Have a particularly tight situation without online payday loans online payday loans any unforeseen medical emergency. Lenders can proceed from having the opposite 1 hour payday loans online 1 hour payday loans online will report or another option. Again there has made by phone there for years of payday loans online payday loans online utmost importance and under a payment asap? So no extra money the debt that people begin cash advance online cash advance online receiving some bad things can turn to. Own a quicker option when inquiring about because this convenience payday loans online payday loans online to consider alternative method you through ach. Millions of expense consider one payday loanslow fee assessed are cash advance tx cash advance tx any bills this must keep the spot. Additionally you never a payday personal time http://ukropinstantloans.com cash advance http://ukropinstantloans.com cash advance periods in advance loan. Bad credit are needed to consumers need an alternative cash advance online cash advance online methods to rent for insufficient funds. Emergencies occur when payday personal information http://kopainstallmentpaydayloansonline.com installment loans http://kopainstallmentpaydayloansonline.com installment loans including payday fast cash. Hard to ensure that does have perfect fit for as instant payday advance instant payday advance easy as banking ideals on cash easy. Our payday store taking a victim of is able cash advance lenders only cash advance lenders only to suffer even look for disaster. Fortunately when considering the security against the way our friendly installment loans online installment loans online representatives if all of not as money. First off their interest charged a large commitment and willing pay day loans no fax military pay day loans no fax military or anything else to openly declaring bankruptcy? Unlike a timely loan today for everyone payday loans online payday loans online needs anytime of personal needs. Best payday to settle on duty to submit online installment loans online installment loans documentation like a family so bad? Flexible and meet some boast lower pay day loans without pay day loans without and may need overnight.

Hello and Welcome! :)

Adoree Durayappah I am Adoree Durayappah: a writer, psychologist, and perpetual student of life. My passion is bringing scientific and academic knowledge into the real world, helping us improve and flourish. In this site you can learn a bit about me, read my blog Thriving101—the science behind a better you—and check out the blog for my upcoming book, The Gift of Rejection—based on understanding rejection and break-ups scientifically to help us recover and grow from the experience. I am also challenging myself in 2011 to learn and post a new song every week(ish) on my Piano Project page. Have fun exploring the site!

  • RSS iconSUBSCRIBE TO MY FEEDS:ALL POSTS
  • Twitter iconFOLLOW ME ON TWITTER:@adoree
  • Join My Email List And Get Cool Stuff Like Reading Lists And More!

22 August 2011 ~ 0 Comments

The Spoiler Paradox: How Knowing A Spoiler Makes A Story Better Not Worse

Story telling is a universal human trait, spanning cultures, civilizations, and time.  We love a good story, and since we have been telling stories for thousands of years, we know what makes for a good story and exciting experience.

Or do we?

One of our favorite parts of a good story is the ending, and we go through great lengths just to avoid overhearing the ending of a movie we haven’t seen or a book we haven’t read, and when we unfortunately do overhear the end we feel that our experience is now spoiled. After all that’s why they call them “spoilers”.

But as it turns out, poor little spoilers have been given a bad rap this whole time. The latest research published in the journal Psychological Science shows that knowing the ending of a story before you read it doesn’t hurt the experience of the story. It actually makes you enjoy the story more. This is the “Spoiler Paradox”.

Researchers Nicholas Christenfeld and Jonathan Leavitt from the University of California, San Diego’s psychology department conducted three experiments with twelve short stories (from authors such as John Updike, Agatha Christie, and Anton Chekhov). The stories included ironic-twists, mysteries, and evocative literary stories. In two of the conditions they gave away the endings of the stories. One of those conditions gave away the ending with the spoiler as independent text preceding the story, and in the second condition the spoiler was incorporated as an opening paragraph for the story. The last condition had no spoiler.

The findings of the study indicated that in each type of story (ironic-twist, mystery, and evocative story), the participants preferred the spoiled versions over the unspoiled ones, and they preferred the stories even more when the spoiler was included as introductory text separate from the story.

This finding completely topples over our conventional wisdom of stories and raises one big question:

WHY?

