Have you ever been derailed by a shame attack?

Shame can sweep through, telling us we are not worthy, acceptable, or enough. It can be amplified by comparisonitis, where we judge our messy insides with our perception of other peoples’ shiny exteriors.

Val Nelson, a career and business coach, specialises in working with highly sensitive and introverted individuals. She wrote this article about dealing with comparisonitis and shame attacks, which I was excited to dive into with her.

Many people have felt like black swans in a world that often fails to provide the right conditions for HSPs to thrive. While shame is not exclusive to quiet and gentle souls, it can be particularly challenging for those who have learned to view their natural needs and preferences as a problem to hide, dismiss, or overcome.

So I invited Val onto The Gentle Rebel Podcast to explore how shame can cause us to shrink back and hide from their dreams, ambitions, and needs. I wanted to explore the words “comparisonitis” and “comparonoia,” which can leave us feeling isolated and alone as we look at the world around us and tell ourselves unsupportive stories.

Connect with Val on Linkedin

Val’s website

Lizzie Campbell is a polymer clay artist who creates under the name Clay Disarray, and wow, she’s phenomenal! Her intricate modelling brings characters and cultural figures to life, and it is mesmerising to see.

I discovered Lizzie through a YouTube video in which she delved into the challenges artists face today. Her unique perspective as a highly sensitive and autistic artist sheds light on the struggles many artists are currently grappling with, such as the impact of COVID-19, the cost-of-living crisis, artificial intelligence, social media algorithms, and Brexit.

Inspired by her gentle tone and wisdom, I invited Lizzie to the Gentle Rebel Podcast to delve deeper into these issues and learn more about her journey with art, creativity, and neurodivergence.

As a highly sensitive multipotentialite, Yvonne Kjorlien has many creative interests, passions, and pursuits. She studies scattered and scavenged remains to help increase the recovery rate of human remains in outdoor contexts, enabling law enforcement personnel to close forensic cases and provide closure for families. She is also an author, blogger (The Reluctant Archeologist) and writing coach for those bringing new work into the world.

I was inspired by the multifaceted nature of Yvonne’s personal and professional interests and invited her to join me to explore them in this episode of The Gentle Rebel Podcast.

This one is for you if you naturally gravitate towards various pursuits and what others might describe as diversions. It can be liberating to hear from people who have connected unexpected dots and forged new pathways based on what brings them to life rather than what socialised stories tell them to do. I hope this conversation will bring you peace, encouragement, and inspiration.

In this episode of The Gentle Rebel Podcast, I speak with Margarit Davtian who is a consumer rights activist, social scientist, and “cult slayer”. She exposes deceptive marketing practices, cult psychology, and New-Age conspirituality trends in the coaching industry.

Margarit, one of the founders of Ethics For Coaching, helps individuals seeking support in life coaching, business consulting, and self-help industries—the project shields against grifters and scammers who exploit vulnerable positions with undeliverable promises and unethical practices.

Ethics for Coaching’s mission is to educate, support, mediate, and raise awareness, giving consumers the power to make more informed choices. They aim to be a reassuring presence in an industry that can sometimes be hyped up, confusing, and misleading.

As you will know if you’ve been listening for a while, this is an area I am increasingly passionate about. I have seen bad actors take advantage of the trust and hope of good people, who have been convinced to spend ridiculous amounts of money on “high ticket offers” that promise the world and deliver disappointment.

I believe that coaching is a fantastic tool that can help us unpick challenges and find clearer ways forward in a desirable direction. So it’s frustrating to see so many horror stories of its manipulative misuse by bad actors.

I hope this conversation contributes in some small way to highlighting signs of a multilevel marketing scams and coaching cults so we can all distinguish between good and bad practices and make more informed decisions about what we are looking for and what a particular person is offering.

Margarit and I delve into the Four Pillars of Ethical Coaching. These are beneficial not only for coaches but also for clients, who should understand what to expect from the coaches they work with.

They are looking for coaches who are passionate about this stuff to continue the work they’ve started.

