After years of depression, I'm sure my personality is one of the cause of me still being depressed. And if I went to therapy, I'd expect and want it to change. But change is scary, and I suppose that's why some depressed persons don't want to seek help. There's sometimes comfort in suffering.
Another reason is that the not-desesperate me feels shallow and boring. But there's probably a hopeful me that's not. I haven't found it yet, it requires more effort.
As someone who suffers from depression and has gone to therapy for over 5 years (I am also on medication), please try and force yourself to go.
It will most likely change your life for the better, if not, what have you wasted? A bit of money and a few hours of your time? It could make you better at dealing with your depression and, as a consequence, make you feel happier.
You might need to try a few different therapists until you find one you like, and it's not a quick fix either. Think of it like getting (physically) fit, you need to keep at it - maybe for years.
You might not also get better in a linear curve, it's up and down, you just have to stick with it.
Therapy has helped me to know myself better, understand why I do what I do and feel the way I do, and, as cheesy as it sounds; learn to accept my limitations.
It's changed my life and the life of many of my friends.
You deserve to be happy, everyone does.
Please try it - if it doesn't I will buy you a beer/coffee.
Thank you for sharing. Sincerely curious what you mean by "A bit of money". I'm lucky that I didn't have to have therapy. My guess is unless your insurance/job covers mental health, it's at least $50/hour (closer to $100 or $150 if in a major city). Surely not much for the possible benefits (and on a developer salary), but I'm wondering how expensive such services are.
AFOAF went through a tough time basically between the end of high school and a year out of college. Family stuff that was so hard to emotionally grasp and make sense of it absolutely paralyzed her. She went through many different forms of therapy; from affordable counselors, to a professor at her college (don't try that, they usually just want you to pay to be in a study), to a relatively average psychologist (~150/hr) who made her feel better able to cope with her mental state but did not provide her any tools to go beyond it.
Finally, when we moved to a larger area she found a first-rate CBT practitioner and the results were nothing short of outstanding. In less than 4 months she went from being completely dependant - afraid to drive a car, visit stores, or pretty much leave the house alone - to regaining her independence and returning to the person she was before everything happened. The downside was she had to wait 3 months for an opening and I believe sessions were in the neighborhood of 300$ and needed to be 2x a week at first if I remember correctly. Regardless it is the absolute best money she had ever spent, and was so much cheaper than the years of seeing a different psychologist who didn't help her move forward.
I guess the moral is if you are in a situation where you are incredibly anxious or depressed to the point where you feel it is irrationally preventing you from making progress or following through on things you want to do, CBT (from the right place) can change things you may have never thought possible.
Every resident of Switzerland has to have obligatory health insurance. Therapy is part of the basic package that every insurance provider has to cover (for up to N sessions per year). The patient has to pay a cover of 10% of the cost on top.
This shifts the cost of therapy from $150/hr to $15/hr + basic health insurance premiums (<$500/mo). Note that this is general health insurance, so this will also cover physical health etc. (apart from dentistry for some reason).
I notice this trend of not covering dentistry through many countries. I think the issue is that a lot of dentistry work tends to be aesthetic and because of that it's hard to draw the lines on what should be covered.
Recently went canvassing myself. In NYC it ranges from 50-350/hr depending on who you're talking with and their exact licensing. Licensed psychologists will be more expensive than licensed mental health workers or counselors. Psychiatrists are the most expensive. However, depending on your level of therapy needed, online can be much cheaper.
From a US perspective, many therapists have a sliding scale based on income. "A bit of money" is the best description for it, as it won't be free but should never break the bank either.
In the UK you can get therapy on the NHS, but it's mostly CBT and not for any extended period. Psychotherapy, which is what is what most people need with long term mental health issues (like myself) is mostly private. You can pay anything from £50-150 p.h
In the US, I'm not sure.
The NHS also offers a range of other talking therapies /counselling, e.g. counselling for depression. The waiting times here can be shorter than for CBT.
If you're in dire need for help (depends on your scores and initial phone interview), you will be seen or referred quickly (within less than a month).
Any GP will refer you. If you need help with your mental health, just ask your GP for a referral, fill out the form and you will get help. It's a great system. (Did I mention that this doesn't cost anything?)
