Idiots are invincible - Dr Ro Страница 12

Explanatory style

Explanatory style refers to the way we explain events that happen to us in life (Seligman, 1989). It consists of three dimensions: internal – external, stable – unstable, and global – specific.

When faced with a negative event, such as a failure, individuals with a pessimistic explanatory style consider it:

a) Personal. They attribute the poor outcome to internal causes (e.g., “it was all my fault”).

b) Pervasive. They tend to generalize, thinking it will affect all areas in their life (e.g., “I failed Math; therefore, I am a failure in everything”).

c) Permanent. They consider it unchangeable (e.g., “this is how things will be in the future”).

Such attributions result in chronic negative feelings and, often, in low self-esteem, melancholy, and depression.

On the contrary, people with an optimistic explanatory style facing a negative event:

a) Attribute it to external and unanticipated factors (e.g., “the exam was difficult”), and expect better outcomes over future events.

b) Consider their failure as specific and therefore confine it (e.g., “I may have failed in my efforts in this field, but I am doing well in others”).

c) Regard the failure as temporary (e.g., “I did not succeed this time, but I will next time”).

The results of the optimistic explanatory style are temporary negative feelings followed by decision-making, redefinition of goals, and planning of future actions.

According to researchers, people with an optimistic explanatory style cultivate positive expectations, have a good self-image, succeed in academic fields and in sales, maintain a positive outlook of life, employ problem-solving and choose approach rather than avoidance strategies, seek social support, and adopt healthier habits in relation to diet, rest, and physical exercise (Buchanan & Seligman, 1995).

In contrast, individuals with a pessimistic explanatory style are vulnerable to learned helplessness25 and depression, isolation and loneliness, and often suffer from social anxiety.

Here is a word of caution: in its extreme, over-optimism is also maladaptive. Excessive positive thinking of the type “everything will be okay” or “that is never going to happen to me” may lead to deficient preparation and produce negative results. A classic example of over-optimism can be drawn from the area of health. In line with the “above the average phenomenon,” among other attributes (e.g., intelligence, driving ability, looks, and … modesty), most people believe that their health is better than the average health of other people and that they are at less risk for diseases. As a result, they underestimate the probability of negative outcomes, and in turn, the importance of sound nutrition, physical activity, rest, etc. The results are all too familiar …

Self-efficacy

This concept refers to a high degree of faith in one’s own skills and an “I can make it”-type convictions. Much like optimism, self-efficacy has been shown to relate to lower adrenaline levels, less work stress, and better self-regulation (e.g., maintaining a healthy weight, following a fitness exercise program, and quitting smoking for good). It has also been shown to assist in successful treatment of depression, overall wellbeing, success in sports, and drug-free birthing (see Holden, 1991; Myers, 2004).

Psychological hardiness

Those who can be characterized as psychologically hardy tend to:

a) Consider change a normal condition, a challenge, and an opportunity for growth, rather than a threat. They choose stress and, instead of getting annoyed, foaming at the mouth and becoming aggressive, they usually interpret stressors as interesting events.

b) Believe that they have control over their life.

c) Commit to and actively engage with the task or the problem.

The following real story illustrates something of a “give me problems” mentality in action.

Roll on today’s problems

George, a clothing manufacturing business owner, whose last name I will not disclose for obvious reasons, described a typical day at his office:

As soon as I arrive early in the morning (at around 10 am), a queue of staff and co-workers has already formed; they are all waiting to see me, often very stressed or even in a state of panic. Each of them has a very serious problem to discuss with me: their own. I make myself comfortable, smile and rub my hands together: Roll on today’s problems. Who is first? What do we have here? Yes, of course … what do you suggest? … Good idea, carry on! Next!

Often, I help my employees place situations in the correct perspective. For example, one day one of them came into my office in a state of panic:

“We’ve got a big problem. Stores have just returned a batch of faulty leather jackets. It’s a disaster! What are we going to do now?”

“Just a minute; what unit are you using?” I asked him. “How big is the problem? How many faulty jackets have been found?”

“Over 50!” he answered.

“What does that mean? 1,000 or 51?” I continued.

“Well, no, not 1,000! If I am not mistaken, there are about 53,” he informed me.

“Oh, okay. How many such jackets did we produce?” I asked him.

“Around 10,000” he determined, much calmer now.

“So, 53 in 10,000 had a problem? Hmmm … let’s see … [Bringing out the calculator]. Indeed: around 0.5 percent. What do you say we throw them out and replace them with new ones? Better still, give them away!”

“Good idea, Mr Nikolis! (Oops! How careless! I’ve given away the name …). “That’s what I’ll do” he answered and left, relieved.

“Every day, all day, that’s my job, dealing with problems,” George states, his eyes sparkling with enthusiasm. “Problem solving is my middle name. Thank God, I enjoy it!”

Locus of control

Individuals with an internal locus of control (term coined by Rotter, 1966) believe that they exercise a reasonable degree of control over the circumstances in their life. They also tend to assume responsibility for the outcome of their efforts and consider that they can influence their fate, to a certain degree, by their own actions.

Internal locus of control individuals are not consumed by blaming others or external conditions. They adopt a problem-solving approach and act to change the conditions, rather than wasting time and energy on negative feelings. They adopt healthier habits, precisely because they believe that they have a significant level of input over their health and success.

On the contrary, people with an external locus of control believe that their successes and failures are the result of external conditions, such as luck, fate, the position of the stars, and the choices and actions of others around them.

Sensation seeking

Certain individuals among us tend to seek intense experiences. They perceive stressful, for the average person, events as vaguely threatening, risky, or distressing. As a result, they report lower stress levels and fewer psychosomatic symptoms.

Cons include that, at a young age, these individuals find it difficult to join organized groups (school, sports teams) and socialise with their colleagues. Following their instincts, later they may adopt various unhealthy habits (such as smoking, drinking, driving at excessive speed) to satisfy their need for excitement.

Autonomic nervous system response

Individuals with an over-reactive autonomic nervous system are more susceptible and have reduced tolerance to stress, as they easily mobilise biological resources during “fight or flight” responses to stimuli they perceive as threatening.