IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rpsyxx/v8y2016i2p166-175.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Resist the negation reflex: Minimizing reactance in psychotherapy of delusions

Author

Listed:
  • Kyle Arnold
  • Julia Vakhrusheva

Abstract

It is widely believed that it is countertherapeutic to confront delusions, but the underlying reasons why have not been clearly conceptualized. The present paper endeavors to clarify both (1) why confronting delusions is countertherapeutic, and (2) why therapists can feel tempted to do so. People experiencing delusions can elicit an automatic reaction in the disbelieving therapist that can be termed the negation reflex. The therapist may feel compelled to negate or disconfirm the patient’s delusions to defend his or her own belief in a stable reality. Doing so evokes psychological reactance and strengthens the imperviousness of the delusion. The negation reflex is part of an interpersonal feedback loop that maintains the delusion’s imperviousness. It is the therapist’s task to interrupt that feedback loop by resisting the negation reflex and implementing therapeutic practices designed to minimize reactance.

Suggested Citation

  • Kyle Arnold & Julia Vakhrusheva, 2016. "Resist the negation reflex: Minimizing reactance in psychotherapy of delusions," Psychosis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 166-175, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:rpsyxx:v:8:y:2016:i:2:p:166-175
    DOI: 10.1080/17522439.2015.1095229
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/17522439.2015.1095229
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/17522439.2015.1095229?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rpsyxx:v:8:y:2016:i:2:p:166-175. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RPSY20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.