← Something You Should Know
Something You Should Know
How Your Biases Are Used Against You & How Top Performers Think -SYSK Choice
00:50:03
How your biases are exploited, how top performers think, and why toothpicks may be more dangerous than you think.
Loading summary
Transcript79 lines
- [00:00]
A
This episode of Something youg Should Know is presented by Dutch. If your pet is still scratching and over the counter treatments aren't cutting it, Dutch connects you with a real licensed vet online. No waiting room and get prescription strength flea and tick meds delivered to your door. Use code sysk@dutch.com for $40 off your membership today on something you should know how to pick the best seat at a group table, and why it matters then Humans have biases. But maybe you think you're smart, you're objective, you don't have biases.
- [00:41]
B
You might think so, and many of your listeners might think why do these biases apply to me? I'm a sensible, rational person. Unfortunately, scientific evidence finds it the opposite that more knowledgeable and more sophisticated people are more susceptible to these biases, why
- [00:58]
A
you just might want to skip the toothpicks at the next party and how developing mental toughness improves performance at just about anything.
- [01:07]
C
I think when you look at the best performers who are sustaining excellence over time, their ability is more along the lines of how are they leveraging their software, those mental techniques that makes the hardware work?
- [01:22]
A
All this today on something you should know. Here's a question for anyone with a dog or cat. Have you ever bought a flea treatment, used it exactly the way the instructions say? And the fleas? Well, they didn't really care? Well, you're not imagining it. Over time, fleas actually build up a resistance to those over the counter treatments. Frontline advantage Seresto they work for a while and then they don't. And Meanwhile you've spent $150, $200, maybe more, and your dog or cat still scratches. Well, here's what most people don't know. The stuff your vet prescribes Bravecto, Simparica, Nexgard they hit differently. Prescription strength is a completely different class of treatment, but getting it usually means you make an appointment, you sit in the waiting room, and then you get a bill that makes you wince. Which is where Dutch comes in. Dutch is an online vet service that connects you with a real licensed vet. No waiting room, no office visit fee. They can prescribe the same prescription strength flea and tick meds your vet would and get them delivered right to your door. So if your pet is still scratching and you've tried everything the pet store has to offer, it's time to stop guessing and go prescription and support us and use code SYSK and you'll get $40 off your membership@dutch.com Dutch.com Dutch.com
- [02:58]
D
something you should know Fascinating intel the world's
- [03:01]
A
top experts and practical advice you can use in your life today. Something you should Know with Mike Carruthers. Hi there. Welcome to Something you should know. And today we're going to start with some very pract advice for a situation I know you've probably been in. And that is you walk into a room, maybe it's a restaurant or it's a meeting or something, and there's a table and chairs and you wonder, where should I sit? Where's the best place to sit? Well, here is a strategy for choosing the best seat in a group situation. At a circular table that has four seats around. Doesn't really matter where you sit, any seat will do. You can't go wrong. At a four person square table, sit opposite your least favorite person because conversations tend to work diagonally at that kind of table. In a six seated situation, choose the middle of one side. It may be harder to get in and out, but you'll have more conversational options that way. For tables of eight or more, timing's everything. If you arrive first, you'll be expected to file to the end. Maybe not so good. If you're last, you'll probably get the least desirable seat that nobody wants to sit in. Also not good. So the best strategy is to just stand back and wait for the right moment to make your move and grab a seat. And that is something you should know. While you might think that you are or can be objective about a topic, people have biases. They have beliefs that color their ability to be objective. A lot of the time it's fine, it doesn't matter. Small stakes. But other times for big things, it can matter. It does matter. And understanding these biases that are ingrained in all of us can be very illuminating. Here to explain them is Alex Edmonds. He is a professor of finance at London Business School. He has a TED talk called what to trust in a post truth world that's been viewed over 2 million times. And he is author of a book called May contain how Stories, statistics and studies explored our biases and what we can do about it. Hi Alex, welcome to something you should know.
- [05:27]
B
Thanks Mike. It's great to be here.
- [05:29]
A
So in broad strokes here, let's start with your explanation of these biases that tend to steer our thinking.
- [05:37]
B
Certainly. So there's two biases that cause us to make mistakes when we're interpreting information, data and evidence. So one of them is confirmation bias. So this is the idea that we have a pre existing view and if there's evidence that supports that view, we will latch onto it. We will accept it uncritically, even if the evidence is flimsy. And then in contrast, if there is some evidence that contradicts our view, we will close our ears to it. We might not even read it, or we might read it, but with the view to try to tear it apart. So this means we will only latch onto things that we like and dismiss things that we don't like. Now, confirmation bias, that does apply to questions where we have a pre existing view. So that might be climate change or immigration or gun control. But what about the set of issues for which there is no pre existing view? That's where the second bias comes in, which is called black and white thinking. So this is the idea that we view something as being always good or always bad. There is no nuance. So let's give an example. So in the sphere of diet, we often think that protein is good. We learn in school this builds muscles and repairs you. We also think that fat is bad. It's cool that way because it makes you fat. But what about carbohydrates? We might not have a pre existing view on that, but Robert Atkins, he went viral because of his Atkins diet, which gave the black and white conclusions that more carbs are always bad. He had a diet saying let's avoid all carbs, not just simple carbs, and saying that complex carbs are fine. He said avoid all carbs. That played into black and white thinking that latched on. It went viral because it was so simple. But notice that if he had had completely the opposite conclusion. If he had said have a diet to eat as many carbs as possible, he might have equally gone viral because that also plays into black and white thinking. We think something is either always good or or always bad. We're not predisposed to a particular direction.
- [07:43]
A
Okay, so I get what you say about having these biases, but doesn't a little knowledge fix that? If I now know if I know the truth about carbohydrates, and then I know the Atkins diet is probably not too healthy? Case closed.
- [08:01]
B
You might think so, and many of your listeners might think, why do these biases apply to me? I'm a sensible, rational person. Can't I use my knowledge to overcome these biases?
- [08:10]
A
Right.
- [08:11]
B
Unfortunately, scientific evidence finds it's the opposite, that more knowledgeable and more sophisticated people are more susceptible to these biases. And so why might that be? It's because of something known as motivated reasoning. So the smarter we are, we can come up with arguments to dismiss evidence that we don't like. And we can also come up with arguments to support evidence that we do like, even if that evidence happens to be flimsy. As an example, it may well be that there's a study which finds a correlation that we don't like. So if we are a supporter of gun control, we might not like a paper which finds that gun control is associated with with higher crime. But we might say, well, correlation does not imply causation. Maybe there's other factors at play here. Maybe crime would have been even higher had there not been gun control. But we turn off those same critical thinking faculties when we find something that we do like. So we do have knowledge, but we apply it only selectively when it suits us.
- [09:19]
A
Two things can be true at the same time. So in some cases, maybe gun control controls crime, and maybe in other cases gun control doesn't. I don't think you can make the blanket statement that gun control does or doesn't affect crime.
- [09:36]
B
You absolutely cannot. And this is the problem of black and white thinking. So some of these issues may be nuanced. It might be that gun control works in certain situations, but it doesn't work in others. But if you were to give that message, you're much less likely to be tweeted in 280 characters and go viral. So something which has a simple message where we say X is true, period, that is what typically sells. So it could be something that carbs are always bad for your health. Or Waking up at 5am always improves your productivity. If you give that simple message, that's going to be far more powerful than Waking up at 5am Improves your productivity, so long as you're also eating healthily and exercising daily and able to get in bed before 10pm so that more nuanced message is probably going to be more accurate. But that's not the message that we want to hear, given our biases.
- [10:28]
A
Right? And it sounds like a miserable life too. I don't want to go to bed at 10 and get up at 5 and just eat vegetables all day. I mean, that would be difficult. So if you take people who have a bias and you explain it to them and you say this is your bias, does it change them? Does knowing it change them? Or does it? Do they say, yeah, I have a bias and too bad it actually can.
- [10:52]
B
So there are some nice studies which look at trying to overcome this situation. So not just studies highlighting the problem, but studies trying to solve this. And so there were two sets of techniques that they tried. So one set of techniques was just to say to people, be as unbiased as possible when evaluating the information. And that just didn't work. That would be like trying to tell a baseball player who's batting.200 try to hit the ball more accurately. So they just don't have the ability to do that. That's just a limit to their physical ability. But there was a second set of techniques which was to give people specific bo bias counteracting thought processes. So one of them was, if you see a study whose findings that you like, let's say it's gun control reduces crime, they told you to imagine the opposite. So imagine that the study instead found that gold gun control increases crime. How would you try to attack that study? Well, you'd say, is it correlation or is it causation? Now that you have found some ways to attack that study, then apply the same scepticism, even if the study finds the results that you do want. So this idea of considering the opposite, how would you react? That is something which helps people to address their biases. And these studies were shown that that technique was in fact able to reduce biases, even though the first one, just generally telling people to be unbiased was ineffective.
- [12:26]
A
I can imagine people listening to you going, yeah, but I don't read studies. It's not. What I do for fun is sit around and read studies. You read studies, but the information I get doesn't come from a study. At least when I read it. I'm reading articles, I'm reading blogs or watching television or listening to a podcast. I'm not analyzing studies.
