The Cluttered Mind Uncluttered

Ph.D., Psychology, author, speaker, consultant

You’re Not That Important!: Letting Go of Self-Consciousness

by:

Is it just me or are people more self-conscious than ever before? Thanks in no small part to the Internet, it does seem like everyone, at least celebrities such actors, pop singers, and professional athletes, seems to be “under the microscope” these days. They are stalked by the paparazzi, web sites chronicle their every step, and, thanks to smartphones, anyone can be caught in the act at any moment.

We also live in a culture where appearance, whether physical, financial, or status, is all important. And we live in a culture of judgment where being critical of others seems like the national pastime. Through the popular media, we also are bombarded by messages that we aren’t good enough, others are better than us, but we can be the best if we really want. As epitomized by reality TV, gossip and cattiness are the coin of the realm.

Because of these persistent messages of being watched, judged, and compared, it isn’t a stretch for us regular folk to feel like we are under the same scrutiny and under the same judgmental eye. It’s so easy to think that everyone is watching and critiquing our every move.

Self-consciousness isn’t necessarily a bad thing. In, fact, in all likelihood, it has been hard wired and enculturated into us as we have evolved as a species and a society. Self-consciousness helps ensure that we act in socially appropriate ways for fear of disapproval and rejection from society.

At the same time, self-consciousness can go well beyond keeping our behavior within a socially acceptable range. It can become a source of tremendous angst and unhappiness. Self-consciousness can create a pre-occupation with how we appear to others, what others think of us, and, often, can cause social anxiety and an inhibition of behavior that we fear others might judge to be less than desirable. I see people in my practice who are paralyzed by their self-consciousness.

Self-consciousness can prevent people from being who they are, expressing what they are feeling, doing what they want to do, and all because they are afraid of what other people will think or say about them.

For the vast majority of us, namely, those who aren’t rich and famous, this self-consciousness, and the anxiety that is associated with it, is painfully misplaced. Here is a simple reality that should be liberating if you are overly self-conscious. Nobody is watching you. Nobody is thinking about you. Very few people even care about you. Why such a seemingly harsh pronouncement? Because you’re not that important!

Nobody outside of your immediate family and circle of friends really cares very much about you because you don’t impact their lives. Most people are focused predominantly on themselves. They have neither the time nor the energy to devote to people that have little effect on them.

Plus, somewhat ironically, the only concern most people have for you is their own misguided self-consciousness about what you are thinking about them!

When you think other people are thinking about you, it’s actually you who is thinking about you. When you believe others are being critical of you, they’re not. Are you a mind reader? Of course not, we humans aren’t clairvoyant (though we like to think we are). So when you think someone is thinking badly of you, it’s really you thinking badly of you. Now that, not what other people are supposedly thinking of you, is something to be concerned about.

Of course, this epiphany is a double-edged sword. It can lift a huge weight off of your shoulders because you no longer have to worry about what other people are thinking or saying about you and you are free to think, feel, and act in ways that are true to yourself. The downside (sort of) is that we all want to live under the illusion that we are worthy of others devoting time and energy to thinking about us. But, as the saying goes, the truth will set you free!

Categories: Psychology

Feed Your Children a Balanced “Diet” of Technology

by:

The operative word in raising healthy children in this often-times unhealthy digital world they are growing up in is balance. A nutritional analogy works well here. A balanced nutritional diet doesn’t mean 50 percent healthy food and 50 percent junk food. Rather, a balanced diet involves ensuring that your children get adequate nutrition from all of the major food groups while allowing them periodic treats.

The same holds true for your children’s diet of technology. You first need to make sure that your children get the proper “nutrition” they need in their lives, meaning offering them a psychological, emotional, intellectual, social, physical, and spiritual “diet” that will fuel their vigorous development, in addition to fostering healthy self-identity, values, thinking, relationships, and life.

Once this “nourishment” is in place and your children are growing strong mentally and physically, you can then introduce other “foods,” namely, technology, that may or may not be healthy. Many aspects of technology, whether searching the Internet for information or maintaining relationships through social media, can be healthy for your children in their own right. Plus, they need to learn these skills to successfully navigate the digital world in which they will live. At the same time, there is a lot of technology “junk food” out there as well, such as violent video games, twitter, and merchandise-related web sites. Also, too much of even a good thing, in other words, using technology past the point that it “nourishes” your children, will obviously do them harm. Your children should be allowed to enjoy media that you deem appropriate and not particularly unhealthy in reasonable portions based on your values and interests.

To raise children who are physically and mentally healthy, you must do several things. First, lack of information and misinformation are two of the most significant obstacles to your making the best “dietary” decisions about technology for your children. You have to learn which aspects of technology have nutritional value and which are the equivalent of candy, snacks, and soda. You must educate yourself about how technology influences your children’s physical and mental health, both positively and negatively. Given the ready access of information through the Internet, there are no excuses for being ill-informed.

