Narsha Bulgakbaev
Learn to be happy! Confidence and Success
«A living person becomes helpless if he gets used to the fact that nothing depends on his active actions, that difficulties occur by themselves and that he cannot influence their appearance.»
Learned helplessness, as well as acquired helplessness, is an outdated concept in psychology that describes a mental state in which a person does not feel the connection between his actions and their results. This phenomenon was formulated by American psychologists Martin Seligman and Stephen Mayer in 1967 as a result of studying the behavior of dogs.
Martin Seligman’s first experiments became widely known and were published in prestigious psychological journals. In 1976, Seligman received an award from the American Psychological Association for his theory of learned helplessness. After working with Seligman, Stephen Mayer became a neurophysiologist and studied brain structures. In the 2000s, he conducted a series of experiments that replicated his and Seligman’s experiments in the 1960s, using instrumental research methods that were not available in the 1960s. He analyzed the activity of different brain structures and determined whether or not animals learned control, not helplessness. From this he concluded that it is not helplessness, but control, its opposite. Helplessness is the initial state, and it is gradually overcome with the development of the individual by assimilating the idea of control. Mayer met with Seligman, who agreed with the findings of his former colleague and described the experiments of the 2000s as turning the concept «on its head», and modern psychology rejected the concept of learned helplessness as a mistake. Passivity is a basic, natural state for animals due to serotonin activity in the dorsal raphe nucleus and can be overcome by activity in the medial prefrontal cortex. According to current concepts, behavioral and cognitive skills for controlling external conditions are formed both during the evolution of species and during the individual development of individuals. In addition, control functions appeared relatively recently in the course of evolution. Overcoming negative effects in the human brain is carried out in the prefrontal regions of the cerebral hemispheres. They ensure the formation of accessory nervous structures that provide a new level of regulation of individual reactions. Research on helplessness, control, and their effects on the human psyche was continued in 1976 by psychologists Ellen Jane Langer and Judith Roden, who conducted the now famous research in nursing homes.
To conduct the study, Langer and Rodin randomly selected two groups of elderly volunteers who were participants in the experiment. Also, the first experimental group included 8 men and 39 women, and the second control group included 9 men and 35 women, a total of 91 people. The experimenters agreed with the administration of the institution on two types of experimental contract. they can be briefly described: the first group of volunteers gained responsibility for themselves and their lifestyle, the second group of volunteers was given the opportunity to lead a normal lifestyle at home, surrounded by the attention and care of patients. The second group was given typical instructions at the first meeting: We want your rooms to be as comfortable as possible and we will try to do everything for this. We want you to feel happy here and we are responsible for you being proud of our nursing home and happy here… We will do everything we can to help you… A gift from Arden House to all of you (a staff member went around and gave a plant to each patient) now these are your plants, they will live in your room, nurses will water and take care of them, you will not have to do anything.
– Rodin J., Langer E.
Long-term effects of appropriate supervision interventions with institutionalized (relationships with established rules, norms) elders. The first group was told: You have to decide what your room will look like, so you want to leave everything as it is, or you want our staff to help you rearrange the furniture… You tell us your wishes, tell us exactly what you want to change. in your life. In addition, I would like to take advantage of our meeting to present each of you with an Arden House gift. If you decide you want to have a plant, you can choose the one you like from this box. These plants are yours, you must take care of them and care for them as you see fit. Next week we will show the film in two evenings, on Tuesday and Friday. You have to decide what day you will go to the cinema and whether you want to see the movie at all. – Rodin J., Langer E.
