The 2024 Paris Olympics have begun. For sports lovers and patriotic people worldwide, it can involve lots of time glued to the couch checking out the live action.
For people living overseas like myself, it can also mean some serious sleep disruption for the next 16 days. Especially if you prefer to watch an event live when it is happening, rather than having to record the events overnight and then watch the replay when it most suits you.
I don’t know about you, but there can be something special about watching an event live. As much as I try to tell myself that it is similar, watching a replay of an NBA or AFL game when the result is already out there and only one click away doesn’t feel quite the same.
But what about the eight hour time difference between Melbourne and Paris? Or the nine hour time difference between Paris and Los Angeles and San Francisco? It might come down to a preference to experience the event live but sacrifice some sleep, or to watch the replay and potentially having the results spoiled by well meaning friends or family. Or even social media or the news.
The easiest and probably best option for people that want to preserve their sleep at night and energy levels during the day is to record the events you want to see or use streaming services that allow you to watch the replays at times that best suit you.
For certain events and certain people, that just might not do. I know that there were a few of my friends that made sure that they were awake to support the Matildas at 3am this morning. Some of them that already work in hospitality until fairly late just stayed up until the game and slept afterwards. For others that work the standard 9am to 5pm, they would have woken up early and would already be feeling pretty tired in their first few hours of work.
Strategies for Managing Sleep During the Olympics
1. Know Your Body Clock:
Morning People (“Larks”): Try to wake up early to watch events. Have a short nap of under 30 minutes during the day if needed. Go to bed a bit earlier than usual the following night if you are feeling sleepy, but then get up at your usual time the day after.
Evening People (“Night Owls”): Stay up to watch events and sleep in a bit later (but not too late) if possible. Have a short nap of under 30 minutes during the day if needed. Go to bed at your usual time the night after.
2. Minimize Disruption:
If you stay up later than usual, limit your sleep-in to a maximum of 30 minutes later per extra hour that you have been awake for to avoid disrupting your sleep cycle too much. For example, if you normally sleep from midnight to 8am, but are awake until 4am, try to only sleep in until 10am.
If you wake up earlier than usual, try to go to bed a maximum of 30 minutes earlier for each hour of less sleep you have had the next night to maintain your regular sleep routine. For example, if you normally sleep from 10pm until 6am, but then wake up at 4am, try to sleep the next night between 9pm and 6am (as long as you feel sleepy around 9pm).
3. Plan for Recovery:
After a late night or early morning, expect to feel more tired and possibly irritable the next day. Get back into your regular sleep schedule as quickly as possible to help recover and get back on track as soon as possible.
Avoid staying up all night multiple times, as it can have a compounded negative effect on your sleep and overall health.
4. Prioritise Safety:
If you’re too tired to drive, consider using public transport rather than driving.
If you need to perform tasks that could be risky or unsafe or require lots of concentration, consider taking a day off work if possible.
Four Key Aspects of a Good Night’s Sleep
Dr Matthew Walker, a sleep scientist and author of the mega selling book, ‘Why We Sleep’, mentioned in a podcast that I was listening to recently the four things that he thinks are important for sleep over time. He called this “QQRT”.
Q: Ideally, we want a certain quantity of sleep. For most adults, this is likely to be somewhere between 6 and 9 hours a night. 7 hours a night is often found to be the healthiest in longitudinal studies, but sleep needs vary a bit from person to person, so see what tends to make you feel the way that you would like to during the day and aim for that. Remember that quantity is only one of the four elements of a good night’s sleep, so doing the other three things right can help people to feel better the next day even if they obtain less sleep than they would like to.
Q: We want to do things to improve our sleep quality. For me, that is minimising my alcohol intake, doing things to wind down and relax before sleep, not eating too large a meal too close to bedtime, waiting until I feel sleepy before going to bed, and only being in bed for a maximum 8.5 hours each night.
R: We want to have good regularity in when we sleep from night to night. For me, that means going to bed between 11 to 11:30pm most nights and waking up between 7 and 7:30am seven days a week. If someone’s sleep schedule has lots of variability in it across the week, it will be much harder for their brain to help them to sleep when they want to at night, and help them to be alert and function well when they would like to during the day. Social jetlag is a real phenomenon, and can happen if someone’s weekend sleep schedule varies a lot from their weekday sleep schedule.
T: Finally, we want to be sleeping at the right time for ourselves and our internal body clock. A “lark” might sleep best between 9pm and 5am. An “owl” might sleep best between 1am and 9am. Think about what 8 hour window in a 24-hour cycle is likely to be when your body and brain most want you to sleep, and try to sleep and wake up around those times. For me, it is between 11:15pm and 7:15am. If you can do this, you will find it a lot easier over time to feel sleepy and sleep well in bed, and feel alert and perform well during the day.
Conclusion
Ultimately, the key is balance. If watching live events is a priority, be mindful of how it affects your sleep and adjust your routine to mitigate any negative impact. If the sleep disruption outweighs the enjoyment, consider replays and avoid unnecessary fatigue. Enjoy the Olympics and make sure to take care of your well-being in the process!
Recently, some things have come to light that I find disappointing. A person has behaved in a self-centred way, and it puts me in an awkward situation.
I always try to be kind, open, honest, respectful, and cooperative if given a choice. However, sometimes some people don’t play by these same rules, and the more direct you are, the more they can use this information against you.
These experiences have led to me doubting myself. Some friends tell me that I am too trusting. Other friends tell me that the only way to respond is by playing the game and putting my own needs first.
What should we do if someone is being unkind and only considering their needs irrespective of the consequences these actions have on us?
Game Theory
Game theory looks for the best rational approach in a strategic interaction between two people or groups of people. There are many different games, including cooperative games, where an official can enforce the rules and consequences, and zero-sum games, where one person’s gain is another person’s loss.
One of the most famous examples of a game is the ‘Prisoner’s Dilemma’:
Imagine that you are a criminal gang member and arrested alongside one of your gang associates. You are in separate rooms at the police station, and you have no way of communicating with your associate. Finally, after some time, the Police tell you that they have insufficient evidence to get either of you on a hefty charge, but enough to get both of you on a minor offence. So the Police give you and the other prisoner one of two options:
You can betray your associate by testifying that they were the one who committed the crime, or
You can cooperate with your associate by remaining silent and refusing to testify.
The possible outcomes are:
A. If you both remain silent and cooperate with each other against the Police, you both only get one year in prison.
B. If you both try to betray each other by agreeing to testify, you both get two years in prison.
C. If they betray you, but you’ve tried to cooperate, they get to walk free, and you get three years in prison.
D. If they try to cooperate by remaining silent, but you betray them and agree to testify, you get to walk free while they have to go to prison for three years.
The best rational approach is not to cooperate with your associate, because at worst, you will get two years in prison (B), and at best, you will serve no time (D). Compare this to the worst outcome of three years in jail (C) if you remain silent, and the best result is one year in prison (A). Therefore, not betraying your associate and cooperating will only lead to a worse outcome, even if you know that your associate will cooperate with 100% certainty.
Consequently, it is not always rational to try to cooperate with someone who could potentially take advantage of you. Furthermore, it is not sound to try to cooperate with someone trying to take advantage of you.
What About Long-term Strategies?
Suppose two people play multiple games of Prisoner’s Dilemma and remember what the other player did previously. Does it make it more desirable to cooperate rather than betray the other person? Similar to how most relationships are in real life, crossing your associates may not be wise if you have to keep dealing with them or the rest of the gang.
We may win more in one situation, but at what cost? This iterated version of the Prisoner’s Dilemma is sometimes known as the ‘Peace-War game’.
In 1984, Robert Axelrod organised a tournament where participants chose their strategies in an extended version of the Peace-War game, with 2000 trials. He found that greedy approaches to the game didn’t fare too well and resulted in more years spent in prison by the end of the game.
One of the most straightforward strategies was also the most effective — tit-for-tat. The tit-for-tat strategy aims to always cooperate in the first trial and then do what your opponent did on the previous trial for your next move. This way, you punish a betrayal with a quick betrayal back and reward cooperation with ongoing cooperation. Sometimes (in 1–5% of the trials), it is good to cooperate once even after your opponent betrays you, but generally, the most effective method is still tit-for-tat, which is interesting to know.
After the tournament ended, Axelrod studied the data and identified four main conditions for a successful strategy when negotiating with other people:
We must be nice. We should never defect or cheat before the other person does, even if we only want the best for ourselves.
We must retaliate quickly and at least 95% of the time if people try to defect against or cheat us. It’s not good to be a blind optimist or always cooperate no matter what the other person does. It only leads to us being taken advantage of by greedy people.
