully to their response, without judgment?
Bryan Krause
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-17T16:52:36.740Z
you make a valid point here insofar as why I, and a minority of other people in the antipsychiatry movement, have a problem with labels. my personal perspective: we can best understand (though not *only* understand) schizophrenia and perhaps a few other conditions as neurological problem akin to dementia or epilepsy. in general, though, psychiatry *hurts* people (and most especially young people) with pseudoscientific labels like "borderline", etc. those people then come to identify themselves with the labels and therefore make excuses and limit themselves. especially bad since shrinks often g
Ria Byss
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-17T17:30:59.637Z
to start off, let's see their definitions. [Categorization](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorization "Categorization - Wikipedia") is an activity that consists of putting things, such as objects, ideas, or people, into categories (classes, types, index) based on their similarities or common criteria. [Labelling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labelling "Labelling - Wikipedia") or using a label is describing someone or something in a word or short phrase.
Ooker
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-17T18:43:59.370Z
@Ooker That's not what labeling means in this context.
Bryan Krause
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-18T08:02:39.553Z
@BryanKrause so what does it mean in this context?
Ooker
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-19T19:06:35.673Z
Better to use the definition of [labeling as a cognitive distortion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_distortion#Labeling_and_mislabeling): "A form of overgeneralization; attributing a person's actions to his or her character instead of to an attribute. Rather than assuming the behaviour to be accidental or otherwise extrinsic, one assigns a label to someone or something that is based on the inferred character of that person or thing."
Arnon Weinberg
<cognitive-psychology><cbt><cognitive-distortion>
Why is labeling a cognitive distortion? How is it different from categorization?
anton_rh
# Why is labeling a cognitive distortion? How is it different from categorization?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2020-09-16)

Is there any difference between label and category? We use categories everyday. Psychiatrists use it too. Aren't psychiatric disorders like schizophrenia or bipolar disorder just labels that are assigned to specific disorder cases that patients have?

Isn't "labeling" itself a label? People have some thoughts, but some of them are labeled as "labeling".

If I say that the bird I see is a pigeon, this is labeling as well. But I don't think that saying that the pigeon is a pigeon is a cognitive distortion.

Sorry, I am not a psychologist. But my psychotherapist said me that I assign labels to person and their actions. But I don't understand what it means and why it is bad.

**Tags:** cognitive-psychology, cbt, cognitive-distortion

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Have you asked your psychotherapist and listened carefully to their response, without judgment?  
> **username_2**: you make a valid point here insofar as why I, and a minority of other people in the antipsychiatry movement, have a problem with labels. my personal perspective: we can best understand (though not *only* understand) schizophrenia and perhaps a few other conditions as neurological problem akin to dementia or epilepsy. in general, though, psychiatry *hurts* people (and most especially young people) with pseudoscientific labels like "borderline", etc. those people then come to identify themselves with the labels and therefore make excuses and limit themselves. especially bad since shrinks often g  
> **username_3**: to start off, let's see their definitions. [Categorization](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorization "Categorization - Wikipedia") is an activity that consists of putting things, such as objects, ideas, or people, into categories (classes, types, index) based on their similarities or common criteria. [Labelling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labelling "Labelling - Wikipedia") or using a label is describing someone or something in a word or short phrase.  
> **username_1**: @username_3 That's not what labeling means in this context.  
> **username_3**: @BryanKrause so what does it mean in this context?  
> **username_4**: Better to use the definition of [labeling as a cognitive distortion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_distortion#Labeling_and_mislabeling): "A form of overgeneralization; attributing a person's actions to his or her character instead of to an attribute. Rather than assuming the behaviour to be accidental or otherwise extrinsic, one assigns a label to someone or something that is based on the inferred character of that person or thing."  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_5 on 2022-05-17. Score: 2 | Accepted answer

#### Scientific labeling:

* If you study arthropods long enough, you will find that many of them have two pairs of antennae. We call these creatures **crustaceans**.

#### Cognitively distorted labeling:

* If you study arthropods long enough, you will find that many of them lack coherent goals in life and generally fail to accomplish anything meaningful. We call these creatures **losers**.

Science, as a discipline, uses labeling just as you mention. Biologists label creatures to fit them into categories based on their ancestry and features. Psychologists classify mental health conditions into diagnoses such as depression and schizophrenia to aid research and treatment. Astronomers divide heavenly bodies into classifications such as stars, planets, dwarf planets, moons, comets, and asteroids.

Scientists sometimes disagree on the best classification system, the exact set of labels to use, or exactly what should get each label. In 2006, the International Astronomical Union (IAU) created the new label of [dwarf planet](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwarf_planet) and reclassified several worlds into this new category, including the formerly classified as planet Pluto and the formerly classified as asteroid Ceres. The fact that there has been a relabeling or that there is a disagreement does not mean that cognitive distortions are being used if the labeling systems being used are founded on logically and empirically reasonable models.