For long-term psychotherapy, you need to go private, but in many cases, a short-term intervention (e.g. over 12 weeks) is sufficient to get you through the worst and on the right track.
I think most people who suffer from actual depression, not a just a bout of sadness need long term treatment.
The NHS is poorly provisioned in this way, sadly.
Just like a diabetic who needs insulin everyday people with serious psychological conditions need regular treatment.
I'm lucky enough to be able to afford it, I don't know how I would cope if I couldn't.
There are different variations of depressions. In particular, it differs between acute and chronic occurrence.
As far as I know, acute occurrences tend to be more intense (as experienced and reported in standardised tests) on average than chronic ones. Here, the risk of, e.g. suicide is also highest. However, long-term depression has a much more long-lasting impact on one's life, so I don't want to downplay it in any way.
Acute episodes tend to have a duration of only a few weeks or months so short-term therapy can be of great help here.
I agree that chronic depression requires long-term support. Your analogy with insulin and diabetes is excellent. And yes, the NHS falls short in this area, unfortunately. It would be great if more people could get the care they need and I hope it will become possible.
So yes, the NHS is not without its flaws. But considering the little funding it receives, it provides excellent care. It just shouldn't be so underfunded. I also think that it is also remarkably well-organised compared to other countries, e.g. Germany, where everything is much more bureaucratic and expensive. I also think it's significantly that countries with more privatised health care like the US.
In my experience, you need to be there face to face. I can't explain it, but it's all the nuances and the uncomfortable silences.
I was seeing my therapist for a while via Skype, even though he lives a few miles up the road. I now make the effort and see him face to face. It's so much better. But, like anything, what works for you.
There's something about physical communication that can't be replicated. You see the posture, the gears turning, immmediate reactions. You can't formulate what to say, you say whatever is at the forefront of your thought.
Teletherapy outcomes have yet to be thoroughly researched, but anecdotally most clinicians report a strong preference for face-to-face sessions. Part of the discomfort stems from legal concerns – how do you handle a patient who reports intense suicidal ideation with a plan being one of the big ones – but also the limitations of teleconferencing. Neither the typical therapist nor their patient is like to have access to a fancy $$$ teleconferencing setup; both are likely stuck using whatever $0.50 on the BOM selfie camera Apple chose for their latest iDevice. Seeing only the face, and a 720p at that, denies the clinician a lot of valuable information about the client's internal state, their physiological responses, and their body language. Not to mention connection issues. Imagine being someone who's kept a secret about their sexuality or childhood abuse and finally developed enough trust and worked up the courage to discuss it to your therapist only to be met with a "Connection lost…" or frozen image of their face.
Additionally, licensure for mental health professionals is handled on a state-by-state basis, making CoL arbitrage difficult.
There are some companies trying to do teletherapy (eg BetterHelp), but video conferencing is a poor substitute for meeting in person, especially when a therapy session may often have the client crying, or panicking, or emotionally reacting very strongly. "Just talking" trivializes the contents of the conversation
as well as the psychologist's role in the healing process.
Data point, $250/visit, SF Bay. I had great insurance, so it was between 60-90% covered, though out-of-network so I spent plenty of hours on the phone with insurers trying to get them to do their jobs.
A therapist can be a useful tool. I spent a total of about 3.5 years of my life in therapy.
I also briefly was in couple's counseling and my husband was seeing a therapist as well during that time. He was extremely introverted and he truly hated discussing private matters with a therapist.
One day I told him "I don't care if you see a therapist. I just want our marriage to get better. Therapy is just a means to an end. That's it."
He happily quit therapy and couple's counseling promptly. He also promptly was a better husband to me and never fell down on the implied promise that he would rise to the occasion somehow.
I continued with therapy because I had a lot to sort out and I saw it as a useful tool.
In the long run, learning how to live well was the best therapy for me, so to speak. But I didn't personally know how to get there without first talking to someone about bad things that had happened to me and how they shaped me. My husband didn't want to go through that step and he was somehow able to just behave different towards me once I made it clear "I just want a better marriage. That's it. I don't actually care if you go to therapy."
