APS Award Address: Strangers to Ourselves

00:45:14
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AYfkJhwykg

概要

TLDRA palestra aborda a importância do autoconhecimento, destacando sua relevância na literatura, filosofia e psicologia. O palestrante menciona que, apesar de ser um tema central em várias áreas, o autoconhecimento não recebeu a devida atenção na psicologia até recentemente. Ele explora três tipos de autoconhecimento: o conhecimento do eu passado, do eu presente e do eu futuro. O palestrante discute como a memória e as teorias pessoais influenciam a percepção do passado, além de abordar a precisão do autoconhecimento e suas implicações. Ele enfatiza a necessidade de construir uma narrativa coerente sobre si mesmo e a importância de considerar diferentes fontes de informação para alcançar um autoconhecimento mais preciso.

収穫

  • 🧠 O autoconhecimento é crucial na literatura e na psicologia.
  • 📚 A memória é um processo construtivo, não uma gravação precisa.
  • 🔍 A introspecção tem limitações e não é o único caminho para o autoconhecimento.
  • ⏳ Conhecer nosso eu passado, presente e futuro é fundamental.
  • 🤔 A precisão do autoconhecimento pode ter consequências positivas e negativas.
  • 👥 A perspectiva de outras pessoas pode enriquecer nosso autoconhecimento.
  • 📖 Construir uma narrativa coerente sobre si mesmo é importante.
  • 😂 Um bom senso de humor ajuda a lidar com a realidade da vida.
  • 🔄 As previsões sobre o futuro muitas vezes são imprecisas.
  • 💡 O autoconhecimento deve ser baseado em dados e teorias bem fundamentadas.

タイムライン

  • 00:00:00 - 00:05:00

    O palestrante expressa gratidão pelo prêmio e esclarece que o título de sua palestra, 'estranhos para nós mesmos', é o mesmo de um álbum da banda Modest Mouse, mas que ele usou o título primeiro em seu livro. Ele discute a importância do autoconhecimento na literatura e na vida cotidiana, mencionando que, apesar de ser um tema relevante, não é amplamente abordado na psicologia.

  • 00:05:00 - 00:10:00

    Ele menciona a história da psicologia, destacando a divisão entre Freud e a psicanálise, que não utilizava métodos empíricos, e Kurt Lewin, que defendia a pesquisa empírica. O palestrante observa que, por décadas, o autoconhecimento foi negligenciado na psicologia, mas que isso está mudando.

  • 00:10:00 - 00:15:00

    O palestrante propõe uma visão mais ampla do autoconhecimento, que inclui o conhecimento do eu passado, presente e futuro. Ele introduz três temas principais: a falácia do acesso direto, a construção teórica do autoconhecimento e a questão da precisão do autoconhecimento.

  • 00:15:00 - 00:20:00

    Ele começa a discutir o conhecimento do eu passado, explicando que a memória é um processo construtivo e que as pessoas tendem a reconstruir suas memórias de forma a se verem de maneira positiva. Ele menciona estudos que mostram que as pessoas muitas vezes não conseguem lembrar com precisão suas atitudes passadas.

  • 00:20:00 - 00:25:00

    O palestrante apresenta um estudo que demonstra que as pessoas tendem a confabular suas memórias, ajustando-as com base em suas crenças atuais. Ele discute a ideia de que a incerteza sobre o passado pode ter consequências positivas, como a sensação de estabilidade.

  • 00:25:00 - 00:30:00

    Ele passa a discutir o conhecimento do eu presente, que é mais complicado de avaliar. O palestrante menciona que as pessoas podem ter dificuldade em relatar com precisão suas atitudes e crenças, e que isso pode ser desafiado por medidas implícitas e relatórios de amigos.

  • 00:30:00 - 00:35:00

    O palestrante menciona que, em muitos casos, as pessoas não têm acesso direto a seus estados emocionais e que suas emoções podem ser influenciadas por fatores externos. Ele discute a construção de emoções e a dificuldade de reconhecer sentimentos reais em certas situações.

  • 00:35:00 - 00:40:00

    Ele aborda o conhecimento do eu futuro, explicando que as previsões sobre como nos sentiremos em eventos futuros são frequentemente imprecisas. O palestrante menciona a 'falácia do impacto', onde as pessoas superestimam a intensidade e a duração de suas emoções futuras.

  • 00:40:00 - 00:45:14

    O palestrante conclui discutindo como podemos alcançar o autoconhecimento, enfatizando que a introspecção não é a única maneira. Ele sugere que devemos construir narrativas sobre nós mesmos com base em dados de várias fontes, incluindo observações de nosso comportamento e feedback de outras pessoas.

もっと見る

マインドマップ

ビデオQ&A

  • Qual é o tema principal da palestra?

    O tema principal é a importância do autoconhecimento e suas diferentes dimensões.

  • Quais são os três tipos de autoconhecimento discutidos?

    Os três tipos são: conhecimento do eu passado, do eu presente e do eu futuro.

  • Por que o autoconhecimento não recebeu muita atenção na psicologia?

    Historicamente, o autoconhecimento foi associado a Freud e à psicanálise, o que levou a uma hesitação em estudá-lo de forma empírica.

  • O que é a 'falácia do acesso direto'?

    É a ideia de que a introspecção é o caminho mais importante para o autoconhecimento, embora tenha suas limitações.

  • Como a memória influencia o autoconhecimento?

    A memória é um processo construtivo, onde as pessoas muitas vezes inferem suas experiências passadas em vez de recordá-las com precisão.

  • Qual é a relação entre autoconhecimento e previsões sobre o futuro?

    As previsões sobre como nos sentiremos no futuro são frequentemente imprecisas, levando a um viés de impacto.

  • O que o palestrante sugere para melhorar o autoconhecimento?

    Ele sugere construir uma narrativa coerente sobre si mesmo, utilizando diversas fontes de informação.

  • Qual é a importância de considerar a perspectiva de outras pessoas no autoconhecimento?

    Outras pessoas podem ter uma visão mais objetiva e precisa sobre nós, que pode enriquecer nosso autoconhecimento.

  • O que o palestrante diz sobre a precisão do autoconhecimento?

    A precisão do autoconhecimento pode ser benéfica, mas também pode levar a consequências negativas se não for equilibrada.

  • Como o humor se relaciona com o autoconhecimento?

    Um bom senso de humor pode ajudar a lidar com a realidade da vida e a manter uma perspectiva saudável sobre si mesmo.

