13 ms·

Your Thoughts Can Release Abilities Beyond Normal Limits

218 points by azsromej 13y ago

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
- bpicolo 13y ago
  He literally linked every single paper he referred to in the article.
Altair909 13y ago
I have experienced this my self in real life. This is very cliché but it reminds me of Starwars, "these are not the droids you are looking for," I have seen the power of thinking influence others in a very positive way.
zoba 13y ago
In many cases, thinking that we are limited is itself a limiting factor. I've noticed this with self confidence as well. Its interesting because suppose there were two people who were both identical in capability - the one with confidence will do much better. He/She will put ideas out, will come across as more impressive to other people, and in the long term grow faster than the unconfident person because of it... I mention it because I was surprised when I realized that success is not just intelligence, hard work, and social interaction, but that success is also intertwined with general personality characteristics, like confidence.
- Peroni 13y ago
  Confidence plays a massive role in success. If you can balance the fine line between confidence and arrogance you'll find more doors open up to you than ever before.
lutusp 13y ago
A quote: "There seems to be a simple way to instantly increase a person’s level of general knowledge. Psychologists ..." Ahh. Psychologists. Expectations calibrated. "Expecting to know the answers made people more likely to get the answers right." Ah, yes -- that conclusion should be easy to rigorously quantify, explain in neuroscientific terms, turn into a general theory, and replicate before anyone assumes we're doing actual science. But no one will shape a theory, there will be no replications, and this study, like 99% of psychology studies, will disappear without a trace, only to be inadvertently repeated years from now by someone who will arrive at the opposite conclusion.
- AdrianRossouw 13y ago
  you dare question a website with 'scientific' in the URL? I like your moxie. I recall reading something posted recently about how the way the grants in social sciences is set up ensures that you get a whole lot of papers that have a catchy 'truthy' hook to them, which will then get disseminated by the mainstream media and quickly forgotten. It basically turned the fields into little more than generators of soundbites.
  - lutusp 13y ago
    > you dare question a website with 'scientific' in the URL? I like your moxie. Yep, I had a lot of nerve doing that. :) A while ago, in an article I noted that Wikipedia defined neuroscience as "the scientific study of the brain and nervous system", while psychology was defined as "the study of the mind, partly through the study of behavior." Within hours of my article's appearance someone inserted the word "scientific" into psychology's definition. Solved that problem. > I recall reading something posted recently about how the way the grants in social sciences is set up ensures that you get a whole lot of papers that have a catchy 'truthy' hook to them, which will then get disseminated by the mainstream media and quickly forgotten. Yes, even to the extent that two studies arrive at opposite conclusions but don't notice each other (and no one points out the contradiction). My favorite example of overlooked contradictions are two current, well-regarded psychological theories -- Grit and Asperger Syndrome. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grit_(personality_trait) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grit_(personality_trait) : "Grit in psychology is a positive, non-cognitive trait, based on an individual’s passion for a particular long-term goal or endstate coupled with a powerful motivation to achieve their respective objective." So according to the Grit contingent, focusing on a few activities, or just one, is a "good thing", and typical of successful people. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asperger_syndrome http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asperger_syndrome : "Asperger syndrome (AS), also known as Asperger's syndrome or Asperger disorder, is an autism spectrum disorder (ASD) that is characterized by significant difficulties in social interaction, alongside restricted and repetitive patterns of behavior and interests." So according to the Asperger contingent, focusing on a few activities, or just one, is a mental illness. How can this happen? The answer is that there's no central defining theory in psychology, so people are free to draw conclusions that don't need to be compared to tested, defining principles like relativity or evolution. > It basically turned the fields into little more than generators of soundbites. Well put. :)
david927 13y ago
We've known for a while now that the placebo effect is not just psychological; it affects real physical change. In one experiment, when given a morphine placebo, patients reported pain relief, but when a morphine-blocker was silently introduced, the placebo morphine no longer worked. [*http://letterstonature.wordpress.com/2008/08/27/the-placebo-effect-it%E2%80%99s-all-in-your-head http://letterstonature.wordpress.com/2008/08/27/the-placebo-...] It's fascinating and deserves more research.
- lobster_johnson 13y ago