I think a therapist is necessary, at least to bootstrap the process. You can listen to podcasts and read books by therapists. You can think and try to reason about it yourself. You can expose yourself to the ideas. You can learn about cognitive behavioral therapy and try out worksheets etc... But that takes time and you may not cover everything or know what will be effective for you. A therapist can keep you accountable but mostly it takes a long time. Plus it's hard to do that when you are depressed. Even with a therapist you will be reading a lot on your own anyway.
This. It's similar to a personal trainer. People don't hire personal trainers because they can't figure out how to exercise, they hire personal trainers so they have someone guiding them, supporting them, keeping them on track.
In my personal battle with depression, a big part of it has been self-distrust. So I could reason about it all day but I struggled to make any actual changes because I was always questioning. Having someone there actively giving me permission to reshape my thought patterns and giving me confidence that I'm on the right track has been absolutely essential.
Totally agreed. When I pay a therapist, it's not really for facts, which I can get from books. It's for their long experience with a lot of different people. That gives them the ability to immediately spot patterns in my life that might take me years to recognize. And also the skill to point out my self-fooling BS in a way that I can listen to and understand the point.
The evidence is fairly clear - reading self-help books or using an internet-based CBT programme is similarly effective to in-person psychotherapy. That doesn't mean that these approaches will be effective for you, but they're viable treatment options that are vastly more accessible. I'd still suggest trying in-person therapy if it's available to you, but don't be disheartened if that isn't an option - there's no evidence to suggest that self-help is significantly inferior to therapy.
> reading self-help books…is similarly effective to in-person psychotherapy
That was not the outcome of the CPR paper, and even the authors' statement in the abstract is considerably more hedged than you imply here.
iCBT and bibliotherapy have both demonstrated the greatest efficact in subclinical or extremely high functioning populations; their utility in more severe cases or those where there are comorbid psychiatric or bio-social issues is less clear.
I absolutely believe in using telehealth to broaden access to behavioural health services and think they're an excellent first line treatment, but stating there's nothing to suggest that they're a fungible good with equivalent value to human-delivered psychotherapy risks dissuading people who're already struggling and fail to improve with self-guided resources from seeking out more comprehensive services.
As with many things, a therapist offers one to exchange money for time spent figuring out things on your own
I've found success without therapy through minimal exercise over no exercise & framing things as neutral
Framing things as neutral: I'm Canadian, so during Winter I've made a point to perceive the statement "I'm cold" as a neutral statement. A sensory experience as opposed to an affliction of pain. Also focussed on relaxing my muscles in the cold, which made it less uncomfortable. Shivering & clenching up are unnecessary until the temperature has dropped to a point that you really are in pain & should either get inside or get better atire
No, a (good) therapist helps you find things that would be difficult or impossible to find on your own, it's literally an outside perspective. If what you did works for you, you either didn't have any serious mental health issues to begin with, or you figured out a hack to avoid thinking about the things which trouble you, which isn't much different from people avoiding problems by losing themselves in work, alcohol, religion, whatever. It's essential to have techniques to help yourself stay on an even keel, but it's damaging to other people who actually have problems to encourage them to dismiss their problems as insufficient detachment.
I started taking cold showers in the morning about two months ago to practice this exact thing.
After about a week, you sort of learn to neutralize the feeling of being cold as just that, a feeling. And a temporary one.
It’s a good reminder for other “negative” feelings, and something I can point my brain to with other emotions I don’t like, anger, anxiety, etc. They all pass fairly quick the less I dwell on them.
This is an approach that worked for you.
You have employed your own CBT technique it sounds like, and that's great!
Bit I think it's unfair to imply that you can just work harder and come to the same conclusions without a professional.
A physiotherapist is often highly educated in psychology and has had, usually, years of experience dealing with a range of people, issues and scenarios.
Some people, due to what ever is going on in their head (myself included) can't see the wood for the tree's and a therapists job is to help bring that clarity.
Mental health is complex and unique to the individual, there isn't a thing that works for everyone, even therapy.
