Mind Reading is a cognitive distortion whereby individuals assume they know what another person is thinking or what they will think.
Offers theory, guidance, and prompts for mental health professionals. Downloads are in Fillable PDF format where appropriate.
Includes client-friendly guidance. Downloads are in Fillable PDF format where appropriate.
Cognitive distortions, cognitive biases, or ‘unhelpful thinking styles’ are characteristic ways in which our thoughts can become biased (Beck, 1963). Mind reading is a cognitive distortion that involves inaccurately assuming what others are thinking.
The Mind Reading information handout forms part of the cognitive distortions series, designed to help clients and therapists to work more effectively with common thinking biases.
Mind reading is a common cognitive bias. This resource helps clients:
Assuming other people are making negative judgments.
Assumptions about other people's perceptions of appearance.
Assuming other people have bad intentions.
Provide psychoeducation on cognitive distortions and automatic thoughts.
Explore whether the client experiences mind reading thoughts.
Help the client notice when they are mind reading.
Address mind reading thoughts using techniques such as cognitive restructuring.
Catching automatic thoughts and (re)appraising cognitions is a core component of traditional cognitive therapy (Beck et al., 1979; Beck, 1995; Kennerley, Kirk, & Westbrook, 2007). Identifying cognitive biases is often a helpful way to introduce this concept. Clients tend to quickly grasp and relate to the idea of "unhelpful thinking styles" and can be trained to notice the presence of biases in their own automatic thoughts. Once these biases are identified, clients can be taught to assess the accuracy of their automatic thoughts and draw new conclusions.
Mind reading is a cognitive distortion that refers to inaccurately perceiving others' thoughts or intentions. It involves forming conclusions about someone else's mind without sufficient evidence, or drawing conclusions that contradict the available evidence (Beck, 1963).
There may be evolutionary reasons for this tendency to mind-read. Gilbert (1998) suggests that jumping to conclusions can be a manifestation of "better safe than sorry" thinking, particularly in situations where failing to identify a threat can have serious consequences, such as rejection. Similarly, Dudley and Over (2003) argue that individuals often respond to potential threats with "threat-confirmatory reasoning," describing it as a "quick and dirty" risk assessment, especially during emergencies (Schlier, 2015). Research indicates that the tendency to jump to conclusions tends to increase alongside feelings of anxiety.
