Postcards from the Id

Interesting Article on Information and Choices

This article at Science Daily reviews research into how people make decisions, even fully informed decisions, based on short-term or long-term gain.  Seems that, even when fully informed about how the long-term decision pays off way more (in the long-term), people will more often choose the route with the short-term pay-off.  From the article:

As part of the study, 78 subjects were repeatedly given two options through a computer program that allowed them to accumulate points. For each choice, one option offered the subject more points. But choosing the other option could lead to more points further along in the experiment.

A small cash bonus was tied to the subjects' performance, providing an incentive to rack up more points during the 250 trial questions.

However, subjects who were given full and accurate information about what they would have to give up in the short term to rack up points in the long term, chose the quick payoff more than twice as often as those who were given false information or no information about the rewards they would be giving up.

In a real-life scenario, a student who stayed home to study and then learned he had missed a fun party would be less likely to study next time in a similar situation -- even if that option provides more long-term benefits.

I think this gets to the essence of many issues involved in the process of therapy, at least from my perspective.  I've never been the biggest fan of "insight" as a catalyst for change.  The idea that someone gains new information, or is able to see something from a new pespective, can have value.  However, I haven't seen much evidence that such insight leads to a permanent shift towards healthier behavior.  I mean, really, who requires "insight" to learn that that Big Mac you want to eat may be quick, cheap, and easy (and satisfies a craving), but isn't as good for your long-term health compared to that salad you could make.  Everyone knows this; often, people even understand their own eating issues.  But that doesn't stop millions of people from ordering Big macs on a regular basis.  This point is touched on in the article:

"You'd think that with more information about your options, a person would make a better decision. Our study suggests the opposite," says Associate Professor Bradley Love, who conducted the research with graduate student Ross Otto. "To fully appreciate a long-term option, you have to choose it repeatedly and begin to feel the benefits."

What I point out to people who are attempting to change behavior is that information is necessary, but not suffiecient, for behavior change.  Yes, you need to know what the better alternatives are.  But how to make those alternative behaviors your new habits requires far more than simply a cognitive understanding of them.

This certainly applies in the case of addictive behavior.  On a certain intellectual level, most people with, say, an alcohol problem will have at least moments of clarity, where they gain insight into the impact their drinking is having on them.  However, this alone is rarely enough to reduce alcohol consumption.  Why?  In part (as related to the findings of the article), sobriety really sucks - from the perspective of the alcoholic.

Let me elaborate.  I think oftentimes people with good intentions will attempt to motivate a loved one or friend to address their alcohol problem with promises of what sobriety will do for them.  This, however, is not a great way to proceed.  Simply put, sobriety does nothing for alcoholic - short-term.  In fact, it tends to suck way more than alcoholism.  If it were so great, no one would need treatment.  The problem is that sobriety is a much better long-term life decision, but in the short-term, it is very uncomfortable.  This is one of the reasons AA and others will state that most people need to hit rock bottom before they get serious about recovery - becasue that's the only vantage point from which the sober lifestyle looks appealing.

I've warned clients who are attempting to quit alcohol and drug use - the next month is going to really, really suck.  You'll feel miserable, irritable, short-fused, poor sleep, etc.  However, if you can get through that month, you will then start to also experience some of the benefits of this alternative lifestyle.  Soberiety may never be easy, but it will get easier, as the advantages catch up, and then pass, the diaadvantages.  But short-term, forget it.

Another little tidbit that's important:

"Basically, people have to stay away from thinking about the short-term pains and gains or they are sunk and, objectively, will end up worse off," says Love.

This is extremely important in facilitating behavior change - filling in the empty spaces.  If you are helping someone try to quit using alcohol, to stay with the example, you can't simply focus on the "don'ts," as in: "Don't do this, don't do that, don't go here," etc.   This is a person who has spent a lot of their day thinking about drinking, thinking about where to get their drinks, actually drinking, recovering from drinking, etc.  There will be a lot of spaces in the day, both mentally and behaviorally.  What should fill in those gaps?:  Something...and that is a post for another time.  But in general, you need "Do's" too - like 90 meetings in 90 days - something to distract from the short-term pain, and to help fill in those gaps.  Otherwise, the old habits will come back, further reinforcing the undesired behavior. 