ビデオをもっと見る

AIを活用したYouTubeの無料動画要約に即アクセス！
字幕
en
オートスクロール:
  • 00:00:07
    well thank you it's great to be here and
  • 00:00:09
    and uh I'm very appreciative of this
  • 00:00:11
    wonderful award and let's just jump
  • 00:00:14
    right into it uh I want to begin by
  • 00:00:17
    clearing up some possible
  • 00:00:18
    misunderstanding about the title of my
  • 00:00:20
    talk strangers to ourselves those of you
  • 00:00:22
    who are independent music fans may know
  • 00:00:25
    that the group Modest Mouse issued an
  • 00:00:28
    album with that same name name just a
  • 00:00:30
    few weeks ago um after an 8-year Hiatus
  • 00:00:34
    and you may think that I stole my title
  • 00:00:37
    um from them
  • 00:00:39
    but that was also the title of my book
  • 00:00:41
    from a number of years ago and I have it
  • 00:00:43
    on good authority that they actually
  • 00:00:45
    named their album after my book so just
  • 00:00:47
    to just to clear that
  • 00:00:50
    up self- knowledge is obviously an
  • 00:00:52
    important topic in literature uh
  • 00:00:56
    personally philosophy everyday
  • 00:00:58
    life the Oracle in Deli famously is
  • 00:01:03
    inscribed with know
  • 00:01:05
    thyself many of uh great literature
  • 00:01:08
    including Shakespeare's tragedies have
  • 00:01:10
    as its theme self- knowledge this is a
  • 00:01:12
    scene from King Lear at the end of the
  • 00:01:14
    play where he's holding his daughter
  • 00:01:16
    Cordelia after her death realizing that
  • 00:01:18
    what he really thought was important to
  • 00:01:20
    him in life was was far from
  • 00:01:23
    it it is the object of or the point of
  • 00:01:26
    insight
  • 00:01:28
    psychotherapies and and some forms of
  • 00:01:31
    meditation have as their goal a better
  • 00:01:33
    access to our our internal
  • 00:01:35
    States but oddly it has not been a
  • 00:01:38
    central Topic in Psychology at least not
  • 00:01:41
    until recently there are no journals of
  • 00:01:44
    self- knowledge no professional
  • 00:01:46
    societies with that uh topic very few
  • 00:01:50
    college courses as far as I know on on
  • 00:01:52
    that topic exceptions are one that I
  • 00:01:54
    teach and one that sine teaches at her
  • 00:01:58
    University and the question is why and
  • 00:02:01
    it I just want to spend a couple of
  • 00:02:03
    seconds delving back to the history of
  • 00:02:05
    psychology and talk about this fork in
  • 00:02:08
    the road from uh the 1940s and 1950s
  • 00:02:11
    where the topic of self- knowledge was
  • 00:02:14
    most closely associated with Freud and
  • 00:02:17
    psychoanalysis Freud however assed the
  • 00:02:19
    the empirical method he thought that it
  • 00:02:21
    wasn't really uh appropriate to study
  • 00:02:24
    the mind through the scientific method
  • 00:02:26
    the case method was what he preferred
  • 00:02:29
    and in the 1950s Kurt Owen who you see
  • 00:02:31
    on the right of your screen uh took a
  • 00:02:34
    different fork and argued that we could
  • 00:02:36
    study the mind and the social situation
  • 00:02:39
    uh empirically as with great
  • 00:02:41
    experimental techniques even so I think
  • 00:02:44
    for the next few decades people were shy
  • 00:02:46
    about studying such topics as self-
  • 00:02:48
    knowledge and Consciousness partly out
  • 00:02:51
    of fear that we'd be misidentified with
  • 00:02:53
    that other fork and we be freudians and
  • 00:02:56
    and unscientific and so it's not a topic
  • 00:02:59
    that was addressed
  • 00:03:00
    um much at all and there also I think
  • 00:03:03
    some some important methodological
  • 00:03:05
    reasons for that that I will touch on
  • 00:03:07
    times are changing and that's a book
  • 00:03:09
    that s and I edited a few years ago that
  • 00:03:12
    has many excellent chapters on self-
  • 00:03:16
    knowledge so uh what I want to do today
  • 00:03:19
    is to give you a broad overview of this
  • 00:03:21
    topic and what kind of research has
  • 00:03:24
    addressed it what the major questions
  • 00:03:26
    are in terms of an outline um there are
  • 00:03:29
    three kinds of self- knowledge that I'll
  • 00:03:31
    talk about I really want to consider
  • 00:03:33
    this broad more broadly than it perhaps
  • 00:03:35
    has in past treatments so when we think
  • 00:03:39
    about self- knowledge usually we think
  • 00:03:41
    of how aware we are of our current
  • 00:03:43
    states and emotions and traits and that
  • 00:03:45
    is indeed something I'll touch on uh but
  • 00:03:48
    I want to begin by talking about how
  • 00:03:50
    well we know our past selves which I
  • 00:03:52
    think is an important form of self-
  • 00:03:53
    knowledge do I know who I was um in the
  • 00:03:56
    past in terms of what my attitudes and
  • 00:03:58
    feelings were and also how well I know
  • 00:04:02
    my future self am I accurate at uh
  • 00:04:05
    predicting how I'll feel in the future
  • 00:04:07
    who I will be in the future these are
  • 00:04:09
    all important forms of self- knowledge I
  • 00:04:12
    will close with a step back and talking
  • 00:04:15
    about some bigger picture issues how can
  • 00:04:17
    we achieve self- knowledge what does
  • 00:04:19
    that mean um is it a good thing to
  • 00:04:22
    Aspire
  • 00:04:24
    to and there are three themes that I'm
  • 00:04:27
    going to weave in on all these topics
  • 00:04:29
    the first is what I call the direct
  • 00:04:31
    access fallacy the idea that that the
  • 00:04:35
    most important root to self- knowledge
  • 00:04:37
    is Naval gazing
  • 00:04:39
    introspection and although I think it's
  • 00:04:41
    an important source of information it is
  • 00:04:44
    uh not something which uh perhaps is the
  • 00:04:47
    best path to self- knowledge because of
  • 00:04:49
    the limits of introspection because of
  • 00:04:51
    that the second theme is that uh self-
  • 00:04:54
    knowledge much like our knowledge of the
  • 00:04:55
    external world is a theory driven
  • 00:04:58
    construction we have some information we
  • 00:05:00
    have to put it together in some kind of
  • 00:05:02
    coherent way using our theories as to
  • 00:05:05
    who we are and the third theme is about
  • 00:05:09
    accuracy a hotly debated question as to
  • 00:05:11
    whether it's good or bad to have
  • 00:05:13
    accurate self- knowledge and uh that's
  • 00:05:15
    something I'll return to towards the end
  • 00:05:17
    of the talk so let's begin with
  • 00:05:20
    knowledge of our past self as we look
  • 00:05:22
    back on who we were how we felt uh what
  • 00:05:25
    kind of personality Trace we had is this
  • 00:05:28
    something that we're accurate at
  • 00:05:31
    uh and in terms of the Criterion just a
  • 00:05:35
    quick methodological aside I think this
  • 00:05:37
    one is pretty straightforward that the
  • 00:05:39
    typical study U measures people's
  • 00:05:41
    attitudes or beliefs or behaviors at
  • 00:05:43
    time one let some time pass and then ask
  • 00:05:46
    the person to recall what those
  • 00:05:48
    attitudes or behaviors were so we have a
  • 00:05:51
    pretty easy way of assessing self-
  • 00:05:52
    knowledge here how accurately can I
  • 00:05:55
    recall who I was in the past which the
  • 00:05:58
    researcher has measured
  • 00:06:00
    so the First theme the direct access
  • 00:06:02
    fallacy I think applies here that that
  • 00:06:04
    most of our memory is constructive
  • 00:06:07
    particularly long-term memory it's not
  • 00:06:09
    like all my attitudes and beliefs and
  • 00:06:11
    traits are somehow a part of my brain
  • 00:06:13
    where those are directly stored instead
  • 00:06:15
    it's a constructive process where I I
  • 00:06:17
    try to remember who I was and how I felt
  • 00:06:20
    and I'm very much um inferring more than
  • 00:06:24
    directly
  • 00:06:27
    recalling much of what I'll have to say
  • 00:06:29
    here was said many years ago by Michael
  • 00:06:31
    Ross in a really great 1989 sect review
  • 00:06:34
    paper in which he um talked about how
  • 00:06:37
    memory for our past selves work and he
  • 00:06:40
    basically made two points that we view
  • 00:06:42