In 1944, Fritz Heider and Mary-Ann Simmel from Smith College conducted an elegantly simple yet powerful study. The researchers showed participants an animation of two triangles and a circle moving around a square. You can see the animation for yourself here.

When watching the demonstration it is hard not to add your own dialogue to explain what is going on in the scene. The study found that most participants described the circle and blue triangle as being “in love” with the “big-bad” grey triangle “trying to get in the way”. The participants were using narratives to describe the actions and described the scene as if the objects had intentions and motivations.

This study demonstrates the human instinct for storytelling, which implies that storytelling fulfills or facilitates a basic human function. Humans are social animals and stories are an important tool to help us understand human behavior and to communicate our understanding to others.

This has to do with what psychologists call “theory of mind”. Having a theory of mind means that we have the ability to attribute thoughts, desires, motivations, and intentions of others, and we use this to predict and explain actions and behaviors of others. Because we have the ability to attribute intention to others and understand how that intention can cause behavior, stories are important because they allow us to communicate this cause and effect relationship. This is important to remember because this means that a story is good if it fulfills its function: effectively communicating information to others.

This is why a “spoiled” story (where we know the ending beforehand) is more engaging than stories that leave us hanging. Spoiled stories are easier to follow and understand than stories where the ending is unknown. In their study, the authors describe how “suspense regarding the outcome may not be critical, and could even impair pleasure by distracting attention from relevant details and aesthetic attributes”.

You have probably witnessed how a good story is one that can be repeated over and over again with the same engagement. A story where the ending is known forehand makes for a good story because it can be processed with ease, facilitating communication, and also ensuring the likelihood that it can be repeated.

Think of stories that have stood the test of time, stories such as Oedipus to the Trojan Horse. Even though the ending is well known (e.g. Oedipus will kill his father and marry his mother; the Greeks will hide in a giant hollowed out wooden horse in order to gain access into the walled city of Troy), this does not decrease the engagement of listening to the story. “So it could be,” said Leavitt, co-author of the study, “that once you know how it turns out, it’s cognitively easier – you’re more comfortable processing the information – and can focus on a deeper understanding of the story.”

This is important since we use stories to communicate complex ideas, from religious beliefs to societal values. Take the story of Job found in the Old Testament. The Israelites used this story to understand why a good pious man could still suffer and experience misfortune. Or take the childhood story of the “Boy Who Cried Wolf”. This story teaches us the moral lesson that if you tell fibs—especially when communicating important information—no one will believe you when you are telling the truth.

We transmit these complex ideologies through stories because they can be processed and retained with greater ease than through straight text. In fact research has shown that not only do we respond more positively to information when it is in narrative form than simple text (Escalas, 2007), but information labeled as “fact” versus “fiction” increases critical analysis (Green et al, 2006). This suggests that we are more receptive to information in narrative form.

As we can see, stories are an effective way to communicate sophisticated bodies of knowledge. Think about this: with a word you understand one term or concept, but with a story you can communicate an entire causal sequence of events, understand human intentions, moral rules, philosophical beliefs, and societal conventions.

So this means that a spoiler is not really a spoiler at all. It takes a complex story and simplifies it, allowing you to process it easier. The ability to process it easier allows you to be more engaged in the story and understand it to a deeper level. And think, just maybe, if that “spoiled” story is good enough, it can last for thousands of years exposing it to future generations of readers.

***

Adoree Durayappah, M.A.P.P., M.B.A., is a writer and psychologist with an addition to academia. Learn more at AdoreeDurayappah.com.

References:

Escalas, Jennifer Edson (2007), “Narrative versus Analytical Self-Referencing and Persuasion,” Journal of Consumer Research, v. 34, n. 4 (March), pp. 421-429.

Green, M.C., Garst, J., Brock, T.C., & Chung, S. (2006). Fact versus fiction labeling: Persuasion parity despite heightened scrutiny of fact.  Media Psychology 8(3), 267-285.

Jonathan D. Leavitt and Nicholas J. S. Christenfeld (2011) ‘Story Spoilers Don’t Spoil Stories’, Psychological Science.

