Category Archives: Psychology

Tying Up Loose Ends — Again

Earlier this year, I did a where I talked about a number of ideas in one post. This served a couple of interconnected purposes: 1) it emptied my “posts to write” list, and 2) it allowed me to flood that list with some new ideas. (I said the purposes were interconnected.) My list has again started to grow a little bit, so I thought I would do another one of those to flush out the list. There are a couple of ideas that I won’t include in this post because I do want to write a “fuller” post on them, so look for some posts in the next few days about “balance,” “The Stockdale Paradox,” and the idea that “every game (in a season) counts equally.”

The Enneagram — Through my exposure to transpersonal psychology, I was introduced to the . I don’t know this for a fact, but my suspicion is that the Enneagram is highly underutilized relative to its helpfulness in understand one’s self and others.

Life’s all about making decisions — One of my interests is “decision-making.” Books, literature, research: I’m fascinated by how humans make decisions. On that note, one of the things I’ve learned is that life is — really — all about making decisions. More importantly though, it’s important to put yourself in situations that allow you to make good choices. Let me say that again: “It’s important to put yourself in situations that allow you to make good choices.”

Measuring outcomes in the non-profit sector — I’ve talked before about my time with , but I also had a class in this summer. The thing that struck me the most about the non-profit sector is the lack of ways to measure outcomes. That is not to say that there aren’t ways to measure outcomes in the non-profit sector, but when compared to the for-profit sector, it seems that, for whatever reason, there aren’t as many established and agreed upon ways to measure outcomes.

Reframing your life — Many people, myself included, sometimes get caught up in choosing things they want to do (career-wise). An important realization on that front: it’s not what you want to do for the “rest of your life,” but simply, what you want to do “for right now.” Meaning, it’s okay to change your mind later and move into a different position, field, or industry.

Psychological reasons why good people do bad things — I came across this a few days ago that recounts a number of reasons why good people do bad things. I think it’s really important to understand the underlying psychological concepts that contribute to these errors in “decision-making.”

Some Key Differences between a Happy Life and a Meaningful Life

I saw a earlier today from , who’s a Professor of Marketing at Stanford’s , that linked to a she was a contributing author to: “Some key differences between a happy and a meaningful life.” When I clicked over to see the , it got me pretty excited or a couple of reasons.

The first, it’s going to be published in the . It was during my senior year of undergrad when I first came across  — what I think is a rather brilliant subject. In fact, I was even a of the for a brief time. The second, the lead author: . During my time at the Institute of Transpersonal Psychology (now called, ), I remember reading a lot of . In fact, one of the papers I wrote on “transpersonal belongingness” relied on a .

Anyway, below is the abstract to the paper that Prof. Aaker linked to. If you find it interesting, I hope you take the time to read the whole journal .

Being happy and finding life meaningful overlap, but there are important differences. A large survey revealed multiple differing predictors of happiness (controlling for meaning) and meaningfulness (controlling for happiness). Satisfying one’s needs and wants increased happiness but was largely irrelevant to meaningfulness. Happiness was largely present-oriented, whereas meaningfulness involves integrating past, present, and future. For example, thinking about future and past was associated with high meaningfulness but low happiness. Happiness was linked to being a taker rather than a giver, whereas meaningfulness went with being a giver rather than a taker. Higher levels of worry, stress, and anxiety were linked to higher meaningfulness but lower happiness. Concerns with personal identity and expressing the self contributed to meaning but not happiness. We offer brief composite sketches of the unhappy but meaningful life and of the happy but meaningless life.

Overconfidence: Know Thyself

On the way to the grocery store this afternoon, I passed through a construction zone. As I was driving by, I glanced over at the work they were doing and remarked, “Oh, it looks like they’re almost finished. They’ll probably be done by the end of the month.” I kept on driving and then laughed out loud. I know nothing about construction and certainly don’t know enough to look at the progress of the job site regarding road reconstruction to be as “confident” as I was in saying they’ll be finished in a month.

Earlier this year, I wrote about lectures I listened to on my trip from . One of those lectures was by Maggie Neale on the subject of negotiation (I highly recommend listening to it!) One of the things she spoke about in this lecture is exemplified by my story about the construction site.