#### Learning about idiots, losers, has-beens, never-wases, stupid people, and uglies.

Labeling, as a cognitive distortion, is not simply attaching a label to something. It is a pathological process of attaching an [extreme and ambiguous label](https://essex-behavioural-therapy.co.uk/article.asp?topic=labelling&id=64) to something in a manner not warranted by the evidence. Read resources on labeling as a distortion. Nearly all of them give examples such as "loser", "failure", "bad", or "pathetic". Note a trend here. These are statements of [opinion, not fact](https://www.bmcc.cuny.edu/wp-content/uploads/ported/lrc/studyskills/factsandopinions.pdf), and they are applied in such a way as to be *unfair* to the target.

Now, let's consider a scenario. You're a gay Scottish dentist. You have several labels but they are all completely factual and value-neutral. You go to your local singles mixer and identify yourself as such, and maybe even add a nice opinion label like "cute" or "cool" to yourself. There is no distortion here.

Now, you botch a root canal and are in the depths of despair. You call your sister frantically and call yourself a "loser" and a "failure" who should "never be allowed to practice dentistry ever again". Now we are getting into cognitive distortion territory. Maybe you made a mistake. Maybe you were even reckless. These things don't define *who you are as a person*. Cognitive distortions are acts of unfair or unreasonable mislabeling that accomplish no good but instead cause psychological distress. Calling a [duck a duck](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test) is not distortion, but good science.

Ways to approach this:

* You are a person who made a mistake. You are not a mistake.
* You are a person who screwed up. You are not a screw-up.
* You may have failed this time. You are not a failure.

> **Comments:**
> **username_6**: Suppose someone habitually made significant mistakes and failed, and was therefore regarded as incompetent (or in colloquial terms: "a failure," "a loser," "worthless," etc.) How could this not define them as a person? The label of incompetence ("failure," "loser," "worthless") seems as legitimate as any other classification. Clearly everyone isn't equal and therefore they're not esteemed and rewarded equally.  
> **username_5**: @username_6 the difference is that cognitively distorted labeling is highly subjective and emotive. For example, "Failed third year exams" is scientific. "A total loser at school" or "complete flunk-out" are cognitive distortions. "Convicted of two class 4 felonies, one class 2 misdemeanor, and a class 6 financial impropriety infraction" is scientific. "Is a completely evil creature and irredeemable career criminal" is distorted.  
> **username_6**: How so? Depending on the cause of failure the first might be labeled "dumb," "lazy," "a bad student." The second — again, we'd need more information — could reasonably be described as "evil," "incompetent," "irredeemable." Those terms aren't that subjective in a given society, and they'd better have an emotive element to get the point across because labels are shorthand. ("Is he a loser?" "No, because that's labeling." "What's he like then?" "Well, he's unemployed, broke, he never showers or leaves his parents' basement, and he's addicted to hentai, Hot Pockets and Pokémon GO.")  
> **username_5**: @username_6 as in a lot of psychology, it's contextual. "Dumb", in common parlance, is an insult. There are scientific ways to describe someone's intelligence or education (e.g. "High school graduate" or "105 IQ"). "Dumb" is not one of them. "Lazy" is not even a measurable concept - what would its units be? Maybe if you can get the scientific community to agree that "Lazy" means a person with fewer than 150 Responsibilityons, then it wouldn't be, but good luck convincing anyone of that.  
> **username_5**: @username_6 instead of describing someone as "lazy" (unscientific), you could describe what it was that they are unwilling to do that makes you feel they are lazy, such as "high school student who has not done their homework for five school days in a row".  
> **username_6**: You’re still labeling. You’re just using more words. No one says, “She’s got a 105 IQ.” They say, “She’s smart.” (The opposite of which is “She’s dumb,” just as the opposite of lazy is “hard-working.”) These labels refer to the defining qualities of a person, and yet you say otherwise (“These things don't define who you are as a person.”)  

---

### Answer by username_7 on 2020-09-17. Score: 2

As username_1 suggested (above), talking with your psychotherapist is likely the **most important** next step for you to take.

Also, please note that what I write below is simply general *information* about cognitive behavioral therapy. I do not know your situation. What I share with you here is not personal advice. It is information only.

You might find it helpful to read more about cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) because it might answer at least one of your questions, which I will paraphrase as: *Why are cognitive distortions potentially harmful?*

### Brief answer with an example

What you *think* (assumptions, beliefs) about yourself and the world greatly influences what you *do* (behavior) and how you *feel* (emotions). Our minds often distort reality by "telling" us untruths, which in turn lead us to feel and act differently.

Example: I'm a college student majoring in psychology. I studied reasonably well for a statistics test, but I received a "B-" grade. My friend received an "A". I immediately think, "I'm not smart enough to be a psychologist." I subsequently don't study as hard and I start thinking about changing to an "easy" major. I feel down and start to smoke weed every day to feel better, which causes me to feel even less motivated.

Thus, according to cognitive behavioral theory, my negative (distorted) thoughts about the "B-" grade led to a downward spiral of maladaptive behaviors and depressed mood.