    the past through through the lens of the
  • 00:06:44
    present so we first check how we feel
  • 00:06:47
    now and then try to guess how we felt in
  • 00:06:49
    the past and we apply theories as to
  • 00:06:52
    whether we would we is reasonable to
  • 00:06:54
    think that we have changed or
  • 00:06:56
    not what are these theories well um as
  • 00:07:00
    Tony Greenwald said a number of years
  • 00:07:01
    ago one is uh that we're really good
  • 00:07:04
    people that we're motivated historians
  • 00:07:07
    we tend to reconstruct our pasts in ways
  • 00:07:09
    that make us look good and favorable
  • 00:07:12
    we're more have to remember our
  • 00:07:13
    successes than our failures for
  • 00:07:15
    example and another theory is that we're
  • 00:07:18
    pretty stable people we have most of us
  • 00:07:20
    have a sense that we don't change
  • 00:07:22
    particularly much that it's not like uh
  • 00:07:25
    10 years ago I was on one end of the
  • 00:07:27
    political spectrum and now I'm on the
  • 00:07:29
    opposite that regardless of what how I
  • 00:07:31
    really felt that we tend to think no
  • 00:07:33
    that people are are
  • 00:07:35
    stable um and this applies to behavior
  • 00:07:37
    and it leads to some interesting errors
  • 00:07:39
    so uh there's a wellestablished finding
  • 00:07:42
    in the political science literature that
  • 00:07:44
    if you ask people who they voted for in
  • 00:07:47
    previous elections say presidential
  • 00:07:49
    elections many more people vote say they
  • 00:07:52
    voted for the president than actually
  • 00:07:53
    did and it appears that people um
  • 00:07:57
    particularly if they support the
  • 00:07:58
    candidate now
  • 00:08:00
    they say surely I I must have voted for
  • 00:08:02
    that person so even something as as
  • 00:08:04
    discreet or you would think easy to
  • 00:08:06
    remember as which lever I pressed in the
  • 00:08:08
    voting booth people sometimes are
  • 00:08:11
    inaccurate at recalling Michael Ross and
  • 00:08:14
    the students had a nice demonstration of
  • 00:08:15
    this in the laboratory where they gave
  • 00:08:18
    people persuasive Communications arguing
  • 00:08:21
    that it's really good to brush your
  • 00:08:23
    teeth a lot or actually it hurts the
  • 00:08:25
    anomaly you shouldn't brush your teeth
  • 00:08:27
    that often and they were successful
  • 00:08:29
    people change their minds in One
  • 00:08:30
    Direction or the other and then they
  • 00:08:32
    asked them well by the way how often
  • 00:08:34
    have you brushed your teeth in the past
  • 00:08:35
    few weeks and people's recall was
  • 00:08:38
    influenced by this attitude change so if
  • 00:08:41
    they now thought it was really good to
  • 00:08:42
    brush your teeth yeah I've brushed my
  • 00:08:44
    teeth a lot and if not well not so much
  • 00:08:48
    and you know I think in these studies
  • 00:08:49
    people were honestly trying to come up
  • 00:08:51
    with the right answer just memory is a a
  • 00:08:53
    constructive process the same is true of
  • 00:08:56
    attitudes there's some well-known
  • 00:08:58
    studies showing that you can change
  • 00:09:00
    people's attitudes and they don't
  • 00:09:01
    realize they've changed I'll tell you
  • 00:09:03
    briefly about an old study of ours that
  • 00:09:05
    showed this with a couple of wrinkles so
  • 00:09:08
    in this study we um were interested
  • 00:09:11
    partly in what people's theories were
  • 00:09:13
    about how their attitudes Chang and so
  • 00:09:15
    we first wanted to change their minds um
  • 00:09:18
    with one of two techniques our
  • 00:09:20
    participants were a group of college
  • 00:09:22
    students who were all very opposed to
  • 00:09:24
    the legalization of marijuana and then
  • 00:09:27
    we tried to change that out ude in one
  • 00:09:29
    of two ways we either gave them a
  • 00:09:31
    well-crafted speech a persuasive
  • 00:09:34
    communication or we had them listen to
  • 00:09:36
    an audio tape with subliminal messages
  • 00:09:38
    embedded in it and um so we had their
  • 00:09:42
    attitudes measured at time one they're
  • 00:09:44
    really against marijuana
  • 00:09:46
    legalization time two a couple weeks
  • 00:09:48
    later we give them one of these Attitude
  • 00:09:50
    Change techniques and then we see if we
  • 00:09:53
    were successful but relevant to this
  • 00:09:55
    point I want to make now we also then
  • 00:09:57
    asked them to recall how they had felt
  • 00:09:59
    at time
  • 00:10:01
    one and this is what we found on a
  • 00:10:03
    ninepoint scale that goes from disagree
  • 00:10:06
    strongly to agree strongly that
  • 00:10:08
    marijuana should be legalized you can
  • 00:10:10
    see these bars are very low because we
  • 00:10:12
    selected people who we knew were very
  • 00:10:14
    opposed to the legalization of marijuana
  • 00:10:17
    this is how they felt at time one couple
  • 00:10:19
    of weeks go by we give them either our
  • 00:10:21
    speech or our subliminal message and as
  • 00:10:25
    we expected the speech was actually much
  • 00:10:27
    more successful at changing attitudes
  • 00:10:29
    than the subliminal message so um for
  • 00:10:32
    these kinds of studies that's big change
  • 00:10:34
    you know they they didn't go above the
  • 00:10:36
    midpoint but they now are two or three
  • 00:10:38
    points more favorable towards the
  • 00:10:40
    legalization of marijuana if they got
  • 00:10:42
    our speech that difference in subliminal
  • 00:10:45
    condition was not significant but again
  • 00:10:47
    relevant to the point here we then asked
  • 00:10:49
    them okay how did you feel at time one
  • 00:10:51
    remember you came in you answered our
  • 00:10:53
    attitude questionnaire and people pretty
  • 00:10:56
    much how they felt now is how they think
  • 00:10:58
    they felt
  • 00:10:59
    3 weeks ago so that yellow bar is
  • 00:11:02
    actually not significantly different
  • 00:11:04
    from the orange one and again with a
  • 00:11:06
    subliminal speech not much change in in
  • 00:11:08
    either direction so even though we we
  • 00:11:11
    brought about pretty substantial change
  • 00:11:13
    people didn't know that they had
  • 00:11:17
    changed okay what about this third theme
  • 00:11:19
    whether self- knowledge and of our past
  • 00:11:22
    is good or bad um I think there probably
  • 00:11:25
    are some positive consequences of
  • 00:11:27
    inaccuracy if it produces
  • 00:11:29
    a sense of stability that's probably a
  • 00:11:32
    good thing one might argue um Dan
  • 00:11:35
    Gilbert and and Jordy quad back and I
  • 00:11:38
    published a paper about the end of
  • 00:11:40
    History illusion that that where we are
  • 00:11:42
    now we tend to think we've we've changed
  • 00:11:44
    as much as we're ever going to change
  • 00:11:46
    maybe we recognize we changed a little
  • 00:11:48
    in the past but we tend to think of
  • 00:11:49
    ourselves as stable uh stable beings and
  • 00:11:53
    that probably is is reassuring in many
  • 00:11:55
    ways but there may be some negative
  • 00:11:58
    consequences and in fact that study with
  • 00:12:00
    the marijuana attitudes one purpose of
  • 00:12:02
    it was to uh see if people knew which of
  • 00:12:06
    those two approaches would would change
  • 00:12:08
    their attitudes the most so we had
  • 00:12:10
    another group of participants who are
  • 00:12:12
    also opposed to the legalization of
  • 00:12:13
    marijuana and we said okay you can we're
  • 00:12:16
    going to try to change your mind and
  • 00:12:18
    which one would you rather get the
  • 00:12:20
    persuasive communication or the
  • 00:12:21
    subliminal messages people's theory was
  • 00:12:24
    that subliminal messages are much more
  • 00:12:26
    powerful so indeed 71% preferred to see
  • 00:12:29
    the speech the very thing that was
  • 00:12:32
    really successful at changing their
  • 00:12:34
    attitudes so not knowing how all this
  • 00:12:36
    works one might argue um is not such a
  • 00:12:39
    good thing it can lead we can put
  • 00:12:41
    ourselves in situations that lead to
  • 00:12:43
    unwanted
  • 00:12:46
    change okay so that's pretty much all I
  • 00:12:49
    have to say about uh knowledge of our
  • 00:12:51
    past memories
  • 00:12:52
    reconstructive and accuracy probably a
  • 00:12:54
    two-edged sort what about knowledge of
  • 00:12:57
    our our current self again I think this
  • 00:12:59
    is is what we usually mean by self-
  • 00:13:00
    knowledge how well do I know what my own
  • 00:13:03
    attitudes and beliefs are so that's
  • 00:13:06
    where we are in the
  • 00:13:09
    talk now this is a little more of a
  • 00:13:12
    complicated question for a couple
  • 00:13:14
    reasons one is it's it's more difficult
  • 00:13:16
    methodologically so if I tell you that I
  • 00:13:19
    think I'm mildly introverted on what
  • 00:13:23
    basis could you challenge that um how
  • 00:13:25
    could you say I'm wrong or if I tell you
  • 00:13:27
    that I think in favor of this P
  • 00:13:30
    particular political
  • 00:13:32
    candidate how do you how could you
  • 00:13:34
    possibly show him wrong well it it's a
  • 00:13:36
    that's a philosophical question that's
  • 00:13:38
    been debated and in Psychology it's been
  • 00:13:40
    addressed and basically by coming up
  • 00:13:42
    with some other Criterion of how I feel
  • 00:13:45
    that maybe you can challenge my
  • 00:13:47
    statement so those criteria have been
  • 00:13:49
    implicit measures um that might give a
  • 00:13:52
    different answer than my verbal report
  • 00:13:55
    uh peer reports how my friends think I
  • 00:13:57
    feel is that something
  • 00:13:59
    how does that compare to what I say and
  • 00:14:02
    also how well my reports predict my
  • 00:14:05
    behavior as another indication of
  • 00:14:08
    accuracy the answer also depends on what
  • 00:14:11
    kind of current state we're talking
  • 00:14:13
    about so that's why this is a little
  • 00:14:14
    more complicated that I think there's no
  • 00:14:16
    blanket answer we can give about self-
  • 00:14:18
    knowledge of our present cell we have to
  • 00:14:21
    break this down a little further and
  • 00:14:22
    talk about well what kind of state are
  • 00:14:24
    we talking about so let's go through
  • 00:14:27
    some of them and one that I think U
  • 00:14:30
    perhaps there some of the clearest
  • 00:14:32
    evidence is knowing why we've done
  • 00:14:35
    something or feel the way we do these
  • 00:14:38
    are reports that um we know from other
  • 00:14:41
    literatures are some CER cases of people
  • 00:14:44
    giving wrong answers one if any of you
  • 00:14:46
    were at Mike gaza's talk yesterday uh
  • 00:14:49
    most of you probably know of his
  • 00:14:51
    research with split brain patients where
  • 00:14:52
    they're clear cases of confabulation we
  • 00:14:55
    know that they uh reached for an object
  • 00:14:58
    uh with their their left hand because of
  • 00:15:00
    something that was flashed to their
  • 00:15:01
    right Hemisphere and yet they give a
  • 00:15:04
    confabulated response uh with their left
  • 00:15:07
    brain
  • 00:15:08
    interpreter um also true of some brain
  • 00:15:11
    damage the article that di n dick nisbit
  • 00:15:13
    and I published in 1977 one way of
  • 00:15:16
    summarizing that is to Simply say it
  • 00:15:18
    extends that to you and I who have a
  • 00:15:20
    corpus colossum that that we too are
  • 00:15:23
    confabulators at least to a big degree
  • 00:15:26
    we use our theories about why we've done
  • 00:15:28
    what we've done
  • 00:15:29
    um and one source of evidence for this
  • 00:15:31
    is that often strangers can give answers
  • 00:15:35
    explanations of our behavior that are as
  • 00:15:37
    accurate as our
  • 00:15:39
    own so let me go through one old study
  • 00:15:42
    to make this point and and then
  • 00:15:43
    summarize this literature so this is a
  • 00:15:45
    study we did many years
  • 00:15:47
    ago in which we had college students um
  • 00:15:50
    for five weeks rate their mood every day
  • 00:15:54
    and also several things that might
  • 00:15:56
    predict their mood so they rated the
  • 00:15:58
    weather how their work was going their
  • 00:16:01
    relationships um uh what else what day
  • 00:16:04
    of the week it was you know a bunch of
  • 00:16:06
    things that might or might not predict
  • 00:16:07
    their mood after the five weeks they
  • 00:16:10
    then told us what they thought these
  • 00:16:12
    relationships were so we said how much
  • 00:16:14
    did your sleep predict your mood over
  • 00:16:16
    the course of these five weeks the day
  • 00:16:18
    of the week your relationships and so on
  • 00:16:20
    and this allowed us to compute a
  • 00:16:23
    accuracy correlation for each
  • 00:16:24
    participant so if I were in the study um
  • 00:16:28
    how accurate was my report about the
  • 00:16:30
    predictability of sleep with how much
  • 00:16:32
    sleep really predicted my mood during
  • 00:16:34
    this 5-week period and averaging across
  • 00:16:38
    participants we found that this accuracy
  • 00:16:41
    correlation was 04 highly significant
  • 00:16:44
    not not terrible um you know it's not a
  • 00:16:47
    huge proportion of the variance but it
  • 00:16:49
    shows that people aren't completely
  • 00:16:50
    wrong at knowing what predicts their
  • 00:16:53
    mood but then we asked a group of
  • 00:16:55
    strangers also college students to guess
  • 00:16:58
    what they thought the average
  • 00:16:59
    relationships were between sleep and
  • 00:17:01
    mood day of the week and so on to
  • 00:17:03
    compare whether a complete stranger how
  • 00:17:06
    their accuracy compare to the actual
  • 00:17:09
    participants and it was 045 um pretty
  • 00:17:14
    much the
  • 00:17:15
    same now it's a little more nuanced than
  • 00:17:17
    that and I want to illustrate this to
  • 00:17:19
    you with a VIN diagram so what we see
  • 00:17:23
    here let me see if my little pointer bre
  • 00:17:25
    yeah so this represents the actual
  • 00:17:27
    causes of our behavor Behavior what say
  • 00:17:30
    is really causing our mood this circle
  • 00:17:33
    here represents the actor's his or her
  • 00:17:36
    own uh causal report and this is this
  • 00:17:39
    circle is the strangers and this
  • 00:17:42
    correlation I just told you of the
  • 00:17:44
    actor's accuracy is the intersection of
  • 00:17:46
    these two circles that's the actors are
  • 00:17:49
    accurate at estimating what the actual
  • 00:17:51
    causes
  • 00:17:53
    are these two uh this area here is the
  • 00:17:57
    stranger act you're seeing you can can
  • 00:17:58
    see it's about the same but you'll also
  • 00:18:00
    notice that there's not a complete
  • 00:18:02
    overlap between the two so what we see
  • 00:18:06
    here this is actually a partial
  • 00:18:08
    correlation from the study I just told
  • 00:18:10
    you about of the actor's reports
  • 00:18:12
    partialling out the The Strangers
  • 00:18:14
    reports showing that um and it's highly
  • 00:18:17
    significant showing that actors do have
  • 00:18:19
    some unique insight as to what predicts
  • 00:18:22
    their mood that is not captured by
  • 00:18:25
    causal theories that strangers use um so
  • 00:18:28
    this shows um and it actually initially
  • 00:18:31
    seemed wow this is inconsistent with the
  • 00:18:33
    nisb and Wilson point that there is some
  • 00:18:35
    unique Insight here but if you compute
  • 00:18:37
    this partial correlation we also find
  • 00:18:40
    that strangers are getting some a piece
  • 00:18:42
    of the accuracy that actors are not um
  • 00:18:45
    the causal theories that that actors um
  • 00:18:48
    avoid causal theories at their risk and
  • 00:18:50
    it actually leads to missing some things
  • 00:18:53
    that are predicting their their behavior
  • 00:18:56
    so uh just to summarize that point Point
  • 00:18:59
    um we can bring privileged information
  • 00:19:01
    to bear that helps us understand why we
  • 00:19:04
    do what we do but on balance it doesn't
  • 00:19:07
    seem to give us much advantage over
  • 00:19:12
    strangers okay what about knowing our
  • 00:19:14
    personalities I'm going to go through
  • 00:19:16
