For instance, many people worry that they're likely to choke under pressure. They look to coaches and elaborate training techniques to overcome this tendency. Or they just worry and bite their nails before important presentations or competitions. But in one study, researchers told some track athletes that what they thought of as pre-race jitters actually improved performance, while telling another group that this sort of arousal was usually detrimental. The athletes performed accordingly when the pressure was on. In another athletics study, the researchers gave every subject a personality questionnaire and then randomly gave some of them false feedback that their answers indicated they were the sort of person who thrives under pressure. When it came time to compete, the athletes told they would likely do better under pressure did so.
How can cheering for a team backfire?
This is one of those things that can happen, under certain circumstances, even though it normally doesn't. Normally, teams benefit when they're playing in front of friendly, supportive crowds hoping for victory. But, psychologist Roy Baumeister has shown in controlled lab conditions where subjects played video games competitively, that players' performance suffered when they had a supportive audience. They sensed the expectations, and they didn't want to disappoint. They seemed to try too hard not to mess up rather than to win. It's a classic sort of choking under pressure — to try and over-control and over think, when we would be better served by allowing more automatic skills and movements to take over.
Outside of the lab, there's the example of British soccer players who play for their national team. They are among the best in the world, beloved by millions. But they know that those who cheer for them, who so want their success, also harbor doubts based on many years of the English team not living up to their high expectations on the international stage. Most pointedly, the English teams are notorious for losing high-pressure penalty kick shootouts in big tournaments. They are among the most highly skilled players around, but studies show they are rock-bottom among soccer powers when it comes to penalty kick conversion. Too much is riding on their shots. Penalty kick shootouts are typically won and lost based on who can handle the pressure and who will crack. And being on a team whose fans are so rabid that wins and losses can radically impact their national pride and self worth brings intense pressure that can be murder on the penalty spot.
You have a fascinating discussion of phantom limbs. Can you explain this phenomena, and what it reveals?
Phantom limbs are a sensory illusion experienced by most people who have lost a limb. Periodically, they actually feel their lost limb re-form but often in strange and painful ways – as if the limb is twisted or being wrenched up behind them. The phenomenon and the pain had been observed for centuries and no drugs or surgery could help.
In the early 1990s, a neuroscientist named V.S. Ramachandran hypothesized that the sensation of the lost limb and the pain are both conjured by the brain based on its expectations that we have an intact body – two arms and two legs — under our control. Accordingly, the brain gives motor commands to an arm or leg that isn’t there anymore, and when nothing happens, the neural confusion results in pain.
The fact that our brains operate with these expectations for our bodies also has implications for people who haven’t lost a limb. It means that our brains are constantly assessing and re-assessing who we are based on matching these expectations with sensory feedback. For instance, when subjects are in a virtual reality world looking at themselves moving in a virtual mirror, their brains takes ownership of their digital avatar. Consciously, the brain knows this is a computer simulation, but at a more automatic level the brain accepts the avatar as its body, moving where and when it’s commanded: OK, this is me. And research shows that if the avatar is taller, or better looking, or older, or a different race, this can subtly change who we think we are, and thereby shift our attitudes, choices and behaviors.
Rights & Permissions
See what we're tweeting about
4 Comments
Add CommentIt seems more accurate to say that expectations bend PERCEPTION of reality, and thereby results in behavioral changes that may affect reality. The placebo effect changes a mental state (perception) which is conducive to brain behavior that results in pain relief.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBut what's new in this observation. Low expectations of parents can result in under-achieving children and vise versa.
Here's a related issue. Does a crack addict gain superhuman strength from the drug, or does the addict perceive others as weaker, and therefore acts accordingly?
Interesting article as it covers a lot of territory, yet the point is not to have any preconceived ideas about anything without further investigation/gaining a learned point of view about the subject matter, though life experience is enormously helpful.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn application of the 4 Person Principle where one wants to contact someone and in theory accepting we are only 3 contacts away from making the connection with the fourth person we wish to contact, it's an interesting exercise in asking do we really believe it's possible? And if so, who are the three front-runners to helping us gain access to the fourth person we wish to reach?
But what happens if it works and contact can be established? What dialogue will follow that will either bring success or failure?
The key most likely is knowing as much as possible about the person one may address in asking for something or wishing to promote an action.
But is our expectation in researching the person and their interests enough? Probably not. We may need to ask one of our three preliminary contacts along the way who may offer a morsel of knowledge about the most suitable approach.
So there one sits with a choice between e-mailing, calling or writing a formal letter. Which one should it be?
The point being at at each juncture we find ourselves somewhere between desire, hope and faith, with our preconceived notion success is possible because we've been told the method is known to work.
Yet, it goes back to simplicity in stating "one cannot succeed for fail, unless one tries. Thus if contact is made the 4 Person Principle worked, though the outcome may fail.
There is some interesting data about expectations. This is a glib restatement of the experiment (ie, I'm not going back to verify the details). Basically, a group of near-failing kids (hovering around a D to F border) were divided into two groups. The first group was told how wonderful they were, how smart they were, how well they were doing, and that the teachers knew they would do well. The other group was told clearly that they were failing without mincing any words.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe following year, the encouraged kids' grades dropped. The condemned kids' grades rose to the C- level. (Lots of details, like teacher quality, were controlled for iirc).
Speculation was that giving kids a false sense of how they are doing undermined their own efforts. Objective reality (in the sense of "dude, you're failing!") apparently helped. It was popular to say this undermines the argument that we need to build up self-esteem.
I'm not sure that conclusion is accurate though. Maybe there's a subtle expectation game going on here. Telling someone what they "know" is the truth means you're not coddling them and that you MUST have real faith in them. But giving out made up awards and complements to boost self-esteem might undermine real self-esteem, real confidence, and real results.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs you put it...
"It seems more accurate to say that expectations bend PERCEPTION of reality, and thereby results in behavioral changes that may affect reality."
Well said!