She had a pop bottle full of paperclips and asked the audience to guess how many paperclips were in the bottle. She told them there wasn’t some sort of trick to it and asked them to think up a number. Then, she asked them to come up with a 95% . Meaning, she wanted the people to come up with a range of the number of paperclips that could be in the bottle, such that they could be 95% confident that the number of actual paperclips in the bottle fell within the range. If I recall correctly, she even said something about being certain that there were less than 1,000,000 paperclips in the bottle.

After they were all done, she told them how many paperclips were in the bottle and then polled the audience to find how many people had the actual number of paperclips within their range.About half of the audience raised their hands. Neale went on to say that statistically speaking, only 5% of the audience should have not guessed a range wherein the actual number of paperclips lay. That is, 95% of the audience should have had the actual number of paperclips fall within their range. As only 50% of the audience raised their hands, she went on to explain why.

The explanation for the paperclips is the same explanation as to why I made a guess about the construction site. Humans have a tendency to be confident — nay — overconfident about their judgments (regardless of their accuracy). This is known in some circle as the .

I knew about this particular bias and I still fell into the trap (albeit shortly) of making an overconfident assessment about the construction site. I wonder what judgments you (or maybe your compatriots) are being overconfident about? Now that you know about this particular bias, I hope that you’ll be a bit more mindful when making estimations and the like.

Do You Know Your Biases?

“You will learn from others around you being skeptical more than you will learn by becoming skeptical.” –

This past October, a world-renowned psychologist () published his latest book, . I’ve read a lot of reviews of the book and seen many of the interviews of him about this book and one of my favorite quotes (above) comes from the video (below). Take a few minutes and watch:

Kahneman, along with have done so much for the fields of psychology and economics. Some say that this book is the culmination of their work. I have enjoyed reading Kahneman and Tversky’s work through the years and think that their contribution on the subject of is monumental.

The quote I started this post with (…learn more from others around you being skeptical…) is worth talking about for a little bit. When I first heard him say that, I must have replayed it at least a dozen times. I heard the words he was saying, but it took some time for the wisdom to sink in. So what is it that Kahneman was saying?

Have you ever heard of an ? It’s the idea that your ideas and beliefs are reinforced (or amplified) because those that you tell them to share said beliefs. There’s nothing wrong with that, but if you’re familiar with and some of the , you know how hard it is to break from the group’s opinion on a topic. I don’t think that Kahneman was referring to this phenomenon in particular, but if you think about how hard it is to break from the group’s dominant viewpoint, it would make some sense that being “skeptical” yourself is not as easy as it sounds. However, if those around you are skeptical, it will be easier to learn from their skepticism about a given topic.

So, as you think about assembling your next business team or you’re just talking with your friends, remember how important and valuable the dissenting voice can be. Remember that having a  might not be the best idea. Remember how hard it is to be the singular dissenting voice. Remember to encourage healthy disagreement and an analysis from all sides. You’ll be much better off.

The Most Unifying Global Event: New Year’s Eve & Day

Is there a more unifying global event than New Year’s Eve & Day?

There have been some rather unifying global events in recent memory, but they usually involve some sort of catastrophe (think: tsunamis). In the US, series finales used to be watched by whole lots of people, but with the further development of individual niche markets, even that has tailed off. There likely won’t ever be a TV show that comes close to touching of over 100 million viewers and close to 80% of households watching.

was a pretty well-liked show, (so I’m told), and its series finale only came in at 54th on the same list. TV is ‘nice,’ but it’s not that I would want unifying the globe. Of course, there are exceptions. If everyone were watching a TV that was commemorating world peace or the end of world hunger, then sure, I’m in.

~

As I sat and thought about the various global events that have happened, I wondered if there were a night/day more filled with hope and love than New Year’s Eve/Day. Some may cite holidays like Christmas, Thanksgiving, or Easter, but those kinds of holidays can be seen as country-specific or denominational. While there are probably lots of people who celebrate these days regardless of their country and/or religion, I was looking for something with a wider scope.

We could go back in time to the , but again, that was country-specific. Of course, the Soviet Union was interested in the event, but I don’t know that it’s fair to say every country was as enveloped with the event. There’s nothing quite like a ‘new year,’ though, is there? All the potential, the hope, the possibility, the dreams.

