The Struggle of Giving Up Personal Goals

[Keit]

I found a study today (unfortunately don't have access to the full version) that talks about physiological and cognitive consequences of wanting to abandon a goal. It appears to jeopardize individual's thinking, so I wonder if it makes a person a half-wit, even if temporarily, when it comes to this specific topic, so networking about it and getting an objective feedback is recommended. And also, wonder if it has any similarities on a cognitive level to the process of "lying to self"and "believing a lie", that also makes a person a half-wit and unable to assess reality in a proper way.

_http://psp.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/08/23/0146167213500151.abstract

The Struggle of Giving Up Personal Goals
Affective, Physiological, and Cognitive Consequences of an Action Crisis

Abstract

A critical phase in goal striving occurs when setbacks accumulate and goal disengagement becomes an issue. This critical phase is conceptualized as an action crisis and assumed to be characterized by an intrapsychic conflict in which the individual becomes torn between further goal pursuit and goal disengagement. Our theorizing converges with Klinger’s conceptualization of goal disengagement as a process, rather than a discrete event. Two longitudinal field studies tested and found support for the hypothesis that an action crisis not only compromises an individual’s psychological and physiological well-being, but also dampens the cognitive evaluation of the respective goal. In Study 3, marathon runners experiencing an action crisis in their goal of running marathons showed a stronger cortisol secretion and a lower performance in the race 2 weeks later. Results are interpreted in terms of action-phase–specific mindsets with a focus on self-regulatory processes in goal disengagement.

 

[darksai]

The Struggle of Giving Up Personal Goals
Affective, Physiological, and Cognitive Consequences of an Action Crisis

Abstract

Our theorizing converges with Klinger’s conceptualization of goal disengagement as a process, rather than a discrete event. .

This really stood out to me. It suggests that by the time conscious "decision" is made to give up, the pursuit of the original goal has already ended in the practical sense, for whatever reason. What I think that happens in most cases, is that at that moment the individual's personal narrative about the goal is rewritten to emphasize why they "would" (instead of "might") have been better off not starting in the first place, that certain difficulties "made it impossible" (instead of recognizing them as part and parcel of their goal), and other similar things. It echoes Gurdjieff when he says that the Aim of the Work must be remembered always and in every action as much as possible.

 

[Buddy]

I found a study today (unfortunately don't have access to the full version) that talks about physiological and cognitive consequences of wanting to abandon a goal.

I agree with you concerning what it talks about.

It appears to jeopardize individual's thinking, so I wonder if it makes a person a half-wit, even if temporarily, when it comes to this specific topic...

Well, with the marathon runner in mind, if he has lost his singlemindedness of purpose, then I suppose one way to describe him might be as a 'half-wit' WRT marathon running, but we might also ask how we would evaluate such a (temporary?) state in terms of it being a positive or negative thing?

...also, wonder if it has any similarities on a cognitive level to the process of "lying to self"and "believing a lie", that also makes a person a half-wit...

I suppose we would also need to know the reasons the marathon runner gives for choosing the activity and what triggered his action crisis?

...and unable to assess reality in a proper way.

What does the phrase "...in a proper way" refer to?

Here's a few thoughts I had from reading the abstract:

_http://psp.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/08/23/0146167213500151.abstract

The Struggle of Giving Up Personal Goals
Affective, Physiological, and Cognitive Consequences of an Action Crisis

Abstract

A critical phase in goal striving occurs when setbacks accumulate and goal disengagement becomes an issue.

I'm following so far.

_http://psp.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/08/23/0146167213500151.abstract

This critical phase is conceptualized as an action crisis and assumed to be characterized by an intrapsychic conflict in which the individual becomes torn between further goal pursuit and goal disengagement.

Like 'splitting' and with cognitive dissonance now associated with an activity for which he was previously "all in."

_http://psp.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/08/23/0146167213500151.abstract

Our theorizing converges with Klinger’s conceptualization of goal disengagement as a process, rather than a discrete event.

I support any attempt to see 'process' in preference to 'a discrete event.'

_http://psp.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/08/23/0146167213500151.abstract

Two longitudinal field studies tested and found support for the hypothesis that an action crisis not only compromises an individual’s psychological and physiological well-being, but also dampens the cognitive evaluation of the respective goal.

OK... ...?

_http://psp.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/08/23/0146167213500151.abstract

In Study 3, marathon runners experiencing an action crisis in their goal of running marathons showed a stronger cortisol secretion and a lower performance in the race 2 weeks later.

Well, elevated cortisol secretion is generally interpreted as one element in a stress response but all stress response isn't necessarily a bad thing. For instance, autonomic arousal indicated by rising cortisol levels is also associated with introversion-extraversion differences, with high arousal indicating introversion, which is known to facilitate learning (_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arousal).

