Key Takeaways

  • Thought suppression backfires. Alison Ledgerwood explains that trying to crush anxious thoughts triggers the classic white bear effect, making negative emotions stickier.
  • Negativity bias treats historical memory as current truth. The human brain routinely blends a minor current challenge with bad experiences from last year or five years ago.
  • Assuming an event will go badly throws the body into a physiological deer-in-headlights alert, treating an uncertain future as a guaranteed disaster.
  • Replacing the word "will" with "might" restores possibility. If something might go wrong, it might also go right, disarming the biological threat response.
  • Ledgerwood packages this cognitive habit as The 'Might Be vs. Will Be' Cognitive Reframing Method.

The 'Might Be vs. Will Be' Cognitive Reframing Method

Step 1: Inquire Into Reality vs. Learned Expectation

Take a beat and ask: 'Am I responding to what's actually happening right now, or am I responding to what my brain has learned to expect?' Separate the immediate factual circumstance from historical emotional baggage (e.g., negative events from last year or years ago) that may be compounding your reaction.

Step 2: Shift from 'Will Be' to 'Might Be'

Reframe the catastrophic assumption 'this will go badly' into 'this might go badly.' Recognize that acknowledging something 'might' go badly inherently means that it might also go well, which disarms the body's 'full system alert' and creates space to become curious instead of certain.

Step 3: Plan Preparation and Restorative Support

Assess whether practical preparation is warranted (e.g., planning key speaking points), and proactively schedule restorative care immediately following the event (e.g., blocking an hour to call a supportive friend or decompress).

When This Works (and When It Doesn't)

This method applies when you face high-stakes board updates, tense co-founder reviews, or difficult customer calls where past scars convince your nervous system that catastrophe is coming. Evolutionary wiring treats ambiguous situations as confirmed threats. As Ledgerwood explains, our brains are trying to protect us by drawing on past data: “negativity bias is often based in something real... our brains really have learned from past experiences, and so that's information.”

It fails when you face verifiable operational emergencies that require immediate tactical execution rather than mindset adjustments. If your server cluster crashes at midnight or cash reserves run dry on Friday, swapping "will" for "might" is wishful thinking. Do not reframe an active, burning crisis into an open question. Reserve this tool strictly for anticipation, interpersonal dread, and performance anxiety where the outcome remains genuinely unwritten.

What to Do With This

Apply this tomorrow morning before pitching a skeptical investor who grilled your peer last week. Your brain is likely spiraling, insisting that the partner will tear your financial assumptions apart.

Run Ledgerwood's three steps before opening the slide deck:

First, isolate the calendar invite from your past baggage. Ask yourself whether this investor is attacking you right now, or if your nervous system is reacting to the angel backer who dismissed you six months ago. Strip out the old baggage.

Second, catch your inner monologue predicting ruin. Change "this pitch will be a disaster" to "this pitch might go badly." Watch your physical tension release. If it might go badly, it might also go well. You replace the tiger-in-the-room panic with genuine curiosity.

Third, prepare and schedule relief. Spend 20 minutes drafting crisp answers for your three shakiest metrics. Then, put a hard 45-minute block on your calendar immediately after the meeting to take a walk without your phone. Treat that recovery window as non-negotiable.