For sure. When I say "time is money" that might involve more time than you'll ever have available. & a friend once reflected on seeing a therapist: "It's not the job of my friends to be my therapist" ie there's value in bouncing ideas off someone who you don't have to worry about stressing a casual friendship over
Part of many personal issues is that you "cheat yourself", or simply avoid tough topics (psychoanalysts call that resistance). A good therapist uncovers these topics, helps you to face them, and supports you in finding ways to deal with them. It is hard for me to imagine how one could do that without a human counterpart.
To piggy-back on the personal trainer analogies earlier, alternatives like CBT tools, podcasts, books, etc. are good augmentations once you’ve learned “good form” on how to work with your depression through a therapist.
The alternatives aren’t going to really push you to unpack thoughts that might be holding you back or know to switch things up if your situation becomes very dire.
I’ve heard plenty of writers describe their writing as therapy. “Free-writes” where I write exactly what I’m thinking with no filter have helped me. At some point I just get tired of retelling whatever story is affecting me and move on. Work outs have helped before (mostly cardio), etc.
One thing that may help is to label your depression as it's own independent thing. Something that exists outside of your core self. Even give it a name, say Dave. Then when you are feeling depressed say, hey that's just Dave, why is Dave feeling this way? Is there another perspective that Dave isn't seeing etc...
This mind trick works for some and at its core it's the same idea of compartmentalizing. There are different ways to get to compartmentalizing and yes, it does help clear the mind, reduce anxiety/mind chatter by grouping and labeling things/thoughts somehow (by personal choice) such that when something arises to the conscious mind it can be located, acknowledged and dealt with at a later time if needed.
Yep, this helps me with my anxiety and depression.
Being able to recognize "I'm feeling anxious, and these thoughts are a product of that anxiety" allows me to process them and move on. It doesn't immediately relieve that anxiety, but it keeps me from spiraling downward, and lets me know that I should take care of myself until I feel better.
There's nothing about 'comfort zone' that suggests it's always a happy place. It's just a familiar one. It's so easy to become accustomed to pain or suffering that it becomes scary to imagine how things might be different, even if that change is positive.
I would recommend giving therapy a shot, but I would recommend even strongly that you find the therapist who is right for you. It won't always be the first one you meet, or even the most recommended one. It's a relationship just like any other so it requires trust.
I've been going through this for 6 years and if I had to go back and decide differently, I'd travel this same path again. Pitfalls and all.
Because I haven't seen it mentioned in any of the other comments: nutrition plays a role in this.
I do have heard several times about people fighting depression, who bettered their lot by improving their diet. Granted, these are just anecdotes, but, if you are suffering from depression you might want to investigate that angle.
As someone that has gone to therapy for several years I can tell you that eventually you get to a place where you need more than talking - action. People tend to need some sort of organizational philosophy to go with their view of life along with habits that comfort them in times of mental disarray. You are not ever going to be able to avoid suffering, times of boredom, or anything else, but you also don't have to be stuck. This is going to sound cliche, but talk is cheap. Practicing what you are discovering about yourself into habitual evidence is what becomes important as you broaden your self-awareness and dig yourself out of the depressive holes in life. In the words of Jocko, discipline = freedom. I've found that a combination of therapy and seeking out actionable things I can do to be more disciplined has been fundamental in getting beyond the ego of the self and out into the world.
Maybe it’s little discussed because that’s the intended effect? A lot of simple things can create positive changes in aspects of your personality, such as meditation, a consistent exercise routine, enough sleep, etc.
Exactly. And think about stressors, too, from a simple weekly to-do list or new years resolution to the maintenance of a basic friendship. These are all going to create additional anxiety and affect the unconscious drive toward personal change.
I used to coach a client who emphasized a lack of neurosis and anxiety as if it was a key selling point for her personality. But she also noted that she was experiencing frequent interventions by family and work colleagues over her behavior, and she complained of having no friends. Within days I found I had to intervene myself! Her communications were truly difficult to experience. In order to "do" social humanity, we need a certain amount of constant adjustment (which causes some stress and anxiety), and it doesn't have to drive us crazy. If it's not there, society quickly finds ways to push back or protect itself.
What even is "personality" - leaving aside technical and dictionary definitions, if you --the person-- are the sum of your life experiences, can you ever truly not be you?
I pose this because I encounter resistance from people to the notion that they can change themselves, lest they lose some notion of their "self", and personality is often equated with "self" from my experience.
