Understanding Psychological Reactance: Why We Resist When Told What to Do

Introduction

Why do we instinctively push back when someone tells us what to do—even when it’s for our own good? Whether it’s a health warning, a parental rule, or a societal expectation, many people feel an urge to resist. Psychological reactance, a strong emotional and cognitive response that has the capacity to significantly impact behaviour and decision-making, is the name given to this counterintuitive reaction.

It is essential to understand psychological reactance in the context of mental health. It explains why some people ignore medical advice, reject therapy, or violate social norms even when doing so could improve their wellbeing. This article explains psychological reactance, its scientific basis, its effects on mental health, and strategies for reducing it, particularly in therapeutic and health communication contexts.

Understanding the Topic: What Is Psychological Reactance?

Psychological reactance was first introduced by Jack Brehm in 1966. He defined it as a motivational state that arises when individuals perceive that their freedom to choose is being threatened (Brehm, 1966). In other words, when people feel their autonomy is at risk, they may act out to restore it—even if that means doing the opposite of what’s advised.

Reactance is a psychological process that protects perceived personal independence; it goes beyond simple disobedience or stubbornness. Thoughts (“They can’t tell me what to do”), feelings (“Anger or Irritation”), and actions (“Non-compliance, rebellion”) can all be manifestations of this reaction.

4 Reasons of Why We Resist When We Are Told What to Do

1. The Science Behind Reactance: A Defensive Mind Mechanism

Reactance is closely tied to our need for autonomy, a basic psychological need outlined in self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Neuroscientific research shows that when individuals perceive a threat to their autonomy, areas of the brain associated with conflict and emotion regulation—such as the anterior cingulate cortex and amygdala—are activated (Kouneiher et al., 2009). This suggests that reactance is both a cognitive and emotional process.

Research also shows that the intensity of reactance can depend on personality traits. People high in trait reactance—those who are naturally more sensitive to perceived control—are more likely to experience strong reactance in various contexts (Dillard & Shen, 2005). Understanding this helps mental health professionals tailor their approaches to avoid triggering defensive responses in therapy or communication.

2. Reactance in Mental Health: A Barrier to Treatment

Psychological reactance has significant implications for mental health. One of the most profound is its role as a barrier to therapeutic engagement. When individuals feel pressured or coerced into therapy, they may disengage or resist the process altogether. This can result in dropped sessions, refusal to take medication, or non-compliance with treatment recommendations.

A study by Brehm and Brehm (2013) found that patients who perceived their therapist as controlling reported lower satisfaction with treatment and were less likely to benefit from it. Similarly, psychological reactance has been linked to poor health outcomes among those managing chronic illness, due to resistance to behavioural interventions (Rains, 2013).

3. Reactance and Public Health Messaging: When Advice Backfires

In public health, psychological reactance can reduce the effectiveness of campaigns designed to change behaviour. For example, anti-smoking or anti-drug campaigns that rely heavily on fear-based messaging can trigger defensive reactions, especially among adolescents.

Recent studies have shown that health warnings framed as commands (e.g., “You must stop smoking”) can provoke backlash and even increase the undesirable behaviour (Richards & Banas, 2015). In contrast, messages that emphasise personal choice and autonomy—such as “You are free to choose, but quitting can improve your life”—are more effective at promoting behaviour change.

4. Digital Age Reactance: Social Media, Influencers, and Rebellion

In the digital age, psychological reactance also plays out on social media, where persuasive messaging is often met with resistance. Young users, in particular, are sensitive to attempts at influence and can react negatively to perceived manipulation by influencers, brands, or online authorities.

A study by Kim and So (2021) found that influencer marketing campaigns that appeared too pushy or inauthentic resulted in higher levels of reactance and lower consumer trust. This highlights the importance of authenticity, transparency, and choice in digital mental health campaigns or psychoeducational content shared online.