Long-term effects of an appropriate control intervention with the institutionalized elderly. Thus, the first experimental group was given the opportunity to make choices about various life issues and control the situation. A second control group was told the same thing, but the message made it clear that most of the decisions affecting their lives were made by management, not them. The experiment lasted for 3 weeks, during which the administration and staff of the nursing home strictly followed the stated policy. After three weeks, the patients were given questionnaires measuring their satisfaction with their lives, and the medical staff received questionnaires about the patients’ activity, sociability, general tone, nutrition and habits. We also measured how many subjects from each group decided to watch the movie and how many of them decided to participate in a simple contest (count the number of candies in a large jar). The differences between the two groups were experimentally significant. Thus, the average level of unhappiness of −0.12 in the second group contrasted with the average score of +0.28 (according to the patients’ self-reports) in the first group. Changes in patients’ condition, evaluated by nurses, showed +3.97 (improvement) in the experimental group and -2.39 (worsening) in the control group. There was also a significant difference in time spent communicating with other patients, talking to staff, and passively observing staff (the latter criterion showed −2.14 in the experimental group and +4.64 in the control group). Residents’ ratings of actual behavior also supported the prediction of positive control effects and ability to influence one’s own life. More participants in the experimental group watched the movie and participated in the guessing game (10 vs. 1). The researchers’ conclusion is that some of the negative effects of aging (memory loss, decreased tone) may be related to a person’s loss of control over their own lives, which means that they can be prevented by restoring their sense of decision-making. Six months after the study, Langer and Rodin returned to Arden House to take another measurement and see if the experimental effect was still there. Nurses’ ratings indicated that subjects in the increased accountability group continued to perform better with an overall mean score of 352.33 versus 262.00 for the control group. There was also a slight improvement in health in the experimental group and a deterioration in the control group. Finally, 30% of the participants in the control group died during the time period after the first study, and 15% of the participants in the experimental group died. Based on the obtained results, the administration decided to further encourage the desire of patients to control their lives. Subsequent studies of the elderly by other psychologists have also shown that elderly patients may engage in self-destructive behavior in severe situations of lack of choice (refusing food and medicine) because it is the only thing they can choose for them. Other experiments have determined the effects of control (and lack thereof) on other aspects of a person’s mental state. For example, even an overcrowded elevator is subjectively perceived as freer and creates less anxiety among passengers who are closer to the controls. In another study, two groups of subjects had to solve problems while surrounded by loud noise. One of them was told that if they could not deal with the noise, the other could turn it off at any time, but asked them not to turn it off if they could still tolerate it. The second group performed the tasks much more successfully.
CAUSAL ATTRIBUTION
Causal attribution is a phenomenon of interpersonal perception, which consists in explaining and attributing the causes of another person’s actions. The concept was formed in Western social psychology and J. Kelly, F. Heider took its most general expression in the attribution theory developed by Lee Ross. Causal attribution researchers tried to identify the mechanisms and factors by which the «ordinary person», the «man on the street» explains the causal relationships of the events he perceives, including his own behavior. The size and degree of attribution (a psychological term denoting the mechanism of explaining the causes of another person’s behavior) depends on two indicators: the conformity of the action to the role expectations – the greater the conformity, the smaller the lack of information, and therefore the lower the degree of attribution; compliance of actions with cultural norms. D. Kelly defined three types of attribution: personal attribution (the cause is attributed to the person performing the action); attribute of the object (the cause is attributed to the object to which the action is directed); situational attribution (the reason is attributed to circumstances). In the course of the study, it was found that the event participant often uses indirect attribution, and the observer often uses personal attribution.
Attribution – significant features, inherent properties, causes of behavior.
Causal attribution mechanisms are based on the following principles: recognizing each other in society, people are not limited to information obtained as a result of external observation: they seek to determine the causes of actions and draw conclusions about personal qualities; Because information from external monitoring is often insufficient, observers identify possible causes of behavior and attribute them to the observed participant; explanation of reasons has a significant influence on the behavior of the observer. Systemic differences in interpretation of people’s own behavior and actions of others; deviation of the replacement process from logical norms under the influence of subjective factors (informational and motivational); stimulating effect on human activity and motivation, explaining the unsatisfactory results of such activity with the influence of external factors, and the satisfactory results with the influence of internal factors.