    this part fairly quickly and actually
  • 00:19:17
    rely on some of samin's work in this
  • 00:19:19
    area uh do we know our own personality
  • 00:19:22
    traits so again what's the Criterion a
  • 00:19:25
    bu the pretty much the same ones have
  • 00:19:27
    been used I mentioned before implicit
  • 00:19:29
    measures like the IAT uh how peers think
  • 00:19:32
    we we um what our personality traits are
  • 00:19:35
    and how well our reports predict our
  • 00:19:38
    behavior and um summarizing from an
  • 00:19:41
    article um Bine we see that uh these are
  • 00:19:45
    the correlations between implicit
  • 00:19:47
    measures and self-reports of personality
  • 00:19:51
    traits not particularly uh impressive
  • 00:19:55
    again you know there's some ambiguity
  • 00:19:56
    here does that mean people are wrong or
  • 00:19:58
    maybe the implicit measures are not
  • 00:20:00
    particularly valid that that's a very
  • 00:20:02
    hard question to answer but let's kind
  • 00:20:04
    of look at the big picture let's compare
  • 00:20:06
    to our own reports to how our friends
  • 00:20:09
    think we feel our peer reports and here
  • 00:20:12
    a little higher for the Big Five
  • 00:20:13
    personality traits there is some overlap
  • 00:20:15
    if if I think I'm a little introverted
  • 00:20:18
    then my friends would kind of agree with
  • 00:20:20
    that but not entirely those those
  • 00:20:22
    correlations aren't all that
  • 00:20:26
    high and as I said this does raise the
  • 00:20:28
    question of okay if my friends and I
  • 00:20:30
    disagree as to uh my personality who's
  • 00:20:33
    right and one way of answering that
  • 00:20:35
    question is to see um well how well do
  • 00:20:39
    these reports predict my behavior are my
  • 00:20:42
    friends better at it than I or or am I
  • 00:20:44
    better than they are and um basically
  • 00:20:48
    it's a wash some other work of s means
  • 00:20:49
    showing that um that friends reports and
  • 00:20:53
    peer reports predicts a person's
  • 00:20:55
    Behavior to about the same degree but
  • 00:20:58
    not always always the same variance
  • 00:20:59
    again it's kind of like the nisb and
  • 00:21:01
    Wilson point that that maybe on balance
  • 00:21:03
    they're about the same but I think each
  • 00:21:04
    is getting a unique portion of of the
  • 00:21:06
    variance variance and this was made
  • 00:21:09
    beautifully in a very recent paper that
  • 00:21:11
    came out in Psych science with an
  • 00:21:13
    interesting data set these researchers
  • 00:21:15
    had personality reports from a uh some
  • 00:21:19
    adults who were in their 20s in the
  • 00:21:21
    1930s so they had rated their own
  • 00:21:24
    personality on Dimensions that were
  • 00:21:26
    roughly equivalent to the big five they
  • 00:21:29
    also had um five friends rate their
  • 00:21:33
    personality and given the time this was
  • 00:21:36
    done this study could use what we might
  • 00:21:38
    think of as the ultimate dependent
  • 00:21:40
    measure mortality um which reports
  • 00:21:44
    predicted how long these people lived
  • 00:21:47
    because they're actually all deceased
  • 00:21:49
    now um and one might think well surely
  • 00:21:52
    my knowledge of my own personality would
  • 00:21:55
    predict this better but in fact the FR
  • 00:21:58
    ratings predicted better how long people
  • 00:22:00
    would live than the self ratings so the
  • 00:22:03
    moral here is if you want to estimate
  • 00:22:05
    how long you're going to live ask your
  • 00:22:07
    friends to estimate your
  • 00:22:11
    personality I'll skip through this one
  • 00:22:13
    pretty quickly again I to be honest I
  • 00:22:15
    think this area is a little bit of a
  • 00:22:17
    morass um how well do we know in our no
  • 00:22:19
    attitudes you there's no doubt that our
  • 00:22:21
    attitudes are sometimes
  • 00:22:23
    constructed um there's no doubt that
  • 00:22:26
    correlations between implicit and
  • 00:22:27
    explicit measures are often low I think
  • 00:22:30
    sometimes people have exaggerated how to
  • 00:22:32
    interpret that to say that our attitudes
  • 00:22:34
    are unconscious nonetheless um we
  • 00:22:37
    published an article in Psych review a
  • 00:22:39
    number of years ago that at least allows
  • 00:22:40
    for that possibility that under some
  • 00:22:42
    circumstances I do think it's possible
  • 00:22:44
    to have an attitude of which we're
  • 00:22:48
    unaware what about our current emotions
  • 00:22:50
    if we know anything I one would think
  • 00:22:53
    it's our emotional state how angry how
  • 00:22:56
    sad how euphoric we're feeling
  • 00:22:59
    and yet it's well known that even
  • 00:23:01
    emotions can be constructed um at least
  • 00:23:03
    to some extent we we're inferring how we
  • 00:23:06
    feel and part from the situation we are
  • 00:23:08
    in and it's possible these constructions
  • 00:23:11
    are wrong again I think this is probably
  • 00:23:14
    the exception to the rule I do think
  • 00:23:15
    emotions are something we're we're
  • 00:23:17
    mostly aware of uh but one can point to
  • 00:23:20
    times at least um such as repression
  • 00:23:22
    which brings back Freud into the picture
  • 00:23:24
    that sometimes we may not want to know
  • 00:23:26
    how we feel or other times when there's
  • 00:23:28
    a strong feeling rule uh that is
  • 00:23:31
    contrary to our feelings I think that
  • 00:23:33
    can make it hard to know how we actually
  • 00:23:35
    feel about something so there are
  • 00:23:36
    various feeling rules such as our
  • 00:23:38
    wedding day will be the happiest day of
  • 00:23:40
    our life and that makes it hard to
  • 00:23:43
    recognize that you know we're we're kind
  • 00:23:44
    of pissed off at Uncle Harry who's
  • 00:23:46
    getting drunk and hitting on the
  • 00:23:47
    bridesmaides You Know It uh same thing
  • 00:23:51
    about funerals um or jealousy we have
  • 00:23:53
    strong theories as how we ought to feel
  • 00:23:55
    in these situations which I think can
  • 00:23:57
    make it harder to detect how we really
  • 00:24:00
    feel so to summarize knowledge of our
  • 00:24:03
    current self uh limited direct access
  • 00:24:05
    often
  • 00:24:07
    constructions and accuracy I want to
  • 00:24:09
    come back to this question again it's
  • 00:24:10
    there's a lot of debate as to whether
  • 00:24:12
    it's good or bad to be accurate so we
  • 00:24:14
    will return to that one but in the
  • 00:24:16
    meantime let's move on to our knowledge
  • 00:24:18
    of our future selves uh this is work
  • 00:24:22
    that I've done largely with Dan Gilbert
  • 00:24:23
    on affective forecasting that looks at
  • 00:24:26
    how we know um will feel help will feel
  • 00:24:29
    in the
  • 00:24:30
    future uh I think these same themes
  • 00:24:34
    apply here so uh by definition we don't
  • 00:24:38
    have direct access to the Future unless
  • 00:24:40
    we believe in
  • 00:24:41
    Clairvoyance uh so it has to be a
  • 00:24:43
    construction how will I feel um if a
  • 00:24:46
    certain event occurs in next week or in
  • 00:24:49
    six months I I have to um infer that and
  • 00:24:54
    accuracy here may be a two-edged sword
  • 00:24:56
    as well so uh affective for again it's
  • 00:24:59
    very hard to summarize a couple of
  • 00:25:00
    Decades of work in in a couple of
  • 00:25:02
    minutes but I will try uh so uh how will
  • 00:25:05
    I feel if x occurs uh there are
  • 00:25:07
    systematic errors the most common one is
  • 00:25:10
    the impact bias where people
  • 00:25:12
    overestimate the intensity and duration
  • 00:25:14
    of their feelings I'll give you an
  • 00:25:15
    example of that in a moment uh the most
  • 00:25:18
    common reasons are uh focalism which is
  • 00:25:21
    that we focus on this one event we're
  • 00:25:23
    thinking about and neglect to realize
  • 00:25:25
    there'll be other things in our life
  • 00:25:27
    impacting our emotions itions and immune
  • 00:25:29
    neglect which is the idea that we don't
  • 00:25:31
    take into account basically how
  • 00:25:34
    resilient we'll be and and adapt to
  • 00:25:36
