In Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT), one of the four major irrational beliefs relates to demandingness. Self-disturbing assumptions within this category generally present in the form of should, must, or ought-type narratives. To illustrate this point, think of the last time you visited the supermarket.
Do you recall use of any should statements you may’ve used that caused an unpleasant personal reaction? If so, there’s no shame in use of these narratives. In actuality, they automatically occur and when they do, you can do something about them. Additionally, not all shoulding is unproductive.
REBT theory uses the ABC model to illustrate how when Activating events (“Actions”) occur and people maintain irrational Beliefs about the events, these unhelpful assumptions – and not the actual occurrences – are what create unpleasant cognitive, emotive, bodily sensation, and behavioral Consequences.
Still, not all should narratives are of the self-disturbing variety. Regarding this matter, page 102 of The REBT Therapist’s Pocket Companion encourages REBT practitioners to help clients understand the difference between various types of should narratives.
To illustrate this point, let’s revisit the supermarket scenario. Have you ever been in a hurry while shopping, only to round the corner of a particular aisle and discover that someone blocked your path with a carelessly placed shopping cart while the individual stands in the way of your ability to maneuver past the obstruction?
If so, you may’ve used an absolute should statement. Perhaps you said to yourself something like, “People shouldn’t inconvenience me,” or, “This person should be more thoughtful.” Regarding absolutistic should statements such as these, one source states:
In [REBT] we teach you to identify and question these absolutistic attitudes. We call this process of questioning the impact and validity of your absolute “shoulds” disputing your self-defeating attitudes.
Rather than disputing the Action (blocked aisle) or Consequence (e.g., anger), Disputation of your unhelpful Belief is used in search of an Effective new belief. For instance, you could productively tell yourself, “While I wish people wouldn’t inconvenience me, being inconvenienced when in public is more likely than not.”
Keep in mind that “absolute” is defined as that which is has no restriction, exception, or qualification. Therefore, use of a flexible belief versus an absolutistic one may better serve your interests and goals.
Now, envision being back at the supermarket. Perhaps when searching for your preferred type of produce, you’ve used a conditional should statement. “If store employees want my loyalty as a customer, they should keep asparagus in stock,” you tell yourself. Concerning this type of conditional should statement, one source states:
[T]he person specifies the conditions that have to be met for an outcome to be achieved (e.g. ‘If I study hard, I should pass my exams’). There is, of course, an element of prediction about this ‘should’, but its defining characteristic is in the specification of the conditions that have to be met for something else to occur.
It may not be rational to rigidly stipulate that one’s loyalty to a supermarket is conditional upon whether or not asparagus is in stock. After all, produce supplies are affected by many factors (i.e., farming supply, shopper demand, etc.) and not always will your desired items be available.
Sticking with the supermarket motif, suppose that as you pass another shopper, you notice she appears to be confused about which brand of macaroni and cheese to purchase. In one hand, she holds the brand Yummo and in her other hand she holds the brand Deliciosa.
You approach the shopper and say, “You know, I’ve tried both of these brands and I think you should go with the Deliciosa, because it’s creamier and the noodles in the Yummo package somehow don’t cook just right.” Here, you’ve used a recommendatory should statement. Regarding this form of shoulding, one source states:
[Y]ou may recommend that a person take a particular course of action as in the statement: ‘You should put your money into a PEP [personal equity plan].’ Assuming that the person is acting in good faith, what she is saying here is that she thinks that it would be good for you to take out a PEP and this is what she recommends you to do. While the content of the recommendation may be questioned an REBT therapist would not question the recommendatory ‘should’ since it is not, by itself, dogmatic.
Your recommendation for a shopper to select one brand of macaroni and cheese over another may be perceived as unwanted, though it isn’t characterized by or given to the expression of opinions very strongly or positively as if they were facts. Therefore, this isn’t a should narrative worthy of disputation.
