Tag: senses

  • How High is Your Physical Intelligence?

    How High is Your Physical Intelligence?

    Physical intelligence is concerned with how different environmental elements interact with our senses to influence or distort our perceptions, judgments, and emotions. These influences then affect our subsequent behaviours.

    In her excellent book ‘Sensation’, Thalma Lobel has neatly summarised all of the critical findings accumulated so far in the emerging field of physical intelligence, or ‘embodied cognition’.

    Like emotional intelligence, physical intelligence appears to be something that can be developed and improved over time. It firstly requires understanding the biases inherent in the interaction between our sensory-motor experiences and the physical environment. Second, it needs an excellent present moment awareness of these biases so that our judgment and actions are adaptive rather than reactive.

    Let’s have a look at how high your physical intelligence is and quick ways that you could improve it:

    1. Temperature

    Q: Should you offer someone a warm or a cold drink when you first meet them if you are trying to make a good first impression?

    In 2008, Williams and Bargh recruited 41 students at Yale and had the experimenter ask half of them to hold a hot cup of coffee for them on the way to the laboratory to ask them a few questions and write down the responses on a clipboard. The other participants held an iced coffee for comparison. They then went to the lab, were given the exact description of a fictitious person, and asked to rate this person on a list of additional traits. Participants who held the hot cup of coffee rated the fictional person as significantly more generous and caring than those who held the iced coffee, even though the participants were not even aware that the cup holding was part of the experiment.

    Subsequent studies have supported this finding in showing that giving someone a physically warm drink contributes to perceiving you or others to be emotionally warmer, which would usually lead to a better first impression.

    Q: Can being treated ‘coldly’ by others lead to a room feeling colder?

    Interestingly, our perception of temperature can change depending on how others treat us or what we think. For example, when we are treated kindly by others, room temperature is typically reported to be higher than it is. Conversely, even thinking of an incident of social exclusion led to the same room feeling 2.6 degrees cooler than in a group that experimenters asked to consider an occurrence of social inclusion (21.4 degrees vs 24 degrees). The way to mitigate this and the feeling of pain that someone experiences following social exclusion? A warm object or drink.

    2. Weight

    Q: Do secrets physically weigh us down?

    In 2003, Profitt and colleagues discovered that when we are carrying a heavy weight, we perceive a hill to be steeper or the distance of something to be further than if we are unencumbered. Seems pretty straightforward, seeing that carrying a heavy backpack would require more effort, and our brain wouldn’t want us to take it as far so that it could conserve energy.

    Interestingly, Slepian and colleagues took this a step further in 2012 and found that having or thinking about a big secret can lead to similar findings as carrying something heavy. By instructing participants to think about a meaningful personal secret, they also perceived a steeper hill. They overshot a target with a beanbag (because they perceived it to be further away) than a control group instructed to think about something trivial. So yes, secrets can weigh us down and make us feel like everything requires more energy and effort, especially physical tasks like climbing the stairs with groceries or helping someone move house.

    If we want to reduce the physical burden secrets have on us, we need to express them and get them “off our shoulders”. Research shows that writing about traumatic experiences or sharing things that we are ashamed of with others that we trust (or a professional such as a psychologist) unburden us and make us feel lighter and better going forward.

    3. Texture

    Q: Do you get trendy but hard chairs or traditional soft chairs if you’re opening a new office or business?

    The texture of materials matters. Soft or fluffy texture often helps people to relax more, be more flexible and feel more comfortable. In contrast, hard, rough or uncomfortable surfaces make people feel more tense, rigid or uptight.

    Wooden, plastic or metal chairs may look great in a new restaurant but may not be so good if it leads to customers thinking the waiting staff are less friendly. However, even if the soft and comfy chairs are more expensive, the long-term benefits could be worth it, especially with internet reviews these days. It may just be the difference between a 4-star and a 5-star review.

    There are situations where you may want to be ‘hard’, such as a lawyer who needs to be assertive and firm to negotiate a tough deal. If that’s the case, bring out the impressively looking but uncomfortable chairs. Also, turn up the air-conditioning, and offer them a glass of icy cold water (see #1).

    4. Colour

    Q: Can a team’s uniform colour impact how many fouls referees call in a sports game?

    Unfortunately, yes. In a 1988 study, Frank and Gilovich presented two identical football game videos to college football fans and professional referees. In one video, the primary team wore a white uniform, and in the other video, the primary team wore a black uniform. The videos were otherwise identical. The fans and the refs commented on how aggressively the teams played and how many penalties they would award. The results were staggering, with the black team receiving significantly more fouls and being perceived as more aggressive by refs and fans alike, even though the only difference was the colour of the uniform.

    Q: What colour is best to wear to a job interview then?

    The colour that probably makes the most significant statement, particularly in power and dominance, is red. It’s why Tiger Woods always used to wear red shirts on the final day of competition back when he was on top of the world and winning all of his majors. The colour red significantly diminishes performance and motivation in others when they see it.

    Red is also the colour that politicians wear when they want to appear powerful. Research findings have linked red with a perception of higher status and success in males and higher attractiveness in females. So keep an eye out for the tie colour the next time you see a male politician in the media. When they want to seem kind and caring, they tend to wear baby blue, and on Election Day or when they want to display conviction or strength, it will be red.

    So if it’s a business or leadership or management interview, red or black is likely to be the best colour to wear. However, if it’s a role in a helping profession where a softer side is more desired, light blue or white may be better for an interview.

    5. Cleanliness

    Q: Who is more likely to lie — someone about to shower or someone who has just finished?

    If you want to find out the truth from someone, don’t ask them straight after a shower. The questioned person will find it much easier to stretch the truth when they feel clean, as they have a “clean conscience”. Just after a workout and before a shower, they may feel sweaty, dirty or unclean, and therefore will find it less easy to tell a fib. Instead, go for a run or to the gym or play sport together, and then ask away.

    Q: What about willingness to help others — someone who has just washed their hands or someone who hasn’t?

    In 2006, Zhong and Liljenquist instructed student participants to recall an unethical deed in writing. The experimenters told half of the group to use an antiseptic wipe to clean their hands after typing their act on a computer, whereas the other group did not wash their hands. Both groups could then volunteer by participating in another student’s research project without receiving any compensation. More participants in the no washing group agreed to volunteer for the additional study than those who had cleaned their hands(74% compared to 41%).

    Follow-up studies also found a higher tolerance of other dubious acts, including cheating, following any actions that led to people feeling cleaner. The more that an individual feels that their physical slate is clean, the more space they have to accommodate for things that feel morally dirty.

    6. Posture and Confidence

    Q: How can our physical space be utilised to feel more confident or powerful?

    If you want to feel more confident, try power posing. For example, stand over a table with both of your hands pressed down for one minute. Or lean back in a chair with your legs up and hands back behind your head. Both poses can increase testosterone, leading to greater feelings of power, confidence and assertiveness.

    Be careful of how you hold yourself in your space too. For example, arms crossed, shoulders hunched, or head lowered indicate less confidence or friendliness, whereas standing up straight with an open posture and appropriate eye contact often represents someone who is welcoming and comfortable in their own space.

    7. Physical Space and Creativity

    Q: What are some easy ways to become more creative?

    • Get a box, and put it next to you while you are brainstorming ideas. It will help you think more abstractly by “thinking outside the box” on a physical level.
    • Do everything with your opposite hand. You will pay more attention, and it will make you think about things differently.
    • Engage in your morning routine backwards.
    • Get out into nature, or look at a picture of nature.
    • Keep a cluttered or semi-cluttered desk. An environment that is too clean stifles creativity.
    • Work in an environment of approximately 70 decibels. A local coffee shop is generally about this volume, so some writers prefer to do their work there (I previously thought they just wanted to look trendy).
    • If you want to come up with opposing ideas, or reasons why you shouldn’t do something, place the left hand up high in the air, and say “on the one hand…”, then raise the right hand and lower the left hand and say “then on the other.” It may seem silly, but doing this helps us to think of more opposing points.

    How does it work?

    Physical intelligence, or embodied cognition, is about how metaphors and abstract concepts are grounded in and related to our physical experiences. We first learn how to interact with our world on a non-verbal, physical and sensory level before we understand the verbal level of language and metaphor. Language skills, therefore, build upon and utilise our previous sensory and physical experiences. It is why the same brain areas light up in neuroimaging studies when we see the sentence “I had a rough day” as when we are touching a rough object. However, a different and unrelated area will light up when we see the sentence “I had a bad day”, even though bad and rough have similar meanings.

    Although some metaphors might now seem outdated, if they are things that most people had learned at some point when they were younger, they can be used to our advantage, depending on what we want to achieve.

    Whether you want to be warmer, more trustworthy, flexible, powerful, confident or creative, you can utilise your physical intelligence to change your feelings, perceptions, and behaviours. You can also influence how others perceive and react to you.

  • How Have Intimate Relationships Changed Over the Years, and Where Does It Leave Us Now?

    How Have Intimate Relationships Changed Over the Years, and Where Does It Leave Us Now?

    I just finished reading the book ‘Modern Romance: An Investigation’ by Aziz Ansari and Eric Klinenberg and was pleasantly surprised to see such a well-researched book written predominantly by a Stand-up Comedian (with a helping hand from a Sociologist).

    For those of you who don’t know Aziz, his stand-up shows typically consist of interesting observations about relationships, as does his new series ‘Master of None’.

    Considering that I liked his stand-up and show, I was intrigued to see his book about relationships in my local bookstore. Here’s what his research found:

    How Has Dating Changed?

    1. Distance

    Back in 1932, a Sociologist named James Bossard examined 5000 consecutive marriage licences in the city of Philidelphia, USA, and looked into how close the partners had lived to each other before they married. Here’s what he found:

    • Same address — 12.64%
    • Same block — 4.54%
    • 1 to 2 blocks — 6.08%
    • 2 to 4 blocks — 7.3%
    • 4 to 10 blocks — 10.16%
    • 10 to 20 blocks — 9.62%
    • 20+ blocks — 17.8%
    • Different cities — 17.8%

    More than half of Philidelphia in the 1930s married someone who lived in a ten-block radius to them. More than one-in-six didn’t even cross the road to find their marriage partner.

    Other Sociologists looked to see if this pattern remained in smaller towns and found that it did whenever suitable marriage partners were available. For example, John Ellsworth Jr., who examined marriage patterns in a Connecticut town of less than 4,000 called Simsbury, declared:

    “People will go as far as they have to to find a mate, but no farther.”

    While this quote may still be somewhat applicable in modern times, it does seem that we are much more likely to date people of different origins, cultures and addresses to us, rather than settling down with someone who lived on the same street.

    2. Places

    Where we meet our romantic partners is much different too. Sociologist Michael Rosenfeld’s survey ‘How Couples Meet and Stay Together’ asked over 3,000 American adults of all ages when and how they met their spouse or romantic partner. Because the age of the respondents differed, it made it possible to see the changes between 1940 and 2010. Here’s what he found:

    • In 1940, the most common way couples met was through family (approximately 25%). The second was meeting through friends (21%), followed by meeting in church (13%), and being neighbours (12%).
    • In 1950, meeting via friends had become the most popular method to meet someone (approximately 26%). Meeting through family was still popular (24%) and was a clear second. Meeting in a bar or a restaurant (14%) was becoming more popular, and meeting at work (12%) or being neighbours (12%) was now more popular than meeting at church (10%).
    • In 1970, meeting through friends was the preferred method to find a partner (approximately 31%). Matching through family (20%) was challenged by meeting at a bar or restaurant (18%). Meeting at work was fourth (15%), followed by neighbours, church and college.
    • In 1990, meeting through friends was just below 40%, finding your partner at work was now second (20%), followed by meeting at a bar or a restaurant (18%). Meeting through family and being neighbours had declined as ways to find a partner. Instead, more people were meeting in college, presumably because more people were also going to college and studying longer. Some early adopters were starting to date online too, but this was still the least favourite method of meeting potential partners.
    • Fast forward to 2010, and meeting through friends was still the most common way couples met, but it was under 30% for the first time since 1960. Meeting at a bar or restaurant fought with meeting online for the 2nd most popular method, with both around 20%. Meeting online was already the most popular option for same-sex partners in 2005 and was up to about 70% by 2010. Meeting at work, meeting through family, being neighbours and finding dates through the church was now much less popular as ways to meet someone, and even meeting at college was beginning to decline. All thanks to the rise of the internet!

    In a separate study looking at how Americans met their spouses between 2005 and 2012, Psychologist John Cacioppo found that more than one-in-three married couples met online (34.95%), which was more than work (14.09%), friends (12.4%) and a bar or club (5.68%) combined. So all of the recent advances in technology, especially the internet and smartphones, really has changed the dating scene dramatically, including how we meet, who we meet, how many potential partners we can meet, and even how we communicate with each other.

    3. Communication Methods

    The first text ever was by a British engineer called Neil Papworth in 1992. It’s crazy to think how much this form of communication has grown in only 24 years. In 2007, text messages began to outnumber phone calls made in the US each month, and in 2010 the world sent approximately 200,000 texts each minute. Since 2010, the number of people owning smartphones has dramatically increased in the USA. It rose from 17% in 2010 to 58% in 2014. 83% of 18- to 29-year-olds already owned a smartphone in 2014. With greater smartphone use comes an increasing use in apps such as Facebook Messenger, WhatsApp, and Viber, which further increases instant messages sent.

    Calling vs Texting vs Face-to-Face?

    First Dates

    Seeing that text messages have been a more popular way of communicating since 2007, does this mean that it is now okay to text someone to ask them out on a first date?

    • In 2010, only 10% of adults under 30 used texts to ask someone out for the first time.
    • By 2013, a Match.com survey found that this number had increased to 32%, with face-to-face still leading the way with 37%, a phone call less popular at 23%, and e-mails virtually non-existent at 1%.
    • For adults over 30, this same Match.com survey found that a phone call (52%) was the most likely method of communication when asking someone out on a date, followed by face-to-face (28%), text messages (8%) and e-mail (7%).

    Older females tended to appreciate phone calls in the focus groups that Aziz and Eric ran about whether to phone or text. They saw them as a sign of confidence and helped separate the person from other potential suitors. It also helped them feel more safe and comfortable going out on a date with someone they may not know very well.

    Younger females seemed just as afraid to receive phone calls as younger males were in making them. They preferred not having to respond on the spot and having time to think of a witty or genuine reply or not even reply at all if they weren’t interested, and texting provided them with these options.

    Breaking Up

    What about breaking up — can this too be done via text without seeing the reaction of the heart that you are potentially breaking? It sure sounds more comfortable, but is it socially acceptable?

    • In a 2014 survey of 2,712 18- to 30-year-olds, 73% said they would be upset if their date broke up with them via text, social media or email.
    • In this same survey, out of those who had ended a relationship in the previous 12 months, 25% had used text, 20% had used social media, 18% had split face-to-face, 15% had broken up through a phone call, and 11% had used email.

    With texting, those who had used this method to break up said that they did so because it was “less awkward” and easier to be “more honest.” I still think it is wrong to end a long relationship over text, no matter how much easier it may be. Even though the majority of young adults still agree with me, their actions say the opposite. It’s only a matter of time before their attitudes begin to change in regards to this too.

    Texting Guidelines for Dating:

    1. Do not just say “hey”, “hi”, “what’s up?”, “what’s going on?”

    • Generic messages like this tend to be a real turn-off for some people, especially females who receive many texts like this from several different guys. It is much better to ask a specific question about them or something that refers to the last time you spoke.

    2. Do not just engage in endless banter that never leads to a real-world catch-up.

    • Endless banter gets boring eventually, and older women, in particular, have less patience for constant text exchanges.

    3. Do not just ask someone if they want to “hang out sometime?”

    • It’s confusing whether hanging out is a date or just friends, and it may never lead to an actual date. So instead, invite them out to a particular event, or ask them to meet you at a specific time and place.

    4. Do try to proofread your text messages for correct grammar and spelling.

    • Incorrect spelling is often a major turn off, as is shortening words or using text slang. Determine the audience first, but stick to “tonight” rather than “2nite” if unsure.

    5. Do use a bit of playfulness and humour, but with caution.

    • Make sure that you have a similar sense of humour before engaging in anything too risky or crude, and remember that it can be challenging to pick up on tone in text messages.

    6. Follow the other basic rules around texting:

    • Please wait a while to text back instead of doing it right away, especially early in the dating process. Waiting a bit implies that you have a busy life and builds suspense, increasing the emotional intensity and attraction in the person who has to wait.
    • If you have already sent a text, do not send another message to the same person until you hear back from them unless it is an absolute emergency.
    • Write a similar amount in your texts to what the other person does. If you increase it slightly, they should too if they like you due to our tendency to reciprocate. If they do not, this may mean that they are not aware of the cultural norms around texting, or they are just not that into you.
    • If you are not interested, others will tell you to be upfront and honest with them, but most people actually either pretend to be busy or stop texting back.

    4. Expectations

    When choosing a partner, it seems that our expectations of what the other person needs to provide us have continued to increase over the past 50 years:

    • Before the 1960s, most people were happy enough with settling for a “companionate” or good-enough marriage. People didn’t spend forever looking for passion and love (even though this may have developed over time). Many people saw passionate love as too volatile or irrational to use as the basis for whether or not they should marry someone.
    • When looking for a prospective husband back in 1939, men with a dependable character, emotional stability, maturity and a pleasing disposition were all more highly sought after by women than men they felt mutual attraction and love towards.
    • By the early 1960s, 76% of women were willing to marry a man they didn’t love.

