Social Engineering Blogs

An Aggregator for Blogs About Social Engineering and Related Fields

Does a Rising Tide Lift All Boats?

People are fond of analogies that help them visualize concepts that are sometimes difficult to grasp. Steve Jobs was use one when he said, “Computers are like a bicycle for our minds.” Another common analogy is people describing the human brain as a computer. One analogy that’s kicked around quite a bit in politics is this, “A rising tide lifts all boats.” That’s easy to picture. After all, when the tide rolls in all boats sit higher relative to the docks they’re tied to or some other stationary object.  Politicians like to use the phrase when it comes to the economy. If more tax cuts are given to the wealthiest people they’ll spend their extra money creating jobs or buying more stuff. Either way, more goods are sold which means more people are employed to produce and sell those goods. Everyone is better off; all boats have been lifted.But there’s a problem. The analogies we use are just that – analogies. They’re merely comparisons to help us understand but they’re not the actual thing. In one sense they’re like a map. A map can be a helpful tool but it’s still a map and not the actual terrain. It can never fully represent the real thing and the more diverse the terrain is, the less a map can fully represent it.People who use the rising tide analogy want us to believe everyone is better off when the wealthiest among us do better. There’s some truth to that however, it ignores a basic tenant of behavioral economics – how we make comparisons and decisions.You see, most people don’t simply look a their situation relative to how they were at some point in the past. Rather, we have a habit of comparing ourselves to others in the moment.We see this publicly played out in sports all the time. Let’s say an athlete has a great year and gets a huge raise because he’s considered among the best in his sport. He’s happy! But the moment he learns someone else just got more money, discontentment sets in. No longer does he care that he’s making significantly more than he used to. Instead he feels slighted compared to the other athlete he just learned about.The same can be said of the average American. While many may be a little better off than they were five or ten years ago based solely on their income they don’t necessarily see it that way. That’s probably because they’re not simply comparing their take home pay to prior paychecks. In fact, if inflation, medical bills or other things that occur in life have eaten away at their take home pay, people tend to feel they’re working harder than ever but have little or nothing to show for it.Another comparison point comes when people hear about senior executive compensation at large corporations. For example, did you know back in 2005 the average CEO made 525 times more than the typical American worker made? That pay differential took a significant dip due to the recession but it’s trending back up and was 369 times more in 2012.Can you see why someone might be disgruntled? Most people have an innate sense of fairness, and of right and wrong, and when that gets violated many people would rather get nothing just to see the other person get nothing too. It doesn’t make economic sense because economically a little bit of something is better than a lot of nothing. Several years ago I conducted survey with my blog readers. One question read: You’re playing a game and your partner was given $100 to share with you any way they see fit. The two of you get to keep the $100 but only if you think you’ve been treated fairly. What’s the least amount you would want in order to not reject the deal?Just over two thirds of the respondents said sharing $50 of the $100 would be fair. The average for all responses was $41.88. Even though they’d have been better off even just getting a dollar, the vast majority would reject the deal if the split wasn’t about equal. It doesn’t make sense economically because if you were given $30, $20, even $1 that’s better than nothing, and more than you started with. But that’s not how most people typical think and behave. When people don’t feel they’re being treated fairly they take action…even if those same actions might hurt themselves in the end.The tide may be rising but all the people in the little boats stare at the luxury liners and perceive those ships are getting the bigger lift and they don’t like it. My fear is this; if our government in conjunction with big business doesn’t come up with ways to make the average workers feel like they’re being compensated in a more equitable way, the consequences could be worse for all of us in the long run. Whether or not you agree with the “We are the 99%” and March on Wall Street movements, they reflect what I’m talking about here. People are unhappy and they’re starting to take action.A take away for those of you who aspire to be more effective persuaders would be this – whenever you use analogies to make a point, make sure the analogies are appropriate for your audience or your best laid plans could backfire on you. Brian Ahearn, CMCT® Chief Influence Officer influencePEOPLE Helping You Learn to Hear “Yes”.

Scientific Evidence for the Efficacy of Training to Recognize Microexpressions of Emotions

MiX-Pro_finalBy Dr. David Matsumoto and Dr. Hyi Sung Hwang

There are numerous tests and ways to evaluate what we have learned.  However, there is currently no method to access the learning effect of reading other people’s emotions. Humintell is a leader of emotion reading training programs, and we have been conducting research in understanding emotions for years in order to not only create the best training tools and programs but also to accurately and reliably examine their impact.

 

Study 1:

Recently we published valuable evidence demonstrating the efficacy of training to recognize microexpressions of emotions (Matsumoto & Hwang, in press). This paper is notable because it presents the first scientific evidence of training efficacy to read microexpressions in normal adult populations. In Study 1, we randomly assigned subjects working as salespersons in South Korea to either a comparison group that received a general lecture of understanding emotions or a training group that received a 60-minute training session by an experienced trainer. The results showed a significantly increased ability of reading other’s emotions on the face in the training group compared to before the training and to the comparison group. This finding was especially notable for a couple of reasons. First, both groups were equivalent in their knowledge of emotions because they were both provided with basic information of reading emotions. However, while the training group received the actual training workshop, the comparison group received a book chapter about facial expressions of emotions instead. Second, the impact of the training program was not only demonstrated in the judgment tasks completed but also emerged in social and communication improvements evaluated on the job by third parties about the trainees two weeks after the participation in our program.

Study 2:

The findings of Study 1 were further bolstered by the results of Study 2, which showed the efficacy of the training program during a longer intermission period. In this study the trainees, who were attorneys or psychologists practicing as trial consultants, received our training. Two to three weeks later, a post-test was administered to the training group and a comparison group that did not receive the training. The training group had significantly higher recognition scores than did the comparison group. They also had faster reaction times. These findings were important because they demonstrated that not only can people be taught the ability to read emotions on face, but also that this ability can be retained.

The scientific data presented in these studies provide the necessary evidence for people who are interested in learning about understanding other’s emotions but hesitate to try it because of uncertainties about the outcome. If you interact with many people daily and want to understand them better, getting microexpression recognition training is an option that you may want to consider.

References

Matsumoto, D., & Hwang, H. S. (in press). Evidence for training the ability to read microexpressions of emotion. Motivation and Emotion. (Click here for a copy of the report. )