{"schema_version":"1.0","id":"cbt-cards-content-library-v1","name":"CBT Cards owned content library","canonical":"https://cbt-cards.github.io/data/content-library.json","human_url":"https://cbt-cards.github.io/library/","updated":"2026-08-24","locale":"en","license_url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/","rights_basis":"cbt_cards_original","publication_status":"published","clinical_validation_status":"not_claimed","editorial_basis":"CBT Cards-owned explanatory and reflection content mapped to the existing reviewed practice mechanisms and evidence registry. The exact short formats are editorial syntheses; they do not have independent efficacy claims.","safety_boundary":"General wellness and self-reflection only. Do not use these records to override genuine danger, protective boundaries, required safety/professional/accessibility rules, or medical/legal/financial/safeguarding decisions. When a record conflicts with the linked reviewed practice, the practice safety boundary controls.","collections":[{"id":"patterns","title":"Patterns","purpose":"Name a recurring thinking–behavior loop without turning it into a diagnosis.","canonical_url":"https://cbt-cards.github.io/library/#patterns","record_count":6},{"id":"experiments","title":"Experiments","purpose":"Turn a low-stakes prediction into a bounded observation rather than an argument with yourself.","canonical_url":"https://cbt-cards.github.io/library/#experiments","record_count":6},{"id":"worked-examples","title":"Worked examples","purpose":"Show how a vague or global interpretation can be separated into facts, predictions, standards, and next actions.","canonical_url":"https://cbt-cards.github.io/library/#worked-examples","record_count":6},{"id":"scripts","title":"Scripts","purpose":"Offer sentence starters for structured reflection; they are prompts, not affirmations or instructions to believe a preferred conclusion.","canonical_url":"https://cbt-cards.github.io/library/#scripts","record_count":6}],"records":[{"id":"pattern-prediction-as-fact","type":"pattern","title":"Prediction as Fact","summary":"A feared outcome starts being treated as if it has already been observed.","signals":["The sentence begins with “what if” but ends with the certainty of “this will happen.”","Planning keeps expanding even though the feared outcome has not occurred.","New information is filtered mainly for signs that confirm the prediction."],"keeps_it_going":"Certainty is being supplied by repetition, vividness, or anxiety rather than by direct observation.","useful_question":"What do I know directly, and what am I predicting?","related_practice_ids":["practice-test-your-prediction"],"evidence_ids":["ev-nhs-thought-record","ev-nice-social-anxiety"]},{"id":"pattern-reassurance-loop","type":"pattern","title":"The One-More-Check Loop","summary":"One extra check briefly reduces uncertainty, then teaches the mind to ask for another.","signals":["A normal decision already has enough information, but finishing still feels premature.","Relief after checking is short-lived.","The next check is justified as the one that will finally make the decision feel certain."],"keeps_it_going":"The check is used to remove uncertainty rather than to obtain genuinely missing information.","useful_question":"Is this check adding information, or only trying to change how certain I feel?","related_practice_ids":["practice-one-less-check"],"evidence_ids":["ev-editorial-low-risk"]},{"id":"pattern-replay-without-learning","type":"pattern","title":"Replay Without Learning","summary":"An event is reviewed repeatedly after the useful facts, lesson, or next action have stopped changing.","signals":["The same scene or sentence is reconstructed again with only minor variations.","Each round promises closure but produces no new decision.","Stopping feels irresponsible even when there is nothing new to do."],"keeps_it_going":"Repetition is being mistaken for problem solving or accountability.","useful_question":"What new fact, decision, repair, or action did the last round produce?","related_practice_ids":["practice-reflection-or-replay"],"evidence_ids":["ev-nhs-worries","ev-editorial-low-risk"]},{"id":"pattern-avoidance-expands-task","type":"pattern","title":"The Task Gets Bigger While You Wait","summary":"Avoiding a safe task makes the imagined task larger, more complete, and harder to start.","signals":["You keep planning the whole task instead of touching one observable part.","The first step is described in terms that are too large to finish in one sitting.","Readiness becomes a prerequisite for starting."],"keeps_it_going":"Distance from the task prevents new information about what the first step is actually like.","useful_question":"What is the smallest safe part I could approach now without making completion the goal?","related_practice_ids":["practice-smallest-approach-step"],"evidence_ids":["ev-nhs-facing-fears","ev-nice-social-anxiety"]},{"id":"pattern-moving-finish-line","type":"pattern","title":"The Moving Finish Line","summary":"A task has no stable definition of done, so each completed pass creates another reason to keep polishing.","signals":["Completion criteria are invented after the work is already done.","Small improvements are treated as proof that another pass is necessary.","Stopping is evaluated by discomfort rather than by fit-for-purpose requirements."],"keeps_it_going":"The standard is allowed to move after every round, so the task never gets a fair stopping test.","useful_question":"What would count as done if I had to define