Self-control , the aspect of inhibition control, is the ability to regulate one's emotions, thoughts, and behaviors in the face of temptations and impulses. As an executive function, self-control is the cognitive process necessary to regulate one's behavior to achieve a particular goal.
The related concept in psychology is the emotional self-regulation. Control yourself like a muscle. According to research, self-regulation, whether emotional or behavioral, proves to be a limited resource that functions like energy. In the short run, excessive use of self-control will lead to depletion. However, in the long run, the use of self-control can strengthen and improve over time.
Self-control is also a key concept in the general theory of crime, a major theory in criminology. The theory was developed by Michael Gottfredson and Travis Hirschi in their book entitled A General Theory of Crime published in 1990. Gottfredson and Hirschi define self-control as individual differential tendencies to avoid criminal acts independent of the situation where they find themselves. Individuals with low self-control tend to be impulsive, insensitive to others, risk takers, farsightedness, and nonverbal. The general theory of evil states that self-restraint is established in early childhood through three main factors: the power of parent-to-child emotional bonding, adequate supervision by parents, the ability of parents to recognize punishable behavior, and proper discipline by parents.
Video Self-control
Riset
Counteractive
Desire is a motivation that is effectively imposed on a particular object, person, or activity, but is not limited to, relating to pleasure or relief from displeasure. Desire varies in strength and duration. Desire becomes temptation when it affects or enters the area of ​​individual self-control, if the behavior resulting from the desire contradicts the individual values ​​or other self-regulating goals. Limitations to research on desire are the problems of individuals who want different things. New research looks at what people want in real-world settings. Over a week, 7,827 self-reports of desires are gathered and show significant differences in the frequency and strength of desire, the degree of conflict between wants and other goals, and the possibility of rejecting the will and success of the resistance. The most common and highly experienced desire is related to the body's needs such as eating, drinking and sleeping. This study has many implications related to self-control and everyday things that interfere with people's ability to stay on task. This is a big reason why self-control is considered the worst nightmare for people who speak in public.
Wanting a conflict with a whole purpose or value is known as temptation. The dilemma of self-control occurs when goals and long-term values ​​conflict with short-term temptations. The Contra-Actual Self-Control Theory states that when presented with such a dilemma, we reduce the importance of instant rewards while momentarily enhancing the importance of our values ​​as a whole. When asked to assess the perceived attractiveness of different snacks before making a decision, people assess the health bar above chocolate. However, when asked to rank after choosing a snack, there is no significant difference in attractiveness. Furthermore, when students complete the questionnaires before their course enrollment dates, they rate recreational activities less important and fun than when they fill out the survey after the deadline has passed. The stronger the temptation is and the stronger the more severe the devaluation will be.
One of the most common self-control dilemmas involves a desire for unhealthy or unnecessary food consumption versus a desire to maintain long-term health. Indications of unneeded foods can also exceed spending on certain types of consumption such as eating away from home. Not knowing how much to spend, or spending too much money on eating out can be a symptom of a lack of self-control. The experimental participants assessed the new snack was significantly less healthy when described as a very good food than when they heard it just a little tasty. Without knowing anything about food, advice only from good taste triggers opposing self-control and encourages them to devalue temptations in the name of health. Furthermore, when presented with the strong temptation of a large bowl of chips, the participants both felt the chip became taller in calories and ate less than those participants who faced the weak temptation of three smaller chip bowls, although both conditions represented the same number of chips as a whole. A weak temptation is wrongly considered unhealthy, so self-control is not triggered and the desired action is more often involved, supporting the opposite self-control theory. A weak temptation presents more challenges to overcome than a strong temptation, because they seem to be less compromised with long-term values.
Satiation
A decrease in one's desire and desire for a substance following the consumption of a substance repeatedly known as a glut. The level of satiety at mealtimes depends on the interaction of self-control and food health. After eating the same amount of healthy foods (raisins and nuts) or unhealthy snacks (M & Ms and Skittles), people who scored higher on self-control tests reported significantly less willingness to eat more many unhealthy foods than they eat. healthy food. Those with low self-satiety self control at the same speed regardless of health value. Furthermore, when reading descriptions emphasizing the sweetness of their snacks, participants with higher self-control reported decreased desire more quickly than they did after hearing a description of the healthy benefits of their snack. Again, those who have low self-control are satiated at the same level regardless of their health condition. The unhealthy feeling of the food itself, regardless of its true level of health, is associated with fuller satiety, but only for people with high self-control.