  Good Wired article on the subject [1], especially about Fabrizio Benedetti [2], a neurologist who has mapped the various hormones and mechanisms that underly the placebo effect. (One fascinating claim mentioned in the article is that in clinical trials, Valium can no longer be statistically distinguished from placebo, possibly due to patients' expectations. This statistical skew in favour of placebo is problematic for a lot of drug research, essentially preventing manufacturers from proving that their drug works.) [1] http://www.wired.com/medtech/drugs/magazine/17-09/ff_placebo_effect?currentPage=all http://www.wired.com/medtech/drugs/magazine/17-09/ff_placebo... [2] http://brainsciencepodcast.com/bsp/neurobiology-of-placebos-with-fabrizio-benedetti-bsp-77.html http://brainsciencepodcast.com/bsp/neurobiology-of-placebos-...
spiritplumber 13y ago
The sleeper must awaken!
loceng 13y ago
This is all about releasing the blocking mechanism that exists. I feel people like Eckhart Tolle have somehow mastered this, at least in the realm of the scope of abilities they are most comfortable being confined in.
- vidarh 13y ago
  Eckhart Tolle is pretty much repackaging meditation practises with a huge dose of new age nonsense. As such, there are certainly the odd kernel of useful stuff in there, but I'd recommend a decent introduction to meditation over Tolle any day.
  - StacyC 13y ago
    Tolle’s work and meditative practice are not mutually exclusive nor in conflict with one another. His characterization of the human mind—how we create (mostly unintentionally, through conditioned habits) so much suffering and problems for ourselves—is spot on and very helpful for gaining an understanding of ourselves, imo.
  - loceng 13y ago
    I've not read any books of his, though I've yet to see in video him say anything that was non-sensical. What are you referring to?
    - MichaelGG 13y ago
      Uh, The Power of Now starts off with something about quantum entanglement "proving" that we're all one with each other.
- loceng 13y ago
  I sense a lot of haters in this thread...
tokenadult 13y ago
I'm glad lutusp has already jumped in here to decry the shoddy quality of "science" relied on to build the opinion piece kindly submitted here. He is correct that psychology often relies on data unrepresentative of humankind as a whole, http://hci.ucsd.edu/102b/readings/WeirdestPeople.pdf http://hci.ucsd.edu/102b/readings/WeirdestPeople.pdf often engages in dodgy data manipulation after gathering the data, http://opim.wharton.upenn.edu/~uws/ http://opim.wharton.upenn.edu/~uws/ and is usually part of a larger scientific universe of rushing to publish. http://www.ma.utexas.edu/users/mks/statmistakes/filedrawer.html http://www.ma.utexas.edu/users/mks/statmistakes/filedrawer.h... That said, while we will always have to be wary of grandiose claims about preliminary study results, http://norvig.com/experiment-design.html http://norvig.com/experiment-design.html and especially about "mind over matter" claims, http://norvig.com/prayer.html http://norvig.com/prayer.html there are skeptical psychologists http://www.lscp.net/persons/dupoux/teaching/JOURNEE_AUTOMNE_CogMaster_2011-12/docs/Lilienfeld_2004_Teaching_PseudoScience.pdf http://www.lscp.net/persons/dupoux/teaching/JOURNEE_AUTOMNE_... http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/publications/observer/2005/september-05/the-10-commandments-of-helping-students-distinguish-science-from-pseudoscience-in-psychology.html http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/publications/o... http://www.psichi.org/pubs/articles/article_730.aspx http://www.psichi.org/pubs/articles/article_730.aspx and other researchers in psychology who apply rigor to their discipline, so over time we may actually find out something about human behavior from psychology more reliable than the weak and debatable assertions found in the article submitted here. AFTER EDIT: Because the submitted article mentions the placebo effect, in the usual manner of popular articles, perhaps I should share here some links that are helpful for understanding what placebo effects are all about. Some of these online links cite quite a few useful scholarly publications. http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/behold-the-spin-what-a-new-survey-of-of-placebo-prescribing-really-tells-us/ http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/behold-the-spin-what-a-n... http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/michael-specter-on-the-placebo-effect/ http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/michael-specter-on-the-p... "In other words, the best research we have strongly suggests that placebo effects are illusions, not real physiological effects. The possible exception to this are the subjective symptoms of pain and nausea, where the placebo effects are highly variable and may be due to subjective reporting." Despite the numerous press releases on the Web pointing to publications co-authored by Ted Kaptchuk, who has NO medical training or credentials, http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/dummy-medicine-dummy-doctors-and-a-dummy-degree-part-2-0-harvard-medical-school-and-the-curious-case-of-ted-kaptchuk-omd/ http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/dummy-medicine-dummy-doc... http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/dummy-medicine-dummy-doctors-and-a-dummy-degree-part-2-2-harvard-medical-school-and-the-curious-case-of-ted-kaptchuk-omd-cont-again/ http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/dummy-medicine-dummy-doc... the statements typically found in those articles, such as "Recent research demonstrates that placebo effects are genuine psychobiological phenomenon [sic] attributable to the overall therapeutic context, and that placebo effects can be robust in both laboratory and clinical settings" are untrue. http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/the-rise-and-fall-of-placebo-medicine/ http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/the-rise-and-fa... "Despite the spin of the authors – these results put placebo medicine into crystal clear perspective, and I think they are generalizable and consistent with other placebo studies. For objective physiological outcomes, there is no significant placebo effect. Placebos are no better than no treatment at all." http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20091554 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20091554 "We did not find that placebo interventions have important clinical effects in general. However, in certain settings placebo interventions can influence patient-reported outcomes, especially pain and nausea, though it is difficult to distinguish patient-reported effects of placebo from biased reporting. The effect on pain varied, even among trials with low risk of bias, from negligible to clinically important. Variations in the effect of placebo were partly explained by variations in how trials were conducted and how patients were informed." Fabrizio Benedetti, a co-author of one of the most cited papers who is also a medical doctor, sums up his view this way: "I am a doctor, it is true, but I am mainly a neurophysiologist, so I use the placebo response as a model to understand how our brain works. I am not sure that in the future it will have a clinical application." To sum up, despite claims to the contrary by a person without medical training who is often covered by the lay press, the best-considered view among medical practitioners with clinical experience is that the placebo response has no clinical application. See also: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/does-thinking-make-it-so-cam-placebo-fantasy-versus-scientific-reality/ http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/does-thinking-make-it-so... http://www.skepdic.com/placebo.html http://www.skepdic.com/placebo.html http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/revisiting-daniel-moerman-and-placebo-effects/ http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/revisiting-daniel-moerma...
spiritplumber 13y ago
semi-CSB that may be related: I often travel with electronic prototypes and/or custom parts, which can be really annoying if you have to cross an international border and go through customs. I found that the best way to get through it speedily is to also carry one of my Antbots, and go into sales pitch mode when asked to explain it. People will automatically want to get rid of a traveling salesman and the fastest way to do so is to let you through. Got me out of a ticket once, too.
- 300bps 13y ago
  Yeah there's a number of techniques similar to that which get people to leave you alone. Here's my favorite: http://www.daily-comix.com/image/comic/small/1307/jesus-saves-bus-seats-alone-jesus-comic-1373668240.jpg http://www.daily-comix.com/image/comic/small/1307/jesus-save...
  - teddyh 13y ago
    As long as we're trading comic links - it can also be used as perimeter defense. http://freefall.purrsia.com/ff100/fv00014.htm http://freefall.purrsia.com/ff100/fv00014.htm or as a method for private communication http://freefall.purrsia.com/ff800/fv00751.htm http://freefall.purrsia.com/ff800/fv00751.htm
sheri 13y ago
In my Psych course in college we were told on how playing on gender roles can affect performance. Boys and girls were given a math test. On average they performed equally. However when they were given the test and told that the test was also to evaluate how girls do as compared to boys the results were interesting. Girls did worse then average on being told this and boys did better than average. This article seems to reinforce this point, as the expectation that boys would do better actually caused them to perform better than average. It also points out how corrosive stereotypes can be, as just the expectation that girls would not do well in math caused a drop in their performance. I don't have references for these studies unfortunately.
- cLeEOGPw 13y ago
  Boys were more motivated by competition, and girls were stressed by expectations that boys will be better. Regarding the original article, people who were told the answer got flashed might simply doubted their intuition less.
  - pasquinelli 13y ago
    i think the girls did worse because they "know" that, in general, girls do worse in math than boys. boys did better because they "know" that, in general, boys do better in math than girls. apparently they were both wrong.
- diydsp 13y ago
  In addition, there was a recent study that said when women write fake names on their test papers before they take math tests, they do better! [1] This suggests not only do gender expectations influence performance, but one's own assessment of one's identity has an influence on performance! Maybe that's why some people have multiple personalities - one is good at math, one at geography, one at programming ;) [1]http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/smartnews/2013/07/if-women-assume-fake-names-they-do-better-on-math-tests/ http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/smartnews/2013/07/if-women-a...
