A measure of creativity

Leave a comment
Anthropology / Myths / Psychology

Are you creative? Many people believe everyone is creative. But how do we define creativity and how can we measure it?

What’s creative thinking anyway? Image credit Axel Tafernervia Flickr

What’s creativity?

Creativity is a fascinating thing. We all have an idea of what it means to be creative – perhaps you’re thinking of Leonardo Da Vinci or Steve Jobs. But coming up with a solid definition of creativity has proven challenging. Most researchers use the words ‘new’ and ‘useful’ to describe creative thoughts, ideas and actions. Sir Ken Robinson defines creativity as the process of having original ideas that have value.

Many researchers agree creative people simply see more possibilities than others. So it makes sense that one of the most common ways scientists assess a person’s creativity are tests of divergent thinking.

Creative thinking

Convergent thinking, one aspect of being creative, is the ability to come up with the one right answer to a problem. Divergent thinking is coming up with as many solutions to a question or problem as possible. Psychologist J. P Guilford coined these terms in the 1950s. And although creativity and divergent thinking aren’t the same thing, most people agree the ability to think outside the box is an important part of being creative.

One popular divergent thinking test is known as the alternate uses test. You get two minutes to come up with as many uses as you can for an everyday object like a paperclip, cardboard box or fork. You’re scored on how many uses you can come up with, how unusual these uses are, how detailed your ideas are and how many different categories they fall into. Most adults come up with 10 or 15 uses; people who blitz the test might think of 200.

One of the most well-known studies exploring divergent thinking followed a group of children starting in kindergarten. At that age, 98% of the kids scored at the top of the charts in divergent thinking. Five years later, half of the same kids made the cut and at age fifteen, only 10% of them showed the same high level of divergent thinking.

If we accept that our ability to think creatively in this way declines as we age, it’s worth thinking about ways we might be able to increase divergent thinking.

Dark, messy, on a treadmill, or sleepy

There has been plenty of research exploring what factors lead to more divergent thinking. One study found dim lighting reduces distractions and leads to a feeling of being free from constraints. People working in darkness were more creative in their thinking.

Walking also influences our ability to think outside the box. More than three-quarters of people scored higher on the alternate uses test after walking, even if the walking was done on a treadmill. But walking outside led to the most original thinking.

Another study found working in a neat, clean ordered environment leads to healthier snack choices and people being willing to give more money to charity. But people who work in a cluttered, messy environment were better at coming up with more ideas, and more creative ideas.

Spending time living overseas and meditation also appear to lead to more divergent thinking. And people who listen to ‘positive’ classical music (Vivaldi’s Four Seasons) do better on divergent thinking tests than people who do the same tests in silence.

One study involved half of the participants going 32 hours (one night) without sleep before taking divergent thinking tests. Unsurprisingly, not getting enough sleep had a clear detrimental effect on creative thinking. Worth remembering if you’re considering an all-nighter. (Although a different study found people are more creative at solving problems at a time of day when they feel tired).

A creative placebo

What if simply believing you’re creative allowed you to think more creatively? One fascinating study found that asking people to ‘take on’ a stereotype of either an ‘eccentric poet’ or ‘rigid librarian’ had a big effect on their performance in an alternate uses test. Students who imagined themselves to be poets while they were doing the test were much better at thinking divergently than those who put themselves in librarians’ shoes.

A study published this year showed the placebo effect also has a role to play in creative thinking. Ninety students were asked to sniff a cinnamon-like substance and half were told this substance had been designed to enhance creativity. Of course in truth, there is no such thing.

But sure enough, the students who had sniffed the supposed creativity elixir were much better at coming up with alternate uses for shoes, nails and buttons. They also did better on other divergent thinking tests than the students who hadn’t been told the odour increases creativity.

So although many of us think, or have been told, we aren’t creative, clearly we just need to believe we are.

Links and stuff

Do dogs understand our emotions?

comments 3
Evolution / Psychology / Zoology

Dogs give the impression of understanding our every word. How well can dogs read our emotions, and can they really smell fear?

Can dogs interpret human emotions? And can they really smell fear? Image credit Alberto … via Flickr

Man – and woman’s – best friend

Anyone who grew up with, or has a pet dog will agree: dogs have an amazing ability to make us feel understood. It’s in the way their eyes study us intently, often with a sympathetic tilt of the head. Dogs tend to stay close when we need comfort and are masters at reading our body language. It’s easy to imagine dogs understand exactly what we feel. But how much is that a case of wishful thinking?

Scientists are still trying to work out exactly how long ago wolves evolved into domesticated dogs, but we know it was tens of thousands of years ago. That’s a long time for humans and dogs to get to know one another. As you’d imagine, there’s been plenty of research into our relationship with man’s best friend. For example, we’ve studied the way dogs respond to our language, voices, body language and emotions. So just how well do dogs understand us?

Reading faces

Dogs are highly tuned to our faces. They use faces to recognise their owners and look particularly to our eyes. Eye-tracking studies show dogs follow our gaze to the same degree as six-month-old babies. Tell your dog not to take a piece of food and then close your eyes. Your dog is more likely to steal the food if your eyes are closed than if you are simply distracted or have your back turned. Worth remembering next time there’s birthday cake on the table.

And just as dogs are tuned into us, dogs have their own facial expressions. We know shelter dogs with a particular facial expression (raised inner eyebrows) are more quickly adopted by new owners. We also know dogs’ faces are more expressive when we pay attention to them. So it’s possible dogs have evolved to use their facial expressions to communicate with us.

But contrary to what you might expect, although dogs’ facial expressions changed when a researcher paid attention to them, dogs didn’t use a cute begging face when there was food around.

Your dog does understand you

Dogs also appear to show empathy; dogs pay more attention to people when they are crying than when they talk or hum. And dogs will sniff, nuzzle and lick a person who is crying, even if that person is a stranger. The fact yawns are contagious has been proposed to be a form of empathy and dogs also ‘catch’ human yawns. Researchers have proposed dogs also have a sense of morality, at least similar to that of babies. One experiment found dogs shun people who won’t help their owners.

Sounds are also important to dogs – they can tell the difference between happy and sad sounds. This research suggested dogs might also ‘catch’ emotions both from humans and other dogs. We also know dogs are able to distinguish between the tone of voice we use and the words we say: researchers scanned dogs brains and found different parts of the brain were involved in processing words and processing how we say those words.

Put sounds and faces together and dogs really stand out in their abilities. A study published last year showed that dogs are the only animals (other than us) able to interpret and recognise emotions from both faces and sounds together.

Can dogs smell fear?

Dogs are renowned for their incredible sense of smell, and it’s commonly said dogs can smell fear. But until recently we didn’t have a lot of evidence.

As part of a recent study, volunteers watched videos designed to make them feel happy, scared or neutral. The researchers then collected samples of these volunteers’ armpit sweat.

Labradors and golden retrievers behaved differently depending on whether they smelled happy or scared sweat. When they were exposed to fear smells, the dogs showed signs of stress. Their heart rates went up, they looked for more reassurance from their owners and were less likely to interact with strangers. But the happy smells made the dogs more likely to approach and interact with strangers – more sociable – and less reliant on their owners.

So dogs are not only able to smell fear, but it appears they may adopt our fear too. No wonder we love them so much.


Links and stuff

It’s not in the way you write

comments 2
Myths / Psychology

It’s tempting to think the way you write – big or small letters, straight or on a lean, with or without swirls, neat or messy – says something about your personality. But is there any truth to handwriting analysis?

Interpreting handwriting is about as scientifically sound as reading palms, tarot cards or the bumps on your head. Image credit Anthony Citrano via Flickr

The rise of graphology

At first glance, the idea that personality is reflected in handwriting does have some appeal. After all, each of us has our own very personal writing style so perhaps the way we write is influenced by our personality.

Handwriting analysis – known as graphology – has been around for centuries. What we think was the first book proposing a link between handwriting and personality was published in 1575, by Spaniard Juan Harte de San Juan. Graphology really took off in the 19th century, led by Jean-Hippolyte Michon. For example, Michon claimed ‘all weak-willed people cross their t’s feebly’. Edgar Allen Poe wrote a series analysing the handwriting of prominent writers.

Research published in 1948 declared “it will be possible (within a not too distant future) to devise a psychodiagnostic test based upon handwriting analysis which will satisfy scientific standards”.

The British Institute of Graphologists claims ‘your handwriting gives the story of yourself’ and one popular infographic claims handwriting indicates more than 5000 personality traits. Handwriting analysts are always keen to discuss the handwriting of political leaders and incidently, Trump also declared himself a handwriting analyst.