One of the most common patterns of the theory is to overestimate one’s own importance and exaggerate the role of certain factors (for example, luck, external or, abilities, internal) in shaping the situation. According to the mechanisms of causal attribution, the methods of practical application of the obtained results to influence the effectiveness of human activities, his motivation, emotions and goals are determined. Attribution studies help identify when group members assign or accept personal responsibility for their actions. The results are used to adequately assess the actual contribution of a particular participant group to the overall corporate activity.
Causal attribution theory was initially studied only within the framework of social psychology. Now it is used in general, pedagogical, developmental, as well as sports psychology. The main areas of research are self-perception, interpersonal perception and perception of a large amount of other social objects.
INTROVERSION – EXTRAVERSION
A criterion for the categorization of personality traits that is widespread in psychology or their measurement index. The most famous are two different concepts of introversion extroversion, Carl Jung and Hans Eysenck. The interpretation of K. Leonhard was also known in the psychiatry of the USSR and the GDR. The terms introversion and extroversion were first introduced by Jung, but their understanding and use in psychology differ from their original meaning. Focusing on interpersonal behavior, Jung defined introversion as «a type of behavior characterized by the orientation of life to the subjective mental content» (focusing on internal mental activity); and extraversion as «a type of behavior characterized by the concentration of interests in external objects» (the external world). Extraversion is manifested by friendly, talkative, energetic behavior, while introversion is manifested by more withdrawn and solitary behavior. In fact, all comprehensive psychological typologies and many psychological tests cover these characteristics in various forms. Examples include the Big Five model, Jung’s analytical psychology, Hans Eysenck’s three-factor personality theory, Raymond Cattell’s 16 personality factors, the Minnesota Multidimensional Personality Inventory, and the Myers-Briggs typology. Carl Jung considered the main criterion for distinguishing extroverts from introverts to be the «direction of movement.» According to Jung, extroversion is manifested in the fact that a person’s direction (vital energy) is directed to the outside world, an extrovert prefers the social and practical aspects of life, with concrete external objects, and an introvert prefers the world of imagination and reflection. An extrovert is focused on wasting his energy, moving it to surrounding objects, and an introvert is focused on accumulating energy, moving it to the inner world. Introversion is one of the archetypal manifestations of the collective unconscious. Analyzing the differences in the concepts of Sigmund Freud and Alfred Adler, two other prominent representatives of dynamic psychology, Jung believed that the essentially similar concepts of these authors differed. If the first, according to Jung, is an extrovert, he subordinates it to serve the goals of attraction to the object so much that the ego is seen as nothing more than a function of drive, then the second, an introvert, on the contrary, believes that everything is aimed at asserting the superiority of the subject in order to ensure individual power over collective drives. Hans Eysenck borrows the term «extraversion» from Jung when developing his dispositional model. found that personality dimensions vary consistently in the degree to which they focus on social relationships rather than on reflection, experience, and feelings. According to Eysenck, a typical extrovert is sociable, optimistic, impulsive, has a wide circle of acquaintances, and has poor control over emotions and feelings. A typical introvert is calm, shy, aloof from everyone except close people, plans his actions in advance, loves order in everything and keeps his emotions under strict control. In this case, Jung’s term came in handy. According to Eysenck, it is known that extroversion can be one of the main personality traits.
According to psychiatrist Leonhard, an extrovert is a person with a weak will, who is influenced by the outside, and an introvert. a strong-willed person. Moreover, Leonhard’s typology is not psychological, but psychiatric, and is primarily concerned with pathologies. If we are not talking about pathologies, then this term should be considered as locus of control (internal and external), externalism and internalism, close to the interpretation of Leonhard (but not Jung).
Eugen Bleiler introduced the concept of autism, a symptom of schizophrenia, into psychiatry, which is mainly covered by Jung’s concept of «introversion». Autism is a pathological introversion accompanied by active withdrawal from the outside world.