it before the next pass?","related_practice_ids":["practice-good-enough-contract"],"evidence_ids":["ev-cci-perfectionism"]},{"id":"pattern-identity-verdict","type":"pattern","title":"From One Event to an Identity Verdict","summary":"A specific mistake, awkward moment, or weak result is converted into a global statement about who you are.","signals":["The description shifts from a verb to a label: “I missed it” becomes “I’m incompetent.”","Context and specific skills disappear from the account.","Responsibility is preserved poorly because the verdict is too broad to act on."],"keeps_it_going":"A global label feels explanatory, but it removes the specific behavior that could actually be reviewed or changed.","useful_question":"What exactly happened, in behavior-level language, without turning it into a verdict about the whole person?","related_practice_ids":["practice-behavior-not-identity"],"evidence_ids":["ev-nhs-thought-record","ev-editorial-low-risk"]},{"id":"experiment-one-normal-reread","type":"experiment","title":"One Normal Reread","summary":"Test whether an ordinary low-stakes message really needs repeated rereading before it can be sent.","prediction":"If I stop after one normal review, I will miss something important or regret sending it.","safe_test":"Use a genuinely low-stakes message. Read it once for meaning and obvious errors, then send it without restarting the review cycle.","observe":["Did a material error actually occur?","How strong was the urge to reread before and after sending?","Did uncertainty change on its own after the action?"],"update_prompt":"What did the result show about the difference between useful checking and certainty-seeking?","avoid_when":["genuine danger or an urgent safety issue","required safety, professional, legal, compliance, accessibility, or safeguarding rules","medical, legal, financial, or other high-stakes decisions","irreversible actions or situations where a small reflection exercise could create material harm"],"related_practice_ids":["practice-one-less-check","practice-test-your-prediction"],"evidence_ids":["ev-editorial-low-risk","ev-nice-social-anxiety"]},{"id":"experiment-ask-without-full-rehearsal","type":"experiment","title":"Ask Without Full Rehearsal","summary":"Test a small social prediction by asking one ordinary question without scripting every possible branch first.","prediction":"If I do not fully rehearse, I will freeze, sound unacceptable, or be unable to recover.","safe_test":"Choose an ordinary, low-risk question. Prepare the first sentence only, ask it, and allow the rest of the exchange to unfold normally.","observe":["What actually happened after the first sentence?","Was recovery possible if the wording was imperfect?","Did the feared outcome occur, partly occur, or not occur?"],"update_prompt":"Which part of the prediction was observed, and which part remained a prediction?","avoid_when":["genuine danger or an urgent safety issue","required safety, professional, legal, compliance, accessibility, or safeguarding rules","medical, legal, financial, or other high-stakes decisions","irreversible actions or situations where a small reflection exercise could create material harm"],"related_practice_ids":["practice-test-your-prediction","practice-spot-the-safety-behavior"],"evidence_ids":["ev-nice-social-anxiety"]},{"id":"experiment-five-minute-start","type":"experiment","title":"Five-Minute Start","summary":"Test whether starting a safe avoided task requires feeling ready first.","prediction":"If I start before I feel ready, the task will be unmanageable and I will get stuck.","safe_test":"Choose one reversible five-minute step that approaches the task without requiring completion.","observe":["What was the task like after contact rather than imagination?","Did the first step reveal a clearer second step?","Was discomfort the same before, during, and after starting?"],"update_prompt":"What did direct contact teach that planning from a distance could not?","avoid_when":["genuine danger or an urgent safety issue","required safety, professional, legal, compliance, accessibility, or safeguarding rules","medical, legal, financial, or other high-stakes decisions","irreversible actions or situations where a small reflection exercise could create material harm"],"related_practice_ids":["practice-smallest-approach-step"],"evidence_ids":["ev-nhs-facing-fears","ev-nice-social-anxiety"]},{"id":"experiment-stop-at-written-criteria","type":"experiment","title":"Stop at Written Criteria","summary":"Test whether a discretionary task can stop at a prewritten fit-for-purpose standard instead of at a feeling of complete certainty.","prediction":"If I stop when the written criteria are met, the result will be obviously inadequate.","safe_test":"Before another pass, write three concrete completion criteria for an ordinary discretionary task. Stop when all three are met unless genuinely new information appears.","observe":["Were the written criteria actually met?","Did another pass seem necessary because of a requirement or because stopping felt uncomfortable?","What feedback did the finished result later provide?"],"update_prompt":"Would you change the criteria next time based on evidence, or only to remove discomfort?","avoid_when":["genuine danger or an urgent safety issue","required safety, professional, legal, compliance, accessibility, or safeguarding rules","medical, legal, financial, or other high-stakes decisions","irreversible actions or situations where a small reflection exercise could create material