Imprinting and critical periods of development

Have you ever watched ducklings walk in sequence behind their mother?  Aside from it being quite cute to observe, it also serves as evidence of the importance of ducklings learning early in their lives the value of following mom.  Even more interesting, scientists have learned that this process, called imprinting, is a time-sensitive experience for ducks to attach — and once passed, can never be recovered in quite the same way.  When ducklings fail to properly imprint, many adverse things can happen, including:

• failing to develop normal social and mating behaviors,
• attaching to inappropriate objects (including people and other animals that are not ducks), and
• struggling to function normally as adults since they never developed in the same, normative ways as other ducklings.

For humans, psychologists have learned that we experience a similar sensitive period where we are prime to learn invaluable life skills.  Just like ducklings, there are windows in development where the human brain is especially receptive to certain experiences, including language development, attachment, social skills, and emotional development.

We know that when kids fail to fully develop during these sensitive periods, unwanted consequences often follow.  For example, if language is not developed during a sensitive period, some kids never fully develop grammar, and often struggle with communication long-term.  When attachment fails to develop during a sensitive period, kids can be later challenged with trust issues, emotional regulation, and social functioning.  Lastly, when kids miss out on social interactions (i.e. playing video games alone for chunks of their teen years) there is evidence that kids lag behind on reading facial expressions, tone of voice, body language, conflict resolution, and empathy.

While there is little debate on the significance of human sensitive periods and the impact on life skills development, there are still questions whether humans can later make up for these periods when they are missed?  Social skills are not simply downloaded form the internet, but they develop during important life periods where kids can trial-and-error things, make mistakes, and learn from others.  If, however, kids glom on to their phones and play hours and hours of video games through their formative years, serious concerns arise that they may never be able to recapture what was missed in terms of life skill development.

Early research on sensitive periods and human development show that when early experiences are limited, social skills may eventually develop later, but less efficiently.  Individuals may also show social awkwardness, difficulty reading cues, emotional dysregulation, and weaker communication skills.  While it appears as though the brain can still learn social skills, it is no longer operating in its most optimal learning window, leaving individuals less developed than they would be had they maximized sensitive periods during development.

Final thoughts

There is definitely a developmental cost to missing invaluable life experiences during sensitive periods, and increasingly more kids today are becoming vulnerable to developmental issues due to high-volume usage of technology (i.e. smart phones and gaming).  In essence, many young people are currently growing into adulthood with limited experience reading body language, verbal communication, and self-regulation largely due to choosing technology over real life human interactions.  As we continue to interface with technology (including artificial intelligence), it is important for parents and teachers to realize the potential psychological damage that can occur when kids replace real-life interactions with stationary phone and video screens.

drstankovich.com

The post Screens vs. Social Skills: What Happens Developmentally When Kids Interact Less in Real Life? appeared first on The Sports Doc Chalk Talk with Dr. Chris Stankovich.

Robots over humans?

Should Major League umpires be worried about their future?  If I were an ump, I sure would be, as it is clear that the ABS system offers distinct advantages over the human eye, leaving umpires at a huge disadvantage.  In fact, as MLB rolls out the new challenge system, umpires are being regularly humbled each game when their calls are overturned on the in-stadium scoreboard for everyone to see.  Keep in mind umpires are very proud of their job, as all MLB umpires go through rigorous umpire school, and are required to log years of minor league games before ever getting to call a big league game.  Now, for the first time, that credibility and respect are being cast aside — not exactly the best way to empower your employees.

The ABS system, depending on how it is received this year, could soon take the place of human umpires entirely and dramatically alter the game.  New technologies currently allow for absolute precision with balls and strikes, and could soon be responsible for foul ball accuracy, and bang-bang calls on close calls on the bases.  Do we want a future game where there are no human umpires on the field, but instead cameras, sensors, and other technology tools officiating the game?  A game where animated umpire calls that add spirit to the game are replaced by monotone, mechanical output decisions delivered with no feeling?

All of this brings me to my final big question — is it perfection we are after, or does the subjective nature of human decision-making add the most to the game?  The truth is MLB umpires get about 99% of the calls correct (an amazing feat in itself), and the times they do miss often adds flavor to the game by means of crowd involvement, on the fly coaching decisions, and even manager-umpire on-field disputes that bring energy to the game.  Replacing all of that with a boring graphic on the big screen showing a baseball hitting a corner of the strike target might get the call right, but lose a lot of the human component that makes baseball a great American game that has endured for over 150 years.

Final thoughts

Often when new technologies emerge, we quickly forget what we just had, and the value of what is being replaced.  There is no doubt that the efficacy of ABS calls are better than human umpires, but does adding this kind of element to the game add, or take away from, the subjective nature of baseball?  While some fans are adamant that getting it right is always better than a human umpire missing a call, critics worry about adding too much technology, minimizing the value of human umpires, and the overall effect of replacing the energy that real umpires bring in exchange for bland, non-feeling computer evidence.

drstankovich.com

The post The End of Human Officiating? MLB’s ABS System and the Future of Sports appeared first on The Sports Doc Chalk Talk with Dr. Chris Stankovich.

Jeffrey “The Dude” Lebowski

These days, we hear expressions like “fake news” and “alternative facts,” but what do people really mean when they say these things?  It seems that a lot of what people call “fake” news is really just news they don’t like, and “alternative” facts are not necessarily facts, but alternative opinions of what the person wished were the case.  As people argue what is and isn’t fake about the news we receive, it seems as though the bigger point that needs attention is helping people understand the difference between objective facts and subjective opinions.  For example, something isn’t fake simply because you don’t like it, and just because you don’t like something doesn’t mean you should dream up some alternative that you call a “fact.”

Understanding objective and subjective information

It is important to first define terms before providing examples of objective and subjective perspectives.  When we make an  objective comment, the claim can be confirmed or assumed independently of any minds, and means evaluating situations, data, or information based on facts and verifiable evidence rather than personal feelings, biases, or opinions.  Examples of objective statements include:

• It is 56 degrees outside.
• The Tigers beat the Bears 35-14.
• A student received an 85% on the math exam.
• The new car just parked in the dealership showroom is painted navy blue with an off-white color leather interior.

As you can see from the examples above, it’s “just the facts” when it comes to objective reporting.  Now, let’s take the same 4 examples and offer a subjective opinion based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions:

The next time you hear objective news that you don’t like (i.e. someone you know lost a school board election), you are welcome to offer a subjective opinion about the news, but try to refrain from calling what you don’t like as “fake.”  Instead, first recognize the objective news (someone you know lost the election), and then, if you want, offer a subjective opinion about the news (“I know him, and he would have been a real asset to the board.  Unfortunately, he lost.”).  These kinds of exchanges allow for a common denominator to be established (the results), leaving plenty of room for subjective discussion to follow (he would have been the best board member had he won!).  This type of communication is healthy and allows room for varying opinions, but is based on objective reality that people can verify without bias.

Final thoughts

It is important that we not blur the lines when it comes to objective and subjective views of information — and the good news is there is room for both!  You can accept that your team lost a game, and still have an opinion as to why they lost.  You can accept a grade on a test, and freely offer your thoughts on the quality of the instructor.  When we fail to acknowledge facts (objective evidence), we lose the opportunity to begin discussion around a central, agreed upon piece of evidence that allows for differences of opinion.  Bypassing truth, however, immediately sends us to subjective arguments without a place of consensus, making it near-impossible for fruitful discussion and future growth.

drstankovich.com

The post Critical Thinking in the Age of “Fake News” and “Alternative Facts” appeared first on The Sports Doc Chalk Talk with Dr. Chris Stankovich.

