What Other Explanations Are There?

Part 15 in the Understanding Your Child's Emotions series

A child comes home upset because a friend didn't sit next to them at lunch. By the time they walk through the door, the explanation seems obvious: "They don't like me anymore."

Another child isn't invited to a birthday party. The conclusion arrives quickly: "Nobody likes me."

When something happens, our brains naturally try to explain it. Psychologists call these explanations attributions, and the study of how people explain events is known as Attribution Theory (Weiner, 1985).

The problem is that the first explanation we reach is not always the only explanation available. One of the most valuable emotional skills children can develop is the ability to ask: "What other explanations might there be?"

The Brain Loves Quick Answers

Human beings are natural meaning-makers. We constantly search for explanations, even when we have very little information to work with. This tendency is often helpful, and helps us to learn. The downside is that the brain's first explanation is sometimes incomplete, inaccurate or heavily influenced by emotion.

Psychologist Richard Lazarus argued that emotions are strongly influenced by how situations are interpreted, a process known as appraisal (Lazarus, 1991). Two children can experience the same situation and reach very different conclusions because they interpret the situation differently. The event may be identical. The meaning attached to it may not be.

The Story We Tell Ourselves

Imagine two children receiving exactly the same result in a spelling test. One thinks: "I need more practice." The other thinks: "I'm stupid." The event is identical. The interpretation is different.

And those interpretations are likely to produce very different emotional experiences.

Psychologists have long recognised that beliefs and interpretations play an important role in shaping emotional reactions (Ellis, 1962; Lazarus, 1991). This does not mean emotions are simply thoughts. It means the stories we tell ourselves matter.

Not All Explanations Point in the Same Direction

One of the most useful ideas from Attribution Theory is that people explain events in different ways. Imagine two children who perform poorly in a test. One says: "I'm just not clever enough." The other says: "I didn't revise properly." Both children experienced the same outcome. But the explanations are very different.

Psychologists often distinguish between internal and external attributions.

Internal Attributions: "It's something about me." Examples include: "I'm stupid." "I'm bad at this."

"Nobody likes me because of who I am."

External Attributions: "Something outside me contributed." Examples include: "I didn't get enough practice." "The instructions weren't clear." "We didn't have enough time."

Neither explanation is automatically correct. However, research suggests that children who consistently view setbacks as permanent personal flaws can become more vulnerable to low confidence and helplessness (Weiner, 1985; Seligman, 1991). Helping children consider alternative explanations may protect against this.

Why Children Jump to Conclusions

Children are still developing perspective-taking skills, emotional understanding and social reasoning. When something upsetting happens, they often work with limited information.

A child who isn't invited to a party may not know: numbers were restricted, invitations were organised by parents, family relationships influenced decisions, or that the host simply had difficult choices to make. Without those details, the brain fills in the gaps.

Often with the explanation that feels most emotionally convincing. Attribution theorists argue that humans are constantly trying to explain events, even when information is incomplete (Weiner, 1985). Children are still learning that their first explanation is not always the most accurate one.

Feelings Can Influence Explanations

When emotions are strong, interpretations can become narrower. A child who feels anxious may focus more on possible threats. A child who feels rejected may become highly sensitive to signs of exclusion. A child who feels embarrassed may assume others are paying far more attention than they actually are. Psychologists refer to this as emotion-congruent thinking, the tendency for emotions to influence the kinds of explanations we generate (Forgas, 1995).

The feeling is real. The explanation may be less reliable. This is why helping children separate:

"What happened?" from "What am I assuming happened?" can be so useful.

The Problem with Mind Reading

One particularly common thinking trap is mind reading. This occurs when someone assumes they know what another person is thinking. For example: "They're ignoring me on purpose." "The teacher doesn't like me." "They did that to upset me."

The challenge is that people rarely have direct access to other people's thoughts. Theory of Mind research has shown that understanding other people's perspectives develops gradually throughout childhood (Wellman, Cross & Watson, 2001). As these skills develop, children become better at recognising that people can have different thoughts, intentions and beliefs.