The science is in

If you Google graphology you’ll find well over a million results. A number of them, even from what I would consider fairly reputable sites, support a link between handwriting and personality. There’s a TEDx talk, a recent article in Business Insider Australia and in the New York Times. A piece in the Guardian from only eight years ago discusses handwriting analysis as part of many recruitment processes, a practice apparently particularly commonly in France. And CNN also weighed in last year on the Trump handwriting discussion.

But in a review of over 200 studies on graphology, the results were clear: taken together, these studies show no link between personality and handwriting. For example, we know handwriting analysis can’t detect the Big Five personality traits, a staple in modern personality testing.

That’s not to say there hasn’t been the odd positive result. For example, one German study from nearly twenty years ago found a link between the personality trait of agreeableness and slower speed of handwriting. Another study suggested graphologists were able to infer extraversion from handwriting (although it raised questions about definitions of extraversion). There is also some evidence of gender differences in handwriting.

But after fifty years of study, we don’t have any solid evidence that you can reliably determine a person’s personality from their handwriting.

Another pseudoscience

Prominent skeptic and professor of psychology Barry Beyerstein was particularly vocal in declaring graphology a pseudoscience, akin to describing a person’s personality on the basis of their skull shape. But he was also interested in why many intelligent, educated people believe in it. Perhaps it’s simply because we like the idea that our handwriting is somehow a true expression of ourselves.

Interestingly, one study found students were capable of altering their handwriting in order to change their teachers’ impressions of them. That suggests we do have shared beliefs about what certain types of handwriting mean, even if they’re wrong.

And we shouldn’t dismiss looking at handwriting all together: one study found a link between signature size and personality traits. People with larger signatures tended to be more socially dominant. More importantly, there’s evidence changes in handwriting can be indicative of Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia.

I’m happy to concede there may be occasions when scientists should analyse handwriting for health purposes. But if I’m ever asked to provide a handwriting sample with a job application, I’ll be thinking very carefully about whether I really want the job.

Links and stuff

Trumped-up confidence

comments 2
Anthropology / Myths / Psychology

Know anyone whose confidence in their own ability far outweighs their actual skills? It’s called the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

The Dunning–Kruger Effect is the ignorance of one’s own ignorance. Image credit Gage Skidmore via Wikimedia Commons

A question of confidence

The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are so sure of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubt. –Nobel Prize Winner Bertrand Russell

A lack of confidence is extremely common: seventy percent of us experience the imposter syndrome. Despite good evidence to the contrary, we worry we’re too inexperienced and incompetent to be doing our jobs. So we work harder to try to prove our abilities, all the while being filled with self-doubt.

But you probably know someone who seems to suffer from the opposite problem: misplaced confidence. Think of the infuriating person who dominates meetings despite clearly knowing very little about the topic being discussed. Or the person who is boring you stupid at a party, waxing lyrical – and apparently knowledgably – about a topic they are unmistakably ignorant about. Or the terrible driver who thinks they are one of the best. We all know someone.

This flipside to the imposter syndrome is known as the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

How funny is this joke?

In 1999, David Dunning, and his then student Justin Kruger, published a paper ‘Unskilled and unaware of it’. They describe a series of experiments designed to uncover the relationship between a person’s skill in a certain area, and that person’s perception of their ability in the same area.

Across tests of grammar, humour and logic, students who performed worst also hugely overestimated their abilities. Although on average, they did worse in these tests than 88% of others, these students estimated they had performed better than two-thirds of the other students.

For example, Dunning and Kruger asked 65 students to rate how funny certain jokes were. They then compared the students’ ratings with those of professional comedians. The students who were terrible at predicting what other people would find funny declared themselves to be excellent judges of humour.

In all cases, the confidence of the lowest-performing students well and truly surpassed their skills. It’s easy to understand how this could happen: if you know virtually nothing about grammar, of course you are unlikely to recognise when you make grammatical mistakes. We are simply not good at knowing what we don’t know.

Kruger and Dunning begin their paper with the now-famous example of McArthur Wheeler. Wheeler attempted to rob two banks in broad daylight with no disguise. It turns out he believed that covering his face with lemon juice would make him invisible to security cameras. He wasn’t under the influence of drugs, or delusional; he was just completely wrong about a key part of his robbery plan. The story goes Wheeler was dumbfounded when police showed him the clear-as-a-bell video footage of himself mid-robbery.

This became the perfect example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect: not only was McArthur incompetent at being a bank robber, his incompetence left him completely unable to recognise his incompetence.

