A Plan For Breaking Those Bad HabitsA thoughtful action plan is needed to help you achieve the goal.Published on January 12, 2014 by James Ullrich in The Modern Time Crunch

So the holidays are over and now you’re working on getting rid of those bad habits you’ve resolved to eliminate. They’re negatively affecting your health or emotions and are therefore negatively affecting your performance. They might be health-related (such as smoking, eating too much sugar) or purely behavioral (such as procrastinating).

Perhaps they’re being a bit more stubborn than you expected. Not the best circumstance you start off the new year, and you’re frustrated at not performing at your highest possible level.

Don’t despair; there are solutions. A desire to reach your goal is key, of course, but it is only one ingredient needed to break a bad habit; what you also need is a thoughtful, logical action plan that takes into account the behavioral psychological realities of the challenge.

A good, though partial, action plan should look something like this:

Know your triggers. For most people it is stress or boredom. Humans instinctively reach for something to soothe it, and it often takes the instant-gratification form of sugar, alcohol, nicotine or (these days) distractions like social media.

Train yourself to be mindful enough to know when you are entering your danger zone (i.e. feeling stressed out, tired, bored, etc). Becoming more conscious of your mood and the likelihood of lapsing will help you to act with intention instead of habit.

When you realize you’re in the trigger zone and the impulse has struck with a vengeance, have a plan in place to defeat it. Make it difficult for yourself to indulge those impulses. For example, disable your internet connection before trying to write or read so that the temptation to visit Facebook or espn.com is simply not an option. While you’re at it, hide the remote control, and then throw out the candy and leftover holiday cookies. Make it difficult or impossible to reach for that yummy sugar rush.

But it is not enough to simply enough try to “break” a bad habit; the process is much more effective when actively replacing it with a good habit. If you’re addicted to nicotine, try chewing gum to address the oral fixation, but avoid replacing food for the cigarette. Remember, this isn’t just a habit you’re trying to kick; it’s a lifestyle adjustment. Cultivate a new way of being.

Social support should be a critical element of your plan as well. Most tasks are easier with a partner, and we often need some social support to make it through the process of kicking a lousy habit. Join up with someone facing a similar challenge. Having a partner to lean on will provide a sense of moral support.

But more than camaraderie, partnership will provide accountability. Having a partner to whom you are accountable can inspire more motivation than any well-intentioned New Year’s resolution. Celebrate your progress together. It can transform a difficult process into an inspiring challenge, and sharing the adversity will likely result in a stronger friendship. If no one you know is interested in joining up, try looking at meetup.com; there are plenty of support groups for just about every situation.

Also, it’s important to accept the fact that there will probably be backsliding. It’s only human to slip up when you’re are triggered. Assume it will happen at some point (most likely in times of stress or fatigue).

Realize that beating yourself up about it will only be counterproductive, resulting in lower self-esteem and motivation. Have a plan in place to deal with backsliding when it happens, such as seeking support and promising yourself to get right back onto the trail again. This sort of attitude will allow you to get back on track faster, and with less stress.

In future posts I’ll flesh out these items further, but hopefully this short list will give you something to start with as you kick off your new year.

How You Are Sabotaging Your Self-Control

Why thought suppression is a bad way to deal with temptation.

Published on August 5, 2010 by Heidi Grant Halvorson, Ph.D.   in The Science of Success

Have you ever tried to lose weight by just not thinking about food? How about trying to play it cool and stop yourself from calling (or emailing, or texting) your love interest by blocking out all thoughts about that person? Ever try to quit smoking by trying not to think about smoking? Did it work? I'll bet it didn't. And it's really not your fault that it didn't.

Thought suppression is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it is a very commonly used strategy - people often try to block out or put the lid on unwanted thoughts and feelings, in order to control their influence. Dieters try to suppress thoughts of tempting snacks, alcoholics suppress their desire to drink, stressed-out workers suppress their feelings of anxiety, and smokers suppress the thought of cigarettes when trying to quit.

On the other hand, thought suppression is not only very, very difficult, but it works only very briefly, and has some very nasty unintended consequences. Suppression has often been shown to increasethe frequency of the unwanted thoughts you were trying to rid yourself of, once the period of active suppression is over. Suppress thoughts of smoking, and the thoughts come rushing back with even greater force once you let your guard down. But does this unintended consequence actually lead to more smoking? Are you actually worse off in terms of quitting than when you started?

Yes, you are. In a new study, undergrads who smoked at least a half-pack a day on average were asked to keep track of their smoking for several weeks. For all of Week 2, some of the students were asked to try to suppress any and all thoughts about smoking. Not surprisingly, they smoked significantly fewer cigarettes during Week 2 than non-suppressers. But during Week 3, when these students were no longer required to suppress thoughts of smoking, they smoked significantly morecigarettes than non-suppressors!