I think that New Year’s Eve & Day will be, for quite some time, the most unifying global event. Why? Because this event can be completely different things for everyone. Some people can see it as the end of the “old year,” and some people can focus on the beginning of the “new year.” Some folks can use it as a way to springboard to a motivational state that allows them to achieve their goals/dreams, while others just see it as another day. New Year’s is, in a sense, the perfect event to whatever we want onto it.

Usain Bolt False Start: Evidence for Heightened Awareness?

The are nearly over, but not without a little bit of controversy. Particularly, in the men’s 100m final that is. I’ve embedded a short 2-minute clip of the false start.

After watching the video, it’d be pretty hard not to agree with the decision that did false start (and based on the , should be disqualified). While some people , some other people took a little closer look at the footage of the race. In fact, some people don’t think that Bolt was the first one who moved! Take a look:

You might find it a little difficult to see on the video (on the TV), but what this fellow is saying seems to be accurate to me. You can watch the actual footage from the race () and pay close attention to the 0:13 mark. You can see the runner on the (left-side of the screen) flinch before Bolt false starts.

You can read about the running implications on some of the articles I’ve linked to earlier in this post or even in the video of the fellow attempting to exonerate Bolt. I’m more interested in the implications of this for heightened awareness.

There’s a concept in psychology that’s known as “.” There are other “colloquial” terms for this concept. : “on the ball; in the moment; present; in the zone; wired in; in the groove; keeping your head in the game.” Flow is often something associated with sports, but it is a concept that can be transferred to any human activity where one “is fully immersed in a feeling of energized focus, full involvement, and success in the process of the activity.” Music is often cited in flow studies, along with religious/spiritual experience. Gamers and coders often describe experiences that could be considered “flow.”

I can’t say this with certainty, but in my review of the literature, I haven’t come across a journal article on flow that specifically studies the body. Most flow studies I have read focus on the brain (of course, a part of the body) and what’s going on in the mind. This is logical given the definition we cited earlier. However, when I first saw the Usain Bolt video, the first thing I thought of was flow. Usain Bolt is a rather gifted athlete and many gifted athletes, whether they know it or not, participate in their sport, while in a state of flow.

I suspect that when humans experience a state of flow, not only are they in an energized focus (mentally), but physically, too. And when this physical focus arises, I would bet that their senses are heightened. Baseball players who are on a hot streak (at the plate) often talk about being able to see the ball really well. Almost as if the ball is slowing down when it gets to them. We could say that this is a heightened sense of awareness. In a way, it (sounds) like they are able to slow down time. In essence, this could be as a result of their heightened awareness.

Because of Usain Bolt’s chosen sport of sprinting, there is a hyper-focus on quick movements, especially at the starter’s block. The runner’s have to wait for the sound that signals the start of the race and then go! As humans are complex systems, it is unreasonable to expect that runner’s rely solely on their auditory ability to know when to go. In fact, I would almost guarantee that runners also take in visual cues from their neighboring runners. “If the person next to me goes, then I better start running.” Of course, this is not something that is taking place cognitively. That is, the runner isn’t consciously deliberating as to when to go because of when the person next to him goes.” This is something that has to take place in the subconscious.

One more piece to add to this is the body. I mentioned this briefly earlier, but then went on to talk about the visual cues. Not only are we (as humans) taking in information through our eyes and ears, but it could also be said that we also take in information through our body. (Some may argue that this information is actually entering through our eyes/ears, but just at a level that is immeasurable with the current scientific tools, but I digress.) Taking in information through our body — through sensing the space around us. For a tangible example, you could think of a blind person. Yes, they rely on their ears to help them navigate the world, but there’s also an intangible that allows them to know what’s around.

Tying this into the race that we have witnessed: Yohan Blake flinches (ever so slightly) and I would argue that Usain Bolt, as a result of being in a state of flow, and with a heightened sense of awareness, noticed this movement, and consequently, began the race.

What is Transpersonal Psychology: A Contextual Understanding

I was looking at my for this site a couple of days ago and I noticed that my explanation of transpersonal psychology might not be entirely clear for those not already familiar with the field of transpersonal psychology. It seems that the field itself has debated about a definition for some time, leading to an assortment of definitions. That’s why the definition that I’ve included in my bio is as follows ():

An approach to psychology that a) studies phenomena beyond the ego as context for b) an integrative/holistic psychology; which provides a framework for c) understanding and cultivating human transformation.

