Here's a conference title I like! Artistry in Mediation: Conflict, Improvisation & Resolution. From the flyer [pdf] for this March conference in Salt Lake City:
This Conference is designed to be highly interactive and creative, with opportunities to practice innovative approaches to mediation. Wear comfortable clothes; ties and nylons are discouraged. On Friday, case managers will join us for a session on the business of mediation and how they add value to our businesses. Join us on Saturday to hear how mediators closed difficult cases and to add your suggestions for future conferences.
Group emotional contagion, the transfer of moods among people in a group, and its influence on work group dynamics was examined in a laboratory study of managerial decision making using multiple, convergent measures of mood, individual attitudes, behavior, and group-level dynamics. Using a 2 x 2 experimental design, with a trained confederate enacting mood conditions, the predicted effect of emotional contagion was found among group members, using both outside coders’ ratings of participants’ mood and participants’ self-reported mood. No hypothesized differences in contagion effects due to the degree of pleasantness of the mood expressed and the energy level with which it was conveyed were found. There was a significant influence of emotional contagion on individual-level attitudes and group processes. As predicted, the positive emotional contagion group members experienced improved cooperation, decreased conflict, and increased perceived task performance. Theoretical implications and practical ramifications of emotional contagion in groups and organizations are discussed.
A man who spent time in Washtenaw County Jail Tweeted about the experience. This resulted in a series published in the Ann Arbor Chronicle. Click to read Washnetaw Jail Diary. Click on the titles here to read each of the diary entries. The man is a compelling writer and tells well one side of a complicated story.
Experts say that these so-called "powerful people" also make stricter moral judgements of others - while doing exactly as they please.
Professor Adam Galinsky, from the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University in Illinois, said: "According to our research, power and influence can cause a severe disconnect between public judgment and private behaviour, and as a result, the powerful are stricter in their judgment of others while being more lenient toward their own actions.
"The past year has been marked by a series of moral transgressions by powerful figures in political, business and celebrity circles.
"And this research is especially relevant to the biggest scandals of 2009, as we look back on how private behaviour often contradicted the public stance of particular individuals in power.
Five studies explored whether power increases moral hypocrisy, a situation characterized by imposing strict moral standards on others but practicing less strict moral behavior oneself. In Experiment 1, compared to the powerless, the powerful condemned other people’s cheating, while cheating more themselves. In Experiments 2-4, the powerful were more strict in judging others’ moral transgressions but more lenient in judging their own transgressions. A final study found that the effect of power on moral hypocrisy depends on its legitimacy: When power was illegitimate, the moral hypocrisy effect not only disappeared but reversed, with the illegitimate powerful becoming more strict in judging their own than others’ behavior. This pattern, which might be dubbed hypercrisy, was also found among low-power participants in Experiments 3 and 4. We discuss how patterns of hypocrisy and hypercrisy among the powerful and powerless can help perpetuate social inequality.
Very good to know this article is on the Internet. It is sad that what was written for The Complete Lawyer is inaccessible. The now-defunct publication ran many good articles, columns, and interviews. But today you can click to read the five strategies in "Lead Your Brain Instead of Letting It Lead You."
Back in junior high school health class, we were told that the brain has two different hemispheres — the left and the right. The left brain, the textbook stated, is responsible for language, math, and science, logic and rationality. The right brain was the artistic one, the creative half of the brain. But that's not quite true. Neuroimaging and experiments on patients with split brains and brain damage to only one hemisphere have allowed a much more detailed, and fascinating, accounting of how the two parts interact with the world, and how they combine to become a unified consciousness (and, in some cases of mental disorders, how they occasionally don't). Iain McGilchrist has combined scientific research with cultural history in his new book The Master and His Emissary: The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World to examine how the evolution of the brain influenced our society, and how the current make up of the brain shapes art, politics, and science, as well as the rise of mental illness in our time — in particular schizophrenia, anorexia, and autism.
That eighth-grade level science textbook was kind of correct. While the left brain does contain much of the language center of the brain, a person cannot understand context without the right hemisphere. Metaphor, irony, and humor are all processed by the right brain. When engaging in face-to-face conversation, it processes facial expressions to add depth to the meaning. Most
We need to be careful and discerning when we read articles by journalists about science research. See my cautionary words, and links to two great posts about the problems with press releases and media reporting of science here. At the NeuroLeadership Summit this year, Dr. Matt Lieberman said about the reporting of neuroscience research that "journalists get it right about a third of the time."
You may want to read this article about the science of will power before you sit down to write your list of New Year's resolutions. From "Blame It on the Brain" (Wall Street Journal):
Willpower, like a bicep, can only exert itself so long before it gives out; it's an extremely limited mental resource.
Given its limitations, New Year's resolutions are exactly the wrong way to change our behavior. It makes no sense to try to quit smoking and lose weight at the same time, or to clean the apartment and give up wine in the same month. Instead, we should respect the feebleness of self-control, and spread our resolutions out over the entire year. Human routines are stubborn things, which helps explain why 88% of all resolutions end in failure, according to a 2007 survey of over 3,000 people conducted by the British psychologist Richard Wiseman. Bad habits are hard to break—and they're impossible to break if we try to break them all at once.
Some simple tricks can help. The first step is self-awareness: The only way to fix willpower flaws is to know about them. Only then can the right mental muscles get strengthened, making it easier to succeed at our annual ritual of self-improvement.