Constitution level
Thinking that is characterized by high construal, whenever individuals "are required to infer additional detail of content, context, or meaning in actions and results that lie around them", will see goals and values ​​in a global abstract sense. While the low-level constraints emphasize concrete, definite ideas and categorizations. Different contextual levels determine the activation of our self-control in response to temptation. One technique for inducing high levels is to ask for a series of "why?" questions that will lead to an increasingly abstract response, while low-level constraints are caused by "how?" a question that leads to an increasingly concrete answer. When taking the Implicit Association Test, people with significantly higher induced induction are faster in association of temptations (such as sweets) with "bad," and healthy choices (like apples) with "good" than those at low-level conditions. Furthermore, a higher rate also indicates a significant increased likelihood of choosing apples to snack on top of candy. Without a conscious or active self-control effort, temptation can be dampened only by inducing high-level constraints. It is recommended that abstractions from high-level constraints remind people of their entire lifetime value, such as a healthy lifestyle, which ignores the current seductive situation.
Human and non-human
A positive correlation between linguistic ability and self-control has been inferred from experiments with common chimpanzees.
Human self-control research is usually modeled using the token economic system. The token economic system is a behavioral program in which individuals in a group can obtain tokens for various desired behaviors and can cash in tokens for various reserves, positive boosters. Differences in research methodology with humans - using token or conditional versus non-human amplifier using sub-primer strength suggests procedural artifacts as possible suspects. One aspect of this procedural difference is the delay for the exchange period (Hyten et al., 1994). Non-human subjects can and will most likely gain access to their strengths. Human subjects have to wait for "exchange periods" where they can exchange their tokens for money, usually at the end of the experiment. When this is done with non-human subjects, in the form of pigeons, they respond like men to men who exhibit far less control than women. (Jackson & Hackenberg 1996). Logue, (1995), discussed further below, shows that in his studies of self-control were boys responded with less self-control than girls. He then stated that in adulthood, for the most part, gender equated their ability to show self-control. This could imply the human ability to use more self-control as they mature and become aware of the consequences associated with impulsivity. These suggestions are further examined below.
Much of the research in the field of self-control assumes that self-control is generally better than impulsivity. Some developmental psychologists have argued that this is normal, and those of the infant age, who lack the ability to think about the future, and therefore no self-control or delayed satisfaction, for adults. Consequently, almost all research done on this topic is from this point of view and very rarely is the impulsive response more adaptive in the experimental design.
Self-control is a variable that can be measured in humans. In the worst situations people with the best self-control and self-defense have the best chance of opposing the opportunities they face, which can be poverty, bad schools, unsafe communities, etc. Those who are harmed with high self-control proceed to higher education and professional work, but these seem to have a negative effect on their health.
When looking at people who come from a backdrop of profits with high self-control, we see different phenomena happening. Those from a profitable background tend to be high performers and with their attainment comes good health. The psychological phenomenon known as "John Henryism" argues that when goal-oriented people, successful minded people endlessly endeavor in the absence of adequate support and resources, they can - like the legend of the nineteenth-century folk who died of aneurysms after besting a steam-powered drill in a rail-driving-driving competition - works to death. Or, at least, in that direction. In the 1980s Sherman James a socio-epidemiologist from North Carolina found that black Americans in the state suffered disproportionately from heart disease and stroke. He also landed on "John Henryism" as the cause of this phenomenon.
Recently some people in the field of developmental psychology have begun to think about self-control in a more complicated way that takes into account that sometimes impulsivity is a more adaptive response. In their view, normal individuals should have the capacity to be impulsive or controlled depending on which is most adaptive. However, this is a recent paradigm shift and there is little research done along these lines.
Maps Self-control
Skinner's engineering survey
B.F. Skinner's Science and Human Behavior provides a survey of nine categories of self-control methods.
