The concept of “scattered thinking” is found in almost all psychiatry textbooks and is used in symptomatology to describe a “loose association, lack of theme, and lack of connection between one issue and another” as reflected in verbal or written expressions. Some psychopathology textbooks describe “scattered thinking” as “a patient who seems to understand every sentence of the conversation, but the main idea of the whole conversation is not clear, or the problem is far away; the more the patient is asked further questions or allowed to talk, the more he talks, the more difficult it is to understand what he really wants to say. ” Although as a clinical phenomenon, this type of “scattered thinking” is common, but if the psychological concept to extrapolate, its naming, categorization and interpretation seems to be inaccurate. 1, thinking and language: thinking is the connotation of language, language is the carrier of thinking According to the concept of psychology, “thinking is the human brain through the use of concepts and logic for analysis, synthesis, abstraction, generalization, reasoning, judgment, problem solving and problem solving process. It is based on perceptual activity and is realized through language.” Humans are delineated from other animals by their thinking ability, which has reached the pinnacle of the animal kingdom, with abstract thinking, imagination and creative ability unmatched by other animals. Moreover, human beings have the “privilege” of expressing their thinking through language and words, which allows members of the human race to communicate deeply with each other about the content of their thinking. There is a relationship between thinking and language in which thinking is the content of language and language is the carrier of thinking. Language is divided into written language and spoken language, which is also called speech. The development of human members thinking through the process of development from concrete to abstract, from sound to silent. 2, thinking is not possible to be fully expressed in the internal process Although there is a relationship between thinking and language “thinking is the connotation of language, language is the carrier of thinking”, but because thinking is an internal process, the language of thinking content may not be fully, accurately, true expression. “The fact that language can express only a limited amount of thinking is a good indicator of how much thinking can be expressed. Moreover, there are differences in the ability and level of thinking among human members determined by innate and acquired factors, and accordingly, there are differences in the ability and level of thinking expression determined by innate and acquired factors, especially the training received in the process of growing up later in life has an important influence on the ability of thinking expression. In addition, differences in these areas are also related to cognitive abilities and levels determined by both innate and acquired factors. As a result, there are communication problems of varying degrees between individuals with significant differences in cognitive level, thinking and expression skills and levels. The dilemma that people may encounter when they communicate through language to “convey their emotions” is the so-called “donkey’s lips do not match the horse’s mouth” and “playing the piano to the cow”. Moreover, thinking is a continuous internal process, less interfered with and interrupted by external environmental factors, while language expression is a phenomenon that occurs intermittently, and very vulnerable to interference and interruption by external environmental factors. Q may have been thinking a lot before his execution, but he could only say “I’ll be a good man again in twenty years”. In addition, thinking is an internal process that operates in the way individuals are accustomed to, so they can be “free” and unrestrained, and only want to “know” what they know. Verbal expression, on the other hand, must follow the rules or logic agreed upon by the group in order to relate to others, i.e., to achieve the purpose of communication. Thus, expression is necessarily subject to rules. The degree of individual mastery of the rules is different, and the level of expression naturally varies and cannot be measured by the same scale. Thus, although language is the carrier of thinking, but for the expression of thinking content, there are a variety of factors, and can only express a limited part of the correct. 3, thinking about the effect of expression by a variety of subjective and objective factors In terms of the expression process, the individual factors that affect the ability and level of expression as a thinker or speaker, in addition to the above-mentioned cognitive level, thinking ability and level of factors caused by the differences, a person since childhood, including habits of expression training, education, cultural transmission and other factors will also affect his thinking about the content of the The ability and level of expression. For example, a person who has been taught by his parents since childhood that “one should only say three things before leaving one’s heart behind” may be careful in expressing his words to the extent that they are carefully considered. Moreover, one’s state of mind, emotion, concentration level, and desire to express (including the influence of conversation style and atmosphere) are the situational factors that influence one’s speech expression. ” and “Xu Shu did not say a word when he entered Cao’s camp” reflect such examples. In the presence of a dignified adult, some people with social phobia may not be able to “speak freely” and “openly” as they would in front of a familiar partner because of nervousness and anxiety. Thinking is a process that can be carried out or completed by a single person, but once the content of thinking is expressed through language, it must have an impact on others and may receive a response. In this way, the person receiving the linguistic information, their ability to understand the linguistic information, mentality and other factors will also have an impact on the content and process of the corresponding expression: on the one hand, because the receiver may be due to their own factors to receive incomplete linguistic information and even misunderstandings, which will inevitably affect the effectiveness of communication. In interpersonal communication, it is not uncommon for the so-called “speaker to be inattentive and the listener to be attentive”. On the other hand, the receiver’s attitude and the corresponding feedback will also have a negative effect on the speaker’s expression, both to influence the speaker to adjust the way and content of expression, and may affect the speaker’s desire to express, and thus affect the process of expression of its thinking, of course, will also affect the effectiveness and purpose of communication. It is common knowledge that “listening to” and “rebuking” play opposite roles to the content and effect of the speaker’s expression. The concept of “disorders of thought form” or “disorders of thought association” in psychiatric symptomatology, such as scattered thinking, broken thinking, and incoherent thinking, is actually the result of previous psychiatrists’ efforts to identify the deficiencies of the patient’s language expression. In fact, the previous generation of psychiatrists inferred such abnormalities in the internal thought processes of patients based on the abnormalities in their verbal expressions. Such inferences and definitions clearly lack support from psychological research on thought processes and verbal expression, and are at least arbitrary as diagnostic criteria for the symptoms of a mental illness such as schizophrenia. Since each person verbally expresses his or her thinking as information that he or she wants others to understand or to communicate with others. Therefore, for the speaker, each sentence has a corresponding meaning and importance. Rather than focusing on the coherence of his or her thinking, it is better to focus on the meaning of his or her words, for example, by asking him or her to explain the meaning of the sentence. The information obtained in this way is much more meaningful than merely describing the coherence of the verbal expressions. Based on the accuracy of the phenomenological description, I believe that a reasonable formulation of the above notion of “diffuse thinking” would be “loose structure of speech”, “confusion in the content of speech ” or “incoherent verbal content”.