Experiential avoidance

• 1. Introduction

  ›

  Experiential avoidance names something most people do every day without realizing it. It is the attempt to escape thoughts, feelings, memories, physical sensations, and other internal experiences, even when that escape causes serious harm over time. The paradox is striking: the very effort to feel better can make things worse. And according to the researchers and clinicians who have studied this pattern, it is not the dark thought or the anxious feeling that creates the problem. It is what a person does in response to that thought or feeling that matters. A habitual, persistent unwillingness to sit with discomfort is linked to a wide range of difficulties, from depression to fractured relationships to substance abuse. The core engine running underneath all of this is a familiar psychological mechanism. Short-term relief arrives through avoidance, and that relief teaches the brain to keep avoiding. The bigger question the research raises is whether trying harder to escape internal experience might be making the problem larger rather than smaller.

• 2. Roots in Earlier Therapy

  ›

  Defense mechanisms, as originally described within psychodynamic theory, were understood as ways of keeping unpleasant affect and the tension of conflicting motivations at a distance. Those processes were thought to feed different forms of psychopathology, and gradually dismantling them was considered a key step toward psychological health. Process-experiential therapy, which merges client-centered, existential, and Gestalt approaches, arrived at similar conclusions from a different direction. Gestalt theory holds that there is genuine benefit in being fully aware of and open to one's entire experience. Therapists working in this tradition were asked to explore and become fully aware of the patient's grounds for avoidance, and then to lead the patient back to that which he wishes to avoid. Early humanistic theory described the ideal as a person who is more open to his feelings of fear and discouragement and pain, and who is more able fully to live the experiences of his organism rather than shutting them out of awareness. Behavioral approaches arrived at a practical version of the same insight. Traditional behavior therapy uses exposure to habituate patients to fears and anxieties, repeatedly bringing individuals into contact with what causes distress until that distress loses its grip. Cognitive theory added another angle: avoidance interrupts the reappraisal of negative thought patterns and schema, leaving distorted beliefs intact and perpetuating a range of difficulties. The thread running through all of these traditions is the idea that turning away from discomfort tends to keep it in place.

• 3. The Third Wave

  ›

  Acceptance and commitment therapy, known as ACT, sits at the center of what researchers call third-wave cognitive-behavioral approaches, and it is largely responsible for bringing experiential avoidance into mainstream clinical discussion. Alongside ACT, the concept is explicitly described and targeted in dialectical behavior therapy (DBT), functional analytic psychotherapy (FAP), and behavioral activation (BA). What these approaches share is a focus not on changing the content of difficult thoughts and feelings but on changing the relationship a person has with them. Laboratory-based thought suppression studies have provided some of the most striking empirical support for this shift. When people make a concerted effort to suppress a particular thought, that thought tends to increase in frequency, a paradox that researchers have documented repeatedly. Studies on emotional suppression and pain suppression point in the same direction: avoidance is ineffective in the long run. Expressing unpleasant emotions tends to bring improvements over time, even though it raises negative reactions in the short term. Exposure-based therapy techniques have shown effectiveness across a wide range of psychiatric disorders, and numerous self-report studies have linked experiential avoidance and related constructs, including avoidance coping and thought suppression, to psychopathology and dysfunction. The Acceptance and Action Questionnaire was the first self-report measure designed explicitly to capture EA, though it has since been reconceived as a measure of psychological flexibility.

• 4. One Pattern, Many Diagnoses

  ›

  Major depressive disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, social phobia, panic disorder, agoraphobia, obsessive-compulsive disorder, substance use disorders, eating disorders, and borderline personality disorder can all be understood, at least in part, through the lens of experiential avoidance. The specific behaviors differ dramatically across these diagnoses. Someone with major depressive disorder may turn to isolation or, at the extreme, to suicide as a way of escaping feelings of sadness, guilt, and low self-worth. A person with PTSD avoids trauma reminders and maintains hypervigilance against memories, anxiety, and concerns about safety. Social phobia drives avoidance of social situations to keep anxiety and the fear of judgment from others at bay. Panic disorder leads to steering clear of any situation that might trigger a panic attack; agoraphobia may narrow a person's world to their home or a small number of safe zones. Obsessive-compulsive rituals and checking behaviors function as attempts to manage worry about contamination or other consequences. Substance use can become a vehicle for escaping emotions, memories, or withdrawal symptoms themselves. Eating disorders link food restriction and purging to fears of becoming overweight or losing control. Self-harm in borderline personality disorder can serve as a way of managing overwhelming emotional arousal. Distress is an inextricable part of life, which means that avoidance, however it is enacted, can only ever offer a temporary solution, and one that often demands considerable effort and energy to sustain.

• 5. The Cost in Daily Life

  ›

  Researchers regard experiential avoidance as especially damaging when it cuts across a person's most deeply held values. Putting off an important task because of the discomfort it evokes is one familiar example. Not taking advantage of a meaningful opportunity because of worry about failure or disappointment is another. People may stop exercising, drop meaningful hobbies, or step back from recreational activities because of the effort those activities demand. Social withdrawal driven by anxiety can keep a person from conversations that might otherwise sustain them. Someone who is constantly scanning the environment for signs of danger may be physically present at a gathering but unable to participate in it. Vulnerability avoidance can block the development of close relationships or prevent someone from sustaining one that already exists. Staying in a damaging relationship to avoid the guilt and loneliness of a breakup is another form. At the far end of the range, a person might lose a marriage or contact with children because drug or alcohol use, chosen to escape uncomfortable feelings or symptoms of withdrawal, erodes what matters most. People may skip a graduation, a wedding, or a funeral to avoid anxiety or panic symptoms. Self-destructive behaviors may be adopted to escape feelings of boredom, emptiness, or worthlessness. In extreme cases, a person may be unable to manage basic responsibilities, whether personal hygiene, showing up to work, or shopping for food, because those tasks carry too much effort or distress. The most direct statement of the cost is this: spending so much time trying to avoid discomfort leaves little time for anyone or anything else.

• 6. Measuring the Invisible

  ›

  Capturing experiential avoidance in a reliable and consistent way has been one of the practical challenges for researchers. The Acceptance and Action Questionnaire was the first self-report tool designed specifically for this purpose, though over time it was reconceived as a measure of psychological flexibility rather than avoidance alone. The 62-item Multidimensional Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire, known as the MEAQ, was built to measure the different aspects and facets of EA as a construct. From the MEAQ came a shorter instrument: the Brief Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire, or BEAQ, a 15-item measure developed using items drawn from the MEAQ. The BEAQ has become the most widely used measure of experiential avoidance. That a 15-item scale can now anchor large bodies of research reflects how far the field has moved from the concept's origins in psychodynamic theory toward a shared, testable framework.