Where does the source of an individual piece of information come from? It comes from a particular point in time. Yes each individual has their own  perspective or memories of what happened but in some cases the information can be agreed upon and in other cases it can be disputed. The issue is. Does it matter? Why is agreement on what happened necessary? Was harm done? What type or level of intensity of harm was done? Why is it not able to be negotiated normally through conversation to solve the issue? In other words, why is someone ignoring the actual conversation and just being in repeat mode over and over and over again. Black is white and white is black. Cognitive rigidity. What does that look like clinically? When is that a part of a diagnosis or when is that part of lying OR when is that part of a gap in information that is purposeful? Well, purposeful in that it has no links with other information and can’t be moved beyond to any greater detail because the individual / individuals talking do not have any more information. That is very clear. The conversation hasn’t shifted. When people are caught lying, where does cognitive rigidity come into it? When the conversation is repeatedly stuck on the same wording, the same phrasing over and over again, why is it still stuck here? One of the important things to look at is what happens during the rest of the world passing by when a conversation is on repeat. For the people involved in the conversation time is standing still, because nothing is shifting in the conversation, yet the world is moving on around them. To whom is it of benefit to keep the conversation still? To stall the other person? To lock them into this part of the conversation?
One of the challenges of being in an environment such as classroom or being in a car with siblings is that you have to learn to ignore someone. As an adult you have the ability to walk away, to choose to not have any interaction with someone who is purposefully taking your time without any benefit to you.