 

 

Your Poker Face May Need Work

Science Daily reviews an article published in Current Biology that indicates people give away the size of the number they are thinking about through their eyes.   According to the researchers, we tend to look down and to the left when the number we are thinking of is smaller than the previous number, while we look up and to the right if the number is larger.  From the article, here is the explanation:

When we think of numbers we automatically code them in space, with smaller number falling to the left and larger numbers to the right. That is, we think of them along a left-to-right oriented mental number line -- often without even noticing this number-space association ourselves."

"This study shows that shifts along the mental number line are accompanied by systematic eye movements. We suggest that when we navigate through mental representations -- as for example numbers -- we re-use brain processes that primarily evolved for interacting and navigating in the outside world."

It's interesting that our eyes shift in response to what we are "looking at" in our mental representations, at least for the majority of us.  I wonder what the researchers hypothesize regarding the outcome if they were to assess individuals who cannot read, are blind, etc.  I also wonder (as many of the professional poker players probably do, as well) if this can be corrected or altered if an individual is aware of this reflex, or if we are unable to prevent our eyes from acting this way...

Statistical Significance

Over at Marginal Revolution, they've got a post up about the meaning of statistical significance, with links to other posts on the issue.  The post discusses the flaws of relying too heavily on alpha levels for determining significance, the reasons why this is a flawed approach, and the particular problems we have in the social sciences with respect to this issue.  I remember discussing this in graduate school to some degree, including discussions about broadening one's knowledge of statistics to utilize other measures such as effect size to gain a better sense of the true significance of a finding.  I also recall more than a few issues where there might have been statistical significance found with respect to a study, but the clinical significance was negligible.  Here is what I wrote about that issue in the comments section:

We see some of this in psychological testing. For example, in IQ testing, we may assess someone with a gap of, say, 10 points between their verbal IQ and their performance (i.e. nonverbal) IQ. While this gap may be statistically significant (happening with a lack of frequency that, statistically, it reaches significance), it doesn't mean much in terms of someone's intellectual functioning. What is of far more concern is whether a gap between the scores approaches what is called clinical significance - at that point, we may see certain issues resulting from a gap that large (say, roughly, 20+ points difference off the top of my head).

In other words, just because something reaches statistical significance (at the .05 level) doesn't mean it is actually telling you anything useful, even if it is infrequent.

I think you sometimes run up against this as you gets tons of data on a particular issue, where the effect size gets bigger and bigger: you may get statistically significant differences for groups that really don't tell you much. As an example (and to stay with IQ), I remember that men outscored women on the nonverbal section by a couple points (on average), while women outscored men on the verbal section by a couple of points. Given the thousands of data sets that were utilized in conducteing such large studies, a difference of 103 versus 100 on Verbal IQ came out as statistically significant, even though a difference of three points is clinically meaningless.

If you are interested in statistics and research, I recommend checking out the links...

Psychology Word of the Day: Thought Latency

Acording to Kaplan and Saddock, "thought latency" is "the period of time between a thought and its verbal expression."  It is increased in schizophrenia (often referred to as blocking), while increased during manic episodes (referred to as pressured speech).

In schizophrenia and other formal thought disorders, one may see significant delays in the ability of the individual to respond to a question.  Internally, they may have a thought to express; however, it is difficult for them to transition from a thought into the initiation of speech.  Other times, they may initiate a statement, only to stop prior to completion.  While this happens to all of us at some point or another (when you lose your train of thought, and discontinue your sentence), it is significantly more pronounced during episodes of disorganized thinking.  The interruption may be permanent, to the point the individual even forgets the original topic they were speaking about.

In manic episodes and other situations where speech is rapid (for example, someone under the influence of meth or cocaine), the latency period is impaired in the other direction.  The speech may be so fast it is difficult to understand, and in signifiant cases, the individual is unable to slow themselves down.  It is almost like hitting a fast-forward button on someone.  Again, someone may exhibit this under less significant circumstances (i.e. excited about something, anxious, etc.), but usually people in those situations can respond to requests by others to slow down their pace.  In full manic episodes, the individual is less likely to be able to control their rate of speech.