Second, just as you hopefully set limits on how much candy and other sweets they eat, you need to set appropriate limits on both the content and quantity of technology your children “ingest.” In all of my blog posts on this topic, I share with you both the latest research and my own perspectives on how “nutritious” might be defined to help you judge what reasonable limits are for your children.

You must then add to this decision-making calculus by considering your own family’s values, interests, and habits. In this step of the process, you need to weigh those values, interests, and habits against what the research and experts say about the nutritional value of technology. If these two parts of the equation conflict, you may decide to make some changes to the diet of technology that your family has. What you deem healthy use of technology will be the result of your completing this equation and your solution to this equation will hopefully provide you with a clear picture of what is healthy and what is not for your children.

Third, recognizing that your children will be exposed to technology, just as they are to junk food, no matter what limits you set for them, you must educate your children about its influence. When they’re confronted with the many forms of technology, they will be able to set their own reasonable limits and only partake in technology that they judge to be healthy.

Fourth, because actions speak louder than words when it comes to parenting, perhaps the best way to encourage a balanced diet of technology and foster physical and mental health in your children is to have a healthy diet of technology yourself. It is a familiar sight these days to see many parents who are watching too much television, playing too many video games, and using their smartphone too much, akin to eating too many sweets. If your technology diet balanced, your children are more likely to have a healthy diet of technology as well.

Categories: Parenting

The Bad, the Ugly, and the Good of Children’s Use of Social Media

by:

Whether we like it or not, the Internet, social media, and all of the related technology are here to stay. As evidenced every day in so many ways, this new technological landscape brings many wonderful benefits to our family’s lives and relationships. At the same time, as with any new innovations, this impact has a dark side.

Though the study of the effects of social media on children is still relatively new, there is a growing body of evidence demonstrating what I will call the bad, the ugly, and the good (because I prefer to conclude this post on a positive note). I will describe some recent findings that are worth considering as you increasingly expose your children to different types of technology.

The Bad: Facebook Depression

There’s no doubt that Facebook is one of the most powerful forms of media for communication today. More than a billion users chat, share photos, and keep their friends and family up to date on their lives regularly. Yet, there is a dark side to its use, along with other forms of social media, that has been labeled Facebook Depression, though this phenomenon also includes anxiety, other psychiatric disorders, and a range of unhealthy behaviors.

Perhaps the most comprehensive study to date found that Facebook overuse among teens was significantly correlated with narcissism. Among young adults, Facebook overuse was also associated with Histrionic Personality Disorder, Antisocial Personality Disorder, Bipolar Disorder, and Sadistic, Passive-Aggressive, Borderline, Paranoid, and Somatoform Personality Disorders. This study also explored the strength of Facebook use as a predictor of these psychiatric disorders and found that, even when demographics, such as age, gender, median income, ethnicity, and education were controlled, Facebook use was one of the three strongest predictors.

An analysis of 15 studies found that increased media exposure, including television, movies, video games, and the Internet, was associated with violent behavior and isolation. It reported that children who watched violent shows were not only more likely to be more aggressive, but also to have fewer friends and to be more secluded socially. The researchers concluded that children who are aggressive will have fewer friends and be more likely to be bullies (because they are more aggressive) or victims of bullying (because they are isolated).

Another study of adolescent girls found that the more they used texting, instant messaging and other social media to discuss their problems, particularly romantic difficulties, the more depressive symptoms they presented. The researchers argued that the ease and frequency that technology affords children to communicate allows them to “co-ruminate,” that is, dwell on their problems without providing any solutions.

The Ugly: Internet Addiction

Addiction was the most widely used descriptor of the one-day moratorium on technology in the research I just described in a recent post. Internet addiction is commonly characterized as excessive use of the Internet that interferes with daily functioning and that can lead to distress or harm.

A review of research from the past decade has found that adolescents who demonstrated Internet addiction scored higher for obsessive–compulsive behavior, depression, generalized and social anxiety, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, introversion, and other maladaptive behaviors. This research also revealed a interesting pattern of parental involvement. Those youth who were judged to have an Internet addiction rated their parents as lacking in love and nurturance, being over-invested, unresponsive, angry, and severe disciplinarians.

There is considerable debate within the mental-health field about whether dependence on technology is a true addiction, like alcohol, drugs, or gambling. In fact, the American Psychiatric Association, which produces the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (think shrinks’ bible), decided not to include Internet Addiction in their latest revision. Some experts in the field argue that the unhealthy dependence on technology may be a symptom of some more fundamental pathology, such as depression or anxiety, and that so-called Internet addicts use technology to self-medicate and relieve their symptoms. Plus, unlike alcohol and drugs, Internet use doesn’t cause any direct physiological or psychological harm.

Despite this uncertainty in the psychological community, the students in the survey I wrote about in my last post made it clear that they believe Internet addiction is very real. It certainly passes the “duck test” (if it looks like a duck and sounds like a duck, it’s probably a duck). Not only did the students miss the functions that the technology offered, for example, texting, surfing the Web, and listening to music, but they actually craved the devices themselves. Said a English student, “Media is my drug; without it I was lost. I am an addict. How could I survive 24 hours without it?” Added an American student, “After experiencing this dreadful 24-hours, I realized that our obsession with media is almost scary. I could not even begin to imagine the world if it was media-free.”

So what specifically does Internet use provide to people such that it gets to the point of unhealthy behavior often associated with addiction? One study examined the types of gratification that people gain from the Internet and found that four specific forms of gratification were, cumulatively, most predictive of the tendency toward Internet addiction: virtual community (feeling connected to a group), monetary compensation (money they earned through various Web-based activities), diversion (distraction from their lives), and personal status (the feeling of individual standing they gained from Internet use). These types of gratification are normal for children, yet there is something about the Internet that morphs them into unhealthy needs that appear to become addicting.

This so-called addiction appears to go deeper than just psychological dependence. There is emerging evidence indicating that, for example, our interaction with technology produces the same neurochemical reaction—a burst of dopamine—as that found with alcohol, drug, sex, and gambling addictions. Persistent exposure to technology-related cues, such as the vibration from a smartphone announcing the arrival of a new text message or the ping of an incoming tweet, can cause people to get caught in a vicious cycle of dopamine stimulation and deprivation. Moreover, the brevity of technology, for example, 140-character text messages, lends itself to this vicious cycle because the information received isn’t completely satisfying, so people are driven to seek out more information for their next shot of dopamine. Imagine your children growing up with this relationship with technology and the strength of its grip on them if they are allowed ungoverned and unguided use of technology.

The Good: Social Media Can Help

Certainly, the research I’ve just described doesn’t paint a very rosy picture of the influence of technology on children. It’s not all bad though. Studies have shown that more time spent with social media is related to increased “virtual empathy,” meaning that expressed through technology, and “real-world empathy” (considered a related, but separate factor). The best predictor of virtual empathy was the time spent on Facebook and the use of instant messaging. More of both forms of empathy means more social support, always a good thing for children.

Social media can also help those young people who experience shyness or social anxiety. Introverted young people can gain comfort and confidence in social interactions in several ways. Shy children can use social media to overcome what is perhaps their most difficult challenge, namely, initiating new relationships, in a low-risk environment. They can avoid awkwardness that is endemic to making friends by allowing them to gain familiarity with others and build friendships online. Introverted children can also practice social skills with the relative distance and safety afforded by social media.

Technology may improve family relationships and encourage feelings of connectedness. First, technology can be used as a point of entry into children’s lives and create opportunities for sharing. Second, they enable families to have quality time and pursue activities of shared interest.

Social media can have educational benefits for children as well. They are learning practical skills that are necessary for success in today’s wired world. Specifically, children are learning how to use and become proficient with technology, developing their creative abilities, appreciating new and different perspectives, and enhancing their communication skills.

One study indicated that prosocial video games encourages helping behavior. The researchers found that young people were more likely to help others after playing a prosocial as compared to a neutral video game. In a related study, they observed that a similar effect when given the opportunity to protect a stranger who was being harassed.

Technology may even help children to better cope with stress in their lives. Technology can potentially mitigate stress is a number of ways. First, technology provides children with more outlets through which to express their feelings of stress, thus allowing a cathartic effect. Second, social media can provide children with social support which can act as a buffer against stressors. Technology, including Facebook postings and instant messaging, enables children to receive more, immediate, and diverse support from a wider range of people. Third, technology can allow children to find useful information that may help them to reduce their stress. Finally, technology may act as a distraction and a means of distancing children from the stressors, providing a respite from the stress and giving them the time and perspective to deal with the stress more effectively.

What Does This All Mean?

As I have often argued, technology is neither good nor bad, but, at the same time, it isn’t neutral either. The impact that technology has on your children depends not on the technology itself, but rather on how you educate them about it and the experiences they have with it. It is your responsibility to become informed about the potential benefits and costs of this new digital age and then make deliberate decisions about the type and quantity of technology you expose your children to.

Categories: Parenting

5/20/13

by:

The conventional wisdom in classical economics is that we humans are “rational actors” who, by our nature, make decisions and behave in ways that maximize advantage and utility and minimize risk and costs. This theory has driven economic policy for generations despite daily anecdotal evidence that we are anything but rational, for example, how we invest and what we buy. Economists who embrace this assumption seem to live by the maxim, “If the facts don’t fit the theory, throw out the facts,” attributed, ironically enough, to Albert Einstein.

But any notion that we are, in fact, rational actors, was blown out of the water by Dr. Daniel Kahneman, the winner of the 2002 Nobel Prize for economics, and his late colleague Amos Tversky. Their groundbreaking, if not rather intuitive, findings on cognitive biases, have demonstrated quite unequivocally that humans make decisions and act in ways that are anything but rational.

Cognitive biases can be characterized as the tendency to make decisions and take action based on limited acquisition and/or processing of information or on self-interest, overconfidence, or attachment to past experience.

Cognitive biases can result in perceptual blindness or distortion (seeing things that aren’t really there), illogical interpretation (being nonsensical), inaccurate judgments (being just plain wrong), irrationality (being out of touch with reality), and bad decisions (being dumb). The outcomes of decisions that are influenced by cognitive biases can range from the mundane to the lasting to the catastrophic, for example, buying an unflattering outfit, getting married to the wrong person, and going to war, respectively.

Cognitive biases can be broadly placed in two categories. Information biases include the use of heuristics, or information-processing shortcuts, that produce fast and efficient, though not necessarily accurate, decisions and not paying attention nor adequately thinking through relevant information.

Ego biases include emotional motivations, such as fear, anger, or worry, and social influences such as peer pressure, the desire for acceptance, and doubt that other people can be wrong.

When cognitive biases influence individuals, real problems can arise. But when cognitive biases impact a business, then the problems can be exponentially worse. Just think of the Edsel and the Microsoft Kin. Clearly, cognitive biases are bad for business. Cognitive biases are most problematic because they cause business people to make bad decisions.

In my corporate consulting work, where I help companies make good decisions, I have identified 12 cognitive biases that appear to be most harmful to decision making in the business world. Some of these cognitive biases were developed and empirically validated by Kahneman and Tversky. Others I identified and subsequently passed the “duck” test (if it looks like a duck and sounds like a duck, it’s probably a duck).

Information biases include:

  • Knee-jerk bias: Make fast and intuitive decisions when slow and deliberate decisions are necessary.
  • Occam’s razor bias:  Assume the most obvious decision is the best decision.
  • Silo effect: Use too narrow an approach in making a decision.
  • Confirmation bias: Focus on information that affirms your beliefs and assumptions.
  • Inertia bias:  Think, feel, and act in ways that are familiar, comfortable, predictable, and controllable.
  • Myopia bias:  See and interpret the world through the narrow lens of your own experiences, baggage, beliefs, and assumptions.

Ego biases include:

  • Shock-and-awe bias: Belief that our intellectual firepower alone is enough to make complex decisions.
  • Overconfidence effect: Excessive confidence in our beliefs, knowledge, and abilities.
  • Optimism bias: Overly optimistic, overestimating favorable outcomes and underestimating unfavorable outcomes.
  • Homecoming queen/king bias: Act in ways that will increase our acceptance, liking, and popularity.
  • Force field bias: Think, feel, and act in ways that reduce a perceived threat, anxiety, or fear.
  • Planning fallacy: Underestimate the time and costs needed to complete a task.

Think about the bad decisions that you and your company has made over the years, both minor and catastrophic, and you will probably see the fingerprints of some of these cognitive biases all over the dead bodies.

You Can Fight Back

The good news is that there are four steps you can take to mitigate cognitive biases in your individual decision making and in the decisions that are made in your company.

  1. Awareness is a key to reducing the influence of cognitive biases on decision making. Simply knowing that cognitive biases exist and can distort your thinking will help lessen their impact. Learn as much as you can about cognitive biases and recognize them in yourself.
  2. Collaboration may be the most effective tool for mitigating cognitive biases. Quite simply, it is easier to see biases in others than in yourself. When you are in decision-making meetings, have your cognitive-bias radar turned on and look for them in your colleagues.
  3. Inquiry is fundamental to challenging the perceptions, judgments and conclusions that can be marred by cognitive biases. Using your understanding of cognitive biases, ask the right questions of yourself and others that will shed light on the presence of biases and on the best decisions that avoid their trap.
  4. Though brainstorming and free-wheeling discussions can be valuable in generating decision options, they can also provide the miasma in which cognitive biases can float freely and contaminate the resulting decisions. When you establish a disciplined and consistent framework and process for making decisions, you increase your chances of catching cognitive biases before they hijack your decision making.

Three Key Questions

Daniel Kahneman recommends that you ask three questions to minimize the impact of cognitive biases in your decision making:

  1. Is there any reason to suspect the people making the recommendation of biases based on  self-interest, overconfidence, or attachment to past experiences? Realistically speaking, it is almost impossible for people to not have these three influence their decisions.
  2. Have the people making the recommendation fallen in love with it? Again, this is almost an inevitability because, in most cases, people wouldn’t make the recommendation unless they loved it.
  3. Was there groupthink or were there dissenting opinions within the decision-making team? This question can be mitigated before the decision-making process begins by collecting a team of people who will proactively offer opposing viewpoints and challenge the conventional wisdom of the group.

In answering each of these questions, you must look closely at how each may be woven into the recommendation that has been offered and separate them from its value. If a recommendation doesn’t stand up to scrutiny on its own merits, free of cognitive bias, it should be discarded.

Only by filtering out the cognitive biases that are sure to arise while decisions are being made can you be confident that, at the end of the day, the best decision for you and your company was made based on the best available information.

Categories: Business

What Do Young People Say About Their Relationship with Technology?

by:

To give you a sense of the scope of the effect of technology on the psychological and emotional health of young people, I want to describe the results of an international study involving more than 1000 students from ten countries across five continents that asked students to disconnect from technology for 24 hours. The results and insights, I think you will agree, are startling, disturbing, sobering, and just a little bit hopeful. To give you a preview of the findings, the adjectives most frequently associated with this period of disconnection were addiction, failure, boredom, confusion, distress, loneliness, anxiety, and depression; not one feel-good descriptor in the lot.

Not surprisingly given the students’ seemingly unhealthy relationship with technology, a “clear majority” was unable to last 24 hours unplugged. The study revealed the indispensable role that technology now plays in young people’s lives. A Chilean student screams, ”I didn’t use my cell phone all night. It was a difficult day…a horrible day. After this, I CAN’T LIVE WITHOUT MEDIA!” As with many aspects of their lives, young people (and many adults, for that matter) seem to have lost sight of what “need” means. People may really, really, really want their smartphone, mp3 player, or tablet, but need is typically associated with more elemental requirements such as food, water, and shelter.

Technology seems to be shifting from a tool that people use to, as the study suggests, something that is a part of who we are, an element of our identity and sense of self, almost as if we are becoming cyborgs without the implantation (though that seems a foregone conclusion at some point in the not-too-distant future). When separated from their technology, many students described themselves as feeling lost, incomplete, confused. A student from Lebanon said, ”The idea of my phone kept jumping into my mind. I was not eager to message or call anyone, I was more eager to just ‘see’ my phone in front of me.”

Abstention from media revealed an unrecognized loneliness among the students who participated in the study. They not only realized how shallow their relationships were when mediated by technology, but that their deepest relationship was with the technology itself. “All I wanted to do was pick up my phone and become a part of the human race again,” said a U.K.-based student without realizing the irony in his statement.

The study showed how reliant young people were on their technology for stimulation and the degree to which they experienced boredom without it to amuse them. Their dependence on technology was illustrated by their lack of initiative and imagination to find their own ways—devoid of technology—to entertain themselves. Said another Chilean student, “I started to think about things to do without media, and found out that actually I couldn’t think of many.”

Just so I don’t end this post on such a downer note, there was a small ray of optimism that came out of this research. Many students in the study found the 24 hours of disconnection to be an eye opener and a wake-up call. Many were shocked to learn how much time they actually devoted to technology. They also noticed how the quality and depth of their relationships improved while unplugged. Wrote a Mexican student, “I interacted with my parents more than the usual. I fully heard what they said to me without being distracted.”

Others learned that they could actually enjoy life without the leash of technology. Said a U.S. student, “I’ve lived with the same people for three years now, they’re my best friends, and I think that this is one of the best days we’ve spent together. I was able to really see them, without any distractions, and we were able to revert to simple pleasures.” The one-day vacation from cyberspace also put its use in perspective. Another student from Mexico observed insightfully, “Media put us close to the people who are far away but they separate us from the ones who are nearby.”

On a further positive note, about 25 percent of the sample actually saw the benefits of unplugging. A number of students learned that they didn’t really need technology and could actually survive without it. In fact, some students experienced a transcendental moment in which, for that one disconnected day, they walked the path of quiet and calm and saw that there was much to be gained from unplugging from technology and plugging into life. Said another U.S. student, “I became more aware with my own thoughts. I realized that maybe it’s important to disconnect every once in awhile and let your brain remember you.”

Categories: Technology

How Do We Humans Ever Make Good Decisions?

by:

It’s a wonder that good decisions are ever made by the species known as Homo Sapiens. The reality is that the cards are stacked against us whenever we are faced with choices, especially when the decisions are of consequence. Think about all of the horrendously bad decisions that have been made in recent history and how obviously bad they look in our rear-view mirrors. The Iraq war, securitizing mortgages, Congress not voting for background checks on gun purchases, another season of The Bachelor, the list goes on. And bad decisions don’t just occur at the highest levels of government or business; rather, everyday folks can make appalling decisions as well, whether getting married to that particular person (50% of marriages end in divorce), wearing those low-cut jeans, buying a Hummer, or going into debt to remodel the kitchen.

The fact is that humans are behind the eight ball from the get-go when it comes to making decisions. Children are wholly ill equipped to for decision making. They lack knowledge, experience, and perspective. Children are myopic, impulsive, and easily persuaded. It doesn’t get much better during adolescence when teenagers are driven by raging hormones, underdeveloped self-identities, and peer and cultural pressure.

Perhaps the biggest obstacle is neurological where the pre-frontal cortex, the part of the brain associated with executive functioning, doesn’t fully develop until the early twenties. Executive functioning directly influence decision making because it regulates, controls, and manages our thoughts, emotions, and behavior. It influences our reactions to new, ambiguous, and difficult situations. It helps us to weigh risks and rewards and short- and long-term consequences. Executive functioning assists us in planning, organizing, and executing decisions and, importantly, it can prevent us from making rash and potentially harmful decisions.

It doesn’t get any easier as adults to make good decisions either. A wide range of research has demonstrated that we are often at the mercy of psychological, emotional, social, and situational influences when we make decisions. Daniel Kahneman, the Nobel Prize winner in economics, has demonstrated the powerful effect that cognitive biases have on our decision making. Cognitive biases involve the tendency to draw conclusions and make decisions based on limited information or self-interest. An extensive body of research has demonstrated that these biases can lead to irrational decisions at very level of society.

Our decision making is also influenced by our emotional states and social world in ways both overt and subtle, making us appear quite fickle in what we decide. For example, feeling stressed or rushed alters our decisions. The decisions we make are affected by our mood. We make different decisions based on whether we are feeling happy, contemplative, or disgust. As considerable research on peer pressure and groupthink has demonstrated, our decisions are also significantly influenced by social forces, whether friends and family, cultural messages, or societal norms.

Another thing I learned recently is that emotionally laden information (i.e., information that is threatening in some way) goes directly to the emotional center of the brain, including the amygdala and related structures. This connection isn’t surprising given the role that our emotions play in our survival; we need to receive and act on threatening information right away or we may die.

Unfortunately, the rapid decision-making associated with triggering the fight-or-flight reaction that served humans well during primitive times is generally ineffective at helping us make good decisions about complex issues in modern times. And emotionally relevant decisions are the ones that are usually the most important and most necessary to get right. What is even more unsettling is that there are no direct neurological pathways to the prefrontal cortex; all emotional information goes through the primitive emotional brain. So, the pre-frontal cortex is at a severe disadvantage in contributing to decision making because the information it receives is “old news,” secondhand, and tainted by emotions.

We can only conclude that we humans are behind the eight ball when it comes to making decisions and we have a long history documenting just that. Yet somehow we do find ways to make good decisions, whether buying a Prius, not investing with Lehman Brothers, or not invading Iran.

With such a strong current pulling us in the direction of bad decisions, what can we do to increase our chances of making good decisions? Here are a few strategies:

  • Don’t make knee-jerk decisions: Give yourself time to reflect on your decisions before you commit to them.
  • Don’t let your emotions make your decisions: The more distance you can create between your emotions and your decisions, the easier it will be for your pre-frontal cortex to “get in the game.”
  • Look at your decisions from many perspectives: The more information you have, the more you will engage your pre-frontal cortex and the more reasoned your decisions will be.
  • Talk to other people about your decisions: People who know you well can identify your biases, offer helpful viewpoints, and reality test your decisions.

Of course, there is no way we can completely resist all of the genetic, neurological, psychological, emotional, and social forces that impact our decision making. But these few simple steps can prevent us from making truly appalling decisions like, say, attacking North Korea or watching the latest music video from Psy.

Categories: Psychology

What Me Worry?: Why Worrying Does More Harm Than Good

by:

Worry is a natural part of the human condition. It has historically played a vital role in our survival and it helps us cope with many of the challenges we face today. At the same time, worry that is too intense, too frequent, and too unrelenting can definitely cut down on your happiness and enjoyment of life.

We all experience worry. We know that nagging feeling that something is wrong and the persistent anxiety that it produces. But what precisely is worry and why do we worry? Interestingly, thefreedictionary.com notes that “The ancestor of our word, Old English wyrgan, meant ‘to strangle.’ In the 16th century worry began to be used in the sense…‘to assault verbally,’ and in the 17th century the word took on the meaning ‘to bother, distress, or persecute.’ It was a small step from this meaning to the modern definitions ‘to cause to feel anxious or distressed’ and ‘to feel troubled or uneasy.’”

Worrying is obviously not a pleasant emotion, but it is actually an essential, normal, and instinctive emotion that has been hard-wired into humans to help us survive since we rose out of the primordial muck. We worry about something because we perceive it as a threat to our existence and worry causes us to focus on it and protect ourselves from that threat. Back in the prehistoric days, carefree cave people, though probably a very fun bunch, were killed by hostile tribes or eaten by wild animals because they didn’t worry about or focus on the potential threats. Cave people who worried, though probably not the life of the party, survived these threats and passed their genes on to future generations. So, worry has been keeping us alive as a species since the dawn of humankind.

Let’s face it, real and present dangers to our health, well being, and livelihoods do exist and you want to be aware of them and take the necessary steps to protect yourself from harm. You want to take reasonable precautions against illness, injury, and accident. So clearly, some form of worrying has adaptive value, the goal of which is to recognize and remove those threats and safeguard yourself from those unnecessary dangers.

Unfortunately, worry can morph from that healthy, practical form of concern and vigilance to a preoccupation with perceived threats that are incredibly unlikely (e.g., nuclear war) or not particularly threatening (e.g., genetically modified foods). These worries can cause you to obsess so much on these low-probability, low-consequence occurrences that they interfere with your worrying about high-probability, high consequence concerns and prevent you from enjoying your life. And it is these worries that can, returning to the original Old English meaning of worry, metaphorically strangle you. So, basically, worrying has been making us miserable since we began walking upright, yet it has also, paradoxically, ensured our survival.   

Unhealthy worry—when it goes beyond concern and reasonable motivation to protect yourself and makes you miserable—is a complex emotion that isn’t easy to wrap your arms around. It involves negative and obsessive thinking, doubt, physical anxiety, and fear. This type of worry is actually a symptom of other problems that becomes a problem in itself.

Unhealthy worry comes from the emotional baggage you acquired as a child and a deep, often unconscious belief that you won’t be able to protect yourself:

  • Insecurity (“I live in a threatening world.”)
  • Perfectionism (“If I make mistakes, I will be a failure.”)
  • Need for control (“If I lose control, I am in danger.”)
  • Social comparison (“People will think I’m a loser.”)
  • Pessimism (“The world is filled with dangers.”)
  • Low tolerance for stress (“How can I protect myself if I’m all stressed out?”)

And recognize that these types of baggage aren’t black-and-white (i.e., you either have them or you don’t); rather, we all carry some baggage around with us from our upbringings and we all worry to different degrees. The question, though, is whether our worrying is healthy and adaptive or unhealthy and maladaptive. The way to tell which worrying you have is to ask yourself the following questions:

  • Do you worry about things that are not real or immediate threats?
  • Are you more anxious than relaxed?
  • Are you more unhappy than happy?
  • Do you have difficulty enjoying yourself because you worry so much?
  • Are you unwilling to take reasonable risks?
  • Do your worries interfere with your normal activities?

If you answered ‘no’ to the above questions, then you’re likely a healthy worrier, so keep doing what you’re doing because you’ll be sensitive to real threats, do what is reasonable to live a happy life, and you won’t drive yourself crazy. However, if you responded ‘yes’ to the questions, then you are probably an unhealthy worrier and you’ll want to take some steps to relieve yourself of that unnecessary burden.

Unfortunately, there is no wonder pill that will magically relieve you of your worrying (though there are, admittedly, anti-anxiety drugs that may help). There are, short of medication, some practical steps you can take to reduce the burden of worrying.

The best place to start is to address the cause of your worrying. If you can figure out what precisely you are worrying about, then you’re in a position to find a solution to the cause of your worrying. In the short term, you can also increase your awareness of what the most common sources of worry are for you (e.g., work, family, relationships). If you understand your worries, they can become, well, less worrisome. You can also look for pre-emptive solutions to the causes of your worrying. For example, if you know you worry excessively about deadlines at work, you can better prepare for the deadlines and be sure to complete your work well in advance.

Another thing that can cause the volume of your worrying to go up several notches is to worry about worrying. You can make yourself even more miserable by thinking that you are the only one in the world who worries about the things you worry about. If you can accept that worrying is just a normal part of life and everyone does it, then you can keep the volume of your worrying to a more manageable level.

Sometimes there is no immediate solution to the worrying (e.g., waiting to hear whether you got a job you had applied for) and you just can’t get your worrying out of your mind. In this case, the best strategy is to distract yourself the best you can from the worry. Whether reading a book, watching a movie, hanging out with friends, exercising, or what-have-you, if you’re focused on other activities, you’re bound to worry less. Even better, if you can do things that produce an emotional experience diametrically opposed to worrying, namely, anything that makes you feel positive, happy, excited, or relaxed, you will counter the negativity and anxiety that accompanies worrying. This is no panacea, but it can provide you with a beneficial respite from your worries.

In the long term, you can explore the deeper causes of your worrying. If you can directly “unpack” your baggage through reading, seminars, or counseling, you liberate yourself from the heart of your worries. Admittedly, this process can be emotionally difficult and time consuming, but the rewards are powerful and will last a lifetime.

Or, you can take the now famous, though somewhat simplistic, advice of the singer Bobby McFerrin: “Don’t worry. Be happy.”  

Categories: Personal Growth

Is Big Media Slowly Killing Our Children?

by:

Your children’s physical health is the foundation for everything they become and do. As corporeal beings, they, like the rest of humanity, are at the mercy of the fitness of their bodies to handle the ordinary challenges and extraordinary demands that are placed on them during childhood and beyond.

You are responsible for ensuring that your children treat their bodies like temples rather than garbage dumps so they continue to function properly for their lifetimes. This means sufficient sleep, a balanced diet, and regular exercise. Unfortunately, Big Media is not only not helping you accomplish this goal, but it’s actually a lot to interfere with your efforts.

Children now spend, on average, more than seven-and-a-half hours a day of free time interacting with technology. That doesn’t even include screen time devoted to school! What do you think children did with that substantial amount of time before this new technology came to dominate their lives? Before the advent of electricity, children worked a lot and played a little, mostly outdoors. Then, with the invention of television, much time has been spent in front of the “boob tube.” With few alternatives, children by default went outside and engaged in physical activity, for example, they ran around, played tag or kick the can, climbed the monkey bars, or rode their bikes. Plus, schools provided daily physical education classes that contributed further to a reasonable level of fitness. Unfortunately, many parents these days are so afraid of letting their children play outside unsupervised that they basically place them under house arrest and force them to stay inside.

And when they are locked up inside, what are they going to most often turn to for entertainment? Well, media, of course, for example, play video games (okay, Wii provides some exercise, but, according to research, isn’t nearly the equal of real physical activity), surf the Internet, and engage in social media. Also, physical education classes are few or nonexistent today due to misguided priorities and budgetary cuts. The result? One-third of American children are overweight or obese and 70 percent of them will become obese adults.

The essential question to ask is: What role does the explosion of media in the last decade play in what many consider to be a public health crisis? A growing body of evidence suggests that the answer to this question is: A significant role. For example, one study found that, among children, pre-teens, and teens, total daily media use was predictive of poor physical health. For pre-teens, daily video game playing was also a predictor. For teens, daily video game playing and daily hours online were also predictive. Importantly, this research controlled for demographics (e.g., age, ethnicity, socioeconomic status) and eating and exercise habits, thus strengthening the argument that technology alone was a significant contributor to poor health among young people.

Research has demonstrated that the more time that children spend in front of a screen (including television and video games), the more they ask for unhealthy food and drinks. The reason why is pretty obvious. The torrent of advertising directed at children and teenagers is comprised primarily of fast food, sugary cereal, candy, and highly processed snack foods (72 percent of all ads aimed at them, in fact), all significant contributors to the epidemic of obesity that has consumed (pun intended) our country.  And, due to what the researchers call the “nag factor,” parents often give in and give their children the junk food they crave.

The Internet has created cross-promotional opportunities that have only strengthened this influence. Children are now exposed to junk food advertising not only on television and in print, but also in social media, product placement on television and in video games, movies, smartphone and tablet apps, and ads that are disguised as online games and web sites.

Children have no chance against this tsunami of unhealthy messages that drowns them in a torrent of poor eating, cavities, sugar addiction, and obesity. Additionally, while your children are immersed in media, for example, sitting on the sofa watching TV, playing video games, or surfing the web, they are incurring significant opportunity costs in the form of being sedentary instead of physically active.

The influence of technology may also extend to unhealthy and potentially dangerous habits. One study reported that teens who use Facebook and other social media have significantly higher rates of smoking, alcohol consumption, and marijuana use, and are more likely to have sex at an earlier age. The researchers suggest that widespread and persistent exposure to images depicting these behaviors make them more acceptable and may cause teenagers to feel left out if they don’t engage in them. However, it should be noted that this study was only able to establish a connection between television watching and sexual behavior, but wasn’t able to prove that young people seeing these images actually causes this increase in high-risk behavior.

What or who can prevent your children from heading down a road of poor physical health? One word: parents. We certainly aren’t going to get the purveyors of junk food, candy, sugary drinks, and processed foods to change their ways because their products harm children. Profits, for them, obviously trumps concern for children. The only chance your children have is that you are on their side and take active steps to ensure that they grow up healthy.

You can’t just play defense in your efforts to ensure that technology doesn’t interfere with your children’s healthy development. Instead, you need to proactively create opportunities that will encourage your children’s physical health in spite of the digital world they live in, for example, turn off the TV, disconnect the Internet, and spend time outside.

You should also recognize that, in your efforts to ensure your children’s physical health, you aren’t just fulfilling their immediate physical requirements for a healthy childhood. Just as importantly, you’re setting your children on a health-affirming road in which healthy living will become their defaults for years to come. Is there any more precious gift you could give your children than their physical health? I don’t think so. And that is a gift that will keep on giving throughout their lives.

Categories: Parenting
Page 1 of 2312345...Last »