You can stop being the you that you were, and people often do so.
Personality can change slowly over time as we develop through experience and reflection, or it can change rapidly due to post-traumatic stress, drugs, electroconvulsive therapy, or traumatic brain injuries.
I think the conceptualization of self as immutable is tautological, as we tend to thus discount aspects of personality which we find to be mutable from being considered part of the self.
It's a question of degree. There's a clear line from me yesterday to me today, with a massive amount of similarity. I'm comfortable about my wants and needs and how my life is set up, because the "me"s of the past set things up, and I'm similar enough to them to fit into the niche they worked on.
That personality can change over time - I'm not who I was when I was 20, and I'll be different again when I'm 60. But with a slow set of changes that's easy enough to cope with - and indeed, people generally don't even notice the changes.
But if I woke up tomorrow with a vastly different personality, the change having happened all at once, it would affect all of my relationships, my working situation, my home life, etc. It's wouldn't be a slow transformation from one person to another, it would be the instant death of one personality and their replacement by a different one. And that feels very uncomfortable to people.
> it would be the instant death of one personality and their replacement by a different one. And that feels very uncomfortable to people.
That's a salient observation, but it's a definitely a curious aversion and possibly linked to a similar underlying thought pattern that "growth mindset" vs "fixed mindset" tries to capture:
Notions like "I can become more confident in everything I do" and "I can learn to be better with people" terrified a friend as some kind of type of desire to deceive others with some inauthentic persona that was disingenuous because you had changed your personality
I guess it depends on how core you view certain parts of your personality as being.
If "you" is "an introvert who isn't good with people", then "learning to be good with people" must be some kind of faking it. Rather than a change in view/approach which actually makes you like people and not be afraid of them.
Agree with your sentiment. At that point is a philosophical issue though. What exactly do you mean by "you" and "self"?
There's a special network in the brain called the Default Mode Network (DMN), which is responsible for our sense of "self" or ego. The DMN can be shut down and you can feel what it's like to not be "your self".
If you are curious about this, lookup Gary Weber on YouTube. Michael Pollan's latest book (How to change your mind) is also very good.
I've always thought that "Neuroticism" was kind of a weird thing to include in "Personality". Sure, it's a long-term behavioral trait that typically doesn't change; but I wouldn't call that a part of who somebody is, any more than (say) an intense fear of spiders is a part of who somebody is.
To say that making someone less "neurotic" changes their personality is about like saying giving someone a prosthetic leg which allows them to walk again changes their personality. It may certainly change the kinds of things they do on a regular basis, but it didn't change the basic concept of self we commonly think of as "personality".
> Sure, it's a long-term behavioral trait that typically doesn't change; but I wouldn't call that a part of who somebody is
This seems like an excellent definition of "who somebody is"
> any more than (say) an intense fear of spiders is a part of who somebody is.
That, too, is definitely part of who somebody is. It is, eg, exactly the kind of trait used in novels or movies to convey something about a character. And it's something that others would notice and use to describe you in ordinary life.
I was deeply influenced by Marvin Minsky's Society of the Mind as a kid.
That along with my readings in Zen, Taoism, Buddhism, and the notion of paradoxes, I gave up trying to precisely define who I am and accept that it's contextual.
(Also Shakespeare's "All the world is a stage" and Ministry's "(Every day is) Halloween". Life is performance art. We're all wearing costumes.)
Just try to keep your different personas (son, father, coworker, lover, frat brother, gamer geek) separate in real life.
On the last part, I think a major part of why therapy can be helpful is because you have the choice to not adopt different personas, which makes me wonder that issue is a large source of problems.
I'm not the first to say this, but I feel most like "myself" when nobody is watching.
There are also some interesting aspects of spirituality in this question. If you are a spiritual person you might look at how the ideas around akhlaq or samsara impact personality, it's an interesting philosophical thought experiment. :)
The idea of therapy and its effects on personality is actually something discussed in psychoanalytic literature (noting that psychoanalysis !== "therapy" in most cases), often framed as an ethical question, "when is it permissible to perform psychoanalysis?" Some quotes from a book on Lacan:
> what exactly does ‘curing’ mean? Is it simply the disappearance of a symptom, or does one aim to change the underlying personality structure that produced it and in which it is inscribed? Is this at all achievable, and if it is, is it desirable? If it is neither achievable nor desirable, then where should curing stop – at what boundary line? And finally, is it always a good thing even to begin the process, when you don’t know where to end it or whether you will be leaving behind a damaged and less effective Subject?
