DO YOU BELIEVE IN LUCK?
Image: Tomasz Zachariasz
-
The Wisdom of Psychopaths
In this engrossing journey into the lives of psychopaths and their infamously crafty behaviors, the renowned psychologist Kevin Dutton reveals that there is a...
Read More »
Ray Allen’s pregame routine never changes. A nap from 11:30am to 1:00pm, chicken and white rice for lunch at 2:30, a stretch in the gym at 3:45, a quick head shave, then practice shots at 4:30. The same amount of shots must be made from the same spots every day – the baselines and elbows of the court, ending with the top of the key. Similar examples of peculiar rituals and regimented routines in athletics abound. Jason Giambi would wear a golden thong if he found himself in a slump at the plate, and Moises Alou, concerned about losing his dexterous touch with the bat, would frequently urinate on his hands. This type of superstitious behavior can veer from the eccentric to the pathological, and though many coaches, teammates and fans snicker and shake their heads, a new study headed by Lysann Damisch at the University of Cologne and recently published in the journal Psychological Science suggests that we should all stop smirking and start rubbing our rabbit’s foot.
When it comes to superstitions, social scientists have generally agreed on one thing: they are fundamentally irrational. “Magical thinking” (as it has been called) is defined as the belief that an object, action or circumstance not logically related to a course of events can influence its outcome. In other words, stepping on a crack cannot, given what we know about the principles of causal relations, have any direct effect on the probability of your mother breaking her back. Those who live in fear of such a tragedy are engaging in magical thought and behaving irrationally.
Yet in their study, Damisch and colleagues challenge the conclusion that superstitious thoughts bear no causal influence on future outcomes. Of course, they were not hypothesizing that the trillions of tiny cracks upon which we tread every day are imbued with some sort of sinister spine-crushing malevolence. Instead, they were interested in the types of superstitions that people think bring them good luck. The lucky hats, the favorite socks, the ritualized warmup routines, the childhood blankies. Can belief in such charms actually have an influence over one’s ability to, say, perform better on a test or in an athletic competition? In other words, is Ray Allen’s performance on the basketball court in some ways dependent on eating chicken and rice at exactly 2:30? Did Jason Giambi’s golden thong actually have a hand in stopping a hitless streak?
To initially test this possibility experimenters brought participants into the lab and told them that they would be doing a little golfing. They were to see how many of 10 putts they could make from the same location. The manipulation was simply this: when experimenters handed the golf ball to the participant they either mentioned that the ball “has turned out to be a lucky ball” in previous trials, or that the ball was simply the one “everyone had used so far”. Remarkably, the mere suggestion that the ball was lucky significantly influenced performance, causing participants to make almost two more putts on average.
Why? Surely it couldn’t be that the same golf ball becomes lucky at the experimenter’s suggestion – there must be an explanation grounded in the psychological influence that belief in lucky charms has on the superstitious. In a follow-up experiment the researchers hypothesized that this kind of magical thinking can actually increase participants’ confidence in their own capabilities. That is, believing in lucky charms would increase participants’ “self-efficacy,” and it is this feeling of “I can do this,” not any magical properties of the object itself, that predict success. To test this, they had participants bring in their own lucky charms from home and assigned them to either a condition where they would be performing a task in the presence of their charm, or a condition where the experimenter removes the charm from the room before the task. Participants rated their perceived level of self-efficacy and then completed a memory task that was essentially a variant of the game Concentration.
See what we're tweeting about
23 Comments
Add CommentThe effect was long ago acknowledged in the children's story of Dumbo, the baby elephant who could not find the confidence to fly until given a magic black feather.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEditor - There appears to be some formatting problems with this article posting, from text overlays to possible text size/line spacing to the comment entry box.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's the same thing that is going on with sugar pills and homeopathy in medicine. The placebo effect. If you believe its going to help, its more likely that it will.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisRatz - I thought this article was going to be about magical thinking and it turns out to be about sports superstitions and lucky charms.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHow disappointing.
Such a simpleton experiment to prove that superstition doesn't not work. Tell me again why a practice that raises "self-efficacy" is illogical? Maybe the sad part is that science is so impractical it cannot come up with an alternative.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this...and now for the irony: those snobs who refuse to believe they have lucky balls are going to get consistently beat by the very ones they have been supressing for years.
The stated definition for "magical thinking" itself seems irrational. In science one simply accepts the fact of observed phenomena whether they make sense or not. Any theoretical explanations usually come later. Where, for instance, is the logical cause-and-effect for quantum mechanical action at a distance or the expansion of the universe? If rubbing a rabbit's foot makes one's athletic performance better (or if it made the number you want come up on a roulette wheel), then that is what it does. So-called logical explanations come afterward. Irrational magical thinking seems to me to be continued belief (or disbelief) in something even when there is ample evidence to the contrary. A study showing the cause(s) of this would be extremely interesting.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMany of the Boston Celtics' fans do not attribute the teams successes to Ray Allen's ritual observances, as they are compelled to perform their own set of rituals that are necessary to ensure the team's success. These compulsive rituals, properly diagnosed, would be identified as symptoms of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder if they became debilitating to their obedient subject.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs for ancient superstitions that seem so ridiculously ignorant to the modern scientist possessing vastly superior knowledge, don't forget that both are the products of rationalizing minds applied to the observed phenomena of the universe, without and with a verified supporting foundation of contextual information. Without the tested interpretations produced by innumerable prior investigators, how would the rising Sun be understood?
