10 Things You Don't Know About

You probably do not fully understand them as you think

1. Your view of yourself is distorted.

Your "identity" lay before you opened an open book. Just look inside and read: who you are, what you like and dislike, your hopes and fears; they are all there, ready to be understood. This idea is popular but probably completely false! Psychological research shows that we have no right to achieve what we are. When we try to measure ourselves accurately, we are trying to get around the fog.

Princeton University psychologist Emily Pronin, who specializes in self-observation and decision-making, calls the erroneous notion of the right to "self-deception." Our attitude is distorted, but we are not aware of it. Because of this, our self-esteem has nothing to do with our actions. For example, we can be absolutely sure that we are compassionate and kind but still pass a homeless person on a cold day.

The reason for this distorted view is simple, according to Prronin. Because we do not want to be stubborn, self-assuming, or self-righteous, we do not think that we are better than they. As evidence, he points to our differing views of ourselves and others. We have no problem knowing how the prejudice we work with in our office affects someone else. But we don't think we can behave in the same way: because we intend to be morally upright, it has never occurred to us that we, too, could be discriminated against.

Pronin has tested his thesis on several tests. Among other things, he asked his study participants to complete tests that included the same face and personal statements that could be considered for their social intelligence. Afterwards, some of them were told they had failed and were asked to report weaknesses in the testing process. Although the views of these subjects were probably biased (not only did they appear to have failed the test, they were also asked to analyze it), the majority of participants said their testing was not intentional. It was exactly like judging works of art, although the subjects who used the bias strategy to assess the quality of the paintings still believed that their judgment was moderate. Pronin argues that we were made to hide our will.

Is the word "inside" just a good metaphor? Could it be that we are not looking at ourselves, as the Latin root of the word suggests, but producing a positive image that denies the failure we all have? Self-help studies have revealed much evidence of this conclusion. Although we think we are self-examining, our image is affected by processes that remain ignorant.

2. Your motives are often a complete mystery to you.

How well do people know? In answer to this question, researchers are faced with the following dilemma: to test a person's self-esteem, a person will need to know who that person really is. Researchers use a variety of methods to answer such questions. For example, they compared the self-assessment of test subjects and subject behavior in laboratory or everyday life situations. They may also ask other people, such as relatives or friends, to check the material. They also tested the tendency to faint using special methods.

To measure the unconscious tendency, psychologists can use a method known as the implicit association test (IAT), developed in the 1990s by Anthony Greenwald of the University of Washington and colleagues, to find hidden methods. Since then, many species have been designed to test anxiety, irrationality, and entertainment, among other things. This approach assumes that the reactions that occur at that time do not need to be demonstrated; as a result, the ignorant parts of personality come to the fore.

Significantly, researchers want to find out how closely related words are related to certain ideas. For example, study participants were asked to press a key as quickly as possible when a word describing an element such as mixing (say, “talking” or “powerful”) appears on the screen. They are also asked to press the same key as soon as they see a word on the related screen (like their name). They had to press a different key as soon as the feature was introduced (say, “silent” or “canceled”) or when the word touched someone else. Of course, keywords and key combinations have been changed during multiple test operations. If the reaction was immediate when the word associated with the participant followed the word "extroverted," for example, it was thought that the mixture may be related to the image of the person.

Such “clear” independent concepts are usually only related to the human examination found in the questions. The image conveyed by humans in the study has nothing to do with their immediate reaction to lightning. And a person's self-consciousness often predicts his or her true behavior, especially when fear or pleasure is involved. On the other hand, questionnaires provide better information about such factors as conscience or openness to new experiences. Psychologist Mitja Back of the University of Münster in Germany explains that the mechanisms designed to arouse spontaneous reactions express spontaneous or normal aspects of our personality. Conscience and curiosity, on the other hand, require a certain amount of thinking and can therefore be easily tested by self-consciousness.

3. Appearance tells people a lot about you.

Numerous studies show that people around us and loved ones often see us as better than we really are. As psychologist Simine Vazire of the University of California, Davis has pointed out, two conditions in particular can make others see who we really are: First, when they are able to "learn" an element from external factors and, second, when an element has a clear positive valence or negative (wisdom and art are obviously attractive, for example; dishonesty and arrogance are nothing). Our self-examination may be quite similar to that of others when it comes to neutrality.

The things that are most readable to others are those that have a profound effect on our conduct. For example, people who naturally love each other like to talk and seek company; insecurity is often seen in behaviors such as shaking hands or obstructing one's viewing. In contrast, anger is often internal, which is not in line with human limitations.

Often we do not see the effects we have on others because we simply do not see our facial expressions, gestures, and gestures. I have no idea if my blinking eyes indicate pressure or if a drop in my posture indicates how heavy something is. Because it is so difficult to examine ourselves, we must rely on the perceptions of others, especially those who know us well. It is difficult to know who we are unless others tell us how we affect them.

4. Getting a certain distance can help you to know yourself better.

Keeping a diary, pausing to reflect on and evaluate conversations with others is a long tradition, but the fact that these methods enable us to get to know them is hard to say. In fact, sometimes doing the opposite - like quitting - is very helpful because it provides a certain distance. In 2013 Erika Carlson, now a University of Toronto, reviewed the literature on how mindfulness meditation improves one's self-esteem. He helps, he noted, by overcoming two major obstacles: distorted thinking and the protection of the ego. Thinking practice teaches us to let our thoughts flow and to associate with them as little as possible. Thoughts are, after all, "thoughts only" and not absolute truth. Usually, going out of your way this way and just looking at what the mind is doing encourages clarity.

Understanding our motives can help us to improve our emotional well-being. Oliver C. Schultheiss of Friedrich-Alexander University of Erlangen-Nürnberg in Germany has shown that our sense of well-being tends to grow as our goals and objectives become more or less intertwined. For example, we should not enslave the work that gives us money and energy if these goals are not so important to us. But how do we reach such an agreement? By thinking, for example. Try to imagine, as clearly as possible, what things would be like if your sincere desire came true. Can it really make you happy? Often we succumb to the temptation to aim too high without regard for all the steps and effort needed to achieve ambitions.

5. We too often think that we are better than something we are.

Do you know the effect of Dunning Kruger? It persists that the less people do well, the less they know about their inability to work. The result is named after David Dunning of the University of Michigan and Justin Kruger of New York University.

Dunning and Kruger presented their experimental studies to a series of cognitive tasks and asked them to rate how well they did. Best of all, 25 percent of participants viewed their performance in a similar way; only some people look down on themselves. A quarter of subjects who got high on exams missed the mark, poorly improving their cognitive skills. Could it be that pride and failure are two sides of the same coin?

As researchers emphasize, their work highlights a common facet of self-esteem: each of us tends to dwell on our own imperfections. According to psychologist Adrian Furnham of University College London, the statistical correlation between visual and real IQ is, on average, only 0.16 - a very poor show, to put it mildly. By comparison, the correlation between height and gender is about 0.7.

So why is the gap between what is going to happen and real work so cheap? Are we not all interested in self-examination? It can certainly save a great deal of wasteful effort and perhaps even a little embarrassment. The answer, it seems, is that moderate inflation has some benefits. According to reviews by psychologists Shelley Taylor of the University of California, Los Angeles, and Jonathan Brown of the University of Washington, yellow glasses often enhance our sense of well-being and performance. On the other hand, people who suffer from depression tend to have vicious facts about themselves. Self-control seems to help us cope with the ups and downs of daily life.

6. People who demolish themselves often face challenges.

While most of our time has extremely positive views of their honesty or ingenuity, some people suffer from the opposite distortion: their humiliation and their efforts. Dealing with childhood abuse and humiliation, often associated with violence and abuse, can lead to this kind of neglect - which can also limit what people can achieve, leading to insecurity, despair and suicidal thoughts.

It would seem logical to think that only those who have a negative image of themselves are the ones who want to pay more. But as psychologists working with William Swann of the University of Texas at Austin discovered, many skeptics seek confirmation of their distorted self-image. Swann described the practice in a study of marital satisfaction. Ask the couple about their strengths and weaknesses, the ways in which they feel supported and valued by their partners, and the satisfaction of marriage. As expected, those who had a more positive outlook on themselves found greater satisfaction in their relationships when they received much praise and recognition from their other half. But those who had a habit of choosing from them felt secure in their marriage when their mates expressed their negative image to them. They did not ask for respect or information. On the contrary, they wanted to hear their own opinion: "You can't work."

Swann based his view on the findings. The idea is that we want others to see us as we see ourselves. In some cases, people actually provoke others to a negative reaction to their efforts to prove their worth. This behavior is not sounds. They are signs of a desire for unity: when others respond to us in a way that guarantees our independence, the world is as it should be.

Likewise, people who see themselves as failures will do their best not to fail, contributing too much to their own plans. They will miss meetings, often neglecting to do their assigned work and slipping into hot water with the manager. Swann's approach contradicts Dunning and Kruger's view of overestimation. But both camps are good: hyperinflated egos are very common, but abnormal images are rare.

7. You deceive yourself unknowingly.

According to one influential theory, our tendency to deceive ourselves is rooted in our desire to please others. In order to appear credible, we must personally believe in our abilities and be honest. Supporting this view is to see that successful fraudsters often fill themselves up. Good marketers, for example, generate contagious enthusiasm; on the other hand, those who are skeptical are generally not good at speaking well. Lab research also supports. In some tests, participants are paid if, in an interview, they can say with certainty that they have requested an IQ test. The more effort the baptismal candidates put into their practice, the more they themselves believe they have a higher IQ, even though their actual results were less or less.

Our self-deception has been shown to change. We often adapt to new circumstances and circumstances. This flexibility was demonstrated by Steven A. Sloman of Brown University and colleagues. Their subjects were asked to move the cursor to a computer screen as quickly as possible. When participants are told that the extraordinary skill in the work shows high ingenuity, they immediately focus on the task and perform better. They did not actually think they had worked harder - which researchers interpreted as evidence of successful self-deception. On the other hand, if the experimental subjects were convinced that only dimwits perform well in such foolish tasks, their performance is fully accelerated.

But is it possible to deceive ourselves? Is there anything we can know about ourselves without knowing it? Absolutely! Test evidence involves the following research formats: Subjects are played on audiocassettes, including their own, and are asked to sign whether they feel it. The level of recognition varies depending on the clarity of the audiotapes and the size of the background sound. When brain waves are measured simultaneously, certain signals in the reading indicate with certainty whether participants have heard their voice.

Many people are somewhat shy about hearing their voice. In a previous study, Ruben Gur of the University of Pennsylvania and Harold Sackeim of Columbia University used the latter, comparing experimental study statements with their brain function. Look, look, the work always showed, "That's me!" with the exception of the titles ’which clearly identify the word as theirs. In addition, if investigators threatened to take part in participants - say, by telling them they had a bad experience in another (less important) test - they would not know much about their voice. In any case, their brain waves tell a real story.

In a recent study, researchers tested self-assessment tests designed to help students test their knowledge to fill vacancies. Here subjects were asked to complete as many activities as possible within the allotted time. Given that the purpose of the practice test is to provide students with the information they need, it is unreasonable for them to cheat; on the contrary, points made by artificial intelligence could have led them to let their studies slip. Those who have tried to improve their points by going too far in the allotted time will only hurt themselves.

But many volunteers do just that. Unknowingly, they wanted to look good. Therefore, the fraudsters described their run over time saying they were distracted and wanted to make up for lost seconds. Or they claim that their frustrating results were close to "their true power". Such explanations, according to researchers, confuse cause and effect, with people who think negatively, “Intelligent people tend to do better in tests. So if I apply my test points by simply taking longer than allowed, I am also one of the smart ones, ”on the other hand, people work tirelessly when they are told that doing well shows a high risk of developing schizophrenia. Investigators call this practice self-examination fraudulent.

8. "Personally" is right for you.

Most people believe that it has a solid core value, itself. Their identity is actually evidenced largely by their moral values ​​and stability; some of your preferences may change, but the reality is always the same. Rebecca Schlegel and Joshua Hicks, both from Texas A&M University, and colleagues have examined how people’s perception of their true personality affects their own self-satisfaction. Researchers asked test subjects to keep a diary in their daily lives. Participants felt very isolated when they did something morally questionable: they felt uncertain about who they really were while being dishonest or selfish. The test also confirmed the connection between the person and the behavior. When experimental subjects are reminded of past sins, their self-assurance matters.

George Newman and Joshua Knobe, both of Yale University, found that people thought that people had a truly good personality. Provide them with lessons for dishonest, racist, and so on. Participants often specify how to behave in lessons caused by environmental factors such as difficult childhood - the actual context of these people should be different. This work demonstrates our tendency to think that, in their hearts, people are attracted to what is good and right.

One of Newman and Knobe's studies involved “Mark,” a devout Christian who was nevertheless attracted to men. Investigators want to understand how participants viewed Mark's problem. In conservative experimental studies, Mark’s “real self” was not gay; they recommend resisting such temptations. Those with an open mind think he should get out of the closet. However, when Mark is portrayed as a nationalist who thinks homosexuality is good but has negative feelings when he thinks of homosexuals, those who are old-fashioned are quick to point to this hesitation as Mark's real evidence; the free thinkers see it as evidence of a lack of understanding or complexity. In other words, what we call the essence of another person's personality is actually based on principles we personally love. "Real identity" appears to be moral.

