(목요모임) [30 Nov. 2017]Thursday meeting topic

[susanna]

1. To Better Cope With Stress, Listen to Your Body


By GRETCHEN REYNOLDS

JANUARY 13, 2016

To handle stress and adversity more effectively, we should probably pay closer attention to what is happening inside our bodies, according to a fascinating new brain study of resilience and why some people seem to have more of it than others.

We live in difficult times, as readers of this newspaper know well. Worries about the state of our world, our safety, our finances, health and more can lead to a variety of physiological and psychological responses.

“When faced with stress, whether it’s giving a talk in front of a hundred people or feeling pressured to get a second gold medal at the Olympics, we experience changes in our body,” said Lori Haase, a clinical professor of psychiatry at the University of California, San Diego, and lead author of the new study. Our heart rates rise, breathing grows shallow, and blood levels of adrenaline and other stress chemicals soar.

While this stress response can have desirable results — “I need anxiety to motivate myself to write a grant,” Dr. Haase said — it can easily can get out of hand. Remaining in a state of heightened arousal undermines physical and mental performance, she explained. So while our bodies should respond to dangers and worries, our stress reactions also should dissipate as soon as possible afterward.

This is where resilience comes in. In scientific terms, resilience is the ability to rapidly return to normal, both physically and emotionally, after a stressful event.

Scientists and therapists long have known that some people are more resilient than others but had not known precisely why.

In recent years, Dr. Haase and colleagues have begun to speculate that part of the answer might involve whether and how people listen to their bodies.

To reach that conclusion, the researchers had been examining how adventure racers and elite special-operations soldiersdevelop resilience in the face of the frequent and often extreme physical and emotional demands of their jobs. The researchers had asked those men and women to lie in brain scanning machines while wearing face masks that, when the researchers touched a button, made it difficult to breathe, conditions that the brain and body find quite stressful.

The scientists soon noticed a common pattern of brain activity among these volunteers. Portions of their brains that receive and process signals from the body, such as changes in heart rate or breathing, were very active when the volunteers thought that their masks were about to close. But despite this heightened awareness, the flow of messages from those parts of the brain to areas that intensify bodily arousal were fairly slight.

In other words, the brains of these highly trained men and women closely monitored the beginnings of bodily panic but dampened the response. They experienced stress but didn’t overreact. They were resilient physically and mentally.

They also, of course, were outliers; most of us are not elite athletes or soldiers.

So for the new study, which was published this month in Biological Psychology, the same researchers recruited 48 healthy adults and asked them to complete a standard questionnaire about their self-perceived emotional and physical resilience. Based on their scores, the scientists assessed them as having high, average or low resilience.

Then they scanned the men’s and women’s brains while the volunteers wore the same type of face masks the athletes and soldiers had and, like them, underwent periodic moments of breathlessness.

The people whose scores had showed that they were highly resilient displayed brain activity very similar to that of the elite athletes and soldiers, as did, to a lesser degree, people with average resilience.

But the brains of those people with low resilience scores behaved in almost the opposite way. As their face masks threatened to close, they displayed surprisingly little activity in those portions of the brain that monitor signals from the body. And then, when breathing did grow difficult, they showed high activation in parts of the brain that increase physiological arousal. In effect, they paid little attention to what was happening inside their bodies as they waited for breathing to become difficult — and then overreacted when the threat occurred.

Such brain responses would undermine resilience, the scientists concluded, by making it more difficult for the body to return to a calm state.

Of course, this study was based on people’s own assessments of their resilience and on a one-time snapshot of brain activity. It can’t tell us why the brains of the different groups of volunteers worked differently or whether we can change our brains’ responses to stress.

But the researchers found the results compelling. “To me, this study says that resilience is largely about body awareness and not rational thinking,” said Dr. Martin Paulus, the scientific director of the Laureate Institute for Brain Research in Tulsa, Okla., and the senior author of the study. “Even smart people, if they don’t listen to their body, might not bounce back” as quickly from adversity, he said, as someone who is more attuned to his or her physiology.

Improving internal communications with our bodies may be as simple as spending a few minutes each day in focused breathing, Dr. Haase said. Quietly pay attention to inhaling and exhaling without otherwise reacting, she said. Over time, this exercise should “teach you to have a change in breathing when anxious but be less attached to that reaction,” Dr. Haase said, “which may help to improve your reaction in a stressful situation.”

Questions!

1.    What are the main causes of stress in your life?
2.    How well do you handle stress?
3.    Do you have good coping mechanisms?
4.    Is stress an important part of life?
5.    When do you feel most stressed?
6.    How can stress damage you physically?
7.    Do you think technology eases stress or brings stress on?
8.    What’s the difference between stress and anxiety?
9.    In what circumstances do you think stress is important?
10.    Do you know anyone who has suffered a nervous breakdown due to stress?
11.     What do you think the number one cause of is stress for most people?
12.    Most people feel very stressed about public speaking. How do you feel about this?
13.    Do you think it’s your responsibility to help friends reduce stress?
14.    Do you think religion reduces stress or causes it?
15.    Do you think most married people feel stressed because of their spouse?
16.    What is more stressful, raising children or having a job?
17.    Do you think taking medication to reduce stress is a good idea?

2. Sporty in, high heels out?

Women seem less obsessed with high heels than before as fashion becomes more casual and cheerful, according to a report by Chosun Ilbo.

At this year’s spring Seoul Fashion Week at Dongdaemun Design Plaza, seeing a female model catwalk down the runway in traditional high-heels was not easy, as most wore comfortable, low-heeled “slip-ons,” the newspaper said.

This new exception has become the norm abroad as towering models from Givenchy to Giambattista Valli alike have opted for the low-rise fit on the latest fashion stage.

The reason?

“It’s called ‘sportism.’ As people’s life becomes more stable on the five-days per week work schedule, the weekend outdoor, leisurely activities have become commonplace. Everyday fashion followed suit, becoming more casual,” fashion designer Hong Hye-jin said.

Despite the lowering of high-heels, people’s tastes for beauty and fashion have heightened, ushered by the avant-garde expressive experimentalism of younger generations.

“Overdressing or dressing formally actually looks countrified in urbane, cosmopolitan city,” another fashion designer, Bae Seung-yeon said.

“What looks cool these days is slightly twisting the standard dress code under one’s own discretion. It looks cooler to wear the suit unlike a suit, the dress unlike a dress,” Bae added.

높은 하이힐을 신은 여성을 찾기가 어려워지고 있다고 조선일보가 보도했다. 거리에서도 패션무대에서도 하이힐이 예전만큼 많이 보이지 않는다. 조선일보는 최근 서울패션위크에서 하일을 신고 런웨이에 오른 모델은 거의 없었다며 이는 전세계적으로 이는 “스포티즘”의 영향이 크다고 분석했다.

즉 너무 차려 입을수록 “촌스럽다”는 인식이 퍼지고 있는 것이다. 하이힐보다는 낮은 구두, 통굽 샌들, 스니커 등이 대세다.

Reference from:

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2014/05/511_157283.html

Question!

1. Do you agree with this article that fashion becomes more casual and cheerful than before?

2. What do you think the reasons for ‘sportism’? 

   -Spotism: 스포티즘. 스포츠룩이나 스포티브룩 따위를 소재로 삼아 평상복을 만들려고 하는 사고방식.

3. In terms of fashion, which one has higher priority for you between comfort and good looking?

4. What is your favorite fashion style? and What is the trend these days? Describe it in detail.

5. If you are a women, How often do you wear high heel? If you are a men, How often do you wear polish shoes? Do you like those kinds of shoes?

3. Decisions Are Emotional, Not Logical: The Neuroscience behind Decision Making

http://bigthink.com/experts-corner/decisions-are-emotional-not-logical-the-neuroscience-behind-decision-making
Think of a situation where you had bulletproof facts, reason, and logic on your side, and believed there was absolutely no way the other person could say no to your perfectly constructed argument and proposal. To do so would be impossible, you figured, because there was no other logical solution or answer.

And then the other person dug in his heels and refused to budge. He wasn’t swayed by your logic. Were you flabbergasted?

This is similar to what many negotiators do when they sit down at the table to hammer out a deal. They come armed with facts, and they attempt to use logic to sway the other party. They figure that by piling on the data and using reason to explain their side of the situation, they can construct a solution that is simply irrefutable—and get the other party to say yes.

They’re doomed to fail, however, because decision-making isn’t logical, it’s emotional, according to the latest findings in neuroscience.

A few years ago, neuroscientist Antonio Damasio made a groundbreaking discovery. He studied people with damage in the part of the brain where emotions are generated. He found that they seemed normal, except that they were not able to feel emotions. But they all had something peculiar in common: they couldn’t make decisions. They could describe what they should be doing in logical terms, yet they found it very difficult to make even simple decisions, such as what to eat. Many decisions have pros and cons on both sides—shall I have the chicken or the turkey? With no rational way to decide, these test subjects were unable to arrive at a decision.

So at the point of decision, emotions are very important for choosing. In fact even with what we believe are logical decisions, the very point of choice is arguably always based on emotion.

This finding has enormous implications for negotiation professionals. People who believe they can build a case for their side using reason are doomed to be poor negotiators, because they don’t understand the real factors that are driving the other party to come to a decision. Those who base their negotiation strategy on logic end up relying on assumptions, guesses, and opinions. If my side of the argument is logical, they figure, then the other side can’t argue with it and is bound to come around to my way of thinking. The problem is, you can’t assume that the other party will see things your way.

What the negotiator can and must do, however, is create a vision for the other side to bring about discovery and decision on their part. In the end, your opponent will make the decision because he wants to. Getting him to want to, using the step-by-step methodology that is part of the Camp System, is the job of the negotiator—not trying to convince him with reason.

You don’t tell your opponent what to think or what’s best. You help them discover for themselves what feels right and best and most advantageous to them. Their ultimate decision is based on self-interest. That’s emotional. I want this. This is good for me and my side.

There’s a detailed and systematic way to go about building vision the right way. But in general, if you can get the other party to reveal their problems, pain, and unmet objectives, then you can build a vision for them of their problem, with you and your proposal as the solution. They won’t make their decision because it is logical. They’ll make their decision because you have helped them feel that it’s to their advantage to do so.

Questions:

1. What do you consider when you make a decision?

2. Do you condsider yourself to be logical or emotional? And why?

3. Do you have difficulty making decisions? And why?

4. How Do You See Yourself?

I gave a toast at my best friend's wedding last summer, a speech I carefully crafted and practiced delivering. And it went well: The bride and groom beamed; the guests paid attention and reacted in the right spots; a waiter gave me a thumbs-up. I was relieved and pleased with myself. Until months later—when I saw the cold, hard video documentation of the event. As I watched myself getting ready to make the toast, a funny thing happened. I got butterflies in my stomach all over again. I was nervous for myself, even though I knew the outcome would be just fine. Except maybe the jitters were warranted. The triumph of that speech in my mind's eye morphed into the duller reality unfolding on the TV screen. My body language was awkward. My voice was grating. My facial expressions, odd. My timing, not quite right. Is this how people saw me? It's a terrifying thought: What if I possess a glaring flaw that everyone notices but me? Or, fears aside, what if there are a few curious chasms between how I view myself and how others view me? What if I think I'm efficient but I'm seen as disorganized? Critical, but perceived as accepting?

While many profess not to care what others think, we are, in the end, creatures who want and need to fit into a social universe. Humans are psychologically suited to interdependence. Social anxiety is really just an innate response to the threat of exclusion; feeling that we're not accepted by a group leaves us agitated and depressed.

The ability to intuit how people see us is what enables us to authentically connect to others and to reap the deep satisfaction that comes with those ties. We can never be a fly on the wall to our own personality dissections, watching as people pick us apart after meeting us. Hence we are left to rely on the accuracy of what psychologists call our "metaperceptions"—the ideas we have about others' ideas about us.

The bottom line: It comes down to what you think about yourself

Your ideas about what others think of you hinge on your self-concept—your own beliefs about who you are. "You filter the cues that you get from others through your self-concept," explains Mark Leary, professor of psychology at Wake Forest University in Winston-Salem, North Carolina.

Our self-concept is fundamentally shaped by one person in particular: Mama. How our mother (or primary caregiver) responded to our first cries and gestures heavily influences how we expect to be seen by others. "Children behave in ways that perpetuate what they have experienced," says Martha Farrell Erickson, senior fellow with the Children, Youth and Family Consortium at the University of Minnesota. "A child who had an unresponsive mother will act obnoxious or withdrawn so that people will want to keep their distance. Those with consistently responsive mothers are confident and connect well with their peers."

As an infant scans his mother's face he absorbs clues to who he is; as adults we continue to search for our reflections in others' eyes. While the parent-child bond is not necessarily destiny, it does take quite a bit to alter self-concepts forged in childhood, whether good or bad. People rely on others' impressions to nurture their views about themselves, says William Swann, professor of psychology at the University of Texas, Austin. His research shows that people with negative self-concepts goad others to eval‎‎uate them harshly, especially if they suspect the person likes them—they would rather be right than be admired.

The top line: You probably do know what people think of you

But it's likely you don't know any one person's assessment. "We have a fairly stable view of ourselves," says Bella DePaulo, visiting professor of psychology at the University of California at Santa Barbara. "We expect other people to see that same view immediately." And they do. On average there is consensus about how you come off. But you can't apply that knowledge to any one individual, for a variety of reasons.

For starters, each person has an idiosyncratic way of sizing up others that (like metaperceptions themselves) is governed by her own self-concept. A person you meet will assess you through her unique lens, which lends consistency to her views on others. Some people, for example, are "likers" who perceive nearly everyone as good-natured and smart.

Furthermore, if a particular person doesn't care for you, it won't always be apparent. "People are generally not direct in everyday interactions," says DePaulo. Classic work by psychologist Paul Ekman has shown that most people can't tell when others are faking expressions. Who knows how many interactions you've walked away from thinking you were a hit while your new friend was actually faking agreeability?

And there's just a whole lot going on when you meet someone. You're talking, listening and planning what you're going to say next, as well as adjusting your nonverbal behavior and unconsciously responding to the other person's. DePaulo calls it "cognitive busyness."

Because of all we have to contend with, she says, we are unable to effectively interpret someone else's reactions. "We take things at face value and don't really have the means to infer others' judgments." Until afterward, of course, when you mull over the interaction, mining your memory for clues.

Questions:

1. Do you agree with the statement "How our mother (or primary caregiver) responded to our first cries and gestures heavily influences how we expect to be seen by others." in this article? Why or why not?

2. Do you think there is a gap between how you view yourself and how others view you?

3. Do you care about what other people think about you? How much that affects you?