Find Margarit on Instagram and YouTube

Conscious Revolution Podcast | Substack

In this episode of The Gentle Rebel Podcast, I talk about some things that came out of our conversation in The Haven around the prompt, “I can’t wait”.

What do you struggle to wait for?

This phrase contains potential for some playful excavation. You’ve probably uttered these words. I have, many times!

Sometimes, we have to wait for possibilities, situations, and people to arrive, change, or evolve. Waiting can be painful, exciting, or boring.

Resistance to waiting uses a lot of energy. One of my favourite places to observe this is in liminal spaces such as airports, lobbies, and queues (lines).

An individual with potent, impatient energy can infect a whole crowd. Our nervous system can sense this coiled-spring-energy around us. It might seek to establish safety and connection through co-regulation or ignite into dysregulation, sensing strong fight/flight readiness in the environment.

I wonder what comes to mind for you when you think about the phrase:

The saying goes that “a stitch in time saves nine”. So, if you notice an issue, you can fix it now rather than wait for it to unravel.

But it’s also true that an impatient stitch today can create chaos down the line, and the right thing to do is pause, assess options, and wait for a better fix. We throw time, money, and energy into things to avoid waiting. We might replace being useful (informed decision-making) with feeling useful (just doing something). When we do this, we can incur more expenses and amplify the problems in the long run.

How much present pain is caused by the fact we couldn’t wait and so rushed into a decision?

Highly sensitive people will often pause to check before taking action. This checking reflects the depth of processing and takes place mainly beyond conscious awareness in the nervous system. It can sometimes mean that others must wait for HSPs to get on board, get started, and decide.

Sometimes, this pause is frustrating because it can happen with decisions about inconsequential things that are safe and enjoyable. But there are many situations where sensitivity can either reinforce and solidify a particular course of action (reasons why it makes sense) or zoom out and consider logical byproducts of taking the proposed path (reasons why we will regret this down the line). Through its deeper processing, sensory sensitivity provides vital checks and balances to the quick-to-act instincts of others. Both are necessary elements for successful collective survival and flourishing. However, sensitive voices often get lost in the noise, especially when they are not valued and encouraged by the broader culture.

There are many angles from which we can look at these words.

Are you a Haven member? Login to access this content. Not yet a member? Register here.

Over the past few years, there have been a bunch of developments in sensitivity research.

In this episode of The Gentle Rebel Podcast, I share some reflections on the Second International Conference on Sensitivity Research. Michael Pluess, Francesca Lionetti, and Corina Greven oprganised it through The University of Surrey.

In all honesty, academic presentations aren’t really my cup of tea. My mind drifts too easily. But I munched on bananas and persevered because I really think this stuff matters. So I hope this episode helps others who are interested in the essence of sensory processing sensitivity research right now.

Grab a banana, strap in, and explore some of the latest high sensitivity research with me!

When the train arrived at 1:26 p.m., I knew it would be tight to make the 2 p.m. start. On top of that, the heavens were saturating the world below with rain. All in all, the thirty-minute walk home could have been more appealing. I decided, instead, to hunker down in a café around the corner, and from there, I would watch the International Conference on Sensitivity Research. The event was organised by Michael Pluess, Francesca Lionetti, and Corina Greven through the University of Surrey on Wednesday 22nd May 2024.

Academic presentations aren’t easy for me to follow at the best of times. It takes me many bananas to stay focused, and even then, my brain wanders and falters. Add a busy coffee shop, indulging my love of people-watching, and let’s say I am glad they recorded the conference!

Douglas Adams said, “If you really want to understand something, the best way is to try and explain it to someone else.”

Well, I do want to understand this stuff, so I’m embarking on what currently feels like an impossible challenge… I will attempt weaving together what I understood of the research and explain it to the best of my ability. Please note that I do this in a spirit of humility. I invite you to clarify, contradict, and correct any misunderstandings.

Before I get into the conference content, I want to share these three words.

“No cut-offs” was the collective agreement among the panel at the end of the conference.

Despite my initial assumption, it wasn’t fashion advice. They weren’t attempting to disuade attendees from repurposing old jeans by chopping them into denim shorts for the summer.

Instead, “no cut-offs” referred to how we measure and talk about high sensitivity in individuals. Because sensitivity is complex and on a continuum, it is difficult to definitively measure and label a tipping point when someone becomes a Highly Sensitive Person (HSP). So when I refer to HSPs in this post, it’s a description of those who score higher on the sensitivity scales.

During the conference, we heard from researchers who have built on the existing foundations to better understand the nature, purpose, and characteristics of sensitivity. The studies examine Sensory Processing Sensitivity (SPS) in different contexts and under various environmental and cultural conditions. They also show new scales for observing, measuring, and assessing factors associated with sensory processing sensitivity.

I am personally interested in how the research can help us design, create, and maintain favourable spaces and routines for more sensitive people. And how we can support those working with HSPs with a better practical understanding of the associated traits. I also want to explore how we might nurture and amplify the voice of high sensitivity as part of our collective survival strategy.

As it turned out, I could have made it home and still had time to put the kettle on before the conference. It started in beautiful chaos. Oh, don’t you just love technology! We joined the Teams meeting and watched as Art Aron tried unsuccessfully to get the sound working on his end. I’m sure everyone in the group felt an empathetic surge of mildly flustered panic.

Michael Pluess remained cool (on the outside, at least) and calmly invited the crowd of 200+ attendees to relocate to Zoom. He kept a wonderfully peaceful presence even though he must have tasted a little stress beneath the surface. He’s one of those people that naturally gives you the feeling that you’re in safe hands.

Once the technology agreed to play ball, Art and Elaine Aron began the conference by highlighting some of their collaborators from the past three decades, notably a sensitive Pumpkin-Seed Sunfish. Surprising!

They picked out some favourite sensitivity research through the years, including one showing how highly sensitive people are naturally less affected by cultural biases in their perception of stimuli. Whether a person’s culture values the individual or the collective more highly impacts HOW individuals process and perceive data. It turns out that because of the deeper processing, HSPs can perceive ideas, people, and situations more objectively than less sensitive individuals.

Elaine celebrated that, while for better or worse, environmental conditions have a greater influence on a sensitive nervous system, a highly sensitive person’s perception is less naturally swayed by the values and beliefs in the culture around them.

This area interests me because it speaks to the value of high sensitivity in the collective context. Might it also mean that HSPs are less likely to get swept up in group-think and more likely to quietly question mob-minded assumptions? What could the upshot of that be for the voice of sensitivity more broadly? I’d be interested in learning about any research that follows this thread to see if there is a link.

The Arons trotted through a few research headlines to give us a flavour of recent work. HSPs have been found to demonstrate higher emotional responsiveness to positive and negative images and can perceive emotions in other people more easily. Highly sensitive people are equally likely to be sensation seekers as the general population. And they’ve noticed a link between sensitivity to medications and the trait of SPS.

Elaine also discussed a study currently under review exploring the reasons for continued confusion surrounding the trait of high sensitivity. This is noteworthy because it will provide an opportunity to reevaluate and revise many of the assumptions that have become ingrained in popular discussions over the years.

One of the reasons the trait sometimes receives criticism is the abundance of information disseminated through online popular culture, which often portrays an incomplete or even incorrect picture of what we know to be true. However, she also notes a palpable shift towards accepting and understanding the evidence, firmly establishing high sensitivity as a natural trait and not just a subject for popular self-help books.

Other potential reasons for confusion include misconceptions about extroverted and high sensation-seeking behaviour, both of which remain common for HSPs. Additionally, most typical HSPs are less visible because they go about their lives without realising they are highly sensitive. Furthermore, while half of HSPs are men, they tend to be less visible, whether by choice or a lack of awareness.

There are also inherent difficulties in observing the depth of processing, which is at the trait’s core. For example, it’s hard to spot people (and ourselves) pausing to notice before acting. The original HSP Scale misses essential aspects and underestimates the importance of depth of processing. HSPs also differ widely because of differential susceptibility (positive and negative environmental effects on sensitive individuals), sprinkling confusion on our expectations for how a highly sensitive person ought to sound, look, and act.

Jenni Kähkönen from Queen Mary University of London started the research presentations with her study into highly sensitive children. This centred on teacher-reported sensitivity collected through a newly developed Highly Sensitive Child in School Scale.

These were consistent factors across Swiss and UK children and were identified equally in girls and boys.

They found a link between the Overstimulation and Core Sensitivity scales in the UK but not Switzerland.

If a school environment is very good, the child might not display overstimulated behaviours. This may indicate that the environment is inherently calming to the child. Or it might mean the child waits to feel safe before displaying behaviours linked to overstimulation, i.e., once they get home at the end of the day.

Several other differences existed between the two schools. In the Swiss study, the teacher-reported sensitivity predicted higher social competence and grades. This was not the case in the UK, where there was no correlation between sensitivity and higher social competence or grades.

There was a link to predicting signs of worry for sensitive children in the UK, unlike in Switzerland, where no such internalising symptoms were identified.

Higher sensitivity predicted lower externalising symptoms (attention issues, hyperactivity, and conduct problems) in both countries.

The research supports the notion that more sensitive children can benefit from calmer working environments and quiet time to recharge after exciting activities. Teachers should be mindful that social or time-pressured tasks may impact more sensitive children. But sensitive children can succeed when conditions are favourable. It is worth considering the impact of class size and classroom design in enabling more sensitive children to thrive.

Veronique de Gucht, from Leiden University explored whether high sensitivity might be considered a blessing or a challenge. She shared findings from studies into sensitivity, giftedness, and resilience.

Veronique introduced the new Sensory Processing Sensitivity Questionnaire (SPSQ), an updated tool for understanding and measuring sensitive traits. The questionnaire covers six sensitivity categories and offers a more nuanced and comprehensive approach to sensitivity research.

The study found those who score more highly for the two scales on the negative dimension, are more likely to experience physical or psychological symptoms like fatigue, physical complaints, depression, and anxiety.

There was a much lower link between those same symptoms and higher scores on the positive dimension.

Using the two dimensions of sensitivity feels like a helpful step forward. It should allow us to see the impact of different sensitivity scales across various contexts.

Veronique shared a study examining the link between giftedness and SPS. It found that gifted individuals scored lower on the Negative Dimension Scales than the general population. There was no real difference on the Positive Dimension.  There is nothing in these findings to suggest sensory processing sensitivity makes an individual more likely to be gifted or that gifted people are more likely to have the SPS trait.

A follow-up study explored whether resilience reduces the adverse effects of heightened sensitivity. It found that higher scores for the negative aspects of sensitivity correlate with lower resilience and higher symptoms. Whereas, higher scores for the positive dimension scales correlate with greater resilience and lower symptoms.

This suggests that resilience has the potential to alleviate the negative impact of SPS on an individual. This is crucial for practitioners to consider when working with sensitive people.

Interventions (therapy, coaching, training etc), can help HSPs cope with the negative aspects of sensitivity (sensory discomfort and emotional and physiological reactivity). But support can also enhance the positive aspects of sensitivity. This can help the individual align with their environment and thrive on their own terms.

Dr. Elham Assary from King’s College London gave the third presentation. Her research delved into how high sensitivity relates to mental well-being. She then explored whether genetic or environmental factors correlate with greater depression, anxiety, and autistic traits in Highly Sensitive People.

The study measured subjective well-being using questionnaires and self-reports to create a comprehensive picture of personal well-being. It found that more highly sensitive individuals reported feeling less hopeful, less optimistic, and less happy (subjective well-being). There no significant difference in curiosity, gratitude, ambition, and grit (psychological well-being).

This suggests that while HSPs may experience psychological well-being, they might still FEEL dissatisfied or unhappy with their life.

The results highlighted a curious link between high aesthetic sensitivity and increased psychological well-being. Aesthetic sensitivity refers to the ability to perceive and appreciate beauty through the senses, such as being deeply moved by art, music, nature, flavours, and scents.

We might connect the dots with the previous research and question whether our relationship with art and beauty can help build resilience and mitigate the adverse effects of sensitivity. It would be fascinating to explore if and how we might be able to deepen our aesthetic sensitivity to increase psychological well-being.

The twin study also revealed that sensitivity and mental health outcomes are primarily influenced by shared genetic factors rather than environmental ones. This means that the same genetic traits leading to high sensitivity also predispose individuals to depression, anxiety, and autistic traits. However, despite a correlation, nothing indicates a causal relationship.

Dr. Assary suggested that a better understanding of the genetic basis of sensitivity could help identify predispositions to anxiety, depression, and autistic traits, enabling more targeted interventions. We might also consider what underpins our subjective judgement of well-being (feeling less happy, satisfied, hopeful, etc) and whether that is a story that we can shift in time.

I think there was then a short break in the presentations at this point. But it must have been brief because the next session had already begun when I returned from the toilet ordering more bananas.

We then had three five-minute flash talks. The first was delivered by Dr Sofie Weyn, who looked at HSP overstimulation and how it fluctuates during the day and across different contexts.

The diary study got participants to gauge and record levels of overstimulation, environment, moods, fatigue, and pleasantness of stimuli in the environment (sounds, sights, smells, tastes, touches) throughout the day.

Sofie found that overstimulation fluctuated throughout the day for everyone regardless of sensitivity, with the highest levels between 5 and 6 p.m. Overstimulation decreased later in the evening. There was an increase across the board in public spaces, especially when other people, negative moods, and fatigue were reported. Overstimulation also increased with reports of unpleasant sounds, lights, smells, tastes, and touches.

Overstimulation was significantly higher for highly sensitive individuals when their fatigue level rose. However, overstimulation decreased when they reported higher levels of pleasant sounds, visual stimuli, and positive moods. This shift was much more prevalent for more sensitive than less sensitive individuals, consistent with the theory that HSPs are more significantly impacted by positive and negative environmental stimuli.

These findings reinforce the need for awareness of variations in overstimulation and to work WITH those fluctuations rather than fighting against them. Focusing on rest and sleep quality can mitigate fatigue, increasing pleasant auditory and visual stimuli through music and ambient lighting in environments we can control and noise-cancelling headphones, dampened lighting, or tinted glasses in conditions we can’t change.

Robert Marhenke from the University of Innsbruck gave the second flash talk about Attentional Capture and Sensitivity. He introduced the concept of selective attention, which has been assumed to be lower in highly sensitive people. Why? Because, as we know, highly sensitive people process information more deeply, are more aware of subtle stimuli, are more easily overwhelmed and distracted by extraneous stimuli, and have a lower ability to filter out irrelevant information.

He explored this through two theories of attentional capture: the Bottom-Up Theory, where our attention is drawn to a stimulus based on its properties (e.g., bright colours or distinctive characteristics), and the Top-Down Theory, where our attention is directed by preconceived intentions, goals, or knowledge (e.g., something we know we want to find).

The study found that individuals high in SPS were not more easily distracted by striking elements in the Bottom-Up experiment. Results from the Top-Down experiment found that highly sensitive individuals were less biased by their own intentions and goals, so they were, in fact, better at ignoring distractions, even if they were similar to what they were looking for.

It might be surprising that HSPs are not more easily distracted by environmental stimuli. However, this aligns with the study Elaine and Art Aron highlighted, showing that cultural influences on perception impact sensitive individuals. So, even though HSPs are more affected by their environment, this doesn’t inhibit their ability to process and perceive it with a greater sense of objective discernment. Interesting!

Sophia Bibb then delivered her inaugural research talk as a first-year PhD student at Ohio State University. She shared her research into the Effects of Sensitivity and Childhood Family Conflict on Objective Stress Responding. Despite mixed results in recent studies, this was based on the previous assumption that stress affects highly sensitive people more than less sensitive individuals.

Sophia looked at the effect of different stress types on sensitive individuals. Predictable threats elicit a fear response (a time-locked reaction to a tangible stressor), and unpredictable threats cause anxiety (an anticipatory state of chronic arousal).

The research examined the relationship between SPS, childhood family conflict, and objective stress response. It found a correlation between high family conflict in childhood and increased reactivity to unpredictable threats later in life. However, it showed no relationship between SPS and reactivity to unpredictable threats for those who didn’t experience family conflict growing up. This suggests that SPS alone doesn’t equate to greater anxiety. Interestingly, individuals low in SPS who experienced family conflict showed lower reactivity to unpredictable threats than those who hadn’t.

Sophia concluded from this research that HSPs are not inherently more biologically reactive to stress. Also, HSPs may experience greater sensitisation to childhood stress, particularly to sustained, unpredictable stressors. This is consistent with the Diathesis-Stress Component, which indicates that greater reactivity in a sensitive individual is contingent on early sensitisation events like high family conflict. Understanding the interaction between SPS and biological stress reactivity can inform approaches to psychopathology and interventions for HSPs.

The three-hour conference concluded with a panel discussion about measuring sensitivity. I’ll admit, by this point in the live event, my brain was frazzled, and I couldn’t process anything. I was beyond the banana, so I was grateful to have a recording to go back and watch later.

The panel explored the strengths and limitations of how sensitivity is currently observed, measured, and applied in research and practice.

Elaine Aron reiterated the centrality of depth of processing to high sensitivity and how challenging it can be to observe and measure. Veronique de Gucht pointed out that very few people would choose to answer a question in a way that sounds like they have no depth. In such a case, respondents are likelier to answer questions based on what is socially desirable rather than true.

Elaine laments the negative flavour of the original HSP Scale, which was developed through exploratory processes rather than being built on the foundations of an initial theory with well-established definitions. If she could go back and start again with the initial scale, she would emphasise the depth of processing more and focus less on overstimulation. But I would love her to cut herself some slack because she seemed pretty hard on herself about the whole thing. They did what they could with what they had at the time, and sensory processing sensitivity was a completely new, unexplored field to uncover and discover. This is how these things start and evolve. Imperfectly and in ways we later regret with the benefit of hindsight!

The six new scales provide a richer and more detailed understanding of different elements of sensitivity. They are emotional and physiological reactivity, sensory sensitivity, sensory comfort, sensory discomfort, social-affective sensitivity, and aesthetic sensitivity. These scales provide greater potential flexibility to future research and are already being integrated into collaborations with other fields of study unrelated to high sensitivity.

The panel also discussed the need for specialised training to understand the functional diagnosis of sensory processing sensitivity. In other words, we need to move away from what I heard described as “differential diagnosis,” which I believe means categorising high sensitivity as dysfunction (comparable to normative functioning) rather than a core biological function of an individual. This requires knowledge and acceptance of the core sensitivity traits in humans.

OK, I think we are there. So, let’s finish where we started and return to those three words, “no cut-offs” (I’m still not talking about denim shorts). While many individuals, as well as teachers and parents, might seek definitive answers (is this child HSP or not?), it’s not possible or even desirable to treat sensitivity in this way. Environmental factors complicate it, and careful consideration is needed regarding the potential harm an individual might face if the HSP label is labelled and used about them.

I felt heartened by this conference, especially after watching it back (several times) and starting to grasp what was being communicated. I hope we might see an increasing flow of discoveries related to sensory processing sensitivity across disciplines, fields, and backgrounds.

There are many elements I would love to explore, so I look forward to finding out where the research goes next. I still get most excited when highly sensitive people see themselves reflected in descriptions of the trait so they can begin the journey of growth in self-understanding, acceptance, and awareness and explore who they’ve always been in light of their sensitivity, not in opposition to it.