That’s a very succinct definition. And to most people who are familiar with transpersonal psychology, that makes sense. In today’s post, I thought I would explain transpersonal psychology in the context of the ‘rest’ of psychology.

~

When , they think of professional counselors and clinical psychologists. “Are you analyzing me?” This is a question that psychology students around the world hear when they tell someone they are majoring in psychology. The thing is – there are within the American Psychological Association.These divisions span from to to to and to, yes, . So, to say that psychologists are always (or only) “analyze” people is like saying doctors are always diagnosing strangers.

The assumption that psychology is all about analyzing people stems from some of the early psychologists, namely, . Freud helped create what we will call the “first force.” This first force is better known as . This particular brand of psychology uses things like and to plunge the depths of one’s psyche by way of their unconscious. Through this ‘force’ of psychology, we, as humans, were taught that we have little to no control over ourselves and that we are merely the manifestation of our unconscious hopes and desires.

The next force, the “second force” of psychology, is . This is where we have the famous experiments where the researchers rings the bell and the dog salivates – . Classical conditioning is when an unconditioned stimulus (say a bell) is paired with a conditioned stimulus (say food) such that the unconditioned stimulus can produce the response one would expect to see with the conditioned stimulus. If I ring the bell every time I feed my dog, I would expect that the dog would begin to salivate when I ring the bell (and don’t feed him because he’s conditioned to expect food after the bell).

Building upon Pavlov’s research is , from . The difference between operant conditioning and classical conditioning is that in operant conditioning, the behavior is said to be voluntary whereas in classical conditioning, thebehavior is said to be reflexive. So, the “second force” of psychology tells us that humans are just like dogs in that we are just a grouping of conditioned responses.

The “third force” of psychology is . The emergence of this field of psychology, not coincidentally, was the same time that came to prominence, which gave rise to such social and political movements as the and . Humanistic psychology brought into focus a more holistic (more holistic than had been previously thought) perspective of the human. This “force” of psychology is where we saw the birth of ‘s . Humanistic psychology is where we see the emergence of Carl Rogers’ as a therapeutic technique. So, this ‘force’ of psychology, builds upon the two that came before it, in that it believes that humans are more than their unconscious motives and that they are more than a jumble of conditioned responses. This ‘force’ would say that it takes a more holistic view of the human by including its emotions, too.

The “fourth force” of psychology, and the purpose of this post, is . The easiest way to understand transpersonal psychology is in the context of the other three forces. Where the first three forces are about unconscious drives, conditioned responses, and an addition of emotions, transpersonal psychology includes that — and beyond. Transpersonal, (like the name implies), goes beyond the person. So, in effect, transpersonal psychology includes spirituality, , and various states of consciousness. From the :

Transpersonal Psychology is a full spectrum psychology that . . . [adds] a serious scholarly interest in the immanent and transcendent dimensions of human experience: exceptional human functioning, experiences, performances and achievements, true genius, the nature and meaning of deep religious and mystical experiences, non-ordinary states of consciousness, and how we might foster the fulfillment of our highest potentials as human beings.

So, contextually, we could say that transpersonal psychology is a more complete “holistic” view of the person (through the lens of psychology). People from transpersonal psychology wouldn’t say that the other forces of psychology are less important than transpersonal psychology. In fact, from my experience, most people within the field of transpersonal psychology are grateful to those that have gone before (and developed the other forces) to have allowed room for transpersonal psychology to fill a voice. Transpersonal psychology builds upon the various areas of psychology before it and treads into some of the areas of the human experience that had not previously been studied in academia.

What’s Your Jung Typology: The Answer May Surprise You!

After having majored in psychology during my undergrad and then specialized in transpersonal psychology during grad school, it’s fair to say that I’m curious about the make-up of humans from a psychological perspective. A few weeks back, I wrote a post about how I scored on . In light of this post, I thought I would continue to write posts about how I scored on other tests.

For today’s post, I thought I would do some tests that claim to be able to accurately assess one’s :

These tests are based on the work of Carl Jung, David Kiersey, Isabel Myers and Katherine Briggs. They are similar in underlying theory to the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and the Kiersey Temperament Sorter. They measure four bipolar factors, Introversion/Extroversion, Thinking/Feeling, Intuition/Sensing, and Judging/Perceiving.

