Why Some Interactions Leave You Doubting Yourself

Many people might experience distress not because of a single dramatic event, but because of something quieter and more difficult to name: a growing uncertainty about themselves.

Everyday interactions — at work, in families, or in professional settings — that appear civil, even supportive, yet leave individuals unsettled. Conversations are replayed, tone is analysed, and meaning is searched for. People begin to wonder whether they were too sensitive, too direct, or insufficiently clear. Nothing overtly harmful seems to have occurred, yet something does not sit easily. What often brings people is not distress alone, but persistent self-doubt.

Relational ambiguity and psychological disorientation

Psychological research increasingly recognises that not all relational harm occurs through overt conflict or abuse. Some forms operate through relational ambiguity: patterns of communication that are indirect, inconsistent, or difficult to interpret, particularly in contexts involving unequal power (Maitlis & Christianson, 2014).

In such interactions:

• concern may be expressed in ways that feel subtly corrective

• feedback is framed vaguely, yet experienced as personally consequential

• politeness is maintained, while meaning remains unclear

Rather than disagreement, the outcome is often disorientation. People leave unsure not only of what was communicated, but of their own interpretation of the exchange.

Over time, repeated exposure to such ambiguity can undermine epistemic trust — the confidence individuals have in their own perceptions and interpretations of social reality (Fonagy & Allison, 2014; Fonagy et al., 2017).

Sensitivity versus perceptiveness

Self-doubt in these contexts is often attributed to being “too sensitive.” However, research suggests that individuals who experience this form of doubt are frequently those who are more socially attuned: attentive to nuance, context, and relational shifts.

What is labelled sensitivity is often better understood as perceptiveness or relational attunement — capacities that are generally adaptive, particularly in complex social environments (Petrides et al., 2016). Difficulties arise when these capacities operate in contexts where:

• communication lacks psychological safety

• expectations remain implicit

• clarity is discouraged or subtly penalised

In such settings, uncertainty is internalised rather than addressed relationally.

Exported discomfort and the distribution of unease

Some interpersonal dynamics involve what can be understood as exported discomfort. Rather than containing uncertainty, insecurity, or disagreement internally, individuals may manage these states by displacing them into the interaction itself — through indirect comments, mixed messages, or subtle destabilisation.

Contemporary models of interpersonal emotion regulation highlight how unprocessed affect can be managed relationally rather than intrapsychically, often without conscious intent (Luyten et al., 2020). The effect is asymmetrical: one person leaves the interaction carrying confusion or self-doubt, while the other experiences relief or restored equilibrium.

Importantly, this process does not require ill will. Yet its psychological impact can be significant.

Why these interactions linger

Interactions characterised by ambiguity tend to persist psychologically because they resist closure. There is no clear rupture, no explicit transgression, and therefore no obvious response.

Instead, people report lingering effects:

• rumination and replay

• diminished confidence

• an impulse to explain or justify themselves

• a sense of being subtly “out of position”

When meaning cannot be clearly located in the interaction, individuals often locate the problem within themselves. Over time, this can contribute to a gradual erosion of self-trust and increased self-monitoring, particularly in institutional or relational contexts where power is uneven.

Self-doubt as relational information

Rather than viewing self-doubt as a personal deficit, it may be more accurate to understand it as relational information.

Repeated self-doubt following specific encounters may signal:

• inconsistent communication

• implicit power asymmetries

• environments that privilege compliance over coherence

• contexts in which clarity is experienced as threatening

Seen this way, self-doubt does not necessarily indicate a lack of confidence or resilience, but a difficulty in locating meaning within the relational field.

A note on self-trust

Restoring self-trust does not always involve becoming more assertive or certain. In many cases, it begins with taking one’s own unease seriously, without immediately trying to resolve or neutralise it.

You do not need to determine intent. You do not need to reach a definitive interpretation.

It may be sufficient to acknowledge: this interaction left me less sure of myself. From a psychological standpoint, that recognition is not a conclusion — but it is a form of orientation.