Daphna Oyserman:
What are cultures for? Well, humans don't live alone. In fact, from an evolutionary perspective, humans are evolved to live in groups. They don't survive well alone. So we need to figure out who's in our group because they will help us, but then we're mutually obligated. We need to help them too.
Elizabeth Koch:
Hi, I'm Elizabeth Koch. We all live inside our own personal private perception box built by our genes and the physical, social, and cultural environment in which we were born and raised. In this podcast, we explore how although the walls of this mental box are always present, they can't expand in states like awe, wonder and curiosity or contract in response to anxiety, fear, and anger. I'd like to introduce our esteemed hosts, two incredible and distinguished minds. Dr. Heather Berlin, Professor of Psychiatry and Neuroscience at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City. And Dr. Christof Kochn, Chief Scientist for the Tiny Blue Dot Foundation and the current Meritorious investigator and former president of the Allen Institute for Brain Science. Welcome to the Science of Perception Box.
Heather Berlin:
Hi everyone. Welcome to Science of Perception Box. I'm your co-host, Dr. Heather Berlin.
Christof Kochn:
And I'm your co-host, Dr. Christof Kochn.
Heather Berlin:
Every week we feature an aspect of science, of perception box highlighting the latest research together with our expert guests. And this week on Science of Perception Box, we explore how cultural differences influence the way we think, feel, and act about ourselves and the world around us, and how our cultural identity influences our mindset. We're thrilled to have with us today Dr. Daphne Oyserman. She studies how small changes in context can shift mindsets with significant effects on important outcomes like health and academic performance. Dr. Oyserman is a Dean's professor in the department of Psychology and of Education and Communication at the University of Southern California. She received her PhD in Psychology and Social Work from the University of Michigan. Dr. Oyserman also studies cultural identity expression, which shows up in things like how people make consumer choices as ways of expressing their identity. So Christof, do you express your identity in any way in terms of how you consume things, for example, the clothes you choose?
Christof Kochn:
Yes. Now that you mentioned is the clothes I choose, sort of a rugged, colorful, outdoor. The food I eat, organic, vegetarian. The books I read, the way I talk and the music I listen to. All of that are expressions of my cultural identity. What about you?
Heather Berlin:
Oh, well, I tend to dress all in black, so clearly I'm from New York and I think that's my cultural identity. It's cool, calm. We don't want to say too much. We don't need to be so out there. But Dr. Oyserman, thanks so much for being here. So I wanted to start with a question of what is the relationship between culture and identity?
Daphna Oyserman:
That's a super question and the important way to think about these things is that on the one hand, we go forth into the world assuming that we know who we are and that who we are actually predicts what we're going to do, what we're going to like. And that's a really important thing because if I don't have a sense of who I am, then I have no idea what are the choices I should be making in the world. So I have to have some sense that I know who I am and that who I am will predict what I'll do.
Christof Kochn:
By who I am you mean I'm a man, I'm a scientist. I'm a-
Daphna Oyserman:
Well, last night before I went to sleep, I set my coffee maker because I made a prediction that in the morning I would want coffee. I didn't say, "Who knows if I want coffee? I used to want coffee before, but will I want coffee in the morning? I have no idea." That's an identity-based prediction.
Christof Kochn:
So it's part of your cultural identity drinking coffee?
Daphna Oyserman:
I'm not yet at the culture part. I'm starting just with the very basic thing that we experience ourselves as being people in the world that have some sense of constancy and that that's really useful because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to make any plans for the future. And when you think about when people say, "I just don't know who I am, I'm just need to find myself." There are moments in our lives where we really don't have that sense of constancy and that sense of constancy is useful because a lot of what we do entails acting now for some future me, for the desires and wants of the future me. And at the same time, it can't be that our identities are completely fixed. I have to actually be able to engage with the world around me. So there's that tension between both things that I think are useful, both are affordances, not constraints, which is I need to have a belief that I know who I am and that what I want, will want in the future is knowable to be now so I can engage.
And I also have to be actually open to new possibilities of who is the person I am now and what I can become. So if that's what we mean by an identity in a very basic way, then the next question is, well, what does that list of possible preferences of the things that I might value or want or desire, where does that come from? And then that's really where we think about culture, that part comes in. So what are cultures for? Well, humans don't live alone. In fact, from an evolutionary perspective, humans are evolved to live in groups. They don't survive well alone. So we need to figure out who's in our group because they will help us, but then we're mutually obligated. We need to help them too. So part of our identities have to entail some usness, who is in my group? What are the things that we do? Oh, why would I care about the things that we do? Well, it's a way of signaling my group identity.
Christof Kochn:
But isn't that universal among all people?
Daphna Oyserman:
Yes, exactly. So the first level of analysis when we think about culture is that all of us live in societies. All of us need to signal to the other members of our group that we're members of the group, but groups don't survive just by all doing the same thing together. Actually, there needs to be some space for innovation. So all human societies not only have some triggers for that collective part, who are we? What are our group ways of doing things? But also there has to be some spaces at least sometimes for people to do their own thing and innovate and then other people can copy them if it's useful.
Christof Kochn:
But is that just a little bit-
Daphna Oyserman:
That's at the highest level of analysis. So all societies would have some means of what we might call collective engagement or collectivism and some means of doing your own thing, being an individualist. So all human societies need that. Then there's a level below that which is really to say, "Well, but societies differ." Why might they differ? Well, they differ in part because environments differ historically ecologically in terms of their harshness, the harsher the environment, the more people needed to band together and engage together. So the more we-ness, there would be the more collective things of doing things together. The more plush the environment, the less you really needed to do that. The more you could actually just do your own thing and engage in your own way.
Christof Kochn:
But how does this affect the way today I perceive what I perceive and I hear what I hear, and I see what I see?
Daphna Oyserman:
Once we've come up with solutions, they become sticky. They're our way of doing things, and then it's easier for me to engage the world knowing what are the likely rules, in air quotes rules, what are the likely norms? So for example, if I'm supposed to be meeting with you guys at eight, does that mean eight exactly? Does that mean 10 past eight? Does that mean I should be here five minutes before. Societies differ in a whole bunch of things, including how they manage time, what is on time look like.
Heather Berlin:
Well, I want to say yes-
Christof Kochn:
Can I quote you something here from your paper-
Daphna Oyserman:
Go ahead.
Christof Kochn:
So this is a paper you wrote, this wonderful review paper on culture a couple of years ago. Noticing culture requires some way of stepping out of it in order to gain perspective on it. The promise of culture psychology is that making this effort matters. And then you make this very striking sentence. However, because all of life takes place within a culture, it is easy to fail to see that a cultural lens exists and instead to think that there is no lens of all just reality, which is what we call the perception box. So maybe you can expound on that.
Daphna Oyserman:
Sure. So the frame that I was taking to begin with is to say, well, culture may exist and for these reasons, that people don't survive alone, there needs to be a solution to these core problems of survival, sticking together, innovating and regulating relationships, which psychologists have labeled individualism, collectivism, and honor. But in any particular society, the way in which we do those things will be our way. It's better than no way so you have a way. Then what you end up with is, as you said, people actually just living in their everyday environment. So it doesn't feel like what we're doing is our cultural way. It feels like the way to do things. And that was why I mentioned this thing of time. It's when you sift to a different place that you actually notice that your way isn't the only way that there are alternatives.
So the time example, for many years I was at the University of Michigan on faculty and there was a thing called Michigan Time, which meant 10 past the hour is on time and no one expected you to be there before that. And if you're there before that it was called early. So if you had a meeting at eight, what you really meant was 10 past eight. I had only been at the University of Michigan, so I didn't know that this was a unique thing to the University of Michigan. I thought it was university time. I then moved to the University of Southern California where I assumed that when we have a meeting at eight, we really mean 10 past eight. One day I was walking up the stairs, not running, just walking up the stairs for a meeting and I was passed at running pace by another person who was going to be at the meeting who said to me in a huffy voice, "Do I know what time it is?"
And I grandly said, "Yep, it's about three past. We have plenty of time." And he curtly said, "Three past means we're late." Oh, light bulb emerges on top of my head. Turns out that was a cultural thing at the University of Michigan. I had no idea. I thought it was university time. So I had been showing up late for over a year. Because that's the other thing, which is that culture entails an implicit but very detailed scheme of how things evolve. And it's rare that people will actually tell you that you've gotten it wrong. They make inferences about you as a person. So I had established an identity as late person at the University of Southern California because I thought I was on time all the time, but I wasn't. And so that's really when we say that when you're in the culture, it seems just like reality and it's only when you step out that you notice. And researchers need to figure out some way of stepping out so they won't only be blundering humans who show up late when they think they're on time.
Heather Berlin:
So I want to talk about these, when we have a change in perspective and does that really change our identity? So for instance, you're living in... I grew up in New York, part of my identity is being Jewish. And everybody's Jewish in New York. It wasn't a big deal. It was not a thing, right? 50% of the people I went to school with were. Then I moved to England and then suddenly I remember someone was like, "Oh, you're Jewish." Like it was a thing. And then I realized was this whole other-
Daphna Oyserman:
And it had italics and air quotes on it.
Heather Berlin:
Yeah. And there was all this stuff that came along with that. But it was only once I left my culture that I gained this other perspective, but it didn't change my identity. Being in these different cultures can say, oh, there are these different perspectives, but it didn't change necessarily how I thought about myself or how I identified. No.
Christof Kochn:
When you're now much more-
Heather Berlin:
Not really.
Christof Kochn:
...self conscious of these things. But before you took advantage-
Heather Berlin:
Well, I knew what it meant to other people. I knew what it meant, oh, this means something to other people. They think about me in this certain way, but it didn't change my identity.
Daphna Oyserman:
Well, if you think about the self, we don't just have selves, we have them for a reason, and there's really three of them. One reason that we have a self is that we can know who we are and it's useful to know who you are. Then you can improve if you don't like it. So it's like an accuracy thing. Another reason that we have a self is to make predictions about how others will engage with us. And if we just think we're people, but others see us as, oh, you're German, you're Jewish, you're from New York, and you fail to know that, then you'll make mispredictions. So one of the domains in which people have studied that a lot is in terms of minority identities and stigmatized identities. And they've said, "If you just think that you're a person, you'll mispredict because others will see you in a negative way.
And you'll fail to understand that they're looking at you as a category of being that they see negatively. And you'll think it's about potentially about you or you just want to understand what went wrong." So on the one hand you're saying, well, I still knew who I was, but at the same time your comment was basically saying, "Well, wait a minute. You had to notice that others were responding to you differently." And over time that does change. One of the goals of having a self is to be able to understand how others will respond. So you have to accommodate in some ways those negative responses.
Christof Kochn:
Which is now you show up on time.
Daphna Oyserman:
Now I show up on actual real time at this place and not on time that would've been at that place. Exactly.
Heather Berlin:
But how you identify, you talk a lot about in your research how that affects our consumer decisions. So can you talk a little bit about that?
Daphna Oyserman:
Sure. So there are two different lines of those research. So one version of that was really back to those issues about individualism and collectivism. And I was wondering, well, is it the case that if my collective identity is queued, do I then pursue things in that way of connecting and relating? So in those series of studies, for example, we thought, well, you go into a store and often they will have a mannequin with an outfit. So say you try on the pants and they look great, but then the belt looks awful, the shirt looks weird, the jacket looks funny. Do you just go, "Okay, well the pants are good, I'm buying them?" Or do you go, "The whole thing doesn't work, so I'm going to leave it?" And our intuition was that if a collectivistic mindset was on your mind, you'd want either the whole thing or you wouldn't want it.
Whereas if an individualistic mindset was on your mind, you would go, "The pants are good," and the rest of it just wouldn't even occur to you. So in a series of experiments, we tested out that prediction and the answer seems to be yes. So depending on the mindset you bring into the consumption situation, you're either thinking about creating a set and then you're willing to pay a premium for the set, but also you're willing to discard discrete elements if you can't have the set.
Christof Kochn:
This is culture-bound or this is at the level of the individual shopper?
Daphna Oyserman:
Well, we were looking at this in terms of remember that first idea of what is culture? Is that it's a human universal. So everyone should be able to trigger an individualistic or a collectivistic on a mindset depending on the situation.
Christof Kochn:
Now I'm either in an individualistic mindset or a collectivistic mindset.
Daphna Oyserman:
One or the other could be triggered in the moment. So even though people vary in how much chronically they're used to functioning in one or another at any moment in time, any of them can be triggered.
Heather Berlin:
But couldn't we think of culture as just another stimuli in our environment that affects our decisions as well as whatever happened in your childhood or if you're hungry or not?
Christof Kochn:
No, I would say it's a way we construct our perception box, our sense of reality of what is real. I mean, as Daphna said, "She was perceived as a person who was consistently late." That was just the way it was. That's part of my cultural mindset.
Daphna Oyserman:
What does culture do for you? It provides you a list of things, what's important, what's valued, how do we do things. And if somebody actually doesn't follow that, you just assume that there's something wrong with them. You don't immediately go for, oh, they must come from a different, right. When you do that, then you can try and make accommodations. But typically what happens is we're all in the same cultural space. We assume as you nicely read from the quote, it's like air. We just assume that everyone is following the same implicit set of this implicit script.
Christof Kochn:
We are all born as naive realists, right? Whatever I perceive of course is what everyone else perceives. How could it be otherwise?
Daphna Oyserman:
What I see is all there is.
Heather Berlin:
But what about the nonconformists whose actual identities related to not conforming with the cultural norms and-
Daphna Oyserman:
There was a lovely, I don't want to make advertisements, but Gap had a lovely individualistic commercial a while ago, and it had all sorts of people wearing the same gap khakis. So there's a way in which even individualism is performed in a way that we all have to have our unique twist. And as you said, my identity as a New Yorker is Black, but I don't look exactly like every other New Yorker. I look uniquely in black compared to you in your black.
Heather Berlin:
In terms of our identity though, how does it affect our motivation? How does it affect our pursuit of long-term goals? How we see ourselves because it's just another construct. It's a narrative we tell ourselves that can change over time. But how does the me now who I think of myself now affect this imagined person in the future?
Daphna Oyserman:
That's a super question. I think one of the interesting things about identity is that it's temporal. We all had selves we were before, selves we are now, selves we might be in the future. But a lot of actual modern human engagement is about the future self. So if you're a kid in school, school is not designed to be the most fun thing you could possibly be doing. It's not like you wake up in the morning and you think to yourself, "How can I have the most fun? I know. Algebra." And it's foolish-
Christof Kochn:
Speak for yourself.
Heather Berlin:
Well, I mean I don't know, I like algebra.
Christof Kochn:
Please speak for yourself.
Heather Berlin:
Algebra.
Daphna Oyserman:
It's foolish for educators to try and win that game. It makes more sense to say, "Well, what am I actually doing? Am I engaging now to invest in some future me?" And to the extent that future me feels connected to current me, then things that will help me get there feel like me things to do. How do we do that? Well, one is to make that future feel close and connected. It's the same me after all. Another way that you could do that is to say, well, if I want in the future to be that, and I'm not like that now how am I going to attain that standard? Well, I better get going. So one version of actually getting going is to say it's the same me. It's continuous. I'm investing in future me because it's me. It's like I'm giving to myself. Another version of that is to say, well, current me isn't as good as what I want future me to do. So I better start climbing that path. And that's thinking of it as a contrasting standard. Both of those can be ways actually to engage. Why?
Well, they both trigger a thing that we don't like to think about a lot, which is that engaging, doing things that are important can feel difficult. And if I don't think about that, then when it feels hard to work on invest in the things I actually care about and want to do, I immediately feel a decline in confidence. Oh, maybe I don't really care about that. Maybe this is not the real me. Maybe I should invest my time in something else. Maybe it's a waste of my time. Maybe I'm bored right now. So one of the things that cultures do for us is they give us an explanation, a go-to for when it's hard what does that imply?
Christof Kochn:
So are you saying that the notion of what is difficult to me is partially cultural bound?
Daphna Oyserman:
What is difficult, but what is my experience of difficulty when it feels hard to think about or start doing something? What is that difficulty in thinking? That metacognitive experience of difficulty, what does that imply? Does it imply that the odds are low and I should reduce my certainty and shift to something else? So that's one possibility that's legitimate. Or alternatively, does that imply no pain, no gain?
Christof Kochn:
You mean should I take it as a challenge that excites me that I can-
Daphna Oyserman:
The important things in life are hard to get to. I can choose to do this. It's a goal I have for myself. It's a possible self. I can choose to engage with it if it's valuable. If other people would desire it must be difficult to get to. So difficulty can in some situations imply odds are low, don't waste your time, shift to something else.
