You're Not Imagining It: How Your Workplace Is Rewriting Your Reality
Welcome back to PsyberSpace. I'm your host, Leslie Poston. Today, we're talking about something that might sound like a buzzword but has very real psychological roots: gaslighting. And more specifically, how it shows up not just in toxic relationships or politics but in the places where we work. You might have felt it before and didn't have a name for it.
Leslie Poston:Maybe you were laid off after months of being told your job was safe. Maybe you've been working in an office that insists it's like a family but routinely throws people under the bus. Or maybe you work in healthcare, education, or government sectors that are supposed to protect people and you're watching your values get twisted and used against you by people in charge. Whatever your situation, one thing is clear: you're not imagining it. And you're not alone.
Leslie Poston:Let's talk about the psychology of gaslighting in the what it is, why it works, and how it's harming people at scale, and also what you can do about it. The term gaslighting comes from the 1938 play Gaslight, where a man manipulates his wife into questioning her perception of reality. In the story, the husband dims the gaslights in their home while denying that the lighting has changed, making his wife doubt her own senses. It became clinically significant in psychology decades later as researchers began to document how some people weaponize trust, confusion, and denial to destabilize others. We cover gaslighting in personal relationships in-depth in an episode in season one, but to refresh your memory, gaslighting is a tactic of psychological abuse.
Leslie Poston:It relies on denying what is plainly true, reframing events to make the victim feel irrational or forgetful, and slowly eroding confidence in one's own thoughts, feelings, and experiences. The abuser creates what psychologists call reality distortion, a systematic undermining of the victim's ability to trust their own perceptions. Gaslighting involves covert control tactics such as persistent contradiction, emotional invalidation, and distortion of facts used to dominate rather than to communicate. It's not about telling a single lie. It's about making someone doubt their entire sense of reality over time.
Leslie Poston:The process is gradual and insidious. Victims often don't realize what's happening until their sense of self has been significantly damaged. But gaslighting doesn't only happen between individuals. Institutions do it too, especially when those institutions want to preserve power without accountability. What we're seeing now is that the same psychological mechanisms that work in interpersonal abuse translate remarkably well to organizational settings.
Leslie Poston:Recent research has validated what many workers have felt intuitively. Studies now show that workplace gaslighting is a measurable phenomenon with distinct patterns. Researchers have identified two core dimensions, trivialization where concerns are minimized or dismissed, and affliction where employees are made to feel their perceptions are fundamentally flawed. These aren't just different types of bad management. There are specific psychological manipulation tactics that follow predictable patterns.
Leslie Poston:What makes workplace gaslighting so terrible is that it often happens where power differentials exist. A supervisor might consistently undermine a subordinate's confidence, not through outright aggression, but through subtle erosion of their reality. The employee begins to question whether they're overreacting, whether they're remembering meetings correctly, whether they're just too sensitive. The research shows that people who engage in gaslighting behaviors often score high on narcissistic personality traits. Some gaslighters may not even be consciously aware of what they're doing.
Leslie Poston:They've learned that these tactics work to maintain their control and avoid accountability so they continue using them. This unconscious quality makes workplace gaslighting even more difficult to address because a small percentage of the perpetrators may genuinely believe they're being helpful or supportive while simultaneously undermining their employees' reality. Workplaces often use gaslighting in more subtle, systemic ways than an abusive partner might, But the psychological impact is strikingly similar. Consider how companies talk about mental health. They might roll out a wellness app or tell employees to prioritize self care while simultaneously demanding unpaid overtime, denying flexible schedules, or laying off half the team without warning.
Leslie Poston:We've seen companies post about Mental Health Awareness Month on LinkedIn while their employees are working seventy hour weeks to meet impossible deadlines. Or think about how diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives are announced with fanfare, complete with press releases and executive statements, only to be quietly dismantled later with leaders insisting that nothing has changed. This messaging creates a profound cognitive dissonance. Employees know what they're experiencing, but the official narrative tells them their experience isn't real. When you bring up the contradiction, you're told you're focusing on the negative or not seeing the big picture.
Leslie Poston:That's not just mixed messaging. It's institutional gaslighting. Take the example of return to office mandates. Many companies spent the first part of this ongoing pandemic praising remote work, celebrating productivity gains, and talking about how they learned that flexibility makes employees happier and more effective. Then almost overnight, that narrative shifted.
Leslie Poston:Suddenly, remote work has been described as harmful to collaboration, innovation, and company culture. Employees who question this reversal are told that they're not team players or don't understand the business's needs. The companies don't acknowledge that anything has changed. They simply act as if the previous two years of praise for remote work never happened. The health care sector provides some of the most stark examples.
