This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Gaslighting article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find medical sources:  Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 60 days

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Psychology Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Feminism Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FeminismWikipedia:WikiProject FeminismTemplate:WikiProject FeminismFeminism articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Sociology Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Systems Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to systems and systems science.SystemsWikipedia:WikiProject SystemsTemplate:WikiProject SystemsSystems articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is within the field of Systems psychology. Medicine Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Text has been copied to or from this article; see the list below. The source pages now serve to provide attribution for the content in the destination pages and must not be deleted as long as the copies exist. For attribution and to access older versions of the copied text, please see the history links below. Copied Denial ( oldid, history) → Gaslighting ( diff) Copied Gaslighting ( oldid, history) → DARVO ( diff)

Daily pageviews of this article A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

The paragraph under the heading of 'Learned Behaviour' seems problematic to say the least:

"Studies have shown that gaslighting is more prevalent in couples where one or both partners have maladaptive personality traits^[26] such as traits associated with short-term mental illness (e.g., depression), substance-induced illness (e.g., alcoholism), mood disorders (e.g., bipolar disorder), anxiety disorders (e.g., PTSD), personality disorder(e.g., BPD, NPD, etc.), neurodevelopmental disorder (e.g., ADHD), or combination of the above (i.e., comorbidity) and are prone to and adept at convincing others to doubt their own perceptions. ^[27]"

This appears to be saying that there are studies that show that people with depression, anxiety, PTSD, Bipolar and ADHD are prone to and adept at convincing others to doubt their own perceptions.

First, this doesn't pass the 'sniff-test'.

Second, the ideas in the first part of the sentence are attributed to one source and the ideas in the second part of the sentence to another source. If there are studies showing this surely the whole thing should be attributable to one source (or more) but not part to one source and part to another.

Third, I haven't been able to verify the source on Google Books. The book is "The Sociopath Next Door" by Martha Stout Phd. The cited edition (March 2006) isn't searchable. I searched the current edition for anything resembling the Wikipedia entry but couldn't find anything close. There were mentions of the author's case studies in relation to the above mentioned mental health conditions but the excerpt provided was too short to tell if it was the relevant quote. I cannot find the relevant source text elsewhere on line but only checked the usual places.

It seems like the entry has got a bit mixed up and has ended up sounding defamatory to people with a number of different mental health issues.

Can anybody else find the source for this citation - in particular, what study is being referred to?

Thanks PenfoldBrown ( talk) 05:35, 7 September 2023 (UTC) reply

"The word gas-lighting (referring to the behavior described in the above amateur psychology section) is occasionally used in clinical literature, but is considered a colloquialism by the American Psychological Association.[1][17]"

The term "gas-lighting" is a seen as colloquial for a good reason:

Outside of fiction it is usually impossible to determine whether one partner is tricking the other or if two people simply have different perceptions. "Gas-lighting" assumes malicious intent. This is sort of tell-tale... It is completely common that people have differing perceptions! How would a therapist or a researcher ever determine who is "gas-lighting" who within a couple? To really know this one would require absolute knowledge about both. Like an author. Fiction is where the term "gas-lighting" originates... The only thing an interviewer knows when two people accuse each other of "gas-lighting" is that they have differing perceptions unless he knows A LOT more about them then just what they say in interviews. Qualitative interviews are theory-generating science not for generalizing.

This is an article that is about a popular, but colloquial (and in my opinion pseudo-scientific) term. What most people mean when they talk about "gas-lighting" is better explained with Double-Bind-Theory. /info/en/?search=Double_bind#:~:text=Double%20bind%20theory%20was%20first,respond%20to%20and%20to%20resist. 2001:A61:12F1:CF01:F5A5:C501:A3C7:1558 ( talk) 00:42, 17 May 2024 (UTC) reply

While the article does mention the 1938 play, it seems to state that the term was established by the 1944 film, but it is used in Preston Sturges' 1941 film "The Lady Eve" in a way that seems to indicate it was already an established term by then. Fisk0 ( talk) 10:50, 24 September 2023 (UTC) reply

This page greatly downplays the significance of Gaslighting ...

... also ... page developer may find this timeline to be of interest ...

Post-Film Recognition (1940s-1950s): The film "Gaslight" was a commercial success and received critical acclaim, including several Academy Awards. As a result, it brought attention to the manipulation tactics used by the husband to deceive his wife. People who saw the film began to discuss the concept of making someone doubt their sanity or perception.

Psychology and Popular Culture (1960s-1970s): The concept of gaslighting started to appear in psychology literature and self-help books. Psychologists and therapists recognized it as a form of emotional abuse and manipulation, and it was discussed in the context of abusive relationships.

Feminist Movement (1970s): The feminist movement of the 1970s played a significant role in popularizing the term "gaslighting." Feminist literature and activists highlighted how gaslighting tactics were often used by men to control and manipulate women in relationships. This contributed to the term's visibility.

Broadened Usage (1980s-Present): Over time, the term expanded beyond its original context of abusive relationships and began to be used more broadly to describe any situation in which one person attempts to manipulate or deceive another person into doubting their own perception or reality. This broader usage has persisted into the present day.

Internet and Pop Culture (2000s-Present): With the rise of the internet and social media, terms and concepts spread rapidly. "Gaslighting" gained even more prominence as it became a common topic in discussions about relationships, psychology, and politics. It is frequently mentioned in online articles, forums, and social media discussions.

Today, "gaslighting" is widely recognized and used to describe various forms of psychological manipulation and emotional abuse in personal relationships, as well as in political and social contexts. Its evolution from a film title to a common expression illustrates how language can adapt and expand over time to describe complex psychological phenomena and social behaviors. 2601:19E:4181:5460:DD62:A7ED:6626:247B ( talk) 16:31, 4 October 2023 (UTC) reply

Wikipedia is not a forum. Your anecdotal opinion "essay" about the history of the term is of no use or interest here; we only care about what reliable sources have to say on the matter.  —  SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  19:54, 4 October 2023 (UTC) reply

Do you have sources for all of that information? Wikipedia can only cite anecdotal opinion essays from reliable sources. 162.246.139.210 ( talk) 17:47, 4 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Sources [1][17] should show you that gas-lighting is NOT "widely recognized". It is a term from fiction. Outside of fiction it is usually impossible to determine whether one person is tricking another or if two people simply have different perceptions. That alone casts a lot of double at "gas-lighting". The term insinuates malicious intent that is often impossible to prove and in most cases assumed without any evidence. 2001:A61:12F1:CF01:F5A5:C501:A3C7:1558 ( talk) 00:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC) reply

"minimize the serious health effects" from "This increased global awareness of the dangers of gaslighting has not been met with enthusiasm by all psychologists, some of whom have issued warnings that overuse of the term could weaken its meaning and minimize the serious health effects of such abuse" under "in psychiatry and psychology" is a very ambiguous choice of words.

The referenced source contains the following.. "However, some psychologists are not encouraged by this increased international awareness of the dangers of gaslighting, warning that overuse of the term could dilute its potency and downplay the serious health consequences – like PTSD and depression – of such abuse."

"minimize" here didn't make sense to me without reading the source, reading it as if "it somehow changes the health effects", whereas the source means "downplaying the health effects", thus trivializing not "minimizing". Ybllaw ( talk) 19:27, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply

This is the referenced source.. https://languages.oup.com/word-of-the-year/2018-shortlist/ Ybllaw ( talk) 19:27, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply