The increased visibility of mental health concerns and therapy have done a lot to reduce the stigma when talking about mental health. The other side of that coin is that people have begun to use terms used in psychology when they may not actually apply.
But why are people using/misusing these terms so much these days? In short, they give those who use them an advantage.
One advantage they give is the appearance of credibility and authority. Scientific disciplines like psychology are built on years of research, rigorous methodology, and constant scrutiny. Because of that, when the scientific community says something, we tend to listen. By using scientific terms, people can borrow some of the credibility the sciences have established.
If someone is trying to get you to believe in something they are saying to, say, gain popularity, win an argument, or sell you something, using (or misusing) scientific terms is an easy way to boost the appearance of credibility.
As these terms gain popularity, they become attention drivers. People will label lists and videos with words like “Narcissist” or “Gaslighting” just to draw traffic to their content. Unfortunately, most who use this tactic have few scruples as to the scientific accuracy of what they are saying.
Though this broad misinformation is definitely the root of the problem, these terms do the most damage in more personal contexts. You likely don’t have to think too hard to remember the last time you heard someone use terms like “gaslighting”, “narcissism”, “triggered” or “codependency” when describing a situation they were in.
In many interpersonal contexts, these terms are too often used as a signal of moral superiority. In simple terms, we’ve coded many of these terms as “bad”. When we label someone else’s behaviour as “narcissistic” or “triggering”, we are categorizing it as “bad”, and making our protest of it “good”.
It is often taken a step further, not just categorizing their behaviour as “bad” but implying that they are somehow bad as a person. This has the advantage of giving us more permanent moral high ground, but is almost always a mischaracterization of the situation and the person being spoken about. For example, labeling your ex as a “narcissist” implies that your are “good” and they are “bad”, which is a morally satisfying narrative.
Lastly, this is generally unnecessary. We can say someone has been selfish, dishonest, or has hurt our feelings without resorting to pathologizing/demonizing them or their behaviour. When we do, we run the risk of dehumanizing that person and justifying a complete lack of empathy for them. This lack of empathy and elimination of nuance can do real damage in our relationships with others.
Stay tuned for posts that directly address the most misused psychological terms along with information about what they actually mean.
David
Simply Counselling Services