While they were at it, the researchers who conducted this study looked at students' stress levels across all three weeks. Not surprisingly, suppressors reported a dramatic rise in stress during the week they were suppressing (while non-suppressors stress levels remained unchanged). So not only does the thought-suppression strategy backfire, it feels terrible while you are doing it.

So how can we deal with unwanted thoughts more successfully, in ways that don't end up actually diminishing our willpower? I've written about this in previous posts, but here are two suggestions:

1. Don't suppress, replace. Decide in advance what you will think about when a thought about smoking, snacking, or hitting "redial" pops into your mind. When you find yourself thinking about how yummy a candy bar would be right now, try replacing that thought with one that focuses on your health and weight-loss goals (e.g., "It feels better to fit into my skinny jeans than it does to wolf down chocolate-covered nougat.")

2. Don't suppress, plan. Creating an if-then plan is an easy and effective way to deal with temptations. You don't need to block out the thoughts - what you really need is to learn how not to act on them. By planning on exactly what you will do, in advance, when the tempting thought occurs, it becomes far easier to stick to your goals. For instance, when thoughts about smoking occur, plan to chew gum, or step outside for several long deep breaths of fresh air. Whatever you plan to do, it will disrupt the connection between the thought and giving in to the temptation, and over time, the thoughts will fade all on their own.

It's almost never a good idea to put a lid on your thoughts and feelings. It may feel like it's working in the short term, but soon you'll find yourself right back where you started - surrounded by candy wrappers, and wondering why he hasn't returned your three dozen phone calls.

What Motivates Impulse Buying?

Impulse buying is a common behavior today.  Our culture of consumption enables us to succumb to temptation and purchase something without considering the consequences of the buy. Is that a bad thing? In my view, yes, it can be. Impulse buying is related to anxiety and unhappiness, and controlling it could help improve your psychological well-being. To control something though, it’s important to first understand it. To understand impulse buying from a psychological perspective, we should ask the question “What motivates us to impulsively buy products?” There are in fact a number of answers to this question, and knowing them will help you make smarter, more rational decisions the next time you’re shopping or the next time you just catch yourself wanting to buy something.

Some people possess a personality trait called an impulse buying tendency, which as you may have guessed means they have a habit of making impulsive purchases. That might sound innocent, but there are a number of behaviors that go along with this trait that reflect its detrimental influence. First, impulse buyers are more social, status-conscious, and image-concerned. The impulse buyer may therefore buy as a way to look good in the eyes of others.  Second, impulse buyers tend to experience more anxiety and difficulty controlling their emotions, which may make it harder to resist emotional urges to impulsively spend money.  Third, impulse buyers tend to experience lesshappiness, and so may buy as a way to improve their mood. Last, impulse buyers are less likely to consider the consequences of their spending; they just want to have it.

People who like to shop for fun are more likely to buy on impulse. We all want to experience pleasure, and it can be a lot of fun to go shopping and imagine owning the products we see that we like. Once we start experiencing pleasure as a result of this sense of vicarious ownership, we’re more likely to buy those products so that we can continue to experience that pleasure.

The concept of vicarious ownership is related to another impulse buying motivator, which is a connection between a consumer and a product. When we’re connected to a product it literally changes the way our minds perceive it. Our minds essentially start acting like we already own the product, which makes it harder to go without buying it. This begs the question “How are connections with products formed?” A physical connection with a product is created when we’re close to it, and when we’re able to touch it. A temporal connection with a product is created when we’re able to purchase it immediately. Finally, a social connection with a product is created when we see someone using it and compare ourselves to that person.

How do all these factors go together to interact on us as consumers? Well, consider the following hypothetical example: The impulse buyer may feel unhappy, and may think that being seen with an expensive new purchase will bring respect and happiness. This perceived road to happiness motivates the impulse buyer to go shopping. Once in the retailenvironment a product catches the impulse buyer’s eye. S/he looks at it, probably picks it up and inspects it, and maybe thinks of a friend who owns it. The impulse buyer likes the product, and experiences pleasure at the thought of being able to purchase it immediately and go home with it. The impulse buyer can’t resist the urge to buy the product and does so, without considering whether it’s too expensive and/or frivolous. This

inevitably leads to buyer’s remorse, paradoxically bringing unhappiness, the very feeling the impulse buyer wanted to stop experiencing.

Knowing what motivates impulse buying and whether these motivators are affecting you can help you spend less money on impulse. There is one caveat I’d like to mention, which is that everyone behaves impulsively now and then, and a certain (modest) level of impulse buying can be harmless. However, an excessive level of impulse buying can lead to debt and unhappiness, so it’s in your best interest to know the warning signs. If you find that you often spend money without really thinking about what you’re buying or why, and you fit the description of an impulse buyer, you may have an impulse buying tendency. If you get a lot of enjoyment from shopping or are a comfort shopper, you may be buying as a way to experience pleasure and are probably buying some products on impulse. If you get a sudden urge to buy something after you play around with it, or after realizing you can buy it immediately, or after thinking of a friend who owns it, you’re probably experiencing an impulse buying urge that came from a connection between you and the product.  Ultimately, an easy way to tell if a purchase is impulsive is to ask “Did I plan to buy this, or did I get the urge to buy it just now?” If you didn’t plan to buy it, you’re probably experiencing an impulse buying urge. By putting that product back on the shelf and refusing to purchase it, you’re doing something to help yourself. You’re rejecting the idea that by purchasing that product you’ll be happier, better respected, or more complete. In so doing, you’ll not only get to keep more of your money, but you’ll become a smarter consumer and possibly a happier person.

Why Are You So Impulsive?Self-regulation and symptoms of impulsivity.

"I spend a lot of time thinking about my own strengths and weaknesses." "I often compare myself with other people." If these statements describe you, you may be interested in the results of a new study that indicates that you are more likely to be impulsive and anxious.

In a recent issue of the journal Personality and Individual Differences, Idit Shalev  (Yale University) and Michael Sulkowski (University of Florida) explored the relation between two key aspects of self-regulation with symptoms of impulsivity and compulsivity. Of course, both the focus on self-regulation and impulsivity caught my interest in terms of procrastination. As I have written previously, a failure to be able to self regulatecan manifest itself as procrastination (or many other problematic behaviors such as compulsive shopping,substance abuse or problematic gambling), and impulsivity is a key correlate of measures of procrastination. The more impulsive an individual is, the more likely he or she will procrastinate.

Shalev and Sulkowski measured two aspects of self-regulation: locomotion and assessment. Locomotion entails initiating and maintaining goal-directed behavior without undue distractions or delay. This aspect of self-regulation is about the "getting on with it" or "making something happen." In contrast, assessment is the aspect of self-regulation concerned with evaluating goals and plans in relation to alternatives. It's about thinking, not acting per

se. This includes the potential for chronic and continuous preoccupation with the evaluation of the self and comparison to others.

Two scales have been developed to measure locomotion and assessment. As the authors report, previous research with these scales "found that high scores on the assessment scale are associated with overly critical and comparative thinking, prevalent counterfactual thinking, and regret following goal pursuit" (p. 85). In contrast, high scores on the locomotion scale have been found to be associated with decisiveness, as well as lack of counterfactual thinking and regret.

It's easy to see where this research might lead when you think about impulsivity and compulsivity, as Shalev and Sulkowski did. They hypothesized "that assessment would be positively related to obsessive-compulsive, impulsive and anxiety symptoms [and] By contrast, locomotion would be negatively related (or unrelated) to obsessive-compulsive, impulsive or anxiety symptoms" (p. 85).

Their researchData were collected from a sample of 330 undergraduate students (211 females), 95% of whom were between the ages of 18 to 21 years (self-described ethnic background as 53% White/Caucasion, 21% Black/African American, 15% Hispanic/Latino, 7% Asian, 4% other). The participants completed measures of: 1) Locomotion and Assessment, 2) Obsessive-Compulsiveness, 3) Impulsivity, and 4) Anxiety. The analyses were based on the relations among the variables (correlations and regression).

Their findings Overall, their results suggest that impulsivity is characterized by high assessment and low locomotion, whereas obsessive-compulsive symptoms and anxiety are only related to high assessment. Chronic assessment as defined by the measure of assessment is maladaptive.

Implications and concluding thoughtsHow can we make sense of assessment (chronic self-appraisal and criticism) in relation to impulsivity? The authors believe that it may be explained in relation to depleting self-control resources. They write, "The association between assessment and impulsivity may be explained, in part, by negative self-appraisals that deplete the self-control resources and subsequently results in impulsive behavior" (p. 86). Additionally, they add, "after engaging in impulsive behaviors, individuals may then be occupied in assessment, negative self-appraisals, and regret. For example, even though pathological gamblers often report experiencing highly pleasurable emotions while gambling . . . these individuals are at a pronounced risk for experiencing symptoms of depression after losing large amounts of money" (pp. 86-87).

If you are reading this because you're a chronic procrastinator, this may sound all too familiar and provide some insight into the self-regulatory failure that you've experienced.

ReferenceShalev, I., & Sulkowski, M.L. (2009). Relations between distinct aspects of self-regulation to symptoms of impulsivity and compulsivity. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 84-88.

Your Inner Voice: A Key To Self-Control?

Most of us have experienced it before. That little voice in our heads that tells us not to take that last slice of pizza, to "keep going" for that few extra minutes on the treadmill, or not to make that snippy comment to our co-worker that we desperately want to blurt out. Intuitively, we have a sense that we can tell ourselves what to do or talk ourselves out of something. But, does our inner voice really aidself-control and help us resist temptation? New research suggests the answer is "yes."

In a paper published this month in Acta Psychologica, University of Toronto psychologists Alexa Tullett and Mickey Inzlicht decided to take our inner voice to task. People performed what is called the Go/No-Go task in which they were instructed to press a button on a keyboard when they saw a yellow square appear on the computer screen (a "Go trial") and to refrain from pressing the same button when they saw a purple square appear (a "No-Go trial"). Go trials outnumber No-Go trials by about 2-1, so people become very accustomed to pressing the button every time a square appears on the screen. As a result, when a square appears that indicates that people should refrain from pressing the button, it's hard to inhibit one's button pressing response. Even though this task is pretty simple, it mimics all sorts of activities where we have to reign in an impulse. The question is, does our inner voice help us with impulse control?

To get at this question, the researchers asked people to do several other things while they performed the Go/No-Go task. On some trials, people had to say out loud the word "computer" over and over while they did the Go/No-Go task. Because repeating "computer" uses the same verbal resources that support our inner voice, it ties up our inner voice so it can't function properly. If, our inner voice is important for controlling our impulses (e.g., "don't press the button"), then it follows that people should perform worse on the Go/No-Go task when they are repeating "computer" than when they are not. Of course, to ensure that it is not the addition of any activity that disrupts Go/No-Go task performance, but specifically an activity that prevents folks from wielding the voice in their head, on other trials people performed another activity that was more spatial in nature. People were asked to continuously draw circles on a piece of paper with their non-dominant hand. Like repeating "computer" over and over, this circle drawing task is repetitive and requires some attention to do correctly, but importantly, it doesn't occupy verbal resources so the inner voice can still function properly.

Compared with the circle-drawing task, repeating "computer" resulted in more impulsive responding. People had a greater tendency to make a ‘Go' response - even when they shouldn't have. These results suggest that the inner voice helps us to exert self-control by enhancing our ability to restrain our impulses.

Keep in mind that repeating the word "computer" over and over is not the only way to lose one's inner voice. As I have blogged about previously, there is research out of my lab and others showing that when people are in pressure-filled performance situations (e.g., taking a test, about to give a speech, interviewing for a job), they worry - about the situation, it's consequences, and what might be on the line if they screw up. These worries are usually verbal in nature and are especially problematic for tasks that rely heavily on important thinking and reasoning skills because the worries co-opt the brain power that could otherwise be used to perform at our best. This new research suggests that, under pressure, we might have a double whammy on our hands. Not only do worries eat up important brain resources, but - like saying "computer" repeatedly - these worries also likely prevent us from exercising our inner voice to help us control our impulses when we need this control the most.

Check out my new book Choke, for tips about controlling worries, impulses, and hints about how to perform our best - especially understress. In stores now!

The Hidden Doublespeak of Willpower and Self-controlWho do we control the self for?

It is suddenly in vogue to talk scientifically about willpower.  The funny thing is that psychologists have been talking about something like willpower scientifically for decades.  With the exception of Walter Mischel (the mastermind behind themarshmallow test of willpower in five year olds), the rest of us have been calling it self-control as long as I can remember.  Although willpower and self-control both refer to the same mental process, the nuance implied by each is difference.  Willpower is a muscular Nietzschean word for our ability to overcome whatever gets in our way through sheer personal force of mind.  Self-control has more Orwellian doublespeak connotations.  Self-control can be read as the ‘the self that is in control’ but it can also be read as ‘that which brings the self under control’ which begs the question ‘for whose sake is the self brought under control?’  To answer this question, lets consider two scenarios.

Alien abduction #1

You’ve been abducted by an alien race that is conducting neuroscience experiments on the human mind.  The alien neurosurgeon is kind enough to give you a choice: permanently lose your capacity for impulses, urges, and desires or permanently lose your capacity to overcomeyour impulses, urges, and desires.  It’s the classic battle between self-control and emotion, between Mr. Spock and Captain Kirk, between business man and burning man.  If you had to give up one of these forever, which would you choose?

If you are at all well-read in psychology over the past twenty years you might protest that this is a false dichotomy.  Self-control and emotion are not always at odds with one another.  We have learned from Antonio Damasio and a myriad of other researchers that emotions commonly facilitate adaptive decisions and behavior.  Emotions are not things that are always better off controlled and minimized.  No argument here.  There are lots of times when you would not want to regulate your

emotional reactions.  Granted.  You might even get nuanced and suggest that Mr. Spock isn’t lacking impulses but is rather supremely skilled in his ability to regulate them so that he appears unemotional and his decisions are free from impulse.  But you probably wouldn’t because that would reveal how big of a Star Trek nerd you are (oops, did I reveal too much there).

These protests are irrelevant.  We can hypothetically imagine losing one or the other capacity and I want you to choose which to lose and which to keep.  Most of us would prefer to keep both, but you can’t.  In the end, most of us are likely to keep our impulses, urges, and desires.  Losing our capacity for self-control will create lots of problems in our lives and more than a few embarrassing moments.  But our impulses, urges, and desires are what give life its meaning and direction – they are the impetus to do or not do each of the infinite things we could choose.  By the way, not all of these remaining urges have to be craven – this surgery will allow altruistic prosocial urges to remain in place, not to mention the urge to enjoy a mountaintop view, or the urge to hug one’s child.  Most of us would take the bad urges with the good, because without these we literally might not do anything at all.

Alien abduction #2

Let’s imagine a second alien abduction.  This time, your entire town or city has been abducted (except your family and closest friends who happened to have all taken a short vacation to Hawaii together and missed the abducting).  You appear to have won the abduction lottery as the alien neurosurgeon tells you that of all the people abducted, you are the only one who will not lose either their urges or their ability to control them.  However, you will have to decide which choice is made for the rest of the people in your town.  Based on what you decide, they will either all lose their impulses, urges, and desires or they will lose their capacity to overcome these.  One choice for all them.  In other towns, other choices will be implemented, so there will be impulse towns and self-control towns.  Remember that these are not the people closest to you in your life.  What do you choose for all the people in your neighborhood?

My hunch is that even if you are conflicted about this choice, your first response is to deprive others of their impulses – the opposite choice you probably made for yourself.  Who wants to live in a town full of crazy people who act on every single impulse they have.  That town sounds ridiculously dangerous.

Who is self-control for?

How odd that we would make opposite choices for other people and ourselves?  If everyone else has self-control they should be able to deal with our pure impulsiveness (isn’t this what parents do for years?).  But a world of pure impulsives are unpredictable and a threat to all (including to themselves).  Let’s put one more wrinkle in this thought experiment.  Given that you would quite possibly choose for those around you to keep self-control, what do you think the people around you would choose for you?  No doubt, most of them would want you to sacrifice your impulses in favor of staying in control. 

This line of questioning suggests that your self-control might be more important to others than it is to you.  When you stay under control it mightbenefit you, but it almost always benefits others.  Our engagement of self-control makes us palatable and predictable and allows society to operate efficiently – yet self-control often makes us stressed out, unhappy, and ruminating over unmet impulses.  Society always benefits from undergraduates who control their impulses long enough to study organic chemistry, so they can get into med school and control their impulses even more to become doctors.  Society needs informed and disciplined physicians.  Yet some of those undergraduates who grow up to become doctors will not be happy with their career.  Sometimes our self-control efforts turn out to be personal sacrifices that benefit others far more than ourselves. 

Mind you, I’m not suggesting a return to the 70s when everyone let down their hair and did whatever they wanted (or so I’m told).  But I think there is at least a little sleight of hand at work when we stop calling it self-control and start calling it willpower.  At least self-control hints at the fact that it is part of the self, a part we identify with, that is being controlled.  Willpower just sounds so empowering and hides the true beneficiary of so much of our effortful self-control.  This subterfuge works so well because we aren’t built to realize that self-control may support society’s interests more than our own.  Anyone else reading Murakami’s new book 1Q84

Not Enough Willpower? Use Your "Extended Will!"Getting help is just another way of extending your will.

During a recent talk on how to change a habit, a woman asked, "Where does lack of willpower figure into this?  I mean, I want to change my eating and exercise habits, but I'm just too lazy."

I'll tell you at the end of the blog how I answered her question.  For now, think of how many people, like the questioner above, believe they must exert super-human effort to get themselves to do what they would really like to do.  But do you have to be a super-hero with awesome willpower to change a habit?  Or is there another way? 

Willpower is "using only the thought of your motivators to guide your behavior."  If your motivator is "lose weight to avoid diabetes," strong willpower would mean you could use this thought to control your eating behavior even in a restaurant that scorns the idea of portion control.  You could sit in front of a bowl of pasta large enough to feed a small third-world country, decide to eat only half of it, and then do it.  Now that's willpower!

Yeah, right. How many people can really do that?  Study after study has demonstrated that most people just eat what's put before them.  Instead of eating mindfully, we sink into a trance state, automatically shoveling food into our open mouths whether it tastes good or not.  In one study, people even ate extra-large portions of stale popcorn because...well, it was there.

So, if you are like most people, you probably need to back up your willpower with "changepower."  "Changepower" is a word I've coined to describe all those outside resources that strengthen willpower--things like support groups, healthy environments, helpful friends, and wise plans and strategies.  I hadn't realized that psychologists were now using a different term for virtually the same thing--"the extended will."

"Extending your will" means figuring out how to arrange your world to support your desired change.  You consciously choose people, places, and things to keep you on your chosen path.  You might "distribute" your willpower to a support group or to a good friend and give them permission to help you change.  These decisions create a "scaffolding" that holds you up when you feel weak.

To "extend your will" in the above example, you might:

Take one look at your food and ask the waiter for a "to-go" carton. Before you eat, you carefully put part of your portion into the carton.

Ask your friend to divide a pasta dish and a salad with you before you order. Ask your spouse to remind you to eat sensibly by pre-arranged signal. Recall the guidelines of your healthy-eating support group. Decline the dinner invitation, knowing you can't resist temptation.

Here are other examples of using your extended will to make changes:

You decide beforehand that 10% of your paycheck will go automatically into your savings account or IRA via direct deposit.

You study in the library where there are fewer distractions. You put out your exercise clothes the night before.  You join a support group. 

I love the term, "extended will," because it reframes the whole idea of "getting help."  You're not "getting help with a problem," you are "extending your will."  You're not turning over your will to a support group, you are "distributing your will" so that the group can help you reach your goals.

In fact, many people you admire for their steely willpower may just be experts at using the extended will.  They've arranged their world to channel their actions in their desired direction.  

So what did I say to the worried questioner?   I replied, "Laziness can be helpful!  If you make the right thing to do the easy thing to do, you'll need much less willpower."  Readers, I would say the same to you--extend your will, and make the right thing to do the easy thing to do. 

© Meg Selig.    

If you enjoyed this blog, you may be interested in my book,Changepower! 37 Secrets to Habit Change Success   (Routledge, 2009). For more tidbits on willpower, habit change, and healthy living, follow me on Facebook and/or Twitter.

Sources:

"Using only the thought..."  Selig, M. Changepower! 37 Secrets to Habit Change Success (Routledge, 2009), p. xix.

"Scaffolding."  Heath, J. & Anderson, J., "Procrastination and the Extended Will," here:

"Stale popcorn." For this and many other examples, see Brian Wansink,Mindless Eating (Bantam-Dell, 2007).

See also PT blogger, Timothy Pynchyl's blog on this topic here.

When Willpower Fails: How to Build Your Resistance to Temptation7 ways to resist the 7 deadly sinsPublished on November 29, 2011 by Susan Krauss Whitbourne, Ph.D. in Fulfillment at Any Age

0inShare

The seven deadly sins- ranging from gluttony to greed- are the universal symbols of temptation. Although we know they're sins, it's sometimes impossible not to give in to them. Ironically, although religious worship is meant to be at the heart of the holiday season, it's precisely the lures of the season that so often get us into trouble. New Year's resolutions are meant to cleanse the soul of our holiday indiscretions though even the best intentioned of these are short-lived.  As the saying goes, the "spirit is willing but the body is weak."  How can you get your body to be more willing to obey your spirit?

As it turns out, we can bolster our resolve to avoid temptation by building our mental muscle.  According to the "strength model" proposed by Florida State University psychologist Roy Baumeister, we have a finite amount of self-control. The self can exert control over the self, but only to a limited degree. The stronger our self-control, the stronger our ability to resist temptation.

If we have self-control, why don't we use it, or at least use it more effectively? According to Baumeister and the many colleagues he has worked with over the years, our self-control can be sapped by overuse (Baumeister & Tierney, 2011). We fall prey to temptation due to "ego depletion" as our tank of self-control goes from full to empty. The harder you work to suppress one set of desires, the less likely it is you'll succeed at suppressing another set. Resisting one temptation leads your ego, the seat of your rational thoughts, to become depleted and therefore be unable to resist the next temptation to come your way. Like a fatigued muscle, your self-control becomes worn out

and unable to do its job. Refraining from sin #1, in other words, makes you more likely to engage in sin #2.

There is a large body of research to support strength theory, as shown in a paper published in the prestigious Psychological Bulletin in 2010 by University of Nottingham researcher Martin Hagger and colleagues.  I came across this literature when I came across a perplexing finding in an informal survey I conducted of undergraduates taking my Psychology of Aging course.  Because I emphasize prevention in this course, I was interested in learning about the health-related behaviors of my students such as how much they exercise, control their intake of high fat foods, smoke, and drink alcohol. Much to my surprise, it was the students who exercised the most who also drank alcohol most heavily. In a previous blog posting, I wrote about this finding and am continuing to gather data through a link to my online survey.  Through the online survey, I've also found out that this is not just a college student quirk.  Anyone can fall victim to the "I drink therefore I exercise" principle.

In the typical test of ego depletion, known as the "dual-task paradigm," the researcher assigns two tasks to the experimental group. The first task is highly ego depleting, leaving participants more likely to lose their stamina in the second task.  In one experiment, participants suppress their emotions while they watch a highly emotion-arousing video such as the heart-wrenching Terms of Endearment. For the second task, participants are required to hold a spring-loaded handgrip until they can no longer grasp it. Invariably, participants in the experimental condition, forced to hold back their tears during the video, have less handgrip strength. Presumably, suppressing their emotions tapped dry their emotional and physical reserves.

Translating ego depletion to everyday life means that if you behave your inner angel in one situation, your inner devil will take over in the next.  For example, at a holiday party, if you deplete your self-control in one area (such as resisting a tray of attractive cookies), you'll be more likely to slip in another area (such as not flirting with someone you should not flirt with).

In an opinion piece published in the New York Times, another group of researchers questioned some of the assertions of Baumeister's strength theory by positing that willpower is enough to bolster our weak egos. According to the article by Greg Walton and Carol Dweck, if you want to overcome your urges, you can do so, just like the Little Engine That Could. Unfortunately, their critique honed in on one proposal of strength theory: that to boost your self-control, you need to ingest some glucose--"sugar power."

There is research showing that in some situations, a little bit of glucose can help people avoid ego depletion.  However, Baumeister's theory gives us lots of other ways to shore up our inner resolve than simply taking a spoonful or more of sugar.  If Walton and Dweck were correct, then all it would take to cure the world of its problems would be the will to do so. Clearly, this isn't the case, or we wouldn't have high rates of addiction, crime, and the other sins that pervade our society.  What's worse, telling yourself you have unlimited willpower may make you more likely to fail. In an email communication to me, Baumeister noted that some of his studies have shown that "people who had been induced to believe in unlimited willpower ... performed worse than others."  Sad to say that willing temptation to go away will not make it go away but may make the tempation more tempting.

It's not easy to avoid temptation, especially if you've drained your self-control resources. However, the research by Hagger and his team suggests that these 7 strategies can work:

1.  Practice self-control. Self-control is a skill you can learn, although it takes time. If you keep it up, your ability to resist temptation will gradually increase.

2.  Take it one day at a time. Thinking about controlling yourself in the future will only deplete your ego even more. Don't worry about what you have to do tomorrow if you have trouble controlling yourself today.

3.  Keep your eyes on the prize. Maintain your motivation to achieve the goals you desire. This won't be enough to vanquish all temptation, but it will help temper it.

4.  Reward yourself for good behavior. Incentives can help you boost your motivation and help you keep your eyes on that all-important prize, bolstering strategy #3.

5.  Avoid fatigue. Ego depletion rests on the idea that you are least likely to control yourself when you're tired. Sleep can give you the mental energy you need to keep control over your impulses.

6.  Tell yourself you can do it.  The jury is out on whether this is an effective strategy, but boosting your self-confidence can't hurt, especially when you combine this method with the others.

7.   Put on a happy face. People feel bad in a state of ego depletion and this negative affect can undermine their further efforts at self-control. We don't like ourselves when we fail. Although being in a good mood doesn't necessarily outweigh the effects of ego depletion, being in a bad mood can make you more prone to giving in to temptation.

In the case of self-control, a little bit of knowledge is a powerful thing. Once you realize the universality of ego depletion, you'll be better able to recognize it in yourself. From then on, the choice of whether or not to resist temptation is up to you but with a little effort, your inner angel will prevail.

Follow me on Twitter @swhitbo for daily updates on psychology, health, and aging and please check out my website,www.searchforfulfillment.com where you can read this week's Weekly Focus to get additional information onpersonality, self-tests, and psychology-related links.

Copyright 2011 Susan Krauss Whitbourne, Ph.D.

References:

Baumeister, R. & Tierney, J. (2011). Willpower: Rediscovering the greatest human strength. New York: Penguin.

Hagger, M. S., Wood, C., Stiff, C., & Chatzisarantis, N. D. (2010). Ego depletion and the strength model of self-control: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136(4), 495-525. doi:10.1037/a0019486

 

The Great Willpower Debate: The Missing PieceTo activate your willpower, ask this simple question.Published on December 14, 2011 by Meg Selig in Changepower

0inShare

The Infamous Stroop Test

Let's say you've volunteered to participate in a series of psychological experiments.  You show up at a lab on a university campus.   First, in Stage 1, the researchers give you a frustrating task like the Stroop test (left) where you must override your tendency to read words and focus solely on calling out colors.  You don't realize it, but this task is meant to wear out (deplete) your willpower.  In Stage 2, you must do another task as best you can. This second task might be:

Gripping a handgrip for as long as possible. Keeping your hand in freezing cold water for as long as you can. Working on a puzzle that doesn't seem to have a solution.

How motivated would you be to persist at one of the above tasks? 

If you are like me, the answer would be "When's lunch?"  The tasks seem meaningless. Who cares?  Yet these are the kinds of tasks that researchers often give students in willpower experiments.  Researchers compare the persistence of the experimental group, whose willpower was presumably depleted in stage 1, with the persistence of the control group, whose willpower was not depleted.  Usually the control group does better, suggesting that willpower is a limited resource.  (Flawed as these experiments might be, at least they help us think about willpower issues.)

I bring this up because the idea that willpower is a limited resource is now being hotly debated in the media, but unless you are a nerd like me, you might have missed it.  Going head to head are two of my favorite researchers, Roy Baumeister and Carol Dweck. The debate, summarizedhere, is over this question:  Is willpower like a muscle that can only do so many biceps curls before it wears out (Baumeister group) or is it a powerful mental idea that can give you almost unlimited energy (Dweck group)? 

Both, in my opinion.  To me, the nature of willpower is neither "it gets depleted" nor "it depends on how you think about it"--rather, these two positions seem to be a matter of degree, at different points on the same continuum.  On the one hand, willpower can get worn down; on the other hand, dedicated people can persist against all--well, at least most--odds, at least up to the point of sheer exhaustion.

The key question is: What really strengthens willpower?

Here's my answer:  To activate your willpower, you must be able to remind yourself WHY it's important for you to do something.   Meaningless tasks do not activate willpower. When you have a purpose, you have the beginnings of willpower because you are committed to your goal.

Here are some experiments that back me up:

After depleting the self-control of study participants, individuals were asked to work on 2 frustrating puzzles. Group 1 was told: "Your work could help create new therapies for Alzheimer's disease." Group 2 was told: "Try your best." Which group performed best? Right, Group 1. The idea that they could be helping others gave their task some purpose.

In another experiment, participants were divided into two groups. One group's willpower was depleted by a task that required concentration. This group was then asked to do a self-control task and was paid according to how well they performed. Results: When motivated by

money, depleted participants performed as well as non-depleted participants. News flash: Money can be a great motivator!

Various experiments performed at the Wharton school of business show that when employees see the positive impact of their work, they work harder and are more effective. For example, a group of paid call center employees had to phone potential donors to scholarship funds. One group met with scholarship recipients for 5 minutes; another did not. In the end, the group that met face-to-face with the scholarship students worked harder and earned more money for the scholarship fund.

The researcher, Adam Grant, did experiments in a variety of settings and found that "task significance" motivated people as diverse as lifeguards, resume writers, and mail-order pharmacy workers.

My conclusion:  People can compensate for depleted willpower, at least to some extent, if they are motivated by something meaningful to them.   So, when you want to achieve a goal, change your lifestyle, or exert self-control in any way, ask yourself:  Why?  Why do I want to do this? Why is it important to me? 

(c) Meg Selig.  All rights reserved.

I'm the author of Changepower! 37 Secrets to Habit Change Success(Routledge, 2009).  Please "like" my facebook page here ,  and you'll receive periodic messages about habit change, motivation, willpower, books, and the good life.  And/or, follow me on Twitter. 

Sources:

Muraven, M. & Slessareva, E. "Mechanisms of Self-Control Failure: Motivation and Limited Resources." Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2003; 29; pp. 894 ff.

"Putting a Face to a Name: The Art of Motivating Employees,"http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2436

See also, "The Power of Why," by Harvey Mackay,http://harveymackay.net/column/the-power-of-why/.

"Willpower: It's In Your Head," by Greg Walton and Carol Dweck.http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/27/opinion/sunday/willpower-its-in-your-head.html?scp=1&sq=carol%20dweck&st=cse

http://www.psychologytoday.com/collections/201204/is-it-willpower-or-self-control/self-control-relies-glucose