A heuristic worth exploring

In psychology, a heuristic is known as a rule or piece of information used in or enabling problem-solving or decision-making, also known as a mental shortcut.  We use heuristics all the time, and often — but not always — they help us with decisions.  Take the following heuristics as examples:

• If something is expensive, it is of good quality.  While this is often the case, it is not always the case.  For example, generally speaking, more expensive cars and computers provide more by means of ease of computing ability and driver perks (equating to better quality).  We also know that not all expensive things are better, as many clothing brands are expensive, but they do not use better materials.  Instead, these companies rely on branding that has been established as high-end, creating an illusion of being better than the competition.
• If something is rare (or scarce), it must be expensive.  Again, some things that are scarce are of greater value, including items that are no longer produced and hard to find.  But not everything that is rare is valuable — if I gave you the only purple paperclip in the world today, it would not have any greater value than other non-purple paperclips even though it is rare.

For psychologists, a contemporary heuristic may be developing in real time, and that is the following:

If someone is a popular influencer online, they must also be of great knowledge and expertise.

Similar to previously established heuristics, the statement above does have some truth to it, as there are some online personalities known as influencers who really are experts in their respective fields.  For example, if there is an emergency room doctor hosting a podcast on how to immediately treat an injury while waiting on an ambulance, we should all pay attention.  But what about the majority of podcasters who are simply, well, popular?  I’ll steer clear of naming names, but I’m sure you can guess a few of them pretty quickly, people who have become influencers online, but have no credible expertise on many of the subjects they opine about daily.

I mean no disrespect by this, but the fella online telling you how to do your hair and makeup — unless he’s also trained in medicine — should not be telling you what you should do about vaccines.

When it comes to medicine, science, engineering, and other important fields that require education and experience before one can claim “expertise,” it is important that we not grant equivalent expertise to online personalities simply because they have a big following.  Perhaps the new heuristic should be much simpler and straightforward: If your favorite online personality has a lot of followers, it simply means he or she has a big following.  HARD STOP!  Having a big online presence means exactly and only that…it does not mean the person is a legitimate expert in anything at all other than drumming up a following.

Final thoughts

As we increasingly live more of our lives online, popular influencers are being seen as experts — and often for things they know little about.  Engaging, polarizing, confident figures tend to command a lot of attention, but is the advice they are spewing of any value?  Or, worse yet, is it dangerous?  Good for influencers who have learned how to make a great living capitalizing off the internet, but use great caution when assuming if they have a big audience, they must know a lot about a lot of stuff.

drstankovich.com

The post When Fame Replaces Expertise: The Rise of the Influencer Authority appeared first on The Sports Doc Chalk Talk with Dr. Chris Stankovich.

Contrasting how different groups of people use AI

If you have played around with AI, you already know how fun and addicting it can be to use.  While not always perfectly accurate, AI can produce information in mere seconds that previously took us hours, days, and weeks to find.  This ease and quickness of delivery is incredibly useful to different audiences for different reasons, and herein lies the concern.

When experts use AI to enhance learning, the results are usually very positive.  For example, if an auto mechanic plugs in your car’s symptoms into AI and quickly determines the root of your car’s problems, that’s great!  Similarly, an attorney who can acquire case studies in half the time saves you money as a client, and a physician using AI to better understand the newest research about a specific health condition might become more efficient in the ways she treats you and your similar symptoms.  Business leaders can crank out powerpoint presentations in a fraction of the time they used to, thereby leaving them more time to lead!  There are literally countless ways for experts to build on their knowledge base by using AI, allowing them to be more efficient by saving time, energy, and money.

Now onto the bad news — not everybody uses AI in these ways.  Perhaps the most concerning setting right now is in education, as young people today now have the most powerful tool ever, and the ability to use AI in exchange for their own thinking whenever they want.  Having no (or little) foundation of knowledge before AI to build upon, increasingly more students today are simply typing into AI what they need to turn in to their teacher.  “Write me a 1,000 word paper on the extinction of dinosaurs” or “What is the answer to this calculus problem?” or “Summarize the book To Kill a Mockingbird into a presentation I can give the class.”  In many cases students come away with the grade they want, but they couldn’t tell you one thing about dinosaur extinction, the calculus problem, or what To Kill a Mockingbird was about.  How is this helpful in any meaningful way beyond simply getting an undeserved grade in a class?

Students will always be incentivized and rewarded to make high marks in school, and AI is the fastest way to make the grade (and save time and effort).  For younger people who need a grade more than they need the feeling of satisfaction from doing hard, scholarly work, it’s easy to see why more and more students everyday are leaning into AI rather than put in the work.  With just a few keystrokes, an entire paper can be written — compare that to the old way of doing things by going to the library, perusing articles, reading those articles, and then synthesizing what was learned into a neat, coherent, grammatically-correct paper.  What do you think most student s are going to do?  Sure, they might not have a clue relating to the paper they just turned in, but they got the grade — and at this point in their life the grade is a lot more important than developing things like “critical thinking.”  What most young people don’t realize is that there will be a day when they need to actually use what they are going to school for, and AI won’t be able to make up for all that lost learning in just a query or two.

Ironically, with experts (defined loosely here as people who have some kind of working knowledge of a topic) AI can be used in amazing, efficient, and helpful ways.  The contrast between the student simply needing a paper written, and an expert using AI to save time and be better at his job, could not be more dramatic.  Same tool (AI), but used in completely different ways.

Final thoughts

We are currently witnessing a very interesting trend with how different people use artificial intelligence, and their patterns are based on different ages and needs.  For established people already having a knowledge base in a specific subject, AI helps with speed, efficiency, and establishing the best practices to do their job.  For younger people not yet in their careers, grades are the most important thing, and AI can write papers and complete homework assignments in mere seconds.  Whether or not the student understands what he just completed using AI does not seem to matter, only that he got a good grade on the assignment.  While it’s relatively easy to see why different people use AI in different ways, it is more than concerning that younger people may be left very unprepared and untrained for the future from using AI solely to make the grade.

drstankovich.com

The post AI as a Tool—or a Crutch? The Growing Divide in How We Use Artificial Intelligence appeared first on The Sports Doc Chalk Talk with Dr. Chris Stankovich.

Are gambling ads more dangerous that cigarette ads?

I was only a baby in 1971, so I don’t know the specific conversations that were had leading to the banning of cigarette ads on television and radio.  What I do know is that as a kid of the 1970’s it was well known by then that cigarettes caused cancer, and that chronic smoking contributed to all kinds of respiratory issues and other health concerns.  What led to the decision to ban smoke ads is unclear, but we can assume society at-large saw a tip in the scale from cigarettes being harmless and fun, to something very toxic and worth banning advertising.

While sports gambling addiction doesn’t have the same background story, nor does it lead to lung cancer, it is every bit as potentially dangerous in different, less visible ways.  No, you won’t see a gambling addict hacking away coughing while taking a drag of a smoke, but you often will see that individual high or drunk, depressed and anxious, and losing large sums of money that can lead to divorce, arrest, and incarceration — or even homelessness.  Yes, the path to lung cancer from smoking may be a direct straight line, but if you look closely you can see a fairly clear pattern of the very serious dangers of gambling addiction, too.