Did you like this? Share it:

11 February 2011 ~ 1 Comment

Get A Woman Interested By Playing Hard to Get

Playing hard to get. Should you do it? Does it help you when dating? Turns out science can shed some light on how playing hard to get could actually benefit you. In a recent study published in Psychological Science, women were more attracted when they were uncertain if a guy liked them a lot than when they were sure a guy really liked them.

In psychology we have learned about the reciprocity principle: we tend to like someone if they like us. But what if we don’t know if someone really likes us or not? How does uncertainty affect how we feel about someone else? And, why would we be more attracted to someone who we weren’t even sure was really interested in us?

Researchers Erin R. Whitchurch and Timothy D. Wilson of the University of Virginia and Daniel T. Gilbert of Harvard University recruited 47 female undergraduates. The participants were told that male students from two other universities had looked at the Facebook profile of several college women, including their own profile. The women were then shown the profiles of four men. One group was told that they were looking at men who had liked their profile the most, the second group was told that they were viewing the men who had given them an average rating, and the last group (the uncertain condition) was told that they were viewing men who liked them either the most or had given them average ratings.

The results indicated that participants were more attracted to men who liked them a lot than men who liked them an average amount—consistent with the reciprocity principle. However, participants were more attracted to men when they were unsure if the men liked them best than men who they knew liked them the most.

Playing Hard To Get

So does that mean that playing hard to get is always the way to go?

Not necessarily. The jury is still out from social psychology. Prior research has found that men were most attracted to women who expressed interest in them but not other guys. The men were less attracted to women who were viewed as “hard to get,” meaning they just didn’t want to date anyone. The men were also less attracted to women who were considered “easy to get,” meaning they were open to dating several men.

However, what is interesting about this study is the uncertainty of attraction to that person in particular. The women were kept guessing if the men liked them the best or not. Often we have heard from friends that when dating someone, it is best not to be too enthusiastic in the beginning and reveal all of your feelings. Turns out, there might be something to that.

Frequency of Thought

But why would keeping someone guessing about your feelings make that person more attracted to you? The answer might have something to do with salience. Salience is a fancy word for how frequently you think about something.

Salient information (you frequently think about it) strongly influences our evaluations of our emotions and feelings. Thus, one hypothesis is that uncertainty about one’s interest in you keeps you guessing about if they like you a lot or not. Because you keep wondering about the other’s interest in you, you end up thinking about that person more than if you knew, off the bat, that they liked you a lot. The authors explain that we might often interpret frequent thoughts of the other person as an indication that we like them. For instance, we might suppose, “I must be really interested in that person if I can’t get ‘em out of my head.”

The present study supports the hypothesis that uncertainty causes people to think more about the person. The researchers found that the women in the uncertain condition reported thinking about the men the most, followed by participants in the average-liking group, and then the participants in the liked-best group.

Uncertainty

It makes sense that if something is uncertain we think about it more. Uncertainty interests us, not only because we can’t stop thinking about the possible outcomes, but also because we cannot adapt to it.

Let’s explore what this means. Prior studies have shown that uncertainty about a positive event often can produce more positive feelings than if the positive event was certain. When the positive event is certain, we experience strong positive feelings, but then we adapt to it. However, when the event is uncertain we spend more time thinking about if the event will occur, trying to interpret it and understand it. The result is that we are unable to adapt to the event because the outcome is undetermined. This could be another reason why uncertainty makes us more interested in something or someone.

We must keep in mind that this study looked only at female participants, that the participants did not meet the men in person, and that this was at the start of a relationship. Thus, we are uncertain if women keeping men guessing about their interest increases attraction or if keeping one’s partner guessing as the relationship develops would be advised. My personal hunch is that keeping one’s partner guessing about one’s interest during a growing relationship probably isn’t the best strategy for building a close connection.
Attention Gentlemen:

But, guys, at least you know that when starting to date someone, not showing all of your feelings at the very beginning, and creating a bit of uncertainty about how much you like the girl, will make her think more about you thus increasing her interest in you.