So, basically the marathon runner is rethinking his commitment to the activity and this rethinking is deeper than just superficial intellectual considerations because ATM it's effecting his performance as indicated by the study.

Maybe he's learned about the law of diminishing returns or something? At the very least, he seems to have some introspection going on which is impairing his performance and I think we can predict how that will turn out if whatever it is that bothers him doesn't get resolved soon.

Over all, and speaking generally, I suppose we could say that some action crises may indicate a process of 'lying to self' or 'believing a lie' and we might characterize such a presumed intermediate state of 'action crisis' as a person being 'half-witted' WRT the topic, but for me it begs the next question which is related to "why would we do that?" :/

 

[Muxel]

The same study introduced in layman's language:

Considering abandoning a goal comes at a cost

Most of us reach a critical juncture when we consider giving up on a tough personal goal whether weight loss or kicking a tough habit. Three longitudinal field studies found that experiencing that point when we feel set back in our goal pursuit and are not sure whether to continue has strong psychological and physiological effects. In one study of runners in a Swiss marathon, those considering no longer running the marathon showed a stronger secretion of the stress hormone cortisol and a lower performance in the race 2 weeks later. "The Struggle of Giving Up Personal Goals: Affective, Physiological, and Cognitive Consequences of an Action Crisis," Veronika Brandsttter, Marcel Herrmann, and Julia Schler, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, online August 23, 2013 forthcoming in print, December 2013.

To which, what Saieden said:

that certain difficulties "made it impossible" (instead of recognizing them as part and parcel of their goal)

And:

The difficult we do immediately. The impossible takes a little longer.

_ _ _ _ _ _

I think the extent to which this

compromises an individual’s psychological and physiological well-being, but also dampens the cognitive evaluation of the respective goal

indicates "halfwittery" must depend on how much selection and substitution is being done by the individual, and for how long. As for the rest, I'm with Buddy on this.

 

[Keit]

Well, with the marathon runner in mind, if he has lost his singlemindedness of purpose, then I suppose one way to describe him might be as a 'half-wit' WRT marathon running, but we might also ask how we would evaluate such a (temporary?) state in terms of it being a positive or negative thing?

Not necessarily a negative thing, but possibly a condition that requires acknowledgment of an inner chaos and awareness that in order to see the situation more clearly one may need external feedback.

...and unable to assess reality in a proper way.

What does the phrase "...in a proper way" refer to?

To see the situation in an objective way. As closer to reality as possible.

_http://psp.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/08/23/0146167213500151.abstract

This critical phase is conceptualized as an action crisis and assumed to be characterized by an intrapsychic conflict in which the individual becomes torn between further goal pursuit and goal disengagement.

Like 'splitting' and with cognitive dissonance now associated with an activity for which he was previously "all in."

Agreed.

Over all, and speaking generally, I suppose we could say that some action crises may indicate a process of 'lying to self' or 'believing a lie' and we might characterize such a presumed intermediate state of 'action crisis' as a person being 'half-witted' WRT the topic, but for me it begs the next question which is related to "why would we do that?" :/

No, what I meant to say was, that perhaps there are certain similarities between what ever goes inside during "action crisis" and the cognitive chaos it produces, and the process of "lying to the self". Maybe "lying to the self" also produces similar kind of inner chaos, a conflict, when there is a part in the individual that is aware of the lie. But since the conflict doesn't get resolved, one way or the other, the inner confusion continues. But these are just speculations. Doesn't mean that there are indeed any correlations.

This really stood out to me. It suggests that by the time conscious "decision" is made to give up, the pursuit of the original goal has already ended in the practical sense, for whatever reason. What I think that happens in most cases, is that at that moment the individual's personal narrative about the goal is rewritten to emphasize why they "would" (instead of "might") have been better off not starting in the first place, that certain difficulties "made it impossible" (instead of recognizing them as part and parcel of their goal), and other similar things. It echoes Gurdjieff when he says that the Aim of the Work must be remembered always and in every action as much as possible.

Yes, it's very interesting! Thanks for noticing. Also, maybe it's like the unconsciousness already knows that something has ended, and even takes steps in the different direction, but it takes time for the conscious part to catch up and create or change the narrative. And maybe the difference between giving up or continuing lies in the narrative.

 

[SMM]

Thank you for sharing this Keit! I agree with what has been written by others so far.

 

[United Gnosis]

[Quote author=Keit]Yes, it's very interesting! Thanks for noticing. Also, maybe it's like the unconsciousness already knows that something has ended, and even takes steps in the different direction, but it takes time for the conscious part to catch up and create or change the narrative. And maybe the difference between giving up or continuing lies in the narrative.
[/quote]

Your whole comment was very insightful, so I would only like to underline a small nuance regarding that last thought; that is, being the unconscious' work, it is as likely - if not more - that subjective conditionings are being projected upon objective data, i.e. "I just completed my first marathon!" being perceived as "I arrived last, I suck, Dad was right..."

