Shattered Assumptions Theory

The Theory of Shattered Assumptions is a phenomenon in psychology that describes how trauma can change the understanding of the world of human individuals. Introduced by Ronnie Janoff-Bulman, this theory states that all people hold three main assumptions about the world and ourselves. In summation, the assumptions state that the world is benevolent and as members of this world, we are meaningful and worthy. However, in the face of trauma, the theory claims that these assumptions are shattered, and one can no longer identify with these views.^[1]

Background

The Theory of Shattered Assumptions was developed and detailed by Ronnie Janoff-Bulman in 1992 in her book, Shattered assumptions: Towards a new psychology of trauma. Janoff-Bulman is a professor of psychology at the University of Massachusetts Amherst and focuses her studies on mortality and motives surrounding such concepts.^[2] Since then, this theory has been widely researched and has since been expanded into more elaborate theories such as Terror Management Theory.

The Theory of Shattered Assumptions

Basic Assumptions

According to Janoff-Bulman,^[1] people come up with general assumptions about the world. These assumptions are undeclared and somewhat implicit, and serve as a basis of our well-being. They give meaning to our existence. The beliefs that we create come in many forms. They are general ideas about the world as a whole and reflect its benevolent nature.^[3] As Brewin & Holmes^[4] state, the five main assumptions are that “the world is benevolent, the world is meaningful, the world is predictable, the assumption of invulnerability, and the self is worthy.“ Therefore, we have high expectations for ourselves, and the world around us, to remain decent and meaningful.

The World is Benevolent

The first fundamental assumption entails the belief that the ‘world’ around us is good. The word ‘world’ makes up the people and events in it. Janoff-Bulman (1993) emphasizes this assumption believes in ‘good fortune and positive outcomes.' People in the world are genuine despite their negative behaviors. All people have an inner goodness.^[1]

The World is Meaningful

The second fundamental assumption regards life’s events as purposeful. In other words, the event whether negative or positive corresponds to the person’s behavior. When an unjust event happens to an ‘undeserving’ person it is viewed as unfair or wrong.^[1] On the flipside, it is assumed that a good person encounters positive events. And a bad person yields negative events. When a person who is good in the eyes of their loved ones dies of an illness, It can seem unfair to the loved ones of the deceased. Thus, the death of someone who is "deserving of good things" can shatter the assumption that the world is meaningful or logical .

The World is Predictable

The third fundamental assumption regards the world as being a predictable place due to an individual's preconceived beliefs about the world. As result of an individual’s preconceived beliefs regarding the world, they feel as though they are able to control and embrace all that they might face throughout their daily life routine, making the world appear as a calm, safe environment.

The Assumption of Invulnerability

The fourth fundamental assumption is better known as the idea of “this couldn’t happen to me.” With this, individuals have begun to overestimate the likelihood of experiencing positive life events and underestimate the likelihood of experiencing negative life events.

The Self is Worthy

The final fundamental assumption evaluates one’s self as a positive, moral, and excellent individual. Based on an individual’s assessment of their self-worth predicts their success in life.^[1] A person’s positive self-worth encourages them to be effective in their tasks at hand. Generality, this assumption believes that an individual has the ability to control for positive or negative outcomes.

Shattered Assumptions

According to the theory, there are some terrible events, which we would refer to as trauma, that shatter these worldviews. They break every assumption one has about the world as a generous and virtuous place. Such events could be the unwarranted murder of a loved one, being critically injured, or losing a job and not having an income. Such events are extremely traumatic, and therefore break our assumptions that the world is a good place. This is especially so for people who have had a generally positive life. Because these people have such strong, optimistic assumptions, the disintegration of these views much more traumatic.^[4]

Rebuilding Assumptions

Once one has experienced such trauma, it is necessary for them to create new assumptions or modify their old ones in order to recover from the traumatic experience.^[1] Therefore, the negative effects of the trauma are simply related to our worldviews, and if we repair these views, we will recover from the trauma.^[5] The psychological effect on an individual due to a traumatizing event will change and disrupt one’s basic life assumptions – hence the title “Shattered Assumption Theory.” Basic life assumptions are norms that are generally not discussed or even recognized until they are questions or harmed due to life changing occurrences, such as a loss of a loved one. According to Hanson & Janoff-Bulman (1983), “The psychological response to victimization is generally immediate and often intense. Even relatively ‘minor’ victimizations such as burglary or robbery can result in a great deal of suffering and disruption” (p. 8). Such experience will make an individual question everything they have known to be normal. Coping from a traumatic experience is achievable, as long as the victim recognizes how the specific event is shaping their current life and learns new behavior that will change these negative thought patterns. This process begins as the individual starts to “[reestablish] a conceptual system that will allow [them] to once again function effectively; the parts of the conceptual system that have been shaken will have to be rebuilt.” (Hanson & Janoff-Bulman, 1983, p. 7). Rebuilding one’s conceptual system will take time and will be different from one individual to another; but with great support system, and introspection, it is doable.

Criticism and Related Theories

Some have criticized Janoff-Bulman’s Theory of Shattered Assumptions. Mary Alice Mills from the University of Connecticut studied this theory. In her dissertation, she did not find a relationship between trauma and people’s views regarding the meaningfulness and benevolence of the world.^[6]

There are some theories that are closely related to the Theory of Shattered Assumptions. Terror Management Theory states that our self esteem and worldviews serve as a mechanism to avoid the overwhelming fear and anxiety that we would normally face about death and suffering. We need such mechanisms to perform daily functions, for without them we would be too conscious of our own mortality. Like in the Theory of Shattered Assumptions, the more positively you view yourself (high self esteem) and the world, the less anxiety you will face about death.^[7]

References

1. Janoff-Bulman, Ronnie (1992). Shattered Assumptions. New York: Free Press.
2. Plous, Scott. "Ronnie Janoff-Bulman". Social Psychology Network. Wesleyan University.
3. Edmunson, Donald; Chaudoir, Stephenie; Mills, Mary Alice; Park, Crystal; Holub, Julie; Bartkowiak, Jennifer (2011). "From Shattered Assumptions to Weakened Worldviews: Trauma Symptoms Signal Anxiety Buffer Disruption". Journal of Loss and Trauma. 16 (4): 358–385. doi:10.1080/15325024.2011.572030.
4. Brewin, Chris; Holmes, Emily (2003). "Psychological theories of posttraumatic stress disorder". Clinical Psychology Review. 23: 339–376. doi:10.1016/S0272-7358(03)00033-3.
5. DePrince, Anne; Freyd, Jennifer (2002). Kauffman, J, ed. Loss of the Assumptive World: a theory of traumatic loss. New York: Brunner-Routledge. pp. 71–82.
6. Mills, Mary Alice (2010). "Shattered Assumptions? A prospective study: The impact of trauma on global beliefs and adjustment". Doctoral Dissertations. Paper AAI3447452.
7. Greenberg, J; Arndt, J (2012). Van Lange, A. M.; Kruglanski, A. W.; Higgins, E. T., eds. Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology. London: SAGE Publications Ltd. pp. 398–415.