    “Marriage was an economic institution in which you were given a partnership for life in terms of children and social status and succession and companionship.” — Esther Perel.

    • When looking for a prospective wife in 1939, men also highly valued emotional stability, maturity, a dependable character and pleasing disposition, and interestingly also appreciated ambition and industriousness over mutual love and attraction.
    • By the early 1960s, however, only 35% of men admitted that they were willing to marry a woman that they didn’t love. Men already had more legal rights and financial freedom and weren’t looked down upon for moving out of the house and enjoying single life before getting married.
    • By the 1980s, things had changed, with 86% of men and 91% of women in the US saying they needed romantic love to marry someone.
    • In 2008, mutual love and attraction were rated #1 for men and women looking for a prospective partner.

    No longer do people settle for companionship or what is good enough. We also want passion and the perfect life partner who completes us, gives us belonging and identity, mystery and awe, and makes us happy. Some people even declare that they are looking for their soul mate and refuse to settle for anything less.

    This search for the perfect partner seems to take a lot of emotional investment, trial and error, potential heartbreak, and much stress and indecision. However, if we find our soul mate, the potential pay-off should theoretically be much higher than for an old-fashioned “companionate” marriage. However, with more possible options and higher expectations, how can we know if we have found the one to marry?

    5. Marriages

    At what age do we get married?

    From 1950 until about 1968, the average age of first marriages in the US was about 20 for females and 23 for males. In the mid-1970s, this age rapidly increased until it briefly stagnated at about 24 for women and 27 for men between 1999 and 2004. It then began to rise again to about 27 for females and 29 for males in 2014. In bigger cities, such as New York, it is over 30 for both males and females.

    After how long do we tend to get married?

    Before the 1960s, the average couple wed after just six months, according to Stephanie Coontz, author of ‘Marriage, A History’. However, the dating period and the engagement period tend to be much longer these days, with some couples even choosing to live together in a de-facto relationship without ever marrying.

    Do we even need to get married anymore?

    Before the 1960s, getting married, buying a house, and moving out were the first significant steps that signified the transition to adulthood. Single women rarely lived alone, and many families discouraged their daughters from moving into shared housing with other working girls. Their parents were heavily involved in their decisions, even who they dated, and typically always knew about their whereabouts.

    Women of previous generations would sometimes get married to get out of the house and get their first taste of adulthood and freedom. However, once married, they were not always more free to do what they wanted. Instead, they had to depend on their husbands for legal and financial purposes whilst being fully responsible for looking after the house and the children.

    Although things still aren’t fully equal with men and women, with women typically earning less and having to do more housework and child-rearing, they now have equal legal rights regarding property and divorce. Alongside the greater acceptance of various lifestyle choices, including moving out without getting married, marriage is now a choice rather than a necessity for many women.

    https://youtu.be/cYdsWtku9gg

    6. Choices

    Thanks to the advances in technology, we now have more potential options available to us at the click of a mouse or swipe of a button than we have ever had before.

    Thanks to the greater rights and freedom provided to most women in the Australian culture, we also have a new developmental period between adolescence and adulthood called emerging adulthood (ages 18–29). It is a phase where people can go to university, start a career, travel, move around a bit, and have some fun and relationship experiences before settling down and getting married.

    During emerging adulthood, we end up greatly expanding our pool of potential romantic partners. Once you include online dating and other apps for meeting people, the number of possible partners grows exponentially, especially in bigger cities like Melbourne.

    But does having more choices make it easier to find “the one”?

    Research on the paradox of choice would suggest not. As I’ve already mentioned in a previous post, Barry Schwartz, a Psychologist, describes an experiment at a supermarket where they offered 24 different samples of jelly (jam) to customers on day one and six jellies on day two. The day with only six options outsold the day with 24 possibilities by ten times the amount.

    Too many options lead to indecision and paralysis and higher discontent after a decision. So before you are searching for a partner, especially if it is online, make sure that you have a sense of what is truly important to you and what is not, and try to limit your search to these options. Then if you find someone who seems to be alright, give them a real chance before moving onto the next one. You’re likely to be more satisfied on a long-term basis if you do.

    Dr Damon Ashworth

    Clinical Psychologist