StacyC 13y ago
Thought, intention and expectation—these are causal and creative. Our experience of the world is substantially shaped by how we view it.
swamp40 13y ago
I am a great fan of Napoleon Hill. But my eyes always glazed over while listening to him talk about tapping into the "Infinite Intelligence". If nothing else, I would like to thank this article for gently reminding me that I do not know everything there is to know about this universe.
Arnor 13y ago
Montaigne explained this phenomena over a hundred years ago: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/3600/3600-h/3600-h.htm#link2HCH0020 http://www.gutenberg.org/files/3600/3600-h/3600-h.htm#link2H...
300bps 13y ago
In many cases, thinking that we are limited is itself a limiting factor. I've noticed this is true in ever facet of my life. When I was 14, I memorized pi to 50 digits with almost no effort. Later, I memorized it to 100, then 200. I realized at that point that I could memorize anything that I wanted to. I memorize phone numbers, credit card numbers, everything with almost no effort and not using any mnemonic device. It's so handy when buying something on the Internet to have every credit card in my wallet memorized. Invariably when I demonstrate this to someone I get the, "Oh I could never do that, my memory is terrible." I actually convinced a friend of mine many years ago that he could in fact memorize pi to 100 digits... and he did and still remembers it to this day. I'm convinced anyone can do this and the major thing stopping them is their belief that they can't do it.
- GoNB 13y ago
  Eh, no mnemonic device? Most people memorize things by simple repetition. If you're implying anyone can have eidetic memory by "removing their limits", I don't buy it. It's something developed at a young age.
  - 300bps 13y ago
    If you're implying anyone can have eidetic memory by "removing their limits" What I said is that most people don't try to memorize things because they think that they can't. Most people memorize things by simple repetition Sure, and most people don't try to memorize things because (again) they think that they can't no matter what technique they use. I don't buy it I'm not selling anything. I'm merely passing on my own experiences and those of my friends. If you choose to continue to believe you can't memorize things because of some innate lack of ability, it doesn't affect me at all.
    - sown 13y ago
      > I'm not selling anything. I'm merely passing on my own experiences and those of my friends. If you choose to continue to believe you can't memorize things because of some innate lack of ability, it doesn't affect me at all. Fortunately, there's a large body of scientific research that can tell us how many numbers a person can memorize in short term memory (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Magical_Number_Seven,_Plus_or_Minus_Two https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Magical_Number_Seven,_Plus...) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exceptional_memory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exceptional_memory
kenster07 13y ago
This is easily explained by a broader psychological phenomenon. The brain and ego will invest itself in a task in direct proportion to the expected payoff.
ajcarpy2005 13y ago
This is explained simply by setting your mind to something, selective attention, etc. I'm not sure why commenters are looking for exact science when we don't even have a working model of consciousness let alone the subconscious. When we focus our attention on something, we are applying more brain resources towards that task, sending more energy through our neurons, etc. If sitting in an aircraft simulator makes you more alert due to the excitement of the experience and task, it makes sense that you will invest more energy into it to get a better outcome. Not too mysterious. I disagree with those commenters who imply that there is nothing scientific about making observations without a theory to attach to it. I actually tink it's a lot more responsible than trying to force a theory that we don't have enough evidence for.
pasquinelli 13y ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5um8QWWRvo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5um8QWWRvo
joe_the_user 13y ago
ABOUT THE AUTHOR(S) Ozgun Atasoy is a doctoral candidate in the Department of Marketing at Boston University School of Management.
gmisra 13y ago
FWIW, pretty much the entire sub-field of "priming" in contemporary psychological research has come under significant scrutiny over the past few years. I am no expert, I would encourage you to read this: https://chronicle.com/article/Power-of-Suggestion/136907 https://chronicle.com/article/Power-of-Suggestion/136907 "The studies that raise eyebrows are mostly in an area known as behavioral or goal priming, research that demonstrates how subliminal prompts can make you do all manner of crazy things. A warm mug makes you friendlier. The American flag makes you vote Republican. Fast-food logos make you impatient. A small group of skeptical psychologists—let's call them the Replicators—have been trying to reproduce some of the most popular priming effects in their own labs. What have they found? Mostly that they can't get those results. The studies don't check out. Something is wrong."
Imagenuity 13y ago
“Whether you think you can, or you think you can't—you're right.” – Henry Ford