harm","tasks with mandated exact accuracy, safety, compliance, or professional standards"],"related_practice_ids":["practice-good-enough-contract"],"evidence_ids":["ev-cci-perfectionism"]},{"id":"experiment-two-dimensions-not-verdict","type":"experiment","title":"Two Dimensions, No Verdict","summary":"Test what becomes visible when a result is rated on specific dimensions instead of passed through one success/failure label.","prediction":"If one important part went badly, the whole result was a failure.","safe_test":"Choose an ordinary completed task. Rate two concrete dimensions from 0–10, such as clarity and timeliness, without assigning one total verdict.","observe":["Did the dimensions receive the same score?","Which part needs work, if any?","What competent or adequate part disappears under the total verdict?"],"update_prompt":"What action follows from the specific ratings that did not follow from “failure”?","avoid_when":["genuine danger or an urgent safety issue","required safety, professional, legal, compliance, accessibility, or safeguarding rules","medical, legal, financial, or other high-stakes decisions","irreversible actions or situations where a small reflection exercise could create material harm","situations with a genuinely binary safety or compliance requirement"],"related_practice_ids":["practice-continuum-not-verdict"],"evidence_ids":["ev-nhs-thought-record","ev-cci-perfectionism"]},{"id":"experiment-same-standard-swap","type":"experiment","title":"Same-Standard Swap","summary":"Test whether a self-rule remains the same when only the person being judged changes.","prediction":"My harsher rule is simply the objectively correct standard.","safe_test":"Describe the same ordinary situation twice: once with you in it and once with another person who has genuinely similar duties, information, and constraints. Write the rule for each.","observe":["Did the rule change when the person changed?","Are any differences explained by real responsibility or only by identity?","What standard would be defensible in both versions?"],"update_prompt":"What is the narrowest rule that respects real responsibility without adding a person-specific penalty?","avoid_when":["genuine danger or an urgent safety issue","required safety, professional, legal, compliance, accessibility, or safeguarding rules","medical, legal, financial, or other high-stakes decisions","irreversible actions or situations where a small reflection exercise could create material harm","comparisons where roles, duties, risks, or prior commitments are materially different"],"related_practice_ids":["practice-same-standard-check"],"evidence_ids":["ev-cci-perfectionism","ev-nhs-thought-record"]},{"id":"example-no-reply-yet","type":"worked_example","title":"No Reply Yet","situation":"You sent an ordinary message this morning and have not received a reply by lunchtime.","before":"They have not replied. They must be annoyed, and I probably said something wrong.","after":{"observation":"There is no reply yet.","interpretation":"They may be annoyed with me.","unknown":"The reason for the delay is not known.","useful_next_step":"Unless the message is time-sensitive, wait for more information instead of treating the interpretation as an observation."},"why_more_useful":"The revised version does not force a positive story. It separates what is known from what is inferred.","related_practice_ids":["practice-test-your-prediction"],"evidence_ids":["ev-nhs-thought-record"]},{"id":"example-mistake-not-identity","type":"worked_example","title":"A Mistake Without an Identity Sentence","situation":"During a presentation, you give one number incorrectly and correct it a minute later.","before":"I am incompetent.","after":{"specific_behavior":"I gave one number incorrectly and corrected it.","responsibility":"I should check why I missed it and whether the correction reached the audience.","identity_boundary":"The event does not by itself establish a global claim about my competence."},"why_more_useful":"The specific description keeps accountability while leaving something concrete to review.","related_practice_ids":["practice-behavior-not-identity"],"evidence_ids":["ev-nhs-thought-record","ev-editorial-low-risk"]},{"id":"example-problem-or-hypothetical-worry","type":"worked_example","title":"Problem or Hypothetical Worry?","situation":"You keep thinking, “What if I forget something important for tomorrow?”","before":"I need to keep going through every possible thing I might forget.","after":{"practical_problem":"There is a short list of items that genuinely need to be ready tomorrow.","action":"Write the list once and prepare the items that can be prepared now.","remaining_worry":"The possibility that there is some unknown thing you have not remembered cannot be solved by endlessly repeating the scan."},"why_more_useful":"The split protects the practical action instead of dismissing the whole concern as “just worry.”","related_practice_ids":["practice-problem-or-worry","practice-park-and-return"],"evidence_ids":["ev-nhs-problem-solving","ev-nhs-worries"]},{"id":"example-good-enough-report","type":"worked_example","title":"A Report With a Finish Line","situation":"A short internal report is complete, but you keep changing wording because it still does not feel finished.","before":"I should keep improving it until nothing bothers me.","after":{"criteria":["The requested questions are answered.","Figures match the source data.","The main recommendation is understandable to the intended reader."],"stopping_rule":"If these criteria are met and no new factual issue appears, discomfort about stopping is not automatically a new requirement."