Physical restrain and physical help
Manipulation of the environment to make some responses easier to do physically and others more difficult to describe this principle. This can be referred to as physical guidance which is a physical contact application to encourage a person to go through the desired behavioral movement. This concept can also be called a physical prompt. Examples include the applause of a person above his own mouth, placing a person's hand in one's pockets to prevent anxiety, and using the hand position of the 'bridge' to stabilize the shot of the pool all representing physical methods to influence behavior.
Changing the stimulus
Manipulating opportunities for behavior can change behavior as well. Removing an interruption that triggers an unwanted action or adds a prompt to induce it is an example. Hiding temptations and reminders are two more. The need to conceal temptation is the result of its influence on the mind. A common theme among the study of desire is the cognitive process investigation that underlies the desire for addictive substances, such as nicotine or alcohol. To better understand the involved cognitive processes, the descended descent theory (EI) was developed. According to EI theory, the desire continues because individuals develop mental images of a coveted substance that is instantly pleasing, but also raises their awareness of the deficit. The result is a cruel cycle of desire, image, and preparation to satisfy desire. This rapidly increases to a greater expression of the image that combines working memory, interferes with performance on simultaneous cognitive tasks, and strengthens the emotional response. Basically the mind is consumed by the desire for the desired substance, and this desire in turn interrupts the cognitive task simultaneously. Obviously the desire for nicotine or alcohol is an extreme case, but however EI theory applies to more normal motivations and desires.
Depriving and satisfying
Deprivation is the time when an individual does not receive a reinforcement, while glutness occurs when a person has received the amplifier in such a way that temporarily will not have strength strengthen over them. If we rob the stimulus, the reinforcement value increases. For example, if someone has been deprived of their food, they may take extreme measures to get the food, such as stealing. On the other hand, when we have an excessive amount of boosters, the gain is losing its value; If an individual eats a large meal, they may no longer be interested in strengthening the dessert.
One can manipulate one's behavior by affecting a state of lack or satiety. By skipping meals before a free dinner, one can more effectively utilize free food. By eating a healthy snack before, the temptation to eat "junk food" for free is reduced.
Also worth noting is the importance of image in cognition of desire during a state of deprivation. A study conducted on this topic involved smokers who were divided into two groups. The control group was instructed to continue smoking as usual until they reached the laboratory, where they were then asked to read a multisensor neutral script, which meant it was not related to the desire for nicotine. The experimental group, however, was asked to distance themselves from smoking before coming to the laboratory to induce desire and upon arrival they were told to read induction scripts of multi-induced impulses intended to intensify their nicotine desires. After the participants finished reading the script they assessed their desire for cigarettes. Next they formulate visual or auditory images when prompted with verbal cues like "tennis game" or "phone ringing." After this task the participants again assessed their desire for cigarettes. The study found that the desire experienced by smokers who do not do so decreases to the level of the control group by visual imagery but not by the image of hearing alone. The mental picture presented to reduce the level of desire in smokers illustrates that it can be used as a method of self-control during the deprivation period.
Manipulating emotional state
We manipulate the emotional state to encourage certain ways to respond. One example can be seen in the theater. Actors often bring tears from painful memories if necessary for the characters they play. This idea is similar to the idea if we read letters, books, listen to music, watch movies, to keep us in a "mood" so that we can be in the right state of mind for a particular event or function. In addition, treating an activity as "work" or "pleasure" can have an effect on the difficulty of self-control.
To analyze the possible effects of cognitive transformation of an object on desire, a study was conducted on the basis of a famous German chocolate product. The study involved 71 undergraduate students, all of whom are familiar with chocolate products. The participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups: control conditions, consummatory conditions, and nonconsummatory transformation conditions. Each group is given three minutes to complete the assigned task. The participants in the control condition were told to read a neutral article about a location in South America that lacks words related to food consumption. Those who are in perfect condition are instructed to imagine as clearly as possible how to consume chocolate will feel and feel. Participants in non-consumptive transformation conditions were told to imagine as clearly as possible the peculiar arrangement or utility for chocolate. Furthermore, all participants undergo a manipulation task that requires them to assess their mood on a five-point scale in response to the ten items they see. After the manipulation task, participants complete an automatic evaluation that measures their reaction time to six different chocolate images, each paired with positive or negative stimuli. The results showed that participants were instructed to imagine chocolate consumption showing a higher automatic evaluation of chocolate than the participants requested to imagine strange arrangements or uses for chocolate, and participants under control conditions falling between the two experimental conditions.. This shows that the way people perceive a good is influencing how much they want.