A child's first interpretation may therefore reflect a developmental limitation rather than a deliberate misunderstanding.

A Question Worth Teaching

Rather than immediately correcting a child's interpretation, adults can model curiosity.

Instead of saying: "That's not true" it can sometimes be more helpful to ask: "What else might explain what happened?" or "Can you think of another possibility?" These questions encourage flexible thinking.

Psychologist Albert Ellis argued that emotional wellbeing often improves when people learn to challenge rigid assumptions and consider alternative interpretations (Ellis, 1962). The goal is not forced positivity, the goal is broader thinking.

Reappraisal: Changing the Meaning

Modern emotion research suggests that changing the way a situation is interpreted can sometimes change the emotional response itself. Psychologists call this cognitive reappraisal (Gross, 1998). For example: A child who thinks: "Everyone is laughing at me," may feel intense embarrassment. A child who realises: "Most people probably haven't even noticed," may experience the situation very differently. The event has not changed. The interpretation has. This does not mean pretending everything is positive. It means recognising that different explanations often produce different emotional outcomes.

Flexible Thinking Builds Emotional Resilience

Children who can generate multiple explanations often become less trapped by a single interpretation. Consider these examples: Instead of: "I'm terrible at maths," perhaps: "I'm finding this difficult right now." Instead of: "They did it on purpose," perhaps: "I don't have enough information yet." Instead of: "Nobody wants to play with me," perhaps: "They were already playing a game." These alternative explanations do not guarantee the most positive outcome.

They simply create more possibilities. And possibilities often reduce emotional intensity.

This Is Not About Ignoring Problems

An important clarification is needed here. Encouraging alternative explanations does not mean dismissing children's experiences. Sometimes the first explanation is correct. Sometimes children really are excluded. Sometimes people genuinely are unfair. The goal is not to talk children out of their emotions. The goal is to help them avoid becoming trapped by assumptions that have not yet been tested. Curiosity should come before certainty.

What Does This Mean for Adults?

Children often benefit from adults who act more like investigators than judges. Instead of deciding immediately what happened, adults can help explore:

What facts do we know?

What assumptions are we making?

What other explanations exist?

What information might be missing?

These conversations develop skills that extend far beyond emotional regulation. They help children become more reflective, flexible thinkers.

Try This

The next time a child reaches a negative conclusion, try asking:

"What else could be true?"

If that feels too direct, try:

"Can we think of three different explanations?"

The aim is not to find the correct answer immediately. The aim is to practise considering multiple possibilities.

Questions for Reflection

Do children tend to jump to conclusions in particular situations?

Which explanations appear most common: rejection, unfairness, failure or blame?

How comfortable are children with uncertainty?

How often do adults model alternative explanations?

When was the last time your first explanation turned out to be wrong?

Key Takeaway

The first explanation the brain produces is not always the most accurate one. Children benefit from learning that there is often more than one way to interpret a situation. Helping children explore alternative explanations does not remove difficult feelings. It helps prevent those feelings from becoming tied to conclusions that may not be true. The feeling is real. The explanation may be less reliable.

Sometimes emotional resilience begins with a simple question: "What other explanations might there be?"

References

Ellis, A. (1962). Reason and Emotion in Psychotherapy. Lyle Stuart.

Forgas, J. P. (1995). Mood and Judgement: The Affect Infusion Model (AIM). Psychological Bulletin, 117(1), 39-66.

Gross, J. J. (1998). The Emerging Field of Emotion Regulation: An Integrative Review. Review of General Psychology, 2(3), 271-299.

Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion and Adaptation. Oxford University Press.

Seligman, M. E. P. (1991). Learned Optimism. Knopf.

Weiner, B. (1985). An Attributional Theory of Achievement Motivation and Emotion. Psychological Review, 92(4), 548-573.

Wellman, H. M., Cross, D., & Watson, J. (2001). Meta-Analysis of Theory-of-Mind Development: The Truth About False Belief. Child Development, 72(3), 655-684.