Subsequently, extraversion as a personality trait has been retained in modern models such as the Big Five (John et al., 2008) or HEXACO (Ashton et al., 2004), demonstrating its consistency. There are differences in behavior between extroverts and introverts. According to one study, extroverts tend to wear more decorative clothing, while introverts prefer practical, comfortable clothes (warmth over beauty). Extroverts like more energetic, traditional music than introverts. Personality traits also affect how people organize their workspace. in general, extroverts decorate their offices more, keep their doors open, keep a few spare chairs nearby, and put bowls of candy on their desks. they try to invite other employees and encourage interaction. Introverts, on the other hand, decorate less and try to isolate their workspace from social interaction.
Despite these differences, a meta-analysis of 15 experimental sample studies showed that there is significant overlap in the behavior of extroverts and introverts. in these studies, participants used mobile devices to indicate how often they exhibited extroverted traits (eg, boldness, talkativeness, assertiveness, sociability) in their daily lives.
Fleeson and Gallagher (2009) found that extroverts consistently act introverted and
introverts consistently act in extroverted ways. indeed, within-person variability was greater among individuals with extraverted behavior. The main difference between extroverts and introverts was that extroverts were about 5% to 10% more likely to engage in normal extroverted behavior than introverts.
Research by Lippa (1978) showed how differently people imagine themselves. this is called expressive behavior and depends on the motivation and ability of individuals to control this behavior. lippa (1978) studied 68 students who were asked to role-play a mathematics lesson. students’ levels of extroversion and introversion were assessed based on their extraverted/expressive behaviors, such as: stride length, graphic width, percentage of time spent talking, time spent making eye contact, and total time spent in each study session. This study found that real introverts were perceived and evaluated as having expressive behaviors that appeared to be extroverts because they were high in self-control (introverts). This means that introverts consciously put more effort into presenting an extroverted and socially desirable version of themselves. In this way, people can adjust and change their behavior depending on the environment. Since people are complex and unique, and introversion-extroversion is a continuum of dimensions (an object with certain continuity properties), people can have a mix of both characteristics. a person who behaves as an introvert in one situation may behave as an extrovert in another, and people can learn «opposite» behavior in some situations. According to Jung’s theory, the primary function of a person is extraversion, while the secondary function is always introversion.
DUALITY
And finally, there is a third group, where it is very difficult to say where the motivation mainly comes from: from outside or from within. This group includes the most and least differentiated normal person, who is considered normal because he does not allow himself to go to extremes or does not need them. For a normal person, there are external and internal influences. It forms a broad middle group, on one side of which are those whose motives are mainly determined by an external object, and on the other side, those whose motives are formed from within. I call the first group extroverts, and the second group introverts. – C. G. Jung, International Congress of Education, Switzerland, 1923.
Ambiversion corresponds to average scores on the introversion scale.
Ambiversion is an independent personality characteristic and is a separate category from introversion and extroversion. An ambivert is neither an introvert nor an extrovert, but combines traits of both. An ambivert can act like an introvert or an extrovert depending on the situation. Basically, most ladies are ambiverts. Jung, a Swiss psychiatrist who popularized the idea of introverts and extroverts, recognized the existence of a third type (according to him, according to the norm) in a lecture given at the International Congress of Education in 1923. However, Jung did not include it in the typology of introversion extroversion.
The term «ambiversion» was proposed by the American psychologist Edmund Conklin in 1923. Conklin considered ambiversion to be a psychological norm. The scientist explained the lack of a term to designate people who are neither introverts nor extroverts by the fact that psychoanalytic terminology was created primarily to describe pathologies. Conklin believed that ambiverts, unlike the other two types, were healthy, flexible, adaptable, and positive. American psychologist M. Crowe and others. In 2006, they examined the relationship between midlife levels of introversion and cognitive status 25 years later (4,039 participants). According to the test results, ambiversion is associated with a lower risk of cognitive disorders; this allowed the authors to propose a hypothesis according to which ambiversion has a positive effect on the preservation of cognitive functions during aging. According to the study of the American psychologist A. Grant (2013), according to the results of 3 months of work of 340 salespeople working in eastern call centers, ambiverts among these salespeople achieved 24% more income than introverts and 32% more than extroverts.
According to Grant, ambiverts are flexible in dealing with customers, use a wide range of behavioral approaches, make balanced decisions about when to speak and when to listen, express confidence and enthusiasm enough to persuade, and tend to be considerate, accepting the buyer’s best interests. Differences in Conflict Behavior of Extroverts, Introverts, and Ambiverts 2016.
Dubrovina et al. According to the researchers, the competitive strategy is more characteristic of extroverts; introverts often resort to the strategy of escape, adaptation and compromise; Ambiverts do not want to get into a conflict situation more than others.
Apunevich et al. 2016
By 2011, they studied the relationship between emotional distress of law enforcement officers and their level of introversion. 32 employees of Cherepovets police department participated in the study. According to the authors’ conclusions, ambiverts are more resistant to emotional burnout than introverts and extroverts. Introverts are also considered to be people who tend to communicate, but do not have the desire to do so. Hans Jürgen Eysenck described extroversion-introversion as the degree of a person’s relationship with other people. these behavioral differences have been hypothesized to arise from underlying differences in brain physiology. Eysenck combined the ascending/descending activation of the brain with the reticular activating system (PAC), a pathway located in the brainstem.
Extroverts seek excitement and social activity to increase their arousal levels, while introverts avoid social situations in an attempt to minimize such arousal. Eysenck identified extraversion as one of the three main traits in his p-e-n personality model, which also included psychoticism and neuroticism. Eysenck initially suggested that extraversion is a combination of two main tendencies: impulsiveness and sociability. Later, he added several other, more specific features, such as liveliness, activity, and excitability. These traits are associated with more specific habitual responses in his personality hierarchy, such as weekend parties. Eysenck compared this characteristic to the four temperaments of ancient medicine: the choleric and sanguine temperaments were equated with extroversion, and the melancholic and phlegmatic temperaments were equated with introversion.
The relative importance of genetics versus environment in determining levels of extraversion has been a controversial issue, the focus of many studies. Eysenck proposed that extroversion is caused by variability in the excitability of the cerebral cortex. He proposed that introverts have a higher level of activity than extroverts and are therefore more chronically agitated than extroverts.
The fact that extroverts need more external stimulation than introverts has been interpreted as evidence for this hypothesis. Another piece of evidence for the «incentive» hypothesis is that introverts salivate more than extroverts in response to a drop of lemon juice. This is due to increased activity in their reticular activating system (PAC), which responds to stimuli such as food or social contact.
Extraversion has been associated with increased sensitivity of the mesolimbic dopamine system to potentiating stimuli. This partially explains the high levels of positive affect found in extroverts, as they experience the excitement of a potential reward (motivation and encouragement), feels more intense. One manifestation of this is that extroverts can easily deal with unexpected situations when achieving a positive outcome, and then the reward itself is even more welcome. One study found that introverts have more blood flow in the frontal lobes of the brain and the anterior or frontal thalamus, areas involved in internal processing such as planning and problem solving. Extraverts have greater blood flow to the anterior cingulate cortex, temporal lobes, and posterior thalamus, which are involved in sensory and emotional experience. Shows that introversion-extroversion is associated with individual differences in brain activity. Brain volume studies showed a positive correlation between introversion and gray matter volume in the right prefrontal cortex and right temporal parietal junction, as well as a positive correlation between introversion and total white matter volume. Extraversion has also been linked to physiological factors such as breathing (more often), which are closely related to emotional reactivity. The degree of extraversion and introversion is often assessed using measures such as self-report, although peer reports and third-party observations may also be used. Self-reports can be lexical or statement-based (affirmation). Lexical measures use personal adjectives that reflect extroverted and introverted traits, such as outgoing, outgoing, reserved, or quiet. Words representing introversion were reverse-coded to create composite measures of extraversion/introversion that run on a continuum (an item with certain continuum properties). Goldberg (1992) developed a 20-word measure as part of his 100-word Big Five markers. Saucier (1994) developed a brief, 8-word measure in his mini-markers of 40 words. However, the psychometric properties of the original Saucier mini-markers were found to be suboptimal in non-North American samples.
As a result, a systematically revised measure with high psychometric properties was developed, the International English Minimarkers – with good internal consistency and other validity for assessing extraversion/introversion and the other five personality factors within and especially outside the American population. internal consistency reliability of the extraversion score was 0.92 for native English speakers and 0.85 for non-native speakers of English.
Respondents are asked, for example, how often they talk to different people in the evening or how often they feel uncomfortable around others. the statement about talkativeness at parties is difficult to answer meaningfully for non-party-goers like Americans. also, sometimes the colloquial language of North America makes them unsuitable for use outside of America. for example, statements such as «staying behind» and «knowing how to engage people» are sometimes difficult for non-native speakers to understand in their literal sense.
Recognizing that introversion and extroversion are normal behaviors can help with self-acceptance and understanding of others. for example, an extrovert may perceive their introverted partner’s need for space, and an introvert may perceive their extroverted partner’s need for social interaction. researchers have found a link between extroversion and happiness. that is, extroverts tend to report higher levels of happiness than introverts. other studies have shown that being told to act extraverted leads to increased positive affect, even for introverted individuals. This does not mean that introverts are unhappy.
Extroverts simply experience positive emotions, while introverts are closer to neutral. This may be due to the fact that in modern Western culture, extroversion is more socially acceptable and introverts are less accepted. Other than happiness studies, extroverts report higher self-esteem than introverts. others argue that such results reflect sociocultural bias in the survey itself. Dr. David Myers said that being happy (the happiness formula) is a matter of having three qualities: self-esteem, optimism, and extraversion. Meyers builds on research that shows extroverts are happier; «I like to be with others»
These findings have been questioned because the items tend to measure happiness only among extraverts. According to Carl Jung, introverts are willing to admit their psychological needs and problems, while extroverts ignore them because they are more focused on the outside world. Extroverted youth are more likely to engage in antisocial or delinquent behavior. Accordingly, some evidence suggests that extraversion may also be related to psychopathy. Introversion is closely related to positive traits such as intelligence and talent. Over the years, researchers have found that introverts are more successful in academic settings, which can be boring for extroverts.
Although extroversion is associated with many positive outcomes, such as higher levels of happiness, it can also be more prone to contagion because they interact with more people.
As people become more vulnerable to infection, social costs become relatively high. Although neither introversion nor extroversion are pathological, psychotherapists, when treating clients, consider temperament (a set of stable, dynamic features of a person’s mental processes. Temperament is related to dynamic aspects of activity, not content. Temperament determines the speed of mental processes, the stability of the emotional sphere, the degree of voluntary effort.) may be considered. Clients may respond better to different types of treatment depending on where they fall on the introversion-extroversion spectrum. Teachers can also consider temperament when interacting with students, for example, introverted children need more encouragement to speak up in class, while extroverted children need to be taught to sit quietly for long periods of time. About half of the world’s population (about 44%) are introverts. There are many countries in Europe where introverts dominate. Lithuania is the most introverted country in Europe, while Albania is the country of extroverts. The researchers found that people living on islands were more introverted than those living on the mainland, and that people whose ancestors had lived on the island for twenty generations were less extroverted than recent arrivals. Moreover, people who emigrate from islands to the mainland tend to be more extroverted than those who stay on islands and those who move to islands. Some argue that Americans live in an «extroverted society» that encourages extroverted behavior and discourages introversion. This is because the United States is currently an outward personality culture, while some other cultures value people for their «inner identity and moral orientation.»