218 points by azsromej 13y ago

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

bpicolo 13y ago
He literally linked every single paper he referred to in the article.

Altair909 13y ago

I have experienced this my self in real life. This is very cliché but it reminds me of Starwars, "these are not the droids you are looking for," I have seen the power of thinking influence others in a very positive way.

zoba 13y ago

In many cases, thinking that we are limited is itself a limiting factor. I've noticed this with self confidence as well. Its interesting because suppose there were two people who were both identical in capability - the one with confidence will do much better. He/She will put ideas out, will come across as more impressive to other people, and in the long term grow faster than the unconfident person because of it... I mention it because I was surprised when I realized that success is not just intelligence, hard work, and social interaction, but that success is also intertwined with general personality characteristics, like confidence.

Peroni 13y ago
Confidence plays a massive role in success. If you can balance the fine line between confidence and arrogance you'll find more doors open up to you than ever before.

lutusp 13y ago

A quote: "There seems to be a simple way to instantly increase a person’s level of general knowledge. Psychologists ..." Ahh. Psychologists. Expectations calibrated. "Expecting to know the answers made people more likely to get the answers right." Ah, yes -- that conclusion should be easy to rigorously quantify, explain in neuroscientific terms, turn into a general theory, and replicate before anyone assumes we're doing actual science. But no one will shape a theory, there will be no replications, and this study, like 99% of psychology studies, will disappear without a trace, only to be inadvertently repeated years from now by someone who will arrive at the opposite conclusion.

AdrianRossouw 13y ago
you dare question a website with 'scientific' in the URL? I like your moxie. I recall reading something posted recently about how the way the grants in social sciences is set up ensures that you get a whole lot of papers that have a catchy 'truthy' hook to them, which will then get disseminated by the mainstream media and quickly forgotten. It basically turned the fields into little more than generators of soundbites.
- lutusp 13y ago
  > you dare question a website with 'scientific' in the URL? I like your moxie. Yep, I had a lot of nerve doing that. :) A while ago, in an article I noted that Wikipedia defined neuroscience as "the scientific study of the brain and nervous system", while psychology was defined as "the study of the mind, partly through the study of behavior." Within hours of my article's appearance someone inserted the word "scientific" into psychology's definition. Solved that problem. > I recall reading something posted recently about how the way the grants in social sciences is set up ensures that you get a whole lot of papers that have a catchy 'truthy' hook to them, which will then get disseminated by the mainstream media and quickly forgotten. Yes, even to the extent that two studies arrive at opposite conclusions but don't notice each other (and no one points out the contradiction). My favorite example of overlooked contradictions are two current, well-regarded psychological theories -- Grit and Asperger Syndrome. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grit_(personality_trait) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grit_(personality_trait) : "Grit in psychology is a positive, non-cognitive trait, based on an individual’s passion for a particular long-term goal or endstate coupled with a powerful motivation to achieve their respective objective." So according to the Grit contingent, focusing on a few activities, or just one, is a "good thing", and typical of successful people. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asperger_syndrome http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asperger_syndrome : "Asperger syndrome (AS), also known as Asperger's syndrome or Asperger disorder, is an autism spectrum disorder (ASD) that is characterized by significant difficulties in social interaction, alongside restricted and repetitive patterns of behavior and interests." So according to the Asperger contingent, focusing on a few activities, or just one, is a mental illness. How can this happen? The answer is that there's no central defining theory in psychology, so people are free to draw conclusions that don't need to be compared to tested, defining principles like relativity or evolution. > It basically turned the fields into little more than generators of soundbites. Well put. :)

david927 13y ago

We've known for a while now that the placebo effect is not just psychological; it affects real physical change. In one experiment, when given a morphine placebo, patients reported pain relief, but when a morphine-blocker was silently introduced, the placebo morphine no longer worked. [*http://letterstonature.wordpress.com/2008/08/27/the-placebo-effect-it%E2%80%99s-all-in-your-head http://letterstonature.wordpress.com/2008/08/27/the-placebo-...] It's fascinating and deserves more research.