Cigarette ads used to be cool, with cowboys on the range taking a drag while herding cattle.  Sports gambling ads, while rarely western-themed, also present a sense of coolness — as well as great jubilation when hitting on that big bet!  These sports gambling ads do lead to more gambling addiction, especially with young men with brains not yet fully developed.  And even if you just want to watch a game without sports gambling ads, you can’t do that in this moment, as literally every big sporting event today includes non-stop sports gambling ads at every turn.  What I am saying is sports gambling ads are everywhere, and these ads are most definitely impacting millions of vulnerable people who can’t get away from them so long as they want to watch sports on television.

Perhaps the reason (beyond the money in advertising) that sports gambling ads are not banned yet is due to the subtle nature of unhealthy consequences that follow.  Unlike the effects of smoking that are painfully easy to see when someone has emphysema or cancer, you don’t always “see” depression, substance abuse, failed marriages, suicidal ideation, and bankruptcy.  The consequences of sports gambling addiction, while very serious, don’t usually present as dramatic, nor is the line as direct with cause-effect.  Are those the reasons why sports gambling ads continue to flourish in this moment?

Sports gambling advertisements have definitely changed the ways in which we watch sports on television, with critics arguing they are tired of seeing the ads non-stop.  The bigger problems, however, have less to do with being annoyed and more to do with the effects that these ads have on gambling, addiction, and the serious mental health and related problems that follow.  Is it finally time to take a closer look at scaling back on these ads — or banning them altogether, as we did with cigarettes?

Final thoughts

In just the last 5 years we have gone from no sports gambling ads on television, to sports gambling ads about parlays, odds, prop bets, and over/under’s at every turn.  This change has been very dramatic, and has invited millions of people who never gambled to try an “easy” first bet, one that many of the casino’s will even allow “on them.”  Sports betting can be fun, especially with that first big win!  But what happens after that, as the odds stack against you and the sports bet losses add up?  The ads keep playing and you keep trying to get back, but the very real consequences of losing money lead to all kinds of new problems you never had, including mental health, marital, and financial issues.   Will there soon be a correction made, one where these ads are limited — or eliminated altogether?  It happened once before with cigarettes, will it happen with sports gambling ads?

drstankovich.com

The post Cigarette Ads Were Banned in 1971—Should Sports Gambling Ads Be Next? appeared first on The Sports Doc Chalk Talk with Dr. Chris Stankovich.

One game.

If we played them ten times, they might win nine.
But not this game.
Not tonight.
Tonight, we skate with them.
Tonight, we stay with them.
And we shut them down because we can!

– Herb Brooks, 1980 USA Olympic Hockey Coach

The quote above from  Herb Brooks reminds us of the importance of a winning mindset, and how success in sports (and life) often happens as a result of healthy, positive, successful thinking.  For youth sport coaches, and really coaches at all levels, a big challenge is getting the team to buy-in that they can win today — especially on days where they are clear underdogs.  When I work with athletes I see the same thing — some go into competition always thinking they have a chance, while others have lost the game even before it has started because of their own negative, pessimistic thinking.  The Herb Brooks speech is special for many reasons, but there is a specific part of his message that is especially useful for coaches trying to maximize team abilities, and win games that others think are unwinnable.

Just win one…

“If we played them ten times, they might win nine.  But not this game. Not tonight.”  While some might read that part of the Brooks speech as simple coach rah-rah pump up stuff, there is a much stronger and important point he is making that can be leveraged for increased focus, motivation, and resiliency:

We only have to win ONE.

So often in life we become overwhelmed at the prospect of achieving success at what looks like a massive, daunting task (like how the 1980 USA hockey team felt about the Russians).  In these moments, energy deflates, attitude goes negative, and a survival mindset takes the place of healthy physical play.  Athletes play to not lose, rather than to win.  This all makes logical sense when you believe that there is no way to win today — and this is exactly the place where great coaches know to intervene and challenge their team.  Why not us today?  Sure, they may have a better team on paper, but what if we give it everything we have, and then keep coming back for more?  What if the first time they hit us, we hit them back three-fold?  What if we weren’t in awe of them, but instead saw this game as the biggest challenge of our life?  And that we only have to win it once!

You don’t have to be an Olympic coach to motivate your team in the same way that Herb Brooks did, but as a coach you do have the same task Brooks had when he coached, and that is the task of getting your team fully ready to play.  Especially with social media today, everybody knows who is good, but it is the job of a great coach to help players see past the noise, believe in themselves, and do the job today better than ever before.  You only have to win today.  How do you create a positive attitude, focus on every play, and get back up faster than the opponent anytime we hit the ground?  How do we win the “game within the game” today?

The mental game in sports often comes down to who wants it more, you or the opponent?  If you are at a clear disadvantage on paper, how do you outwork them?  How do you play together as a team today, like a fine-tuned engine?  How do you keep going, especially when you get beat on a play, or a referee makes a terrible call?  How hungry are you for success??  By focusing on these questions and dedicating efforts to improve where shortcomings exist, you will give yourself a great chance at success today — and many times in sports that is all that is needed!

Final thoughts

In life, we often lose any chance for future success the very moment we size up the competition as “impossible,” and this mindset is one that we create entirely on our own.  If we instead break down what at first looks intimidating into more realistic framing, we begin to see we may very well have a chance today.  How does this change in thinking happen?  One way, as Herb Brooks pointed out, is to simply win today, and not be consumed by anything else — including how talented the opponent is on paper.  Yes, they might beat you just about every time out, but if you bring your A-game today you might be shocked at the results.  Don’t believe me?  Go ask the 1980 USA Hockey team how they feel about putting it all together for one big game.

drstankovich.com

The post Miracles Start with Belief: The Mental Edge Behind Great Upsets in Sports appeared first on The Sports Doc Chalk Talk with Dr. Chris Stankovich.

The professionalization of interscholastic sports

Today’s youth and interscholastic sports often mirror what we see in college and pro sports — nice, new training facilities and sport venues, field turf, state-of-the-art weight rooms, and branding and social media at every turn.  In fact, in nearly every state today high school student athletes are permitted to cash in on Name, Image, & Likeness (NIL) money, just like college athletes.  While there are a lot of similarities between interscholastic and college/pro sports, there are some really big, important differences that need to be recognized in order to better protect kids.

• These are kids. It is shortsighted to assume kids can handle the same sport and life pressures that college and pro athletes experience, and this is especially true when it comes to how kids identify and cope with stress.  Expecting kids to compete vigorously year-round in an experience that feels more like a serious job than it does a fun sport experience really puts kids in vulnerable situations, and many struggle with mental health issues as a result.
• Their role is not that of elite athlete.  While most pro and elite college athletes self-identify as “athlete” (often exclusively), most kids do not self-ascribe in this way.  In fact, unlike adult athletes, many kids play sports simply because they are good — but they are not necessarily married to this role.  This disconnect in assumption can leave kids in a real bind when they just want to play sports for fun, while others see them branded as “athlete.”
• They rarely have a say, and this can lead to distress.  For many kids, they don’t have a lot of say in their sport experience — mom and dad sign them up, pay for extra training, and if the kid is good they can deeply invest in youth sports.  When kids feel as though they don’t have a say it can lead to a lot of distress, and without support it can lead to isolation, depression, anxiety, and even self-harm.
• Resources are tough to find, especially alone.  When kids feel as though they can’t ask for time off, or feel stuck that they can’t quit sports for fear of letting important people down, they often struggle trying to figure it all out on their own.  Parents are usually the best place to start for a kid dealing with a problem, but how can you go to mom or dad when they are the ones with big sport expectations?
• Youth and interscholastic sports simply aren’t D1 or pro sports, nor should it feel like that.  Lets be honest, while it’s cool to see youth and interscholastic sport improve with the times, many people still like the innocence and organic nature of school and community sports.  The fact of the matter is that no matter how many games you add to a travel schedule, it is not professional sports — nor should it be.  Instead, allow kids to grow, laugh, struggle, and fail, as it’s the life lessons learned and the friendships gained that are the true rewards of youth and interscholastic sports.