We must be forgiving and get back to trying to cooperate once we see that the other person is trying to cooperate again.
We must not be envious and try to beat our opponent or score more than them. Creating a win-win scenario is ideal if possible, even if it means giving up some points by cooperating when you could defect.
What Relevance Does This Have For Real Life?
It may be easy to fall into the trap of thinking that screwing others over is the best way to get ahead in life. Or to not put ourselves out there so that others don’t take advantage of us. In reality, this would only be the best approach in a world where every other person tries to take advantage of everyone else every chance they can. It is not the case in any society on our planet, as far as I know. So never trusting people and always assuming the worst from others is not the way to go.
By looking at the table above, the best outcome is to try and trust reliable individuals (and co-operate with them) and not rely on or co-operate with individuals who are not. The worst results are being hurt by putting our trust in those we shouldn’t or not letting in or co-operating with others that we really could have.
Maybe I am a little too trusting. I assume that other people are kind and good people who have good intentions unless I am proven otherwise. It is the position that I will continue to take, even if it means that sometimes I get hurt once I realise that someone is a bit more self-centred or dishonest than I had hoped.
Looking at the four elements of a successful negotiating strategy, I know that I am nice, forgiving and non-envious. However, the lesson that I need to learn is that of swift and appropriate retaliation or enforcing a particular consequence shortly after someone is nasty towards me. It would help deter the other person from trying any more selfish tactics in the future and could put them back on the path towards co-operating and trying to achieve a win-win situation for both of us.
I have previously thought that if I always co-operate, I can be happy with the person I am. However, sometimes being firm and assertive and standing up for myself in the face of unkind and selfish behaviour is the far better and more self-respecting approach to take.
I hope this article has encouraged you to not give up on trying to trust or cooperate with others. I also hope it will enable you to stand up for yourself if someone tries to take advantage of you.
For the first time, the 2020 World Happiness Report ranked 186 cities worldwide in terms of their level of subjective well-being. Moreover, by looking at the Gallup World Poll data across more than 160 countries and 99% of the world’s population, we can now tell which city’s residents evaluated their current life the highest. Well, at least how they evaluated their life satisfaction before the COVID-19 pandemic hit.
If you want to determine your life satisfaction, you could also ask yourself: “imagine yourself on a ladder with steps numbered from 0 at the bottom to 10 at the top. Zero represents the worst possible life, and ten is the best possible life. Which step would you put yourself on based on your life currently?”
Here are the top 20 cities, based on their inhabitants’ responses to the above question:
Helsinki, Finland = 7.828 average
Aarhus, Denmark = 7.625 average
Wellington, New Zealand = 7.553 average
Zurich, Switzerland = 7.541 average
Copenhagen, Denmark = 7.530 average
Bergen, Norway = 7.527 average
Olso, Norway = 7.464 average
Tel Aviv, Israel = 7.461 average
Stockholm, Sweden = 7.373 average
Brisbane, Australia = 7.337 average
San Jose, Costa Rica = 7.321 average
Reykjavik, Iceland = 7.317 average
Toronto, Canada = 7.298 average
Melbourne, Australia = 7.296 average
Perth, Australia = 7.253 average
Auckland, New Zealand = 7.232 average
Christchurch, New Zealand = 7.191 average
Washington, USA = 7.185 average
Dallas, USA = 7.155 average
Sydney, Australia = 7.133 average
Scandinavian cities dominate, with more than half of the top ten cities worldwide. Australia’s happiest city is Brisbane, but three other Australian cities make the top 20, with Melbourne beating Sydney (yes!). NZ also fares pretty well, with Wellington the happiest city outside of Finland and Denmark and Auckland and Christchurch in the top 20. The happiest city in the US is Washington DC, surprisingly at #18, with Dallas just behind it in 19th.
Which Cities Are Improving their Happiness Levels the Most?
Here are the top ten cities with the biggest improvement in life satisfaction from 2005 to 2018:
Abidjan, Ivory Coast = 0.981 average increase in subjective well-being
Dushanbe, Tajikstan = 0.950 average improvement
Vilnius, Lithuania = 0.939 improvement
Almaty, Kazakstan = 0.922 improvement
Cotonou, Benin = 0.918 improvement
Sofia, Bulgaria = 0.899 improvement
Dakar, Senegal = 0.864 improvement
Conakry, Guinea = 0.833 improvement
Niamey, Niger = 0.812 improvement
Brazzaville, Republic of the Congo = 0.787 improvement
Some of the most significant subjective well-being improvements come from Africa, with six out of the top 10 cities. Central Asia and Eastern Europe are the other two main areas with the most significant jumps in subjective well-being in the 21st Century.
Which Cities Feel the Most Hopeful About the Future?
Below are the top ten most optimistic cities and how they imagine their subjective well-being will be in the future:
Tashkent, Uzbekistan = 8.390 average future subjective well-being
San Miguelito, Panama = 8.372 average
San Jose, Costa Rica = 8.347 average
Accra, Ghana = 8.297 average
Panama City, Panama = 8.286 average
Aarhus, Denmark = 8.286 average
Copenhagen, Denmark = 8.208 average
Helsinki, Finland = 8.206 average
Atlanta, USA = 8.204 average
Freetown, Sierra Leone = 8.203 average
Central America seems to be very optimistic about its future, especially the two countries of Panama and Costa Rica. Atlanta is the only USA city to crack the top ten in any category in this article, and Scandinavia remains hopeful about improving things as we advance, especially Denmark and Finland. Tashkent in Uzbekistan comes out of nowhere to win this category, although Central Asia has improved its subjective well-being over the last 15 years. Finally, Ghana and Sierra Leone expect that things will continue to improve for them, with greater levels of happiness predicted in their cities than anywhere in Australia or Western Europe in the future.
Which Cities Experience the Most Positive Emotions?
Here are the top ten cities in the world with the highest levels of positive affect:
Asuncion, Paraguay = .892/1
Mogadishu, Somalia = .877/1
Vientiane, Laos = .873/1
San Pedro Sula, Honduras = .867/1
Quito, Ecuador = .862/1
San Jose, Costa Rica = .860/1
Cork, Ireland = .857/1
Reykjavik, Iceland = .855/1
Santiago, Chile = .853/1
Montevideo, Uruguay = .850/1
These rankings are from people’s responses to the positive and negative affect scale (PANAS). The 10-item positive affect scale measures how much people describe feeling active, alert, attentive, determined, enthusiastic, excited, inspired, interested, proud and strong on a 5-point scale from 1 = not at all to 5 = very much. South American cities seem to rate relatively high on this scale, with Asuncion in Paraguay winning by quite a bit, Quito in Ecuador landing in the top 5, and Santiago in Chile and Montevideo in Uruguay rounding out the top 10. Central America has two cities in the top 6, with Somalia having the only city from Africa, Laos the only city from Asia, and Ireland and Iceland representing Europe.
Which Cities Report the Fewest Negative Emotions?
The top ten cities with the lowest levels of negative affect:
Taipei, Taiwan = .110/1
Prishtine, Kosovo = 0.132/1
Shanghai, China = 0.140/1
Talinn, Estonia = 0.144/1
Singapore = 0.144/1
Ashgabat, Turkmenistan = 0.144/1
Baku, Azerbaijan = 0.145/1
Wellington, New Zealand = 0.152/1
Almaty, Kazakhstan = 0.158/1
Moscow, Russia = 0.159/1
These rankings are also from people’s responses to the PANAS. The 10-item negative affect scale assesses how much people report feeling afraid, ashamed, distressed, guilty, hostile, irritable, jittery, nervous, scared and upset on a 5-point scale from 1 = not at all to 5 = very much. Unlike many other findings, Asia and Eastern Europe come out on top, with no sign of African or North, Central or South American countries in the top 10. Taiwan, China and Singapore all rank in the top 5, indicating low levels of negatively reported emotions in this region. Unfortunately, low negative affectivity doesn’t result in super high levels of reported happiness or life satisfaction. The only city to rank in the top 10 in any other section is Wellington, New Zealand.
Conclusion
If you want to go where people are most satisfied with their life, Finland is the place to be, as it has been rated the happiest country in the world for three years now. Of course, Helsinki also takes the crown as the city with the highest life satisfaction at present, but other cities in Scandinavia aren’t too far behind.
When you explore the data a little further, it gets a bit more complicated as to where the happiest places in the world are. No Australian city ranks in the top 10 globally for the recent improvement in life satisfaction, optimism about life satisfaction in the future, or levels of positive or negative affectivity. Only one US city (Atlanta for optimism about the future) makes the top ten for any of these categories, and UK countries are nowhere near the top.