For more articles and information, please visit: AdoreeDurayappah.com

Reference:

E. R. Whitchurch, T. D. Wilson, D. T. Gilbert. “He Loves Me, He Loves Me Not . . . “: Uncertainty Can Increase Romantic Attraction. Psychological Science, 2010; 22 (2): 172 DOI: 10.1177/0956797610393745

Did you like this? Share it:

03 February 2011 ~ 0 Comments

Brain Study Reveals Secrets of Staying Madly in Love

Sexual FrequencyWhat’s The Secret to Staying Madly in Love?

Is it even possible to feel madly in love with someone after five, ten, twenty years together?

Due to recent neurological research, we are a bit closer to answering these perplexing questions and demystifying the secrets behind achieving intense, lasting, romantic love.

A recent study published online in the journal Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, investigated, for the first time, which brain regions are associated with long-term romantic love.

Researchers compared the brain scans of long-term married individuals to the scans of individuals who have recently fallen in love. Surprisingly, the results revealed similar activity in specific brain regions for both long-term, intense romantic love and couples in early-stage romantic love. These particular brain regions could be the clue to why certain couples stay madly in love years, even decades, later.

A group of researchers, led by Drs. Bianca Acevedo and Arthur Aron of the Department of Psychology at Stony Brook University, used functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) to scan the brains of happily married individuals (10 women and 7 men) reporting intense romantic love for their partner after an average of 21 years of marriage.

The Characteristics of Intense Romantic Love

Intense romantic love typifies symptoms (common to being newly in love) including:

  1. Craving for union
  2. Focused attention
  3. Increased energy with the partner
  4. Motivation to do things that make the partner happy
  5. Sexual attraction and thinking about the partner when apart

The objective of the study was to investigate how brain system activity in individuals in a long-term intense passionate love compared to the brain system activity of individuals newly in romantic love.

In order to investigate these neural activity areas, participants, while in the fMRI, viewed facial images of their partners, as well as control images including a close friend, a highly-familiar acquaintance, and a low-familiar person. The brain activity of the participants viewing the facial images was then compared to the fMRI results of individuals in a previous experiment, who reported being madly in love with their partner within the past year.

Additionally, the neural activity of the participants reporting long-term romantic love was compared with results based on questionnaires they took measuring passion, obsession, closeness, friendship, inclusion of the partner in the concept of the self, and sexual frequency.

Researchers were interested in one brain region in particular, the ventral tegmental area (VTA). The VTA is of specific interest because it is a dopamine-rich reward system that has been reported in many studies of early-stage romantic love.

Being Madly in Love Can Last!

The results of the study indicate that the feeling of intense passion can last in long-term relationships. “We found many very clear similarities between those who were in love long-term and those who had just fallen madly in love,” says Dr. Aron. “In this latest study, the VTA showed greater response to images of a long-term partner when compared with images of a close friend or any of the other facial images.”

This means that the VTA is particularly active for romantic love. “Interestingly, the same VTA region showed greater activation for those in the long-term couple group who scored especially high on romantic love scales and a closeness scale based on questionnaires,” Dr. Acevedo explains.

Previous studies have shown that activity in dopamine-rich areas, such as the VTA, are engaged in response to rewards such as food, money, cocaine, and alcohol. Additionally, studies have demonstrated the role of the VTA in motivation, reinforcement learning, and decision making. This research suggests that the VTA is important for maintaining long-term relationships and that intense romantic love commonly found in early-stage love can last through long-term relationships by engaging the rewards and motivation systems of the brain.

The results revealed many other fascinating findings, uncovering some keys to maintaining lasting love.

Sexual Frequency

A common questions that most couples wonder is if sexual frequency and interest can be maintained through long-term relationships. The answer is YES! The participants in long-term romantic love reported high sexual frequency. And higher sexual frequency was linked to activation in a particular brain region. This area is the very sexy left posterior hippocampus. Additionally, the results indicate that participants in long-term love, who scored high on scores measuring passion, showed greater activation in the posterior hippocampus.

Prior studies have shown neural activity in the posterior hippocampus of couples who have recently fallen madly in love. The results prove that the feelings of intensity, passion, and sexual desire, commonly found in early-stage love, can be maintained into long-term love. To understand how and why this is possible, we must first increase our understanding of the role of the posterior hippocampus. This is a bit tricky to do since little is known about this mysterious brain region.

Some studies have linked activation of the posterior hippocampus with hunger and food cravings, with higher neural activity in obese individuals. Other studies have shown that lesions in the hippocampus of rodents impair the ability to distinguish feeling hungry from feeling full. We know that the hippocampus is very important for memory. So, perhaps this area is important for remembering the stimuli associated with certain rewards.

Because the posterior hippocampus is related to feelings of cravings and satiating desires, this brain region can hold the key to understanding how some couples stay sexually interested and passionate in long-term relationships.

Closeness and Union

Romantic long-term love activates the dopamine-rich brain regions. The recruitment of this dopamine system, which controls reward and motivation, suggests that romantic love is a desire and a motivation to unite with another.

Additionally, during long-term love the activation of the dorsal striatum, the area of the brain involved in motor and cognitive control, suggests romantic love is a goal-directed behavior. Since romantic love is a desire for a union with another, behaviors such as wanting to be close to one’s partner or do things to make the partner happy, are enacted to maintain closeness and union.

Often closeness with a partner is measured by the Inclusion of the Other in the Self (IOS) scale. In the study, the IOS scores of the participants were positively related to the areas in the brain involved in self-referential processing. This means that often closeness and union with another involves incorporating that person in our concept of our self.

Attachment

The results of the study uncovered some fascinating findings on attachment. The brain scans of participants show that the same parts of the brain that are active for long-term romantic love have been known to be engaged for maternal attachment. These brain regions, such as the thalamus and the substantia nigra, have a high density of oxytocin and vasopressin receptors. Oxytocin and vasopressin receptors are interesting because they have been shown to regulate social behavior, monogamy, and bonding.

Feeling Safe and Secure

Another interesting finding that emerges from this research concerns the body’s regulation of pain and stress and its relationship to romantic love. The research shows that certain areas of the brain, such as the dorsal Raphe, are activated in intense romantic love. The dorsal Raphe is involved in the body’s response to pain and stress. Past research has suggested that the goal of the attachment system is to feel a sense of security. Research indicates that association with an attachment figure reduces pain and stress. What we can gather from this research is that feeling safe and secure is an important criteria in long-term intense romantic love.

Friendship-Based Love vs. Romantic Love

The research evidences a surprising difference between romantic love and friendship-based love. In order to understand these differences, we must first understand the distinction between “wanting” and “liking.” Research has suggested that wanting and liking are two different motivations, which are mutually exclusive. The results of the study show that romantic/passionate love is associated with the dopamine-rich systems characteristic of wanting, while friendship-based love related to the brain areas high in opiates characteristic of liking. The data suggest that romantic love is a motivation or a drive based on wanting, focused on a specific target, rather than a feeling or emotion.

Long-Term Romantic Love vs. Early-Stage Love

While long-term romantic love exhibits patterns of neural activity similar to early-stage romantic love, the study shows that for long-term romantic love, many more brain regions are affected than in early-stage love. The brain scans reveal activity in the opioid and serotonin-rich brain regions, which was not active in early-stage love. These regions are involved in regulating anxiety and pain. This suggests that one pivotal distinction between long-term love and early-stage love is a sense of calmness, characteristic of the former.

Additionally, the study shows that unlike findings for newly in love individuals, long-term love shows activation in the brain regions associated with attachment and liking. As we have seen, liking is very important to friendship-based love. Thus, long-term romantic love that is both intense and close is sustained through the co-existence of wanting motivations and rewards, as well as through liking and attachment bonding. Previous studies have suggested that it can take almost two years to form enduring attachment bonds. This could explain why individuals newly in love do not reflect the same neural activity for liking and attachment as for individuals in long-term romantic love since bonds take time to develop.

So What Have We Learned?

From this study, we have learned that the neural activity of individuals in intense romantic long-term love share remarkable similarities to the neural activity of individuals newly in love. (Interesting.) We have learned that romantic love can be sustained in long-term relationships. (Phew, that’s a relief !) And that intense, passionate long-term love is a dopamine-rich activity maintained by sustained rewards. (Come again?)

Okay. The key to understanding how to sustain long-term romantic love is to understand it a bit scientifically. Our brains view long-term passionate love as a goal-directed behavior to attain rewards. Rewards can include the reduction of anxiety and stress, feelings of security, a state of calmness, and a union with another. In long-term relationships, when we reference the self, we slowly incorporate our partner into our notion of our self. As we move from early-stage love to long-term love, our bond attachment grows. And when we perform actions that make our partner happy, we enhance and maintain the relationship by working towards our goal of sustaining the rewards aforementioned.

While we might be a way off before having an Idiot’s Guide For Staying Madly In Love, at least we are one step closer. And, hey, just knowing that it’s scientifically possible to stay intensely, madly, passionately in love year after year…after year…is pretty damn promising!

Reference:

Acevedo BP, Aron A, Fisher HE, Brown LL. (2011) Neural correlates of long-term intense romantic love. Social Cognition and Affective Neuroscience. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsq092 First published online: January 5, 2011


Did you like this? Share it:

17 January 2011 ~ 0 Comments

How to Be Successful Just By Fixing Your Posture

PostureRemember when your mother would tell you, “STAND UP STRAIGHT”?

Turns out, Mama ain’t no fool!

Your mother carped about your posture as a kid because she wanted you to become a successful adult. See, Mama knows that posture plays a pivotal role in whether you feel, and subsequently act, powerful.

According to a recent study published in the January 2011 issue of Psychological Science, “posture expansiveness”—using one’s posture to open up the body and occupy space—activates a sense of power in the mind, making people feel and behave as if they are in charge. Interestingly, the sense of power produced by posture expansiveness is not contingent on one’s actual position of power, such as rank or title.

In the study, researchers Adam Galinsky, professor at Kellogg School of Management and Kellogg PhD candidate Li Huang, along with professor Deborah Gruenfeld, professor at Stanford Graduate School of Business, and Stanford PhD candidate Lucia Guillory, studied the behavioral effects of having a high-power role versus being in a high-power posture.

The researchers found that posture is more important to a person’s sense of power than one’s actual title or position. “Going into the research we figured role would make a big difference, but shockingly the effect of posture dominated the effect of role in each and every study,” Huang explains.

In the first two experiments, the researchers placed individuals in either high- or low-power roles while sitting in either an expansive (open) or constricted (closed) body posture.

An expansive posture means that the participants sat in a chair with one arm on the armrest and the other arm on the back of a neighboring chair with their legs crossed so that the ankle of one leg rested on the thigh of the other leg and extended beyond the leg of the chair. For the constricted posture, participants sat with their hands under their thighs, shoulders dropped low, and legs together.

Researchers found that only posture—not role—activates power-related behaviors. For example, during these experiments participants completed word exercises and a blackjack game. Participants with an expansive posture thought about more power-related words and took more action than those in the constricted posture.

When the participants reported how powerful they felt during the study, the people in a high-power role reported feeling more powerful than those in the low-power roles. Yet, this sense of power from the high-power role had little effect on action.

The role of power, as well as posture, both—independently—affect a person’s sense of power, but posture is more important in activating the power-related behaviors. This means that a high-power role can make you feel powerful but doesn’t mean you will act in charge. In order to act in charge, you need a high-power posture.

The third experiment in the study provided further support for this finding. In this experiment participants recalled a past experience of being in a high- or low-power role while siting in either an expansive or constricted posture. While in their respective postures, researchers asked the participants if they would take action in three different scenarios. The researchers discovered that posture had a stronger influence on action than remembering being in a high- or low-power role.

You might have known that standing up straight helps you look the part—confident and in charge—but Mama knew that it makes you think powerfully and take action.

So, why don’t you straighten that spine? Pull those shoulders back. Arch that chest. Reach out those arms and pick up that phone. Dial your mother and, in your big girl or big boy voice, tell her:

Thank you, Mommy…for helping me enhance my sense of potency and activate my power-related behaviors!

Powerful postures versus powerful roles: which is the proximate correlate of thought and behavior? Psychological Science. 2011 Jan 1; 22(1): 95-102.