Now pretend you’re shopping and you notice that yogurt within a day of its expiration is being sold for 75% of the original price. You then tell yourself, “Well, the price should be reduced, because the yogurt expires tomorrow.” Would it surprise you to learn that this isn’t a problematic should narrative? Per one source:
When the empirical ‘should’ is used, the person is indicating that she acknowledges that all the conditions were in place for what happened to have happened. Thus, when I use an empirical ‘should’ in the statement ‘The Conservative Party should have lost the election’, all I am saying is that all the conditions were in place for them to lose the election – nothing more, nothing less. I am not indicating my personal preference in this statement, nor am I appealing to any sense of deservingness. I am outlining what happened and stating that it should have happened because it did; i.e., all the conditions existed for it to happen. As such, the empirical ‘should’ is not the target for change in REBT.
You discovered that an almost-expired yogurt product is sold at a drastically discounted price, as perhaps it should be. There’s nothing to dispute in this regard.
Now consider that when you’re at the supermarket another shopper who isn’t paying attention when texting on a smartphone accidentally bumps into you. You could use an absolutistic should statement by inflexibly demanding that the individual apologize.
However, you instead say to yourself, “You really should apologize when not paying attention and running into someone, though I realize this is my preference and not some cosmic rule of the supermarket.” This preferential should is an adaptive belief about which one source states:
This is the healthy alternative to the absolute ‘should’ and contains an implicit negation to it. If we make both the preferential nature of this ‘should’ and this negation explicit in our example, we get the following statement: ‘You preferably should not have treated me in this way, but there is no law that states that you absolutely ‘should’ not have done so. As you can just hear this sounds very awkward, so the person is more likely to say: ‘You should have not treated me in this way.’ This is, of course, confusing, since it is exactly the same wording as was used to denote an absolute ‘should’. First, it leads to a further set of rational beliefs (e.g. ‘It’s bad that you treated me in this way, but it is not terrible’, ‘It’s difficult, but I can stand the fact that you treated me in this way’, and ‘You are not a swine for treating me in this way, but an unrateable fallible human being who has acted badly’). The preferential ‘should’ also leads to a healthy negative emotion, and in this example the person experienced non-demanding, non-condemnatory anger about the other person’s mistreatment of him. As the preferential ‘should’ is healthy, it is not target for change in REBT.
How was that for a complex explanation to understanding the difference between self-disturbing and non-self-disturbing beliefs? Do you believe you can tolerate one more example of shoulding at the supermarket?
Imagine that as you’re paying for groceries at the supermarket you hear thunder rattling the building. You then tell yourself, “It shouldn’t rain just yet.” Given the various forms of should narratives covered thus far, what do you think of this ideal should statement? Is it self-disturbing? According to one source:
This is really a special sub-type of the conditional ‘should’ and is more formally known as the ideal conditional ‘should’ in that it specifies a relationship between the meeting of ideal conditions and a particular outcome. ‘The grey mare should win this race’ is an example of the ideal ‘should’ in that the person is saying that, if ideal conditions exist, the grey mare should (or will) win the race.
When using an ideal should statement about the weather when at the supermarket, you’re essentially expressing hope regarding ideal conditions for exiting the store. Unless you willfully self-disturb concerning weather patterns over which you can’t control or influence, this form of should statement doesn’t require disputation.
Throughout my blog, I address demandingness related to should, must, and ought-type narratives. In the current entry, I’ve taken time to differentiate between various types of should statements.
The psychoeducation lesson herein also relates to derivatives of should statements such as “you have to move your shopping cart,” “you gotta open up another cashier lane,” and “you better not take the last box of Deliciosa macaroni and cheese.” Can you think of any more helpful or unhelpful should narratives?
Understanding that not all should narratives are self-disturbing in nature, I hope that the next time you visit the supermarket you’ll consider use of productive alternatives to unproductive beliefs. Also, if you’d like to know more about REBT, I’m here to help.