lobster_johnson 13y ago
Good Wired article on the subject [1], especially about Fabrizio Benedetti [2], a neurologist who has mapped the various hormones and mechanisms that underly the placebo effect. (One fascinating claim mentioned in the article is that in clinical trials, Valium can no longer be statistically distinguished from placebo, possibly due to patients' expectations. This statistical skew in favour of placebo is problematic for a lot of drug research, essentially preventing manufacturers from proving that their drug works.) [1] http://www.wired.com/medtech/drugs/magazine/17-09/ff_placebo_effect?currentPage=all http://www.wired.com/medtech/drugs/magazine/17-09/ff_placebo... [2] http://brainsciencepodcast.com/bsp/neurobiology-of-placebos-with-fabrizio-benedetti-bsp-77.html http://brainsciencepodcast.com/bsp/neurobiology-of-placebos-...

spiritplumber 13y ago

The sleeper must awaken!

loceng 13y ago

This is all about releasing the blocking mechanism that exists. I feel people like Eckhart Tolle have somehow mastered this, at least in the realm of the scope of abilities they are most comfortable being confined in.

vidarh 13y ago
Eckhart Tolle is pretty much repackaging meditation practises with a huge dose of new age nonsense. As such, there are certainly the odd kernel of useful stuff in there, but I'd recommend a decent introduction to meditation over Tolle any day.
- StacyC 13y ago
  Tolle’s work and meditative practice are not mutually exclusive nor in conflict with one another. His characterization of the human mind—how we create (mostly unintentionally, through conditioned habits) so much suffering and problems for ourselves—is spot on and very helpful for gaining an understanding of ourselves, imo.
- loceng 13y ago
  I've not read any books of his, though I've yet to see in video him say anything that was non-sensical. What are you referring to?
  - MichaelGG 13y ago
    Uh, The Power of Now starts off with something about quantum entanglement "proving" that we're all one with each other.
loceng 13y ago
I sense a lot of haters in this thread...

tokenadult 13y ago

I'm glad lutusp has already jumped in here to decry the shoddy quality of "science" relied on to build the opinion piece kindly submitted here. He is correct that psychology often relies on data unrepresentative of humankind as a whole, http://hci.ucsd.edu/102b/readings/WeirdestPeople.pdf http://hci.ucsd.edu/102b/readings/WeirdestPeople.pdf often engages in dodgy data manipulation after gathering the data, http://opim.wharton.upenn.edu/~uws/ http://opim.wharton.upenn.edu/~uws/ and is usually part of a larger scientific universe of rushing to publish. http://www.ma.utexas.edu/users/mks/statmistakes/filedrawer.html http://www.ma.utexas.edu/users/mks/statmistakes/filedrawer.h... That said, while we will always have to be wary of grandiose claims about preliminary study results, http://norvig.com/experiment-design.html http://norvig.com/experiment-design.html and especially about "mind over matter" claims, http://norvig.com/prayer.html http://norvig.com/prayer.html there are skeptical psychologists http://www.lscp.net/persons/dupoux/teaching/JOURNEE_AUTOMNE_CogMaster_2011-12/docs/Lilienfeld_2004_Teaching_PseudoScience.pdf http://www.lscp.net/persons/dupoux/teaching/JOURNEE_AUTOMNE_... http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/publications/observer/2005/september-05/the-10-commandments-of-helping-students-distinguish-science-from-pseudoscience-in-psychology.html http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/publications/o... http://www.psichi.org/pubs/articles/article_730.aspx http://www.psichi.org/pubs/articles/article_730.aspx and other researchers in psychology who apply rigor to their discipline, so over time we may actually find out something about human behavior from psychology more reliable than the weak and debatable assertions found in the article submitted here. AFTER EDIT: Because the submitted article mentions the placebo effect, in the usual manner of popular articles, perhaps I should share here some links that are helpful for understanding what placebo effects are all about. Some of these online links cite quite a few useful scholarly publications. http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/behold-the-spin-what-a-new-survey-of-of-placebo-prescribing-really-tells-us/ http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/behold-the-spin-what-a-n... http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/michael-specter-on-the-placebo-effect/ http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/michael-specter-on-the-p... "In other words, the best research we have strongly suggests that placebo effects are illusions, not real physiological effects. The possible exception to this are the subjective symptoms of pain and nausea, where the placebo effects are highly variable and may be due to subjective reporting." Despite the numerous press releases on the Web pointing to publications co-authored by Ted Kaptchuk, who has NO medical training or credentials, http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/dummy-medicine-dummy-doctors-and-a-dummy-degree-part-2-0-harvard-medical-school-and-the-curious-case-of-ted-kaptchuk-omd/ http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/dummy-medicine-dummy-doc... http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/dummy-medicine-dummy-doctors-and-a-dummy-degree-part-2-2-harvard-medical-school-and-the-curious-case-of-ted-kaptchuk-omd-cont-again/ http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/dummy-medicine-dummy-doc... the statements typically found in those articles, such as "Recent research demonstrates that placebo effects are genuine psychobiological phenomenon [sic] attributable to the overall therapeutic context, and that placebo effects can be robust in both laboratory and clinical settings" are untrue. http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/the-rise-and-fall-of-placebo-medicine/ http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/the-rise-and-fa... "Despite the spin of the authors – these results put placebo medicine into crystal clear perspective, and I think they are generalizable and consistent with other placebo studies. For objective physiological outcomes, there is no significant placebo effect. Placebos are no better than no treatment at all." http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20091554 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20091554 "We did not find that placebo interventions have important clinical effects in general. However, in certain settings placebo interventions can influence patient-reported outcomes, especially pain and nausea, though it is difficult to distinguish patient-reported effects of placebo from biased reporting. The effect on pain varied, even among trials with low risk of bias, from negligible to clinically important. Variations in the effect of placebo were partly explained by variations in how trials were conducted and how patients were informed." Fabrizio Benedetti, a co-author of one of the most cited papers who is also a medical doctor, sums up his view this way: "I am a doctor, it is true, but I am mainly a neurophysiologist, so I use the placebo response as a model to understand how our brain works. I am not sure that in the future it will have a clinical application." To sum up, despite claims to the contrary by a person without medical training who is often covered by the lay press, the best-considered view among medical practitioners with clinical experience is that the placebo response has no clinical application. See also: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/does-thinking-make-it-so-cam-placebo-fantasy-versus-scientific-reality/ http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/does-thinking-make-it-so... http://www.skepdic.com/placebo.html http://www.skepdic.com/placebo.html http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/revisiting-daniel-moerman-and-placebo-effects/ http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/revisiting-daniel-moerma...

spiritplumber 13y ago

semi-CSB that may be related: I often travel with electronic prototypes and/or custom parts, which can be really annoying if you have to cross an international border and go through customs. I found that the best way to get through it speedily is to also carry one of my Antbots, and go into sales pitch mode when asked to explain it. People will automatically want to get rid of a traveling salesman and the fastest way to do so is to let you through. Got me out of a ticket once, too.

300bps 13y ago
Yeah there's a number of techniques similar to that which get people to leave you alone. Here's my favorite: http://www.daily-comix.com/image/comic/small/1307/jesus-saves-bus-seats-alone-jesus-comic-1373668240.jpg http://www.daily-comix.com/image/comic/small/1307/jesus-save...
- teddyh 13y ago
  As long as we're trading comic links - it can also be used as perimeter defense. http://freefall.purrsia.com/ff100/fv00014.htm http://freefall.purrsia.com/ff100/fv00014.htm or as a method for private communication http://freefall.purrsia.com/ff800/fv00751.htm http://freefall.purrsia.com/ff800/fv00751.htm

sheri 13y ago

In my Psych course in college we were told on how playing on gender roles can affect performance. Boys and girls were given a math test. On average they performed equally. However when they were given the test and told that the test was also to evaluate how girls do as compared to boys the results were interesting. Girls did worse then average on being told this and boys did better than average. This article seems to reinforce this point, as the expectation that boys would do better actually caused them to perform better than average. It also points out how corrosive stereotypes can be, as just the expectation that girls would not do well in math caused a drop in their performance. I don't have references for these studies unfortunately.

cLeEOGPw 13y ago
Boys were more motivated by competition, and girls were stressed by expectations that boys will be better. Regarding the original article, people who were told the answer got flashed might simply doubted their intuition less.
- pasquinelli 13y ago
  i think the girls did worse because they "know" that, in general, girls do worse in math than boys. boys did better because they "know" that, in general, boys do better in math than girls. apparently they were both wrong.
diydsp 13y ago
In addition, there was a recent study that said when women write fake names on their test papers before they take math tests, they do better! [1] This suggests not only do gender expectations influence performance, but one's own assessment of one's identity has an influence on performance! Maybe that's why some people have multiple personalities - one is good at math, one at geography, one at programming ;) [1]http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/smartnews/2013/07/if-women-assume-fake-names-they-do-better-on-math-tests/ http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/smartnews/2013/07/if-women-a...