Conversely, there are many cities in Africa and Central Asia where well-being has improved quickly over the last 15 years. Their citizens remain excited about the potential for what is yet to come. None more so than Tashkent in Uzbekistan. Central America also has several cities that feel happy and hopeful about their future, especially Panama, Costa Rica and Honduras.
Based on the findings, South America has the most cities that report a lot of positive emotions in the present, and Asia and Eastern Europe win out on minimal negative emotions. Personally, living somewhere with minimally reported negative emotions and a high level of life satisfaction sounds pretty good to me.
Below are the findings from the seventh wave of the World Values Survey. My dad is from the US, and my mum is Australian, so I was curious to see how much I have been influenced by what people value in these countries:
Neither Australia nor the USA is the most traditional or secular of all the countries surveyed. The USA is about as close to the middle as possible, showing a slight preference for Secular Values over Traditional Values (about 0.10 standard deviations above the average). Australia is more secular than both the USA and the world average.
Neither are Australia nor the USA the highest in terms of Self-Expression or Survival Values. The USA is just under 1.5 standard deviations higher than the world average regarding Self-Expression Values. Australia also prefers Self-Expression over Survival Values and is about 2.35 standard deviations above the average, putting them in the top 2.5% of all countries endorsing these values.
Traditional vs. Secular Values
For the Y-axis, more traditional countries value the importance of family, religion and deferring to and being respectful of authority. Therefore, they tend to be more hostile toward divorce, abortion, and euthanasia. Countries that are more secular place less emphasis on traditional family values, religion and authority. Divorce, abortion, and euthanasia are more acceptable than in countries with traditional values.
Australia is approximately 0.55 on the Y-axis. It means that it is half a standard deviation more secular than traditional. Australia is more secular than the UK and many countries in the Middle East, Africa and Latin America. Qatar has the most traditional values, but Ghana, Tanzania, Nicaragua, Ecuador, Trinidad and many others are too.
Australia is more traditional than all Scandinavian countries, some Catholic European countries (especially the Czech Republic), and nearly all Confucian countries. Interestingly, Japan and South Korea are two of the highest-ranked countries globally regarding Secular Values and are less traditional than any country in Europe. I was surprised by this finding, as my Sociology lecturers at university often used Asian countries (including Japan) as exemplars of collectivist cultures. People in collectivist cultures put the goals and needs of the group, including what the authorities and their families say, over their individual needs and desires. Yet, their traditional — secular continuum findings do not indicate that for Confucian countries.
Survival vs. Self-Expression Values
Findings on the X-axis are also significant. For example, countries that endorse Survival Values prioritise physical and economic security over self-expression. As a result, they are less trusting and tolerant of outsiders or people who don’t fit in with what the average person does.
Countries that endorse Self-Expression Values, on the other hand, prioritise environmental protection and want more extensive participation in political and economic life decision-making. They also exhibit greater acceptance of differences and equality for anyone previously discriminated against, whether based on country of origin, sexuality or gender.
People from South Korea endorse Survival Values more than Self-Expression Values (approximately -0.50). Australia’s preference for Self-Expression Values (about 2.35) compared to Asian countries might also help explain why Asian countries were referred to in my Sociology lectures as examples of collectivist cultures. However, other countries, especially Egypt and Zimbabwe in Africa, endorse Security Values more than all Asian countries. Both Vietnam and Japan also show a decent preference for Self-Expression over Security Values. Perhaps my university Sociology professors were influenced by inaccurate stereotypes or did not use the best examples.
Based on their answers to the World Values Survey and their positions on the above map, the average Australian is more likely to be happy, accept homosexuality, sign a petition and trust others than the average Japanese person or individual from the USA. Furthermore, the average American or Japanese person is more likely to endorse these four characteristics than the average Egyptian. However, the average individual from nearly every country is less likely to support Self-Expression Values than the average Swede or Norwegian. These Scandinavian countries are the top two globally, just ahead of Iceland, Denmark and New Zealand.
Which Areas of Life are Most Important?
As a dual citizen of Australia and the USA, I will include each country’s results on the following questions to the countries that most and least endorsed each item as very important. Here are six areas of life that the World Values Survey asks people about in terms of how important they are to them:
1. How important is your family in your life?
The country with the highest percentage of people who endorse family as very important: Egypt = 99.7%
USA = 91.0%
Australia = 90.2%
The country with the lowest percentage of respondents who endorse family as very important: Nicaragua = 77.8%
2. How important are friends in your life?
The country with the highest percentage of people who endorse friends as very important: Serbia = 62.6%
Australia = 52.4%
USA = 50.7%
The country with the lowest percentage of respondents who endorse friends as very important: Myanmar = 11.8%
3. How important is leisure time in your life?
The country with the highest percentage of people who endorse leisure time as very important: Nigeria = 67.5%
Australia = 42.8%
USA = 39.5%
The country with the lowest percentage of respondents who endorse leisure time as very important: Vietnam = 12.8%
4. How important is politics in your life?
The country with the highest percentage of people who endorse politics as very important: Nigeria = 34.8%
USA = 14.9%
Australia = 10.3%
The country with the lowest percentage of respondents who endorse politics as very important: Serbia = 4.4%
5. How important is work in your life?
The country with the highest percentage of people who endorse work as very important: Indonesia = 92.9%
USA = 39.4%
Australia = 33.1%
The country with the lowest percentage of respondents who endorse work as very important: New Zealand = 29.1%
6. How important is religion in your life?
The country with the highest percentage of people who endorse religion as very important: Indonesia = 98.1%
USA = 37.1%
Australia = 13.8%
The country with the lowest percentage of respondents who endorse religion as very important: China = 3.3%
Neither Australia nor the USA is the highest or lowest country regarding endorsing any of the six categories as very important in their life. It’s nice to see that family, friends and leisure time are all considered more important in life in the USA and Australia than work, religion and politics. However, I wonder if everyone lives in line with what values they say are most important to them.
17. “Instead of condemning people, let’s try to understand them. Let’s try to figure out why they do what they do. That’s a lot more profitable and intriguing than criticism; and it breeds sympathy, tolerance and kindness. ‘To know all is to forgive all.’” Dale Carnegie
14. “Though philosophers have traditionally been concerned with the pursuit of happiness, far greater wisdom would seem to lie in pursuing ways to be properly and productively unhappy. The stubborn recurrence of misery means that the development of a workable approach to it must surely outstrip the value of any utopian quest for happiness” — Alain de Botton
6. “The Ultimate Measure Of A Man Is Not Where He Stands In Moments Of Comfort And Convenience, But Where He Stands At Times Of Challenge And Controversy.” — Martin Luther King, Jr.
4. “I’ve missed more than 9000 shots in my career. I’ve lost almost 300 games. Twenty-six times I’ve been trusted to take the game winning shot and missed. I’ve failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed.” — Michael Jordan
3. “Be more concerned with your character than your reputation, because your character is what you really are, while your reputation is merely what others think you are!” — John Wooden
Last weekend I managed to complete my PADI Open Water SCUBA Diver Course:
PADI Temporary Card — Open Water Diver
Name: Damon Ashworth Instructor Number: 305944
This person has satisfactorily met the standards for this certification level as set forth by PADI.
It was a pretty big challenge for me since I don’t really like being on boats and find it scary just swimming out in the middle of the ocean. But, I did it because a close friend asked me if I would be her dive buddy for the course, and I thought there would be no better opportunity than when I am already living in Vanuatu, home to some of the best dive sites in the world.
To get your Open Water Card, you need to pass many theory tests about diving, and you need to complete 24 skills in a pool and then replicate these skills out in the open water across four dives. We saw a shipwreck, some amazing coral and sea life, and even a few small reef sharks during the open water dives.
The scariest part to me was when I was up to 18 metres underwater, knowing that I’d need to stop for 3 minutes at 5 metres on the way up and ascend slowly to avoid decompression sickness. It meant that if I felt a bit anxious or panicky for whatever reason, I couldn’t just get out to the surface straight away and start gasping for air. Instead, I had to remain calm, breathe slowly and steadily using my regulator, put some confidence in my divemaster who was guiding us through the training and focus on whatever was in my control instead of worrying about things that were out of it.
Fortunately, I successfully completed the dives and all the skills. Some moments were pretty cool, especially seeing the wreck and the sea life on the coral reef. In general, though, I didn’t love it and was utterly exhausted and a little bit relieved once I did it.
