Brains On Purpose™

Some nuggets of self-directed neuroplasticity gold

Click to get some tips on changing your brain—on purpose!

Now online: A new article by Jeff Schwartz and me, plus the newest intallment of my ADR column

The new edition of The Complete Lawyer includes an article by Jeff and me entitled "Exercise Mind Hygiene On A Daily Basis." Excerpt:

Become More Self-Aware In Three Steps

Your reflective mind is your shield against living reactively. It can help you become wiser, healthier and more satisfied—which is worth more than any imaginable income. It is easy to use—but not often simple. Here are three steps that will help you separate yourself from your reactive brain and begin to move into your reflective mind.

The edition is focused on "A Sound Mind in a Sound Body" and has articles for everyone. While you are over there, please take a look at the second installment of my ADR column "The Human Factor." I cowrite it with my terrific ADR sisters Victoria Pynchon, Gini Nelson, and Diane Levin.

Take a closer look at what the media report: Recent studies about fairness and empathy

Reading about research in the media sometimes can be misleading. Here are two recent examples. First, several articles and blog posts have covered "The Sunny Side of Fairness," research out of UCLA by Golnaz Tabibnia, Ajay B. Satpute, and Matthew D. Lieberman.

An article about the study at physorg.com is titled "Are humans hardwired for fairness?" Professor Greg Downey of Neuroanthropology posted at Craving money, chocolate and… justice his concern about interpreting the research as saying fairness is hardwired.

I still reject the notion that this necessarily proves that we are ‘hard-wired to treat fairness as a reward [quoting Dr. Lieberman in a UCLA press release].’  I don’t think that the research shows anything about ‘hard-wiring’, but rather about the ‘wiring’ of university students. No developmental or cross-cultural data has been discussed that might go to the issue of whether this ‘wiring’ is ‘hard’ or ’soft,’ and I strongly suspect that it’s not ‘hard’ in the sense that this usually means, as we have plenty of cross-cultural evidence suggesting not every society thinks money should be divided equally, or even that money is terribly valuable.

The notion of ‘hard-wiring’ still seems to me to be one of the most problematic pieces of baggage that gets drug out in much of the brain imaging research, usually without data that would actually support it. The research is plenty interesting without the assumption of ‘hard-wiring’, . . .

I am looking forward to reading the study. Here you will find links to the study and to several articles about it.

The second example: At idealawg, I posted Better to lead with thinking rather than feeling in negotiations? Maybe if you are an MBA student in a negotiations course. I question the conclusions drawn from the research both in the media—and by the study itself.

Bottom line: Whenever possible, read the actual studies in addition to what the media reports.

Are people wrong if they do not see the world as you do? Let's talk about it

A new post over at idealawg on naive realism and a method of dialogue to overcome the differences it causes.

Naïve realism is the conviction that one sees the world as it is and that when people don’t see it in a similar way, it is they that do not see the world for what it is.

Click to read Minds locked against the resolution of conflict? Here's one key for opening the locks.

Images can help you paint a bright resolution to conflict

Western societies have largely lost the ability to think in images rather than words.
-Ian Robertson

Each day, I am amazed at the brain power that is lost when we focus solely on words; I now am using hand-drawn images more and more for:

• problem-solving
• thought clarification
• communication
• memory enhancement.

For a couple of years, since reading neuroscientist Dr. Ian Robertson's Opening the Mind's Eye: How Images and Language Teach Us How To See, I have been increasingly convinced through many experiences that including both words and images enhances processes such as the four listed above.

Now it looks as if more and more people are coming to the same conclusion and practicing brain enhancement by image or drawing. Take a look at some of these links and excerpts below before discarding the idea of drawing pictures (and lots of them!) in your dispute resolution.

Over at idealawg, I posted about the new book The Back of the Napkin: Solving Problems and Selling Ideas with Pictures by Dan Roam. Roam's book about the value of using images in business has been in the top 200 at Amazon since it came out. Seems I am not the only one who found the book to be an excellent book, offering practical advice on using pictures—and explaining why you would want to incorporate images. A couple of articles about the book . . .

From "Doodling for Profit" (Business Week):

In a corporate landscape awash with slick computer presentations, charts, graphs, and logos, some managers still utilize an age-old tool for business problem solving: the hand-drawn doodle. Whether sketched on a legal pad or drawn on a whiteboard, a doodle has the power to humanize the abstract and simplify the complex. It's a way to add humor into a dry topic. And, when doodles are used in meetings with colleagues and clients, it's a way to pull people into the process of solving a problem.

The author of "Pictures aid communication, book argues" (Miami Herald) writes:

. . .I think the very act of trying to come up with the right images forces the presenter to break things down into the most important and meaningful components, which is a very good way to get a point across, irrespective of the chosen medium.  . . .[A]s a way to get attention and disrupt the status quo and penetrate defenses, simple imagery is deceptively potent and effective.