Christof Kochn:
Is that a character trait or are some people just born with this attitude?
Daphna Oyserman:
I'm wanting to argue that it's a culture-based thing that cultures give us narratives for what difficulty would imply. And that all cultures on the one hand probably provide both, but maybe more likely, more fluently, more practiced in giving you one or the other. So I'll give you an example. In the US there's that, the children's stories about the little engine that could, he was like, "I think I can. I think I can." And that was really like a, when it's hard just persist, which isn't quite difficulty as importance, but at least it's a persistence. But we also have narratives about finding ourselves, being true to ourselves. How do I know if I found myself? How do I know if I'm true to myself? Well, if it's hard, maybe it's not for me because the things that I'm truly good at, the essence of me-
Christof Kochn:
Should come natural.
Daphna Oyserman:
...should descend upon me like fairy dust. So in many ways, those narratives of finding yourself being true to yourself actually carry an underbelly of signaling that difficulty implies impossibility. It's not the true you should shift to something else.
Heather Berlin:
When people come across difficulties in life, it's how we perceive those. And if we can somehow shift our mindset around that, how we think about difficulties, it'll affect how we feel about them and then how we behave.
Daphna Oyserman:
So rather than thinking about it as one coin that has a good side and a bad side, I want to think about this as two coins because sometimes it's actually a good idea, right? Sometimes it's true. You don't want to perseverate and bang yourself against a wall and keep applying to medical school and by the time you're in your 40s, maybe you should be shifting to something else. That's really the question is under what circumstances is it a good idea to pull out the coin that says, "When it's difficult, I should reduce my certainty, I should shift to something else?" And under what circumstances is it a good idea to say, "Of course it's hard. This is valuable. I'm going to roll up my sleeves and really engage?" And I think you're right. What we want to think about a well-functioning person can shift between the two and not perseverate only on one or the other.
Christof Kochn:
I think in Chinese there's this expression, eat bitter.
Daphna Oyserman:
Eat bitter.
Christof Kochn:
So can you explain this in this context?
Daphna Oyserman:
So when we are engaging in environments that are hard or tough, does that imply it's hard for me and I should shift to something else or does that imply that the process of attaining a goal requires that I actually suffer along the way? And eating bitter is a way of describing that narrative of engaging with difficulty. So one of the things that we asked ourselves was are there differences across cultures in the clinic accessibility of difficulty implying impossibility, difficulty implying importance? And we had been doing this by asking people to remember a time that when it was... Where they were working on task, we go, it was hard and they thought it was a waste of their time or that it was really valuable for them. And Americans can do that. When we just ask you to fill out a scale Americans say, "Oh no, I completely agree. No pay, no gain. And I reject the idea that when it's difficult, it's impossible."
And yet when we looked at what people were doing, it seemed as if they had more accessible this idea of difficulty is impossibility. So we thought, let's look at this from a different angle. So what we did is we showed people the definitions or synonyms of difficulty, all the English language ones on the front of a computer screen and we just had you sit there and just say, "Read that. Is that more about importance or is that more about impossibility and just press a button?" And on average Americans in different age groups from middle school, high school, college age, adults, what was more accessible for them was that any version of difficulty, it seemed more like about impossibility. Then we said, "All right, we'll take all of that stuff. We'll bring it to India," because in India there's a large population of people for whom English is a first language or at least a dominant language.
Christof Kochn:
So it was also in English in India.
Daphna Oyserman:
So we could use the exact same material so we could find out is this about English language or is this about American culture? And guess what, Indian participants were, if anything more likely to say, "No, no, those definitions and synonyms of difficulty, they're more about importance." So it looked more like culture than language, but we didn't want to stick only to English. So you then went to China, and of course then you're not going to use English-
Christof Kochn:
In Mandarin.
Daphna Oyserman:
So we used the definitions and synonyms from Chinese, which is actually more extensive because pictographs, so one of my most favorite one is there's one synonym for difficulty is pulling down your sleeve to hide your frayed cuff only to expose your elbow because the cloth is so thin, and that's a really nice way of describing difficulty. So again, people are just saying, is it more about importance or more about impossibility? And for Chinese it was about half and half. So American culture, at least from these versions of the studies, seems to be uniquely more likely to infer from difficult circumstances to have accessible the of, maybe it's just not for me.
Christof Kochn:
But how big are these effects compared to the inter-individual difference? If I pick any two individuals versus within China, within India, within US?
Daphna Oyserman:
There's always going to be huge within population differences. So the culture that you live in, if we again go back to that idea of it's the water you swim in, so it's the culturally accessible constructs, and all we were measuring was is it culturally accessible? That's what that task was. In my culture, is this the way to think it's separate from what I believe? So we didn't find a correlation between the cultural accessibility and your individual beliefs. It's just in my culture, that's the usual way of thinking about it. And I'm a part of my culture, so I know.
Christof Kochn:
What I find utterly fascinating that something as ephemeral as do I believe something is hard work or impossible that affects the way I perceive reality. That's really, that's cool.
Daphna Oyserman:
Yeah.
Christof Kochn:
That's where perception works, right there and then.
Heather Berlin:
Well, I'd say I think it's really, I mean the way that I'm seeing this is that culture affects our general mindset, the way we think about things. And when you can move to another culture, you can maybe shift that mindset or you see it from a different perspective or you expand your perception box in a way. So I want to think about or get into this idea of how can small changes in our environment shift our mindset and how does that affect our long-term life outcomes?
Daphna Oyserman:
We have heard the quote potentially from Einstein, we believe it's from Einstein, maybe other people said it too, that when you make progress, it's a small portion of that is the inspiration and most of it is the perspiration. But in the US we often think that talent is much more valuable than mere effort, which is actually a weird reversal of that-
Christof Kochn:
If you have to work at it's no good.
Daphna Oyserman:
If you have to work at it, you're just a hard worker, you're not all that talented. So the things that you're... Then what would that set us up to do, that would set us up to be very, very sensitive to the least possibility of difficulty. "This feels hard for me. I don't have talent in that. I should shift to something else." And you can see how that would be very corrosive because in fact, most things that are worth doing require lots of practice to get there.
Heather Berlin:
But wait, wouldn't you achieve the greatest heights when you actually discover what it is either you're good at or you enjoy doing and then work at that versus... Because then there's a synergistic effect.
Daphna Oyserman:
And there's this tension, how would I know?
Heather Berlin:
Okay.
Daphna Oyserman:
When I was in school, we were supposed to pick a language as a second language to learn based on who knows what. When my kids were in school, they had perfected this model. This is in the US. And so they had you take many few weeks of each language at the end of which you were supposed to pick. And again, based on what? So the few weeks is going to tell you what, I like the teacher, the other kids are fun, or I learned something and hence I must have talent for Spanish, which I have no talent for French?
So it just seems like once we set up this idea that I should be fore fronting my talent, it creates many situations in which in fact I get less far than I could have. That eating bitter perspective assumes that we can get a lot of advance just by working hard. Now maybe at the very edge talent matters, but there may be a huge amount of progress that we can make of ways in which we can actually engage and enjoy ourselves and do something useful in the world that just involves doing it.
Christof Kochn:
For most people most of the time I think hard work pays off.
Daphna Oyserman:
Yes. Yes.
Christof Kochn:
Now if you're an Olympic athlete and you're trying to get that 0.1 second advantage, in that case, I think natural talent makes a difference.
Heather Berlin:
To get the highest heights.
Daphna Oyserman:
So for most of us, we are not at the highest heights of anything. We are John Bowlby's good enough parents, we're good enough people. We are not awful, but we aren't necessarily the very best. And I think potentially another way of thinking about this in terms of well-being and life satisfaction, finding a sense of purpose and meaning in life, it's very draining to think that I can't do anything till I found my one true métier. The one thing that I'm going to be the best at. Most of us may not be the best at anything, but we can still actually have productive, useful, meaningful lives, have a sense of purpose by just engaging. So I think that's really to me the tension.
Heather Berlin:
But so this question still of how do these small changes in our context affect our mindset and shift the decisions we make and our long-term life goals and outcomes? How does that work?
Daphna Oyserman:
So there are three different ways that we can think about that. One is in terms of whether the context shifts us to an individualistic or collectivistic mindset. Am I thinking about how things connect and relate or am I thinking about pulling out a main point? Am I supposed to be the one distinct best one in my unique black outfit or my unique khakis, or am I trying to actually fit in and connect to others? So that's one very small change in context that can really matter. The other very small change in context that can really matter is really has to do with these triggering of different ways of thinking about what does difficulty mean. And the third way that we can think about those small changes in context is really this idea that as I'm engaging with the world, what is the brain doing?
Well, the brain is this continuous prediction system and it's making small predictions about what'll happen next, what'll happen next. And to the extent that seems to me that I made a correct prediction, I can keep going back to that example about being late. I had no idea I was late, so I didn't experience a prediction error. I experienced everything as moving along just fine. Essentially I was a tenured professor and no one said anything. But what does that mean? That means that the context shift can shift how we act without us necessarily even noticing it.
Christof Kochn:
When you say small modification, what do you have in mind? Particular to teach maybe kids that hard work is part of life and it's really useful, what small interventions do you have in mind? Some pixel dust that you put into drinking a lot of stuff.
Daphna Oyserman:
Yes. That's exactly what I had in mind. That fairy dust, you just sprinkle it upon your head. I want to get A's and I have the bright powder and you sprinkle you and it get sparkly. That's what I meant. No. So that's actually one of the questions that I asked. So for many years I've been asking kids about their... What are they expecting to like, what are they concerned they might be like in the coming year in the farther future?
Christof Kochn:
This is school kids?
Daphna Oyserman:
School kids. The most common response is to do well in school, which may come as a surprise to educators and so forth who are looking at basically missing the mark. So I said, "Well, let's take kids seriously." So if you actually want to do well in school and you're imagining futures in the farther future that require lots of advanced education because kids want to be various careers and to and do things that would require lots of schoolwork. So then the question is why might it be that I carry around these ideas that I want to do on school, that I want to be a doctor or a lawyer, or I want to be a gamer, I want to be right to-
Heather Berlin:
Influencer.
Daphna Oyserman:
One of the things is that unless it feels like future me is relevant to me right now, unless the current situation seems relevant to my goal of being a good student, I'm actually focusing on other things. So one of the small changes in context can be to actually help kids see that that future is actually relevant to right now.
Heather Berlin:
Well, I was going to say, how does this relate to procrastination? Because I think we often think there is this cognitive bias that our future self is going to be better than our current self, right? Like, oh, my future me is going to totally write that paper, but not the current me and I'll just trust that future me is going to do that. And so you end up procrastinating. So how does our perception of ourselves, and you talked about this consistency of identity, but really we have this abnormally higher perception that our future selves are going to be much better than our current selves when it's probably going to be just about the same. And this leads to the cycle of procrastination. So can you speak to that?
Daphna Oyserman:
Sure. So when I started talking about the three reasons that we have a self, we mentioned two of them. One was I need to actually know who I am. The second one is I need to be able to predict how others will respond. But the third one is actually literally what you just said right now, which is that it's actually useful to maintain a somewhat positive sense of self, to feel a sense of self-worth, self-efficacy to believe that I am or can be competent allows me to keep engaging with things. And it can have its underbelly, which is that one way to feel good about myself is to say, "Not doing it now, but future me is going to just be the cat's pajamas. Future me is going to really ace that thing, is going to get it done. I'm just 12 right now, but later I'll be a doctor."
And just imagining that future self doesn't necessarily get you going. So there needs to be something that happens between imagining this nice, lovely, positive future me, which we don't in any way want to undermine and actually getting going, which requires that I think. So now is the time to get going. Sometimes when we think about procrastination, it's a fancy word and there are two different elements to it. One element of procrastination is, as you said, I don't need to work now because I can really feel taste and just vividly immerse myself in how wonderful it'll be. Once the book will write itself, I can so clearly envision it. So now I can have a coffee and read the newspaper. And so I think the question then is no one says right now I'm procrastinating. When they do, they probably feel less efficacious, bad about themselves.
Often people simply say, "Okay, I can just really imagine it and it'll really flow wonderfully. Now I'm not really in the mood for it, but later it'll happen." And I think the first thing is when you get started, the reason you think you're maybe not in the mood for it right now is when you get started, you have this disconcerting thing, you're just not sure how to start or you write the first paragraph, it's not very good, or you're editing and nothing is really happening and you think something is wrong right now and it reduces your confidence that now is the time to get going and you think maybe later I'll work. And that's because it feels hard. And so I think the small thing that we want to do is actually get practiced up that yes, of course getting going, continuing to work feels difficult.
Christof Kochn:
Feels hard.
Daphna Oyserman:
It is hard.
Christof Kochn:
You want to get kids used to the fact that feeling hard is good, it's okay.
Daphna Oyserman:
Yes. So that you won't immediately think, oh, this feels hard. If I have a talent modality, the pixie dust is descending upon me way of thinking about actually engaging, then any signal of difficulty will reduce my confidence and make me say, "Maybe I should shift to something else. Maybe this isn't for me."
Christof Kochn:
How do do this practically? How do you teach kids that it's good to feel hard work? How do you do that just practically? What do you tell them?
Daphna Oyserman:
So I think if we're thinking about this from an American culture perspective, because we're so practiced with the alternative, just dumping that on kids' plates they'll counter-argue you. And so the more forcefully you say it, the more you scold, the more you say you ought to believe this, the more they'll instantly and immediately counter-argue you and come up with the examples of why it isn't true. So rather than doing that, what we've been doing is working with teachers, with kids in school to do a bunch of activities that can help kids get those insights themselves. Starting with things that are fun and engaging so that the cultural frame, which is that if it's really for me, it should be easy to do, easy as possible, easy as true. Once they're trusting the process to begin to add things that are harder to do to actually get that.
Christof Kochn:
Oh, sneaky. So you sneak in slowly gradual.
Daphna Oyserman:
It's a gradual process. It's not sneaky, it's that I have to actually be willing to engage. If you throw something at me that that doesn't make sense to me, then given that I have those three goals of self-concept, one of them is to feel good about myself. And if you try and plunge me into something that's going to make me feel bad about myself, I should grab onto that piece of self-concept that says, "No," I need to feel good about myself and counter-argue it. So I think sneaky is the wrong way to frame it because there's something useful about being willing to believe that I'm a person of worth, I am or could become competent. And then the way that I get there, I think what's iatrogenic about American culture is that we overemphasize ease as a signal of talent. Talent would just feel effortless. And I think we know that that's not true, and yet we sell that to ourselves and to others.
Christof Kochn:
For most of us, it's a fiction we should get rid of. We should also get rid of the belief that I always need to feel good about myself.
Daphna Oyserman:
I think there's two different ways of feeling good. So one way of feeling good, the way that you're probably thinking of is this way, right? I'm the best. Ooh, right. There's another way of feeling good, which is this calm satisfaction of knowing that I tried my best and tomorrow's another day. And that way of feeling good about yourself is very useful. You should knock yourself out. You should do your darnedest and then tomorrow's another day.
Heather Berlin:
And also this framing of that it's not about the outcome per se, but it's about the process and the effort. And there is this book, the Coddling of the American Mind, or this concept of we're coddling a lot of the... Preventing them from having any adversity. Everybody gets a trophy and no one should feel bad. And that's really actually detrimental because some hardship early on actually teaches you how to deal with it and inoculates you to the inevitable later hardships down the road.
Daphna Oyserman:
By not letting kids have a chance, what you're telling them is that if I fail along the way, all is lost. And that is very corrosive because it produces a sense that every single step is a make or break situation. And I think when we think about is it about the outcome or the process, I would want to argue that it's not about a particular outcome. So did I write this paper? Did my paper have this amount of impact? No, I'm trying to actually engage with science and sometimes I'll be wrong, sometimes I'll work really hard and there's actually nothing there. I was simply wrong. That's okay because I'm engaging with the process. And along the way, if you want to call it succeeding, I'm succeeding in making progress. I'm creating some-
Christof Kochn:
But you should always treat it as it's important, right? I'm always trying to write the best possible paper in my class.
Daphna Oyserman:
I'm trying to write the best possible paper, but I have to be willing to shift flexibly to say, "But this isn't getting me there."
Heather Berlin:
Thinking again, going back to the influence of culture in this world right now it's so we have access to all these other cultures. We're not as isolated as we once were. And so I'm a little skeptical about how much we really are inside these perception boxes. I mean maybe in certain aspects like the United States that are isolated and don't have a lot of... But like growing up in New York, you have access to all these other cultures and influences.
Daphna Oyserman:
But you're in a perception box, whether you define it as a box that contains a variety of cultures or only one culture. Humans don't engage with some objective world.
Christof Kochn:
No one does.
Daphna Oyserman:
They engage with the world through their senses. No one does. So if we want to increase this to beyond humans, other living creatures as well. So the only way that we can engage with the world is, like I said, the brain is a prediction machine and it makes minute predictions, but it doesn't tell us the answer. So we're always in that box.
Christof Kochn:
You mean this is where science comes in, right? Like the sign for you do you have to compare different culture? And then by stepping out of one you realize, oh, there are all these different cultures and different ways of-
Daphna Oyserman:
And those cultures are the actual everyday practices. And then that's the most proximal level. And the level above that is how commonly is the right way of doing things this collective way or a do your own way or an honor way. And above all of that is all humans have to be able to do all of those we don't survive. All of us have some concept of what does it mean to persist? It depends on the frame that we use. So it's not that any one of these things either comes only from one culture or is only good or bad. Some of these are tools that we should be practiced at pulling out.
So we should be asking ourselves as we go through life, well, when this feels difficult, the inference they draw matters for what they do next, whether they engage, whether they disengage. And I think that's really when we say the small changes in context, we're not going to change the fact that people notice whether it feels easy or hard. What we can change is potentially to increase the vocabulary so you're at least aware that doesn't have to mean one thing. It could also mean something else. And the more practiced up I am with it, that idea of that prediction, automatic prediction process, the more practiced up I am, the more it feels natural to say, "Oh, maybe it could mean that."
Heather Berlin:
If you think of the brain as an algorithm and then whatever the inputs, as the inputs change these decision, the algorithms that go into these decisions and how we think about things will change. And that's why I think exposure to other cultures can be really, really helpful.
Daphna Oyserman:
Instead of thinking about it, this is the way you can think about it as a way.
Christof Kochn:
A way. But to Heather's point, isn't it true that given globalization, the internet and all of that, we are all evolving towards some common worldwide culture because many of us watch the same things and do similar things?
Daphna Oyserman:
So more ideas would be accessible. Still, I don't think that when you are living in very different places in the world that everything is the same. And I think those underlying, why am I doing things, what counts? Those things are a little more sticky.
Heather Berlin:
So at the end of each episode, we like to ask our guests a few perception box questions. So my question is, when have you let go of very deeply held conviction? Maybe it's something to do with your research, you really thought something was going to be one way and it really surprised you.
Daphna Oyserman:
I think a couple of things that to me resonate. One is apparently prior to even thinking about this idea of people can draw inferences from their metacognitive experiences of difficulty, I had been more of a chronic difficulty as importance kind of a person. So I remember having to shift majors when I started college because I was like, "Oh, I'm not all that interested in history and philosophy, so maybe I should study them because they don't come naturally to me." And this is back to your idea that shouldn't you pick the things you're good at? An alternative is to say you should pick the things you're not good at because you can't possibly get better if you don't work on them more.
And so realizing that there's no right answer, it depends on the situation. Why am I doing this? Am I doing the things I'm less good at to attain competency? Which is really what you're supposed to do through high school, but at the point that you're transitioning to where do I want to invest my energies for my job, for the rest of my life? Maybe I should ask myself what are the things that I feel like I can make really a contribution to. So that was an aha moment. I don't know if it was painful, but later when I started thinking about difficulty as importance, I thought, huh. So apparently I was a difficulty-is-importance kind of a person.
Christof Kochn:
So did you end up studying history and philosophy?
Daphna Oyserman:
No. No. I let that go and I went into sociology and psychology.
Christof Kochn:
Because you felt you had a talent for it?
Daphna Oyserman:
Because it was the kind of field where if I had nothing that I had to do at that moment, I'd happily pick up that stuff to read. Whereas the other stuff was more like, well, have I finished my homework? If so, then done.
Christof Kochn:
So that's why some people study food flies and nematodes, C. elegans. Because there you can directly manipulate-
Daphna Oyserman:
Exactly.
Christof Kochn:
Directly access all the processes.
Daphna Oyserman:
Not interesting to me, but I can understand that. Yes.
Heather Berlin:
Well, thank you for this great conversation. I want to thank you for being here, for joining us today. And if you'd like to learn more about your own perception box, spend time this week, answer the same perception box questions that we asked our guests, and check out other questions on our website at unlikelycollaborators.com. You can also subscribe to our YouTube channel and watch the show or listen wherever you get your podcasts.
How Does Our Cultural Identity Influence Us? with Dr. Daphna Oyserman
Our cultural lenses can expand our Perception Box or contract it, keeping us closed off to new opportunities. So how do we become aware of the personal influences that shape our perceptions? In this episode of Science of Perception Box, cohosts Dr. Heather Berlin and Dr. Christoph Koch discuss the impact of cultural differences on identity and mindsets with guest Dr. Daphna Oyserman. Dr. Oyserman shares her insights on how small changes in context can significantly affect our mindset and choices, impacting our health and academic performance.
Dr. Daphna Oyserman is a Dean’s Professor of Psychology and Professor of Psychology and Education at the University of Southern California. Dr. Oyserman received a PhD in psychology and social work from the University of Michigan and served on the faculty of The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, before returning to the University of Michigan where she last held appointments as the Edwin J. Thomas Collegiate Professor of Social Work, Professor of Psychology, and Research Professor in the Institute for Social Research.
Dr. Heather Berlin is a neuroscientist, clinical psychologist, and Professor of Psychiatry and Neuroscience at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City.
Dr. Christof Koch is Chief Scientist for the Tiny Blue Dot Foundation and the current Meritorious Investigator and former President of the Allen Institute for Brain Science.
Join us for new episodes every Thursday. Follow the show on YouTube, Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music, or wherever podcasts are found.
Love the show? Write us a review on your podcast app, or tell a friend about the show.
Daphna Oyserman:
What are cultures for? Well, humans don't live alone. In fact, from an evolutionary perspective, humans are evolved to live in groups. They don't survive well alone. So we need to figure out who's in our group because they will help us, but then we're mutually obligated. We need to help them too.
Elizabeth Koch:
Hi, I'm Elizabeth Koch. We all live inside our own personal private perception box built by our genes and the physical, social, and cultural environment in which we were born and raised. In this podcast, we explore how although the walls of this mental box are always present, they can't expand in states like awe, wonder and curiosity or contract in response to anxiety, fear, and anger. I'd like to introduce our esteemed hosts, two incredible and distinguished minds. Dr. Heather Berlin, Professor of Psychiatry and Neuroscience at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City. And Dr. Christof Kochn, Chief Scientist for the Tiny Blue Dot Foundation and the current Meritorious investigator and former president of the Allen Institute for Brain Science. Welcome to the Science of Perception Box.
Heather Berlin:
Hi everyone. Welcome to Science of Perception Box. I'm your co-host, Dr. Heather Berlin.
Christof Kochn:
And I'm your co-host, Dr. Christof Kochn.
Heather Berlin:
Every week we feature an aspect of science, of perception box highlighting the latest research together with our expert guests. And this week on Science of Perception Box, we explore how cultural differences influence the way we think, feel, and act about ourselves and the world around us, and how our cultural identity influences our mindset. We're thrilled to have with us today Dr. Daphne Oyserman. She studies how small changes in context can shift mindsets with significant effects on important outcomes like health and academic performance. Dr. Oyserman is a Dean's professor in the department of Psychology and of Education and Communication at the University of Southern California. She received her PhD in Psychology and Social Work from the University of Michigan. Dr. Oyserman also studies cultural identity expression, which shows up in things like how people make consumer choices as ways of expressing their identity. So Christof, do you express your identity in any way in terms of how you consume things, for example, the clothes you choose?
Christof Kochn:
Yes. Now that you mentioned is the clothes I choose, sort of a rugged, colorful, outdoor. The food I eat, organic, vegetarian. The books I read, the way I talk and the music I listen to. All of that are expressions of my cultural identity. What about you?
Heather Berlin:
Oh, well, I tend to dress all in black, so clearly I'm from New York and I think that's my cultural identity. It's cool, calm. We don't want to say too much. We don't need to be so out there. But Dr. Oyserman, thanks so much for being here. So I wanted to start with a question of what is the relationship between culture and identity?
Daphna Oyserman:
That's a super question and the important way to think about these things is that on the one hand, we go forth into the world assuming that we know who we are and that who we are actually predicts what we're going to do, what we're going to like. And that's a really important thing because if I don't have a sense of who I am, then I have no idea what are the choices I should be making in the world. So I have to have some sense that I know who I am and that who I am will predict what I'll do.
Christof Kochn:
By who I am you mean I'm a man, I'm a scientist. I'm a-
Daphna Oyserman:
Well, last night before I went to sleep, I set my coffee maker because I made a prediction that in the morning I would want coffee. I didn't say, "Who knows if I want coffee? I used to want coffee before, but will I want coffee in the morning? I have no idea." That's an identity-based prediction.
Christof Kochn:
So it's part of your cultural identity drinking coffee?
Daphna Oyserman:
I'm not yet at the culture part. I'm starting just with the very basic thing that we experience ourselves as being people in the world that have some sense of constancy and that that's really useful because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to make any plans for the future. And when you think about when people say, "I just don't know who I am, I'm just need to find myself." There are moments in our lives where we really don't have that sense of constancy and that sense of constancy is useful because a lot of what we do entails acting now for some future me, for the desires and wants of the future me. And at the same time, it can't be that our identities are completely fixed. I have to actually be able to engage with the world around me. So there's that tension between both things that I think are useful, both are affordances, not constraints, which is I need to have a belief that I know who I am and that what I want, will want in the future is knowable to be now so I can engage.
And I also have to be actually open to new possibilities of who is the person I am now and what I can become. So if that's what we mean by an identity in a very basic way, then the next question is, well, what does that list of possible preferences of the things that I might value or want or desire, where does that come from? And then that's really where we think about culture, that part comes in. So what are cultures for? Well, humans don't live alone. In fact, from an evolutionary perspective, humans are evolved to live in groups. They don't survive well alone. So we need to figure out who's in our group because they will help us, but then we're mutually obligated. We need to help them too. So part of our identities have to entail some usness, who is in my group? What are the things that we do? Oh, why would I care about the things that we do? Well, it's a way of signaling my group identity.
Christof Kochn:
But isn't that universal among all people?
Daphna Oyserman:
Yes, exactly. So the first level of analysis when we think about culture is that all of us live in societies. All of us need to signal to the other members of our group that we're members of the group, but groups don't survive just by all doing the same thing together. Actually, there needs to be some space for innovation. So all human societies not only have some triggers for that collective part, who are we? What are our group ways of doing things? But also there has to be some spaces at least sometimes for people to do their own thing and innovate and then other people can copy them if it's useful.
Christof Kochn:
But is that just a little bit-
Daphna Oyserman:
That's at the highest level of analysis. So all societies would have some means of what we might call collective engagement or collectivism and some means of doing your own thing, being an individualist. So all human societies need that. Then there's a level below that which is really to say, "Well, but societies differ." Why might they differ? Well, they differ in part because environments differ historically ecologically in terms of their harshness, the harsher the environment, the more people needed to band together and engage together. So the more we-ness, there would be the more collective things of doing things together. The more plush the environment, the less you really needed to do that. The more you could actually just do your own thing and engage in your own way.
Christof Kochn:
But how does this affect the way today I perceive what I perceive and I hear what I hear, and I see what I see?
Daphna Oyserman:
Once we've come up with solutions, they become sticky. They're our way of doing things, and then it's easier for me to engage the world knowing what are the likely rules, in air quotes rules, what are the likely norms? So for example, if I'm supposed to be meeting with you guys at eight, does that mean eight exactly? Does that mean 10 past eight? Does that mean I should be here five minutes before. Societies differ in a whole bunch of things, including how they manage time, what is on time look like.
Heather Berlin:
Well, I want to say yes-
Christof Kochn:
Can I quote you something here from your paper-
Daphna Oyserman:
Go ahead.
Christof Kochn:
So this is a paper you wrote, this wonderful review paper on culture a couple of years ago. Noticing culture requires some way of stepping out of it in order to gain perspective on it. The promise of culture psychology is that making this effort matters. And then you make this very striking sentence. However, because all of life takes place within a culture, it is easy to fail to see that a cultural lens exists and instead to think that there is no lens of all just reality, which is what we call the perception box. So maybe you can expound on that.
Daphna Oyserman:
Sure. So the frame that I was taking to begin with is to say, well, culture may exist and for these reasons, that people don't survive alone, there needs to be a solution to these core problems of survival, sticking together, innovating and regulating relationships, which psychologists have labeled individualism, collectivism, and honor. But in any particular society, the way in which we do those things will be our way. It's better than no way so you have a way. Then what you end up with is, as you said, people actually just living in their everyday environment. So it doesn't feel like what we're doing is our cultural way. It feels like the way to do things. And that was why I mentioned this thing of time. It's when you sift to a different place that you actually notice that your way isn't the only way that there are alternatives.
So the time example, for many years I was at the University of Michigan on faculty and there was a thing called Michigan Time, which meant 10 past the hour is on time and no one expected you to be there before that. And if you're there before that it was called early. So if you had a meeting at eight, what you really meant was 10 past eight. I had only been at the University of Michigan, so I didn't know that this was a unique thing to the University of Michigan. I thought it was university time. I then moved to the University of Southern California where I assumed that when we have a meeting at eight, we really mean 10 past eight. One day I was walking up the stairs, not running, just walking up the stairs for a meeting and I was passed at running pace by another person who was going to be at the meeting who said to me in a huffy voice, "Do I know what time it is?"
And I grandly said, "Yep, it's about three past. We have plenty of time." And he curtly said, "Three past means we're late." Oh, light bulb emerges on top of my head. Turns out that was a cultural thing at the University of Michigan. I had no idea. I thought it was university time. So I had been showing up late for over a year. Because that's the other thing, which is that culture entails an implicit but very detailed scheme of how things evolve. And it's rare that people will actually tell you that you've gotten it wrong. They make inferences about you as a person. So I had established an identity as late person at the University of Southern California because I thought I was on time all the time, but I wasn't. And so that's really when we say that when you're in the culture, it seems just like reality and it's only when you step out that you notice. And researchers need to figure out some way of stepping out so they won't only be blundering humans who show up late when they think they're on time.
Heather Berlin:
So I want to talk about these, when we have a change in perspective and does that really change our identity? So for instance, you're living in... I grew up in New York, part of my identity is being Jewish. And everybody's Jewish in New York. It wasn't a big deal. It was not a thing, right? 50% of the people I went to school with were. Then I moved to England and then suddenly I remember someone was like, "Oh, you're Jewish." Like it was a thing. And then I realized was this whole other-
Daphna Oyserman:
And it had italics and air quotes on it.
Heather Berlin:
Yeah. And there was all this stuff that came along with that. But it was only once I left my culture that I gained this other perspective, but it didn't change my identity. Being in these different cultures can say, oh, there are these different perspectives, but it didn't change necessarily how I thought about myself or how I identified. No.
Christof Kochn:
When you're now much more-
Heather Berlin:
Not really.
Christof Kochn:
...self conscious of these things. But before you took advantage-
Heather Berlin:
Well, I knew what it meant to other people. I knew what it meant, oh, this means something to other people. They think about me in this certain way, but it didn't change my identity.
Daphna Oyserman:
Well, if you think about the self, we don't just have selves, we have them for a reason, and there's really three of them. One reason that we have a self is that we can know who we are and it's useful to know who you are. Then you can improve if you don't like it. So it's like an accuracy thing. Another reason that we have a self is to make predictions about how others will engage with us. And if we just think we're people, but others see us as, oh, you're German, you're Jewish, you're from New York, and you fail to know that, then you'll make mispredictions. So one of the domains in which people have studied that a lot is in terms of minority identities and stigmatized identities. And they've said, "If you just think that you're a person, you'll mispredict because others will see you in a negative way.
And you'll fail to understand that they're looking at you as a category of being that they see negatively. And you'll think it's about potentially about you or you just want to understand what went wrong." So on the one hand you're saying, well, I still knew who I was, but at the same time your comment was basically saying, "Well, wait a minute. You had to notice that others were responding to you differently." And over time that does change. One of the goals of having a self is to be able to understand how others will respond. So you have to accommodate in some ways those negative responses.
Christof Kochn:
Which is now you show up on time.
Daphna Oyserman:
Now I show up on actual real time at this place and not on time that would've been at that place. Exactly.
Heather Berlin:
But how you identify, you talk a lot about in your research how that affects our consumer decisions. So can you talk a little bit about that?