So how do I know if it was worth it? Should I have bothered challenging myself to do something where I worried I could have died if something went badly wrong?
When Is It Worth Facing Your Fears?
The answer is it depends. It depends on:
What scares you?
How afraid you are (on a scale from 0 = no anxiety at all to 10 = completely overwhelmed and having a panic attack)?
How safe or dangerous is the thing that you fear? and
Will it impact your quality of life if you do not face up to your fear or try to overcome it?
Suppose what you fear has a low risk of actually occurring. The activity is relatively safe even though it feels scary, and not doing it has a significant negative impact on your life. In that case, it is worth trying to challenge yourself and overcome your fears.
For me:
I think the fear of SCUBA diving was dying.
The thought of actually going SCUBA diving increased my anxiety to a 7/10, which is high but not quite at the panic stage.
The 2010 Diver’s Alert Network Workshop Report found that only one-in-211,864 dives end in a fatality. SCUBA diving is riskier than flying in an aeroplane or riding a bike but much less dangerous than driving a car, skydiving, or running a marathon. We’re even more likely to die from walking or falling on stairs than we are from SCUBA diving.
4. If I never went SCUBA diving, I doubt that it would have reduced my quality of life in any way. I did it mainly because I wanted to spend time with my friend, and I wanted to challenge myself to face my fears, as not being able to overcome any fears would have a substantial negative impact on my quality of life.
I am glad to get my PADI Open Water Certificate based on the above information. I’m not too sure if I will ever go again, though. I could enjoy it more and become less anxious about diving over time, and that did happen even across my four open water dives. If I went again, my anxiety might be a five or a six. In reality, though, I think I can enjoy snorkelling just as much without it lowering my quality of life in any way, and I’ll probably do that more than SCUBA diving in the future.
What Are the Most Common Fears?
The top ten most common specific phobias are:
Arachnophobia — fear of spiders
Ophidiophobia — fear of snakes
Acrophobia — fear of heights
Agoraphobia — fear of crowds or open spaces
Cynophobia — fear of dogs
Astraphobia — fear of thunder and lightning
Claustrophobia — fear of small spaces
Mysophobia — fear of germs
Aerophobia — fear of flying
Trypanophobia — fear of injections
Looking at the above common phobias, they all have some basis for why we may become afraid of them. Some spiders and snakes can kill, as can dogs (especially if they have rabies). Planes can crash, and falling from high up can be fatal. People can become trapped and suffocate in a small space or crowds, and lightning strikes have killed people. Germs and bacteria spread disease too. Medical mishaps are the third most significant cause of death in the US, according to the latest figures from the US Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Unfortunately, our brain is not very good at distinguishing dangerous things versus things that feel dangerous but are pretty safe.
How Do We Overcome Fears?
We overcome any fear through the dual process of gradual exposure and cognitive reappraisal after the exposure:
1. We determine what fear it is we would like to master. Preferably, this is something that you are currently avoiding that is negatively impacting your life, such as not going to the doctor or dentist because you are afraid of needles.
2. We develop an exposure hierarchy on this fear. It should have at least five tasks that you want to do ranked from least scary to most scary (scale from 0–10). For Arachnophobia, it may be a 2/10 for looking at pictures of spiders to a 4/10 for watching videos of spiders. Then a 6/10 for looking at spiders in an enclosure to a 10/10 for letting a spider crawl up your arm.
3. We start with the least scary task first and stay in the situation for at least 10 minutes if possible. It should be long enough for the anxiety to peak and then reduce substantially during the exposure exercise. A psychologist can teach specific behavioural and thinking skills to help lower stress levels during exposure.
4. We reflect on the exposure experience afterwards and try to change our previously held beliefs about what we fear. It is called cognitive reappraisal and is done by asking ourselves, “how did it go?” “was it as bad as I thought it would be?” and “how would I approach a similar situation in the future?”
5. Once we are comfortable with that level of the exposure hierarchy, we repeat steps three and four with the next task on the exposure hierarchy. Then, once we become comfortable with the next step, we take each step until we are successful with all tasks on the hierarchy. By the end, you have overcome or mastered the fear.
What if What I Fear is Dangerous?
If you have Ophidiophobia and live in Australia, you’re probably not going to want to befriend a snake that you run into out in the bush. Australia is home to 21 out of the 25 most deadly snakes globally. If you want to overcome this fear, you might want to learn instead how to distinguish between poisonous and non-poisonous snakes and get more comfortable only with deadly ones from behind solid glass panels at your local zoo. Or you could visit someone who owned a harmless pet snake so that you could get used to being around it and touching it and realising that you are safe.
If you’re afraid of heights, I wouldn’t suggest being like Alex Honnold and trying to free climb El Capitan in Yosemite. However, testing ‘The Edge’ experience at the Eureka tower in Melbourne or even riding ‘The Giant Drop’ on the Gold Coast might be a pretty safe way to challenge your fears.
Facts can really help some people challenge their beliefs about their fears, but nothing beats putting ourselves in a feared situation first and then challenging our beliefs afterwards.
For me, knowing that only 12 out of the 35,000 different varieties of spiders are harmful to humans makes me not worry every time I see a little one unless it is a whitetail or a redback spider.
It helps to know that flying is one of the safest forms of travel, with a one-in-12 million chance of crashing. Likewise, although I don’t try to stand in an open field with a metal pole during a storm, it does help to know that being killed by lightning is nearly as rare, with a one-in-10.5 million chance.
Even though I’m not particularly eager to watch it pierce my skin, needles don’t hurt nearly as much as I used to imagine, and the pain goes away almost immediately after the injection. Bacteria is everywhere, so I couldn’t avoid germs entirely even if I tried.
If I ever feel a bit trapped or panicky the next time I dive, it will help to remind myself that I have done it before. I have my open water certificate and the skills from this, and what I’m doing is pretty safe as long as I don’t panic and follow my training.
Just because we are afraid of something, it doesn’t mean we have to avoid it for the rest of our lives. But we don’t have to face our fears every time either, especially if it is not harming our quality of life. So if you determine it would be good to challenge yourself and try to overcome a fear, I hope the steps outlined above help, and I’d love to hear about any success stories in the comments.
I used to lie a lot growing up. Not quite as bad as Holden Caulfield in ‘The Catcher in the Rye’:
“I’m the most terrific liar you ever saw in your life. It’s awful. If I’m on my way to the store to buy a magazine, even, and somebody asks me where I’m going, I’m liable to say I’m going to the opera. It’s terrible.” ― J.D. Salinger, The Catcher in the Rye
I remember lying to my mum about cleaning my room to go outside to play. So instead, I would push all the mess under the bed or throw it in the wardrobe.
I remember lying about doing my homework so that I didn’t have to do it and could play video games. I would then lie about being sick the next day to finish the assignment I needed to do the night before.
I remember lying about how many points I scored in basketball to friends or how many alcoholic drinks I had to my parents whenever they picked me up from a high school party.
I even remember lying to my brother’s friend about my surfing skills (I didn’t have any) and to a classmate about how many languages I spoke (I can say maybe 30 words in Indonesian, Spanish, and Italian, but not much more).
I think back to these moments, and I’m not proud of saying these things, but I can also understand why I did it.
I wish I could have been a less lazy, more confident and self-assured kid who was always honest with his friends and strangers and did the right thing by his parents and teachers. But how realistic is that scenario, and is it even ideal?
“The truth is always an insult or a joke. Lies are generally tastier. We love them. The nature of lies is to please. Truth has no concern for anyone’s comfort.” ― Katherine Dunn, Geek Love
Why Do People Lie?
We lie to:
fit in and pretend we are like others
stand out and pretend we are different to or better than others
seek approval from others
be seen as more loveable/desirable/acceptable
feel better about ourselves
avoid getting into trouble
protect other people’s feelings or avoid hurting them
be polite
avoid feeling hurt, sad, disappointed, guilty or ashamed
keep a secret
maintain confidentiality
be consistent with societal norms
“I’m not upset that you lied to me, I’m upset that from now on I can’t believe you.” ― Friedrich Nietzsche
What Happens if We Are 100% Honest?
Jim Carrey plays the main character in the 1997 comedy ‘Liar Liar’. He’s a high flying lawyer who keeps disappointing his son Max by making promises to him that he doesn’t keep by putting work first. Finally, after his dad doesn’t turn up to his birthday celebration, Max wishes for his dad not to be able to tell a lie, and the magic of movies makes this wish come true.
What results is some hilarious situations in which Jim Carrey’s character gets himself into trouble for telling the whole truth when it would be more polite to lie. It includes telling his secretary why he didn’t give her a pay rise, telling his boss that he has had better than her, and confessing to everyone in a crowded elevator that he was the one who did the smelly fart.
The moral of the story was two-fold:
Sometimes it is necessary to lie, or at least not always be brutally honest and say everything that comes to your mind, and
By being tactful and as honest as possible, you may become a better person who upsets people less and has more authentic relationships.
“One lie has the power to tarnish a thousand truths.“ ― Al David
Radical Honesty
In 2007, A.J. Jacobs wrote an article for Esquire magazine about a month-long experiment on a movement called Radical Honesty. It was titled ‘I Think You’re Fat’ and is worth reading. Much more than the 1995 book called ‘Radical Honesty’ by Brad Blanton that initially inspired the article:
Blanton had worked as a psychotherapist for 35 years in Washington D.C. and ran 8-day workshops on Radical Honesty that retailed for $2,800 back in 2007. Blanton says his method works, although he may distort some of the positive benefits for personal and financial gain. He’s been married five times and claims to have slept with more than 500 women and six men, including a “whole bunch of threesomes.” He also admits to lying sometimes.
“She looks honestly upset, but then, I’ve learned that I can’t read her. The problem with a really excellent liar is that you have to just assume they’re always lying.“ ― Holly Black, Black Heart
I Think You’re Fat
In Jacobs article, he wasn’t overly optimistic about Blanton’s version of Radical Honesty either. If we didn’t have a filter between what we say and what we notice in the world, in our body and our thoughts like Blanton advocates, the results would probably be less funny and more consequential than what happened to Jim Carrey in ‘Liar Liar’. He declares:
“Without lies, marriages would crumble, workers would be fired, egos would be shattered, governments would collapse.” — A.J. Jacobs
Jacobs found it impossible not to tell a lie during his month-long experiment but did cut down his lying by at least 40%. But unfortunately, he also scared a five-year-old girl, offended numerous people, and spoke about sex and attraction to the point where he felt creepy.
On the positive, being radically honest did save Jacobs time, resulting in him having to talk less to the people he didn’t want to talk to and do less of the things he didn’t want to do. In addition, it saved him mental energy by not having to choose how much he would lie or massage the truth. It also meant that people were usually more honest with him in return, and he found out that his relationships could withstand more truth-telling than he expected. So, similar to the ‘Liar Liar’ take-away message, Jacobs concluded:
Being radically honest all the time and never having a filter is likely to be inappropriate in many settings and lead to more confrontations with others, and
We could probably benefit by being more authentic, honest and truthful with others, especially in intimate relationships, as secrets tend to weigh us down.
“There is beauty in truth, even if it’s painful. Those who lie, twist life so that it looks tasty to the lazy, brilliant to the ignorant, and powerful to the weak. But lies only strengthen our defects. They don’t teach anything, help anything, fix anything or cure anything. Nor do they develop one’s character, one’s mind, one’s heart or one’s soul.” ― José N. Harris
What is a Lie?
In his interesting small book ‘Lying’, Sam Harris defines a lie as:
“Anything that is done to intentionally mislead others when they expect honest communication.” — Sam Harris
Omission vs Commission
In ‘Lying’, Sam Harris distinguishes between lies of commission, where the person is active in their intent to deceive, and the more passive act of omission, where the person fails to do something or say something they probably should. Both are deceptive and misleading to the audience who is the target of the action or lack of action.
Harris believes that lies of commission are a more serious violation of ethics and likely to be more harmful. It is similar to how pushing someone in front of a train is a more serious ethical violation than not saving someone who was hit by a train when you had a chance to do so.
Harris argues for people to stop all forms of commission and says that we can enhance our world, build trust and improve relationships by always being honest in our communication. While he believes that omission is also lying, he does not think that we can or should eliminate all forms of omission. Instead, he says that “skilful truth-telling” is sometimes required to be both honest and tactful in our words and avoid causing unnecessary harm.
Let’s look at the following three examples to see the difference between radical honesty, lying and skilful truth-telling.
SCENARIO ONE: Your husband asks if he looks fat in an outfit that you honestly believe isn’t flattering for him. You could say:
A) “Yeah. You do look fat. I’d say about 10 pounds overweight. Maybe you should skip dessert for a while.”
B) “Not at all, sweety. You look amazing!”
C) “You look nice, but I think I prefer the black jumper and blue jeans I bought you a few weeks ago. Want to try that one and see which one you feel better in?“
SCENARIO TWO: Your sister and her family are in town for the week and have decided to stay at your place for the whole time because they want to save money. You don’t dislike them, but you’d prefer to be catching up on your work that you are behind on. On night four, she notices you are a little tense and asks if you mind them staying there. You could say:
A) “I do. I wish you weren’t so tight and could have paid for a hotel if you planned to stay more than three nights. A week is pushing it, and I’d prefer you left.”
B) “Mind? Are you kidding? I love it. The more, the merrier, I always say! Stay for as long as you’d like.”
C) “It’s a busy week for me in terms of work, so it wasn’t ideal timing for me. If I seem a bit tense, I’m sorry. I do want to be able to help you guys out because family means a lot to me.“
SCENARIO THREE: You’ve been unemployed for six months and get a job interview to wait tables at a restaurant in town. You’d ideally prefer an acting job. The restaurant boss asks what your career plans are, as they want to hire someone who will stick around. You could say:
A) “Well, acting has always been my passion, so this is just a stop-gap job to pay the bills and put food on the table. I couldn’t care less about the job or your restaurant. I want a regular paycheck so that I can pay my rent and bills until I get a real job.”
B) “I’d love to become a professional waiter. I’ve always thought that providing great service to people is my calling in life, and I plan to stick around for at least five years and show everyone just how amazing your restaurant is. So I’m in it for the long haul.”
C)“I’m not too sure about what will happen with my career, but at this stage, I’d like to be able to work here. I am available seven days a week and will put in 100% effort whenever I am on shift. I am also willing to learn whatever skills are required, and I can promise that I will give you as much notice as possible if my plans ever do change in the future.“
In each scenario, A is the radically honest response, B is the active lying or commission response, and C is the skilful truth-telling response. Some truths are unsaid in the C responses, which is technically a lie of omission.
Many people still believe that omissions are a big no-no:
“When truth is replaced by silence, the silence is a lie.” ― Yevgeny Yevtushenko
“A lie that is half-truth is the darkest of all lies.” ― Alfred Tennyson
“At times to be silent is to lie. You will win because you have enough brute force. But you will not convince. For to convince you need to persuade. And in order to persuade you would need what you lack: Reason and Right.” ― Miguel de Unamuno
“People think that a liar gains a victory over his victim. What I’ve learned is that a lie is an act of self-abdication, because one surrenders one’s reality to the person to whom one lies, making that person one’s master, condemning oneself from then on to faking the sort of reality that person’s view requires to be faked…The man who lies to the world, is the world’s slave from then on…There are no white lies, there is only the blackest of destruction, and a white lie is the blackest of all.” ― Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
Is it Ever Helpful to Lie to Ourselves?
The short answer is yes. It is psychologically healthier to be slightly optimistic rather than entirely realistic. Research indicates that people with depression are often more realistic in their appraisals of situations and other people’s judgments than people without depression. Most “healthy people” believe that they are better drivers, more intelligent, better workers, better parents, and better lovers compared to the average person.
People lie to themselves because they like to feel that they are important and maybe more unique or special than they are. To prove this point, how would you feel if someone told you that you were just “average”? People also like to see themselves as good people who behave in particular ways for sound reasons. Even people that consistently cause harm to themselves or others.
Anyone with an unhealthy addiction becomes an expert at lying to themselves and others. This secrecy and dishonesty only further fuel the sense of depression, shame and guilt that people with addiction feel. As long as they are in touch with the truth of the situation and the consequences of their actions. Most addicts are not, however, thanks to in-built defence mechanisms.
Defence mechanisms are mostly subconscious or unconscious methods that we engage in to protect our ego or positive sense of self. Some of the more famous ones are denial, humour, repression, suppression, rationalisation, intellectualisation, projection, displacement and regression. My personal favourite is reaction formation (click here for a full description of these defence mechanisms and how to identify yours). Most people will deny engaging in defence mechanisms if you ask them directly about it, but they’ll tell you that others do. The reality is we all lie to ourselves at times, and maybe we need to lie to maintain a “healthy” outlook on ourselves, others, the world and our future.
“The visionary lies to himself, the liar only to others.” ― Friedrich Nietzsche
“I lie to myself all the time. But I never believe me.” ― S.E. Hinton, The Outsiders
“The best lies about me are the ones I told.” ― Patrick Rothfuss, The Name of the Wind
“Anybody who says they are a good liar obviously is not, because any legitimately savvy liar would always insist they’re honest about everything.” ― Chuck Klosterman
So What Can We Do?
The most accurate recommendations that I could find on lying were also some of the simplest:
“If you don’t want to slip up tomorrow, speak the truth today.”
― Bruce Lee
“If you tell the truth, you don’t have to remember anything.“
Mark Twain
I agree with Sam Harris that it is a worthwhile aim to never be actively dishonest. Furthermore, this approach is consistent with one of Jordan Peterson’s better rules from his ’12 Rules for Life’ book — Rule #8: “Tell the truth — or, at least, don’t lie“
The philosopher Robin Devenport wouldn’t agree with either Harris or Peterson. He states:
“it is impossible for anyone to be truly honest about many things, as long as he (or she) carries biased perspectives, hidden resentments, unresolved longings, unacknowledged insecurities, or a skewed view of self, to name just some inner human conditions… if absolute honesty is impossible, then we are all liars by nature, at least to a degree.”
Dan Ariely concludes in his excellent book ‘The Honest Truth about Dishonesty’ that we all tend to lie to everyone, especially ourselves. We lie only as much as we know we can get away with, but not so much that it becomes hard to keep seeing ourselves as good people.
Devenport continues:
“Perhaps the best we can do, then, is only to lie in ways that are intended to promote another’s well-being or spare her unnecessary pain, and so further our integrity. The ‘noble liar’ is someone who tries to live by good intentions, even if that means intentionally lying to another person, if doing so is the lesser of two evils…Before we cast too harsh a judgment on the liar, let’s first understand what his motives are.”
Robin Devenport
We all need to be as honest as we can, especially with those we love and make sure that it is for a good reason when we lie. We also need to realise that it will never be possible to be 100% honest about everything to anyone,including ourselves, and that is okay. Other people won’t be 100% honest with you or themselves either, which doesn’t make them bad people. It’s what we lie about and why that matters.
With the development of the internet, dating websites, social media, smartphones and dating apps, it is now easier than ever for someone to cheat on their partner or spouse.
This same technology can also make it easier to get caught due to the potential digital trail created by these unscrupulous liaisons.
The Ashley Maddison hack and the scandal were examples of technology helping people have extramarital affairs and leading to them getting caught. The hackers tried to blackmail the company and many users and then released all their details in a massive data leak when users did not meet their demands. As a result, families broke up; and the scandal ruined reputations and even lives in the aftermath.
The consequences of infidelity continue to have a devastating impact on individuals, partners, children and society. Yet, it remains a prevalent issue in every country and culture. Maybe even more so today with the advent of technology.
Given the massive changes that we have gone through in the past 30 years, I am interested in finding out the prevalence rates of cheating, if our attitudes towards infidelity have changed, and if there is anything that we can do about it.
What is Cheating?
The definition of cheating depends on who you talk to and their expectations for their relationship. The stereotype is that males tend to perceive cheating as exclusive to physical encounters or actions. In contrast, females also see emotional infidelity as cheating. Emotional cheating is sharing something with someone you wouldn’t say to your partner. Many people also believe that relationships that exist purely over the internet or phone are also cheating, especially if you share explicit words, photos, or sexual acts on these devices.
Weeks, Gambescia and Jenkins (2003) define infidelity as a violation of emotional or sexual exclusivity. The boundaries of exclusivity are different in each couple, and sometimes these boundaries are explicitly stated, but they are usually merely assumed. Because each partner can have different assumed limits, it is difficult for all exclusivity expectations to be met (Barta & Kiene, 2005).
Leeker and Carlozzi (2012) believe that when someone has a subjective feeling that their partner has violated the rules around infidelity, sexual jealousy and rivalry naturally arise. If an act of adultery has occurred, the consequence is often psychological damage, including feelings of betrayal and anger, impaired self-image for the person cheated on, and a loss of personal and sexual confidence (Leeker & Carlozzi, 2012).
Prevalence of Infidelity
Most of the research presented in this post comes from the surprising and entertaining book ‘Modern Romance’ by Aziz Anzari (the actor and comedian) and Eric Klinenberg (a Sociologist).
Unfortunately, people who are suspicious of infidelity sometimes have a reason to be. More than half of all men (60%) and women (53%) confess to having tried to mate-poach before. Mate-poaching means that they attempted to seduce a person out of a committed relationship to be with them instead. I can’t believe that these figures are so high.
I also can’t believe that in “committed relationships”, where the partners are not married to each other, the incidence rate of cheating is as high as 70%.
It gets a little bit better for married couples, with only 2–4% of married individuals admitting to having an extramarital affair over the past year in the USA. However, this increases to 30% of heterosexual men and 25% of heterosexual women who will have at least one extramarital affair at some point during their marriage. It’s scary to think that nearly one-third of all married individuals have affairs. However, it’s good to know that two-thirds of all married people stay faithful to their spouse.
Attitudes Towards Extramarital Affairs
In ‘Modern Romance’, an international study examines people’s views on extramarital affairs across 40 countries.
84% of people strongly agreed that cheating was “morally unacceptable” in the USA. In Australia, 79% view extramarital affairs as morally unacceptable. Canada, the UK, South America and African countries all have similar rates of cheating disapproval as Australia. Areas with the highest disapproval rates are typically Islamic countries, with 93% of those surveyed in Turkey stating that marital infidelity is morally unacceptable, second only to Palestinian territories with 94%.
France is the most tolerant country for extramarital affairs, with only 47% saying that cheating is unacceptable. Unsurprisingly, they also happen to be the country with the most extramarital affairs. The latest data indicates that 55% of men and 32% of French married women admit to having committed infidelity on their spouse at least once. The second most tolerant nation is Germany, with 60% finding extramarital affairs morally unacceptable. Italy and Spain are equal third, with 64% each.
Expectations vs Reality
When you compare the level of disapproval towards infidelity with the data on the actual prevalence of extramarital affairs, the numbers don’t quite add up. Furthermore, many people who cheat themselves still condemn the practice and would not be okay with being cheated on themselves.
A Gallup poll on cheating found that disapproval of infidelity is higher than animal cloning, suicide and even polygamy. Although it is against the law, being married to two people is seen as less offensive than being married to one and breaching the honesty, trust and connection that you share with your partner.
People also differ between their beliefs and practices regarding whether or not to confess infidelity.
A Match.com US survey found that 80% of men and 76% of women would prefer their partner to “confess their mistake… and suffer the consequences” rather than “take their secret to the grave”. However, the excuse given by most people who have cheated and haven’t told their partner is that they didn’t want to hurt their partner. Interestingly, they only worry about their actions’ impact on their partner after the unfaithful act has already occurred and not beforehand.
Unfortunately, most people try to keep their affairs to themselves and make excuses for their behaviour while demanding at the same time that their partners own up to their indiscretions if they stray. If their partner does own up, they are likely to treat them harshly for it, because, after all, cheating is considered morally unacceptable by most.
Why Do People Cheat?
Dr Selterman from the University of Maryland looked into why 562 adults cheated while in a “committed” romantic relationship. He found eight main reasons given for why the infidelity occurred:
Anger: seeking revenge following a perceived betrayal
Lack of love: falling “out of love” with a partner, or not enough passion or interest in the partner anymore
Neglect: not receiving enough attention, respect or love (#1 reason for women)
Esteem: seeking to boost one’s sense of self-worth by being desired by or having sex with multiple partners
Sexual desire: not wanting sex with their partner or wanting to have sex more with others (a common reason for men)
Low commitment: Not clearly defining the relationship as exclusive or not wanting a future with their partner or anything too serious
Variety: Want to have more sexual partners or experiences in their lifetime (a common reason for men)
Situation: Being in an unusual scenario, such as under high stress, under the influence of alcohol or a substance, or on vacation or a working holiday (a common reason for men)
Interestingly, these factors suggest that infidelity doesn’t always reflect how happy or healthy a relationship is. Instead, it says more about the person who commits adultery and their personality rather than anything else.
Ways to Reduce the Likelihood of Infidelity
In ‘Modern Romance’, the authors explain that passionate love inevitably fades within every relationship. A loss of passionate love could lead to infidelity if people don’t realise that this may indicate how long they have been together, not an issue with their relationship.
Companionate love, or that sense of building a life and a legacy with a partner, is different to passionate love. It can continue to grow across a relationship and a lifetime rather than decline with time. Couples in their 60s and 70s often rate their relationship satisfaction as much better than when they were younger and trying to raise children together and work full-time.
One way to reduce the likelihood of committing infidelity is to build companionate love and a shared life and legacy together, rather than equating real love with passion.
In his classic book ‘On Love’, philosopher Alain de Botton said that:
“Perhaps the easiest people to fall in love with are those about whom we know nothing…we fall in love because we long to escape from ourselves with someone as beautiful, intelligent and witty as we are ugly, stupid and dull.”
Alain de Botton
It’s much easier to idealise or become infatuated with someone you don’t know well. Because you can imagine that they are perfect or have none of the flaws that your current partner (or you) possess.
The quickest cure for infatuation is to get to know the person a bit more (without breaching the infidelity norms of your relationship) and realise that they are just as flawed as the rest of us. Once you understand this, leaving one flawed relationship for another and having to start all over again carries much less appeal.
In another of his excellent books, ‘The Course of Love’, de Botton states:
“When we run up against the reasonable limits of our lovers’ capacity for understanding, we musn’t blame them for dereliction. They were not tragically inept. They couldn’t fully fathom who we were — and we could do no better. No one properly gets, or can fully sympathize with anyone else… there cannot be better options out there. Everyone is always impossible.”
Alain de Botton
de Botton is not saying that we shouldn’t leave abusive and neglectful partners. He means that we need to avoid imagining that there is “a lover (out there) who will anticipate (all) our needs, read our hearts, act selflessly and (always) make everything better. (This) is a blueprint for disaster.” No one is perfect. Try to be grateful for what you have with your current relationship. Trying to make your current relationship as good as possible is much healthier than imagining that “the one” could be around the corner.
We still have the issue of love and sexual desire typically being separated in our society. Esther Perel, couples therapist and author, points this out better than anyone in her groundbreaking book ‘Mating in Captivity: Reconciling the Erotic and the Domestic’:
“Today, we turn to one person to provide what an entire village once did: a sense of grounding, meaning, and continuity. At the same time, we expect our committed relationships to be romantic as well as emotionally and sexually fulfilling… our need for togetherness exists alongside our need for separateness… (but) it’s hard to feel attracted to someone who has abandoned (their) sense of autonomy… Is it any wonder that so many relationships crumble under the weight of it all?”
Esther Perel
A way to keep the spark of desire alive is to ensure that even though you do many things with your partner, you must also do some things individually.
Perel also agrees that both love and desire can be maintained or grown over time with effort and a specific way of looking at things:
“For [erotically intelligent couples], love is a vessel that contains both security and adventure, and commitment offers one of the great luxuries of life: time. Marriage is not the end of romance, it is the beginning. They know that they have years in which to deepen their connection, to experiment, to regress, and even to fail. They see their relationship as something alive and ongoing, not a fait accompli. It’s a story that they are writing together, one with many chapters, and neither partner knows how it will end. There’s always a place they haven’t gone yet, always something about the other still to be discovered.”
Esther Perel
What About If Infidelity Has Already Occurred?
If cheating has already taken place, many people say that too much pain has occurred, trust has been breached and broken, and leaving is the best thing to do. However, breaking up may not be the most straightforward, practical, or best solution in other cases. For individuals in these cases, I would recommend reading Perel’s more recent book ‘The State of Affairs: Rethinking Infidelity’.
In this book, Perel says that:
“Once divorce carried all the stigma. Now, choosing to stay when you can leave is the new shame.”
Perel warns against only judging the cheating, as this closes all further conversation about what happened and why. It also makes it hard to know where to go from there. Instead, Perel believes that it is much better to see an affair as a symptom of a troubled relationship or a troubled person.
If the person is troubled, and they are remorseful for what they have done and willing to try to make amends and not cheat again, they must get help to address whatever issue led to the infidelity in the first place. But, on the other hand, be wary if they are unwilling to get help and work on themselves but merely say it won’t happen again.
If it is the relationship that was in trouble, relationship counselling may help too. Perel says that:
“Infidelity hurts. But when we grant it a special status in the hierarchy of marital misdemeanors, we risk allowing it to overshadow the egregious behaviors that may have preceded it or even led to it.”
If both people in a relationship can take ownership of the behaviours they engaged in that caused pain and hurt to the other and are willing to start again to build a stronger relationship, they can have a healthy relationship in the future. It’s just never going to be the same as things were before the infidelity took place.
My Personal Opinion
Monogamy is sometimes challenging, but it is a choice. So is continuing to work at having a healthy relationship. We may not always have complete control over what we initially think or feel, but we do have the capacity to consider things properly before acting.
Relationship researcher John Gottman found that couples who turn towards each other when there is an issue in their life are much more likely to stay together. Couples who turn away from each other or turn against each other when fighting are more likely to break up.
One study found that newlyweds who remained married six years later turned towards each other 86% of the time when issues arose. Newlyweds who were divorced six years later only turned towards each other 33% of the time. Turning towards your partner when a problem occurs is the key to a close and connected relationship and is much less likely to result in infidelity or breaking up.
For me, it comes down to personal values. I want to have a close and connected relationship with openness, honesty, and trust. I don’t want to feel like I have to hide anything, and I don’t want to do anything that I am not personally okay with or that I know would hurt those I care about the most.
Anything that we hide from our partners tends to lead to greater distance and a feeling of disconnection. Especially with stuff we feel ashamed of or know is dishonest or disrespectful. Our body language, micro-expressions and tone of voice also tend to reveal how we genuinely feel over time if we hide something, even if we wouldn’t like to admit it.
Existential philosophers believe that our biggest challenge in life is to come face-to-face with the true nature of who we are. Over time, our actions rather than our intentions become our character or who we are. I aim to be the best partner and person that I can be and learn from any mistakes that I make along the way so that I hopefully never repeat them. What about you?
One of the least surprising findings by now for me when looking through the latest World Happiness Report (2024) is how high the life satisfaction scores tend to be in the Nordic countries. Norway is the 7th happiest country in the latest findings assessing life satisfaction from 2021 to 2023. Sweden is 4th, Iceland is 3rd, Denmark is 2nd and Finland is still on top in 1st.
By asking people all across the world the Cantril scale, it can be possible to compare how satisfied people are with their life in comparison to what they would consider the best life for themselves. The question is as follows:
Imagine a ladder where the highest rung is a 10 and represents the best possible life for you, and the lowest rung is a 1 and represents the worst possible life for you. Where would you put your current life satisfaction?
Since the first World Happiness Report in 2006, there have been some countries that have much lower life satisfaction scores, some that have barely changed, and others that have higher life satisfaction scores on average.
Seven countries now have a life satisfaction score that is more than one rung lower on the ladder in 2021-2023 than it was in 2006-2010. These are:
Botswana = -1.20 rungs
Zambia = -1.20
Malawi = -1.20
Venezuela = -1.32
Jordan = -1.52
Lebanon = -2.32
Afghanistan = -2.60
Seventeen countries have a life satisfaction score that is one rung higher or more on the ladder in 2021-2023 than it was in 2006-2010. The top 10 are:
Serbia = +1.85 rungs higher
Bulgaria = +1.57
Latvia = +1.47
Congo (Brazzaville) = +1.40
Romania = +1.31
China = +1.29
Georgia = +1.29
Lithuania = +1.23
Phillipines = +1.22
Togo = +1.21
Out of the 134 countries that have had their life satisfaction tracked since 2006, 79 countries (58.96%) have improved their average score, and 55 countries (41.04%) now have a lower score in 2021-2023 than what they used to in 2006-2010. So even though life satisfaction scores have lowered in the USA, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and parts of Western Europe, there are still more countries worldwide that believe their lives have been getting better for them and not worse over the last 18 years.
When we look at youth below 30, both the USA and Canada say that their life satisfaction has dropped by more than a full rung on the ladder in 2021-2023 in comparison to what it was in 2006-2010. Canada has seen the fifth largest drop in life satisfaction for people below 30, and the USA has seen the seventh largest drop.
The youth in Eastern Europe are much more hopeful, with six out of the top seven largest improvements in reported life satisfaction occurring in Serbia, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Georgia, North Macedonia and Latvia, all improving by between 1.39 and 2.42 rungs on the ladder between 2006-2010 and 2021-2023.
Congo and Togo saw the largest improvements in life satisfaction for people under 30 in Africa and were the third and the eighth biggest improvers worldwide. Armenia and Mongolia saw the largest improvements in life satisfaction for people under 30 in Asia and saw the 9th and 11th biggest jump for youth worldwide.
Depending on which factors are most important to you, it may be that the best country for you to live in is different from what may be best for the average person. Interestingly, when people move to a new country, they are impacted by how things are in the country that they move to more than they realise.