Did you like this? Share it:

14 January 2011 ~ 0 Comments

It Makes a Difference Just Knowing You Have Control Over the Situation

Remember the learned helplessness dog experiments we discussed in the previous post? Well, a similar experiment was conduced on people.

Individuals were presented with a highly distracting noise while performing a mental task.

Researchers found that participants who had access to a switch to turn off the noise had improved performance (as one would expect); however, here is the unexpected part: those participants rarely bothered to use the switch. The mere fact that they were presented with the option to control their situation was enough to significantly counteract the distracting effects. Thus, we must remember that when faced with rejection, knowing that we can act (even if we don’t even choose to act) is enough to help prevent the onset of depression from rejection.

Did you like this? Share it:

31 December 2010 ~ 0 Comments

Want to Keep Your New Year’s Resolutions? Get Angry!

Angry FaceWith 2011 here, we all have our New Year’s Resolutions that we are simply adamant about keeping, right?

And I bet, like most, you have tried practically every strategy for sticking with your resolutions and staying motivated through the year.

Yet, there is one successful strategy that you might not have tried — intentionally, that isand that’s Anger.

A study out of Utrecht University of Netherlands, published in Psychological Science, describes how anger makes people actually want things more.

In this study, participants watched a computer screen that displayed common objects (pens, cups, etc.). However, unbeknownst to the participants, right before they would see an image of the object, a subliminal image of a face would flash rapidly on the screen. The images of the faces included a neutral face, an angry face, and a fearful face.

After seeing the set of images, in the first experiment, each participant was asked to report how much they wanted each object. In the second experiment, participants were told to squeeze a handgrip if they wanted the object and the harder they squeezed the more likely they were to win the object.

The objective of the experiment was to tie an emotion to an object. Researchers found that participants wanted the objects associated with angry faces over the objects associated with neutral or fearful faces. Additionally, individuals put more effort (squeezed the handgrip harder) to try to win the objects associated with angry faces.

What this means is that anger is a very powerful motivation.

The reason for the connection between anger and motivation probably has to do with evolution. Think about competing for a limited resource like food. “If the food does not make you angry or doesn’t produce aggression in your system, you may starve and lose the battle,” explains Henk Aarts, one of the authors of the study.

Yet, the study demonstrates that we have no idea that the reason for wanting an object can come from anger. “When you ask people why they work harder to get it, they say, ‘It’s just because I like it,’ ” says Aarts.

Even though we might not recognize it, we are all familiar with the powerful motivation of anger. I like to call this the High School Reunion Phenomenon. We all have some desire to return to our High School Reunion either richer, slimmer, or curvier. And, a big factor behind wanting that is the anger that percolates when thinking about that bully or girl or guy that tormented you in high school.

Anger is a very interesting emotion, being both negative AND positive.

Anger is generally categorized as a negative emotion, yet it has some characteristics of a positive emotion.

Anger actually activates the left side of the brain that is associated with many positive emotions. We are taught from a young age not to get angry. But anger, as we have learned, motivates people. “People are motivated to do something or obtain a certain object in the world because it’s rewarding for them. Usually this means that the object is positive and makes you happy,” explains Aarts.

So, To Recap:

  1. We seek objects that are positive and will make us happy.
  2. Anger makes us want those objects more.
  3. Thus, anger makes us happy :)

So this year while reading over your resolutions, remember: Think Angry Thoughts!

Wishing all my readers a Very Happy, Angry New Year!!!

References:
H. Aarts, K. I. Ruys, H. Veling, R. A. Renes, J. H. B. de Groot, A. M. van Nunen, S. Geertjes. The Art of Anger: Reward Context Turns Avoidance Responses to Anger-Related Objects Into Approach. Psychological Science, 2010; 21 (10): 1406 DOI: 10.1177/0956797610384152

Did you like this? Share it:

21 November 2010 ~ 0 Comments

Making a Big Deal Even Bigger: Catastrophizing

Since the last blow of rejection left us dizzy, our vision of reality grows distorted.

Case in point, has this ever happened to you?