  

Short Article on Treatment Options for Generalized Anxiety Disorder

Here is a short but informative article on Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD), including symptoms and treatment options.  From the article:

GAD is excessive worry that lasts at least six months and disrupts daily activities, according to the March issue of Mayo Clinic Women's HealthSource. Typically starting during middle age and more common in older adults, GAD affects an estimated 4 to 7 percent of adults 65 and older and often goes hand in hand with depression or other anxiety disorders, such as phobias.

As I've written before, anxiety and depression often go hand in hand.  The article notes that both therapy (particularly cognitive-behavioral therapy, or CBT) and/or medications are usually the treatment options of choice for this disorder. 

A couple of personal observations.  First, the type of worry typically associated with GAD is referred to as "free-floating anxiety."  What this entails is that the person will find something to worry about.  If that particular stressor (i.e. a math test) is successfully negotiated, then the individual will find something else to worry about (let's face it, there's always something to worry about if you look hard enough).

My other thought is, as with most anxiety issues, the therapy component is far more important for long- term recovery than medication.  Medication may provide some short-term relief, but until the mental and behavioral habits that perpetuate the ruminations over various issues are addressed, the issue will continue, though maybe with less physical discomfort.  The good news is that most anxiety-related issues are very amenable to therapy, so individuals experiencing these types of problems can effectively address them with solid therapy.  

Picking NCAA Tourney Upsets

Wow!  If you are a college basketball junky, and have any interest in the mathematics and probabilities in selecting upsets in your "entirely for fun, no gambling here, move along" pools, then check this article out.  Peter Tiernan gives you all the statistics you need regarding the history of upsets in the tournament.  Really well done!

The Timing of the (Industrial) Revolution

Over at Marginal Revolution, there is this post addressing the question of why it took so long for the industrial revolution to occur.  Cowen, in addition to providing a quick response, also links to prior debates that occurred with the publication of A Farewell to Alms.  This book offers an all-encompassing theory regarding why the industrial revolution occurred when and where it did.  I bought the book when it was released, but still haven't gotten around to reading it yet, so I'll just offer up my link, and maybe revisit the issue after I've read the book.

The Issue of Cell Phones in Prisons

Here is an article addressing the issue of cell phones in prison, and what to do about them.  While they are a security risk, there are also laws that prohibit unilaterally blocking phone transmissions.  It seems like there are several common-sense solutions to this porblem, but amazingly, Congress has been unable to address the issue in a timely manner.  Worth a read.

Geekdad's Anniversary

Chris Anderson wrote this post about the third anniversary of Geekdad.  I've linked to more than a few of their articles, recommendations, etc. over the years, and Anderson's book The Long Tail is one of my favorite reads over the last 3-4 years.  I actually have a review of the book fully written: however, it is on my old netbook, which has suffered an untimely demise.  At some point, I may make an effort to recover several of my writings off of the hard drive, but that moment has not yet arrived.

I should also note Anderson has been involved with Wired magazine (and Geekdad is associated with them), and a Geekdad book is pending release in May, which looks to be full of great ideas for parents and kids to complete.

In the meantime, happy anniversary, and keep up the good work!

Needed A Break!

No, work wasn't overwhelming.  And no, nothing else was going on that detracted from blogging.  Just didn't feel motivated - I needed a break.  I'm feeling as if the battery is recharged, so I'm going to make an effort to post at least semi-regularly again, hopefully with some interesting stuff to talk about!

I'm also considering splitting this into two blogs.  I know, that makes a lot of sense: "First, no posts at all, now he wants two blogs to not post on?"  However, I'm considering two blogs in order to separate the serious stuff from the fun/serious stuff.  First, I'll see how much I get into posting again.  If I get on a roll, I might do a second blog that focuses on pop culture, games, sports, etc., and leave this one as the psychology/science blog. 

We'll see!