> By the early 1960s, Lacan felt that forcing people to confront the truth about themselves, the meaning of their symptoms and the hitherto repressed elements in their unconscious, had consequences too serious to be undertaken with anything less than the greatest caution.
> I shall finish with an example of a patient who, at the end of her treatment, seemed quite aware of the loss she would suffer as a result of being cured. The young woman, who had been severely anorexic, talked about a dream during one of her last sessions. In it, she had on a necklace on which there was a great, pointed spike or barb. The curious thing was that this necklace was under her skin, within her body, and she wanted to remove it – to get it out of her. She somehow managed to tug it out, but as the spike came out of her body, it left a gaping hole, and she was bleeding. The analyst said in agreement with her unconscious knowledge: ‘Yes, you will be left with a hole. And you will be
bleeding.’ The patient understood immediately and perfectly the meaning of both: that the giving up of her symptom would indeed leave a hole in the structure of her Subject, and she would face the new reality of menstrual bleeding. If this illustration leaves one with many questions, that is as Lacan would have wished.
I had eight years of therapy and it totally transformed my life, it was rather odd but it was only when my therapist and I started using dreams in non-traditional way (as set out here https://psyarxiv.com/k6trz) that things started to rapidly improve.
This was a really fascinating paper! The first part feels intuitively true – that dreams are instructional surfacings of situational classes that require attention. The bit about PTSD dreams being "mercy of environment" rather than having situational autonomy was really interesting. It's a shame the paper cuts off right there, but I'm glad they at least dropped the teaser, it's a thread I'm going to pull. If you have any more recommended reading on this, I'd love to check it out / talk about this. Email's in profile.
If you want to dig more into the "anxiety/avoidance mental responses are fundamentally biological" aspect: I and others on HN recommend "The Body Keeps The Score".
The research also leaves unanswered a big question for the future: just how is psychotherapy enacting these personality trait changes?
A large part of "personality" is about social interaction. If you have always been treated terribly, you won't know how to interact in a not terrible fashion, even if you run into people who aren't going to treat you terribly.
Therapy can help you see that you have patterns of behavior shaped by negative social experiences and those patterns of behavior basically presume that everyone will behave in a particular way towards you and that way is not a nice way to behave. It can help you see that how you behave helps keep the negative social climate alive in your life and you have the power to behave differently going forward.
It can help you sort out "Some people will do bad things to me and some won't. It's okay to make judgement calls about how to interact with different social situations for my own benefit." instead of going with some default learned behavior that is no longer serving you well.
Metaphorically, it's a little like growing up in a very bad neighborhood where everyone carries a gun. Carrying a gun and being quick to show it to let people know you aren't going to be an easy victim is a matter of course. It's the only way to survive.
Then you move to a nicer neighborhood where no one owns a gun. You continue flashing your gun anytime you feel threatened by anything to let people know you aren't an easy mark.
They react negatively to you signaling that you are prepared to defend yourself with deadly force if necessary. In their world, only crazy people routinely talk about being prepared to use deadly force. That's simply not how things get settled in their world.
You go to a therapist and he tells you "So, have you noticed that you left the neighborhood you grew up in and no one around you even carries a gun? Have you thought about trying to find some means to enforce your personal boundaries without pointing a gun at everyone you meet? Why don't you try that and see if people react different to you."
So you go to a party and don't pull out your gun. And people are weirdly nice to you, nicer than they have ever been.
And it's food for thought and you discuss the incident with your therapist the next time you see them. Your entire social life improves and you start to trust that maybe your therapist actually has good ideas and they aren't just trying to convince you to lay down your arms just to make it easier to take advantage of you, even though that's the standard you grew up with.
I've changed my personality a few times. Twice purposefully, that I know of.
First time, having exhausted all other ideas for improvement, I decided to fake being happy, using ridiculously positive words for every situation. "How are you today?" "Phenomenal!" While initially it was kinda sarcastic, at some point it became sincere. Roughly three years later, I woke up one day said "Phenomenal!" to myself, and was surprised that I meant it. The change was so slow, subtle, I didn't sense the transition.
Years later, I found the book How You Talk Changes How You Think. So apparently I'm not the only person with this experience. Also, I had read up about social cognition (swarm intelligence), how we learn from each other. At the time, there was some research showing that we individuals conform and change our minds without realizing it or any memory of it. (Scary!)
Second time, I ran for public office. I usually play to win, regardless of the odds. So I decided to become like the winners. I changed my outward personality. How I stand, smile, eye contact, etc. I stopped swearing (vulgarity). I learned to how to do small talk, vague noncommitmental positive agreement. (eg "Wow, that's a great idea, tell me more.", per Guy Kawasaki per Jean-Louis Gassée). I met thousands of people. And, frankly, in the aftermath, the experience completely converted from an extrovert into an introvert.
I've also changed personalty a few times unwillingly.
I was proscribed high dosage prednisone & cyclosporine for years. They made me insane. Suicidal. Mania. Super erratic. It took me years to "detox", become psychologically normal.
I had a very rough childhood. I remember being loving and affectionate as a toddler. But I became angry, distrustful and distant.
So. All these wild swings of personality. I honestly don't know who am I. When I try to describe myself (dating profiles), I can only describe how I think I behave, at this time. Is that accurate? Stable? No idea. I also don't know how much aging and experience factor in.
And I don't know where the lines are between personality, character, and daily behavior.
If I could travel back in time, I'd love to be able to administer myself personality assessments over time, maybe chart the changes.
There's definitely the bits about socializing being taxing (introvert) or energizing (extrovert). Maybe that's just aging and slowing down.
But a huge component is becoming very transactional, jealously guarding my time and attention (both rapidly diminishing resources). Having become best friends with 100s of people and then becoming yesterday's news after my defeat, my calculus changed. What does this person want? Is this interaction worth my time?
At the same time, I've become very nice and polite. I strive to reduce my social footprint, never be the problem customer, be ever patient, be unremarkable. And maybe provide some cheer, or positivity, or respite, to most everyone I meet. But now it's anonymous. I almost never share my name. I hope the person quickly forgets me.
(Note: In person. My online persona is still a troll, but I'm trying to change.)
--
The aspect I'm still chewing on is "social availability". Like openness vs aloofness. It's a weird thing. I used to be the most approachable person. Spontaneous conversations. People sharing the weirdest most intimate stuff about themselves. Always being asked for directions by strangers. Having children and dogs crawl all over me. It was unsolicited and unavoidable.
Now I can turn that off.
You may have experienced the difference while traveling vs commuting to work. Visiting somewhere new, everything's stimulating, you're trying to take it all it, you have certain openness, you recognize the openness in others, maybe you're more flirtatious. But during your commute, routine settles in, you develop tunnel vision, avoid eye contact, face goes slack / neutral / hard, become avoidant so the panhandlers and other people striving to get your attention just become part of the background noise.
--
I'm also trying to be a better friend to my besties. Concentrated friendship equity vs spread out.
Lastly, things change. Having cared for my grandparents and now parents, watching how they've pulled themselves in, it's a sad thing to survive all your contemporaries. Whoever said "it's better to have loved and lost then to have never loved at all" was full of shit.
Right, even before I start therapy, my personality changed all the time. I'd say the only constant is how I experience things. Everything else seems to be fluid.
> is associated with significant and long-lasting changes in clients’ personalities, especially reductions in the trait of Neuroticism and increases in Extraversion.
Well since a common thing therapists do is (covert) social skills training, increased extroversion makes perfect sense. The was recently another one linked here that said long term therapy can increase neuroticism.
My biggest complaint is that most of their studies suffer from survivor bias. They ignore people who drop out or have negative outcomes (there is overlap there).
My biggest complaint is studies being inadequately placebo-controlled. It's not just that studies often have no control group or a blatantly different control condition (waitlist, pill placebo), it's that there's no consensus on how psychotherapy works. That means there's no agreed-upon approach for sham psychotherapy, and even assertions that it's impossible to do because virtually any therapy-like experience already contains most of the beneficial elements (cf. [1]).