    particularly negative events but let me
  • 00:25:39
    give you a concrete example let's say
  • 00:25:41
    this woman is trying to imagine how she
  • 00:25:43
    will feel uh if her candidate is elected
  • 00:25:46
    president in the 2016 presidential
  • 00:25:48
    election and what might make her
  • 00:25:50
    predictions accurate or inaccurate well
  • 00:25:53
    to illustrate that let me first show
  • 00:25:56
    you how she going to feel when the event
  • 00:25:59
    really happened so time two is the
  • 00:26:01
    election has happened her candidate has
  • 00:26:04
    been elected if she's a Democrat let's
  • 00:26:06
    say it's Hillary Clinton she's thrilled
  • 00:26:08
    that Hillary was was elected if she's a
  • 00:26:11
    republican well it will take me to the
  • 00:26:13
    rest of the talk to list all the
  • 00:26:14
    Republican candidates that could be so
  • 00:26:16
    so I I won't but whatever she's happy
  • 00:26:19
    because her her let's say that you know
  • 00:26:21
    was kind of a close election and so her
  • 00:26:23
    initial reaction here is that she's
  • 00:26:26
    happy but that's going to be influenced
  • 00:26:28
    by other things happening in her life at
  • 00:26:30
    that time so let's say she's having uh a
  • 00:26:34
    tough week at work um you know maybe she
  • 00:26:37
    has a cold you know there's going to be
  • 00:26:38
    other things that that temper that now
  • 00:26:41
    if we're going to look at how that
  • 00:26:43
    reaction lasts over time we also have to
  • 00:26:46
    take into account that that's going to
  • 00:26:48
    fade and and the more she makes sense of
  • 00:26:51
    this event adapts to it the reaction
  • 00:26:52
    will fade so she has to take that into
  • 00:26:55
    account when making the forecast so now
  • 00:26:57
    let's look at the time one when she's
  • 00:27:00
    making the prediction and what might
  • 00:27:02
    make her accurate or inaccurate so first
  • 00:27:05
    she has to represent the event
  • 00:27:07
    accurately so maybe she's thinking of it
  • 00:27:09
    as a landslide but it's actually going
  • 00:27:11
    to be a close election there all sorts
  • 00:27:13
    of errors that can come in here as to
  • 00:27:15
    how she envisions what the event will be
  • 00:27:18
    but let's say that she kind of gets that
  • 00:27:19
    right that generates a pre-filing yeah
  • 00:27:22
    I'll feel really good if my candidate's
  • 00:27:24
    elected but now there's other sources of
  • 00:27:26
    bias so now there there's corrects she
  • 00:27:28
    has to correct for Unique influences at
  • 00:27:31
    this time maybe she has a cold now or
  • 00:27:34
    maybe uh her card has broke down you
  • 00:27:36
    know things that are tempering her
  • 00:27:38
    prediction that aren't going to apply at
  • 00:27:40
    time two she has to correct for the time
  • 00:27:43
    two things such as the unique influences
  • 00:27:46
    here she has to correct for the
  • 00:27:48
    adaptation that will happen here and the
  • 00:27:51
    long and short of it is that all of
  • 00:27:52
    these are sources of error that can lead
  • 00:27:55
    to an inaccurate forecast usually in the
  • 00:27:57
    direction of overestimating the impact
  • 00:28:00
    and duration of an emotional event to
  • 00:28:03
    give you just one of many illustrations
  • 00:28:05
    of that a study we did of a presidential
  • 00:28:08
    election this one was the 2000 election
  • 00:28:11
    between George Bush and Al Gore in which
  • 00:28:14
    we uh asked people to predict how they
  • 00:28:16
    would feel we had both Democrats and
  • 00:28:18
    Republicans how will you feel if Gore is
  • 00:28:20
    elected how will you feel if Bush is
  • 00:28:22
    elected um as you know on Election Day
  • 00:28:24
    no one was elected in this election so
  • 00:28:27
    um as the interpret and researchers we
  • 00:28:30
    got back in touch with them say okay how
  • 00:28:31
    are you going to feel when the elections
  • 00:28:33
    actually decided how will you feel the
  • 00:28:35
    day after the elections
  • 00:28:37
    decided we got back in touch with them
  • 00:28:39
    the day after the election was decided
  • 00:28:41
    by the Supreme Court on December 12th
  • 00:28:44
    2000 so on December 13th we emailed them
  • 00:28:47
    and said okay how happy are you now and
  • 00:28:50
    then uh we got some time pass and ask
  • 00:28:52
    them to recall how happy they
  • 00:28:54
    were now uh what the the axis here is
  • 00:28:59
    actually a different score between how
  • 00:29:02
    they predicted they would feel minus
  • 00:29:04
    their Baseline level of Happiness on a
  • 00:29:07
    nine-point scale so what you see Bush
  • 00:29:09
    supporters thought if Bush wins I will
  • 00:29:12
    be three points happier on a ninepoint
  • 00:29:14
    scale uh Gore supporters that have Bush
  • 00:29:17
    wins I'll be about three points less
  • 00:29:20
    happy pretty massive uh difference they
  • 00:29:23
    predicted that was their prediction in
  • 00:29:25
    advance about how happy they'd be the
  • 00:29:28
    day after the election the day after the
  • 00:29:29
    election well Bush supporters were a
  • 00:29:31
    little happier Gore supporters a little
  • 00:29:34
    less happy that actually is a pretty big
  • 00:29:36
    significant difference between the red
  • 00:29:37
    bars but you can see not nearly as big a
  • 00:29:40
    difference as they predicted and That's
  • 00:29:42
    a classic case of the impact by us that
  • 00:29:45
    that people think that um you these
  • 00:29:47
    events are going to have a bigger impact
  • 00:29:49
    than they do when we asked them several
  • 00:29:52
    months later to recall how they felt the
  • 00:29:54
    day after the election we see our
  • 00:29:56
    standard kind of memory B too where they
  • 00:29:59
    they now are using their theories again
  • 00:30:01
    about uh how one probably feels after
  • 00:30:04
    presidential elections and they're again
  • 00:30:06
    overestimating in retrospect as well as
  • 00:30:09
    in
  • 00:30:12
    Prospect there's been a lot of debate as
  • 00:30:14
    to whether these kinds of errors are
  • 00:30:16
    functional or not is it good or bad uh
  • 00:30:19
    Mor wedge and Buell have some recent
  • 00:30:21
    evidence suggesting there may be a
  • 00:30:23
    motivational function to the impact bias
  • 00:30:26
    we uh we commit the impact bias even
  • 00:30:29
    more for events we can control
  • 00:30:31
    suggesting that maybe it's a way to get
  • 00:30:33
    us out of bed in the morning to work
  • 00:30:34
    towards um events that we want to happen
  • 00:30:38
    uh but I think um it's surely not
  • 00:30:39
    completely functional it happens for
  • 00:30:41
    events people can't control and we have
  • 00:30:44
    actually evidence from other studies
  • 00:30:46
    that sometimes people actually get the
  • 00:30:47
    veilance wrong of a prediction that in
  • 00:30:50
    this particular study they thought
  • 00:30:52
    Revenge would make them feel better when
  • 00:30:54
    it actually made them feel worse uh
  • 00:30:56
    exerting revenge against someone who had
  • 00:30:59
    done something bad to them so I again I
  • 00:31:01
    think it's a two-edged sword maybe a
  • 00:31:02
    little bit of motivational function but
  • 00:31:04
    not completely um a good
  • 00:31:07
    thing so um pretty much the same thing
  • 00:31:11
    here no direct access um a effect of
  • 00:31:15
    forecast are constructions and accuracy
  • 00:31:17
    is a two-edged
  • 00:31:18
    sword but I want to move on to some kind
  • 00:31:21
    of bigger picture issues about self-
  • 00:31:24
    knowledge and one question that often
  • 00:31:27
    comes up is okay well how can we achieve
  • 00:31:29
    it and if it's true that there is this
  • 00:31:32
    direct access fallacy then uh one answer
  • 00:31:35
    is that if we want to gain self-
  • 00:31:37
    knowledge Naval gazing introspection is
  • 00:31:40
    not the complete answer now again I
  • 00:31:42
    don't want to say we should ignore our
  • 00:31:44
    internal States rather we should use
  • 00:31:46
    them as data to constructing a good
  • 00:31:49
    theory about ourselves and in fact we