Having been a psychology student for as long as I have, I’m familiar with the MBTI and have taken the actual test on a couple of different occasions enough to know where I usually score on the four bipolar factors. In fact, part of my interest in taking the few tests with this was to see if the assessment was accurate.

The first test I took was a . Initially, you enter your gender and then you are taken to a page with 36 pairs of words wherein you are asked to select the position between the words (5 spaces) where you exist between the words. I thought that this was rather interesting. I’d never taken a paired word test to assess my before.

At the conclusion of the test, I was a little surprised by the results. The system assessed me as an ENTJ. Extroverted, iNtuitve, Thinking, Judging. I found this surprising because I’m almost always an ENFJ when I take tests like these (Feeling instead of Thinking). The mini-description for ENTJ:

ENTJ – “Field Marshall”. The basic driving force and need is to lead. Tend to seek a position of responsibility and enjoys being an executive. 1.8% of total population.

After reading the “quick” description, I’d say that’s a fair assessment of who I am (or who I want to be). Then, I read the :

decisive, fearless, planner, thrill seeker, engaged, social, self-centered, comfortable around others, image conscious, likes to be center of attention, adventurous,outgoing, manipulative, emotionally stable, leader, ambitious, hard-working, dominant, prepared, hates to be bored, confident, opinionated, analytical, prepares for worst case scenarios, organized, orderly, clean, driven, resourceful, finishes most things they start, achieving, risk taker, desires fame/acclaim, image focused, narcissistic, arrogant, perfectionist, driven, academic, scientific, critical, avoids giving in to others, does not like to compromise, skeptical. [Emphasis added]

I’ve bold-faced the words that I do feel strongly about (in that they do describe me) and I’ve italicized some of the negative adjectives that I’ve heard used to describe some of the things I’ve done in the past. When I inquired with those who thought I was arrogant, I learned that this had more to do with the way I conveyed information. With regard to manipulative — this is a word I remember being tossed around when I was a kid. I was told that I was quite good at getting my way (I don’t remember, really!) And lastly, “avoids giving in to others” – translation: stubborn; yes, I can agree to this one. I know that I can be, at times, stubborn.

I then proceeded to look for some other tests that were meant to assess the same measure. . This test, like the first, had the participant enter in their gender. Then, there was a page of 48 statements that the participant was to rate on a scale from very inaccurate to very accurate (5 choices). At the conclusion of this test, I was greeted by familiar results:

ENFJ – “Persuader”. Outstanding leader of groups. Can be aggressive at helping others to be the best that they can be. 2.5% of total population.

I then went onto read the long-description of the ENFJ:

outgoing, social, attention seeking, emotional, loving, organized, comfortable around others, involved, open, hyperactive, complimentary, punctual, considerate, altruistic, easily hurt, religious, neat, content, positive, affectionate, image conscious, good at getting people to have fun, easily excited, perfectionist, assertive, ambitious, leader, hard-working, seductive, touchy, group oriented, anti-tattoos. [Emphasis added]

With the ENTJ description, I highlighted 10 adjectives that I agreed with (and 3 adjectives that I have heard people refer to me in the past) for a total of 13. With this ENFJ description, I’ve highlighted 17 adjectives that I feel accurately describe me at the present moment.

So, I decided to take one more . This test was very different from any other Jung typology test I had seen. On this test, (you had to select your gender, of course), there were 48 adjectives. Under each adjective were two rating scales (each with 5 spaces) where the participant is asked to rate their ideal selves and their real selves. In effect, the test is trying to gauge where you are and where you wish (or want) to be. I thought that this could be interesting, so I took the test. My results: ideal type – ENTJ; real type – ENFJ.

How interesting. So, maybe the first test I took wasn’t off like I thought it was. Maybe it was just a better measure of my “ideal” self. Either way, I thought it was pretty cool to take this last test and get a result that validated my first two results. In the end, I am glad that I found this site with these tests because it gave me a different window into my Jung Typology. For as long as I can remember, I’ve always scored as an ENFJ on these sorts of tests, but it’s interesting to now have a different perspective in that maybe I really wish I were an ENTJ. If you only have time to take one test, I’d advise taking the . The results may surprise you!

Jeremy Taylor’s Six Basic Hints for Dream Work

When I spent some time working for the , someone recommended that I read ‘s book called . Before reading Taylor’s book, I had already read about or heard of many dream theories. There’s , , ‘, , and the . After reading Taylor’s book, though, I was convinced — I had found the dream interpretation guide for me. On Taylor’s website, he offers that I’ve included below:

One
All dreams speak a universal language and come in the service of health and wholeness. There is no such thing as a “bad dream” — only dreams that sometimes take a dramatically negative form in order to grab our attention.

Two
Only the dreamer can say with any certainty what meanings his or her dream may have. This certainty usually comes in the form of a wordless “aha!” of recognition. This “aha” is a function of memory, and is the only reliable touchstone of dream work.

Three
There is no such thing as a dream with only one meaning. All dreams and dream images are “overdetermined,” and have multiple meanings and layers of significance.

Four
No dreams come just to tell you what you already know. All dreams break new ground and invite you to new understandings and insights.

Five
When talking to others about their dreams, it is both wise and polite to preface your remarks with words to the effect of “if it were my dream…,” and to keep this commentary in the first person as much as possible. This means that even relatively challenging comments can be made in such a way that the dreamer may actually be able to hear and internalize them. It also can become a profound psycho-spiritual discipline — “walking a mile in your neighbor’s moccasins.”

Six
All dream group participants should agree at the outset to maintain anonymity in all discussions of dream work. In the absence of any specific request for confidentiality, group members should be free to discuss their experiences openly outside the group, provided no other dreamer is identifiable in their stories. However, whenever any group member requests confidentiality, all members should agree to be bound automatically by such a request.

A year after reading Dreamwork, little did I know that I’d have the opportunity to take a with at the Institute of Transpersonal Psychology. During my time at ITP, I have to say, hands down, it was one of my favorite classes. For 10 weeks, 3 hours at a time, I got the opportunity to put into practice the ‘hints’ that Jeremy Taylor offers in doing dream work. I got to see these tenets in action and let me tell you — it was marvelous.

Sometimes, the class would split up into smaller groups and sometimes we would stay together as the full class. When we stayed together as a full class and worked with one person’s dream, it was quite remarkable some of the a-has that happened (not only for the dreamer, but for fellow classmates!) In fact, it wasn’t odd for classmates to gain deeper insights (than the dreamer) as a result of interpreting a fellow classmate’s dream.

The best part about Taylor’s methods for interpreting dreams is that the interpreter can never be wrong (and simultaneously, never right). The person interpreting the dream (from hint #5) should always preface their comments with, “If it were my dream…” By doing this, the interpreter is taking ownership of their onto the dream. And according to Taylor, projecting onto the dream is all we can do (as the non-dreamer). When the dreamer tells the dream, as we (the group) listen to the dream, all that we can do is project onto the dream. Referring back to (hint #2), only the dreamer can be sure of what their dreams mean or don’t mean (for them). So, when someone says, ‘if it were my dream…’ anything they say (so long as it stays in their first-person), is true, for them. However, the dreamer may not accept their projections (or resonate with their projections). Speaking in this way may seem weird at first, but trust me, it really helps — especially if the dream is sensitive.

While I’ve introduced this post and Taylor’s work specifically as it relates to dreams, these 6 hints are useful in other ways. For instance, if one were trying to broker peace within some sort of group conflict, the whole “if it were my dream…” could come in handy (if we switch out dream for a more accurate description of what’s happening). The next time someone asks you to interpret their dream, I really encourage you to use the Taylor’s method, especially the whole idea of, “if it were my dream…” I think that in using this qualifier to begin our interpretation, not only are we being more polite to the dreamer, we’re actually giving a more accurate description of our interpretation (as, of course, our interpretation can only be a projection).

After I finished writing this post, I found a recent (as of May 2011) video of Jeremy Taylor talking about his dream work. He is talking about his dream work in the context of a course offering at (Note: this university is by ‘any regional accrediting agencies recognized by the US Department of Education nor by any other national governments’), so it’s semi-promotional, but for the most part, he elaborates on the six hints for dream work that I’ve included above. If any of what I’ve said about Taylor’s dream work in this post has interested you, I really encourage you to watch Taylor talk about it. He is very articulate!