4 Strategies to Reduce Reactance in Therapy and Communication

Understanding psychological reactance enables therapists, educators, and communicators to design more effective interventions. Here are several evidence-based strategies to reduce reactance and promote cooperation:

• Motivational interviewing: This approach, widely used in therapy, focuses on collaboration rather than confrontation. By affirming autonomy and encouraging clients to explore their own motivations, it helps lower resistance (Miller & Rollnick, 2013).
• Use of autonomy-supportive language: Phrases like “You might consider…” or “What are your thoughts on…” are less likely to trigger defensiveness than direct commands.
• Personal relevance: Tailoring messages to the individual’s values and goals increases the likelihood that the message will be accepted (Quick & Stephenson, 2007).
• Two-sided messages: Acknowledging counterarguments (e.g., “You may feel this advice doesn’t apply to you…”) reduces defensiveness and increases openness to new ideas.

The Link Between Reactance and Self-Esteem

Research has also linked high psychological reactance with fragile or threatened self-esteem. When individuals with low self-worth feel controlled, it may amplify their defensiveness as a way to protect their identity. On the flip side, fostering healthy self-esteem may reduce the intensity of reactance and open individuals up to constructive feedback.

One study by Brown and Stanaland (2017) found that interventions that supported participants’ sense of self-worth led to lower levels of resistance to behaviour-change messages. This suggests that boosting self-esteem might be a valuable companion strategy when addressing reactance in therapeutic or public settings.

Understanding the Topic: Why It Matters for Mental Health

Psychological reactance is a practical reality in behaviour modification, mental health therapy, and interpersonal relationships; it is not only a theoretical idea. People may be reacting to a perceived danger to their independence rather than out of defiance when they reject guidance, orders, or assistance. This has major implications for our approaches to parenting, therapy, public health messaging, and even the production of digital material.

Professionals who understand reactance are better able to interact with clients in a compassionate, flexible, and sympathetic manner, which lowers resistance and fosters cooperation. The first step to addressing this internal resistance in a healthier way for individuals may be to acknowledge it as a type of self-defence.

Conclusion

Psychological reactance is really about freedom. Knowing that our resistance frequently results from a need to feel in control allows us to assert autonomy in more positive ways without endangering our emotional well-being.

By recognising this need and adapting their methods, health communicators, educators, and therapists can foster engagement and establish trust. Additionally, understanding when and why reactance occurs can help people develop their emotional intelligence, personal growth, and general well-being.

Instead of resisting our urge for independence, we can respect it and use it to promote happier, more independent lives.

References

Brehm, J. W. (1966). A theory of psychological reactance. Academic Press.

Brehm, S. S., & Brehm, J. W. (2013). Psychological reactance: A theory of freedom and control. Academic Press.

Brown, T. J., & Stanaland, A. J. S. (2017). The role of self-esteem in psychological reactance. Journal of Psychology and Behavioral Science, 5(2), 23–31. 

Dillard, J. P., & Shen, L. (2005). On the nature of reactance and its role in persuasive health communication. Communication Monographs, 72(2), 144–168. 

Kim, S. J., & So, J. (2021). Influencer marketing and psychological reactance: The role of perceived authenticity. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 53, 14–26. 

Kouneiher, F., Charron, S., & Koechlin, E. (2009). Motivation and cognitive control in the human prefrontal cortex. Nature Neuroscience, 12(7), 939–945. 

Miller, W. R., & Rollnick, S. (2013). Motivational interviewing: Helping people change (3rd ed.). Guilford Press.

Quick, B. L., & Stephenson, M. T. (2007). Further evidence that psychological reactance can be modeled as a combination of anger and negative cognitions. Communication Research, 34(3), 255–276. 

Rains, S. A. (2013). The nature of psychological reactance revisited: A meta‐analytic review. Human Communication Research, 39(1), 47–73. 

Richards, A. S., & Banas, J. A. (2015). Inoculating against reactance to persuasive health messages. Health Communication, 30(5), 451–460. 

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.