Using hostile stimuli
Aversive stimulation is used as a means to increase or decrease the likelihood of target behavior. Similar to all self-management methods, there is a control response, and a controlled response. Unpleasant stimuli are sometimes referred to as punishment or just an animosity. Closely related to the idea of ​​a punishment is the concept of punishment. Punishment is the idea that in certain circumstances, a person does something that the punitive follows immediately, then the person tends to do the same thing again when he or she next faces the same situation. This example can be seen when a teenager is outside the curfew. After being out of the curfew, the teenagers looked at the teenager. Since teenagers have been punished for their behavior, they tend not to come out of their curfew again, thereby reducing the likelihood of target behavior.
Drugs
Certain types of drugs affect self-control. Stimulants, such as methylphenidate and amphetamine, increase general inhibitory control and are used to treat ADHD. Similarly, depressants, such as alcohol, are barriers to self-control through lethargy, slower brain function, poor concentration, depression and disorientation.
Operation conditioning
Operant conditioning sometimes referred to as Skinnerian conditioning is a process of reinforcing behavior by strengthening or weakening it by punishing it. By continuing to strengthen and strengthen behavior, or weaken and punish a behavior, an association and consequences are made. Similarly, behavior that is changed by its consequence is known as the operant behavior There are several components of operant conditioning; This includes reinforcers such as positive reinforcers and negative reinforcers. A positive amplifier is a stimulus which, when presented immediately after the behavior, causes behavior to increase the frequency. The negative amplifier is a stimulus that is immediately removed after the response causes the response to be amplified or to increase the frequency. In addition, punishment components are also included such as positive punishment and negative punishment. Examples of operant conditioning can be seen daily. When a student tells a joke to one of his friends and they all laugh at this joke, the student is more likely to continue the behavior of telling this joke because the joke is reinforced by their laughter. However, if a colleague tells his joke student is "ridiculous" or "stupid", he will be punished by telling a joke and the possibility to tell another joke greatly decreases. Another example of operant conditioning can be seen in the form of quit smoking such as smoking. By using this technique to quit smoking, self-discipline should be displayed when smokers should stop giving up on their addiction.
Punishment
Punishing off the response will include punishment settings that depend on unwanted responses. This can be seen in the whipping behavior perpetrated by some monks and religious. This is in contrast to hostile stimuli in that case, for example, the alarm clock produces the release of the alarm, while self-punishment presents stimulation after the fact to reduce the possibility of future behavior.
Punishment is more like conformity than self-control because with self-control there needs to be an internal push, not an external source of punishment that makes the person want to do something. There is an external locus of control similar to determinism and there is an internal locus of control similar to free will. With a punishment learning system, the person does not make decisions based on what they want, but based it on external factors. When you use negative reinforcement you are more likely to influence their internal decisions and allow them to make their own choices whereas with punishment, the person will make their decisions based on the consequences and not use self-control. The best way to learn self-control is by free will where people can see them making their own choices.
"Doing something else"
Skinner notes that various philosophies and religions exemplify this principle by instructing believers to love their enemies. When we are filled with anger or hatred, we may control ourselves by 'doing something else' or more specifically something that does not fit our response.
Brain region involved
Brain functional imaging has shown that self-control correlates with areas in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC), part of the frontal lobes. These areas are different from those involved in generating deliberate action, attention to intent, or choosing between alternatives. This control occurs through inhibition of the top-down of the premotor cortex. There is some debate about the mechanism of self-control and how it arises. Traditionally, researchers believe that the bottom-up approach directs self-control behavior. The more time a person spends to think of a useful stimulus, the more likely he or she will experience a desire for it. The most important information is control over working memory, and can then be processed through a top-down mechanism. More and more evidence suggests that top down processing plays a strong role in self-control. In particular, top-down processing can really set the bottom-up attention mechanism. To demonstrate this, the researchers studied working memory and distractions by presenting participants with neutral or negative images and then math problems or no assignments. They found that participants reported less negative moods after solving a mathematical problem than with no task group, due to the effect on working memory capacity.