Just because some things are getting more challenging, especially in some parts of the world, and especially for some people, it doesn’t mean that everything is getting worse for everyone. If anything, things have been improving for more people over the last 18 years worldwide than worsening.
In Nordic countries, life satisfaction continues to be high even though it may not be improving overall. And in other countries, especially several in Eastern Europe, things are getting a lot better than what they used to be and there is hope that things will continue to improve going forward.
I hope that you find some of these findings as fascinating as I do.
In 2018, the American Psychiatric Association identified what they considered to be the three primary goals of parenting:
“1. Ensuring children’s health and safety
2. Preparing children for life as productive adults, and
3. Transmitting cultural values”
Many environmental and biological factors influence a parent’s and a child’s capacity to reach these ambitious goals. However, there are still a few simple changes in how we try to parent our children and manage emotions in ourselves and those closest to us that can make a significant difference.
Parenting Styles
In 1971, Baumrind identified and developed three main parenting styles. These parenting styles include parents’ attitudes and values about parenting, their beliefs about the nature of children, and the specific strategies they use to help socialise their child.
The parenting styles are known as:
1. Authoritative
Includes being warm and involved in the child’s day-to-day life, helping the child with reasoning and inductive thought processes and reflective practices, democratic participation, letting the child have a say in what goes on, and being good-natured and generally easy-going with the child.
2. Authoritarian
Includes being verbally hostile towards the child, using corporal punishment, not reasoning things through with the child, using punitive control strategies or excessively harsh penalties, and being directive towards the child rather than discussing things with them.
3. Permissive
Includes high levels of warmth, but a relaxed and non-consistent discipline style, with minimal rules, expectations and guidance. It consists of a lack of follow-through on consequences, ignoring misbehaviour and boosting self-confidence rather than disciplining the child.
The graph above highlights a fourth style known as uninvolved (Maccoby & Martin, 1983), including very little control or strictness and very little parental warmth.
Subsequent reviews by Baumrind in 1989 and 1991 found a clear winner for parents who employed an authoritative parenting style over an authoritarian or a permissive parenting style, especially once children reach higher.
An authoritative parenting style leads to the more significant development of child competence, including better maturity, assertiveness, responsible independence, self-control, better co-operation with peers and adults, and academic success (Baumrind, 1989; 1991). In addition, children of authoritative parenting also exhibit higher levels of moral conscience and prosocial behaviours (Krevans & Gibbs, 1996).
Other research has found that non-authoritative parenting styles can lead to a higher risk of depression, anxiety, ADHD and conduct or behavioural problems (Akhter et al., 2011). For example, authoritarian parenting can lead to antisocial aggression, hostility and rebelliousness (Baumrind, 1991), and anxiety (Chorpita & Barlow, 1998).
Indulging children too much and not setting appropriate boundaries can reduce the child’s academic performance and social competence (Chen et al., 2000). Permissive parenting can also lead to low self-control and impulsive, bossy or dependent behaviour in children (Baumrind, 1967).
Uninvolved parenting leads to a greater risk of behavioural problems and depression (Downey & Coyne, 1990).
The chart below clearly highlights the consequences of each style of parenting:
If you want to develop a more authoritative parenting style, be warned that it is the most time-consuming and energy-demanding of all the methods (Greenberger & Goldberg, 1989). However, try to see if any of the following strategies work for you:
“Learn the names of your children’s friends.
Ask about your child’s problems or concerns at school and communicate with their teachers about any issues that they may be having.
Encourage the child to talk about their troubles.
Give praise and acknowledgment when the child does something positive.
Tell your child that you appreciate what they try or accomplish.
Give emotional comfort and understanding when the child is upset.
Respond to the child’s feelings and emotional needs.
Show sympathy or empathy when the child is hurt or frustrated.
Express affection by hugging, kissing or holding your child when it is appropriate to do so.
Explain the consequences of your child’s behaviour.
Give your child the reasons for the rules you have.
Emphasise why they must follow the rules.
Help them understand the impact of their behaviour by encouraging them to talk about the consequences of their actions.
Explain how you feel about your child’s good and bad behaviour.
Take into account your child’s preferences when making family plans.
Allow your child to give input into family rules.
Take your child’s desires into account before asking them to do something.
Joke and play with your child.
Show patience with your child.
Try to be easy-going and relaxed around your child.”
The Relationship Cure
There isn’t an author out there who has conducted more in-depth and scientific research on interpersonal relationships than John Gottman. ‘The Relationship Cure: A Five-Step Guide to Strengthening Your Marriage, Family, and Friendships’ is his 2002 book that offers a 5-step guide to improving the quality of your relationship with your partner or children.
The five steps to improve your relationships are:
1. Look at Your Bids for Connection
We need to analyse how we bid for connections with others and respond to others bids.
A bid is simply any form of expression, whether a verbal question, a visual look, or a physical gesture or touch that says, “I want to connect with you!”
A response to a bid can be either an encouraging sign that shows that you also want to connect by turning towards them or a discouraging sign that indicates that you do not wish to connect through turning away from them or turning against them.
Over time, turning towards responses lead to even more bidding and responding and a stronger, closer relationship. But, conversely, both turning away and turning against reactions leads to less bidding, hurt or suppressed feelings, and the breakdown of the connection you share in the long-term.
2. Discover Your Brain’s Emotional Command Systems
There are seven main areas in which people differ, influencing relationship needs. Once you have discovered if you and your family members are low, moderate or high on each system, it becomes easier to see how it affects the bidding process in the relationship.
The systems are the following:
Commander-in-chief (dominance and control)
Explorer (exploration and discovery)
Sensualist (sensual gratification, pleasure)
Energy Czar (regulates the need for energy, rest, relaxation)
Jester (play, fun)
Sentry (safety, vigilance)
Nest-builder (affiliation, bonding, attachment)
3. Examine Your Emotional Heritage
People typically develop one of four emotional philosophy styles. These styles are learnt during childhood and can affect your method of bidding and your ability to connect with others.
The four emotional styles are:
Emotion-dismissing (“You’ll get over it!“) = less bidding and turning away
Emotion-disapproving (“Don’t feel that way!“) = less bidding and turning against
Laissez-faire (“I understand how you feel.“) = bidding may or may not increase
Emotion-coaching (“I understand. Let’s figure out how we can help you.“) = more bidding, turning toward, with the bonus of guidance being offered for how to cope.
Families that create emotion-coaching environments give their children a higher chance of having more successful and loving relationships with their parents, siblings and friends. They also tend to get along better with their co-workers and romantic partners when they are older.
4. Sharpen Your Emotional Communication Skills
By learning effective communication skills, we are more likely to say what we mean and feel without the other person becoming defensive. As a result, it can increase our chances of positive changes occurring and improve relationship satisfaction.
The four steps of effective communication are as follows:
D — Describe the situation, and stick to facts, not judgments
(e.g., ”When you don’t clean up your room”, not “When you are disrespectful and don’t care about your things!”).
E — Explain how you feel
(Emotions — e.g., “I feel hurt and upset!”. Not opinions — e.g., “I feel like you don’t care about me or the house rules!”)
A — Ask for what you need or would prefer
(Behaviours — e.g., “I would prefer that you follow the rules we have established and clean up your room before going outside to play with friends”. Not feelings — e.g., “I would prefer if you actually cared about this family and your things like you say you do”).
R — Reinforce the potential benefits to them, you and the relationship if they could do what you have asked
(e.g., “Then your things won’t get wrecked, you can play, I can relax, and we can all have fun together later instead of me having to nag you all the time!”).
You might be sceptical, but it really can work, and it does become more comfortable with practice.
5. Find Shared Meaning with Others
This can be done by sharing your dreams or visions, or it can be about developing consistent rituals together that, over time, can lead to more shared experiences and a stronger emotional bond.
With the kids, this may be prioritising having dinner around the table with the whole family and chatting each night without technology. Or it could be:
a regular movie night every Friday,
church every Sunday morning,
games night once a week,
Christmas and Family Day with the extended family,
New Year at the beach every year, or
Anything else that you can repeat regularly
Rituals provide great memories for the children and predictability and help them feel loved and secure. What you do does not matter too much; it is about what is meaningful to you and your family.
So there we have it. Try to develop an authoritative parenting style, turn towards your child’s emotional bids, foster an emotion-coaching philosophy in the home, and try to communicate and find shared meaning with your children. Then, you will be well on your way to raising emotionally healthy children. I wish you all the best with the inevitable challenges along the way.
Damon Ashworth Psychology 
You must be logged in to post a comment.