},"why_more_useful":"The standard is defined before another pass and can be revised later from actual feedback rather than from endless hypothetical defects.","related_practice_ids":["practice-good-enough-contract"],"evidence_ids":["ev-cci-perfectionism"]},{"id":"example-one-awkward-moment","type":"worked_example","title":"One Awkward Moment on a Continuum","situation":"A conversation had one awkward pause, but you also asked the question you needed to ask and received a useful answer.","before":"That conversation was a failure.","after":{"clarity":"7/10 — the question was understandable.","smoothness":"5/10 — there was an awkward pause.","usefulness":"8/10 — the needed information was obtained.","next_step":"If anything needs work, practice a clearer opening rather than treating the whole interaction as failed."},"why_more_useful":"Specific dimensions can preserve a real weakness without erasing the rest of the outcome.","related_practice_ids":["practice-continuum-not-verdict"],"evidence_ids":["ev-nhs-thought-record","ev-cci-perfectionism"]},{"id":"example-replay-to-review","type":"worked_example","title":"From Replay to Review","situation":"After a meeting, you have replayed the same comment several times.","before":"I need to go through it again until I understand exactly why I said it that way.","after":{"new_information":"No new facts appeared in the last two replays.","lesson":"Next time, pause before answering a question you did not expect.","repair_or_action":"No repair is currently needed; if new information appears, review then.","stop_point":"End this round because the review has produced a lesson and no further action."},"why_more_useful":"Stopping is tied to whether the review is still producing information, not to whether the event feels emotionally complete.","related_practice_ids":["practice-reflection-or-replay"],"evidence_ids":["ev-nhs-worries","ev-editorial-low-risk"]},{"id":"script-observation-inference","type":"script","title":"Observation / Inference","use_when":"A thought contains both something directly observed and a conclusion about what it means.","template":"What I know directly is ____. The interpretation I am adding is ____. What would give me more information is ____.","guardrail":"Do not use this wording to dismiss credible warning signs or to force an uncertain situation to sound harmless.","related_practice_ids":["practice-test-your-prediction"],"evidence_ids":["ev-nhs-thought-record"]},{"id":"script-action-or-worry","type":"script","title":"Action / Worry","use_when":"A concern keeps returning and you are unsure whether more thinking is producing a practical step.","template":"The concrete problem, if any, is ____. The action I can take now is ____. The part I cannot solve right now is ____, so I will review it again at ____.","guardrail":"If delaying action could worsen a real problem, take or seek the appropriate action instead of parking it.","related_practice_ids":["practice-problem-or-worry","practice-park-and-return"],"evidence_ids":["ev-nhs-problem-solving","ev-nhs-worries"]},{"id":"script-uncertainty-without-certainty","type":"script","title":"Enough Information Without Total Certainty","use_when":"An ordinary low-risk decision has enough information but still does not feel certain.","template":"I would prefer certainty about ____. This decision actually requires ____. The information I already have is ____. One more check would add ____ / would mainly reduce discomfort.","guardrail":"Do not apply this to required checks, high-stakes decisions, or situations where material information is genuinely missing.","related_practice_ids":["practice-one-less-check"],"evidence_ids":["ev-editorial-low-risk"]},{"id":"script-good-enough-contract","type":"script","title":"Good-Enough Contract","use_when":"A discretionary task keeps expanding because “done” has not been defined.","template":"For this task, fit for purpose means: 1) ____, 2) ____, 3) ____. I will stop when these are met unless new factual information changes the requirement.","guardrail":"This does not lower legitimate safety, accuracy, compliance, or professional standards.","related_practice_ids":["practice-good-enough-contract"],"evidence_ids":["ev-cci-perfectionism"]},{"id":"script-behavior-not-identity","type":"script","title":"Behavior, Not Identity","use_when":"A specific mistake is being turned into a global self-label.","template":"The specific behavior was ____. Its effect was ____. What I am responsible for now is ____. The global label I am tempted to add is ____, but that label is broader than the event.","guardrail":"Specific language should preserve responsibility and repair where they are actually needed.","related_practice_ids":["practice-behavior-not-identity"],"evidence_ids":["ev-nhs-thought-record","ev-editorial-low-risk"]},{"id":"script-replay-exit","type":"script","title":"Replay Exit","use_when":"You have already reviewed an event and are unsure whether another round is useful.","template":"The new information from the last round is ____. The decision, lesson, or repair is ____. If nothing new is appearing, my next action is ____ and this review ends here for now.","guardrail":"Do not stop a review that is still needed for a concrete safety issue, accountability step, or decision with genuinely missing information.","related_practice_ids":["practice-reflection-or-replay"],"evidence_ids":["ev-nhs-worries","ev-editorial-low-risk"]}]}