The belief that the real title is moral probably explains why people link personal development over their “personal” mistakes. Apparently we are doing this diligently to improve our self-examination. Anne E. Wilson of Wilfrid Laurier University in Ontario and Michael Ross of the University of Waterloo in Ontario have shown in several studies that we tend to give more negative traits to someone we have in the past — which makes us look better here and now. According to Wilson and Ross, people going backwards are getting worse and worse. While progress and change are part of the normal process of maturity, it seems reasonable to believe that in time, man has become what he really is.

Assuming we have a strong foundation ownership reduces the complexity of a country that is constantly flowing. The people around us play many different roles, act inconsistently and at the same time continue to progress. It is comforting to think that our friends Tom and Sarah will be exactly the same tomorrow as they are today and that they are actually good people - whether that view is correct.

Can life without believing in a real person ever be imagined? Researchers have explored this question by comparing different cultures. Self-belief is widespread in many parts of the world. Another exception is Buddhism, which preaches the absence of a stable personality. Expected Buddhist monks are taught to see through the deceptive character of the ego - it is constantly evolving and completely shaped.

Nina Strohminger of the University of Pennsylvania and colleagues want to know how this view affects the fear of death of those who hold it. They gave a series of questions and situations to 200 Tibetans and 60 Buddhist monks. They compared the results with those of Christians and non-Christians in the U.S., and those with Hindus (who, as Christians, believe that the origin of the soul, or atman, gives people their identity). The common image of Buddhists is that they are deeply free, completely “unselfish”. However the less the Tibetan monks believed in a stable internal interior, the more they would fear death. In addition, they were extremely selfish in a state of mind where discarding a particular drug could extend another person's life. About three quarters of the nuns decided to oppose the belief, which was much higher than the Americans or the Hindus. Selfish, fearful Buddhists? In one paper, Strohminger and his colleagues call the personal reality a "phantasm of hope," although it may be helpful. In any case, it's hard to shake.

9. People who lack self-confidence tend to be morally upright.

Insecurity is often thought of as a relapse, but it is not necessarily a bad thing at all. People who feel insecure about their good habits often try to justify themselves. Those who are unsure of their generosity, for example, are more likely to donate money for a good cause. This behavior can be aggravated by giving the subjects a negative response - for example, "According to our tests, you are less helpful and more cooperative than usual." People do not like to hear those judgments and end up feeding the donation box.

Drazen Prelec, a psychologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, explains his findings on the concept of self-expression: what an action says about me is often more important than the real purpose of the action. More and more people are clinging to food because they do not want to appear to have a weak appetite. On the other hand, it has been strongly established that those who are sure to be generous, intelligent, or friendly make little effort to prove it. Overconfidence creates a sense of inadequacy and widens the gap between those who think about themselves. Therefore, those who think that they know themselves well tend to know themselves better than they do.

10. If you consider yourself flexible, you will do much better.

People's own ideas about who they are are influencing their behavior. Self-identification can easily be a prophecy that fulfills itself. Carol Dweck of Stanford University spent a lot of time researching such results. His take: if we look at a feature as flexibility, we tend to work on it more. On the other hand, if we consider a factor such as IQ or strength to be consistent and natural, there is nothing we can do about it.

In Dweck's study of students, men and women, parents and teachers, he gleaned a basic principle: people with a strong sense of self-perception take it seriously. They see it as evidence of their limitations and are afraid of it; fear of failure, meanwhile, can also cause failure. On the contrary, those who understand that a certain talent can be developed accept the challenge as an invitation to do better in the future. Dweck therefore recommends an attitude aimed at personal growth. If in doubt, we should assume that there is something we can learn and that we can improve and grow.

But even people with a strong sense of independence are not correct in every aspect of their personality. According to psychologist Andreas Steimer of the University of Heidelberg in Germany, or people who say that their strengths are completely strong, they often believe that they will soon overcome their weaknesses. If we try to figure out what our personality will look like in a few years, we will be relying on ideas such as: “Understanding level and clear focus will still be part of who I am, and I may have less confidence. ”

All in all, we tend to view our character as more flexible, perhaps because these tests provide security and guidance. We want to see our features and preferences in order to act accordingly. In the final analysis, the image we create for ourselves is a form of refuge in a ever-changing world.

And the moral of the story? According to researchers, self-awareness is far more difficult to detect than previously thought. Modern psychology has raised the question of whether we can know for sure. It has made it clear that the title is not the “thing” but rather the process of constantly adapting to changing circumstances. And the fact that we often see ourselves as more capable, moral, and stable than we really are helps us to adapt.