Daphna Oyserman:
Sure. So there are two different lines of those research. So one version of that was really back to those issues about individualism and collectivism. And I was wondering, well, is it the case that if my collective identity is queued, do I then pursue things in that way of connecting and relating? So in those series of studies, for example, we thought, well, you go into a store and often they will have a mannequin with an outfit. So say you try on the pants and they look great, but then the belt looks awful, the shirt looks weird, the jacket looks funny. Do you just go, "Okay, well the pants are good, I'm buying them?" Or do you go, "The whole thing doesn't work, so I'm going to leave it?" And our intuition was that if a collectivistic mindset was on your mind, you'd want either the whole thing or you wouldn't want it.
Whereas if an individualistic mindset was on your mind, you would go, "The pants are good," and the rest of it just wouldn't even occur to you. So in a series of experiments, we tested out that prediction and the answer seems to be yes. So depending on the mindset you bring into the consumption situation, you're either thinking about creating a set and then you're willing to pay a premium for the set, but also you're willing to discard discrete elements if you can't have the set.
Christof Kochn:
This is culture-bound or this is at the level of the individual shopper?
Daphna Oyserman:
Well, we were looking at this in terms of remember that first idea of what is culture? Is that it's a human universal. So everyone should be able to trigger an individualistic or a collectivistic on a mindset depending on the situation.
Christof Kochn:
Now I'm either in an individualistic mindset or a collectivistic mindset.
Daphna Oyserman:
One or the other could be triggered in the moment. So even though people vary in how much chronically they're used to functioning in one or another at any moment in time, any of them can be triggered.
Heather Berlin:
But couldn't we think of culture as just another stimuli in our environment that affects our decisions as well as whatever happened in your childhood or if you're hungry or not?
Christof Kochn:
No, I would say it's a way we construct our perception box, our sense of reality of what is real. I mean, as Daphna said, "She was perceived as a person who was consistently late." That was just the way it was. That's part of my cultural mindset.
Daphna Oyserman:
What does culture do for you? It provides you a list of things, what's important, what's valued, how do we do things. And if somebody actually doesn't follow that, you just assume that there's something wrong with them. You don't immediately go for, oh, they must come from a different, right. When you do that, then you can try and make accommodations. But typically what happens is we're all in the same cultural space. We assume as you nicely read from the quote, it's like air. We just assume that everyone is following the same implicit set of this implicit script.
Christof Kochn:
We are all born as naive realists, right? Whatever I perceive of course is what everyone else perceives. How could it be otherwise?
Daphna Oyserman:
What I see is all there is.
Heather Berlin:
But what about the nonconformists whose actual identities related to not conforming with the cultural norms and-
Daphna Oyserman:
There was a lovely, I don't want to make advertisements, but Gap had a lovely individualistic commercial a while ago, and it had all sorts of people wearing the same gap khakis. So there's a way in which even individualism is performed in a way that we all have to have our unique twist. And as you said, my identity as a New Yorker is Black, but I don't look exactly like every other New Yorker. I look uniquely in black compared to you in your black.
Heather Berlin:
In terms of our identity though, how does it affect our motivation? How does it affect our pursuit of long-term goals? How we see ourselves because it's just another construct. It's a narrative we tell ourselves that can change over time. But how does the me now who I think of myself now affect this imagined person in the future?
Daphna Oyserman:
That's a super question. I think one of the interesting things about identity is that it's temporal. We all had selves we were before, selves we are now, selves we might be in the future. But a lot of actual modern human engagement is about the future self. So if you're a kid in school, school is not designed to be the most fun thing you could possibly be doing. It's not like you wake up in the morning and you think to yourself, "How can I have the most fun? I know. Algebra." And it's foolish-
Christof Kochn:
Speak for yourself.
Heather Berlin:
Well, I mean I don't know, I like algebra.
Christof Kochn:
Please speak for yourself.
Heather Berlin:
Algebra.
Daphna Oyserman:
It's foolish for educators to try and win that game. It makes more sense to say, "Well, what am I actually doing? Am I engaging now to invest in some future me?" And to the extent that future me feels connected to current me, then things that will help me get there feel like me things to do. How do we do that? Well, one is to make that future feel close and connected. It's the same me after all. Another way that you could do that is to say, well, if I want in the future to be that, and I'm not like that now how am I going to attain that standard? Well, I better get going. So one version of actually getting going is to say it's the same me. It's continuous. I'm investing in future me because it's me. It's like I'm giving to myself. Another version of that is to say, well, current me isn't as good as what I want future me to do. So I better start climbing that path. And that's thinking of it as a contrasting standard. Both of those can be ways actually to engage. Why?
Well, they both trigger a thing that we don't like to think about a lot, which is that engaging, doing things that are important can feel difficult. And if I don't think about that, then when it feels hard to work on invest in the things I actually care about and want to do, I immediately feel a decline in confidence. Oh, maybe I don't really care about that. Maybe this is not the real me. Maybe I should invest my time in something else. Maybe it's a waste of my time. Maybe I'm bored right now. So one of the things that cultures do for us is they give us an explanation, a go-to for when it's hard what does that imply?
Christof Kochn:
So are you saying that the notion of what is difficult to me is partially cultural bound?
Daphna Oyserman:
What is difficult, but what is my experience of difficulty when it feels hard to think about or start doing something? What is that difficulty in thinking? That metacognitive experience of difficulty, what does that imply? Does it imply that the odds are low and I should reduce my certainty and shift to something else? So that's one possibility that's legitimate. Or alternatively, does that imply no pain, no gain?
Christof Kochn:
You mean should I take it as a challenge that excites me that I can-
Daphna Oyserman:
The important things in life are hard to get to. I can choose to do this. It's a goal I have for myself. It's a possible self. I can choose to engage with it if it's valuable. If other people would desire it must be difficult to get to. So difficulty can in some situations imply odds are low, don't waste your time, shift to something else.
Christof Kochn:
Is that a character trait or are some people just born with this attitude?
Daphna Oyserman:
I'm wanting to argue that it's a culture-based thing that cultures give us narratives for what difficulty would imply. And that all cultures on the one hand probably provide both, but maybe more likely, more fluently, more practiced in giving you one or the other. So I'll give you an example. In the US there's that, the children's stories about the little engine that could, he was like, "I think I can. I think I can." And that was really like a, when it's hard just persist, which isn't quite difficulty as importance, but at least it's a persistence. But we also have narratives about finding ourselves, being true to ourselves. How do I know if I found myself? How do I know if I'm true to myself? Well, if it's hard, maybe it's not for me because the things that I'm truly good at, the essence of me-
Christof Kochn:
Should come natural.
Daphna Oyserman:
...should descend upon me like fairy dust. So in many ways, those narratives of finding yourself being true to yourself actually carry an underbelly of signaling that difficulty implies impossibility. It's not the true you should shift to something else.
Heather Berlin:
When people come across difficulties in life, it's how we perceive those. And if we can somehow shift our mindset around that, how we think about difficulties, it'll affect how we feel about them and then how we behave.
Daphna Oyserman:
So rather than thinking about it as one coin that has a good side and a bad side, I want to think about this as two coins because sometimes it's actually a good idea, right? Sometimes it's true. You don't want to perseverate and bang yourself against a wall and keep applying to medical school and by the time you're in your 40s, maybe you should be shifting to something else. That's really the question is under what circumstances is it a good idea to pull out the coin that says, "When it's difficult, I should reduce my certainty, I should shift to something else?" And under what circumstances is it a good idea to say, "Of course it's hard. This is valuable. I'm going to roll up my sleeves and really engage?" And I think you're right. What we want to think about a well-functioning person can shift between the two and not perseverate only on one or the other.
Christof Kochn:
I think in Chinese there's this expression, eat bitter.
Daphna Oyserman:
Eat bitter.
Christof Kochn:
So can you explain this in this context?
Daphna Oyserman:
So when we are engaging in environments that are hard or tough, does that imply it's hard for me and I should shift to something else or does that imply that the process of attaining a goal requires that I actually suffer along the way? And eating bitter is a way of describing that narrative of engaging with difficulty. So one of the things that we asked ourselves was are there differences across cultures in the clinic accessibility of difficulty implying impossibility, difficulty implying importance? And we had been doing this by asking people to remember a time that when it was... Where they were working on task, we go, it was hard and they thought it was a waste of their time or that it was really valuable for them. And Americans can do that. When we just ask you to fill out a scale Americans say, "Oh no, I completely agree. No pay, no gain. And I reject the idea that when it's difficult, it's impossible."
And yet when we looked at what people were doing, it seemed as if they had more accessible this idea of difficulty is impossibility. So we thought, let's look at this from a different angle. So what we did is we showed people the definitions or synonyms of difficulty, all the English language ones on the front of a computer screen and we just had you sit there and just say, "Read that. Is that more about importance or is that more about impossibility and just press a button?" And on average Americans in different age groups from middle school, high school, college age, adults, what was more accessible for them was that any version of difficulty, it seemed more like about impossibility. Then we said, "All right, we'll take all of that stuff. We'll bring it to India," because in India there's a large population of people for whom English is a first language or at least a dominant language.
Christof Kochn:
So it was also in English in India.
Daphna Oyserman:
So we could use the exact same material so we could find out is this about English language or is this about American culture? And guess what, Indian participants were, if anything more likely to say, "No, no, those definitions and synonyms of difficulty, they're more about importance." So it looked more like culture than language, but we didn't want to stick only to English. So you then went to China, and of course then you're not going to use English-
Christof Kochn:
In Mandarin.
Daphna Oyserman:
So we used the definitions and synonyms from Chinese, which is actually more extensive because pictographs, so one of my most favorite one is there's one synonym for difficulty is pulling down your sleeve to hide your frayed cuff only to expose your elbow because the cloth is so thin, and that's a really nice way of describing difficulty. So again, people are just saying, is it more about importance or more about impossibility? And for Chinese it was about half and half. So American culture, at least from these versions of the studies, seems to be uniquely more likely to infer from difficult circumstances to have accessible the of, maybe it's just not for me.
Christof Kochn:
But how big are these effects compared to the inter-individual difference? If I pick any two individuals versus within China, within India, within US?
Daphna Oyserman:
There's always going to be huge within population differences. So the culture that you live in, if we again go back to that idea of it's the water you swim in, so it's the culturally accessible constructs, and all we were measuring was is it culturally accessible? That's what that task was. In my culture, is this the way to think it's separate from what I believe? So we didn't find a correlation between the cultural accessibility and your individual beliefs. It's just in my culture, that's the usual way of thinking about it. And I'm a part of my culture, so I know.
Christof Kochn:
What I find utterly fascinating that something as ephemeral as do I believe something is hard work or impossible that affects the way I perceive reality. That's really, that's cool.
Daphna Oyserman:
Yeah.
Christof Kochn:
That's where perception works, right there and then.
Heather Berlin:
Well, I'd say I think it's really, I mean the way that I'm seeing this is that culture affects our general mindset, the way we think about things. And when you can move to another culture, you can maybe shift that mindset or you see it from a different perspective or you expand your perception box in a way. So I want to think about or get into this idea of how can small changes in our environment shift our mindset and how does that affect our long-term life outcomes?
Daphna Oyserman:
We have heard the quote potentially from Einstein, we believe it's from Einstein, maybe other people said it too, that when you make progress, it's a small portion of that is the inspiration and most of it is the perspiration. But in the US we often think that talent is much more valuable than mere effort, which is actually a weird reversal of that-
Christof Kochn:
If you have to work at it's no good.
Daphna Oyserman:
If you have to work at it, you're just a hard worker, you're not all that talented. So the things that you're... Then what would that set us up to do, that would set us up to be very, very sensitive to the least possibility of difficulty. "This feels hard for me. I don't have talent in that. I should shift to something else." And you can see how that would be very corrosive because in fact, most things that are worth doing require lots of practice to get there.
Heather Berlin:
But wait, wouldn't you achieve the greatest heights when you actually discover what it is either you're good at or you enjoy doing and then work at that versus... Because then there's a synergistic effect.
Daphna Oyserman:
And there's this tension, how would I know?
Heather Berlin:
Okay.
Daphna Oyserman:
When I was in school, we were supposed to pick a language as a second language to learn based on who knows what. When my kids were in school, they had perfected this model. This is in the US. And so they had you take many few weeks of each language at the end of which you were supposed to pick. And again, based on what? So the few weeks is going to tell you what, I like the teacher, the other kids are fun, or I learned something and hence I must have talent for Spanish, which I have no talent for French?
So it just seems like once we set up this idea that I should be fore fronting my talent, it creates many situations in which in fact I get less far than I could have. That eating bitter perspective assumes that we can get a lot of advance just by working hard. Now maybe at the very edge talent matters, but there may be a huge amount of progress that we can make of ways in which we can actually engage and enjoy ourselves and do something useful in the world that just involves doing it.
Christof Kochn:
For most people most of the time I think hard work pays off.
Daphna Oyserman:
Yes. Yes.
Christof Kochn:
Now if you're an Olympic athlete and you're trying to get that 0.1 second advantage, in that case, I think natural talent makes a difference.
Heather Berlin:
To get the highest heights.
Daphna Oyserman:
So for most of us, we are not at the highest heights of anything. We are John Bowlby's good enough parents, we're good enough people. We are not awful, but we aren't necessarily the very best. And I think potentially another way of thinking about this in terms of well-being and life satisfaction, finding a sense of purpose and meaning in life, it's very draining to think that I can't do anything till I found my one true métier. The one thing that I'm going to be the best at. Most of us may not be the best at anything, but we can still actually have productive, useful, meaningful lives, have a sense of purpose by just engaging. So I think that's really to me the tension.
Heather Berlin:
But so this question still of how do these small changes in our context affect our mindset and shift the decisions we make and our long-term life goals and outcomes? How does that work?
Daphna Oyserman:
So there are three different ways that we can think about that. One is in terms of whether the context shifts us to an individualistic or collectivistic mindset. Am I thinking about how things connect and relate or am I thinking about pulling out a main point? Am I supposed to be the one distinct best one in my unique black outfit or my unique khakis, or am I trying to actually fit in and connect to others? So that's one very small change in context that can really matter. The other very small change in context that can really matter is really has to do with these triggering of different ways of thinking about what does difficulty mean. And the third way that we can think about those small changes in context is really this idea that as I'm engaging with the world, what is the brain doing?
Well, the brain is this continuous prediction system and it's making small predictions about what'll happen next, what'll happen next. And to the extent that seems to me that I made a correct prediction, I can keep going back to that example about being late. I had no idea I was late, so I didn't experience a prediction error. I experienced everything as moving along just fine. Essentially I was a tenured professor and no one said anything. But what does that mean? That means that the context shift can shift how we act without us necessarily even noticing it.
Christof Kochn:
When you say small modification, what do you have in mind? Particular to teach maybe kids that hard work is part of life and it's really useful, what small interventions do you have in mind? Some pixel dust that you put into drinking a lot of stuff.
Daphna Oyserman:
Yes. That's exactly what I had in mind. That fairy dust, you just sprinkle it upon your head. I want to get A's and I have the bright powder and you sprinkle you and it get sparkly. That's what I meant. No. So that's actually one of the questions that I asked. So for many years I've been asking kids about their... What are they expecting to like, what are they concerned they might be like in the coming year in the farther future?
Christof Kochn:
This is school kids?
Daphna Oyserman:
School kids. The most common response is to do well in school, which may come as a surprise to educators and so forth who are looking at basically missing the mark. So I said, "Well, let's take kids seriously." So if you actually want to do well in school and you're imagining futures in the farther future that require lots of advanced education because kids want to be various careers and to and do things that would require lots of schoolwork. So then the question is why might it be that I carry around these ideas that I want to do on school, that I want to be a doctor or a lawyer, or I want to be a gamer, I want to be right to-
Heather Berlin:
Influencer.
Daphna Oyserman:
One of the things is that unless it feels like future me is relevant to me right now, unless the current situation seems relevant to my goal of being a good student, I'm actually focusing on other things. So one of the small changes in context can be to actually help kids see that that future is actually relevant to right now.
Heather Berlin:
Well, I was going to say, how does this relate to procrastination? Because I think we often think there is this cognitive bias that our future self is going to be better than our current self, right? Like, oh, my future me is going to totally write that paper, but not the current me and I'll just trust that future me is going to do that. And so you end up procrastinating. So how does our perception of ourselves, and you talked about this consistency of identity, but really we have this abnormally higher perception that our future selves are going to be much better than our current selves when it's probably going to be just about the same. And this leads to the cycle of procrastination. So can you speak to that?