Here's the "lost chapter" of the book: "The 10-1/2 Commandments of Visual Thinking." (pdf)

Best-selling author Dan Pink's new book (book's Web site) uses lots of images: it's a comic book! (Or manga to be exact.) Howard Zinn's newest title is in comic format, too. The graphic novel genre is growing in popularity and acceptance.

Pictures are great teachers. I was happy to see that I am in good

Dan Rather reports on neuroplasticity

You may watch online a Dan Rather report on how our brains change throughout life. This 52 minutes on neuroplasticity includes segments on memory, meditation, stroke, and brain fitness.

Hat tip to Dr. Ginger Campbell. Click for her overview of this "Mind Science" program on neuroplasticity.

Grit your teeth and bear it: Get angry for all the right reasons

Another study on the usefulness of anger! That emotion is enjoying attention and a second—and third—look. (Is March the month for mad?) From a Science Daily article "Anger Has An Upside, Study Suggests":

Psychologists Maya Tamir and Christopher Mitchell of Boston College, and James Gross of Stanford University tested whether people prefer to experience emotions that are potentially useful, even when they are unpleasant to experience.

The authors wanted to examine whether individuals are motivated to increase their level of anger when they expect to complete a confrontational task, where anger might enhance performance.

This study "Hedonic and Instrumental Motives in Anger Regulation" (pdf) seems to suggest that, yes, people will choose anger-inducing over pleasant activities when they know they are about to engage in confrontation. The angry people also performed better in the confrontational task. They did not perform better in an activity which involved serving customers. (I think some of those study participants are now working in stores near me.)

[I]t seems that individuals are not always striving to feel pleasure and may even be willing to endure some nasty emotions if necessary.  “Such findings,” write the authors “demonstrate that what people prefer to feel at any given moment may depend, in part, on what they might get out of it.”

As I said earlier this week in Anger—your inner fiend or your friend? Or both? What's the role of emotion?:

[T]here is a time and a place for every emotion—including anger.

What are your thoughts? When and where is anger appropriate?

Notes from the actual Psychological Science research article (linked to above): The authors of the study conclude that negative emotions may be adaptive in certain contexts.

Unpleasant emotions are important predictors of mental health. It is not surprising, therefore, that emotion-regulation research has emphasized the importance of decreasing unpleasant emotions. Our findings, however, suggest that experiencing some degree of negative emotions in specific contexts may be adaptive, if those emotions promote goal pursuits (Tamir & Diener, in press). [pdf]

And they add something related to conflict resolution.

Anger may be instrumental in some contexts (e.g., when fighting over limited resources) and harmful in others (e.g., when cooperating and sharing limited resources).

But they also introduce some caution about their results.

In this investigation, we created artificial contexts in which anger could be more or less instrumental. Given the uncertain ecological validity of these contexts, future research should test our hypotheses in the context of daily life . . .  .

Good mind hygiene—thought management—is the pathway to conflict resolution

In her blog Lab Notes, Newsweek's Sharon Begley posted a story about the Dalai Lama observing brain surgery.

Afterwards, he chatted with the surgeon, telling him how his scientist friends had patiently explained to him that all of our thoughts, feelings, memories, dreams and other mental activities are the products of electrical and chemical activity in the brain. But he had always wondered something, the Dalai Lama told the surgeon. If electricity and chemistry can produce thoughts and all the rest, can thoughts act back on the physical stuff of the brain to change its chemical, electrical and other physical properties?

The surgeon said no.

The brain produces and shapes mental activity, the brain surgeon said; mental activity does not alter the brain.

This incident took place about a decade ago. We now know that "mental activity" can shape and change the brain. In her post The Lotus and the Synapse, Begley gives examples of research showing that both thinking and meditation can mold your brain. Jeff's research with self-directed neuroplasticity (and here) has also shown that your thoughts change your brain.

You definitely have control over the neuron paths you create inside your skull. What brain pathways have you been forging? Have you created paths that are bearish, bitchy, surly, sullen, frenzied, fierce, arbitrary, absolutist, wimpy, weak,  stolid, stoic, considerate, compassionate? (You get the idea.) The thoughts you entertain, allow, and author are those that design your brain.

Each minute, the thoughts to which you are giving attention are sculpting your brain. Your mind hygiene, your thought management, shapes not only your brain but your life. And your conflict! The conflict between people practicing good brain hygiene will be very different from between people who have poor mind hygiene.

The life of a person with poor mind hygiene usually, well, stinks. And they often have lots of conflict that is messy. Think neuro-Pigpen.

What are your clients thinking? How good is their mind hygiene? And how about you? Aside from being a good model and attending to your place in the conflict's emotional contagion, what is your role in the mind hygiene of your clients? Let me know what you think, please.

Image credits:
jetolla at morgueFile
ammcf at photobucket

Note (added April 20, 2008, 9:17 AM Mountain): A blog post at Creating Passionate Users that includes information about emotional contagion. Scroll down to the section entitled "Emotional Contagion"

Anger—your inner fiend or your friend? Or both? What's the role of emotion?

