Go on, have another one (Image: Helen Rushbrook/Flickr/Getty)
Self-controlled people have better lives – but for the rest, lack of willpower is more like physical fatigue than moral failure
AS
THE last of your New Year's resolutions unravels in front of your eyes,
you probably feel like a moral pygmy. But before you sink into a heap
of self-loathing, consider this.
After
decades of research, psychologists now reckon two traits are most
likely to make us successful. The first is intelligence, with smart
people doing better at all jobs. Unluckily, there is little evidence
that you can make lasting improvements to intelligence.
The
other trait is self-control, the ability to change thoughts, emotions,
actions and level of performance on duties and tasks. Of course, goals,
moral rules, laws, social expectations, personal commitments and other
forces play a role, but the more you can change yourself, the more
successful you tend to be.
Studies
on self-control have their roots in the "marshmallow test" devised by
Walter Mischel at Stanford University, California, in 1972. More than
600 children aged between 4 and 6 were offered treats (an Oreo cookie,
marshmallow or pretzel). The children could eat the treat, but if they
waited 15 minutes without giving into temptation, they would be
rewarded with two treats. Mischel watched as some children covered
their eyes or turned around so that they couldn't see the treat, others
kicked the desk, tugged their pigtails or stroked the marshmallow as if
it were a stuffed animal. Some waited for the researchers to leave the
room before eating the treat.
Interestingly,
a minority ate the treat immediately. Of those attempting to delay,
one-third deferred gratification long enough to get the second treat.
Age was a major factor, with older children waiting longer. Years
later, Mischel's researchers tracked down the children and found that
those who had done best at 5 grew up to be more successful in school
and work, and to be more popular.
Other
studies support this. People with stronger self-control do better at
school, earn more and are more respected by co-workers. They are also
less likely to be arrested, have fewer personal problems, less stress
and live longer.
So
what is this amazing thing called self-control? The common sense view
is it depends on using willpower to resist temptation and to enable the
right action. Our research suggests this notion is not entirely
fanciful but that it lacks a key dimension. Research has shown
repeatedly that after people exert self-control, they tend to perform
relatively poorly on a subsequent, seemingly irrelevant test of
self-control. The most plausible explanation is that "energy" was
consumed and depleted during the first test, leaving less for more
challenges.
Evidence
for this depletion of willpower comes from studies like ours in 1998 at
Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio, when we had people
turn up at our lab hungry. They were shown into a room full of the
scent of freshly baked chocolate cookies and seated at a table facing a
tray of them. Also on the table was a bowl of radishes. Some subjects
were allowed to eat radishes only. They were left, ostensibly to eat
radishes, but in fact had to use willpower to resist cookies.
Later,
we measured how long people persevered before giving up on a difficult
(actually unsolvable) puzzle. Those who had depleted their willpower
resisting the cookie temptation gave up faster than controls - some of
whom had eaten cookies, others who had eaten nothing. Resisting the
cookies had used up some of their willpower, leaving less to help them
persevere with the puzzle.
Another
study led by Wilhelm Hofmann, now at the University of Chicago, had 200
German adults wear beepers for a week. When the beeper went off, they
reported what they were doing. This provided snapshots into the daily
patterns of desire and resistance in ordinary people. Extrapolating
from the beepers, Hofmann found that people spend a staggering three to
four hours a day on average just resisting temptations and desires.
Not
surprisingly, as the day wears on, the more often the person exercises
self-control to try to resist what they desire, the more likely they
are to give in to whatever temptation comes along: it's not the time of
day that matters, but the cumulative exertion that saps your willpower.
If you do not have many temptations to resist, your willpower stays
relatively strong, and you may well be able to resist new temptations.
So
rather than seeing willpower as a moral quality, the scientific view is
that it is like a muscle that tires. After you exert self-control, you
have less willpower so you are less able to resist a new demand.
Self-control is only temporarily weakened and can recharge after a
rest. Willpower resembles a muscle also in that it can be strengthened
by exercise.
Two
clear facts about willpower have emerged so far. Willpower is what
researchers call "domain-general": controlling thoughts, emotions and
feelings, restraining impulses, and performing tasks and duties will
draw on one pool of willpower, not, as people tend to imagine, multiple
pools with different quantities for, say, dieting or exercise.
http://www.newscientist.com/
QUOTE:
ReplyDelete"If you do not have many temptations to resist, your willpower stays relatively strong, and you may well be able to resist new temptations."
That seems to work for me. But my willpower is weak, so I try to not even have any bad food choices in my home.