  • 00:31:52
    have a line of research from several
  • 00:31:53
    years ago suggesting that too much
  • 00:31:55
    introspection can actually backfire and
  • 00:31:58
    confuse us about how we feel so we do it
  • 00:32:00
    at our own
  • 00:32:02
    risk but the basic message is construct
  • 00:32:05
    good stories I'm fond of using stories
  • 00:32:07
    as a metaphor for self- knowledge that
  • 00:32:09
    we construct a narrative as to who we
  • 00:32:11
    are um based on hopefully good data what
  • 00:32:15
    are that data well introspection is One
  • 00:32:17
    Source we should use our internal States
  • 00:32:20
    as one source of information from which
  • 00:32:22
    to construct this good story but we
  • 00:32:24
    should also use other sources of
  • 00:32:26
    information we should observe our
  • 00:32:28
    Behavior U and see how we actually
  • 00:32:31
    respond we should try to see ourselves
  • 00:32:33
    through others eyes they may actually
  • 00:32:35
    have a view of us that we should take
  • 00:32:38
    into account and to give a shout out to
  • 00:32:41
    our own field we should be good
  • 00:32:42
    consumers of psychological science just
  • 00:32:44
    like we can learn about our bodies from
  • 00:32:46
    Medical Science um psychological science
  • 00:32:49
    can tell us things such as there are
  • 00:32:52
    implicit biases that might at least lead
  • 00:32:54
    to the hypothesis that that applies to
  • 00:32:56
    me uh as as
  • 00:33:00
    well but okay so self knowledge is a
  • 00:33:03
    story what makes a good story I would
  • 00:33:06
    suggest that a good story first of all
  • 00:33:07
    should be believable it's probably not
  • 00:33:09
    very adaptable to say that you know I'm
  • 00:33:11
    an alien who arrived yesterday from
  • 00:33:13
    outer space um it should provide peace
  • 00:33:16
    of mind it should be coherent U maybe a
  • 00:33:19
    little bit flattering as we'll get
  • 00:33:21
    to and maybe somewhat
  • 00:33:25
    accurate which I'll return to
  • 00:33:28
    but um as a slight aside this metaphor I
  • 00:33:32
    think is useful to know how to help
  • 00:33:34
    people whose stories aren't working for
  • 00:33:36
    them very well there's plenty of cases
  • 00:33:38
    where people have stories that are
  • 00:33:39
    leading to maladaptive behaviors or
  • 00:33:42
    unhappiness and um just to give a shout
  • 00:33:44
    out to my recent book um there are
  • 00:33:47
    techniques that have been developed by
  • 00:33:49
    social psychologists to help people edit
  • 00:33:51
    their own stories in ways that are
  • 00:33:53
    beneficial and this is a really exciting
  • 00:33:55
    time in social psychology um in terms of
  • 00:33:58
    these interventions often they're
  • 00:33:59
    minimal interventions that are cheap um
  • 00:34:02
    that are can take in some cases an hour
  • 00:34:06
    and just by Framing information to
  • 00:34:08
    people differently or getting them to uh
  • 00:34:11
    write about themselves in various ways
  • 00:34:13
    can lead to cascading change in their
  • 00:34:16
    stories with some really good outcome
  • 00:34:18
    measures so uh that's one use of this
  • 00:34:22
    metaphor but let's get to this question
  • 00:34:24
    of accuracy I I keep postponing um you
  • 00:34:26
    know should a story be accurate and by
  • 00:34:29
    that I simply mean should it cor
  • 00:34:31
    correspond to our actual past present
  • 00:34:33
    and future selves and there are at least
  • 00:34:36
    two views on this you know one is uh
  • 00:34:39
    originally stated by Taylor and brown
  • 00:34:41
    that we a little bit of distortion in a
  • 00:34:43
    positive direction is a good thing that
  • 00:34:46
    it helps us get out of bed in the
  • 00:34:47
    morning that thinking we can control our
  • 00:34:50
    futures and that we are better than
  • 00:34:52
    average uh is is a sign of mental health
  • 00:34:56
    but there are those who have challenged
  • 00:34:57
    that few um some personality
  • 00:34:59
    psychologist primarily who say yeah but
  • 00:35:02
    you know um nobody likes a narcissist
  • 00:35:05
    that that if you go around saying how
  • 00:35:07
    great you are you're not going to have
  • 00:35:09
    many friends
  • 00:35:10
    eventually uh an example of this that I
  • 00:35:13
    think I'm fond of is if you remember the
  • 00:35:15
    play pigmon or my My Fair Lady uh Henry
  • 00:35:19
    Higgins um says to his friend Pickering
  • 00:35:22
    in reference to his housekeeper that Mrs
  • 00:35:25
    Pierce that you know she has the most
  • 00:35:26
    extraordinary ideas about me here I am a
  • 00:35:29
    shy defant sort of person and yet she's
  • 00:35:31
    firmly persuaded that I'm an arbitrary
  • 00:35:34
    overbearing bossy kind of person I can't
  • 00:35:36
    account for it well the reason this is
  • 00:35:38
    so funny is it's obvious that he is an
  • 00:35:40
    overbearing arbitrary bossy kind of
  • 00:35:42
    person and so the question is is it good
  • 00:35:44
    for Henry Higgins to have this view or
  • 00:35:48
    not I think it's probably pretty good as
  • 00:35:50
    long as it's not too extreme obviously
  • 00:35:54
    we don't want huge distortions there's
  • 00:35:56
    some recent evidence that
  • 00:35:58
    self-enhancement is better if we keep it
  • 00:36:00
    to ourselves than wear it on our sleeves
  • 00:36:02
    so if you privately think you're the
  • 00:36:04
    smartest person in this room um that's
  • 00:36:07
    probably okay uh but if you go around
  • 00:36:11
    telling everyone you're the smartest
  • 00:36:12
    person in this room not so
  • 00:36:16
    much and Taylor armor and Taylor had an
  • 00:36:19
    article um in 1998 where they talked
  • 00:36:22
    about situated optimism the idea that
  • 00:36:25
    really what's best is to recognize our
  • 00:36:27
    flaws when we can do something about it
  • 00:36:30
    uh but there are times when um you know
  • 00:36:33
    there's not a whole lot we can do and
  • 00:36:35
    then maybe it's better to enhance a
  • 00:36:37
    little bit as as a motivator so I think
  • 00:36:39
    we should know our flaws well enough to
  • 00:36:41
    try to improve them uh but maybe a
  • 00:36:44
    little bit of of self-enhancement is not
  • 00:36:46
    so bad but I want to take a broader look
  • 00:36:48
    at this um John lennin famously saying
  • 00:36:52
    Whatever Gets You Through the Night it's
  • 00:36:54
    all right it's all right and I think
  • 00:36:57
    there are are I'd like to sort of take
  • 00:36:58
    this up a level where rather than
  • 00:37:00
    looking at accuracy in terms of how well
  • 00:37:02
    I know a particular trait or uh
  • 00:37:05
    attitude um I want to talk about some
  • 00:37:08
    general myths that may be good to have
  • 00:37:10
    to live our lives by and I'm going to
  • 00:37:13
    tell you about four such myths that I
  • 00:37:16
    think are pretty good now I warn you um
  • 00:37:20
    that by telling you about them I kind of
  • 00:37:21
    puncture them so this may not be the
  • 00:37:23
    most beneficial thing if you agree with
  • 00:37:25
    me that these myths are important but
  • 00:37:27
    here they
  • 00:37:29
    are
  • 00:37:31
    first I hate to say it but this is not
  • 00:37:36
    true um we all but you know we don't
  • 00:37:39
    live every day most of us thinking yep
  • 00:37:41
    today could be the day I die uh we kind
  • 00:37:43
    of live um not thinking about that fact
  • 00:37:46
    and there may be some benefit to that
  • 00:37:49
    second um this general idea that we're
  • 00:37:53
    important and there's I heard an
  • 00:37:55
    interesting talk Yesterday by Mark Alec
  • 00:37:56
    where he he found that not only do we
  • 00:37:59
    enhance our our positive qualities
  • 00:38:02
    people actually also enhance their
  • 00:38:03
    negative car characteristics to some
  • 00:38:05
    extent suggesting that we just think
  • 00:38:07
    we're important people that have this
  • 00:38:09
    big impact on the world and you know I
  • 00:38:11
    hate to tell you but uh we're all kind
  • 00:38:14
    of grains of sand out there in some
  • 00:38:18
    sense naive realism is the idea that we
  • 00:38:22
    think we see the world as it is but in
  • 00:38:24
    fact we are constru it and interpreting
  • 00:38:26
    it and as a very pervasive bias that uh
  • 00:38:30
    maybe has some benefit and the last one
  • 00:38:33
    is thinking that the world is more
  • 00:38:35
    predictable than it is for which there
  • 00:38:37
    is considerable
  • 00:38:40
    evidence such as the fundamental
  • 00:38:42
    attribution eror thinking that we can
  • 00:38:44
    see people as they are and use that to
  • 00:38:46
    predict their behavior in the future
  • 00:38:51
    now I'm going to suggest that we
  • 00:38:54
    actually these myths are good to have to
  • 00:38:56
    a small degree so like Goldilocks I
  • 00:38:59
    think we have to hold them at just the
  • 00:39:01
    right level so it wouldn't be too good
  • 00:39:04
    for us to go through our days without
  • 00:39:06
    these myths thinking I could die at any
  • 00:39:09
    moment um I'm really unimportant you
  • 00:39:12
    know boy I just uh let's face it you
  • 00:39:14
    know 10 20 30 surely 100 years from now
  • 00:39:17
    no one's going to have any idea who I
  • 00:39:19
    was or am um pretty pretty
  • 00:39:22
    trivial um you know it's really hard to
  • 00:39:25
    view the world the way it is it's who
  • 00:39:28
    knows what's really out there and I have
  • 00:39:30
    no idea what's going to happen next you
  • 00:39:32
    know this is not a good way to live our
  • 00:39:35
    life nor though is it good to uh perhaps
  • 00:39:38
    have the opposite view that uh I'm never
  • 00:39:41
    going to die I might as well uh smoke
  • 00:39:43
    cigarettes and and uh drink as much as I
  • 00:39:46
    want and drive as fast as I want that's
  • 00:39:48
    not so good uh obviously not good to
  • 00:39:50
    think we're the most important person in
  • 00:39:52
    the world that we can view the world
  • 00:39:54
    completely
  • 00:39:55
    accurately and predict the world
  • 00:39:57
    accurately that leads to gambling
  • 00:40:01
    problems so um let me just suggest a
  • 00:40:05
    couple of solutions to this I think as
  • 00:40:07
    far as this myth of immortality perhaps
  • 00:40:11
    um the best approach here is well first
  • 00:40:13
    of all um a good belief system a good
  • 00:40:16
    meaning system that allows us to make
  • 00:40:18
    sense of the world to to think there's a
  • 00:40:20
    purpose of of some sort obviously
  • 00:40:23
    religion can play this role to allow us
  • 00:40:25
    to feel that yes we are not Immortal but
  • 00:40:28
    there's a larger purpose to the world
  • 00:40:31
    and come up with a a good purpose so
  • 00:40:34
    you've probably noticed if you read New
  • 00:40:35
    Yorker cartoons and others that there's
  • 00:40:37
    a whole series of cartoons of people
  • 00:40:39
    climbing the mountain and finding the
  • 00:40:41
    guru to discover what the meaning of
  • 00:40:43
    life is and in this one this guy climbs
  • 00:40:46
    the mountain and he finds out that the
  • 00:40:48
    meaning of Life Is Life is a and
  • 00:40:50
    then you
  • 00:40:51
    die that's not a good belief system yeah
  • 00:40:54
    we got to have something that that keeps
  • 00:40:56
    us going
  • 00:40:58
    and you know that could be many things
  • 00:41:00
    so here's a guy who climbs the
  • 00:41:01
    Mountaintop and he finds out the meaning
  • 00:41:03
    of life is cats um well if that works
  • 00:41:07
    for you then you know why not or if like
  • 00:41:10
    from the movie bu durm you like uh the
  • 00:41:13
    woman who uh says I believe in the
  • 00:41:15
    Church of baseball you know what it
  • 00:41:16
    doesn't really matter what your belief
  • 00:41:18
    is as long as it gives you a sense of
  • 00:41:19
    meaning and
  • 00:41:21
    purpose but there's also something I
  • 00:41:24
    think helps with this myth that is
  • 00:41:26
    underappreciated and that is just a good
  • 00:41:28
    sense of humor U that looking at life uh
  • 00:41:32
    with a smile um this is something that I
  • 00:41:34
    learned from my dear friend Dan Wagner
  • 00:41:36
    who every day I think lived with humor
  • 00:41:40
    um even when he passed away a couple of
  • 00:41:42
    years ago uh there are many cartoons
  • 00:41:45
    with with this source of inform this
  • 00:41:47
    idea as well so here's death visiting
  • 00:41:52
    us it happen they came for me you so it
  • 00:41:56
    it uh
  • 00:41:58
    let's all laugh that's that's the
  • 00:42:00
    principle there well what about
  • 00:42:02
    self-importance I mean obviously we
  • 00:42:03
    shouldn't think we're we're totally
  • 00:42:05
    unimportant people but you have to have
  • 00:42:07
    some dose of humility I like this
  • 00:42:09
    t-shirt that says I'm kind of a big deal
  • 00:42:12
    on a fairly irrelevant social media site
  • 00:42:15
    that falsely inflates my ego you know
  • 00:42:17
    that's you know that's that's probably
  • 00:42:20
    pretty
  • 00:42:24
    healthy knive realism well you know I do
  • 00:42:26
    think it's good for us most of the time
  • 00:42:28
    to think that we're seeing the world the
  • 00:42:30
    way it is but to realize that you know
  • 00:42:32
    it when there are certainly times when
  • 00:42:35
    it's important for us to know that it
  • 00:42:37
    really is an interpretation and to be
  • 00:42:39
    able to to realize that as far as uh
  • 00:42:42
    predictability goes um you know having
  • 00:42:46
    some idea of what thinking we have some
  • 00:42:48
    idea of what will happen next is is a
  • 00:42:50
    good thing as well so uh to wrap up I
  • 00:42:54
    would say that when it comes to looking
  • 00:42:57
    at our past selves looking at our
  • 00:43:00
    current self or looking at our future
  • 00:43:03
    self just keep in mind that it's all
  • 00:43:06
    about the story that we construct and we
  • 00:43:08
    should do so with care and I'll leave
  • 00:43:11
    you with some lyrics from a singer uh
  • 00:43:15
    Courtney Barnett who is a wonderful
  • 00:43:17
    independent singer with a new album out
  • 00:43:20
    and she has these lines we either think
  • 00:43:23
    that we're Invincible or that we're
  • 00:43:25
    invisible realistically more somewhere
  • 00:43:28
    in between thank you very
  • 00:43:32
    [Music]
  • 00:43:38
    [Music]
  • 00:43:41
    much I guess
  • 00:43:43
    there's or
  • 00:43:46
    not my mic is off okay yeah we have time
  • 00:43:48
    for a question or two yeah I wonder how
  • 00:43:51
    you reconcile your view that we see the
  • 00:43:54
    self as consistent and
  • 00:43:57
    with research suggesting that people
  • 00:43:59
    think they change more and will change
  • 00:44:02
    more in the future than other people
  • 00:44:05
    will well I'd have to look at that
  • 00:44:07
    research because you know we have some
  • 00:44:09
    research showing this end of History
  • 00:44:10
    illusion that that people regardless of
  • 00:44:13
    what age you you uh ask them they think
  • 00:44:16
    they're pretty much done changing um is
  • 00:44:18
    what we found in our
  • 00:44:20
    research yeah introspection is not like
  • 00:44:25
    you don't have a little organ in it's a
  • 00:44:28
    conceptual achievement it requires Focus
  • 00:44:31
    thought integration and it seems to me
  • 00:44:34
    that one of the reason people are so bad
  • 00:44:37
    knowing themselves is they never learned
  • 00:44:38
    how to do it and don't bother to do it
  • 00:44:41
    and psychologist often disallow the
  • 00:44:44
    concept to even be used well I'm open to
  • 00:44:47
    the possibility and you know certainly
  • 00:44:49
    some forms of meditation claim that
  • 00:44:50
    training uh improves introspection uh so
  • 00:44:54
    I'm open to that possibility I I do
  • 00:44:56
    think there are still limits that
  • 00:44:57
    training is not going to uh get us in
  • 00:45:00
    total of
  • 00:45:03
    a okay I think we're pretty much out of
  • 00:45:05
    time so I'm happy to answer questions uh
  • 00:45:07
    afterwards thank
  • 00:45:12
    you
タグ
  • autoconhecimento
  • psicologia
  • memória
  • introspecção
  • teorias pessoais
  • futuro
  • narrativa
  • precisão
  • emoções
  • comportamento