Daphna Oyserman:
Sure. So when I started talking about the three reasons that we have a self, we mentioned two of them. One was I need to actually know who I am. The second one is I need to be able to predict how others will respond. But the third one is actually literally what you just said right now, which is that it's actually useful to maintain a somewhat positive sense of self, to feel a sense of self-worth, self-efficacy to believe that I am or can be competent allows me to keep engaging with things. And it can have its underbelly, which is that one way to feel good about myself is to say, "Not doing it now, but future me is going to just be the cat's pajamas. Future me is going to really ace that thing, is going to get it done. I'm just 12 right now, but later I'll be a doctor."
And just imagining that future self doesn't necessarily get you going. So there needs to be something that happens between imagining this nice, lovely, positive future me, which we don't in any way want to undermine and actually getting going, which requires that I think. So now is the time to get going. Sometimes when we think about procrastination, it's a fancy word and there are two different elements to it. One element of procrastination is, as you said, I don't need to work now because I can really feel taste and just vividly immerse myself in how wonderful it'll be. Once the book will write itself, I can so clearly envision it. So now I can have a coffee and read the newspaper. And so I think the question then is no one says right now I'm procrastinating. When they do, they probably feel less efficacious, bad about themselves.
Often people simply say, "Okay, I can just really imagine it and it'll really flow wonderfully. Now I'm not really in the mood for it, but later it'll happen." And I think the first thing is when you get started, the reason you think you're maybe not in the mood for it right now is when you get started, you have this disconcerting thing, you're just not sure how to start or you write the first paragraph, it's not very good, or you're editing and nothing is really happening and you think something is wrong right now and it reduces your confidence that now is the time to get going and you think maybe later I'll work. And that's because it feels hard. And so I think the small thing that we want to do is actually get practiced up that yes, of course getting going, continuing to work feels difficult.
Christof Kochn:
Feels hard.
Daphna Oyserman:
It is hard.
Christof Kochn:
You want to get kids used to the fact that feeling hard is good, it's okay.
Daphna Oyserman:
Yes. So that you won't immediately think, oh, this feels hard. If I have a talent modality, the pixie dust is descending upon me way of thinking about actually engaging, then any signal of difficulty will reduce my confidence and make me say, "Maybe I should shift to something else. Maybe this isn't for me."
Christof Kochn:
How do do this practically? How do you teach kids that it's good to feel hard work? How do you do that just practically? What do you tell them?
Daphna Oyserman:
So I think if we're thinking about this from an American culture perspective, because we're so practiced with the alternative, just dumping that on kids' plates they'll counter-argue you. And so the more forcefully you say it, the more you scold, the more you say you ought to believe this, the more they'll instantly and immediately counter-argue you and come up with the examples of why it isn't true. So rather than doing that, what we've been doing is working with teachers, with kids in school to do a bunch of activities that can help kids get those insights themselves. Starting with things that are fun and engaging so that the cultural frame, which is that if it's really for me, it should be easy to do, easy as possible, easy as true. Once they're trusting the process to begin to add things that are harder to do to actually get that.
Christof Kochn:
Oh, sneaky. So you sneak in slowly gradual.
Daphna Oyserman:
It's a gradual process. It's not sneaky, it's that I have to actually be willing to engage. If you throw something at me that that doesn't make sense to me, then given that I have those three goals of self-concept, one of them is to feel good about myself. And if you try and plunge me into something that's going to make me feel bad about myself, I should grab onto that piece of self-concept that says, "No," I need to feel good about myself and counter-argue it. So I think sneaky is the wrong way to frame it because there's something useful about being willing to believe that I'm a person of worth, I am or could become competent. And then the way that I get there, I think what's iatrogenic about American culture is that we overemphasize ease as a signal of talent. Talent would just feel effortless. And I think we know that that's not true, and yet we sell that to ourselves and to others.
Christof Kochn:
For most of us, it's a fiction we should get rid of. We should also get rid of the belief that I always need to feel good about myself.
Daphna Oyserman:
I think there's two different ways of feeling good. So one way of feeling good, the way that you're probably thinking of is this way, right? I'm the best. Ooh, right. There's another way of feeling good, which is this calm satisfaction of knowing that I tried my best and tomorrow's another day. And that way of feeling good about yourself is very useful. You should knock yourself out. You should do your darnedest and then tomorrow's another day.
Heather Berlin:
And also this framing of that it's not about the outcome per se, but it's about the process and the effort. And there is this book, the Coddling of the American Mind, or this concept of we're coddling a lot of the... Preventing them from having any adversity. Everybody gets a trophy and no one should feel bad. And that's really actually detrimental because some hardship early on actually teaches you how to deal with it and inoculates you to the inevitable later hardships down the road.
Daphna Oyserman:
By not letting kids have a chance, what you're telling them is that if I fail along the way, all is lost. And that is very corrosive because it produces a sense that every single step is a make or break situation. And I think when we think about is it about the outcome or the process, I would want to argue that it's not about a particular outcome. So did I write this paper? Did my paper have this amount of impact? No, I'm trying to actually engage with science and sometimes I'll be wrong, sometimes I'll work really hard and there's actually nothing there. I was simply wrong. That's okay because I'm engaging with the process. And along the way, if you want to call it succeeding, I'm succeeding in making progress. I'm creating some-
Christof Kochn:
But you should always treat it as it's important, right? I'm always trying to write the best possible paper in my class.
Daphna Oyserman:
I'm trying to write the best possible paper, but I have to be willing to shift flexibly to say, "But this isn't getting me there."
Heather Berlin:
Thinking again, going back to the influence of culture in this world right now it's so we have access to all these other cultures. We're not as isolated as we once were. And so I'm a little skeptical about how much we really are inside these perception boxes. I mean maybe in certain aspects like the United States that are isolated and don't have a lot of... But like growing up in New York, you have access to all these other cultures and influences.
Daphna Oyserman:
But you're in a perception box, whether you define it as a box that contains a variety of cultures or only one culture. Humans don't engage with some objective world.
Christof Kochn:
No one does.
Daphna Oyserman:
They engage with the world through their senses. No one does. So if we want to increase this to beyond humans, other living creatures as well. So the only way that we can engage with the world is, like I said, the brain is a prediction machine and it makes minute predictions, but it doesn't tell us the answer. So we're always in that box.
Christof Kochn:
You mean this is where science comes in, right? Like the sign for you do you have to compare different culture? And then by stepping out of one you realize, oh, there are all these different cultures and different ways of-
Daphna Oyserman:
And those cultures are the actual everyday practices. And then that's the most proximal level. And the level above that is how commonly is the right way of doing things this collective way or a do your own way or an honor way. And above all of that is all humans have to be able to do all of those we don't survive. All of us have some concept of what does it mean to persist? It depends on the frame that we use. So it's not that any one of these things either comes only from one culture or is only good or bad. Some of these are tools that we should be practiced at pulling out.
So we should be asking ourselves as we go through life, well, when this feels difficult, the inference they draw matters for what they do next, whether they engage, whether they disengage. And I think that's really when we say the small changes in context, we're not going to change the fact that people notice whether it feels easy or hard. What we can change is potentially to increase the vocabulary so you're at least aware that doesn't have to mean one thing. It could also mean something else. And the more practiced up I am with it, that idea of that prediction, automatic prediction process, the more practiced up I am, the more it feels natural to say, "Oh, maybe it could mean that."
Heather Berlin:
If you think of the brain as an algorithm and then whatever the inputs, as the inputs change these decision, the algorithms that go into these decisions and how we think about things will change. And that's why I think exposure to other cultures can be really, really helpful.
Daphna Oyserman:
Instead of thinking about it, this is the way you can think about it as a way.
Christof Kochn:
A way. But to Heather's point, isn't it true that given globalization, the internet and all of that, we are all evolving towards some common worldwide culture because many of us watch the same things and do similar things?
Daphna Oyserman:
So more ideas would be accessible. Still, I don't think that when you are living in very different places in the world that everything is the same. And I think those underlying, why am I doing things, what counts? Those things are a little more sticky.
Heather Berlin:
So at the end of each episode, we like to ask our guests a few perception box questions. So my question is, when have you let go of very deeply held conviction? Maybe it's something to do with your research, you really thought something was going to be one way and it really surprised you.
Daphna Oyserman:
I think a couple of things that to me resonate. One is apparently prior to even thinking about this idea of people can draw inferences from their metacognitive experiences of difficulty, I had been more of a chronic difficulty as importance kind of a person. So I remember having to shift majors when I started college because I was like, "Oh, I'm not all that interested in history and philosophy, so maybe I should study them because they don't come naturally to me." And this is back to your idea that shouldn't you pick the things you're good at? An alternative is to say you should pick the things you're not good at because you can't possibly get better if you don't work on them more.
And so realizing that there's no right answer, it depends on the situation. Why am I doing this? Am I doing the things I'm less good at to attain competency? Which is really what you're supposed to do through high school, but at the point that you're transitioning to where do I want to invest my energies for my job, for the rest of my life? Maybe I should ask myself what are the things that I feel like I can make really a contribution to. So that was an aha moment. I don't know if it was painful, but later when I started thinking about difficulty as importance, I thought, huh. So apparently I was a difficulty-is-importance kind of a person.
Christof Kochn:
So did you end up studying history and philosophy?
Daphna Oyserman:
No. No. I let that go and I went into sociology and psychology.
Christof Kochn:
Because you felt you had a talent for it?
Daphna Oyserman:
Because it was the kind of field where if I had nothing that I had to do at that moment, I'd happily pick up that stuff to read. Whereas the other stuff was more like, well, have I finished my homework? If so, then done.
Christof Kochn:
So that's why some people study food flies and nematodes, C. elegans. Because there you can directly manipulate-
Daphna Oyserman:
Exactly.
Christof Kochn:
Directly access all the processes.
Daphna Oyserman:
Not interesting to me, but I can understand that. Yes.
Heather Berlin:
Well, thank you for this great conversation. I want to thank you for being here, for joining us today. And if you'd like to learn more about your own perception box, spend time this week, answer the same perception box questions that we asked our guests, and check out other questions on our website at unlikelycollaborators.com. You can also subscribe to our YouTube channel and watch the show or listen wherever you get your podcasts.
How can parents embrace science in order to give their children the best possible environment to thrive in? Cognitive development expert Dr. Alison Gopnik joins us to discuss how navigating challenges fosters healthier adults, likening caregiving to being a gardener creating an environment where various ”plants” can thrive in different conditions. Exposing children to diverse environments helps them develop better coping mechanisms, akin to how the immune system strengthens against viruses.
Dr. Gopnik is a professor at the University of California at Berkeley, where she has taught since 1988. She is a world leader in cognitive science, particularly the study of children’s learning and development. She is the author of over 100 journal articles and several books including the best-selling and critically acclaimed popular books The Scientist in the Crib, The Philosophical Baby, and The Gardener and the Carpenter. She is a fellow of the Cognitive Science Society and the American Association for the Advancement of Science and a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.
Dr. Heather Berlin is a neuroscientist, clinical psychologist, and Professor of Psychiatry and Neuroscience at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City.
Dr. Christof Koch is Chief Scientist for the Tiny Blue Dot Foundation and the current Meritorious Investigator and former President of the Allen Institute for Brain Science.
Join us for new episodes every Thursday. Follow the show on YouTube, Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music, or wherever podcasts are found.
We long for love. We die for love. We kill for love. But why do we love? Cohosts Dr. Heather Berlin and Dr. Christoph Koch ask this question to Helen Fisher, PhD. who dedicated her career to researching romantic love. In this episode of Science of Perception Box, we explore how the act of being in love or out of love changes how we view ourselves and the world around us.
Dr. Fisher was a biological anthropologist, Senior Research Fellow at The Kinsey Institute, and Chief Science Advisor to Match.com. She used brain scanning (fMRI) to study the neural systems associated with the sex drive, romantic love, attachment, rejection, love addiction, long-term partnership happiness, and the biological foundations of human personality. She conducted extensive research on the evolution, biology, and psychology of human sexuality, monogamy, adultery, and divorce.
Dr. Heather Berlin is a neuroscientist, clinical psychologist, and Professor of Psychiatry and Neuroscience at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City.
Dr. Christof Koch is Chief Scientist for the Tiny Blue Dot Foundation and the current Meritorious Investigator and former President of the Allen Institute for Brain Science.
Join us for new episodes every Thursday. Follow the show on YouTube, Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music, or wherever podcasts are found.
Love the show? Write us a review on your podcast app, or tell a friend about the show.
What happens when an irredeemable person receives love, gratitude, and respect? After decades of drug and alcohol abuse, chef and television personality Andrew Zimmern learned firsthand.
As a teenager, Andrew Zimmern experienced deep pain when his mother became permanently disabled, and his father enforced a rule to avoid discussing feelings. Without an outlet, that pain grew into resentment and substance abuse. By 14, Zimmern was drinking daily, and his addiction followed him into adulthood, ultimately costing him his career, relationships, and home.
In January 1992, after hitting rock bottom, Zimmern attempted to take his own life. When he woke up, something shifted. For the first time, he asked for help. His friends intervened, sending him to rehab, where he began confronting his emotions and embracing a mindset of learning and giving.
Zimmern rebuilt his life, becoming a celebrated chef, author, and TV personality. Today, he credits that one vulnerable moment with saving his life and inspiring him to live with purpose and gratitude.
About Andrew Zimmern:
Andrew Zimmern is a chef, food writer, and television personality best known for hosting Bizarre Foods on the Travel Channel. A four-time James Beard Award winner, Zimmern has dedicated his career to exploring global cuisines and advocating for culinary diversity. Beyond television, he is a passionate philanthropist, focusing on hunger relief, food sustainability, and social justice. He founded the Andrew Zimmern Project to support food security initiatives and works with organizations like Second Harvest and Services for the Underserved. Through his work, Zimmern strives to create a more equitable food system and inspire cultural appreciation through cuisine.
The one phrase that changed Diana Nyad’s life, and set her on course to become the first person ever to conquer the 110 mile, 53 hour swim from Florida to Cuba.
At 64, Diana Nyad swam 110 miles from Cuba to Florida, facing jellyfish, exhaustion, and tough ocean currents for over 53 hours. But this feat was more than just physical - it was the result of a lifetime of mental endurance.
As a young swimmer, she faced sexual abuse from her coach, which derailed her Olympic dreams and left deep emotional scars. Instead of letting those experiences hold her back, she found a way to channel that pain into something powerful. She talks about developing a "steel trap mind," using her struggles as motivation to pursue her goals.
Diana's journey goes beyond breaking records. It’s a powerful reminder of the human spirit's ability to persevere and heal, no matter the odds. Her swim from Cuba to Florida, completed on her fifth attempt, showcases her incredible willpower and serves as an inspiration to people everywhere.
About Diana Nyad: Diana Nyad is an endurance swimmer, author, and motivational speaker best known for her 2013 record-breaking swim from Cuba to Florida at age 64. Completing the 110-mile journey without a shark cage, she demonstrated unparalleled resilience and determination. Nyad is also a bestselling author, journalist, and co-founder of EverWalk, a fitness initiative promoting community through walking. Her story of perseverance, chronicled in her memoir Find a Way, continues to inspire audiences worldwide.
“I saw that when I believed my thoughts, I suffered, and when I didn’t believe them, I didn’t suffer.”
Author and public speaker Byron Katie shares how she transformed her life after discovering ‘The Work’, a method for identifying the thoughts that cause pain and suffering. By asking herself four simple yet profound questions, she found a way to recover from her agoraphobia, reunite with her family, and begin teaching others how to heal.
Katie’s strategy for ending suffering lies in asking yourself four questions about the thoughts you’re having: Is it true? Can you absolutely know it’s true? How do you react when you believe it? Who are you without the thought?
By asking yourself these questions, Katie explains how you can begin to escape the mentalities that hold you back. Her method shows us that peace doesn’t come from changing the world—it comes from changing how we see it.
About Byron Katie: Byron Katie is an author and teacher who helps people find peace by questioning their stressful thoughts. In 1986, after years of depression, she experienced a life-changing realization that led her to create The Work, a simple process of self-inquiry. Her books, like Loving What Is and A Thousand Names for Joy, have touched millions. Through workshops and talks, Katie shares a path to clarity and freedom, helping people live with more acceptance and ease.
Our cultural lenses can expand our Perception Box or contract it, keeping us closed off to new opportunities. So how do we become aware of the personal influences that shape our perceptions? In this episode of Science of Perception Box, cohosts Dr. Heather Berlin and Dr. Christoph Koch discuss the impact of cultural differences on identity and mindsets with guest Dr. Daphna Oyserman. Dr. Oyserman shares her insights on how small changes in context can significantly affect our mindset and choices, impacting our health and academic performance.
Dr. Daphna Oyserman is a Dean’s Professor of Psychology and Professor of Psychology and Education at the University of Southern California. Dr. Oyserman received a PhD in psychology and social work from the University of Michigan and served on the faculty of The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, before returning to the University of Michigan where she last held appointments as the Edwin J. Thomas Collegiate Professor of Social Work, Professor of Psychology, and Research Professor in the Institute for Social Research.
Dr. Heather Berlin is a neuroscientist, clinical psychologist, and Professor of Psychiatry and Neuroscience at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City.
Dr. Christof Koch is Chief Scientist for the Tiny Blue Dot Foundation and the current Meritorious Investigator and former President of the Allen Institute for Brain Science.
Join us for new episodes every Thursday. Follow the show on YouTube, Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music, or wherever podcasts are found.
Love the show? Write us a review on your podcast app, or tell a friend about the show.
.png)
Humans have a symbiotic relationship with plants. Plants coevolved to suit our desires for nourishment, beauty, and altering consciousness. Journalist Michael Pollan has investigated the human connection to plants. This week on Science of Perception Box, Dr. Heather Berlin and Dr. Christof Koch ask Pollan about modern trends like ultra-processed foods, industrialized agriculture, and consciousness-altering drugs from plants including caffeine, cannabis, and psychedelics.
For more than 30 years, Michael Pollan has been writing books and articles about the places where the human and natural worlds intersect: on our plates, in our farms and gardens, and in our minds. Pollan is the author of eight books, six of which have been New York Times bestsellers. In 2003, Pollan was appointed the John S. and James L. Knight Professor of Journalism at UC Berkeley’s Graduate School of Journalism and the director of the Knight Program in Science and Environmental Journalism. In 2020, along with Dacher Keltner and others, he cofounded the UC Berkeley Center for the Science of Psychedelics.
Dr. Heather Berlin is a neuroscientist, clinical psychologist, and Professor of Psychiatry and Neuroscience at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City.
Dr. Christof Koch is Chief Scientist for the Tiny Blue Dot Foundation and the current Meritorious Investigator and former President of the Allen Institute for Brain Science.
Join us for new episodes every Thursday. Follow the show on YouTube, Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music, or wherever podcasts are found.
Love the show? Write us a review on your podcast app, or tell a friend about the show.
.jpg)
Jim McKelvey, co-founder of Square, overcame a challenging upbringing marked by social isolation and family tragedy, channeling those experiences into a life defined by action, innovation, and iconoclasm. Though he’s undeniably earned his reputation as a business trailblazer, McKelvey remains uncomfortable with any attempts to mythologize his journey.
.jpg)
As a child, Bob Stiller felt unmoored. His mother’s death was a loss that fueled anger, insecurity and, as a teenager, lots of partying. He founded rolling paper company E-Z Wider in 1971 and, a decade later, Green Mountain Coffee Roasters.
Sophia Amoruso (aka Nasty Gal) started a tiny online vintage clothing store that quickly turned into a $350 million business. Fame soon followed, but so did all of her insecurities.
Anxiety can make us feel like we’re trapped in our brain. So how do we open the door and gain freedom? This week in the inaugural episode of Science of Perception Box podcast, Dr. Heather Berlin and Dr. Christof Koch invite Dr. Judson Brewer to delve into the roots of anxiety, its impact on our perception, and how curiosity can be the key to lasting change.
Dr. Judson Brewer studies the neural mechanisms of mindfulness. He is the Director of Research and Innovation at Brown University’s Mindfulness Center, where he’s also an Associate Professor at the School of Medicine. Dr. Brewer is a leading expert in the science of self-mastery and breaking habits. His books include Unwinding Anxiety, The Craving Mind, and The Hunger Habit.
Dr. Heather Berlin is a neuroscientist, clinical psychologist, and Professor of Psychiatry and Neuroscience at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City.
Dr. Christof Koch is Chief Scientist for the Tiny Blue Dot Foundation and the current Meritorious Investigator and former President of the Allen Institute for Brain Science.
Join us for new episodes every Thursday. Follow the show on YouTube, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, or wherever podcasts are found.
Love the show? Write us a review on your podcast app, or tell a friend about the show.
Join renowned scientists Dr. Heather Berlin and Dr. Christof Koch on the Science of Perception Box, where they delve into the Perception Box—a groundbreaking concept developed by Elizabeth R. Koch, that reveals how our beliefs, biases, and neural wiring shape our reality and define how we experience the world.
Through captivating conversations with expert guests like psychiatrist Dr. Judson Brewer, anthropologist Dr. Helen Fisher, and journalist Michael Pollan, the show explores how the Perception Box expands in states of awe, curiosity, and love, and contracts during fear, anxiety, or anger.
From mindfulness and romantic relationships to psychedelics and human connection, each episode uncovers transformative insights into unlocking greater awareness, fostering curiosity, and reshaping how we perceive the world.
New episodes drop every Thursday on YouTube, Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music, or wherever you listen to podcasts. Follow the journey and redefine your reality.
Don’t call yourself “a writer,” just write. Ryan Holiday on how the labels you give yourself can hold you back.
Who would you be without all the labels and identities you’ve collected over the course of your life?
Ego, titles, and societal expectations often shape who we think we are—or who we think we should be. Author, and for simplicity's sake, bookstore owner, Ryan Holiday explains the simple question “What do you do?” can turn into a trap, making us cling to roles that don’t really define us. But what happens when you let go of these labels? What if, instead of focusing on the identity of being a writer, you focused on the act of writing itself?
As Holiday got older, he learned that being busy “doing the verb” is far more valuable than obsessing over the noun. It’s easy to get caught up in trying to fit into the “right” categories and titles, but that often means copying, comparing, and losing sight of what really matters.
About Ryan Holiday: Ryan Holiday is a bestselling author, marketer, and one of today’s leading voices in modern Stoicism. He’s known for taking ancient wisdom and making it relatable and practical for everyday life. Before becoming an author, he led marketing at American Apparel. Now, he writes about strategy, self-discipline, and leadership, weaving history into real-world advice.
When a group of first responders were asked to confront the Perception Box question, "What need inside of yourself have you been neglecting?", their raw and honest responses were deeply moving and sparked profound reflection.
This series (a collaboration with Jubilee Media) is designed for communities with shared experiences to spark deeper self-understanding and connection by sharing their answers to specially selected Perception Box questions. This highlights the power of vulnerability and the importance of creating safe spaces for honest conversations.
“I feel like I had to lose my sight to fully gain my vision.” John Furniss on how becoming blind led him to drug abuse, rehab, woodworking, and finally, to a fulfilling life.
John Furniss, also known as the Blind Woodsman, opens up about his journey from a difficult past to finding peace and purpose. After losing his sight as a teenager, John struggled for years to accept his new reality, battling inner turmoil and substance abuse along the way. It wasn't until he discovered woodworking through a vocational rehab program that he found a way to channel his creativity and start healing.
Woodworking became more than just a skill for John; it allowed him to bring the designs he imagined in his mind to life. This craft also led him to meet his wife, Annie, who has been a constant source of love and support. Through his work and his relationship, John found a sense of belonging and a new way of seeing the world. He reflects on how losing his sight actually helped him gain a clearer vision of who he is and what he’s meant to do, ultimately finding peace in embracing his true self.
About John Furniss:
John Furniss, known professionally as The Blind Woodsman, is a skilled woodworker, author, and disability advocate recognized for his meticulous hand-turned creations. After losing his sight at 16, John faced significant challenges adapting to life with total blindness. In his 20s, he found his passion for woodworking through a class designed for the blind, which led to the development of his unique craft.
Today, John’s work has been featured on platforms such as Good Morning America and The Kelly Clarkson Show. He and his wife, Anni, who is also an artist, use their social media platforms to share their work and raise awareness about disability and mental health. John’s expertise in woodworking and his contributions to the art community have established him as a respected figure in his field.
Kaelynn Partlow shares her story about life with autism, ADHD, and dyslexia, and how finding the right diagnosis helped her embrace her neurodivergent identity.
Kaelynn Partlow, an author, autism advocate, and registered behavior technician, shares her own experiences living with autism, ADHD, dyslexia, and more. She talks about how these diagnoses shifted her self-perception from feeling "stupid" to understanding her unique challenges and strengths.
Kaelynn opens up about the misunderstandings neurodivergent people face and the difficulty of connecting in a world that often doesn't accommodate different ways of thinking. She also shares her fears—like wondering if her social difficulties will ever improve—and how she copes with loneliness, especially when not focused on work.
Through it all, Kaelynn emphasizes the value of recognizing your own strengths, even when it’s hard. By taking on challenges and thriving under pressure, she found new opportunities, from public speaking to creative writing. Her story shows that growth often comes from facing fears and redefining success on your own terms.
About Kaelynn Partlow:
In 2015, Kaelynn Partlow joined Project Hope Foundation as a Registered Behavior Technician. She is now a Lead Technician, providing services to middle and high-school-aged clients and contributing to staff training development.
In 2021, Kaelynn was featured on the Netflix series Love On The Spectrum. She has also been a guest on numerous national podcasts and has published several articles, offering insights from an autistic perspective.
With a large following on various social media platforms, Kaelynn uses her reach for autism advocacy, connecting with millions globally. In addition to her online work and role at Project Hope, she is an international public speaker, passionate about sharing tangible strategies for best practices when interacting with individuals on the autism spectrum
Your brain is wired to repeat the familiar. Change this wiring, and it will change your life.
Nicole Vignola, a neuroscientist and organizational psychologist, explains how deeply rooted beliefs can limit our potential and keep us trapped in patterns of thought. These perceptions, often shaped by our upbringing and environment, aren’t necessarily our own—but they can be changed.
Nicole shares how the brain’s natural biases, like negativity bias and confirmation bias, reinforce these limiting beliefs. However, with the right approach, it’s possible to reshape our mental patterns. By practicing metacognition—observing and naming our thoughts—we can start to rewire our perception and create new, empowering narratives.
Our brains are capable of change at any age. By focusing on small wins and challenging automatic thoughts, we can break free from old beliefs and begin using a mindset that better serves ourselves and our futures.
About Nicole Vignola:
Nicole Vignola is a neuroscientist, author and corporate consultant. With a BSc in Neuroscience and an MSc in Organizational Psychology, Nicole works with companies and individuals worldwide, educating them on the science of human optimisation, health and longevity, and how to enable employees to perform better in their daily lives and in turn, bring peak performance to the workplace. Recent clients include Lloyds Bank, Makers Mark and Smeg Ltd.
Expanding your worldview starts with understanding your brain. Stanford neuroscientist David Eagleman explains.
David Eagleman, a neuroscientist at Stanford and host of the Inner Cosmos podcast, explores how our brains shape the reality we experience and why we often accept our perceptions as the only truth. From a young age, we develop our understanding of the world based on limited experiences and biases, which can lead us to form narrow views about what's true.
Eagleman explains that our genetics and life experiences wire our brains in unique ways, meaning that each of us sees the world a little differently. He introduces the idea of "perceptual genomics," which looks at how slight genetic differences influence our perception of reality. He also discusses how our brains naturally create in-groups and out-groups, a tendency rooted in evolution that affects how much empathy we feel for others.
To overcome these biases, Eagleman suggests that we start by recognizing our own prejudices, understanding the tactics of dehumanization, and connecting with others through shared interests. This approach helps us appreciate the diverse realities others experience, ultimately contributing to a more empathetic and understanding society.
About David Eagleman:
David Eagleman is a neuroscientist at Stanford University and an internationally bestselling author. He is co-founder of two venture-backed companies, Neosensory and BrainCheck, and he also directs the Center for Science and Law, a national non-profit institute. He is best known for his work on sensory substitution, time perception, brain plasticity, synesthesia, and neurolaw.
Challenging the loneliness stigma can change your life. Here’s how to start.
From a young age, many of us are taught that being alone means something is wrong, leading to negative thought patterns that reinforce feelings of isolation. Kasley Killam, author of The Art and Science of Connection and an expert in social health, explains how these perceptions of loneliness can shape our experiences and influence our lives.
According to Killam, this stigma around loneliness can trigger a stress response in the body, affecting both mental and physical well being. However, by challenging these narratives and reminding ourselves of how much control we really have, it’s possible to redirect our mindsets. It also helps, she says, to understand the difference between individualistic and collectivist cultures, and how each one can influence the way we interpret and discuss our feelings with others.
For those who have struggled with loneliness or felt trapped in a cycle of negative thinking, this perspective can help us break free. By shifting our thought patterns, we can transform our relationships, enhance our sense of connection, and improve our overall well-being.
About Kasley Killam:
Kasley Killam is a social health expert, author, and advocate focused on strengthening connections and enhancing community well-being. With a background in behavioral science and public health from Harvard University, she is a leading voice on the impact of social relationships on mental and physical health.
As the founder of Social Health Labs, Killam collaborates with organizations to develop innovative solutions for combating loneliness and social isolation. Her work has been featured in major publications, and she is a sought-after speaker on the importance of social well-being in creating healthier, more resilient communities.
Ever wonder why your partner goes Tasmanian Devil in traffic jams while you just shrug? Or why you have such a hard time setting boundaries with parents when your sibling has no problem saying "hell no!" Everyone has something that triggers panic or turns their blood cold…and it all starts with the story you made up about yourself when you were too young to know the difference…your Perception Box Seed Story.
A group of LGBTQ+ individuals courageously answered the Perception Box question, "Who or what have you left behind on your journey to become who you are today?" Their honest and insightful responses were deeply moving.
This series (a collaboration with Jubilee Media) is designed for communities with shared experiences to spark deeper self-understanding and connection by sharing their answers to specially selected Perception Box questions. This highlights the power of vulnerability and the importance of creating safe spaces for honest conversations.
How has Kel Mitchell navigated self-doubt, isolation, and the desire to “hit the off button”? He says it’s all faith, community, and personal forgiveness.
After his debut on Nickelodeon, Kel Mitchell began a life-long career as an actor and comedian. He got married, started a family, and basked in professional success. However, behind the scenes, he faced intense personal hardships that pushed him to the brink, testing his resilience and strength in ways he never imagined.
Kel guides us through the lowest points of his life, showing us how faith in himself and his religion helped him rebuild and achieve a fulfilling existence. He reminds us that blessings can often be hidden in hardships and that mistakes play a crucial role in shaping who we are.
By expressing his pain and opening up to others about the things he was struggling with, he was able to find unity, community, and support from those who had experienced similar drawbacks. Mitchell stresses the importance of understanding others, and how deep relationships can change – and even save – lives.
If you or someone you know is considering suicide, please contact the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 1-800-273-TALK (8255), text “STRENGTH” to the Crisis Text Line at 741-741 or go to suicidepreventionlifeline.org.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kel Mitchell is a two-time Emmy Award-nominated actor, producer, comedian, and youth pastor hailing from Chicago, Illinois.
Mitchell executive produced and appeared in the new iteration of the beloved Nickelodeon series All That, bringing him full circle to the original award-winning show that was his big break. All That was Nickelodeon's longest-running live-action series, with 171 episodes across ten seasons from 1994 to 2005. The franchise paved the way for a number of successful spin-offs, including Kenan & Kel, The Amanda Show, The Nick Cannon Show, and the feature-length film Good Burger, all of which cemented Mitchell's impact on pop culture.
A two-part visualization to help you gain distance from any overpowering emotion so you can respond to the true need of the moment with something closer to calm.
Harvard physician Aditi Nerukar explains how to rewire your brain’s stress response to live a more resilient life.
If you’ve ever heard the phrase “pressure makes diamonds,” this video is for you.
Harvard physician Aditi Nerurkar was working 80 hours a week, and, despite what she was telling herself about resilience, the stress was taking a major toll. She explains how there are two different kinds of stress, aptly named “adaptive” and “maladaptive.” But how can you tell the difference between the two?
Dr. Nerukar explains that healthy, adaptive stress moves your life forward, while unhealthy, maladaptive stress wears you down and diminishes your productivity. When experiencing maladaptive stress, you may find yourself plummeting closer to burnout, or a complete shutdown. To combat these consequences, Dr. Neurkar offers two easily achievable methods for resetting your brain in high-stress situations.
Whether you're navigating a demanding job, balancing multiple life roles, or simply looking to improve your stress management, this information can help you thrive without compromising your well-being. Remember to slow down, take deep breaths, and regularly check in with yourself to ensure your stress remains healthy and manageable!
Neuroanatomist Dr. Jill Bolte Taylor explains the 4 key ”characters” of the brain, and how understanding each can expand your perception of yourself, and the world, forever.
At age 37, neuroanatomist Dr. Jill Bolte Taylor suffered a stroke that would take her eight years to fully recover from. This is how it changed her understanding of the brain.
In this interview, Dr. Jill draws a map of the human brain, explaining how it is comprised of four distinct modules, each serving a unique role in function and personality. This combination of cognitive and emotional components gives rise to the multidimensional characters within each of us.
Are you looking to be more rational, more creative, more forgiving, or perhaps less rigid in your thinking? Dr. Jill suggests that by becoming aware of the four modules of our brains, we can consciously choose to engage specific parts. This awareness allows us to harness the true power of our brains and shape who we want to become, ultimately fostering less anxiety, more inner peace, and a vastly more purposeful life.
Carrie Berk reveals how she transformed her struggle with anxiety and internet fame by changing her perception and finding her true voice as a writer.
Carrie Berk, author, journalist, and social media influencer with nearly 4 million TikTok followers, shares her journey through anxiety, internet fame, and personal growth.
Amid the pandemic and sudden online fame, Carrie faced intense anxiety, receiving harmful threats from strangers and grappling with the pressures of social media. Sharing her most vulnerable moments, including her first heartbreak at sixteen, Carrie emphasizes the importance of authenticity. Through therapy and self-discovery, she learned that while she couldn’t switch off her anxiety, she could change her response to it.
Carrie’s story is a perfect example of the resilience it takes to be a young person in today’s social climate, and proves how powerful self-confidence and inner strength can be.
This group of people who have experienced homelessness were asked the Perception Box question, "In moments of deep solitude, what major concerns and questions about YOU tend to dominate your thoughts?" Their honest answers were deeply moving and insightful.
This series (a collaboration with Jubilee Media) is designed for communities with shared experiences to spark deeper self-understanding and connection by sharing their answers to specially selected Perception Box questions. This highlights the power of vulnerability and the importance of creating safe spaces for honest conversations.
In this episode, a group of formerly incarcerated individuals was asked the Perception Box question, "What are you most afraid is true about you?" Their candid responses were incredibly moving and thought-provoking.
This series (a collaboration with Jubilee Media) is designed for communities with shared experiences to spark deeper self-understanding and connection by sharing their answers to specially selected Perception Box questions. This highlights the power of vulnerability and the importance of creating safe spaces for honest conversations.
Jewel says denying the truth cost her years of her life. This is how she shifted her perception to see truth more clearly and regain her strength.
“My number one job was to be a happy, whole human — not a human full of holes.” Jewel Kilcher, singer-songwriter, and visual artist, opens up about her childhood, the start of her career, and what makes Jewel, Jewel.
After being discovered during a coffee shop gig in the 1990’s, folk singer Jewel began the life-long endeavor of being a performer. Jewel went on to gain worldwide recognition for her talent and creativity. But who is she at her core? What are her greatest fears, her deepest aspirations?
In this interview, Jewel shares the personal struggles and triumphs that have shaped her, the importance of truth on her life and well-being, and the lessons she's learned along the way. Through this conversation, Jewel offers an up-close look into her journey, revealing the experiences and hard-won insights that have shaped her as both an artist and a person.
Experience Jewel’s latest exhibit at the Crystal Bridges Museum of American Art, The Portal: An Art Experience by Jewel ► https://crystalbridges.org/calendar/the-portal-an-art-experience-by-jewel/
About Jewel:
Jewel Kilcher, known mononymously as Jewel, embodies the quintessential story of resilience and artistic integrity. From her humble beginnings in the rugged landscapes of Alaska to her rise as a multi-platinum recording artist, Jewel's journey is a testament to the transformative power of art. Homeless at 18, she honed her craft performing in coffee shops, blending folk, pop, and country influences with her ethereal voice and introspective songwriting.
Her debut album, "Pieces of You," captured hearts worldwide, achieving remarkable commercial success while delivering profound, soul-stirring messages. Beyond music, Jewel's talents extend to poetry and acting, with her literary works and performances reflecting her deep empathy and authenticity.
Jewel's commitment to social causes, including mental health advocacy and her foundation, the Inspiring Children Foundation, underscores her dedication to making a positive impact. In a world often dominated by transient fame, Jewel stands out as a beacon of enduring creativity and compassionate leadership.
Alyssa and her ex-boyfriend Trey have successfully transitioned from lovers to best friends. But can she recreate that same dynamic with her most recent ex, Adal? Alyssa, Trey, and Adal dive deep into their pasts and their relationships with each other by answering a series of thought-provoking Perception Box questions. Watch their honest reflections, uncover their perspectives on love and friendship, and discover what the future holds for this unique trio.
What happens when men shed their armor and embrace their emotions? Men from diverse backgrounds share their stories of overcoming trauma, redefining masculinity, and finding strength in vulnerability. This is a must-watch for anyone seeking deeper connections and understanding.
Emma and Nick both swiped "yes" in person. Now that they have a chance to get to know each other and themselves more deeply by answering Perception Box questions, are they compatible?
Arielle & Ella met on a Nectar dating show. Was it meant to be, or are they destined to be just friends? They will find out when they get to know their true selves and each other by answering Perception Box questions.
Participants are invited to sit down to ask each other Perception Box questions to see if two strangers could sit down and get vulnerable with one another.
This powerful episode features a group of individuals with disabilities opening up about their deepest fears and struggles. Their experiences highlight the unique challenges they face, from concerns about independent living to mental health struggles and navigating social stigma, and ultimately how they can relate to one another.
Michael Oher gained widespread recognition through Michael Lewis's book "The Blind Side" and its film adaptation, which depicted his difficulties in early life and time playing college football. After attending the University of Mississippi, he played in the NFL for the Baltimore Ravens, Tennessee Titans, and Carolina Panthers, winning the SuperBowl with the Ravens in 2013.
Shaka Senghor spent 19 years in prison, 7 of them in solitary confinement. This is how he found true freedom.
Watch the full video here.
Watch what happens when this group of strangers bravely share their unspoken truths. Will these women find connection in the unexpected? Could sharing your secret be the key to unlocking a powerful sense of belonging?
Curious about tools for fostering deeper self-awareness? Check out the latest episode of Tea for Two by Nectar. Former high school sweethearts, Diane & Justin, use Perception Box questions to explore their individual needs and communication styles. Great insights for anyone in a relationship, whether personal or professional.
Hailey and Travis first met on the Nectar channel, now they are going on their first date and things get deep.
Do you ever feel like you have something to prove?
Scientific experts explain how each person's perception is skewed by various factors such as beliefs, biases, and narratives.
.png)
A collection of interviews dedicated to sharing unique perspectives and challenging our preconceived notions.
Jim Lee, President, Publisher, and Chief Creative Officer of DC Comics tells us how his childhood obsession with Superman changed his life.
.png)
Explore how overcoming the limiting beliefs that hold us back, can expand the possibilities of our perception, and open us up to new ways of seeing and being seen.
The Osbournes was MTV’s biggest show – and it almost cost Jack Osbourne his life. Here’s how his family’s reality TV fame stole his childhood, and how he’s been able to heal since.
Meet Jordan and Rana. These two undergrads have been in an exclusive situationship, but are ready to confront where their relationship is going and what might come next.
Tea for Two explores how daters show up in a relationship by first taking a look at their relationship with themselves. Through a series of Perception Box questions, Tea for Two questions, and challenges, these daters get to know each other and themselves on a whole new level. This allows them to dig deeper, uncover more meaningful connections, and figure out if they are ready to be in this relationship.
This is how rejection made executive producer and director Julie Plec an undeniable leader.
Creator of the popular series “The Vampire Diaries,” Julie Plec is proof imposter syndrome never goes away, no matter how big you make it. The writer and producer answered our questions about self-doubt, getting “blacklisted,” and how we can alter our perceptions to better appreciate our successes.
About Julie Plec:
Julie Plec is a creator, showrunner, executive producer and director, most notably responsible for the complete Vampire Diaries Universe (The Vampire Diaries, The Originals, and Legacies), which spanned thirteen years and more than 300 episodes of television.
Plec is co-creator and co-showrunner of the upcoming series Vampire Academy, based on the popular book series, which recently wrapped production in Spain and is debuting September 15, 2022, on Peacock. She is also co-creator of the new series Dead Day, along with her Vampire Diaries partner Kevin Williamson, which was recently picked up to series at Peacock as well, and executive producer of Girls on the Bus, which was picked up straight to series at HBO Max.
Plec is creator and executive producer of Legacies, which recently aired its fourth and final season on the CW, along with serving as an executive producer of Roswell, New Mexico, which recently aired its fourth and final season on the CW as well. In addition, Plec served as executive producer of The Endgame, starring Morena Baccarin and Ryan Michelle Bathé, which recently aired on NBC.
She is currently under an overall deal at Universal Television, where she and Emily Cummins, president of her production company, My So-Called Company, are developing projects across all platforms for the studio. Plec and Cummins recently announced a new project at Peacock, Clifton, along with a slate of several other projects in development.
Along with directing multiple episodes of The Vampire Diaries, Legacies, and Roswell, New Mexico, for which she also directed the pilot, Plec directed an episode of the CW’s hit series Riverdale, and most recently directed an episode of her new series Vampire Academy.
Plec developed and executive produced Containment, which aired as a limited series on the CW in 2016.
She got her start as a television writer and co-executive producer for the series Kyle XY, which she produced for the show’s three-year run. Other television credits include Dawson’s Creek, on which she collaborated with creator/executive producer Kevin Williamson, and The Tomorrow People, on which she collaborated with fellow executive producers Greg Berlanti and Phil Klemmer.
In the early part of her career, Plec worked with both Wes Craven and Kevin Williamson during the run of their hit Scream franchise. She also co-produced Berlanti’s directorial debut film, The Broken Hearts Club.
Your emotions do not reflect an irrefutable truth. Psychologist Kristen Lindquist explains how important that is for connecting across cultures.
When it comes to obtaining an objective understanding of the world around us, emotions may not be as reliable as we think, explains Kristen Lindquist, a professor of psychology and neuroscience at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Lindquist explores the concept of "affective realism," a term that describes how our feelings shape our reality, both of which are influenced by cultural nuances. She unravels the connections between emotions, culture, and the brain, challenging the notion that our emotional experiences always mirror objective truths.
About Kristen Lindquist:
Kristen Lindquist, PhD. is a Professor of Psychology and Neuroscience at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Her research seeks to understand the psychological and neural basis of emotions, moods, and feelings. Her on-going work uses tools from social cognition, physiology, neuroscience, and big data methods to examine how emotions emerge from the confluence of the body, brain, and culture.
Robert Waldinger is a psychiatrist, psychoanalyst and Zen priest. He is Professor of Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital, where he directs the Harvard Study of Adult Development. His TEDx talk on this subject has received nearly 44 million views, and is the 9th most watched TED talk of all time. He is the co-author of The Good Life with Dr. Marc Schulz.
Scott Barry Kaufman talks to Robert Waldinger about the secret to a happy life. Robert shares the recent findings of The Grant Study, which is the longest scientific study of happiness ever conducted. It’s been ongoing for more than 80 years now, and has had high profile participants like US President John F. Kennedy. Robert and Scott get into the details of how they continue to conduct research and how to make sense of both the new and old data. Sure enough, what the study has found consistent is the power of connection. They also touch on the topics of psychodynamic therapy, defense mechanisms, attachment, and psychological research.
Website: www.robertwaldinger.com
X: @robertwaldinger
The divisive gold/blue dress that almost broke the internet in 2015 is a relatable example of how a Perception Box works. How each of us having our Perception Box, own subjective reality, affects the way we experience the world.
Expert James Fadiman explains how psychedelics have the power to expand consciousness, enhance creativity, and deepen our connections to the world.
James Fadiman, a distinguished figure with over six decades in psychedelic research, examines the profound impact psychedelics have on consciousness, creativity, and connectivity.
Fadiman shares insights into how these substances shift perception, offering perspectives that challenge and expand our understanding of reality. He also delves into the scientific underpinnings of psychedelics, their therapeutic potential, and the societal benefits of fostering deeper empathy and open-mindedness. Highlighting the importance of integration post-experience, Fadiman sheds light on the transformative power of psychedelics to not only alter individual consciousness but also to enhance community bonds and personal relationships.
Through a focus on responsible use and the expansion of human awareness, Fadiman's expertise offers a compelling view into the capacity of psychedelics to redefine our interaction with the world and ourselves.
About James Fadiman:
Dr. James Fadiman is a leading scientific expert on the use of psychedelics for personal exploration, healing, and transformation. He has been researching, writing and lecturing on the topic for more than fifty years. His research focuses on exploring the potential of psychedelics to help individuals achieve a more meaningful, balanced and enlightened life. He has written numerous books on the topic, such as The Psychedelic Explorer’s Guide and Your Symphony Of Selves, and is widely considered to be one of the most influential figures in the field.
There are three kinds of memory that all work together to shape your reality. Neuroscientist André Fenton explains.
Neuroscientist André Fenton discusses the intricate relationship between memory, perception, and reality, shedding light on the complexity of human cognition.
Fenton believes memories are not fixed but are continually modified by our experiences and mindsets.
This, in his mind, underscores the importance of humility and empathy in acknowledging the fallibility of our memories and the need to consider different perspectives in our quest for truth.
About André Fenton:
André Fenton, professor of neural science at New York University, investigates the molecular, neural, behavioral, and computational aspects of memory. He studies how brains store experiences as memories, how they learn to learn, and how knowing activates relevant information without activating what is irrelevant. His investigations and understanding integrates across levels of biological organization, his research uses genetic, molecular, electrophysiological, imaging, behavioral, engineering, and theoretical methods. This computational psychiatry research is helping to elucidate and understand mental dysfunction in diverse conditions like schizophrenia, autism, and depression. André founded Bio-Signal Group Corp., which commercialized an FDA-approved portable, wireless, and easy-to-use platform for recording EEGs in novel medical applications. André implemented a CPAP-Oxygen helmet treatment for COVID-19 in Nigeria and other LMICs and founded Med2.0 to use information technology for the patient-centric coordination of behavioral health services that is desperately needed to equitably deliver care for mental health. André hosts “The Data Set” a new web series on how data and analytics are being used to solve some of humanity’s biggest problems.
Nothing is real and everything is an illusion. Neuroscientist Heather Berlin explains why that’s not exactly a bad thing.
Neuroscientist Heather Berlin likens each person's perception to a unique box shaped by their own experiences. Perception, Berlin explains, arises from a blend of internal expectations and external sensory input, creating a subjective experience.
Berlin believes our mental state can also profoundly affect our perception; a pessimistic mindset might skew it negatively, for example. The brain filters information, relying on preexisting schemas that can lead to cognitive biases. She notes that these biases can be altered through changing inputs over time, which can expand our empathy.
Understanding perception's illusory nature empowers us to shape our experiences and find joy despite life's challenges.
About Heather Berlin:
Dr. Heather Berlin is a neuroscientist, clinical psychologist, and associate clinical professor of psychiatry and neuroscience at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York. She explores the neural basis of impulsive and compulsive psychiatric and neurological disorders with the aim of developing novel treatments. She is also interested in the brain basis of consciousness, dynamic unconscious processes, and creativity. Clinically, she specializes in lifespan (child, adolescent, and adult) treatment of anxiety, mood, and impulsive and compulsive disorders (e.g., OCD), blending her neural perspective with cognitive-behavioral therapy, mindfulness, and humanistic approaches.
You know Steve-O. Now meet Steve Glover, as the professional stuntman talks to us about pain, insecurity, and never finding contentment.
In this deeply personal and revealing interview, Steve Glover, better known as Steve-O, the daredevil entertainer known for his jaw-dropping stunts and unflinching willingness to face pain, shares the untold story of his journey from a childhood craving for attention to becoming an icon of wild antics and extreme performances.
Opening up about his struggles with alcoholism, the relentless pursuit of fame, and his battles with feeling 'not good enough', Glover offers an introspective look into the complexities behind the laughter and the screams.
With raw honesty, he discusses the pivotal moments that shaped him, the drive to document his existence through stunts, and the liberating power of sharing the secrets he once vowed to take to his grave.
This interview is not just a glimpse into the life of a professional idiot; it's a candid exploration of human vulnerability, the cost of fame, and the ongoing quest for self-acceptance.
About Steve-O:
Steve-O (a.k.a. Stephen Glover) was willing to do whatever it took to become famous, even if it meant stapling his ball sack to his leg. After failing miserably at the University of Miami and couch-surfing with friends, he decided that in order to further his goal of becoming a stuntman he would enroll in Ringling Brothers and Barnum & Bailey Clown College. But it was his relentless attention whoring that ultimately led to working with Johnny Knoxville on a new stunt-based reality show called Jackass.
In 2000, MTV aired the first season and the rest, as they say, is history. Since then, he's had continued success, as a New York Times best-selling author with the release of his memoir, 'Professional Idiot', as well as establishing himself in the world of stand-up comedy. With fourteen years of sobriety under his belt, Steve-O shows no signs of slowing down.
Former SNL star @JayPharoah answers our most challenging questions about life, self-esteem, and changing his mind.
Jay Pharoah is known best for his impressions, but he’s got a lot more going on. The actor, comedian, and rapper sat down with us to talk about embracing triumphs, overcoming setbacks, forgiveness, and the way all of it shapes who you are.
About Jay Pharoah:
Jay Pharoah is an actor and stand-up comedian. With six seasons as a cast member of NBC's Saturday Night Live, Pharoah is best known for his wide array of uncanny celebrity impressions, including President Barack Obama, Will Smith, Denzel Washington, Stephen A. Smith, Kanye West and Chris Tucker, as well as his recurring character, school principal Daniel Frye.
Over 250 million records sold and more than 70 platinum hits later, @JasonDerulo sits down with us to talk about goals, insecurities, and why he still doesn’t feel like he’s “made it.”
Jason Derulo's career flashed before his eyes when he broke his neck in 2012. Despite fearing the worst, he used positive self-talk and daily routines to recover and create hit songs like “Marry Me” and “Talk Dirty.” Overcoming childhood insecurities, he emphasizes the power of self-improvement. Now a global superstar with 250 million singles sold, Derulo prioritizes family time since becoming a father in 2021.
Cindy Gallop answers our questions about sex, identity, and why we need to stop giving a damn.
Cindy Gallop, the founder and CEO of MakeLoveNotPorn, answered our questions about self-worth, the weight of other people’s expectations on women, and hope.
She shares her mission to normalize and destigmatize conversations about sex, including the negative consequences of using pornography as a substitute for sexual education.
Cindy hopes for a world where we’re all unburdened by societal judgments and true equality is achieved.
About Cindy Gallop:
Cindy Gallop is a graduate of Somerville College, Oxford, whose background is over 30 years in brand-building, marketing and advertising — she started up the US office of ad agency Bartle Bogle Hegarty in New York in 1998 and in 2003 was named Advertising Woman of the Year.
She is the founder and CEO of IfWeRanTheWorld, co-action software launched in beta at TED 2010 and subsequently written up and taught as a Harvard Business School case study, which enables brands to implement the business model of the future — Shared Values + Shared Action = Shared Profit (financial and social).
She is also the founder of MakeLoveNotPorn – ‘Pro-sex. Pro-porn. Pro-knowing the difference’ — a social sextech platform designed to promote good sexual behavior and good sexual values, which she launched at TED 2009, and for which she has just raised $2 million to build out MLNP.tv as ‘the Social Sex Revolution’.Cindy recently partnered with AARP on their Disrupt Aging initiative to challenge and change ageism.
Cindy has also published ‘Make Love Not Porn: Technology’s Hardcore Impact on Human Behavior’ as one of TED’s line of TEDBooks.
You can follow her on Twitter @cindygallop.
He co-created one of TV’s funniest shows. He still felt like a failure in his 30s. This is comedian Neal Brennan’s story about conquering toxic self-talk.
We all tell lies to ourselves about ourselves, usually in the form of vicious inner criticism. Neal Brennan, seasoned comedian and one of the brilliant minds behind “Chapelle’s Show,” confronted his inner critic on video for our entertainment.
Despite being instrumental in one of the most successful comedy shows of all time, there was a time when Brennan didn’t think he had much to show for himself, especially not as a solo entertainer. The eventual demise of “Chappelle’s Show” led him down a dark path of self-doubt and, then, rediscovery.
Brennan worked 12-step programs, ventured into the world of psychedelics, and even tried magnetic brain manipulation to break out of his despair. Now, he has a new perspective on the value of going it alone. Turns out, it isn’t quite so bad.
About Neal Brennan:
Three-time Emmy nominated writer, director, producer, and standup comedian Neal Brennan has become a force in the comedy world. An across-the-board talent, Neal has found success in almost every creative vein in the comedy landscape. Hailed by The Hollywood Reporter as “Hollywood’s Comic Whisperer” and lauded by The New York Times as having a “hip-hop and Frontline aesthetic,” he has collaborated with top talent both in front of and behind the camera for three decades.
Neal’s most recent one-man show Neal Brennan: Unacceptable enjoyed a sold-out run in NYC in 2021 with The New York Times offering “Brennan starts off with a regular joke format before turning toward introspection as he exposes his doubts, neuroses and vulnerabilities. And he remains very funny as he does so.” Neal’s critically acclaimed first off-Broadway one-man show 3 Mics also enjoyed a sold-out NYC run in 2016 with musician John Legend serving as Executive Producer with Paste Magazine gushing “It will floor you in the best way possible.” In a break from traditional standup comedy, 3 Mics saw Brennan alternating between three separate microphones; one for traditional stand-up, one for one-liners, and one for short confessional monologues covering everything from managing his depression to his difficult relationship with his father. Both one-man shows were taped as stand-up specials and premiered on Netflix to much fanfare and critical acclaim.
Neal co-created Comedy Central’s legendary Chappelle’s Show, for which he received three Emmy nominations. Together, Brennan and Dave Chappelle wrote and produced virtually every sketch on the show themselves. A longtime writing partner of Chappelle, Neal was a standout speaker in his televised Mark Twain Prize ceremony, wrote on his Emmy-winning 2016 Saturday Night Live hosting turn, and co-wrote the cult hit feature Half Baked. Neal also served as a Creative Consultant and on-air correspondent on Comedy Central’s The Daily Show with Trevor Noah, for which he was personally picked by Noah to be his final guest. He was Executive Producer on Chris Rock’s special Chris Rock: Tamborine, Consulting Producer on Ellen Degeneres’ special Relatable, and collaborator with Seth Meyers on his White House Correspondents Dinner speech. In addition to standup, writing, directing, and producing, Brennan has also directed popular commercials for Sprite, Netflix, Best Buy and Nike.
The Osbournes was MTV’s biggest show – and it almost cost Jack Osbourne his life. Here’s how his family’s reality TV fame stole his childhood, and how he’s been able to heal since.
About Jack Osbourne:
Jack Osbourne is well known for participating in reality TV shows with his celebrity family, like The Osbournes and Ozzy and Jack’s World Tour. Jack has also overcome and dealt with great difficulties in his life, such as dyslexia, drug addiction, an MS diagnosis, depression, various medical scares in his family, and more. His ability to bounce back from these challenges has served as inspiration for others undergoing difficulties in life. Jack uses his platform to advocate for people living with MS.
Jim Lee, President, Publisher, and Chief Creative Officer of tells us how his childhood obsession with Superman changed his life.
Jim Lee is synonymous with DC Comics now, but when he was first charting his path, his family pushed him towards medical school. In this interview, Jim shares how he reasoned with his parents and bought time to pursue his dream of being a comic book artist over the span of a gap year.
About Jim Lee:
Jim Lee, a world-renowned comic book artist, writer, editor and publisher, is currently Chief Creative Officer of DC (DC) and Publisher for the company.
Known for his incredibly detailed and dynamic artistic style, Lee is one of the most revered and respected artists in American comics. A veritable legend in the industry, he has received numerous accolades and recognition for his work, including the Harvey Special Award for New Talent in 1990, the Inkpot Award in 1992, and the Wizard Fan Award in 1996, 2002 and 2003.
Shaka Senghor spent 19 years in prison, 7 of them in solitary confinement. This is how he found true freedom.
The way Shaka Senghor tells his story, he found himself incarcerated long before he officially went to prison for second-degree murder, and he experienced freedom long before completing his sentence at the age of 38.
Senghor ran away from home and got drawn into the crack cocaine trade at the age of 14. After a series of traumatic events, he felt trapped in a narrative that dictated his life could only lead to limited outcomes: an early grave or a prison cell.
In our intimate interview, Senghor shares the three "keys" that transformed his perspective on life and have enabled him to live as a genuinely free man today.
“The Blind Side” only told part of Michael Oher’s story. Now, he tells us the rest.
You might know Michael Oher as the subject of “The Blind Side,” the 2009 movie starring Sandra Bullock and Tim McGraw. The film was based on the true story of Oher, a young Black football player, who gained a second chance at life after being adopted by white parents.
But Oher’s version of the story is a lot different, and it starts long before the Tuohys entered the picture.
In this interview conducted with our partner Unlikely Collaborators, Oher paints a picture of the crack epidemic in the ‘80s and ‘90s, a broken and tumultuous family, and a young boy determined to climb out of it.
About Michael Oher:
Michael Oher gained widespread recognition through Michael Lewis's book "The Blind Side" and its film adaptation, which depicted his difficulties in early life and time playing college football. After attending the University of Mississippi, he played in the NFL for the Baltimore Ravens, Tennessee Titans, and Carolina Panthers, winning the SuperBowl with the Ravens in 2013.
Michael has also written two books: I Beat The Odds and When You’re Back’s Against The Wall, which detail his struggles and successes in life, imparting wisdom on how to overcome adversity. Michael has also contributed to the book Blindsided, where he outlines his experience of early-stage CTE, how he walked away from the NFL, and his urgent recommendations to reform football and make it a safer sport.
Built from the material of your beliefs (aka, the bullshit you tell yourself and collect from those around you over the course of your life), the Perception Box™ has the power to distort your reality and leave you feeling isolated, disconnected, and fearful. By asking sometimes contradictory but always consequential questions, we’ll show you how to understand and work with your Perception Box—how to overcome the limiting beliefs that hold you back, expand the possibilities of perception, and invite in new ways of seeing and being seen.
A guided body awareness mediation to help you get out of your head and into your body. Learn to tune into your body for a heads up on what you’re feeling before you explode. It’s literally your friend on the inside.
Simple, easy, and faster than chasing down that driver that cut you off.
Orin Davis earned the first doctorate in positive psychology, and is a self-actualization engineer who enables people to do and be their best. As the Principal Investigator of the Quality of Life Laboratory, he conducts research on flow, creativity, hypnosis, and mentoring. Dr. Davis consults for companies from startups to multinationals on hiring strategies, culture, innovation, and employee well-being. He is the author of Team Flow: The psychology of optimal collaboration.
Scott Barry Kaufman talks to Orin Davis about the new science of flow. A lot of people are familiar with the concept of flow, but according to Dr. Davis, the experience of it is not very common. They discuss Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi’s work and how Dr. Davis is expanding the research of flow by studying it at a group level. Dr. Davis talks about how we can increase the chances of experiencing flow for both individuals and teams. Orin and Scott also touch on the topics of microflow, hypnosis, absorption, positive psychology, and self-actualization.
Website: https://qllab.org/
X: @DrOrinDavis
Robert Sapolsky is professor of biology and neurology at Stanford University and a research associate with the Institute of Primate Research at the National Museum of Kenya. His research has been featured in the National Geographic documentary "Stress: Portrait of a Killer". At age 30, Robert received the MacArthur Foundation's "genius" grant. He is author of Why Zebras Don't Get Ulcers, A Primate's Memoir, The Trouble with Testosterone and Monkeyluv. His latest book is called Determined: A Science of Life Without Free Will.
Scott Barry Kaufman talks to Robert Sapolsky about life without free will. Humans like the idea of having control over their lives, but Robert asserts that free will is just an illusion. Life beyond free will may sound unpleasant, but Robert explains the profound consequences of this belief in reforming the justice system, meritocracy, and education. Robert and Scott also touch on the topics of philosophy, quantum physics, mindfulness, grit, and responsibility.
LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/robertsapolsky/
For over 40 years, Bob Mankoff has been the driving force of comedy and satire at some of the most honored publications in America, including The New Yorker and Esquire. He is the founder of Cartoon Collections, parent company to CartoonStock.com, the world’s most successful cartoon licensing platform. For twenty years as Cartoon Editor for The New Yorker, Bob pored over thousands of submissions each week, analyzing, critiquing, and selecting each cartoon. In 2005, he helped start the “New Yorker Cartoon Caption Contest.” Bob is the author of numerous books, including his New York Times bestselling memoir, How About Never – Is Never Good For You?: My Life In Cartoons.
Scott Barry Kaufman talks to Bob Mankoff about the psychology of humor. Looking back at his illustrious career as a cartoonist, Bob talks about his early beginnings and the people he's mentored in the field. He explains the anatomy of a joke and reveals his all-time favorite cartoons. While humans are creative creatures, Bob believes that using AI and technology can further augment our intelligence and humor by opening up worlds of possibilities.
Website: www.bobmankoff.com
X: @BobMankoff
Joseph Goldstein is a co-founder and the guiding teacher of the Insight Meditation Society (IMS) along with Jack Kornfield and Sharon Salzberg. He is one of the first American vipassana teachers and has been teaching Buddhist meditation worldwide since 1974. A contemporary author of numerous popular books on Buddhism, his publications include Mindfulness: A Practical Guide to Awakening, One Dharma, Insight Meditation and others.
Scott Barry Kaufman talks to Joseph Goldstein about Buddhism and the impermanence of life. Being too attached to the self can bring suffering. However, this doesn’t mean that we need to forego our identities or self-care. Joseph explains that enlightenment can be achieved when the mind is free from clinging. He talks about the different states that can help us realize the insight of impermanence and selflessness. Scott and Joseph also touch on the topics of mindfulness, compassion, creativity, and wisdom.
Website: www.dharma.org
X: @onedharma
Dan Siegel is a clinical professor of psychiatry at the UCLA School of Medicine and the founding co-director of the Mindful Awareness Research Center at UCLA. Dr. Siegel is also the Executive Director of the Mindsight Institute. He’s authored numerous articles, chapters, and books including the New York Times bestsellers Mind: A Journey to the Heart of Being Human and Aware: The Science and Practice of Presence. His latest book is called IntraConnected: MWe (Me + We) as the Integration of Self, Identity, and Belonging.
Scott Barry Kaufman talks to Dr. Dan Siegel about expanding the notion of the self. Modern culture has taught us that the self is all about individual identity and personal experiences. But Dr. Siegel posits that who we are is not limited to the brain or body. He argues that the self is not isolated, it’s composed of our relationships to other living beings and to the natural world. This expanded view of the self has important implications for the trajectory of humanity. Dan and Scott also touch on the topics of consciousness, neuroscience, quantum physics, and the flow state.
Website: drdansiegel.com
Instagram: @DrDanSiegel
Michael Slepian is the Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. Associate Professor of Leadership and Ethics at Columbia University. A recipient of the Rising Star Award from the Association for Psychological Science, he is the leading expert on the psychology of secrets. He’s authored more than fifty articles on secrecy, truth, and deception. Michael’s research has been covered by The New York Times, The Atlantic, NPR, BBC, The Wall Street Journal and more. He is the author of The Secret Life of Secrets.
Scott Barry Kaufman talks to Michael Slepian about the psychology of secrets. Everyone has secrets that they keep from others—how does this affect our relationships and well-being? According to Michael, maintaining privacy is not the most burdensome aspect. Carrying a secret all by ourselves is what weighs us down. Michael and Scott explore the different categories of secrets and we talk about when to reveal the deepest parts of ourselves and who to reveal them to. Scott and Michael also touch on the topics of personality, morality, trauma, developmental psychology and communication.
Website: michaelslepian.com
X: @michaelslepian
Monica Parker is the founder of global human analytics and change consultancy HATCH, whose clients include blue-chip companies such as LinkedIn, Google, Prudential, and LEGO. Her career has been nothing short of colorful, having been an opera singer, a museum exhibition designer, a policy director, a Chamber of Commerce CEO, and a homicide investigator. She is also a world-renowned speaker, writer, and the author of The Power of Wonder.
Scott Barry Kaufman talks to Monica Parker about the power of wonder. In today’s fast-paced world, most people fail to notice the richness of life. To become more wonder-prone, Monica encourages us all to slow down and pursue meaningful exploration. When we pay more careful attention to the world, we become more empathetic, resilient, and exuberant. Monica shares with her cycle of wonder framework and how we can be more open and present in our daily lives. Monica and Scott also touch on the topics of personality, post-traumatic growth, mindfulness, and education.
Website: www.monica-parker.com
Instagram: @monicacparker
Explore more