Final thoughts

While all kids are vulnerable to mental health issues, student athletes experience some very unique stressors that are sometimes overlooked.  The sport intensity, personal identity, expectations from others, and social media implications are a few examples of issues and challenges young athletes face, and often struggle when trying to find help.  Remember, by far the #1 reason why kids play sports is to have fun, so it is our job as adults to help create the type of experience kids most desire.  Another part of our job as adults is to make sure kids are safe, not just physically from things like concussions and ACL’s, but also their mental health and helping them respond to stressors in healthy and effective ways.

drstankovich.com

The post More Demands, More Stress: Why So Many Student Athletes Are Dealing With Mental Health Issues appeared first on The Sports Doc Chalk Talk with Dr. Chris Stankovich.

Why does rage sell?

Even if you are not in advertising, it’s probably not too difficult to see why sex sells based on primitive, biological drives, but what is it about rage makes us act in similar ways?  And why are we so easily manipulated by rage — even when we are shown clear, demonstrable evidence that what we just consumed online was deeply distorted, if not entirely made up?  And what does it say about us that getting people to hate one another is actually a useful tool when looking to peddle goods and services?

There are no simple answers to the questions just posed, but by Galloway identifying the effects of rage on influence, it allows us to look at ourselves more critically and objectively — and hopefully begin to make corrections where needed.  For example, as you go clicking away today, take note of how often you are prompted to divide, hate, and blame ________ for all your troubles.  How does actively seeking rage help your day?  Do you feel better after consuming rage?  Does it lead to better emotional states, and healthier interactions with others?  Does rage consumption help you become more open-minded, learn about others, and consider new ways of thinking?  How does starting your day by hating a person or group help you grow in any meaningful ways?  While Galloway might be right that rage sells, it is up to us as consumers of rage to look more deeply at what rage-baiting does to us psychologically to our mental health, and to stop consuming content that stunts our development and creates artificial hate toward others.

There are countless healthy and fun ways to use the internet, but actively seeking rage content is not one of them.  When we consume this kind of information day after day, unhealthy thinking and behaviors develop over time, as does our world view.  While these changes occur, we tend to seek more content that confirms our biases (confirmation bias), and we spend more time interacting with other exact like-minded people.  This constant reinforcement impacts our world view, and it is all manipulated by folks who know they can throw out just about any angry and/or outlandish claim and that their audience will be there ready and waiting.

I believe Galloway has identified a growing problem that desperately needs attention, an issue that lives freely on the internet with virtually no policing of any kind.  Increasingly more podcasters are realizing that solid, accurate content doesn’t sell nearly like it would if it were salacious, and so they are incentivized (monetarily) to push truth to the farthest boundary — if not disregard it altogether.  Why not flat-out lie and use rage at every turn?  There doesn’t appear to be any penalty for doing so, and in all likelihood you will soon generate a following of other angry people looking to point their frustrations toward someone or some thing.  Sure, the podcaster makes money and the advertisers see a spike in sales from this artificial rage, but how does it make you feel?  What benefits does it provide to you?  Do you think this kind of daily pattern of tuning into anger helps — or hurts — your mental health?

Final thoughts

Rage certainly sells, especially online where there isn’t much policing, and the goal is to get you to click and stay on specific webpages that make a lot of money keeping you pissed off.  They (the podcasters and advertisers) win, but do you?  While it might feel cathartic in the moment to hate on the same people that your favorite podcaster tells you to hate, there is also very serious, psychological damage that can occur when coping with human stress in this fashion.  Instead, step outside, take a walk, enjoy the company of positive people in your life, and serve as a role model to others for better mental health and life outcomes.  Yes, rage sells, but it only sells if we let it.

drstankovich.com

The post Hooked on Anger: The Mental Health Price of Online Rage Culture appeared first on The Sports Doc Chalk Talk with Dr. Chris Stankovich.

Big changes are happening right now

If you went to college before the current AI age, you can immediately recall long hours of studying, attending study groups, meeting tutors, writing and editing papers, and engaging in many more time consuming, laborious actions and behaviors designed to help you make the grade.  No, we didn’t have to read caveman drawings scrawled on walls, but we did have to actively participate in the learning experience so that we understood theories, best practices, and valid criticisms relating to the topics we studied.  By engaging in the traditional learning process, the active pursuit of knowledge by means of discovery, conversation, and analysis helped students best prepare for the future — but is that still happening today?

Ideally, as the NPR article discusses, AI can be used to supplement learning by means of teaching at different grade levels for better understanding, and clarifying challenging subjects by providing new examples and answering student questions directly.  What is happening instead is the opposite of that, where increasingly more students each day passively enter a query, then cut-and-paste the answer back to the professor.  While some students might give a quick glance-over of the AI answer to make sure it looks right, many students simply forward the AI answer directly to the professor as they wait for their A+ grade.  Would you consider this learning?  What confidence would you have in your dentist, accountant, or electrician that got their credentials this way?

If you think this is an over-simplification and over-dramatization of what is happening right now, I challenge you to look more closely.  As someone who regularly treats students, as well as teaches college courses, I have these conversations almost daily with individuals who are very candid about the ease and prevalence in which they use AI — and the answers would scare you.  In fact, some students have told me that they take as many online courses as possible to get around traditional course hurdles (i.e. proctors for exams) so that they can keep one window open to take an exam, while keeping another window open to search for (cheat) answers.  Making things worse, profit-driven universities continue to offer more online courses to increase margins, thereby allowing more students to approach college in this manner.

It should be noted there are many well-intended professors trying to keep things in check, but are essentially handcuffed when trying to help.  First, increasingly more universities are allowing for AI, making it tough for professors to know what is and isn’t valid student work.  Second, online courses continue to make it incredibly difficult for professors to properly proctor exams.  And finally, even if professors could catch every student who cheats with AI plagiarized papers, what would they do about it?  There aren’t enough hours in the day for a professor to meet with all the students who would fit into this category, and then consider that they would need to arrange these meeting literally every week.  Catching a cheater here and there is one thing, but devoting huge chunks of time each day toward catching AI plagiarists is not in the professor job description, does not contribute toward tenure, and certainly does not help with student-professor evaluations.

Final thoughts

There is certainly a place for AI in society, and there are many good uses of AI in increasingly more settings.  Where AI is a major concern, however, is in education and how we are preparing students for the future.  When we allow students to freely use AI without consequence, it’s like leaving a bucket of candy out on Halloween and expecting kids to just take one — good luck with that!  Students will always look for shortcuts, and universities are ill-equipped to respond to all the threats AI poses in this moment.

drstankovich.com

The post Degrees Without Learning: The Growing Risk of Artificial Intelligence in Academia appeared first on The Sports Doc Chalk Talk with Dr. Chris Stankovich.