We don’t know what we don’t know

As John Cleese famously put it: ‘If you’re very, very stupid, how can you possibly realise that you’re very, very stupid?’

The Dunning-Kruger Effect has now been widely researched. Whether you look at debating, financial knowledge, chess, firearm safety, emotional intelligence or driving ability, the story is the same. Unskilled people simply don’t have the ability to recognise their lack of skills. If you don’t know how to play chess very well, you are completely ignorant to all the far better chess moves you could be making.

The problem isn’t when we know absolutely nothing about a topic. ‘Most people have no trouble identifying their inability to translate Slovenian proverbs, reconstruct a V-8 engine, or diagnose acute disseminated encephalomyelitis’. The problem arises when we know a little bit, but not enough to realise how little we know (a graph explains it better).

An important point to take away from these studies is that the Dunning-Kruger Effect isn’t about ridiculing the stupidity of others. It’s about recognising the traps we all fall into. How do we tackle the effect? By improving our skills. As we become more competent at something, at the same time we become better at recognising the limits of our abilities.

Students who originally estimated that they got five out of ten logic puzzles correct (when in reality they struggled to get one right) changed their tune after getting training. After being taught the basics of how to solve logic puzzles, the same students now predicted they would score one out of ten.

The challenge for all of us is clear. Next time we feel confident about something, we need to think carefully. Is our confidence a sign of genuine ability, or of complete incompetence?

Links and stuff

Hearing accents

comments 2
Anthropology / Myths / Psychology

We all speak with an accent, and we judge each other by our accents. Our accents can change gradually, or sometimes dramatically. But if you want to speak an additional language without any foreign accent, you may be facing an uphill battle.

Did you know that some animals – like these Japanese macaques – have accents too? Image via Wikimedia Commons.

Accent, accents everywhere

Everyone has an accent. And I’m not just talking about humans. The clicking sounds sperm whales use to communicate with each other vary by region, and Japanese Macaques have local accents too. In fact a variety of animals have patterns to their calls that are influenced by where the animal lives – for example wolves, other monkeys and cod. There has even been research into whether a cat’s miaows are affected by its owner’s accent.

Our accents can change over time – both as individuals and as whole countries. One study observed the way reality TV participants regularly changed their accents while living in isolation together for three months.

In the case of the rare foreign accent syndrome, a person’s accent can drastically and immediately change as a result of damage to the brain. Well-known examples are an Australian who has spoken with something similar to a French accent since a car accident twelve years ago, an American who has been speaking with a Cockney accent since having a stroke and a Brit who spoke in a thick Russian accent for several years after a brain hemorrhage. The first recorded case of foreign accent syndrome was in 1941 when a Norwegian woman began speaking in a German accent after being hit by shrapnel. The story goes that she was thought to be a German spy and was shunned by the people around her.

Talk like an Egyptian

If you’re hoping to speak a second language and sound like a native, you may be running out of time. The strength of your accent is directly correlated with your age at the time you learned the additional language. Unfortunately, your ability to speak an additional language accent-free has been tapering off since puberty. If you want to speak an additional language accent-free, your best bet is to learn it before the age of six. How much of the time you continue to speak in your native language will also affect the accent you speak with in a second language.

It’s difficult to sound like a native speaker when you’re not because the sounds you recognise (and will later copy) are established before your first birthday. In one study, researchers played the sounds ‘la’ and ‘ra’ to six-month old Japanese and English babies. At that age, all the babies could pick the difference between the two sounds. But at the ripe old age of ten months, Japanese babies could no longer hear the difference between ‘l’ and ‘r’ sounds, which don’t exist in Japanese. It’s amazing to think your pattern of speaking was already largely set before you spoke your first word.

Here’s a sobering fact for all of us who speak additional languages with a detectable accent: speaking with an accent makes you harder to understand. And research shows we are less likely to trust someone we find harder to understand. The more severe your accent, the less credible people assume you to be. This accent discrimination may be frustrating for travellers but of course is far more damaging for immigrants.

Can I borrow your accent?

Do people ever tease you about the fact you pick up accents easily? You might not even be aware you’re doing it but what’s been dubbed a ‘wandering accent’ is quite common. Without intention, you mimic whatever accent you hear at the time. It’s also known as the chameleon effect. It turns out we even imitate other peoples’ speaking styles when lip reading, and not able to hear their voice.

We mimic other people as a result of wanting to empathise and bond with them and imitating someone’s accent is the best way to improve your ability to understand that person. We now know exactly which part of the brain is active when impersonating someone else which may help to treat someone who has lost their own accent through foreign accent syndrome.

A head’s up: if you suddenly find yourself speaking with a distinctly British accent, a whole new line of acting work may be open to you. In the movies, most villains are portrayed by people with posh British accents – also known as received pronunciation (RP).

We perceive speakers with this accent as highly intellectually but low in morals. Sounds like a villainous combo to me.

Links and stuff

There’s a face in there

comments 2
Anthropology / Evolution / Myths / Psychology

Ever seen Elvis in a corn chip? How about a face in a building or a cloud? Spotting faces – even ones that don’t exist – is something your brain is very good at.

Seeing faces? Image credit Mk2010 via Wikimedia Commons

Do you see what I see?

One of my favourite Twitter accounts is Faces in Things. You’d be amazed where people have spied faces and other human and animal shapes.

You’ve probably heard about Jesus on a banana peel, the Man in the Moon and the face of Madonna on a toasted sandwich (which sold for US$28,000). We’ve seen capsicums that look like British politicians and a crab tainted with the face of Osama bin Laden.

Melbournians may know the Hume Highway rooster tree, now with its own Facebook page and song.

Since the 1700s, the surface of Mars has been a particularly rich source of these illusions. In 1976, people were captivated by images of a face on Mars, which turned out to be nothing more than a trick of light and shadows. Mars also boasts a smiley face in a crater, a lava flow that resembles Kermit the frog, the face of Mahatma Gandhi, a rat and Bigfoot.

Famous cases aside, people have spied faces in power points, trees, buildings, rocks and USB drives. If you tend to see faces everywhere, don’t worry. You’re not going crazy: our brains are exceptionally good at spotting faces.

It’s called pareidolia: the tendency to perceive a familiar pattern when one doesn’t exist.

Faces, faces everywhere

There are many different kinds of pareidolia, but seeing faces is the most common. Why are we so quick to see a face where there isn’t one? Simple – because we spend so much of our time looking at faces. And we’ve evolved to depend on our ability to recognise and extract information from these faces.

We’ve over-learned human faces so we see them where they aren’t – Professor Takeo Watanabe, Brown University

We are hard-wired to recognise faces: our social lives have long relied on us being able to spot a face from a distance or in low light. Not only that, it’s extremely useful to be able to deduce other things from a face: mood, age, gender and the direction a person is looking. Is this person a friend, or a threat? Even as very young babies, we prefer to look at faces over non-faces.

It turns out we have an entire brain area dedicated to recognising faces – the Fusiform Face Area (FFA). This area is active when we see a face, even in blind people.

Research shows this area of the brain lights up in the same way when we see an illusory face as when we see a real face. The FFA is active when a person reports seeing a face, even when there is absolutely no pattern (in a pure noise image).

True believers

Identifying patterns is nothing new – it’s the basis of the infamous Rorschach inkblot test. But some of us are more likely to see faces than others.

A Finnish study firstly asked volunteers whether they saw faces in dozens of objects and landscapes. The researchers then asked about the belief systems of the participants. Did each person believe in God? And how about the paranormal? Religious people and those who believed in the paranormal were much more likely to see faces than atheists and skeptics. ‘Believers’ were also more likely to see emotions in the illusory faces.

And if you’re thinking our ability to see faces in toast, tortillas and toilets is something that makes us uniquely human, think again.

Recent research shows rhesus monkeys see faces that aren’t there too. And it makes perfect sense – if a monkey thinks it sees a tiger when there’s no tiger around, it isn’t a big deal. But the consequences of not spotting a real tiger might not be so pretty. It’s not just humans who have evolved to be highly tuned to faces.

Now given I’m hard-wired to spot faces, excuse me while I waste a bit more time indulging my pareidolia.

Links and stuff


How to rock paper and scissors

comments 2
Anthropology / Mathematics / Myths / Psychology

We’ve all used rock-paper-scissors to resolve a dispute. Is there a foolproof winning strategy?

Want to win at rock-paper-scissors?

The earwig and the elephant

When all else fails, rock-paper-scissors (also known as RPS) is an excellent way to make a decision. The rules are simple. At an agreed moment – usually after two or three ‘primes’ to get in sync, two people each make a symbol with their hand. The symbols are rock (closed fist), paper (flat hand) and scissors (index and middle fingers form a V to represent scissor blades).

There is an agreed hierarchy to determine who wins each round: rock breaks scissors, scissors cuts paper, paper covers rock. Despite considerable debate as to whether the rock smashes the scissors or blunts them, the outcome is the same. There are three possible results: win, lose or tie.

There’s plenty of discussion about the origins of RPS – it probably dates back to the Chinese Han Dynasty. The Japanese version, Junken, has a long history and continues to play an important role in Japan today. There are many variations on the theme: for example, the tiger, village chief and village chief’s mother (who trumps the village chief). My personal favourite – earwig-man-elephant – hails from Indonesia. Earwig beats elephant because it crawls up the elephant’s trunk and eats its brain. The game is also sometimes called Rochambeau or Roshambo (remember the Southpark episode?)

Just a kid’s game?

At one level, RPS is a kid’s game, good for settling playground disputes. Among adults, it can decide who should pay for a round of drinks. But don’t be fooled: RPS is a cultural phenomenon.

International competitions offer five-figure prize money. The World RPS Society has an Internationally Recognised Throwing System of hand symbols. There’s also a Player’s Responsibility Code including the sage advice “Think twice before using RPS for life-threatening decisions.”

Why do we love RPS so much? Because despite the deceptively simple rules, there’s a whole world of strategy.

RPS is written off as a kids’ game … but when you delve into it, it’s one of the purest forms of competition that two minds can have with each other – Professional rock-paper-scissors player Jason Simmon

Let’s talk strategy

We tend to think RPS is a fair way to resolve disputes because the winner is decided by chance. Each player picks a hand symbol at random meaning each has an equal likelihood of winning that round.

Except that we are lousy at being random. We follow patterns and if you understand those patterns, you suddenly have a distinct advantage over your opponent. You can find a variety of RPS strategy guides and most suggest different tactics depending on your opponent’s gender and level of experience. For example, inexperienced men tend to lead with rock whereas most women lead with scissors. If you’re not convinced experience makes any difference, play against a computer first in Novice mode, then in Veteran mode where the computer “pits over 200,000 rounds of previous experience against you.” Experience matters.

Recent studies have revealed on average, we choose each action about a third of the time, which is what you would expect if our choices were random. But closer inspection shows there are predictable patterns to our choices. In a study of 360 students playing 300 rounds of RPS, the patterns were clear.

Players who won the last round will most likely stick with the same action. If it worked once, it may well work again.

Importantly, players who lost the last round will most likely switch to the next action in a clockwise direction (where R → P → S is clockwise). This is the tendency you can exploit to your advantage.

Can you always win?

The latest research led to dozens of claims that with maths on your side, you can always win at rock-paper-scissors.

The latest research findings can definitely up your chances of winning. If your opponent just won with rock (because you played scissors), you should choose paper next because they are likely to play rock again. If your opponent lost, you should respond to the likelihood that they will switch from rock to paper to scissors in that order by playing the actions in the opposite order. For every scenario, the research predicts which action will most likely win you the next round.

But the problem here is that if your opponent has also read up on strategy, your plans may be foiled. I don’t think you can ever be guaranteed of winning.

Unless, of course, you’re a robot. The Janken robot wins RPS every time because it recognises in one millisecond what shape your hand is forming and almost simultaneously makes the winning action.

Time to channel your inner robot.

Links and stuff

Imposters are us

comments 2
Health / Myths / Psychology

Have you ever felt like a fraud? That you aren’t good enough, experienced enough or smart enough to be doing what you’re doing? Join the club.

Anxious you’re about to be found out?

Feeling like a phoney

On the outside you appear confident, composed and on top of your game. But on the inside you are wracked with self-doubt. You feel like a fraud and as though someone is about to tap you on the shoulder and ask you what you think you’re doing. You’re sure your inadequacies and incompetency are just about to be revealed. Hello Imposter Syndrome.

In 1978, psychologists Pauline Rose Clance and Suzanne Imes described this phenomenon among high-achieving women. Five years of research had highlighted how many successful women believed their success could be attributed to luck, chance or errors in selection processes. These women were sure their abilities had been overestimated. Clance went on to create a scale to quantify the experience of imposter syndrome.

Researchers have been studying the imposter syndrome ever since and we now know a lot about it. Despite the fact the imposter syndrome was first described in women, we now know men are just as likely to experience it. One study among University academics (a profession in which the imposter syndrome is rife) found men were even more likely than women to experience imposter syndrome.

Research suggests 70% of people will experience feelings of being an imposter at some point in their lives. And it’s worth pointing out this phenomenon doesn’t qualify as a syndrome according to the medical definition. According to Clance, if she could go back she would call it the Imposter Experience since nearly everyone experiences it and it’s not a mental illness.

Come one, come all

An important aspect of the imposter syndrome is the fact each of us tends to think we are the only one suffering from it. We listen to the monologue of self-doubt going on in our own heads and mistakenly assume it’s just us. But the truth is most people feel this way at least some of the time. When Olivia Fox Cabane asks incoming students at the notoriously highly-selective Harvard Business School each year ‘How many of you in here feel that you are the one mistake the admissions committee made?’, two-thirds of the students put up their hand.

(And of course, it’s somewhat terrifying to consider the possibility everyone around us is just winging it. We like to think the people out there flying planes, performing surgery, making decisions in court and running our governments are highly competent.)

There are a number of common features among people experiencing imposter syndrome. The vast majority of ‘imposters’ are able to successfully fulfill their work requirements despite their perceptions of incompetency. In fact, many ‘imposters’ are high achievers who fail to internalise their success. Despite ample objective evidence of their achievements, ‘imposters’ still feel like they are making it up as they go along and fear they are about to be unmasked.

Other features of imposter syndrome are a fear of failure; a tendency to attribute success to luck, error or charm; and the feeling of having given others a false impression. People experiencing imposter syndrome often experience anxiety, may be perfectionists and may also fall victim to procrastination. ‘Imposters’ often feel they need to stand out and be the very best compared with their peers. Interestingly, people suffering imposter syndrome crave praise and acknowledgement but feel uncomfortable when they receive it (because they feel they don’t deserve it).

Although men and women experience imposter syndrome in equal numbers, they do respond to it differently: women commonly work harder to try and prove themselves whereas men tend to avoid situations in which their weaknesses might be exposed.

Fake it ’til you make it

The most common advice we hear about how to deal with feelings of inadequacy is to ‘fake it ’til you make it’. Pretend you feel confident and assured and ignore the nagging doubts. It’s not bad advice, but we may be waiting for a long time to feel like we’ve ‘made it’. The frustrating irony of imposter syndrome is the more experienced and senior you become, the more likely you are to find yourself being required to do new things, and therefore feeling like you are winging it. Getting better at your job isn’t a guaranteed way of making your imposter syndrome go away.

There is plenty of other advice for coping with imposter syndrome. For example, learn to accept compliments, talk with the people around you about how you feel and remember that feeling like a fraud is completely normal. It can also be useful to focus on what you’re learning, rather than how you’re performing. This is mindset theory: if you focus on how you’re performing, you see any mistakes you make as evidence of your inadequacy. But if you have a growth mindset, your mistakes are simply part of the inevitable learning process.

And if all else fails, take heart from the words of an expert in the field:

Impostorism is most often found among extremely talented and capable individuals, not people who are true impostors –Associate Professor Jessica Collett

Links and stuff


It’s a seasonal thing

comments 3
Health / Myths / Psychology

We all know horoscopes are bunk. But research suggests the season you were born may say something about you after all.

What season were you born in?

What’s your star sign?

Is checking your horoscope a guilty pleasure? Most of us agree: there’s no science behind the star sign columns that abound in newspapers, magazines and online. But that doesn’t mean people don’t read them. One study found more than 20% of adults read their horoscope often. There’s also been plenty of research into how many people believe in horoscope predictions, and the numbers are higher than you might think. This is despite the fact we know full well that predictions based on astrology are no better than those based on chance.

Astrological predictions aside, it turns out there are other interesting correlations between the season in which you were born and your personality and health. Research has found a variety of factors including your mood, risk of suffering allergies and how long you are going to live may be influenced by when you were born.

The seasons of life

Researchers have found a number of correlations between season of birth and personality traits. People born in summer are more likely to experience frequent mood swings. Those born in summer and spring are more likely to be excessively positive. But people born in winter are less likely to be irritable than those born at other times of the year.

We know people born during the winter months are more likely to have Seasonal Affective Disorder (‘winter depression’), bipolar disorder and schizophrenia. One fascinating study also found differences in brain structure between people born in different seasons. One very large study found relationships between month of birth and risk of developing a disease for 55 different conditions including MS, diabetes and heart conditions.

When you were born may also influence how long you are going to live. In the US, you are more likely to live to 100 if you were born in September – November. A Danish study found remaining life expectancy at 50 was higher for people born in October or November. In the southern hemisphere, the pattern is shifted by half a year: in Australia, people born in May and June are likely to live longer. Interestingly, British immigrants to Australia fit the pattern for the northern, not southern hemisphere.

Your seasonal brain

We don’t fully understand how the season you were born in influences your personality and health. There are a few different possibilities. Perhaps the fact that sunlight varies across the year, and the amount of sunlight you are exposed to influences vitamin D levels may play a role. We know people born in winter have lower levels of vitamin D in adulthood than those born at other times of the year. The timing of your birth may also be linked to how likely your mother experienced seasonal illnesses during pregnancy. Levels of important chemical messengers in our bodies like serotonin and dopamine also vary according to the season of birth.

There’s also evidence from studies of mice that the season you are born in may have an ongoing effect on your body clock. Mice raised in a winter light cycle had more trouble adapting to a seasonal shift in light than mice raised under summer conditions. This has led to an intriguing suggestion: perhaps the cycles of night and day we experience during the time our brains are developing may affect our personality.

We know the seasons influence us in other ways too. For example,  how our eyes perceive different colours and possibly even how effectively we can pay attention and memorise things.

So although I’m not advocating you spend any time reading your star signs, it may be worth considering that the seasons could be having more of an effect on us than we realise.

Links and stuff

To eat it or not to eat it?

comments 3
Biology / Health / Myths

We’ve all heard the five-second rule: as long as the food has been on the ground for less than five seconds, you’re  safe to eat it. But are you?

Would you eat this biscuit off the floor?

Birth of an urban myth

When it comes to the origin of the five-second rule, stories abound. Genghis Khan often stars in these accounts, with claims it was originally known as the Khan rule. This rule apparently came into play at 13th-century victory banquets when Khan declared that as long as food had been on the ground for less than twelve hours, it was safe to eat. Another story centres on celebrity chef Julia Child famously advising on her TV show The French Chef what to do if you drop food while cooking. ‘You can always pick it up, and if you’re alone in the kitchen, who is going to see?’

One survey found 70% of women and 56% of men are aware of the five-second rule and use it to make decisions about whether to eat dropped food. Another found 87% of people would, or already have, eaten food that’s been on the ground. The five-second rule was the focus of a Mythbusters TV segment and even made it into a Volkswagen commercial.

But is there any science to back up the claim that it takes more than five seconds for bacteria to attach to dropped food?

Testing, testing

I found a couple of tests of the five-second rule, with conclusions both for and against. In 2003, high school student Jillian Clarke set out to examine the rule as part of her science internship. Her conclusion: university floors are remarkably clean. But if you do drop food on a floor containing germs, your food will become contaminated in less than five seconds.

Another study concluded there is definite truth to the five-second rule: food picked up within a few seconds of being dropped is less likely to be contaminated than food left for longer. But a 2006 study found a sausage dropped on a tile floor picked up 99% of the bacteria present within five seconds.

A detailed study published last year found some food picks up bacteria within a second of landing on the floor. The scientists tested four foods (watermelon, bread, buttered bread and a jelly sweet), four surfaces (stainless steel, ceramic tile, wood and carpet) and a variety of contact times from less than a second to five minutes. Unsurprisingly, the moister the food, the more it got contaminated. The message: next time you drop watermelon on the floor, put it in the compost.

All floors aren’t equal

One of the biggest influences on whether bacteria end up on food is not how long the food has been on the floor, but rather what floor the food falls on. And I’m not just talking about how often you vacuum or mop: different floor surfaces provide more or less friendly surfaces for bacteria. Interestingly, the researchers found much lower contamination rates from carpet onto food than from tiles or stainless steel.

Clearly, what sort of food you’ve dropped and where you’ve dropped it matters just as much, if not more, than how long you’ve left the food on the floor for.

But it’s worth bearing in mind your floor is probably far cleaner than many of the other surfaces around your house. Study after study have highlighted how many bacteria live on many of the surfaces we touch regularly: money, mobile phones, remote controls, supermarket trolleys, computer keyboards and, often the most contaminated, kitchen cloths. There are a whole heap of bacterial hotspots you are probably touching before you eat without a second thought.

It’s highly likely your floor contains bacteria, and almost certain any food you drop on that floor will very quickly pick up that bacteria. Most bacteria won’t do you any harm, but some will make you very sick.

Whether eating food you’ve dropped on the floor is more likely to make you sick than any other number of things you do every day is a decision only you can make.

Links and stuff