August
05th
  7:45:42 AM

Lead us not into temptation…

In a refreshing change from research that looks for excuses for everyday vices in people’s genes or family background, a study from the Kellogg School of Management looks at things like temptation, willpower and humility (yes, really) in impulsive and addictive behaviour.

Previous research has shown that people in a “cold state” (not experiencing hunger, anger, sexual arousal and so on) tend to underestimate how a “hot”, impulsive state will influence their behaviour. The new study led by Loran Nordgren confirmed that, and also found that those who are most confident about their self-control are the most likely to give into temptation.

“People are not good at anticipating the power of their urges, and those who are the most confident about their self-control are the most likely to give into temptation,” said Nordgren. “The key is simply to avoid any situations where vices and other weaknesses thrive and, most importantly, for individuals to keep a humble view of their willpower.”

Nordgren did his research mainly with college students and may not hold for the population at large. Here is one of his experiments:

Hunger pangs: Seventy-nine university students and employees rated a list of snacks from least to most favorite and then selected one. Participants were told, "You can eat the snack anytime you like. However, if you return the snack to this location in one week, we will give you four Euros (and you will get to keep the snack you chose)."

Questions also measured participants' level of hunger. Satiated participants exposed themselves to more temptation, generally choosing their first or second favorite snack, while the hungry individuals selected their second or third favorite item. Those with full bellies were also less likely to bring back an uneaten snack, Nordgren said.

The technical term for the human weakness he describes is “restraint bias”:

“A system which assumes people will control themselves is going to fall prey to this restraint bias; we expose ourselves to more temptation than is wise, and subsequently we have millions of people suffering with obesity, addictions and other unhealthy lifestyles,” said Nordgren. “And, while our study focused on personal behaviors like smoking and eating, it is easy to apply our findings to a broader context. Understanding the power of temptation, you might also ask about the extent to which we need oversight or regulatory guidelines for business and political leaders.”

Of course, there is another Power one could call on (in all humility) to counter temptation, but it appears that its effect has yet to be studied. In any case, avoidance seems the best strategy.




 
about this blog | Bookmark and Share

Search this blog

 Subscribe to FamilyEdge
rss RSS feed of posts

 Recent Posts
Why Sensible, Well-balanced Parents are Superior
10 Feb 2012
Daycare must focus on child, not adult needs, says new report
9 Feb 2012
About gender
7 Feb 2012
More time online = less happiness among girls
6 Feb 2012
Changing the way teens think
3 Feb 2012

 MercatorNet blogs
Style and culture: Tiger Print
US political scene: Sheila Liaugminas
News about bioethics: BioEdge
From the editors: Conniptions

 Archive
Feb 2012 | Jan 2012 | Dec 2011 | more >>

 From MercatorNet's home page

How hedonism became America’s official religion
9 Feb 2012
An edict from the Obama administration has ended the American experiment in religious liberty.

Bombs across the border
10 Feb 2012
The US makes a strong case that its military interventions in Pakistan are just and legal. Whether they’re good is…

A parental defence of highly effective nagging
10 Feb 2012
When a deadly habit becomes a useful tool in the parental armoury.

Lost in Transition III: A collective challenge
9 Feb 2012
Who is to blame for the moral ignorance of young adults, and what is to be done?

Pink Lego
8 Feb 2012
Why are feminists throwing their toys out of the cot over a victory for girl power?


 Tags
divorce, family values, smacking, men, China, child safety, cohabitation, child development, dating, family economics, birth control, Africa, mental health, family structure, feminism, teenagers, sex education, polygamy, child abuse, same-sex marriage, recession, emerging adults, demography, friendship, gender equality, media, adolescence, adoption, poverty, morality, schools, commitment, France, psychology, childcare, fertility, self-control, work-life balance, one-child policy, Hollywood, marriage, religion, AIDS, contraception, violence, suicide, unemployment, children, education, New Zealand, child obesity, baby boomers, large families, motherhood, child welfare, internet, books, prostitution, family, brain, sexualisation of children, homosexuality, South Africa, young adult, abortion, technology, social networking, United Nations, video games, pornography, education of children, television, family meals, child wellbeing, sexual behaviour, women, immigration, parental rights, gender, social media, Obama, working mothers, research, happiness, single motherhood, youth, girls, obesity, work, family relationships, parenting, family policy, Australia, media ethics, trafficking, abstinence, ageing, fatherhood, Spain, United States, fathers, health, character education, fashion, family breakdown, children's health,