Use the right level of validation for the situation

Match your validation to what is actually true — surface agreement, emotional acknowledgment, or deep understanding.

Why it works

DBT describes validation as occurring at different levels: acknowledging someone’s behavior occurred (level 1), accurately reflecting their feelings (level 2), reading their unexpressed experience (level 3), and validating within historical or biological context (levels 4–6). Under-validating (level 1 for a situation requiring level 3) feels dismissive; over-validating (claiming to fully understand something you don’t) is recognized as hollow. Matching the level to what you can honestly offer is the skill.

How to do it

1. Assess what is genuinely true: can you only acknowledge it happened, or can you say you understand why they feel as they do?
2. Be honest about the depth of your understanding: "I can see you’re hurt" is level 2; "I understand exactly how that feels" requires you actually do.
3. When in doubt, ask rather than claim: "Tell me more about what that was like for you" is more validating than a hollow "I totally understand."

Evidence

Linehan’s validation levels are a clinical framework derived from therapeutic practice and theory; the differentiation between levels of validation is consistent with empathy research showing that accurate but not overstated empathy is more effective than either minimal or exaggerated empathic responding. (clinical)

The six-level taxonomy is a clinical framework; the specific differentiation has not been independently studied in controlled trials.

Common mistake

Claiming deep understanding of an experience you have not had ("I know exactly how you feel") — which the other person typically recognizes as false and experiences as more invalidating than accurate acknowledgment of limited understanding.