So the unconscious definitely has the power to change the narrative, but it doesn't mean that it is correct in its judgment that something has ended... hence your suggestion to network during that phase of the crisis process.

 

[Jefferson]

Very interesting article and good find Keit!

It is relevant in my life as well and surely many others here - more data supporting the QFS working framework/hypothesis around the adaptive subsconscience.

I was able to get the full article, but it is quite large and I'm not sure the attachment will be accepted to the posting. I tried to split the article into parts but the individual file size was still over 600MB for each part (couldn't optimize size on these and my Adobe skills are quite lacking) so I will send you a PM the link where it can be downloaded. Maybe someone can find a way to share it if necessary.

 

[Tomiro]

I have access to the full text too. It's only a 1 MB pdf (16 pages). I can send a link if someone is interested.

 

[SMM]

I have access to the full text too. It's only a 1 MB pdf (16 pages). I can send a link if someone is interested.

I'd be interested in seeing this study.

Wondering about comparisons between this study & Overthinking detrimental to performance, or information therein.

 

[Muxel]

How about if we relate what the study calls an "action crisis" to cognitive dissonance (as coined by Leon Festinger in his book When Prophecy Fails).

Caption taken from the wiki page:

"The Fox and the Grapes" by Aesop. When the fox fails to reach the grapes, {"goal disengagement" becoming a highly probable reality} he decides he does not want them after all. Rationalization (making excuses) {"misuse" of System 2} is often involved in reducing anxiety about conflicting cognitions, according to cognitive dissonance theory.

Therein you have the "believing in lies," the selection and substitution.

From the thread on splitting:

We speak of blocking out conclusions if the inferential process was proper in principle and has almost arrived at a conclusion and final comprehension within the act of internal projection, but becomes stymied by a preceding directive from the subconscious, which considered it inexpedient or disturbing.

This is primitive prevention of personality disintegration, which may seem advantageous; however, it also prevents all the advantages which could be derived from consciously elaborated conclusion and reintegration.

System 1 of the fox draws close to computing that he has failed, and failure is somehow unbearable to System 1 (possibly due to trauma), so System 2 is marshalled in order to provide an acceptable narrative. If the fox does this long enough, or often enough, System 1 graduates to selection of premises, where System 2 is no longer required.

Finally, a kind of habit seems to take over: similar material is treated the same way even if reasoning would have reached an outcome quite advantageous to the person. {This might be where the fox begins to appear as a half-wit.}

Although, the process I described above might actually be this (or they might be the same thing):

The most complex process of this type is substitution of premises thus eliminated by other data, ensuring an ostensibly more comfortable conclusion. Our associative ability rapidly elaborates a new item to replace the removed one, but it is one leading to a comfortable conclusion. {"Oh, you aren't even ripe yet! I don't need any sour grapes."} This operation takes the most time, and it is unlikely to be exclusively subconscious.

In any case it's clear that the fox has a psychologically unhealthy habit in the least, or is psychologically unhealthy himself at the most.

Another thing: the fox in the fable seems to suffer from a dearth of creativity, or an unwillingness to explore other avenues. It's as if System 1 is locked into one mode. "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." The fox leaps and leaps, and when nothing comes of it he throws in the towel, accompanied by said psychological defense. Does it indicate an amygdala hijack, a lack of brain plasticity?

From Learning to overcome fear:

The study findings suggest there is altered plasticity in the prefrontal cortex of the brain during adolescence, with its inability to overcome fear ...

... In the case of psychiatric disorders, however, fear may persist long after a threat has passed, and this unremitting and often debilitating form of fear is a core component of many anxiety disorders, including post-traumatic stress disorders (PTSD). ...

"In young and old mice, we see plasticity, which is activity in the infralimbic cortex, which helps the animals decrease their fear response when a threat no longer applies," says Dr. Pattwell. "Interestingly, we didn't witness similar activity in adolescent mice."

Should we approach life as if it were a brain teaser? When presented with a brain teaser, you have all these tools (or algorithms) in System 1 that can be applied to solve it. But you (or some part of you) must stop yourself when it becomes clear that the current tool (algorithm) that System 1 is using (running) is becoming more of a liability, more of a drain on other resources. If your "brute force" method to solve a brain teaser is taking you too long, you probably aren't doing it right. Stop the train on its current line, set it going on another line.

A historical case:

Fear it seems to me, is the defining matrix control mechanism over us humans. Fear of death (even in the shape of ego anxiety) defines most people, even those who don’t suffer from what I describe above. The hypertensives simply experience it more acutely; like canaries in the mine they express acute awareness and experiences of some kind of frequency that pulses unseen and yet is ever present through the entire human bio-system. To become one without fear (which could be defined as an utterly objective, in the now, liberation from a death anxiety) should be our life’s ambition. I suspect when one truly masters this, the veil collapses and one gets to be truly free.