About a year ago in Good brain, bad brain? Bring it all to the negotiation table, I wrote about the research article "Thinking straight while seeing red: The influence of anger on information processing," in which researchers looked at the effects of anger on decision-making and thinking. The effects are sometimes positive.

Today in Negotiation, I saw some related thoughts in the sidebar of an article titled "Will your emotions get the upper hand?" (pdf)

Angry individuals approach situations with confidence, a sense of control, and negative thoughts about others. In negotiation, these appraisal tendencies can trigger overconfidence, unrealistic optimism, and aggression, yet they buffer decision makers from indecision, risk aversion, and overanalysis, write Jennifer Lerner and her colleague Larissa Tiedens of Stanford University. In addition, anger can motivate us to stand up for ourselves and others in the face of injustice.

Given these different patterns, Lerner and Tiedens raise the interesting question of whether anger, despite being widely regarded as a negative emotion, can be considered a positive force in some instances.  . . .

Of course, it can. But I think we are in need of a clear description of anger. From "Are you happy?" an article in The New York Review of Books:

Let us agree to a moratorium on the use of single words, such as fear, anger, joy, and sad, and write about emotional processes with full sentences rather than ambiguous, naked concepts . . .  .

Read "Law Professor Urges Courts to Re-consider Bar on Emotions in the Courtroom" for a discussion of the relationship between reason and emotion. Excerpt:

In his article "The Emotional Juror," published recently in the Fordham Law Review, [Todd] Pettys points to recent advances in psychology and neurology that suggest emotion plays a much larger role in formulating our logical thinking than was previously known.

For instance, he cites research demonstrating that when we feel a powerful emotion, our brain looks for evidence that supports that emotion while discounting evidence that is in opposition. In this way, our emotional response over time becomes a belief borne of what we think is a logical assessment of the evidence.

How true! Have you observed that search for evidence to support emotion in yourself? Your clients? I answer "yes" to both questions. The line between emotion and reason is fuzzy and shifty and situational, don't you think? And there is a time and a place for every emotion—including anger. Agree?

Has brain science reached a tipping point? Do mediators and lawyers "need to incorporate neuroscience into their practice"?

Ed Batista, Leadership Coach at Stanford's Graduate School of Business, posted today about the use of neuroscience in coaching, leadership and learning. His thoughtful post includes due concern about "neuro-hype" and the limitations of the science, topics on which I have posted before (posts here). Batista's discussion about limitations includes the link to a very good article from Haaretz.com titled "Of two minds". From the article:

[M]any scientists are taking issue with the rising dominance of brain sciences within the study of the human mind and human behavior. Psychologists, philosophers and even a large number of brain researchers maintain that many of the studies that are attracting public interest are scientifically untenable, rely on as-yet-unproven technologies, or simply show the obvious after appalling financial investments. Others argue that the studies are unethical and subject to commercial manipulation.

Nevertheless, the science does have some good information and need not be ignored. Batista says:

[W]e're clearly at a point where humanistic professionals--executive coaches, OD consultants, experiential educators--need to incorporate neuroscience into their practices.

I add mediators and lawyers to that list of professionals who "need to incorporate neuroscience into their practices." Why? For the many reasons I have blogged about here and about which I will continue to write.

About that possible tipping point: In the general public, the interest in neuroscience seems to be growing. These days, I frequently receive e-mails from people saying they are learning about the science and describe themselves with such adjectives as "fascinated" or immersed." Another example: our program at the Smithsonian enjoyed an unusually high registration. A time for excitement—and a time for even more caution and critical thought. What is your thinking? Is the interest growing?

Note: I added the image above from the new service picapp.com but I am not sure I did it correctly. What is that little person peeking over the edge? Do any of you know how to use the service? They have some terrific images and I would like to master its use. Thanks.

Brain Overclaim Syndrome: Expecting too much from neuroscience —and the cure

Brain Overclaim Syndrome. I wish I had thought up that name to describe the tendency to exalt neuroscience to unwarranted heights. I did not, but I will be using it from now on. When I hear someone making claims about human behavior based on neurosience that leap beyond what we know through research or that are flimsy extrapolations, I will now say, "Why, that is BOS!" Sometimes, if the guesswork is particularly egregious, I may utter a second statement which is very similar but leaves out the "O".

Does BOS occur in the field of conflict resolution. Yes, although I have seen it much more frequently in the business arena where people are drawing shaky conclusions and engaging in large stretches about the brain and what it does in the workplace. Even more frequently, you can find wild and wispy assertions about the brain's behavior in the sales process. On the whole, those working at the nexus of conflict resolution and neuroscience are using caution and care. Let's be grateful for the integrity.

Click for more about Brain Overclaim Syndrome, its cure, and links to interviews and articles about neurolaw.

Image credit: nevermindjez and stretchynick

Upcoming Colorado event: Wednesday, April 23, 2008

Click to read all about Networking for Skeptics and Procrastinators: Using Your Brain to Create More Business.