Skip to main content

Rational Emotive Behaviour Education - dealing with disappointment healthily

There’s two students in the yard (kids 1 and 2). They’re playing one on one basketball. 

A game of one on one
Another person (3) approaches and asks to join in. He’s told as it’s a one on one game so another player isn’t needed. He waits a while and moves on. Another child comes by (4) and asks the same question and the basketball players say it’s a one on one and another player is not required. This is said respectfully and assertively to the third person. The news is not received well. This student (4) goes into a rage and throws their basketball away which ultimately comes to the notice of the teacher on yard duty. Student 4 is asked to sit out and is talked to for his behaviour.

Something happened in the lives of Kid 3 and Kid 4. They were both declined their request to join in the basketball game with 1 and 2. This is called the activating event, situation A.

So A = they didn’t let me join in.

Person 3 Felt OK about this. It (A) probably rated a 2 on the emotional thermometer. A little upset and disappointed perhaps, still in control. No hard feelings. He moved on after a while. No big deal.


Person 4 felt angry. It (A) rated an 8 on the emotional thermometer. It was a big deal. Catastrophic even. He made some average behavioural choices and was taken to task for it.


Did the situation (A) make the children do and feel as they did? If this was the case surely they would feel and act the same way? But we know person 3 was calm and person 4 was angry so A didn’t make their feelings and behaviours. We will call feelings and behaviours C i.e. the emotional and behavioural Consequence of A.

Person 3 said to another student that they didn’t let him join in. They were playing one on one. Three would be too many and that’s OK. This person accepted the situation calmly.

The emotional thermometer
Person 4 said to another student the kids wouldn’t let him join in. They made him angry. It was their fault!

Why the difference? Kid 3 is OK and kid 4 spat the dummy! What’s going on here?


According to REBT (Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy) theory kids 3 and 4 have constructed contrasting philosophical perspectives. They have different thinking rules. We will call these thinking rules B for beliefs. What are they?

Kid 3 we would speculate has the following philosophical rule:

I don’t always have to get my. It’s rarely a catastrophe when I don’t. I can handle disappointments.

We would say that is a rational/reasonable/helpful/healthy view.

Kid 4 we would suggest according to REBT theory has the following philosophical rule:

I must always get my way. It’s a catastrophe when I don’t. It’s not fair and I can’t stand it!

We would say that is an irrational/unreasonable/unhelpful/unhealthy view.

Rational Emotive Behaviour Education teaches students that thinking feeling and behaving are interconnected and that people’s experience of a situation emotionally and behaviourally is linked to their beliefs; their thinking rules.

According to REBT Kid 3 has the following perspective on life:

A + B = C where he will account for how he feels and behaves not solely as a consequence of A but my thinking B (me) has a lot to do with it.

According to REBT Kid 4 has the following perspective on life:

A=C When A happens IT (A) makes my feelings and behaviours. It's is not my fault!


One kids way of looking at things is healthy and the others is not so.


The ABC Theory of Emotional Disturbance was created by Albert Ellis and is a very useful teaching tool.



Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Grieving the Loss of Self When Narcissistic Feed Dries Up

Professor Sam Vaknin is an authority on narcissistic personality disorder. His videos are informative and well communicated which helped my understanding of this condition. A narcissists  'feed' dries up when the supply of others adulation and affirmation withers and stops. A crisis ensues when the narcissist realises that incoming approval has diminished and their idealised self is under attack. The contrived and carefully constructed 'self' is no longer acknowledged and valued by external sources. They cease 'to be' because the sources feeding their self sees through the narcissists grandiose and phony veneer. The self they have concocted and which demands the positive regard and affirmation of those they have trained to adore them, is but an irrational virtual representation of the real world. There's a disparity between the narcissists version of reality and how things really are, projecting a world of fantasy replayed on a loop inside their heads, feedi...
Post a Comment
Read more

APPROVALISM – the philosophy of the ‘love slob’

An approvalist is one who practices the philosophy of Approvalism. An approvalist lives life for the service of others seemingly without thought for self, ministering to the needs of others, making life ‘better’ for them. A good approvalist needs to do for others and her worth is measured according to how others view her and how helpful she can be to others. Approvalists say ‘yes’ to others demands and requests and are ultra sensitive to the needs of others (they must be rescued and saved). If they don’t perform to their own lofty expectations or (quelle catastrophe!) others don’t seem to value them (as they should) then they tend to harshly judge themselves as being ‘bad’ and may down themselves harshly! They will think, ‘I should have known that he needed support. I should have been there. I should have done better. I am a loser. It’s my fault he is in such a mess.’ They may also experience deep anger and direct it towards those ‘who do not appreciate me, after all shouldn’t they ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Positive Psychology and Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy

The ABC Theory of Emotional Disturbance illustrates how feelings and behaviour at C are determined by what happens at A and B i.e. what we believe (B) about what happens (A). This is an A+B=C philosophy. What happens when our constructed view of ourselves equates to an A=C way of believing e.g. failing at A makes me feel depressed at C and causes me to give up. An A=C philosophy ‘If I fail at A I feel really bad at C 'it' (A) makes me angry and sad’ is problematic for our less resilient kids because they are unaware that constructed beliefs at B have a lot to do with it! 
A is what happens e.g. 'someone has rejected me!' and C is how I feel and act in response to A e.g. 'I feel really sad because she has rejected me so I stay at home etc' The depth of despair and how long it lasts will depend on how self accepting the person is. If a child ‘needs’ the approval of others he/she is at risk of depression, anger, anxiety because...
4 comments
Read more