Understanding the value of parsimony

When I was in graduate school many moons ago, one of the most important concepts I learned was the principle of parsimony — the idea that when trying to understand a problem, we should favor the simplest adequate explanation before jumping to more complex conclusions. In science, this is often associated with the idea that we shouldn’t multiply assumptions unnecessarily.  In everyday life, it simply means: don’t over-complicate things.

We are living in an era of information overload in what some would call the technology revolution.  Social media offers instant diagnoses, viral explanations, and confident “expert” opinions about nearly everything — confirmation bias at every turn!  The louder and more dramatic the explanation, the more attention it seems to attract.  While that might be the formula to keep people tethered to social media, these are not the means scientists and helping professionals use to understand and treat problems.  Instead, a more direct and likely approach is taken — regardless of whether the internet agrees.

For example, consider youth sports.  A kid suddenly struggles during the season and you are pressed to understand why?  The non-parsimonious explanations arrive quickly: sport burnout, poor coaching, deeper emotional issues, and clear evidence that the kid wants to quit sports.  Yet the simplest, and most parsimonious explanation is that the kid is mentally and physically fatigued from a long travel sport season.  Since it is very common for kids to struggle with motivation and focus at the end of an intense sport season, it is more responsible to start there when trying to come up with answers, versus assuming the kid is deeply depressed and on the verge of quitting.  Common things occur commonly.  Starting with the obvious is not dismissive — it’s responsible.

The same principle applies to mental health.  Not every episode of sadness is clinical depression.  Not every lapse in focus is ADHD.  Not every bout of nervousness is an anxiety disorder. Human beings experience a wide range of normal emotional fluctuations.  Parsimony helps us avoid turning every challenge into psychopathology.

This does not mean complex problems do not exist.  They do.  But effective problem-solving works best when we start simple and escalate only if necessary.  When we skip that first step, we risk mislabeling issues, increasing anxiety, and overlooking practical solutions, and even creating new problems.

Parsimony is also a powerful emotional regulator.  When we assume catastrophic explanations, we feel helpless.  When we consider simple explanations, we often discover actionable solutions.  Tired?  Check sleep.  Irritable?  Check stress levels. Struggling at practice?  Check workload and recovery.  Very often simple solutions prove effective, and when they don’t, you can always escalate to the next level of inquiry.

Even if you re not a scientist or helping professional, parsimony can serve as a critical thinking safeguard.  Before accepting an explanation — whether about health, sports, relationships, or world events — it helps to ask:

• What is the simplest explanation that fits the facts?

• Have I ruled out the common causes?

• What assumptions am I making that perhaps I should revisit?

• What actual evidence supports this conclusion?  And perhaps most importantly, am I being objective (unbiased) when evaluating evidence?

In a world that rewards dramatic narratives, choosing simplicity can feel unsatisfying.  But simplicity is often closer to truth, and truth is always more valuable than throwing out a theory because it sounds more complex.

Final thoughts

In an age of endless information and instant conclusions, the ability to pause and ask, “What’s the simplest explanation?” may be one of the most important thinking skills we can teach ourselves — and our kids.  In order to do this we must remain objective, and steer away from confirmation bias.  Employing parsimony does not mean you are taking a shortcut because you are lazy, but instead supports the idea that most issues we face in life are ones we have seen before, and that they are often simple in nature once diagnosed properly.

drstankovich.com

The post Parsimony: In a World of Loud Explanations, Start With the Simple One appeared first on The Sports Doc Chalk Talk with Dr. Chris Stankovich.

The quote you just read is something you might hear me say to kids, especially on those perfect afternoons when the sun is warm, a light breeze drifts across the field, and teammates are laughing together for no reason other than the joy of being there.  As adults, we know these moments move by quickly, and with seemingly nothing important happening, it’s understandable why kids don’t stop and appreciate moments like this.  Ironically, these are precisely the moments that create our best, permanent memories!  They are the memories that define our childhood!  As the great Ferris Bueller once said, “Life moves pretty fast. If you don’t stop and look around once in awhile, you could miss it.”  

It’s the journey, not the end result

While it’s easy to get caught up in winning games and working toward championships, the youth sport experience is a far more comprehensive experience and much more valuable than that.  Kids gain so much from playing youth sports, in fact, it might just be the most developmental thing they do throughout childhood.  Learning life skills, problem-solving, being an important part of a group, and learning how to set and achieve goals are just a few of the important experiences kids enjoy while competing, but youth sports are even more than that.

When kids play on a team, they make new friends, learn about similarities and differences, and soon come to understand that when you are on a team, everyone pulls together.  And kids laugh — a lot — when they are out on a sports field and living their best days with other kids also growing up and having fun with sports.  When you watch a group of kids practicing their sport you have to ask yourself where else do kids have this kind of fun, interactive, shared experience with one another beyond sports?  Kids are moving their bodies, laughing, and supporting one another — you don’t witness these things in math class, at church, or during a music recital, but you do see these things happening at most sports fields across America.

When we focus too much on winning that next game/championship, we overlook this amazing time for kids and their formative years.  Just ask yourself right now how often you talk about memories from youth sports with your adult friends — the big base hit, the unexpected thunder storm, the touchdown pass in double coverage, and the soccer goal that somehow found the net.  Or maybe you talk about the fun bus rides, jokes in the locker room, or trips to get ice cream after the game.  What’s striking about these memories is that they’re rarely the ones you expected to keep.  Yet, in the end, those simple moments shared with friends often become our most cherished memories of childhood.

Final thoughts

Now it’s your turn!  Make sure to go out today and remind kids of how fun these days are, and how fast these days pass.  Yes, it really might be one the best day’s of their lives today, and there’s a good chance kids don’t know it — just how you didn’t know that day you huddled in the dugout with teammates laughing while it thunder stormed would be one of your best youth memories.  Yes, it really is the process, not the end goal, that is the best part of youth sports, and it’s our job as adults to regularly remind kids of these great times!

drstankovich.com

The post The Games We Forget, The Memories We Keep: What Youth Sports Are Really About appeared first on The Sports Doc Chalk Talk with Dr. Chris Stankovich.

Modern training vs. tried and true approaches

Look around, you might be surprised to see all the specialized sport training offered to kids these days.  Indoor training facilities and field houses are popping up everywhere, new technology is coming out all the time, and expert coaches are available for just about any sport your child plays.  Along with all of this comes a lot of “bells and whistles” in terms of data, spread sheets, video analysis, and professional feedback — but are kids getting better from all of this new stuff, or becoming bored and overwhelmed instead?

One unintended tradeoff from kids being overly-booked with specialized training is that fewer kids today simply go out and play — specifically pickup games.  While sport instruction is important, getting sport reps to build muscle-memory may be even more important, and herein lies the problem.  For many kids, the lessons they receive take the place of natural reps, and their skill acquisition and development suffers as a result.  The same is true for many parents who want to fast-forward their kid’s athletic success by seeking out expensive expert coaches, when often their kid would actually get better, faster, by simply playing his or her sport every day.

Take for an example the simple fact that most sports involve a ball of some kind — kids can throw, play catch, and shoot daily to improve accuracy and velocity, but how many kids actually do this?  Ask any great athlete about how much practice — including the mundane stuff — needs to happen daily in order to get really good, and you will soon learn that it’s every day!  Kids need to be encouraged to take into account how much they can do by themselves on a daily basis, including watching video, journaling, practicing in front of a mirror, and playing pickup games!  And the best part?  It’s all FREE!