Leslie Poston:Medical institutions promote wellness and healing while subjecting their own staff to conditions that directly undermine both. When nurses report dangerous patient to staff ratios, they're often told they need to be more adaptable or resilient. The systemic problem gets reframed as a personal failing. A recent study of nurses found that workplace gaslighting was directly linked to increased workaholism and decreased workplace agility. Essentially, gaslighting was making health care workers less effective at the very jobs they were being gaslit about.
Leslie Poston:This extends to how organizations handled discrimination complaints. Rather than investigating bias concerns, leadership often reframes the concern as negativity or a misunderstanding of company culture or a misunderstanding that someone must have had good intent even if the outcome was harmful. The institution avoids introspection by recasting the truth teller as disruptive. It's a classic gaslighting move. Make the person bringing up the problem into the problem.
Leslie Poston:The complaint gets buried under layers of HR processes and employee development plans designed to fix the complainant rather than address the underlying issue. Gaslighting in workplaces is about more than confusion. It's about control. Organizations often use gaslighting to avoid accountability, manage reputation, and reinforce existing hierarchies. It pairs particularly well with toxic positivity, the forced optimism that demands everyone smile through dysfunction and with vague corporate values like excellence, grit, and professionalism, which can be weaponized against anyone who questions authority.
Leslie Poston:The intersection of gaslighting and toxic positivity creates what we call a double bind for employees. They're told that expressing negative emotions is unprofessional, but they're also expected to be authentic and bring their whole selves to work. When they try to address legitimate concerns, they're accused of being negative. When they suppress their concerns to maintain positivity, they're told they're not being honest about problems. It's a no win situation that keeps employees constantly off balance and questioning their own judgment.
Leslie Poston:Recent research has shown how toxic positivity functions as a form of emotional suppression that creates physical stress. When people are forced to suppress negative emotions, their heart rates increase and their stress responses activate. Over time, this constant emotional labor takes a serious toll on both mental and physical health. What's cruel about workplace gaslighting is that it often targets the very people who are trying to improve the organization, the ones who care enough to speak up about the problems. This is especially visible in how companies handle internal criticism.
Leslie Poston:A worker raises concerns about bias in hiring practices, and instead of investigating, leadership reframes the concern as negativity. Suddenly, the critic is disruptive. The institution avoids introspection by recasting the truth teller as the problem. I've seen this pattern play out countless times. An employee notices a pattern of discrimination, reports it through proper channels, and then finds themselves labeled as difficult or not a cultural fit.
Leslie Poston:The gaslighting often escalates when the employee persists. They might be told they're misinterpreting situations, that they're looking for problems that aren't there, or that they're creating drama. Management might even suggest they need coaching or professional development to improve their interpersonal skills or emotional intelligence. The message is clear. The problem isn't the discrimination.
Leslie Poston:The problem is your reaction to it. The intersection of gaslighting and toxic positivity creates what we call emotional labor demands where workers are expected to manage not just their productivity but their entire emotional presentation to protect the organization's image. This is especially harmful for women and people from marginalized communities who already face pressure to appear agreeable and nonthreatening. Research shows that women in particular are often subject to workplace gaslighting when they express concerns or push back against unfair treatment, with their feelings being dismissed as emotional or irrational. The literature shows that people in marginalized groups are especially vulnerable to gaslighting because they're already dealing with societal messages that their experiences aren't valid.
Leslie Poston:When workplace gaslighting compounds this, it can create a devastating sense of isolation and self doubt. Over time, this has a serious psychological effect. Employees begin to doubt their instincts. They question whether they're overreacting and wonder if the stress they feel is a personal failure rather than a rational response to manipulation. Studies have documented the long term consequences of this kind of environment.
Leslie Poston:One by DeCruz and Aronja looked at emotional labor in call centers and found that workers experienced a kind of reality shock, an internal dissonance between what they were told about their jobs and what they actually experienced. Another by Hoff, Hoehl, and Carnero connected workplace bullying to increased turnover and psychological distress in health care environments. When people are consistently told that their reasonable reactions are irrational, it's no wonder they begin to burn out, check out, or break down. The psychological toll extends beyond individual employees. Research also shows that workplaces with high levels of gaslighting behaviors experienced decreased innovation, reduced psychological safety, and increased turnover.
Leslie Poston:Teams become less willing to surface problems or challenge ineffective processes when they know their concerns will be invalidated. One of the clearest examples of corporate gaslighting is in how companies handle layoffs. Let's say a company spends months assuring employees that their jobs are safe. Leaders hold town halls, send reassuring memos, and double down on promises. Then with no warning, entire teams are cut.
Leslie Poston:The messaging shifts instantly. We've made the difficult decision to restructure. This isn't about performance or we're so grateful for your contributions. These statements sound caring on the surface, but they are carefully crafted to avoid accountability. Employees are left reeling, confused not just by the loss of their job, but by the dissonance between what they were told and what happened.