Yes, why is the article implying there is something philosophically bad about a changed personality? Ideally, if someone was a serial killer, it would be objectively good to change their personality wouldn't it?
Changing one's personality doesn't take away 'me-ness' anymore than it reveals your ideal self.
Imo no personality is ever wrong, except for when the brain/mind is influenced by a disease. I am not saying that the actions of a serial killer will ever be approved, but the notion that one "type" of personality is more good than any other is strictly cultural.
At the same time, I agree with you that it is not bad to change a personality, if it is the owner of that personality that initiate the change.
Isn't this the point? If I suffered trauma as a child, my amygdala is over developed and I am in constant fight, flight or freeze. Therapy would give me tools to deal with this and thus, change my personality.
Isn't this the expected result? Some aspect of your behavior or thought process (key components of your personality) are in some way running counter to your happiness and/or ability to function in some way. When therapy is effective, that is a de facto change to personality.
If traits like "neuroticism", which would result from the very mental illnesses that psychotherapy promises to address, constitute personality, isn't it obvious that psychotherapy should change it? Why is anyone acting surprised?
Neuroticism in the context of personality is not necessarily the same as having a mental illness or being "neurotic." There is some crossover between the behavior of someone we would describe as "neurotic" and someone with "high neuroticism" on the big five, but as a matter of personality, high neuroticism simply means that you worry more and tend to see things in a more negative, realistic way.
This carries obvious advantages in certain contexts as long as it is tempered and doesn't get out of hand. It has lots of disadvantages too, especially in the job market, but all personality traits have a downside if you score too highly. If you are too open, you can fail to weigh and measure risks properly. If you are too agreeable, people will walk all over you. If you are too extroverted, it can create dependency issues and alienation. If you are too conscientious, you can end up so consumed by the minutiae of life that you miss important, big picture ideas.
The review includes 35 experimental studies with control groups. See table 3: "Experimental Personality Change Effect Size Estimates Comparing Treatment to Control".
my depression went away after changing my diet. a ton of neurotransmitters are made in the colon and intestines. Don't stop looking for things that might improve the condition, you will know when you find something that works.
Yes, it's a helping profession. The goal is to form models of mind to be used to help people feel/live better. Not to understand the brain.
That's why you can have multitudes of wildly conflicting theories and schools of psychotherapy, where most of them work to achieve the goal of wellbeing, but none of which achieve understanding of how human brain works. (of course, some pretend they do, and try to portray this to the patients - as if the ideology the school of therpay holds is the truth about the human brain)
There's nice discussion of this in the book "Health & Suffering in America by R. T. Fancher"
> That's why you can have multitudes of wildly conflicting theories and schools of psychotherapy, where most of them work to achieve the goal of wellbeing, but none of which achieve understanding of how human brain works. (of course, some pretend they do, and try to portray this to the patients - as if the ideology the school of therpay holds is the truth about the human brain)
There's not yet a Wikipedia page for "Computational Psychiatry". I guess that very definable category of psychiatry doesn't like to publish.
Are transference and countertransference of traits like extraversion a result of the (indeed widely varying) therapeutic methods or the result of just spending some quality time together rewarding self-focus and insight?
There may be some quantifiable rejections of guesstulative models of cognition (and personality!) available due to advances in neuroimaging which are enabling computational neuroscience (which does have a Wikipedia page for it)
> Computational neuroscience (also known as theoretical neuroscience or mathematical neuroscience) is a branch of neuroscience which employs mathematical models, theoretical analysis and abstractions of the brain to understand the principles that govern the development, structure, physiology and cognitive abilities of the nervous system.
> As James Lawley and Penny Tompkins describe it, Grove realized many clients were describing their symptoms in metaphors drawn from the exact words of previous therapists, instead of from their own experience
There, that should help with the disinhibition and extraversion.
Well, obvious. For context - the article is about therapy. The book is mostly about therapeutic schools too. Also I said nothing about psychiatry.
The book is mostly about historical context of psychological treatment in america and a critique of when people in helping professions jump from "our techniques help people" to "therefore the theoretical basis for our techniques is the truth"
