Gasliters target our brains’ dependence on others

In 2025, researchers Willis Klein, Suzanne Wood and Jennifer Burtz published their findings on how gaslighters use their dependence on brain relationships to reverse the way they examine reality. We rely on others to “examine our self-view and world experiences,” but when we connect with emotional abusers, especially gaslighters, we may replace self-trust with self-doubt, lose our sense of agency and succumb to “emotional and mental instability” due to the construction of a shared reality.

When we think about it Gas lightwe tend to focus on gaslighters and victims. Klein, Wood and Burts will expand this focus to include a wider community and a more expanded timeline. Looking at the ways our brains develop their sense of self and how we develop a sense of reality through and with others, through and with others, it helps explain why our brains are vulnerable to the gas layer.

When we require others in our communities and society to construct self-identity and reality itself, we understand that those who try to manipulate us can effectively hijack the innate plurality or community of our brains. One of our biggest vulnerabilities is the fact that our brains are wired to establish reality and function in relation to other brains.

Gaslighters utilize the brain’s dependence on others

Klein, Wood and Burt review extensive research documenting their dependence on others. from Attachments Theoretical Society Baseline Theory, our brains have evolved to seek belonging and trust. When we are in “social ecology,” research shows that it affects our information processing. Cognition “More fun and less vigilant.”

In other words, when we are in our community, we can disappoint our guards and direct our brain resources towards other functions. It is this relaxed defense that the gaslighter attacks. We solve “sharing” scan loads for threats, assessing safety and navigating a ever-changing world.

When we are in close personal relationships, or in a set of organizational or professional relationships that guide us into a shared mental space with others, we rely on these figures in our lives to promote learning about the self and the world. These relationships are built on trust, and we end up “adopting beliefs” not only about ourselves but the world. What bothers me is when “gasliters abuse this privilege for their own benefit.” Gaslighters operate in concrete spaces Intimate In the realm of an individual, dependencies, and authority, as well as in the realm of an organization.

Two core functions of gaslight

Klein, Wood and Burt assume two basic characteristics of gaslight. They consider the first one as “an attempt to convince the target that the target is epistemologically incompetent, i.e., unable to grasp some (or all) aspects of reality and potentially include aspects of themselves.”

This type of abuse can be seen in Bullying Culture labels targets in a sly way that trusts the perpetrator’s ability to understand reality and self. For example, you call someone “crazy” or say they’re “crazy.” Not only will you label someone as crazy or crazy, but you will not only gaslight your target, observer Bullying. This format of Emotional abuseI’ll use it public Gaslight can intensify the destabilization of the target as well as the perpetrator. others They are manipulated to view them as mentally deficient.

This type of gaslight leads to the second basic feature that researchers identify. This is “epistemic trust in the target perpetrator.” This trust applies to personal relationships, but also to organisational gas lighting as mentioned above. It increases the strength, reliability and social status that an individual is attributable to his or her position. Teachers, coaches, priests, doctors, leader– Communities trust more in their knowledge of the perpetrator’s reality.

How power location affects gaslights

Power dynamics work against targets. Not only is their mental state damaged, but gaslights may also help increase by labeling the perpetrator as mentally inappropriate I’m worried Trust in the gaslighter’s ability to specify who is mentally valuable and who is not. This similarity: people in the group and those who are present. When the gaslighter is convinced that he is mentally incompetent with the target, the researchers explain that this “will give the gaslighter more control over the target.”

Looking at how this works in an organization, the gaslighter has more control over the group if the target is publicly publicly published and published. fear It is relatively labeled and exposed. This adds another layer to the way we rely on each other to share our co-created visions of ourselves and reality. Those with power and influence can control the group’s vision of “reality.”

Researchers begin an article discussing community dynamics about how we create reality, but when we look at how our brains succumb to manipulation, we focus on gaslighters and targets. Continuing to look at real community or social constructs, building on how the brain works together reveals how gaslight affects organizational psychology, relying on and affecting the position of power. It helps you see the whole group, and even how you oppose a target or target that is labeled mentally ineligible and unreliable.

The dangers of gaslights for individuals and communities

Klein, Wood, and Baltz argue that “close relationships meet basic needs related to belonging and security,” so targets could postpone the gaslighter’s vision of reality instead of their own experience. They explain that we are motivated to see us close from a positive perspective, even if it means we have to dismiss our relationship with the truth. Applying this insight to organizational psychology explains why we sacrifice truth to align our vision of reality with people of power and influence.