Leslie Poston:That's textbook gaslighting. Organizations use language like realignment and streamlining to soften the blow, but what they're really doing is distancing leadership from the impact of their choices. The emotional harm is repackaged as strategic vision. Corporate storytelling is often used to rewrite unpleasant truths in ways that protect the organization's image even at the expense of its people's well-being. The language around layoffs has become increasingly sophisticated in its manipulation.
Leslie Poston:Companies talk about rightsizing, optimization, and transformation while people lose their livelihoods. They might frame layoffs as a tough but necessary decision while simultaneously posting record profits or giving executives massive bonuses. The cognitive dissonance is intentional. It's designed to make you question whether you have a right to be upset about losing your job. I've seen companies hold celebration events after layoffs, focusing on the exciting opportunities ahead for the remaining team.
Leslie Poston:They'll talk about how the organization is now leaner and more focused, as if firing people was actually a gift to everyone involved. Employees who express grief or anger about their colleagues' departures are told they're dwelling in the past or not embracing change. Exit interviews become exercises in gaslighting where departing employees are asked to frame their experience positively for the sake of closure and learning. Questions are designed to extract admissions that the layoff was necessary or even beneficial, such as what could you have done differently to contribute more value? How do you think this change will benefit the company going forward?
Leslie Poston:The subtext is clear. Your job loss is partly your fault, and you should be grateful for the learning experience. This manipulation extends to how companies communicate with remaining employees. Survivors are told that layoffs were based on performance even when everyone knows that they were based on salary cost, departmental politics, or shareholder value. This creates a climate of fear where people start to believe that their survival means they're more valuable when in reality, it might just mean they're cheaper or less willing to push back against unreasonable demands.
Leslie Poston:Companies often use nostalgia as a gaslighting tool during layoffs. They'll reference the good old days when a company was a family while simultaneously destroying that sense of security and community. Research on organizational nostalgia shows how leaders use idealized memories to manipulate employees into accepting present dysfunction. They'll say things like we need to get back to our entrepreneurial roots, as if firing half the workforce is somehow a return to company values rather than a response to poor leadership decisions. This is especially brutal in public sector work where people often enter the field to do good.
Leslie Poston:When mission driven institutions use the same manipulative tactics as profit hungry corporations, it hits harder. It feels like a betrayal, not just of a job, but of a purpose. Teachers are told budget cuts are opportunities to be creative. Social workers are told that increased caseloads will help them develop efficiency. The mission becomes a weapon against the people trying to fulfill it.
Leslie Poston:The psychological impact extends to survivors as well. Remaining employees often experience what we call survivor's guilt and a longing for how things used to be. Management exploits these feelings, suggesting that loyalty means accepting whatever conditions remain without complaint. So if gaslighting is so harmful, why do people stay? Part of the answer is learned helplessness, a concept introduced by psychologist Martin Seligman in the 70s.
Leslie Poston:When people are repeatedly exposed to situations where they have no control over the outcome, they begin to internalize that powerlessness. Even when escape or change becomes possible, they may not believe it's real. Gaslighting accelerates this process and wears down resistance. It creates a sense that speaking up won't help and that leaving might be worse. There's also the issue of identity fusion when people's sense of self becomes tied to their role or their employer.
Leslie Poston:If you believe that your job is part of who you are, then questioning the company feels like questioning yourself. That's especially true in fields like education, science, or health care where the work is often framed as a calling. The institution exploits this dedication by suggesting that truly committed professionals should be willing to endure any conditions for the sake of the mission. Recent research has shown us that employees in helping professions teachers, nurses, social workers are particularly vulnerable to workplace gaslighting because their professional identity is tied to service and sacrifice. When institutions exploit this dedication by framing unreasonable demands as part of the mission, it becomes harder for workers to separate their professional worth from their willingness to endure mistreatment.
Leslie Poston:I've talked to teachers who were told that requesting reevaluation of over fall 40 student class sizes meant they didn't really care about kids or nurses who were told that questioning mandatory overtime meant they weren't committed to patient care. The economic reality compounds this psychological manipulation. People stay because they need health insurance, because they're caretakers, because the job market is unstable, because leaving might mean starting over in a new field entirely. The institution knows this and uses it as leverage. They can push people further and further because they know most employees can't afford to just quit.
Leslie Poston:But this doesn't mean that people are fooled. It means they're stuck and often exhausted. The psychological literature on workplace trauma shows that people in gaslighting environments often develop a form of cognitive dissonance where they simultaneously know something is wrong and doubt their own perceptions. This internal conflict is exhausting and can lead to depression, anxiety, and even physical symptoms. One of the worst aspects of workplace gaslighting is how it affects people's careers long term.
