Self-control is a limited resource, use it sparingly.(miller-mccune.com)
miller-mccune.com
Self-control is a limited resource, use it sparingly.
http://www.miller-mccune.com/blogs/news-blog/the-down-side-of-self-control-3922/
7 comments
We don't gain a greater capacity for self-control, though, do we? It appears to me that what happens is that at some point, a thing that once required an exercise of self-control to resist no longer does. It is as though the weight has been lifted, not that our strength has increased.
The chronic adaptation, in other words, is habit. The process of intentionally breaking old habits and establishing new ones seems to always be particularly taxing, but maintaining an established habit, regardless of what it is, is easy. (Ignoring external factors, of course.)
With that in mind, it would be good advice to conserve the limited resource, or at least acknowledge it's variable availability and adjust your expectations of your own abilities in accordance. I'm certain there are many among the ambitious folk of HN who have taken on too many new and exciting challenges at once only to find that they turn into new and exciting chores that we can't even force ourselves to do, instead turning to the things that don't require self-control instead.
We call that procrastination and treat it like a challenge to overcome, too, but if it's a symptom of depleted self-control (and not a weak self-control "muscle"), then we'd be better served by being miserly about how we spend it than by taxing it unnecessarily. In that sense, there is a meta-adaptation in how you consciously manage your attention.
The chronic adaptation, in other words, is habit. The process of intentionally breaking old habits and establishing new ones seems to always be particularly taxing, but maintaining an established habit, regardless of what it is, is easy. (Ignoring external factors, of course.)
With that in mind, it would be good advice to conserve the limited resource, or at least acknowledge it's variable availability and adjust your expectations of your own abilities in accordance. I'm certain there are many among the ambitious folk of HN who have taken on too many new and exciting challenges at once only to find that they turn into new and exciting chores that we can't even force ourselves to do, instead turning to the things that don't require self-control instead.
We call that procrastination and treat it like a challenge to overcome, too, but if it's a symptom of depleted self-control (and not a weak self-control "muscle"), then we'd be better served by being miserly about how we spend it than by taxing it unnecessarily. In that sense, there is a meta-adaptation in how you consciously manage your attention.
"We don't gain a greater capacity for self-control, though, do we? It appears to me that what happens is that at some point, a thing that once required an exercise of self-control to resist no longer does."
I find that I do gain ability in self-control. As you mention, the same task becomes effortless, but also, new ones become easier to confront. Practicing self-control has, for me, led to it becoming easier in general.
I find that I do gain ability in self-control. As you mention, the same task becomes effortless, but also, new ones become easier to confront. Practicing self-control has, for me, led to it becoming easier in general.
I'm wondering if most of that is attributable to conscious/rational factors, though, and not the ego depletion phenomenon examined in the study. How much of it is learning to recognize patterns that presage tests of will and dealing with them by some optimized heuristic that doesn't tax willpower much at all? A sense of temptation. An awareness of our position on a slippery slope. Experience.
The test would be to see how you perform with novel depleting tasks (like writing without certain letters) where no such learned heuristics might apply.
That's what I mean by a meta-adaptation. It just makes more sense to me that you can learn to manage the demands on your self-control than to boost the total supply of it. It's more like time, to me.
It may of course be some mixture of both, but I always find it interesting when people's mental models of seemingly universal experience differ.
The test would be to see how you perform with novel depleting tasks (like writing without certain letters) where no such learned heuristics might apply.
That's what I mean by a meta-adaptation. It just makes more sense to me that you can learn to manage the demands on your self-control than to boost the total supply of it. It's more like time, to me.
It may of course be some mixture of both, but I always find it interesting when people's mental models of seemingly universal experience differ.
yes, you can learn to increase your executive function. less wrong has had a few excellent threads on the subject, search for the tag "akrasia".
edit: actually, see Cayenne's post.
edit: actually, see Cayenne's post.
Weight-lifting does weaken you. Rest makes you stronger :)
"Sparingly" was not the best term for the link, but the intention was to communicate the idea that self-control is not infinitely supplied. Like any finite supply, it can be depleted; therefore, use it on things that that you find it to provide the best return on investment. (Whether or not self-control can be cultivated is not really address in the article.)
There is a lot more evidence.
http://lesswrong.com/lw/10x/the_physiology_of_willpower/ -- exerting willpower leads to glucose-depletion.
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=848839 -- this topic has been on here before, though it was a different paper.
http://lesswrong.com/lw/10x/the_physiology_of_willpower/ -- exerting willpower leads to glucose-depletion.
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=848839 -- this topic has been on here before, though it was a different paper.
thanks!
I’ve experienced what the article describes first hand when my son was born two months ago. For whatever it’s worth, here are my 2c for other HN readers who are babying a startup while starting up a baby:
Even after my sleeping patterns returned to normal, it was harder to deal with some of the more annoying parts of startup-life. Here’s what it took to get my work stamina back on track:
I’m now doing one thing at a time, wholeheartedly. I don’t think of work when with baby. I don’t think of baby when at work. Sounds trivial, but easier said then done. I use whatever self-control I have left on this.
I separate work and home with an indulging buffer activity. Preferably something that also nourishes the body like mild exercise (but even if not that’s ok). What works now is biking a few miles between home and work, with a short pit stop at my favorite coffee shop.
Took me a couple months to get this to work, and it takes energy to keep it optimized. But when it clicks right, be prepared for a powerful feedback loop of goodness.
Even after my sleeping patterns returned to normal, it was harder to deal with some of the more annoying parts of startup-life. Here’s what it took to get my work stamina back on track:
I’m now doing one thing at a time, wholeheartedly. I don’t think of work when with baby. I don’t think of baby when at work. Sounds trivial, but easier said then done. I use whatever self-control I have left on this.
I separate work and home with an indulging buffer activity. Preferably something that also nourishes the body like mild exercise (but even if not that’s ok). What works now is biking a few miles between home and work, with a short pit stop at my favorite coffee shop.
Took me a couple months to get this to work, and it takes energy to keep it optimized. But when it clicks right, be prepared for a powerful feedback loop of goodness.
interesting. i realise that there must be much more evidence and study than is contained in that article, but it struck me that for the particular experiment they gave the people with the harder task may have a stronger sense of being "owed" something, since they made more effort, and that maybe this stronger sense of entitlement leads them to take more rewards...?
I had the same thought. Back when I was in school, I would often eat a lot of junk food after studying. It wasn't that I was tired from exerting self-control, but rather that I thought I deserved it. Many other studies about morality have shown a similar effect; people who do something "good" early on are less likely to later on because they feel they've reached their internal "doing good stuff" quota. For instance, people who do programs like Teach for America have much lower rates of volunteerism afterwards than others.
a very good point.
don't really get this study and line of thinking.
Are they saying there's an optimum sweet spot because if you don't exercise self control at all then it's hard to have a decent amount of it.
don't really get this study and line of thinking.
Are they saying there's an optimum sweet spot because if you don't exercise self control at all then it's hard to have a decent amount of it.
I was going to make much the same point (before skimming the responses to see if it would be a duplicate).
I will add that maybe some people felt not only 'owed' something but an urge for vengeance. The stricter test condition is not merely one requiring 'self control' but is rather draconian in the degree to which it requires self-control. There is a difference between expecting self-restraint and imposing hardship on people. "What goes around comes around". When you crap on people for purposes of your so-called experiments, don't be all shocked when they crap on you if given the opportunity.
I will add that maybe some people felt not only 'owed' something but an urge for vengeance. The stricter test condition is not merely one requiring 'self control' but is rather draconian in the degree to which it requires self-control. There is a difference between expecting self-restraint and imposing hardship on people. "What goes around comes around". When you crap on people for purposes of your so-called experiments, don't be all shocked when they crap on you if given the opportunity.
If you take for granted that executing a 'hard' task (why do we deem it 'hard'?) gives you a stronger sense of entitlement, then you can explain the result away. The question you are thn overlooking is: why do they feel a stronger sense of entitlement? If that is because our capacity for self-control is exhausted, then the explanation in the article holds, only the consequence of the exhausted self-control has shifted one step up in the chain of cause and effect.
The fact that you imagine this task being 'hard' indicates that you are aware of the mental exhaustion the task will cause. It's actually the exact same explanation given in the article, only you overlook it, because the 'hardness' of the task seems so obvious that you forget to ask why it is 'hard'.
From a classic play by Moliere: Why do sleeping pills make you sleepy? Because they have sleep-inducing qualities!
The fact that you imagine this task being 'hard' indicates that you are aware of the mental exhaustion the task will cause. It's actually the exact same explanation given in the article, only you overlook it, because the 'hardness' of the task seems so obvious that you forget to ask why it is 'hard'.
From a classic play by Moliere: Why do sleeping pills make you sleepy? Because they have sleep-inducing qualities!
i see your point, but it doesn't mean that they are identical. you would need to do another test - one that compared people who were tired through some task that was not considered "hard", and those that are tired through something that is considered "hard". if the two groups behaved identically, then you would be right. but you are assuming that result in what you write.
alternatively, it might even be the same task, but two groups that have a different attitude to it (some might consider it play, others work).
(i suspect you can also continue down your route, re-labelling things; for example, you might say that people only calls things "work" if, for that individual, they are "theft-inducing". at that point i am not sure if we simply agree to disagree, or if the argument becomes whether you are still learning something new over the original experiment)
alternatively, it might even be the same task, but two groups that have a different attitude to it (some might consider it play, others work).
(i suspect you can also continue down your route, re-labelling things; for example, you might say that people only calls things "work" if, for that individual, they are "theft-inducing". at that point i am not sure if we simply agree to disagree, or if the argument becomes whether you are still learning something new over the original experiment)
This explains some aspects of corporate politics quite nicely.
Interesting. Anyone think this correlates to top athletes cheating on their wives? Most notably, Tiger Woods and Michael Jordan.
Also, with a small n of 84, I think more experiments should be conducted in this area.
Also, with a small n of 84, I think more experiments should be conducted in this area.
My speculation is that 'willpower' or 'vitality' relates directly to the available reserves of neurotransmitter(s) in your nervous system.
Notes:
If you try to do something bad (that part of you knows is wrong), this will set up repetitious, conflicting thoughts which act to deplete willpower.
Willpower is replenished by sleep.
Activities seemingly opposite to those activities which require willpower are known as pleasures. However, my guess is that these also drain neurotransmitters, rather like revving an engine in neutral.
Therefore the way to maximise useful activity is to:
(a) do something that is genuinely in accordance with your highest wishes and values (b) decide that it will be your sole source of pleasure and entertainment
Notes:
If you try to do something bad (that part of you knows is wrong), this will set up repetitious, conflicting thoughts which act to deplete willpower.
Willpower is replenished by sleep.
Activities seemingly opposite to those activities which require willpower are known as pleasures. However, my guess is that these also drain neurotransmitters, rather like revving an engine in neutral.
Therefore the way to maximise useful activity is to:
(a) do something that is genuinely in accordance with your highest wishes and values (b) decide that it will be your sole source of pleasure and entertainment
This study tells us that self-control might be a bit like a muscle, in that its use acutely makes it weaker. But do we chronically adapt to its use, and become stronger once the temporary fatigue has passed, as with so many other forms of stress? Intuitively, from my experience, we do, but it might be interesting to study. Either way, this possibility makes this study insufficient basis for advice to "use it sparingly."