One thing puzzles me, though. If the science of astronomy has stripped the starry night of its magic, why enlist the belief in dark matter and dark energy to explain simple misinterpretations of observational evidence?
What's happening here is simple, the rational mind is using ritual to hijack the irrational subconscious (which is much more powerful) and make it do what you want it to.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYou don't even need a specific charm for this to work. I've personally used a small pebble to enable myself to job longer distances than I was previously able by convincing myself that I was drawing endurance from the stone. The idea is absurd, but the subconscious will run with it... and it doesn't even care if you don't consciously believe it will work.
You don't even need a physical object for this either, you can use imaginary objects/energies/entities/etc... and it'll do just as well. It does indeed, harness the power of the placebo effect, but it is effective. It seems irrational, it seems like woo woo thinking, but it works. I am an atheist and a skeptic, but I still believe in magic... at least in the personal kind that hijacks your subconscious to make it do what you want it to. I know there isn't any real magic going on, but I do know that there is a definite and testable psychological effect.
I quite agree with Nathaniel. There is vast evidence that the brain has its evolutionary way of working, and that what we call 'rational' thought does not particularly rule. There are needs to address the brain/mind as a whole and it is not entirely/largely a rational process.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thismmmm,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisthe day will come when it can be true.
your choice: mind Over matter.
Having seen gamblers do certain rituals and then get on a roll while playing craps makes me wonder.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMagical thinking probably reflects how the deep and more primitive part of the brain works, someones call it the reptile brain , and also how early mankind used to think. For some primary rewards, success, placement in the social pyramid, mating, influencing others, this kind of thought can be the best adapted, as it addresses precisely what your desires are
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisScience steals the starry night of it's magic??? No way!!! So, similarly, if I suddenly become keenly aware that food is simply an insanely complex web of carbon molecule combinations, I will no longer find it delicious? Keep one foot on the ground, and the other in the clouds :)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI did the same thing with a silver dollar :)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWe're aware of how the placebo effect works, and how to use it on ourselves, right? If you combine it with our awareness of our ability to "suspend disbelief" such as while watching a movie, for example, we can, in effect, purposely believe a lie. And still awe in the "magic of starry nights," knowing full well they're just a bunch of stars. Makes sense?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnother view on this phenomenon is the psychodramatic concept of "warm up" which is a conative construct that pays attention to how a person gets themselves going - for want of a better phrase. When someone is doing a particular activity t=that they require specific outcomes from, such as these sporting folks, then these rituals can significantly alter their head space. In regular human life this warming up process can just as clearly be seen in, for instance, how people get ready for work, how they drive to work, what they listen to, how the end their day, what they do on going to bed, how people prepare their breakfast. If the rituals become problematic then there are dilemmas and assistance may be required. Where this is really problematic is when a person has warm up processes that work against themselves such as staying out all night before an important meeting, drinking excessively before an important home discussion and other things. Its a good thing I don't do anything like this, at all, ever, never ever ever in my life :)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCheers
Peter
www.moreno.com.au
I find myself in agreement with Nathaniel's comments. Paradoxically while believing in no such thing as a God, it seems so helpful to imagine a god bent on helping you do better.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThen some religious person would tell you "see, if it's working then it's proof god is there and he loves you, it's just your arrogance/satan that wants to deny you this." And hence the paradox.
On one occasion I jogged twice as long as I normally did (and thought I was able to do) simply by entering a state of mind where I was able to lie to myself about how long I had been jogging and what my body was telling me about how tired it was. It was an amazing experience that I never repeated.
Magical thinking REALLY REALLY WORKS!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this__
THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION!
let them eat their own sh*t!
the WORLD TRADE CENTER PROPHECY - THE DANCE OF DEATH
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0Hez25fFrg
the ungrateful bastards full of hubris...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubris
a bullet for your head, traitor
And finally, the *only* man in Minnesota who says there is no God has suddenly become an arbiter on mental health...
http://www.unfacts.org/factsforum/viewtopic.php?t=4080
COME SEE A PHOTO OF MABUS AND AN EXPLANATION OF IT!
The study comprises four experiments. In the first two, participants are selected randomly, but they are not asked if they believe in luck or not. So it cannot be said that the effect does not work if you are not a believer.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn the 3rd and 4th experiments, the participants are selected among those who already have a charm object, i.e., they are superstitious. The study does not compare their performance with a sceptical control group. Therefore it cannot be said that magical thinking "works" for some people. The study only shows that if a person believes in a lucky charm and if you take it away from her, she performs worse than if she had the charm with her.
"The same amount of shots"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"amount" for a countable item?
"The same number of shots" is what you are looking for.
MajikalThinking sure worked for Nina Kulagina & men who stare @ goats
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisone comment seems to come close from a logical perspective, such as hijacking the subconscious mind where magical thinking would seem more prevalent. unfortunately for me, a magical thinker, the problem is that one is trying to again logically describe a process on its terms.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisyou are asking me to describe an orange on the terms of an apple. we might look at the possibility that the subconscious mind has access to information or ways of being connected that the conscious rational mind upon which we posit this magical thinking does not. the article touches the surface but there is more to discover here.
but yes, i also would sat that mind makes reality
If you rationally pick your irrational behavior, that's fine. If what we've uncovered is one benefit of being irrational, I still don't feel that it outweighs the risk of being stupid. Rational behavior for me, except on Facebook, thanks.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this