Leslie Poston:When you've been repeatedly told that your perceptions are wrong, you start to doubt your professional judgment. You become less likely to trust your instincts about new opportunities, less confident in interviews, and less willing to advocate for yourself. The damage extends far beyond the toxic workplace. It follows you wherever you go. For many workers, especially those supporting families or dealing with visa restrictions, the power dynamic makes resistance feel impossible.
Leslie Poston:The institution holds not just their income but their entire future in their hands. This creates a form of economic coercion that makes gaslighting especially effective. When questioning your boss could mean losing your work visa or your family's health insurance, the psychological pressure to just accept their version of reality becomes overwhelming. The isolation factor is critical as well. Gaslighting works best when victims are cut off from reality checks.
Leslie Poston:In workplace settings, this might mean being excluded from certain meetings, having your concerns dismissed in front of colleagues, or being assigned to work alone. When you can't compare notes with others, it becomes much easier to doubt your own perceptions. And I should insert a side note to this conversation. If you are autistic, have ADHD, or ADHD, or other neurodivergence in the workplace, gaslighting is especially harmful to you, and you may have a strong sense of justice that inspires you to speak truth to power as part of your everyday reality or to ask clarifying questions, which can come across as challenges to a neurotypical. This makes workplace gaslighting so much worse, And it's one of the reasons why autistic people tend to be less employed and to get fired more often.
Leslie Poston:However, I thought that this deserved its own episode. So in a few weeks, come back, and I'm going to talk about that in-depth. So what do you do if you recognize this happening where you work? First, name it. When you identify gaslighting as a form of manipulation rather than a personal failing, you begin to take back your perception.
Leslie Poston:It's not about being too sensitive. It's about being lied to in a way designed to make you question yourself. Second, document. In environments where reality is constantly shifting, having a personal record of what was said and when and by who can be a powerful tool for clarity and validation. It also helps resist the narrative rewriting that gaslighting relies on.
Leslie Poston:Keep emails, take notes after meetings, record calls and meetings if it's legal in your state, and maintain a timeline of events. This isn't paranoia It's protection. And don't forget to keep those records off your work laptop as well. Third, find allies. Gaslighting thrives in isolation.
Leslie Poston:But when people talk to each other, sharing notes, comparing experiences, and resisting the culture of secrecy, it becomes harder for institutions to maintain the illusion. Employee resource groups, unions, and informal networks can provide reality checking and support. Fourth, practice self care that includes emotional validation. This means accepting that your negative feelings about toxic situations are appropriate and healthy. It means resisting the pressure to stay positive when positivity is being used to silence legitimate concerns.
Leslie Poston:Sometimes the most radical thing you can do at work is trust your own perception. And fifth, if you're in a position of leadership, recognize the long term damage that gaslighting does. Psychological safety is a foundational part of trust and innovation. You can't have a healthy workplace if people are afraid to name what's real. If you're committed to ethical leadership, stop asking employees to interpret mixed messages.
Leslie Poston:Say what you mean. Be honest about hard decisions. And most importantly, invite feedback without retaliation. Control is not the same as competence. People don't need you to be perfect.
Leslie Poston:They need you to be real. Create structures that support honest communication. Regular check ins, anonymous feedback systems, and clear escalation processes can help prevent gaslighting behaviors from taking root. When employees know their concerns will be heard and addressed, they're less likely to internalize doubt about their perceptions. And remember from a previous episode, this has a positive effect on your bottom line.
Leslie Poston:Addressing workplace gaslighting isn't just about individual well-being. It's about organizational effectiveness. Teams that feel safe to surface problems and challenge assumptions are more innovative, more resilient, and more successful over time. Gaslighting isn't just something that happens in abusive relationships or on reality TV. It's happening in the boardroom, HR meetings, and in performance reviews and public statements.
Leslie Poston:And increasingly, it's happening in the institutions we were told to trust: schools, hospitals, labs, the halls of government. But recognizing this is the first step towards breaking its spell. When we understand that confusion, self doubt, and emotional invalidation can be tools of institutional control, we can begin to resist them. When we document our experiences and connect with others, we create accountability that gaslighting depends on avoiding. The research is clear: Workplaces that engage in gaslighting behaviors ultimately harm themselves.
Leslie Poston:They lose talent, reduce innovation, and create cultures of fear that stifle the very creativity and engagement they claim to value. This hurts their bottom line. The short term control that gaslighting provides comes at the cost of their long term sustainability. Thanks for listening to PsyberSpace. I'm your host, Leslie Poston, signing off and reminding you to stay curious and don't let anyone rewrite your reality.
Leslie Poston:Don't forget to subscribe so you never miss an episode, and share it with a friend in case you think they'd enjoy it as well.
Creators and Guests