StacyC 13y ago

Thought, intention and expectation—these are causal and creative. Our experience of the world is substantially shaped by how we view it.

swamp40 13y ago

I am a great fan of Napoleon Hill. But my eyes always glazed over while listening to him talk about tapping into the "Infinite Intelligence". If nothing else, I would like to thank this article for gently reminding me that I do not know everything there is to know about this universe.

Arnor 13y ago

Montaigne explained this phenomena over a hundred years ago: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/3600/3600-h/3600-h.htm#link2HCH0020 http://www.gutenberg.org/files/3600/3600-h/3600-h.htm#link2H...

300bps 13y ago

In many cases, thinking that we are limited is itself a limiting factor. I've noticed this is true in ever facet of my life. When I was 14, I memorized pi to 50 digits with almost no effort. Later, I memorized it to 100, then 200. I realized at that point that I could memorize anything that I wanted to. I memorize phone numbers, credit card numbers, everything with almost no effort and not using any mnemonic device. It's so handy when buying something on the Internet to have every credit card in my wallet memorized. Invariably when I demonstrate this to someone I get the, "Oh I could never do that, my memory is terrible." I actually convinced a friend of mine many years ago that he could in fact memorize pi to 100 digits... and he did and still remembers it to this day. I'm convinced anyone can do this and the major thing stopping them is their belief that they can't do it.

GoNB 13y ago
Eh, no mnemonic device? Most people memorize things by simple repetition. If you're implying anyone can have eidetic memory by "removing their limits", I don't buy it. It's something developed at a young age.
- 300bps 13y ago
  If you're implying anyone can have eidetic memory by "removing their limits" What I said is that most people don't try to memorize things because they think that they can't. Most people memorize things by simple repetition Sure, and most people don't try to memorize things because (again) they think that they can't no matter what technique they use. I don't buy it I'm not selling anything. I'm merely passing on my own experiences and those of my friends. If you choose to continue to believe you can't memorize things because of some innate lack of ability, it doesn't affect me at all.
  - sown 13y ago
    > I'm not selling anything. I'm merely passing on my own experiences and those of my friends. If you choose to continue to believe you can't memorize things because of some innate lack of ability, it doesn't affect me at all. Fortunately, there's a large body of scientific research that can tell us how many numbers a person can memorize in short term memory (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Magical_Number_Seven,_Plus_or_Minus_Two https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Magical_Number_Seven,_Plus...) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exceptional_memory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exceptional_memory

kenster07 13y ago

This is easily explained by a broader psychological phenomenon. The brain and ego will invest itself in a task in direct proportion to the expected payoff.

ajcarpy2005 13y ago

This is explained simply by setting your mind to something, selective attention, etc. I'm not sure why commenters are looking for exact science when we don't even have a working model of consciousness let alone the subconscious. When we focus our attention on something, we are applying more brain resources towards that task, sending more energy through our neurons, etc. If sitting in an aircraft simulator makes you more alert due to the excitement of the experience and task, it makes sense that you will invest more energy into it to get a better outcome. Not too mysterious. I disagree with those commenters who imply that there is nothing scientific about making observations without a theory to attach to it. I actually tink it's a lot more responsible than trying to force a theory that we don't have enough evidence for.

pasquinelli 13y ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5um8QWWRvo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5um8QWWRvo

joe_the_user 13y ago

ABOUT THE AUTHOR(S) Ozgun Atasoy is a doctoral candidate in the Department of Marketing at Boston University School of Management.

gmisra 13y ago

FWIW, pretty much the entire sub-field of "priming" in contemporary psychological research has come under significant scrutiny over the past few years. I am no expert, I would encourage you to read this: https://chronicle.com/article/Power-of-Suggestion/136907 https://chronicle.com/article/Power-of-Suggestion/136907 "The studies that raise eyebrows are mostly in an area known as behavioral or goal priming, research that demonstrates how subliminal prompts can make you do all manner of crazy things. A warm mug makes you friendlier. The American flag makes you vote Republican. Fast-food logos make you impatient. A small group of skeptical psychologists—let's call them the Replicators—have been trying to reproduce some of the most popular priming effects in their own labs. What have they found? Mostly that they can't get those results. The studies don't check out. Something is wrong."

Imagenuity 13y ago

“Whether you think you can, or you think you can't—you're right.” – Henry Ford