Internet review

Citation

(2007), "Internet review", Health Education, Vol. 107 No. 4. https://doi.org/10.1108/he.2007.142107dag.001

Internet review

CatastrophizingImagine the following scenario. You have just left home to catch the train to work when you realise you have left your watch in the house. Without a watch how will you know the correct time? If you don’t know the time you may miss your train. If that happens you will be late for work, the boss will be angry and you may get fired. Without a job you can’t pay the mortgage, you will lose your house. You will start drinking heavily and your spouse will leave you. Without a home, a job and a family, what’s the point in carrying on? You will end up destitute on the streets; your life will be over. And all because you forgot your watch! This is an (exaggerated) example of catastrophizing. Catastrophizing is a quite common response to often quite minor daily challenges, but the consequences of this way of viewing the world can have quite serious mental and physical health implications. Men who habitually adopt this way of thinking are 25 per cent more likely to die before the age of 65 than men with other ways of viewing the world. In this review we look at how people can use the internet to learn about catastrophizing and ways of avoiding this sort of dysfunctional thinking and the harmful health consequences.

Box of Crayonswww.boxofcrayons.biz/articles/catastrophe.phpThis web site has been designed to highlight the work of Michael Bungay Stanier, who runs life coaching seminars for individuals and corporations, and “The Fine Art of Catastrophizing” is an online essay summarising his approach to this problem. After presenting a brief, and quite funny, example of the problem and what the health implications might be, the author goes on to look at ways in which this dysfunctional thought process can be avoided.

The web site points out that catastrophizing is a cycle of despair that needs to be broken if it is to be avoided. Two techniques are suggested for this; the first seems reasonable, the second dubious to say the least. In the first technique you are advised to write down the catastrophizing sequence rather like the example in the introduction to this review. You should then assign probabilities to each of the predicted events. In the above example, because the person has forgotten their watch they predict that they will miss their train. But how likely is this – 5 per cent, 25 per cent, 100 per cent? Realistically it is probably quite low. The second prediction was that because you were late for work you would get fired. How likely is this – 4 per cent, 44 per cent? If you continue like this for each separate event and then multiply all these probabilities together you arrive at the probability of the final predicted outcome. Because of the nature of probability this final outcome will nearly always have an extremely small likelihood of actually occurring, and this gives the individual a more realistic view of the whole situation. This technique may well be recognised by some readers as a form of cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT). By forcing the person to look at each element of their dysfunctional thought process separately they get a much clearer picture of how they arrived at the catastrophic, but extremely unlikely, final outcome.

The second technique sounds a little bizarre and amounts to no more than standing up and shouting “How fascinating!” in the face of the challenging situation. It is claimed to work because the phrase gives an obvious but unnecessary sense of importance to a situation that does not warrant it. This helps the individual put the challenge into a more realistic sense of perspective and therefore counters the likelihood of catastrophizing.

This is an uncomplicated web site and it only provides the basic minimum of information, but it does provide a good starting point for anyone who wants to know more about this troubling condition.

Intuitive Eatingwww.lindamoran.net/blog_archives/2007/03/do_you_disturb.htmlThis little web site is of interest because it starts out by pointing out the positive benefits of catastrophizing. For example catastrophizing helps us to prepare for (inevitable?) disappointment. It helps us to cope with (unavoidable?) shocks. By predicting possible bad outcomes we can be better prepared and therefore improve our chances of overcoming these and achieving success. In this sense then, far from being a dysfunctional thought process, catastrophizing may be seen as a healthy way of dealing with potentially harmful situations.

The negative aspects of catastrophizing do get a mention, for example catastrophizing is physically and mentally draining, it makes us set our sights too low, it limits ambition and it can build barriers between ourselves and people who have a more positive outlook.

The suggestions for dealing with catastrophizing are quite interesting. The main suggestion is that you should start with a list indicating all the ways in which catastrophizing may be a help or a hindrance. Then, try to replace the negative thought processes with those that are more positive. This is fairly systematic and again has some resemblance to CBT. The emphasis is on taking control of the catastrophizing process and using it beneficially, recognising when it may be a good thing and controlling it when it seems to be getting out of hand.

While this web site looks as if it has been written for lay people by lay people, nevertheless some of the ideas it contains are interesting and they are presented in a manner that makes the information readily accessible.

John C. Flanaganwww.johncflanaganlcsw.com/articles/Catastrophizing.htmJohn Flanagan is a trauma therapist who specialises in helping adults who have undergone a variety of traumas. In this section of his web site he describes what catastrophizing is from the perspective of a therapist and as a person who has recently experienced this dysfunctional thought process. One of the more interesting insights to be gained from this web site is the notion that the internet may well be promoting this way of thinking. He cites his own experience, which was a simple allergic reaction to some medication, but by the time he had pursued his symptoms on the internet he felt he was faced with a life-threatening critical condition!

Occasionally the author does wander off into the realms of speculation when trying to account for catastrophization. For example, he suggests that childhood illness may play a part. When we were ill as a child we almost certainly attracted attention. As adults this continues, but attention is only likely to be forthcoming if the illness is very serious or possibly life-threatening. So a sniffle becomes a symptom of pneumonia, or lethargy an indicator of HIV infection. Thus catastrophizing is simply a form of attention seeking. The most useful tip for dealing with catastrophizing is really quite simple; seek out the evidence. Always strive for as much information as possible before reaching a conclusion. By way of an illustration he cites the example from the early days of astronomy when it was discovered that Venus was covered in cloud, rather like Earth was during the time of the dinosaurs. The incorrect conclusion that Venus might therefore be inhabited by dinosaurs is perhaps an example of going beyond the information given and is similar to what happens when people catastrophize.

From a design point of view this is not the most enticing of web sites. Apart from a single photograph of the author, the web site is wholly text-based, using a small font against a dark background. But the content is good, is interesting to read, only takes a few minutes to absorb and is therefore worth a look.

Life in Motionhttp://lifeinmotioncoaches.blogspot.com/2005/10/mistake-1-chicken-little-syndrome.htmlThis web site is one is a good example of “pop” psychology that actually hits the mark. The author is a life coach and counsellor with a Master’s degree in Educational Psychology. The overall design and approach of the web site is captured by the title of this section “The Chicken Little Syndrome”. For those readers too old to remember, Chicken Little was a hen who when hit on the head with something assumed the whole sky was falling in and the world was doomed, i.e. he was a catastrophizing chicken. The author uses this and other examples to illustrate the idea of catastrophizing and goes on to discuss how people who are prone to catastrophizing write their own scripts for disaster. When faced with challenging situations the authors of these scripts start to work through all the possible outcomes, becoming more and more negative in their evaluation until by the time the script is complete it has almost become a self-fulfilling prophecy. This self-fulfilling prophecy of course never comes about but that doesn’t stop it having seriously inhibiting influences on thoughts, feelings and behaviour.

The solution to this problem suggested in this web site is for people to think more realistically, or more specifically to adopt an evidence-based approach to their thinking before arriving at (catastrophic) conclusions. If Chicken Little had adopted this approach he would have taken note that something had fallen onto his head but he would have sought more evidence before coming to the conclusion that the sky was falling down!

This web site is based in North America and it has that “home-spun philosophy” approach that you either like or loathe. But if you can go beyond this and look at the content, then it really is worth the time and effort.