If you’re looking for a provider who works to help you understand how thinking impacts physical, mental, emotional, and behavioral elements of your life—helping you to sharpen your critical thinking skills, I invite you to reach out today by using the contact widget on my website.
As a psychotherapist, I’m pleased to help people with an assortment of issues ranging from anger (hostility, rage, and aggression) to relational issues, adjustment matters, trauma experience, justice involvement, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, anxiety and depression, and other mood or personality-related matters.
At Hollings Therapy, LLC, serving all of Texas, I aim to treat clients with dignity and respect while offering a multi-lensed approach to the practice of psychotherapy and life coaching. My mission includes: Prioritizing the cognitive and emotive needs of clients, an overall reduction in client suffering, and supporting sustainable growth for the clients I serve. Rather than simply helping you to feel better, I want to help you get better!
Deric Hollings, LPC, LCSW
References:
Ален Свейнсон. (2024, March 6). Shopping with cart but instead of products where are guns [Image]. Playground. Retrieved from https://playground.com/post/shopping-with-cart-but-instead-of-products-where-are-guns-g-cltg8ty6r06lss6013b82n17i
Dryden, W. (2013). Rationality and pluralism: The selected works of Windy Dryden. Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?id=EybfBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA108&lpg=PA108&dq=rebt+%22conditional+shoulds%22++-rent&source=bl&ots=c-De6beMNV&sig=ACfU3U0bdE279AGHTb65Yrn_TNajSWpm2Q&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwij9c_W57WFAxXiMEQIHZ_bCyk4ChDoAXoECAYQAw#v=onepage&q=rebt%20%22conditional%20shoulds%22%20%20-rent&f=false
Dryden, W. and Neenan, M. (2003). The REBT Therapist’s Pocket Companion. Albert Ellis Institute. ISBN 0-917476-26-3. Library of Congress Control Number: 20031044378
Hollings, D. (n.d.). Blog – Categories: Disputation. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/blog/categories/disputation
Hollings, D. (2022, May 17). Circle of concern. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/circle-of-concern
Hollings, D. (2022, October 31). Demandingness. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/demandingness
Hollings, D. (2022, March 15). Disclaimer. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/disclaimer
Hollings, D. (2023, September 8). Fair use. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/fair-use
Hollings, D. (2024, April 2). Four major irrational beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/four-major-irrational-beliefs
Hollings, D. (2023, October 12). Get better. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/get-better
Hollings, D. (2023, September 13). Global evaluations. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/global-evaluations
Hollings, D. (2024, February 24). High frustration tolerance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/high-frustration-tolerance
Hollings, D. (n.d.). Hollings Therapy, LLC [Official website]. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/
Hollings, D. (2022, November 4). Human fallibility. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/human-fallibility
Hollings, D. (2024, January 2). Interests and goals. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/interests-and-goals
Hollings, D. (2023, May 18). Irrational beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/irrational-beliefs
Hollings, D. (2023, September 19). Life coaching. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/life-coaching
Hollings, D. (2024, January 1). Psychoeducation. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/psychoeducation
Hollings, D. (2022, March 24). Rational emotive behavior therapy (REBT). Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rational-emotive-behavior-therapy-rebt
Hollings, D. (2024, January 4). Rigid vs. rigorous. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rigid-vs-rigorous
Hollings, D. (2022, November 1). Self-disturbance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/self-disturbance
Hollings, D. (2022, October 7). Should, must, and ought. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/should-must-and-ought
Hollings, D. (2022, November 9). The ABC model. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-abc-model
Hollings, D. (2023, February 16). Tna. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/tna
Hollings, D. (2022, November 15). To don a hat. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/to-don-a-hat
Hollings, D. (2024, March 18). Unhealthy vs. healthy negative emotions. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/unhealthy-vs-healthy-negative-emotions
Matweychuk, W. J. (2019, April 29). Shoulding on thy self leads to self-depreciation. REBTDoctor. Retrieved from https://rebtdoctor.com/shoulding-on-thy-self-leads-to-self-depreciation/
コメント