### Very brief history

[**Edit of 17 Dec 2020**: Thank you to [username_8](https://psychology.stackexchange.com/users/11556/username_8) for calling attention to my egregious and baffling omission (see the Comments, below). I added this section about Albert Ellis because Ellis was indeed the first cognitive-behavioral theorist and clinician.]

**Albert Ellis (1913–2007)**

In the mid-1950s, Albert E. Ellis, Ph.D., developed the first systematic cognitive therapy, which he originally called "rational therapy", with the therapy approach evolving, the name changed to "rational-emotive therapy" (RET), and finally, "rational-emotive behavior therapy" (REBT). This book chapter provides a concise, yet complete overview of REBT:

Dryden, Windy, Daniel David, and Albert Ellis. "[Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Windy-Dryden/publication/227153297_Rational_Emotive_Behavior_Therapy/links/563200b808ae3de9381d893e/Rational-Emotive-Behavior-Therapy.pdf#page=241)." In *Handbook of Cognitive Behavioral Therapies*, 3rd ed., edited by Keith S. Dobson, 226–276. New York: Guilford, 2010.

And here are few representative samples of Ellis' publications:

Ellis, Albert. "Rational Psychotherapy and Individual Psychology." *Journal of Individual Psychology* 13, no. 1 (1957): 38-44.

Ellis, Albert, and Robert A. Harper. *A New Guide to Rational Living*. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1961.

Ellis, A. (1962). *Reason and Emotion in Psychotherapy*. Secaucus, NJ: Lyle Stuart.

Ellis, Albert. "Rational-Emotive Therapy and Cognitive Behavior Therapy: Similarities and Differences." *Cognitive Therapy and Research* 4, no. 4 (1980): 325-340.

Ellis, Albert. "Changing Rational-Emotive Therapy (RET) to Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT)." *Journal of Rational-Emotive and Cognitive-Behavior Therapy* 13, no. 2 (1995): 85-89.

**Aaron Beck (1921– )**

Aaron Beck, M.D. developed "cognitive therapy" in the early 1960s. One of his first breakthrough articles was:

Beck, Aaron T. "Thinking and Depression: I. Idiosyncratic Content and Cognitive Distortions." *Archives of General Psychiatry* 9, No. 4 (1963): 324–333. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1963.01720160014002

### Helpful articles

John M. Grohol, "[15 Common Cognitive Distortions](https://psychcentral.com/lib/15-common-cognitive-distortions/)", *PsychCentral* (24 Jun 2019). Here is a quote from Dr. Grohol's article:

> What’s a *cognitive distortion* and why do so many people have them?
> Cognitive distortions are simply ways that our mind convinces us of
> something that isn’t really true. These inaccurate thoughts are
> usually used to reinforce negative thinking or emotions — telling
> ourselves things that sound rational and accurate, but really only
> serve to keep us feeling bad about ourselves.

Cherry, Kendra. "[What Is Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT)?](https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-cognitive-behavior-therapy-2795747)" *verywellmind* (13 June 2020). This is a quote from the article:

> Cognitive behavioral therapy focuses on changing the automatic
> negative thoughts that can contribute to and worsen emotional
> difficulties, depression, and anxiety. These spontaneous negative
> thoughts have a detrimental influence on mood.

Note that "automatic negative thoughts" and "cognitive distortions", as used by most psychotherapists, have very similar if not identical meanings.

### Best-selling book

The top-selling cognitive behavioral therapy book on Amazon.com currently is:

Gillihan, Seth J. *Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Made Simple: 10 Strategies for Managing Anxiety, Depression, Anger, Panic, and Worry*. Emeryville, CA: Althea Press (Callisto Media), 2018. (Amazon rating/reviews: 4.6 stars; [ReviewMeta: 4.6 stars](https://reviewmeta.com/amazon/1939754852))

I haven't read Gillihan's book, but a ReviewMeta rating of 4.6 based on 97 reviews suggests it's been helpful to most people.

Of course, there are scores of good online articles and books about cognitive behavioral therapy. The ones I mentioned are just a select sample to (hopefully) get you started learning more.

> **Comments:**
> **username_8**: Can’t believe you didn’t mention Albert Ellis here as equally useful and informative  
> **username_3**: This is more of a comment than an answer. Or do you mean that by labeling the (OP's) therapist actually mean cognitive distortion?  
> **username_9**: @username_8 Albert Ellis was the father of REBT not CBT. See https://psychology.stackexchange.com/q/1977/7604  
> **username_8**: @ChrisRogers yes, and REBT (or RT as it was called then) was the first CBT, circa 1957.  Albert Ellis is known as the grandfather of CBT.  
> **username_7**: @username_8 - I can't believe it myself! You are, of course, absolutely correct. I edited my answer today. // I suspect I have been influenced by the overemphasis on Beck as the "father of CBT", and I was previously not aware of the bias that had developed in my mind. I appreciate you identifying my error.  
> **username_7**: @username_3 - Yes, I assumed that OP's therapist was referring to cognitive distortions.  

---