It’s easy to see why increasingly more families chase the shiny objects by means of fancy training and legendary sport experts, but the greatest gains your child will ever make will be by his or her daily decisions.  How bad do you really want it?  There are ball fields and courts all around, friends to get to play pickup games, and countless exercises that can be done for free (i.e. pushups, sit ups, running, etc), and kids who take advantage of these offerings often pass up kids who only develop their game when working with a coach or going to a camp.  Yes, playing the game on a daily basis will provide kids the best chance to learn the game, develop muscle-memory, and build confidence, precisely the things that allow kids to reach their full potential.

Final thoughts

Sports training has certainly advanced in recent years, but there is still no substitute for kids working on their own, playing pick-up games, and getting in the reps.  An expert coach can offer great information, but if the kid does not go out and practice over and over, the odds of the kid mastering the skill he or she just learned is pretty small.  Sport skill acquisition comes from doing something repeatedly to the point where it becomes automatic, and this only happens by putting in the work — regardless of how many specialized camps and clinics your child attends.  There are no shortcuts, but kids who embrace the work will undoubtedly play to their highest levels.

drstankovich.com

The post Private Lessons vs. Playground Reps: Which Actually Makes Kids Better? appeared first on The Sports Doc Chalk Talk with Dr. Chris Stankovich.

Coaching up all kids

Coaching the best kids in youth sports is fun and enjoyable, especially since they give you the best chance of winning.  There usually isn’t a lot of coaching skill required to hand the best pitcher the ball to go pitch, or let your star running back get most of the carries in football.  The challenge for a coach is not just letting the star player excel, but getting every other kid on the team to buy in, focus, and give their best effort.  While some coaches ignore lesser kids and only play them when they have to, great youth sport coaches — like great teachers in the classroom — find ways to connect, motivate, and support all kids.  Is this easy to do?  Heck no!!  But coaches, like teachers, are expected to make these kinds of efforts, and are reminded of the huge difference they can make in a kid’s life for doing so.

When lesser kids are given attention, treated fairly, supported by teammates and coaches, and truly feel like a meaningful part of the team, it allows for group acceptance that can lead to increased self-confidence and future success.  Youth sport coaches can serve a far greater purpose than simply winning a league championship, they can serve as an instrumental force in a kid’s life that literally changes the trajectory of what the future holds — and not just in sports.  When kids begin to feel as though they can achieve something in sports (i.e. earn minutes of playing time), they often begin to allow that confidence to spill over in many other areas of life, including academic and social experiences.  Now that’s what coaching is all about!

Yes, every kid can most certainly be coached, just like every kid can be taught.  Adults in coaching and teaching jobs are in great positions of power, and their efforts to connect with kids lead to life changing experiences.  In fact, when you talk to adults and learn about their back story in life, you almost always hear about that great teacher or coach that made a difference.  Think about that the next time you look down the bench at the kids who don’t play much, but might just need that one moment to experience something special on the field — something so special it propels the kid into thinking “I can do it” about far more than scoring a soccer goal or getting a base hit.

There is no textbook to follow when coaching or teaching kids struggling to succeed, you simply have to care.  When we connect with kids in the classroom or sports field, we give them hope and a support system, and often that serves as the first spark of belief.  From there, the relationship must be nourished with ongoing attention, and reinforced whenever small gains are made.  Once this dynamic is in place, kids often take it from there and begin trying, bouncing back, and trying again.

Final thoughts

The primary role of a youth sport coach, similar to a classroom teacher, is to help kids believe in themselves so that they can put their best effort forward — regardless if it’s a soccer field or classroom.  Adults play a big part in this, as the efforts coaches and teachers make to help kids experience that “aha!” moment where they begin to believe they can do something is what it’s all about.  As the old saying goes, kids don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care…what a great reminder of what it’s really all about.

drstankovich.com

The post Coaching With Purpose: Developing Kids, Not Just Lineups appeared first on The Sports Doc Chalk Talk with Dr. Chris Stankovich.

Assessing stressors

One easy way to approach the stress you experience in life is to categorize your stressors into predictable vs random stressors.  With predictable stressors, we are afforded the opportunity to prepare for them in healthy and effective ways.  For example, if you make a daily commute that includes expected traffic, how can you prepare for this potential stress?  Perhaps leave earlier, take a different route, or maybe find something that puts you in a great mood (a fun podcast!) before facing the clogged traffic.  Much of the stress we experience in life is predictable, allowing us to get a head start on how we might respond — a big advantage when dealing with stress!  Other additional predictable stressors include the weather and the seasons (i.e. preparing for winter), bills due at the end of the month, maintenance costs with our car, and the fatigue we may experience at the end of a long work day.  None of these events are surprises, so we can get a head start on them by preparing ahead of time.

Random stressors, on the other hand, are near impossible to plan for and require a different approach.  Examples include a flat tire, an unexpected thunder storm, a broken furnace, or a computer glitch.  When we prepare for predictable stressors, we have more focus and energy to devote toward random stressors, providing for better coping responses as the cumulative effect of “everything piling up” simply does not happen.  For example, if you have managed the traffic jam and paid your bills on time, you are in a much better mental state to handle the unexpected — including surprise stressors like an unexpected injury or power outage at home.

Managing stress is always challenging, but if you can chip away at some of it by breaking down predictable and random stressors, doesn’t it make sense to do so?  Stress coping relies largely on perception, focus, predictability, and efficiency, and we become better in these areas when we break down our stressors accordingly.

Final thoughts

Often when we experience stress in our lives, it feels like it’s all coming in at the same time and with the same challenges.  Interestingly though, that is not the case, and that we actually experience both predictable and random stressors in our lives.  By better preparing for the predictable stressors we experience, it gives us more energy to devote to those random issues that pop up each day.  By exercising control over our stressors, we gain confidence, improve focus, and ultimately galvanize our resiliency — all qualities that allow us to use stress for life success!

drstankovich.com

The post Think Before You Cope: The Science of Choosing the Right Stress Response appeared first on The Sports Doc Chalk Talk with Dr. Chris Stankovich.

Most of us do not need a philosophy textbook to understand that statement.  As humans we possess an internal mechanism that signals when something feels off, even if we struggle to articulate it.  We may debate a position publicly, but internally experience a moment of clarity — where we recognize what is happening and that it is wrong.  The more interesting question is not whether we know the difference between right and wrong, but whether we live in alignment with what we already know.  Above all, how does this process impact our mental health?

The body often knows before the mind

Psychology research suggests that moral judgments are frequently intuitive and emotional before they are rational.  Social psychologist Jonathan Haidt’s work on moral intuition proposes that we often “feel” a moral reaction first and then construct reasoning afterward to justify it.  Haidt’s theory explains why when we know something is wrong yet do not act accordingly, moral discomfort often shows up with physical symptoms including:

• A tightening in the chest
• Stomach butterflies
• Restlessness
• Irritability
• A subtle urge to disengage, including the conversation, venue, and even the people in your company

These are not random sensations, but are internal signals.  The nervous system reacts quickly to perceived unfairness, dishonesty, or harm. The mind then works to interpret what the body has already registered.  In essence, this means is that our body reacts faster (the physiological symptoms) than we can cognitively interpret (attach value to) an event.

Knowing is common, but congruence is rare

Where things become complicated it is not in recognition — it is in how we respond to things.  Psychological congruence refers to alignment between:

• What we believe (including our personal values, morals, informal and formal education).
• What our internal signals tell us (how we feel — calm, excited, bothered, disturbed?).
• What we actually choose to do (continue to participate, or disengage and/or try and rectify a situation).

When those three are aligned, there is psychological steadiness, clear thinking, less defensiveness, and a feeling of being grounded. Problems arise when we are not congruent – this is when internal tension is experienced

In cases of misalignment, we might:

• Laugh at something that crossed a line, rather than call out that the action was uncalled for and/or unfair.
• Stay silent when someone is mistreated, including watching passively rather than speaking up or stopping the situation.
• Publicly defend what privately feels wrong, like defending the indefensible simple because you like the person or political party.
• Rationalize behavior we would condemn in someone else by tamping down the seriousness or significance of the event.

That internal tension has a name: cognitive dissonance.  Festinger’s theory of cognitive dissonance describes the discomfort that arises when our beliefs and behaviors conflict.  In order to reduce that discomfort, we often change the story rather than change the behavior.  Examples of self-talk, or actual things that we say to others, include:

“It’s not that serious.”
“Everyone does it.”
“It’s not my place.”
“I don’t want to create conflict.”

These explanations “work” in the short-term by reducing discomfort, but over time, repeated misalignment dulls the internal alarm system.  Generally speaking, most people do not abandon their moral framework overnight, but instead adjust it incrementally.

If we know something is wrong, why don’t we act?  Because alignment often carries risk, including social rejection from a group, possible verbal/physical conflict, loss of status/identity within a group, potential isolation, and general discomfort.  Simply put, silence is easier, agreement is safer, and rationalization is smoother.  The problem, however, is that our long-term mental health is strongly tied to internal consistency.  Research in self-determination theory and authenticity suggests that people who live in alignment with their core values experience greater well-being and lower internal stress.

The pause matters…

Not every disagreement is moral, as many issues are nuanced. But there are moments when something inside you pauses and says, “This isn’t right.”  That pause is your body’s way of warning you of misalignment, and that something is potentially wrong and worth paying attention to rather than just going along.  In order to align, you may need to make a tough decision, including examples like:

• Refusing to participate, which may include leaving a particular organization or group.
• Declining to endorse, including issues and individuals supported by friends, family, and/or colleagues.
• Speaking calmly instead of reacting defensively, offering information that may upset and disturb important people in your life
• Choosing not to justify what feels wrong — holding on to your convictions, regardless the cost with respect to relationships and opportunities.

Final thoughts

Right is right.  Wrong is wrong.  We are our best when accept what we know to be true, as this congruence and alignment is best for our mental health.  Unfortunately, there are variables that often get in the way — including expectations, the groups we belong to, and the alternatives we face if we don’t go along with what our tribe expects.  Our bodies tell us directly through physiological symptoms that something isn’t morally right, but do we always listen?  Or is it better to tamp down our morals in order to remain true to a group?

drstankovich.com

The post The Psychology of Moral Compromise: The Slow Drift From Right to Rationalized appeared first on The Sports Doc Chalk Talk with Dr. Chris Stankovich.

Winning on the margins…

When I talk to athletes and look for ways to maximize abilities, we look for ways to beat the competition.  Occasionally an athlete’s natural strengths are good enough, but more times than not the athlete has to find unique approaches to make up for differences.  Specific targets we discuss are attitude, effort, and a willingness to do what others won’t do.  You might not be the strongest or fastest, but how do you condition your mind to play through pain and discomfort?  To quickly bounce back from adversity?  Or to out-endurance the competition?

Outside of sports, the rest of us can also benefit from winning on the margins in similar ways.  Attitude and effort still count, as do all the “little things” like being early to work and prepared, keeping up with job responsibilities and going above and beyond, and adding important education and related experiences to your resume to stay ahead of the competition.  Additional “margin” ideas including networking, attending conferences, and offering genuine appreciation toward others who have helped you along the way.  If you want to emerge from the competition, you must do things different than the competition — in sports and in life.

As you can see, “winning on the margins” highlights two key ideas: first, that success is often shaped by seemingly small factors—such as showing up with the right mindset and preparation—and second, that we all have room to grow in these areas, which can give us a meaningful edge over the competition.  This is important, inspiring news — especially for people who tend to fall down the trap of self-doom by assuming that they can never make up for differences in natural abilities possessed by the competition.

Do a self-audit and see how you stack up.  Are you doing the little things?  The things that others won’t do?  Future growth and success is dependent on the efforts that we make, and often the difference between individuals simply has to do with who wants it more?

Final thoughts

Statistics and expectations can only go so far when it comes to predicting outcomes, and individuals (in sports and life) who take care of all the little things are often surprised when they witness firsthand just how much those efforts matter.  Outworking and outsmarting the competition can go a long way toward success, and individuals who pay attention to small details can attest to the importance of things like attitude, effort, and a commitment toward success.  In life, it’s easy to come up with all the reasons why you can’t, but if you are interested in learning how you can, then be sure to win on the margins in life.

drstankovich.com

The post How to Win Without Being the Strongest, Fastest, or Smartest appeared first on The Sports Doc Chalk Talk with Dr. Chris Stankovich.

This past weekend legendary USA skier Lindsey Vonn experienced an unfortunate accident, essentially ending her competitive skiing career.  Vonn competed having just recently torn her ACL, an admirable — yet questionable — decision in hindsight.  While millions of Americans cheered on Vonn to do the impossible, others wondered if this was a safe decision?  Logically, the answer is ‘no,’ but athletes — especially elite athletes — don’t always think rationally.  Why do some athletes avoid all warning signs and instead choose to compete, regardless of the cost?  Sport psychology studies help us better understand this unique phenomena, and the deeper factors that leave some athletes vulnerable to questionable (and potentially dangerous) decisions.

The mental makeup of athletes

Robert Weinberg, in his text Foundations of Sport & Exercise Psychology, found that high-level athletes may accept significantly greater physical risk than non-athletes because the psychological rewards of winning or performing at a peak can outweigh the perceived cost of injury — even severe injury or death.  Factors associated with risk level acceptance include:

• The more an athlete’s identity and self-esteem are tied to performance outcomes,

• The more likely they are to “normalize” severe risk,

• And the more likely they are to override pain, injury cues, and danger signals in pursuit of winning.

One survey in particular asked:  Would you accept a serious injury (or even death) if it meant achieving your competitive dream?

When examining the results from the survey, a non-trivial percentage of elite competitors (higher than the general population) responded that they would accept serious injury/death — not because they want to die, but because the psychological value of achievement outweighs avoidance of risk in their internal hierarchy.  Drilling deeper, an athlete’s motivation interacts with perceived risk, and the greater the athletic identity, the more willing an athlete will be to endure danger.  The idea is that the same drive that pushes someone to train at elite levels can also make them less responsive to danger cues and more likely to rationalize risk as necessary.

In cases like Lindsey Vonn or other high-risk sport athletes:

• The athlete has spent decades shaping a personal identity around sport performance.

• The athlete sees competing (even injured) as meaningful in a way most people don’t experience.

• The athlete’s internal reward system is wired to prioritize achievement over risk avoidance.

Because of all this, elite athletes can show distorted risk tolerance where the psychological value of peak performance and victory can override the typical self-preservation instinct, even when the odds are severe.

Final thoughts

Lindsey Vonn is not the first elite athlete, nor will she be the last, to compete while likely being advised to take a break and continue with rehabilitation.  In fact, in combat sports we regularly see boxers and MMA fighters trying to get back in the ring when their corner pleads with them not to — or forfeits the fight out of safety concerns for their athlete.  Athletes become their identity, and competing at the highest level is what they work toward, making it understandable why they will often look past serious dangers and concerns.  It is for these reasons that yes, often those around an elite athlete have to bring logic and concern to a discussion that is filled with persoanl identity, unwavering motivation, and raw human emotion.

drstankovich.com

The post Do Athletes Need Protection from Their Own Minds? Lessons from Lindsey Vonn appeared first on The Sports Doc Chalk Talk with Dr. Chris Stankovich.

Video games & mental health

Video games have changed a lot since you were a kid, as the old Atari joystick has been replaced by state-of-the-art games that allow for online play.  While video game types range from sports games to fantasy to combat (and everything in between), today’s focus will be on the sheer quantity of hours kids play video games, and not the type of games they play.  So, what can be learned from recent research when it comes to kids and the amount of time they spend playing video games?  We know that when kids sit stationary for hours on end that they are not exercising, outside in fresh air, socializing in person with friends, or learning life skills that come about by living life!

Moderate gaming, defined as playing < 2 hours a day, does not appear to have many negative effects impacting development and mental health, and can actually help with relaxation and stress relief.  Excessive gaming of 4 hours or more per day does correlate with a number of unwanted outcomes, including the following:

• Attention problems
• Mood disturbances
• Academic problems
• Sleep deficits
• Physical fitness issues
• Increased symptoms of depression and anxiety
• Lower life satisfaction
• Social withdrawal
• General irritability, especially when no longer able to play video games

It is important to note that the findings presented are from correlational, not causal, research.  What that means is that while we might suspect that chronic video game playing causes things like depression, a correlation can also mean that kids struggling with depression might be more inclined to play video games compared to kids who are not experiencing depression.  While cause-effect relationships are still being tested, these correlations are still important and help us better understand how video gaming impacts kids, especially along the lines of growth, development, and mental health.

Kids game today for a variety of reasons, including first and foremost that video games are generally fun to play.  Additional reasons include the ease in playing (no need to go to an arcade, just turn on your system at home), the connection with others (online play is really fun for kids), and the challenges many games present (it can take weeks, or even months, to finish a game).  Adding it all up, if you were a kid today and could turn on an amazing video game system, go online with friends, and continue playing until the cows come home wouldn’t you do it, too?!

As a mental health clinician, I don’t blame kids for wanting to play, especially in those moments where they are relaxing around the house and the system is sitting there in front of them.  I get it, it’s tempting, and it sure beats boredom.  For parents, I also understand why many seem to look the other way, or lose track of how many hours their kids play video games — feelings of reassurance are quickly established when parents don’t have to worry about their kids being out late, drinking, or doing other ill-advised things.  How bad could it be for my kid to be home playing online video games with friends, right?!

Again, for kids that play in moderation studies have not found anything too alarming — yet.  But many kids play well beyond and hour or so a day, sometimes 5, 10, or even more hours in a given day!  It is easy to lose sight of how much time kids devote to their gaming as parents are busy and doing their own things, while their kids gaming are usually in another part of the house, relatively quiet, and seemingly not doing anything at all that would be considered “harmful.”  It’s like a perfect storm, but really, it isn’t.

Final thoughts

Issues that flow from video gaming are often difficult to detect, especially because the activity itself is not nearly as alarming as catching your kid drinking or using illegal drugs.  The problems that kids experience, however, can be quite serious — especially when examining mental health.  While moderate video gaming appears to be fine, many kids go well beyond an hour or so a day, leaving themselves vulnerable to a host of psychosocial issues.  Chronic gaming can quickly become a problem, with the isolation leading to mental health concerns, as well as social and physical issues.

drstankovich.com

The post Video Games, Mental Health, and Human Development: Key Findings for Kids appeared first on The Sports Doc Chalk Talk with Dr. Chris Stankovich.

Breaking down cognitive dissonance 

When we experience cognitive dissonance, it often manifests in anxiety, anger, defensiveness, confusion, shame, and a threat to our ego.  This discomfort becomes even more unbearable when trying to understand and explain things that are public, our identity is involved, and the information is morally disturbing.  You might think about how uncomfortable it is when we learn of a favorite athlete or celebrity who is found to have broken the law, harmed someone, or committed a serious crime.  Do you accept reality in situations like this, or is your first (and only?) move to go on the defensive and ignore, deflect, or flat out deny what we know to be true?

The best answer, of course, is to simply admit you were wrong, or had misjudged the person.  When we do this, it frees our mind and leads to better mental health.  On the other hand, by doubling-down we may gain temporary psychological relief, but the dissonance remains.  In these cases we often employ the following defense strategies to tamp down our unrest:

• Denial.  Can this incident be completely ignored, like it never happened?
• Minimization.  Thinking that it’s not as bad as being reported, and that people are overreacting.
• Source attacks.  The media is biased, or the source has been corrupted.
• Whataboutism.  Pretty straightforward — instead of processing what happened, it becomes easier to simply point toward similar faults in others.
• Moral licensing.  Using previous good gestures to shield from the current negative accusation.
• Conspiracy thinking.  Simply slinging stuff against the wall, going down rabbit holes in an attempt to justify reality with some kind of deep conspiracy.

Interestingly, studies have shown that people often know when they are experiencing cognitive dissonance and using defense strategies, yet they still suppress those feelings because the social cost feels too high, they fear losing belonging to a group, and/or they do not see a safe alternative.

Sometimes in life cognitive dissonance is experienced in funny, harmless situations — like if you see your likeable car salesman who works for one car company, drive home in a car from a different company.  While you might second-guess your desire to purchase a car from him as he appears disingenuous, this example is not nearly as serious as someone you know well being found to have stolen money from work, or been caught having an extra-marital affair.  The point is that while cognitive dissonance can range in significance and severity, we still use the same general approaches to minimize dissonance, and regain comfort and stability.

The best advice?  Ward off cognitive dissonance by following reality, facts, and truth.  Accept that people are fallible, and that even our most favorite people will make mistakes — sometimes serious mistakes.  It is also important to be realistic with our own impression management behaviors by realizing that we often build people up when we like them, sometimes to unrealistic standards and expectations.  Behaviors that should be avoided include flat-out denial without investigation and critical thought, re-calibrating your morality scale in accordance with an unwanted act, or immediately going to whataboutism by trying to find something similarly bad in someone else.

Final thoughts

When you see someone mentally struggling to square up two conflicting things, there’s a good chance cognitive dissonance is at play.  Psychologists have discovered this unique quirk about humans that allows for irrational thinking to take the place of logic and perception, especially when we run into conflicts relating to people and institutions we admire.  Often the work needed to tamp down the anxiety experienced with cognitive dissonance requires us to do unorthodox things, including denial and attacking the source, but these coping efforts are not needed when we work hard to accept reality.

drstankovich.com

The post Truth vs. Comfort: How Cognitive Dissonance Shapes Our Choices appeared first on The Sports Doc Chalk Talk with Dr. Chris Stankovich.