There are many researchers working to identify areas of the brain involved in self-control; many different fields are known to be involved. In relation to self-control mechanisms, the gift center in the brain compares external stimuli versus the state of internal needs and a person's learning history. At the biological level, the loss of control is thought to be caused by the malfunction of the decision mechanism. The mechanistic explanation of self-control is still in its early stages. However, there is strong demand for knowledge of these mechanisms because knowledge of these mechanisms will have tremendous clinical applications. Much of the work on how the brain reaches a decision is based on evidence from perceptual learning.
Many of the tasks that the subjects tested were not tasks typically associated with self-control, but more general decision tasks. Nevertheless, research on self-control is informed by more general research on decision tasks. Sources for evidence on self-control nervous mechanisms include fMRI studies on human subjects, neural recording in animals, the study of lesions in humans and animals, and studies of clinical behavior in humans with impaired self-control.
There is widespread agreement that the cortex is involved in self-control. The final model details have not been done yet. However, there are some interesting findings that suggest self-controlled mechanistic accounts can prove to be of exceptional explanatory value. The following is a survey of some of the most important literature recently in areas of the brain involved in self-control.
Prefrontal cortex
The prefrontal cortex lies at the very front of the frontal lobe in the brain. It forms a larger part of the cortex in humans. Dendrites in the prefrontal cortex contain up to 16 times more dendritic spines as neurons in other cortical areas. Because of this, the prefrontal cortex integrates a large amount of information. Orbitofrontal cortex cells are important factors for self-control. If an individual has a choice between a direct gift or a more valuable gift they can receive later, an individual will most likely try to control the urge to take the immediate gift. If a person has a defective orbitofrontal cortex, this impulse control is unlikely to be as strong, and they may be more likely to take immediate reinforcement. In addition, we see a lack of impulse control in children because the prefrontal cortex develops slowly.
Todd A. Hare et al. using functional MRI techniques to show that the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) and the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) are strongly involved in self-control deployment. They found that activity in vmPFC correlated with objective values ​​and that self-deployment of self-control requires modulation of vmPFC by DLPFC. This study found that lack of self-control is highly correlated with reduced activity in DLPFC. The Hare study is highly relevant to the self-control literature because it shows that an important cause of poor self-control is the damaged DLPFC.
Results when determining whether a selection was made
Alexandra W. Logue is interested in how results change the likelihood of self-control options being made. Logue identifies three possible effects: yield delays, yield measures, and yield contingencies. Delay in results results in the perception that results are less valuable than results that are more easily achieved. Lowering delayed results can lead to less self-control. The way to improve self-control in the situation of delayed results is to pre-expose an outcome. Pre-exposure reduces frustration associated with delayed results. An example of this is a signing bonus.
The size of the results relates to the relative, perceived size of the possible outcomes. There tends to be the relationship between the value of the incentive and the desired outcome; the greater the desired result, the greater the value. Some factors that degrade value include delays, effort/costs, and uncertainty. Decisions tend to be based on options with higher values ​​at the time of decision.
Finally, Logue defines the relationship between responses and results as a result contingency. Contingency results also affect a person's level of self-control. For example, if a person is able to change his or her choice after the initial choice is made, the person is far more likely to make an impulsive choice instead of self-control. In addition, it is possible for people to take pre-commitment actions. Precom commitment is an action intended to lead to self-controlled actions in the next period. When someone sets an alarm clock, they make a timely response to wake up early. Therefore, the person is more likely to run a self-controlled decision to wake up, rather than go back to bed to sleep less.
Cassandra B. Whyte studied locus of control and academic performance and determined that internal tend to reach at a higher level. Internals can see they have the option to choose from, thereby facilitating a more hopeful decision-making behavior compared to dependence on externally determined results that require less commitment, effort, or self-control.
Behavioral physiology
Many things affect a person's ability to exercise self-control, but it seems that self-control requires considerable glucose levels in the brain. Deploying self-control drains glucose. Decreased glucose, and poor glucose tolerance (reduced ability to transport glucose to the brain) correlate with lower performance in self-control tests, especially in difficult new situations. Self-control requires that an individual work to overcome thoughts, emotions, and automatic responses/impulses. This powerful effort requires higher blood glucose levels. Lower blood glucose levels may lead to poor self-control ability. Alcohol causes a decrease in glucose levels in the brain and body, and also has a damaging effect on various forms of self-control. Furthermore, self-control failure occurs most probably at times when glucose is used most effectively. Self-control thus appears highly susceptible to glucose.