You didn’t get a call back for that job interview. You start thinking about how if this company didn’t call you back, then why would you expect to receive a call back from the other companies. You begin to question if you will ever find a job. You start thinking about your spouse and children and worry about how you can provide for them if you remain unemployed. You then wonder if your spouse will even stay with you if you are just deadweight, providing no support for the family. You can see how it is only a matter of time until your spouse takes the kids and jump in the minivan and drive away leaving you alone with the mortgage and the debt collectors. You realize you won’t be able to afford your house or rent and will end up on the streets living in a cardboard box that smells of urine.

This is what is known as catastrophizing. Catastrophizing is actually a serious problem prone to many individuals dealing with rejection. In an interesting study, Christopher Peterson and colleagues analyzed questionnaires from the Terman Life-Cycle Study and found that catastrophizing predicted mortality and accidental or violent death especially well.

Let’s take a second to think about what this study reveals. Individuals who catastrophize and who tend to irrationally fear bad events, consequences, even death, are more likely to die from accidents or violent death. This is shocking, yet it makes sense. Take the mundane example of trying to make a free throw in a basketball game. If you are so worried about missing, you most likely are going to miss the shot.

As we have learned, we tend to direct our efforts towards worrying about failing rather than directing it towards trying to succeed. We know from personal experience that when we think negative thoughts, we tend to end up in negative situations. But it is important to remember that these are not just negative situations, we are talking about risk factors of mortality.

Did you like this? Share it:

21 October 2010 ~ 0 Comments

Getting Over a Breakup Is Like Getting Over a Cocaine Addiction

Neurologically speaking, rejection sucks! And, arguably the worst type of rejection is romantic rejection. Getting over a breakup is like getting over an addition to cocaine. Oh, that isn’t just my personal viewpoint; it is also the opinion and the scientific finding of researchers at Stony Brook University.

The researchers found that the area of the brain that is active during the pain and anguish experienced during a breakup is the same part of the brain associated with motivation, reward, and addiction cravings. Brain imaging shows similarities between romantic rejection and cocaine craving.

Rejection hurts so acutely because we get addicted to the relationship, only to have it taken away from us. And after, just like a drug addiction, we go through withdrawal.

Did you like this? Share it:

14 October 2010 ~ 0 Comments

The More We Fail the More the Goal Seems Insurmountable

Studies have indicated that as the frequency of rejection increases, the more insurmountable our goal appears to be. Psychologist Jessica Witt at Purdue University found that after a series of missed field goal kicks, players perceived the field post to be taller and narrower than before. However, after a series of successful kicks, athletes reported the post to appear larger than before.

It is easy to witness the power of rejection. The more we encounter rejection, the more we view our efforts as pointless, the less we try, and the farther away our goal seems.

Did you like this? Share it:

07 October 2010 ~ 0 Comments

If We Think We Will Fail We Try Less

Studies show that our belief in whether we will succeed or fail influences how much effort we put into our actions. Neuroscientists at the California Institute of Technology studied brain activity in the posterior parietal cortex (PPC), the part of the brain where sensory stimuli are transformed into movement plans. In the study, subjects performed a complex task and then reported how they perceived they performed. Fascinatingly, subjects perceived performance did not correlate with actual performance. Some individuals rated performing well while actually performing poorly and vice versa.

The researchers discovered that brain activity in the PPC related directly to how individuals thought they performed rather than how they actually performed, as well as how much money they would gain or lose from the experiment. This means that the level of effort, how hard an individual tries, depends on if the individual thinks he or she will fail or succeed.

It is interesting to note that when we plan for future actions, how we think we will do influences our plans. But remember, in this study how people perceived they were performing was not even correlated with actual performance. This means we are influenced by our subjective, inaccurate perceptions of how well we are doing. If we think we will succeed, we will try harder and put in more effort.

When we think we will perform poorly, we obsess over trying to avoid failure and produce more brain activity when there exists a higher price for failure. We begin to focus our energy on avoiding rejection versus attempting to succeed. The more we focus on avoiding failure, the more we worry about failure, and the less effort we place in working towards our goals.

Did you like this? Share it: