Blind to Betrayal: Why We Fool Ourselves We Aren't Being Fooled by Jennifer Freyd, Pamela Birrell Page B
Authors: Jennifer Freyd, Pamela Birrell
Ads: Link
of that contract. In other words, for every deal we make, there is the chance we can get cheated. With every social contract, we risk betrayal. When there is betrayal, the pain of that betrayal is highest in close relationships that depend on mutual trust for their maintenance.
Because we can be cheated in social contracts, we have developed—through evolutionary history and our individual life experiences—the ability to expertly detect cheating in others. In fact, we are so good at detecting cheating that evolutionary psychologists have come up with the term cheater detectors to describe our specialized skills. A series of research studies conducted in the 1990s by evolutionary psychologists Leda Cosmides and John Tooby demonstrated that humans can reason about violations of social contracts—that is, cheating—at a much more rapid rate and at a more accurate level than they can reason about other sorts of problems that involve the same reasoning logic. 1.
The exquisite ability we have to detect cheaters is a very important survival skill because it means that we can reduce the probability of getting cheated. Most of the time, when we realize we have been betrayed or cheated, we also have a strong emotional reaction—a very negative reaction that washes over us, like the free fall or disorientation described in previous chapters. This sort of predictable strong emotional reaction in response to a thought or a perception is the hallmark of a highly important process—the strong reaction motivates our behavior. If we experience cheating or betrayal, we typically take one of two actions. One action is to confront. The other action is to withdraw. Either action may protect us from the harm of cheating. For instance, if you are cheated by a friend, you can confront the friend and demand that the situation be corrected, or you can withdraw from that relationship and protect yourself from future harm.
Betrayal Blindness When Attachment and Cheater Detectors Collide
What should you do when the person perpetrating a betrayal is also a person you are dependent on? This is the core bind of a betrayal trauma victim. The standard response to betrayal—confrontation or withdrawal—might only make the situation worse for the person who depends on the perpetrator, because confrontation and withdrawal are generally not good for inspiring attachment and care giving. In this case, the victim might be better off remaining unaware of the betrayal in order to protect the relationship. Indeed, this is what leads to betrayal blindness.
Analogy to Fight, Flight, and Freeze
You have probably heard about fight or flight reactions to threats. When an animal—or a person—is under threat, the first response is to fight back or to flee the situation, if that is possible. If neither fight nor flight is possible, the animal then has only one option left: to freeze. This freeze reaction is sometimes called “tonic immobility” when observed in prey animals under attack from a predator. Fight, flight, and freeze responses in predator-prey situations are highly evolved defenses that involve distinct physiology. Some researchers have observed humans display exactly this same set of responses and physiological changes. 2.
An interesting analogy between fight, flight, and freeze can be seen in our response to betrayal. If we are strong enough and in a good enough situation, we confront (fight) the betrayal to correct the situation. If we cannot do that, we withdraw from the person or the situation (flight) to avoid future harm. If that option is too dangerous—for instance, because we are dependent on the betrayer—our next best defense is to block out awareness of the betrayal; in other words, a kind of mental freeze (betrayal blindness) is our next best option.
Betrayal Trauma Theory and Research
Since its inception in the early 1990s, we have been further developing betrayal trauma theory. We have
Because we can be cheated in social contracts, we have developed—through evolutionary history and our individual life experiences—the ability to expertly detect cheating in others. In fact, we are so good at detecting cheating that evolutionary psychologists have come up with the term cheater detectors to describe our specialized skills. A series of research studies conducted in the 1990s by evolutionary psychologists Leda Cosmides and John Tooby demonstrated that humans can reason about violations of social contracts—that is, cheating—at a much more rapid rate and at a more accurate level than they can reason about other sorts of problems that involve the same reasoning logic. 1.
The exquisite ability we have to detect cheaters is a very important survival skill because it means that we can reduce the probability of getting cheated. Most of the time, when we realize we have been betrayed or cheated, we also have a strong emotional reaction—a very negative reaction that washes over us, like the free fall or disorientation described in previous chapters. This sort of predictable strong emotional reaction in response to a thought or a perception is the hallmark of a highly important process—the strong reaction motivates our behavior. If we experience cheating or betrayal, we typically take one of two actions. One action is to confront. The other action is to withdraw. Either action may protect us from the harm of cheating. For instance, if you are cheated by a friend, you can confront the friend and demand that the situation be corrected, or you can withdraw from that relationship and protect yourself from future harm.
Betrayal Blindness When Attachment and Cheater Detectors Collide
What should you do when the person perpetrating a betrayal is also a person you are dependent on? This is the core bind of a betrayal trauma victim. The standard response to betrayal—confrontation or withdrawal—might only make the situation worse for the person who depends on the perpetrator, because confrontation and withdrawal are generally not good for inspiring attachment and care giving. In this case, the victim might be better off remaining unaware of the betrayal in order to protect the relationship. Indeed, this is what leads to betrayal blindness.
Analogy to Fight, Flight, and Freeze
You have probably heard about fight or flight reactions to threats. When an animal—or a person—is under threat, the first response is to fight back or to flee the situation, if that is possible. If neither fight nor flight is possible, the animal then has only one option left: to freeze. This freeze reaction is sometimes called “tonic immobility” when observed in prey animals under attack from a predator. Fight, flight, and freeze responses in predator-prey situations are highly evolved defenses that involve distinct physiology. Some researchers have observed humans display exactly this same set of responses and physiological changes. 2.
An interesting analogy between fight, flight, and freeze can be seen in our response to betrayal. If we are strong enough and in a good enough situation, we confront (fight) the betrayal to correct the situation. If we cannot do that, we withdraw from the person or the situation (flight) to avoid future harm. If that option is too dangerous—for instance, because we are dependent on the betrayer—our next best defense is to block out awareness of the betrayal; in other words, a kind of mental freeze (betrayal blindness) is our next best option.
Betrayal Trauma Theory and Research
Since its inception in the early 1990s, we have been further developing betrayal trauma theory. We have
Similar Books