- [12:51]
B
I think this is a great question. It's a really important one. So somebody might look at me and say, well, I am an academic researcher. I spend my life evaluating academic papers. What relevance does this have to the person on the street who does not do this for your day job? And hopefully you don't do this for fun either. But what I'm trying to stress is that you receive the information from research in any form whenever you pick up a magazine. Let's say this is men's health, women's health, or runner's World. You're reading about research. You're reading, is it true that drinking more water improves your athletic performance? Should you be drinking caffeine before a workout? What is the best recovery shake? That is research. If you read a blog saying, waking up at 5am changed my life, is it that the act of waking up at 5am caused you to change your life? Or is it that somebody who chooses to wake up at 5am is probably doing lots of other things to get their act together. And it's those other things that are leading to the improvements in performance. Before I had my first child, I went to some parenting courses and they said you need to breastfeed. Breastfeeding is correlated with superior performance in terms of child iq, child health, mother postpartum depression. But was it that breast milk causes these outcomes? Or is it that mothers with a more supportive home environment were able to breastfeed because of how challenging it is and that supportive home environment is what caused those outcomes? Because if so, the onus is then on me as a father to provide a more supportive home environment rather than telling my wife she needs to breastfeed all the time. So we get information in so many different contexts and we need to think about is this information correlation or causation? Is this information a unique hand picked case or is it generally true? Maybe there is one person who Woke up at 5am and it did change their life and they will blog about it and tell people if you were somebody who Woke up at 5am and it had no effect, you would keep that to yourself. So what we might be seeing is a selected sample of isolated anecdotes. And again, this is a case in which we need to be discerning about the information that we see.
- [15:11]
A
But it seems to me you're a research guy, an academic guy, you look at these things in a much different way than most people. And the fact is that you can go on Google and pretty much find evidence to support whatever you want, either side of the breastfeeding issue or any other. I mean it just. So then what do you do?
- [15:36]
B
Yeah, and this is a huge challenge in the information age. So you might think, oh, it's great now that information is so easy to get. When I was a kid, I had to trek down to the library and to look it up into the exciting encyclopedia. Nowadays we have easy access to information and even academic research which used to be behind paywalls. This is now increasingly open access. But this leads to challenges as well as opportunities, is that you can always corral information to support whatever you want to support. And this is a particularly a problem if you are biased. Right? So if I wanted an excuse to drink a lot of red wine after dinner this evening, I would just Google why red wine improves your health. And I'm sure I could come up with a lot of high, highly cited studies and highly circulated studies to support this. So what this means is that what matters is not just whether there's a study we often hear the phrase research shows that X. Studies show that why? But studies show nearly everything you want them to show. What matters is the quality of research and these issues we've discussed, such as correlation versus causation. That is critical to finding out whether research is of sufficient qual for you to change your decisions based on it. Or is this just conventional wisdom? Or to be unfair? Is this just an old wives tale?
- [16:59]
A
We're talking about human biases and how they affect our thinking. My guest is Alex Edmonds. He's author of a book called May Contain How Stories, Statistics, and Studies Exploit Our Biases and what We can do about It.
- [17:16]
E
This episode is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. Do you ever find yourself playing the budgeting game? Shifting a little money here, a little there, and hoping it all works out well? With the name your price tool from Progressive, you can be a better budgeter and potentially lower your insurance bill too. You tell Progressive what you want to pay for car insurance and they'll help you find options within your budget. Try it today@progressive.com Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates Price and coverage match limited by state law not available in all states
- [17:48]
A
Whenever you start something new, like a new business idea, you always doubt yourself. You think, ooh, this is exciting. But your brain says, yeah, but what if it doesn't work? When I started this podcast, I had no idea what would happen. But look, at some point you either launch your idea or you don't. And that's why tools matter. Shopify is the commerce platform behind millions of businesses worldwide. They're behind 10% of all E commerce in the US from major brands to people just getting started. They let you build a professional online store with ready to use templates, and they're packed with helpful AI tools that write product descriptions and page headlines so you don't have to do everything yourself. And if you get stuck, Shopify's award winning 24. 7 customer support is always there, which makes those what if moments a little less scary. It's time to turn those what ifs into with Shopify today. Sign up for your $1 per month trial today at shopify.comSYSK go to shopify.comSYSK that's shopify.comSYSK so Alex, it seems to me that it's kind of human nature to want to believe whatever you believe and have some evidence to believe. And most things aren't life or death anyway. And there's comfort in thinking that what I believe has got some sort of backup to it. And that's kind of how people operate.
- [19:26]
B
That is indeed kind of how most people operate. And then what I'm trying to highlight is, well, how can you be different from most people? So sometimes it might not be life or death situations, but it just affects our understanding of the world. So you might think, oh, why is inflation higher in one country rather than another? What causes unemployment? What causes economic success? And I might not be a central banker with the ability to directly cause inflation or control inflation, but I just want to understand the world better. And I think to have a more discerning look at the data just helps me having a richer understanding, even if there's no practical effect on decision making. Is not my knowledge of the world just richer if it's a bit more informed? But also the number of decisions that we might take based on information is just much wider than one might think if you thought of research as just scientific paper. So nearly every decision that you take. So after this, this recording, I'm going to work out and so what is the work am I going to do? Is it high intensive interval training? Is it low intensity, steady state? How is this matching with the other workouts I've done this week? Am I going to have some pre workout supplement? All of these decisions are based on evidence. And you might think this sounds like a bit like a professor who's trying to scientifically analyze every decision. Is this not analysis paralysis? No, because this information might make my life easier rather than more complex. Because if I can achieve the same outcome with three workouts a week, which are based in the science as I can with six workouts a week, then I actually then have more time for myself. And what I'm trying to highlight in the book is the questions that we ask ourselves. They don't think take a lot of analysis to do. Simple questions like if this was the opposite, how would I react? That will only take a moment's reflection. But in terms of our productivity and our effectiveness, there can be large effects in terms of the outcome.
- [21:28]
A
So here's an example of something that we just discussed on this podcast a few episodes ago. It was, is going barefoot a good idea? And there is good evidence for both and it's good evidence for both. And a lot of things have good evidence for both sides. And you could and you just kind of have to pick one if you want to go barefoot. There's the evidence and it doesn't necessarily contradict the evidence on the other side. It's just different evidence.
- [22:00]
B
I think that's fair and there could be good evidence for is, is rugby better for you, or is football better for you, or should you study English or math? So what I would like to then look at is how tail is the evidence for my particular situation. So if going barefoot is generally good, but there's studies finding that going barefoot is bad, if you've got a history of ankle weakness, because that's when ankle strength is particularly important, because you're not wearing shoes that can be supportive, I might pay more attention to that. And it might be that going barefoot is good if in conjunction with a lot of other things, if you're doing certain things with your diet, if you're doing particular types of plyometric training. And so I want to look at beyond headline study. We like to believe the headlines going barefoot is good or it's bad, but it's often good or bad in conjunction with other types of behavior and for certain types of people. And therefore, that would allow me to focus on the particular studies that matter for my particular situation with the other behaviors that I'm doing alongside going barefoot.
- [23:06]
A
People seem to like whether they should or shouldn't. People like recommendations, which are basically anecdotes. I had a good experience with this doctor. I had a good experience with this company. And so you should, too. And people find comfort in that. And it's based on just one experience. But there seems to be something in human nature that feels right.
- [23:32]
B
Yes, this is known as a bias called familiarity bias, where if something is familiar to you, if it's a recommendation given by one person who you're friends with, that might outweigh all of the other negative recommendations by lots of other people. For example, after an earthquake, people are much more likely to buy earthquake insurance, even though scientifically, after an earthquake, the. The plate tectonics are now resolved, it's less likely that there will be an earthquake in the near future. So when something is particularly salient or familiar, this has an outsize effect on our decision. So it may well be that a friend says, hey, I breastfed my child and my child is doing well. Well, it could be that your child would have done well otherwise. It could be that you were doing lots of other things to help your child, such as always being present, like reading to your child and so on. But if it is a particular example that we want to be true, we will believe it and we will isolate this particular case and generalize and extrapolate from it.
- [24:33]
A
Well, it's interesting because everything you say makes perfect sense, and yet it seems that we Kind of fight it or not fight it, but we just, we do what we do because of the biases we have and it makes people feel good. So there's not a lot of reason to not and yet there is a lot of reason to not.
- [24:54]
B
Yeah. So these biases, they're often really ingrained with us. They're quite difficult to fight. So they go back to confirmation bias, which we led this, this chat with. This is the idea that we don't like evidence that contradicts our viewpoint. This is so deeply ingrained in us and this has been evidenced in the following way. So if you take people, you give them a statement that they know that you know they agree with and then you give them something that contradicts that statement and you see what happens to their brain by hooking them up to an MOI scanner. If you give a politic a non political statement, like Thomas Thomas Edison invented the light bulb, you give them contradictory evidence, nothing really happens. But if it is a political statement, like immigration is good for society, you give them some contradictory evidence, then the part of the brain that lights up is the amygdala. That is the same part of the brain that lights up. When the tiger attacks you, you go on the defensive, you respond to something that you don't like, like a tiger attack. So this is why it is difficult to overcome biases and therefore those who are able to do this, be this in investment decisions, as a shareholder, be this in company decisions, as an executive, you are the people who are able to get out of subprime loans before the crisis, make different decisions and get ahead.
- [26:18]
A
So really, no matter how objective you think you are, how able you are to critically evaluate something, we all have these biases. It's really, I think, important for people to understand that and that you can't really escape it, but you can try to fight it. I've been speaking to Alex Edmonds. He's an economist, a professor of finance at London Business School and he's author of a book called May Contain How Stories, Statistics and Studies Exploit Our Biases and what We Can Do About It. He also has a TED Talk that's been viewed over 2 million times called what to Trust in a Post Trust World. And there's a link to the TED Talk and a link to his book at Amazon in the show notes. Appreciate you coming on today. Thanks Alex.
- [27:08]
B
Thanks Mike. Really enjoyed the conversation.
- [27:11]
F
Eczema is unpredictable, but you can flare less with Ebglis, a once monthly treatment for moderate to severe eczema. After an initial 4 month or longer dosing phase. About 4 in 10 people taking MGLIS achieved itch relief and clear or almost clear skin at 16 weeks, and most of those people maintain skin that's still more clear at one year with monthly dosing.
- [27:30]
D
MGLIS Lebricizumab LBKZ a 250mg per 2ml injection is a prescription medicine used to treat adults and children 12 years of age and older who weigh at least 88 pounds or 40 kilograms with moderate to severe eczema, also called atopic dermatitis, that is not well controlled with prescription therapies used on the skin or topicals, or who cannot use topical therapies. EBGLIS can be used with or without topical corticosteroids. Don't use if you're allergic to ebglis. Allergic reactions can occur that can be severe. Eye problems can occur. Tell your doctor if you have new or worsening eye problems. You should not receive a live vaccine when treated with ebglis. Before starting ebglis, tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection.
- [28:04]
F
Ask your doctor about ebgliss and visit ebgliss.lilly.com or call 1-800-lilyrx or 1-800-545-5979.
- [28:11]
G
Get in the game with the College Branded Venmo Debit Card Rep your team with every tap and earn up to 5% cash back with Venmo Stash, a new rewards program from Venmo. No monthly fee, no minimum balance, just school pride and spending power. Get in the game and sign up for the Venmo debit card@venmo.com collegecard the Venmo MasterCard is issued by the Bancorp Bank NA Select Schools available Venmo Stash terms and exclusions apply at venmo.me stash terms max $100 cash back per month
- [28:44]
A
When I say the phrase mental toughness, you probably think of certain people in the military, like the Navy seals or maybe elite top athletes, people who have this ability to use their mind to ignore distractions and to stay focused even under the most stressful conditions. Almost like a superpower. But it can't be a superpower, because superpowers aren't real. So what is mental toughness? And how can we all be more mentally tough? Here to reveal those secrets is Eric Potterat, who knows a thing or two about this. Eric is a clinical and performance psychologist, a retired commander from the US Navy. After 20 years of service, during which time he helped create the mental Toughness curriculum for the Navy seals. Eric spent several years as the director of specialized performance for the Los Angeles Dodgers. He's worked with the U.S. women's National Soccer team, the Miami Heat, and several other Olympic athletes, first responders, business leaders, and NASA astronauts. He's the author of a book called Learned Mental Disciplines for Leading and Winning from the World's Top Performers. Hi, Eric. Welcome to something you should know.
- [30:00]
C
Hey, Michael. Good to be here. Thanks for having me.
- [30:02]
A
Sure. Well, when most people hear the term mental toughness, they have a sense of what it means. But what does it mean to you? What. What do you mean by mental toughness?
- [30:12]
C
Boy, great question. Look, there are a lot of definitions out there, and I tend to be a relatively simple guy. I think the easiest definition to wrap my head around is the ability to control the human stress response in multiple situations. So regardless of the discipline that you practice, whether it's military, first responder, sport, business, I think it's really the ability to use certain tools and techniques to control that human stress response and be able to thrive and perform optimally in that discipline.
- [30:45]
A
Well, that sounds almost impossible.
- [30:48]
C
It's not.
- [30:48]
A
It sounds very difficult. And when I think of people who are mentally tough, I think of them as that their mental toughness defines them. That that's who they are, not just what they do.
- [31:03]
C
I think we're. A lot of people make a mistake is they assume that these are end states. Like, you know, when you look at, pick your favorite performer, whether it's an athlete, military, businessman, or woman, whatever it may be. And if you think of that person, you probably think of a few things they do well. Their ability to focus, perform well under pressure, limit distractions, be resilient. And I think the difficulty with a lot of those terms is they're accurate, but they're end states. What very few people are telling us are, what are these individuals doing in order to execute that end state? I know they're focused. I know they're extremely disciplined. I know they're resilient. But this is why I think the better definition is really looking at the tools and techniques that they do to get to that end state.
- [31:55]
A
Well, and are they focused, disciplined, and resilient all the time, or this is something they work themselves into when they need to?
- [32:07]
C
Look, you're talking to a guy who's extremely biased. I've spent a career in this field, and I think so. My two answers to this is I think they can turn it off and on, but I think more importantly, this ability is learned. I don't think anyone's come out of the womb with this ability to be mentally tough. I haven't seen any data to support that, whether it's on the neuropsychological side, psychological side, et cetera. So I think that these men and women have navigated through years of micro failures and years of coaching, good teachers, parenting, difficult things to kind of hone this ability to leverage these techniques and perform optimally.
- [32:56]
A
When I think of somebody mentally tough, for some reason, I think of somebody who's physically tough, like military guys. And is there a connection?
- [33:10]
C
Yes and no. I really like the metaphor of a computer metaphor, as it were. I, I mean, this is this software versus hardware. I think as you just stated, when you think of military, you think athlete, you think of. These are physical outliers. I'm telling you. I have, you know, having been someone who's worked 20 years in the military with incredible physical performers, and then I spent obviously the, the second half of my career in professional sport. Again, outlier physical specimens, whether they're Olympians or professional, you know, pick your favorite sport. But at the world class level, everyone has the same hardware, yet everyone isn't performing under pressure very well all the time. So, you know, the best example I have is the Olympics, right? At the Olympics, every year every country sends their best men and women to perform. Pick your favorite event. And everyone generally has the same physical abilities, right? And the difference between no metal and a metal is sometimes hundreds or thousands of a second. So they're showing up with the same hardware. But this is why. Back to that metaphor of the computer. I think when you look at the best performers who are sustaining excellence over time, their ability is more along the lines of how are they leveraging their software, those mental health techniques that makes the hardware work? That's why I really like that metaphor a lot. I mean, you and I can have the best computers money can buy, but we're not going to leverage the power of that computer without the updated operating system and applications if it's a, you know, a smartphone. So I think with these men, and I'm sorry, I think with these men and women, they're physically performing well, but it's the software that's making everything work.
- [34:57]
A
So how do I leverage my software?
- [35:00]
C
Yeah, it's a great question. I mean, I think that, you know, that's what I spent 30 years looking at. I mean, literally 25,000 encounters with the best performers in the world. And after time, after about 10 to 12 years of working with these people, it became clear as day to me that generally the best performers are doing roughly the same things, plus or minus. So we've been able to kind of consolidate what those are and, and they kind of fall under bins of adversity, tolerance, tactics and everything from goal setting, visualization, self talk, breathing, compartmentalization. So there's a number of, I think, lessons and tools and tactics that we can reverse engineer to the general public, if you will.
- [35:44]
A
All right, well, let's start reverse engineering and put some of these things into practice.
- [35:50]
C
You know, I think first and foremost, I think one of the easiest things to do is to really, we talk about mindset. I think that's when you look at the best performers on earth, they are leveraging, catalyzing and optimizing a certain mindset for the role that they're playing. And I think my takeaway message to you would be, you know, just keep in mind that we all have different roles that we play in life. Myself, I'm a father, I'm a husband, I'm a performance psychologist. I'm a, you know, avid pickleball player, tennis player on the weekends. And if I executed the same mindset for every role that I play, research is pretty clear I'm not going to do many of those roles very well. So I think one of the ways to catalyze a certain mindset for a certain role that we see these top performers do is they have what we call pre performance routines. So I think that's one of the easiest ways to think about transitioning into a certain mindset to a high performance role.
- [36:51]
A
So how would that look?
- [36:52]
C
Yeah, the metaphor I really like is a dimmer switch. So the most popular pre performance routines for humans to perform is probably music. Think about, you know, if you want to go perform something athletically or a, a very important business presentation to a client or to a boss or to a teammate, you know, think about maybe a song that might catalyze and get that juices and the focus, get those juices and the focus going. So pre performance routines can be workouts, they can be mantras, they can be an article of cloth that just starts to tell you, hey, I'm ready to perform. I think another technique that, you know, there's, there's about eight to ten that we, we unpack that we've learned from the best performers. Another one that's extremely important and low hanging fruit, as it were, would be breathing. We know that when human beings get into high pressure, high performance situation, let's, let's call that leverage. We know that when human beings are in leverage or high performance, high pressure situations, the breathing rates change. They become very rapid and shallow. In fact they range from about 16 to 22 breaths a minute. One of the ways to reverse engineer that we see the top performers practicing is they get their breathing rates to about six breaths a minute. So an easy way to think about that is a four second inhale, just a natural pause at the top of that in inhalation and then roughly a six second exhale. So it's, it's a little bit longer of an exhale and that obviously is 10 seconds and that's about six breaths a minute. So that is a very quick way to physically and mentally be able to perform very, very well.
- [38:29]
A
Because it does what to you.
- [38:32]
C
Yeah, it actually reverses the human stress response. Back to your initial question of my definition of mental toughness is the ability to control the human stress response when we're stressed. Or put another way, when we're not practicing mental toughness. There's something called, you know, vasoconstriction. We get muscles get tense, the veins and arteries kind of constrict, blood pressure goes up, heart rate goes up. And those are the physical symptoms, if you will. The mental effects are what we call executive functions. Our ability to problem solve, the ability to think clearly on our feet. So those really go by the wayside under pressure. The fastest way to reverse that is this theory of fours. Four seconds in, four to six seconds out, out for you know, roughly four minutes. It reverses that. And to put very candidly, what it's going to do is it's going to vascularize a certain area of the brain. It's going to get a lot more blood to the frontal lobes of the brain where you can execute better decision making processes as well as all the physical aspects that we've talked about as well.
- [39:34]
A
And that makes sense. I think people have a sense that breathe, breathing. Well, we hear it from, you know, in other areas of life that breathing is really important. It calms you down. It's part of meditation and all that. That and, and what else? Because these are great. I mean I hadn't heard these talked about in this topic, so maybe a few more please.
- [39:54]
C
You bet. So obviously pre, pre performance routine. So how do you get ready, how you catalyze or you know, construct that mindset and then breathing. I think next on that list would be. And it sounds a little bit touchy feely, but just hear me out here is, is really self talk and, and thought management. We know that when the non elite performers get into high pressure situations, again, pick your discipline. I'm agnostic to what that discipline is that sometimes their self talk starts to take over. I can't do this or I've made a mistake and therefore I start thinking about that mistake and it just literally derails everything. So when you look at the best performers in the world, they are really much better at looking for evidence. They may make a mistake, they do make mistakes, but their ability to put that into a box, compartmentalize that and not let that lead to this, you know, domino effect of thinking that I'm more likely to make another or what are these people thinking of me? Are they, are they thinking I can't give this presentation, for example. So I think, you know, my, my long story short here is really look for evidence and think. You know, make sure that self talk is evidence based and more focused on the positive rather than the negative. I think, you know, these performers are definitely controlling those negative thoughts and they're putting them by the wayside more times than not.
- [41:17]
A
But when you say when we do a self talk, a lot of it is not reality based. We're like trying to imagine, we're trying to make ourselves better by saying how wonderful we are and how well we're going to do. And it isn't reality based. It's much more future based and wishful thinking. Thinking.
- [41:37]
C
Yeah, I'm glad you mentioned that. I mean there's, there's great studies that really kind of talk about how, how future oriented we all are. You know, I came across one that, you know, 60% of our thoughts are future oriented and that's why people are successful. They're thinking about the things and the deadlines they have and, and they're future based. I get that. But I think a lot of the, the elite performers, they're really working much more in the present state. Meaning, you know, if I use a sporting example, let's say a wide receiver, you know, drops a very easy touchdown pass or a business person makes a hiccup in a presentation that, that and they, they misstate something that they'd gone over repeatedly. It's really important to be present and to really make sure you're looking for evidence. This doesn't mean I'm a failure. This doesn't mean the client is going to, you know, say hey, this person isn't qualified for whatever advice or whatever presentation they're given. So I think interestingly, when you look at the statistics at the world class level, the only way that individuals are more likely to make an additional mistake after they've made a mistake is if they focus on that mistake. So if you think about it, it makes intuitive sense, right? If I'm taking my mental energy and I just dropped that proverbial touchdown pass or I dropped that proverbial presentation to a client, I'm much more likely to fumble again if I'm focusing on that rather than kind of what my mission was and what I've pre prepared for prior to that event. So self talk is really important.
- [43:14]
A
But how do you do that? When I think it's the natural inclination when you drop the ball to think about the ball you dropped. How do you not think about what you're thinking about?
- [43:26]
C
About. Yeah. So think about this as again I'm bringing up a lot of metaphors or a lot of examples today. Think about dominoes. The whole idea of, you know, if I lined up a hundred dominoes in front of you and me today and the first one falls, we know what's going to happen to the other 99. The ability of controlling that selft talk is watching the first three or four dominoes fall and then grabbing that fifth domino before it can affect this, you know, sixth or seventh. Seventh. So that's metaphorically speaking. What I'm trying to state is that it's really important to put that mistake and here's another technique by the way, we call it black boxing, or the fancy psychological term is, is compartmentalization. When you make that proverbial mistake, put it into a box and stay mission minded, Meaning tell yourself, I need to put that away for a moment or an hour or two. I need to complete whatever the mission is, whether it's a game, whether it's, you know, combat, whether it's a business presentation. And then at a future time when the mission is done, we can unpack that, unpack the proverbial box and take a look at what went wrong and try to learn from that. So what interesting statistics. Also we know that most negative consequences to self talk. So when I say negative consequence, most of the time when I'm anxious, when I'm irritated, when I'm bummed out, 94% of the time that's due to what we call irrational thoughts. So this ties directly to self talk. The elite performers don't have the 94% irrational talk right those irrational thoughts because they're looking for evidence. They know, hey, this is just one pass that I've dropped. That means I'm statistically going to catch, you know, the next 30 in a row or something.
- [45:16]
A
And is there a point where you find in working with people that there is a plateau? I mean, you can't continually get better because your head will explode or something.
- [45:28]
C
Yeah. Respectfully, I just don't buy that narrative. I do think, you know, one of my favorite quotes of all time is a Roger Federer quote. And he said, staying the same is going backwards. And I do think when you look and obviously how many weeks number one or how many years number one was this guy, we can name countless, you know, the Roger Federers of the world in their disciplines. I do think that that's also. And something we see with the world's best performers is they're constantly trying to incrementally improve. The mistake that I think a lot of people make, Mike, is that they try to do too much too soon, and that proverbial head will then explode. Right. Rather than, okay, how can I continue to work, work incrementally out of my comfort zone and keep pushing what I believe the limits are? Because I actually think those limits are self imposed. So.
- [46:22]
A
But isn't it true that. Well, I think everybody knows it's true that you only get better if you go beyond your comfort level to play tennis, to get better at tennis, you got to play people who are better than you, not worse than you.
- [46:39]
C
Yeah, 100% agree. And this is where I can certainly create some hate mail and some naysayers out there as well. And I have to say this very carefully. Do I want people to fail? Of course not. None of us want to watch, you know, someone fail. But these micro failures or iterations are really important. The other quote I really like is, you know, if you're not failing, you're not trying hard enough, you're not moving outside of that comfort zone. But there's a very fine area there. Right. If you think of the comfort zone as this, you know, circle in the middle, and then there's this buffer zone where that growth happens. If you go too far out, then it's catastrophic failure. Right. And embarrassment. And that's when people kind of, kind of pull back into their shell and they're like, see, I told you so. I'll never try that. As opposed to being very incremental and progressive about how you're trying to hone that craft, whatever it may be.
- [47:32]
A
I think when I. Well, for me, when I think of somebody who's mentally tough, somehow in that mix of that definition is somebody who's not very emotional, that they. That they can keep emotions out of it, that you know, they don't cry. You know, when they lose, they're tough, they're mentally tough. But can you turn it off and go have a good cry?
- [47:59]
C
Yeah, I think so. The Navy, as you know, I was 20 years in the military. 10 of those years, I was the head performance psychologist for the Navy seals. I retired as a commander. And one of the terms that the SEALs used, I'm not a SEAL, I was their psychologist was calm is contagious. And it's a very interesting term. I went one step further to related to your question. I think emotion is contagious. So I do think there's a time and place to emote and to have that, you know, as you say, cry or really get upset. But keep in mind that if you're doing that around people, around teammates, around coworkers, it is literally a contagion. I know when I'm around people who are irritated, I find myself getting more irritated. When I'm around angry people, I find myself getting defensive and upset as well. So it's a really interesting concept to think about emotions as a contagion. Do the best performers in the world have emotions? Of course they do. But when it comes time to perform, they are. They're really, I think, exercise that we call more of a neutral, detached mindset for I'm not going to go too high or too low. I'm just going to execute my plan and my blueprint, and I'm going to do it without emotion.
- [49:14]
A
Well, I think there's a fascination. Well, I've always had a fascination with how people who are mentally tough have that ability to. To focus and zero in and block the rest of the world out. And it's really interesting to hear how it's done and maybe try to do it yourself. My guest has been Eric Potterat. He is a clinical and performance psychologist. He is a retired commander from the US Navy, where he helped develop the mental toughness curriculum used by the Navy seals. He is author of a book called Learned Mental Disciplines for Leading and Winning from the World's Top Performers. And there's a link to that book in the show notes. Appreciate it. Thanks for coming on today, Eric.
- [49:57]
C
Thank you so much for having me, Mike. It's been fantastic.
- [50:03]
A
Toothpicks, they sound like a pretty benign, small little piece of wood. How much harm can they do? Well, they can do a lot of harm. Serving food with toothpicks might seem like a handy and harmless way to serve food, but if people bite into a hidden toothpick, it can do some serious damage to the mouth, and if a portion of the toothpick is swallowed, it can perforate the intestine with life threatening or even deadly results. Sometimes people don't even realize they've swallowed a piece of toothpick, which can make the diagnosis extremely difficult. In addition, a lot of toothpick users tend to chew on it well past its prime, and that can cause premature wear and tear on tooth enamel. Toothpicks can also damage existing dental restorations like crowns, veneers and fillings, and cause them to dislodge or fall off. In general, serving food with a toothpick might not be worth the trouble, and that is something you should know. Oh I would really like it if you would just take a moment and leave a rating and review on Apple Podcasts, Spotify. Whatever platform you listen on, it would really help us. A lot. A lot. I'm Mike Carruthers. Thanks for listening today to something you should know.
- [51:22]
H
This episode is brought to you by Athletic Brewing Co. No matter how you do game day, on the couch, in the crowd, or manning the snack table, Athletic Brewing fits right in with a full lineup of non alcoholic beer styles. You can enjoy bold flavors all game long. No hang on, no buzz, no subbing out for water in the second half. Stock the fridge for tip off with a variety of non alcoholic craft styles. Available at your local grocery store or online at athleticbrewing.com near Beer Fit for all times.
- [51:52]
E
Spring just slid into your DMs. Grab that boho.
- [51:55]
C
Look for that rooftop dinner, those sandals
- [51:57]
B
that can keep up with you and
- [51:59]
C
hang some string lights to give your patio a glow up.
- [52:02]
E
Spring's calling. Ross. Work your magic.