Relationships, power, and psychological independence

Gaslighting in relationships: when disagreement becomes manipulation

The argument may begin with something that happened. Over time, it becomes an argument about whether you can trust your own mind. That shift is what makes gaslighting especially damaging.

By Dr. Mark R. Dell, Psy.D. · Licensed psychologist and founder of The Dark Triad Institute
Published October 21, 2026

Gaslighting has become a recurring subject in my work with people trying to understand broken relationships. They may describe a conversation that leaves them more confused than when it began, a concern that is turned against them, or growing uncertainty about events they once felt able to describe.

I take that confusion seriously. I also want to understand what produced it. The word should help us examine a pattern, rather than settle an argument before we have looked at the evidence.

What is gaslighting?

In its narrower psychological sense, gaslighting is manipulation that undermines a person's confidence in their perception, memory, or judgment. It is generally understood as a process unfolding over time. The issue is more specific than being contradicted or lied to: the person is being led to distrust their ability to know what is happening.

The broader everyday use of the word includes misleading people for advantage. That broader meaning can be useful, but it can also blur distinctions. Here, I focus on the erosion of confidence in one's own judgment, particularly in close relationships. Sources 1–2

Gaslighting is not a clinical diagnosis. Identifying concerning conduct does not establish narcissistic personality disorder, psychopathy, or any other diagnosis.

Why “gaslighting” became Word of the Year

Merriam-Webster selected gaslighting as its 2022 Word of the Year, reporting a 1,740% increase in lookups that year. The dictionary connected the term's wider use with concern about deception and misinformation. That is evidence of public attention, not a measure of how often gaslighting occurs. Source 1

Its name comes from the 1938 play Gas Light and its film adaptations. The story concerns a husband who manipulates his wife into questioning her perceptions. The term now carries meanings well beyond that original story.

Gaslighting vs. disagreement, lying, and mistaken memory

“That is not how I remember it” can be an honest statement. “You always invent things; nobody should believe you” raises a different concern, especially when it repeatedly replaces discussion of checkable facts. No single phrase proves a pattern or reveals a person's intent.

Different accounts are not automatically equally well supported. Fair examination means weighing the information available, including information that challenges your preferred explanation.

Signs to examine in the pattern

The following are prompts for inquiry, not a checklist with a diagnostic cutoff:

• The subject keeps changing. You raise a specific event; the discussion becomes an attack on your competence, stability, or character.
• Correction is repeatedly blocked. Relevant information is dismissed without examination, or the standard for accepting it keeps changing.
• Your credibility becomes conditional. Your account is accepted when convenient and dismissed as unreliable when it raises an uncomfortable issue.
• Outside perspectives are discredited. People who might offer an independent view are portrayed as incapable of understanding or unworthy of trust.
• You increasingly defer to the other person's version. You find it difficult to describe an event or make a decision without their approval.

These observations can occur in different circumstances and have different explanations. Confusion and self-doubt deserve attention, but do not by themselves establish gaslighting. Record the conduct as carefully as the effect it has on you.

An example: the agreement disappears

Illustrative example, not a patient account. Two partners agree by message to discuss a substantial purchase before committing. One makes the purchase. When the other asks about the agreement, the reply is, “That conversation never happened. You are imagining things again.”

The message supports a narrow conclusion: an agreement was communicated. It does not establish everything about the relationship or the purchaser's motives. A meaningful response would address the agreement, acknowledge an error where appropriate, and discuss what happens next.

The concern deepens if similar events recur and the response consistently attacks the questioning partner's reliability rather than addressing the discrepancy. The pattern matters, as does whether there is room for an honest correction.

If it is safe to respond, a specific statement may be more useful than a label: “The message records the agreement. I want to discuss what happened to it.” You do not have to persuade someone to accept the word gaslighting before deciding what you will agree to.

Why gaslighting can leave you confused and doubting yourself

A relationship can hold affection, dependence, shared responsibilities, and harmful conduct at the same time. A person may keep searching for an explanation that preserves the relationship, especially when accepting the evidence would require a painful decision.

Klein and colleagues studied accounts from 65 people who identified themselves as having experienced gaslighting in romantic relationships. Participants described harm to their sense of self and trust. Because this was a qualitative study using selected, retrospective accounts, it does not tell us the population prevalence or establish a universal sequence of abuse and recovery. Source 2

You can acknowledge uncertainty without abandoning what is well supported. Equally, you can revise a mistaken interpretation without accepting that your judgment is worthless. The aim is a more reliable way of thinking, not absolute certainty about every detail.

Families, workplaces, and institutions

I see the wider concern as a question about power and accountability: what happens when the person or institution being questioned also claims the authority to decide whose account is credible? That question deserves attention in marriages, families, workplaces, and public life.

Sweet's sociological work examines how power and institutional inequalities can be used to undermine credibility in abusive relationships. It helps broaden the discussion beyond an isolated exchange between two people. It does not establish that all institutions operate this way or that every disputed public account is gaslighting. Source 3

My concern about a wider social pattern is an interpretation, not a population finding. A false public statement, an unfair workplace decision, and psychological manipulation within a marriage require their own evidence. Calling them all gaslighting can obscure the particular conduct that needs to be challenged.

A useful question across settings is whether relevant evidence can be considered and errors corrected without the person raising the concern being discredited merely for raising it.

How gaslighting relates to narcissism and Machiavellianism

March and colleagues examined Dark Tetrad traits and acceptance of gaslighting tactics in an online sample of 315 adults. The findings concern associations with the acceptability of tactics; they do not establish that a particular partner used them or that a personality score causes abuse. Source 4

Gaslighting should not become shorthand for “a narcissist disagreed with me.” A personality label does not prove conduct, and concerning conduct does not require a personality diagnosis before you can take it seriously. Read more about Machiavellianism, trust, and manipulation in relationships and narcissistic traits versus a clinical diagnosis.

How to respond without getting trapped in the argument

1. Return to one event. Describe the words, action, agreement, or decision. Mark what you recall approximately and what you can verify.
2. Separate the record from the explanation. “The appointment was changed” and “They changed it to undermine me” are different kinds of statements.
3. Look for information that could change your view. Consider misunderstanding, missing context, error, and deliberate distortion without assuming they are equally likely.
4. Seek a useful independent perspective. Choose someone who can consider the situation fairly, rather than simply confirm your conclusion.
5. Choose a practical condition or limit. Depending on the circumstances, you might pause a commitment, ask for written clarification, or seek individual professional support.

Keep notes only if doing so is safe. Preserve information you are entitled to access; do not turn verification into surveillance. You do not need a complete documentary record for your concerns to deserve support.

If there are threats, monitoring, coercion, or fear of retaliation, prioritize confidential, situation-specific support over confronting someone or presenting your notes. A worksheet is not a safety plan. For immediate danger, contact local emergency services.

The free Gaslighting Clarity Guide develops these questions through a worked example and fillable pages. For related reading, see boundaries in difficult relationships and protecting your judgment and reputation at work.

When individual assistance may help

If the relationship is leaving you persistently anxious, uncertain, or unable to make decisions, individual assessment can help clarify what is happening and what support you need. The task includes understanding the relationship, your own reactions, and the choices available to you.

How this gaslighting resource connects with my clinical practice explains the place of these articles and tools alongside individual psychological care.

You are welcome to contact me through my clinical practice in Pennington, New Jersey. My practice website describes services and consultation inquiries. The Institute's articles and publications provide general information; they do not provide individualized assessment or therapy.

For a broader set of examples and printable tools addressing pressure in relationships, work, and financial decisions, Don't Be Played is available separately. The gaslighting guide remains free.