An alternative explanation of the limited amount of glucose found is that it depends on the allocation of glucose, not on the limited supply of glucose. According to this theory, the brain has adequate glucose resources and also has the possibility of providing glucose, but individual priorities and personal motivations cause glucose to be allocated to other sites. This theory has not been tested.
Mischel Experiment
In the 1960s, Walter Mischel tested four-year-olds for self-control in "The Marshmallow Test": each child was given a marshmallow and was told they could eat it whenever they wanted, but if they waited 15 minutes , they will receive another marshmallow. Follow-up studies show that results correlate well with the success rate of these children in the future.
The strategy used in the marshmallow test is to focus on the "hot" and "cool" features of an object. Children are encouraged to think about "cool features" of marshmallows like their shapes and textures, perhaps comparing them to cotton balls or clouds. The "warm features" of marshmallows are sweet and sticky. These hot features make it more difficult to delay gratification. By focusing on cool features, the mind is distracted from the interesting aspects of marshmallows, and self-control makes more sense.
Years later. Mischel reached out to his research participants who were in their 40s. He found that those who lacked self-control by taking a single marshmallow in early studies were more likely to develop problems with the relationship, stress, and substance abuse later in life. Dr. Mischel conducted another experiment with the same participants to see which parts of the brain were active during the self-control process. The participants received a scan through M.R.I to show brain activity. The results showed that those who showed lower levels of self-control had higher brain activity in the ventral striatum, an area associated with positive rewards.
Reviews conclude that self-control correlates with positive life outcomes, such as happiness, adjustment and positive psychological factors. Self-control is also negatively correlated with sociotropy which in turn correlates with depression.
Depletion of Ego
There is conflicting evidence as to whether power will have limited resources, no limits or self-strength, a phenomenon sometimes called ego depletion or a reversal of the inverted ego. However, the belief that unlimited strength or self-strength is associated with greater will power, the function of voluntary executive.
Mobilizing self-control through executive function in decision-making is held in several theories to deprive one's ability to do so in the future. The depletion of the Ego is the view that high self-control requires energy and focus, and during a long period of self-control, this self-control can be reduced. There are several ways to help this thinning of the ego. One way is through rest and relaxation from these high demands. In addition, exercising self-control with certain behaviors can also help to strengthen individual self-control. This seems very effective for those who will have difficulty controlling their impulse in the desired domain. Another way to deal with unwanted desires is to change the method we approach. One study specifically analyzed the impact of approaching temptation by defining it in abstract, general terms as opposed to specific, concrete details. For research purposes, approaching a situation using a general term is defined as a high-level contextual condition while using specific details is called a low-level contractual condition. The study involved 42 students who were randomly assigned either to high or low-level conditions. The participants were then presented with a package that described the five scenarios, each involving a unique self-control conflict. For participants in high-level contextual conditions, scenarios are described using only general terms and for those who are in low-level contextual conditions, scenarios are depicted using only specific details. After imagining themselves in each scenario, the participants were asked to show how badly they would feel if they were involved in a temptation using a six-point scale ranging from "not at all bad" to "very bad." The data show that participants in high-level contextual conditions report a larger negative evaluation of temptation than participants in low-level constraints. This implies that individuals who use high-level contextuality are better able to put temptation in context and correctly evaluate its long-term impact, and are therefore more likely to maintain self-control.
src: i.ytimg.com
See also
src: previews.123rf.com
References
src: lifeloveandyoga.files.wordpress.com
Further reading
-
Baumeister, Roy F.; Tierney, John (2012). Will. Rediscovering the Greatest Human Power -
Ameriks, John; et al. (2007). "Measuring Self Control Problems". American Economic Review . 97 (3): 966-972. doi :. 10,1257/aer.97.3.966 Ã,
src: cdn.vox-cdn.com
External links
- Discipline in our lives (religious channels)
- Teaching Children the Art of Self-Control
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments