Harmful Healing: Iatrogenic Fragility in Psychological Safety Interventions
Discuss this preprint
Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?Listed in
This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.Abstract
Trigger warnings, content warnings, and related psychological safety interventions have proliferated across educational, digital, and clinicalenvironments with the explicit goal of protecting vulnerable individuals from emotional harm. Meta-analytic evidence demonstrates theseinterventions fail to reduce distress upon content exposure while reliably increasing anticipatory anxiety beforehand. This paper proposesthat safety interventions are not merely ineffective but potentially iatrogenic, causing the psychological fragility they claim to prevent.I introduce “iatrogenic fragility” as a theoretical framework explaining how well-intentioned protective measures may construct vulnera-bility through three interacting mechanisms. First, nocebo priming: warnings function as verbal suggestions of negative outcomes, activatinganticipatory anxiety through neurobiological pathways documented in clinical nocebo research. Second, institutionalized avoidance: warn-ings legitimize safety-seeking behaviors that prevent the inhibitory learning necessary for resilience, functioning as institutional-scale safetysignals that maintain rather than extinguish anxiety. Third, identity consolidation: warnings reinforce trauma-centered identity by implic-itly communicating that recipients require protection, increasing the centrality of past adversity to self-concept in ways that are directlycountertherapeutic for trauma recovery.These mechanisms interact to produce a self-reinforcing cycle: safety interventions increase fragility, which generates demand for ex-panded protections, which further increases fragility. The framework synthesizes findings from clinical psychology, health psychology, andsocial cognition that have not previously been integrated. By identifying the causal pathways through which protective intentions produceharmful outcomes, the iatrogenic fragility framework generates testable predictions and suggests that resilience-focused alternatives maybetter serve the populations these interventions were designed to help.