When I was a kid, I was always fascinated by magic tricks. Whether it was simple coin tricks or watching David Copperfield walk through the Great Wall of China on television, I always wanted to know: How do they do that?
By the time I finished training as a therapist, I had learned to focus on entirely different kinds of magic tricks, or illusions — the kinds that we consciously and unconsciously create all of the time.
The question pressing on me shifted: Why do we do that? Why do we, as seemingly rational, well-intentioned people go around deluding ourselves on a regular basis?
In the 1970′s, Ellen Langer, a researcher from UCLA, demonstrated evidence for a phenomenon she called the illusion of control. Subsequent researchers corroborated this so-called positive illusion across a number of experimental setups.
Before posting, please read our blog moderation guidelines. The comments below begin with the oldest comments first. Click on the last comments page to jump to the most recent comments.
Before posting, please read our blog moderation guidelines.
Post a Comment:
Copyright © 1995-2013 Psych Central. All rights reserved.
Site last updated: 21 May 2013
|
Two passions of mine have become understanding politics and psychology. I see this when talking to people about politics. They have a belief that their vote can change the world. They have a belief that IF their guy wins the world will become a nirvana and prosperity will come across the land, BUT if he looses they are going to have to run to another state/ country. They simply have unrealistic understanding not only of their control, but the control of their “team”.
You said something that I find interesting that probably seemed petty. You said “ intelligence not withstanding”. That would require how you define intelligence. If it is defined by ones ability to see into the depth of consequences for actions, my guess is that those that can reason deeper into that “flow chart” the less likely they are to be delusional. Once you reach that point where you no longer have understanding, you must then switch to “faith” to complete the story. Somebody throwing dice harder simply doesn’t have a grasp of physics and statistics.
If I am picking up the feel of this post, It seems Dr. Sanger is wondering why this pheromone exists. However, the pioneers like Freud had a very complete explanation of it. If we are willing to accept two truths that 1) we will always seek the most pleasurable behavioral path and 2) the goal of the mind is repression of painful memories, then this doesn’t seem much of a mystery at all. It causes “pain” to put money on a chip or a lottery ticket. It is a repression mechanism to delude oneself into believing it was for a positive gain. The rush that comes when one is right is actually just as ridiculous. However, this is where the work of Pavlov and the likes comes into play. Sometimes the dogs got a shot when they saw the lab coats. But they forgot that in favor of remembering the food.
As our culture has become a “borderline society” we have stopped teaching our generations to trust anybody outside themselves. We all think we are going to live forever, be healthy, be rich, and stay young. Depression comes from the inability to repress that reality and the fear of being in this world all alone, with nobody to trust. For some reason the mind perceives repressing those realities are in the long term less desirable then remembering them.
Thanks for your comment. To clarify: when I mentioned “intelligence notwithstanding,” I was referring more to the idea that there is a split between reason and emotion when it comes to gauging degree of control in particular situations.
There are multiple theories as to why the illusion of control exists. These include Langer’s idea that “skill cues” present in situations, such as playing craps, increase the strength of the illusion. People don’t throw dice harder on purpose. They do so (so the theory goes) because they hold an implicit belief that there is skill involved in the game, and they can therefore influence the outcome.
Another theory holds that in situations in which we truly do not have control, it often feels better to believe that we do, even if the situation feels “out of control.” It’s a coping strategy, albeit not one that typically holds up well over time.
Sandra, thank you for your response!!
Also thank you for introducing me to Langer. I had not heard of this research before. I do not see how, at the moment, either of these examples are not just restating and then confirming Freud’s theory that “repression” was the result of an unbearable idea. We can see that in the course of human history there are some things that can point to as seemingly obvious signs of this as a common truth. For example, every civilization has a religion and an explanation for what happens after death. No matter how irrational (and sometimes dysfunctional) that belief is, humans would rather believe in witches, sacrifice, and gods that they can appease over science that says “that is just the way it is, there is no control”. If I understand what I have read, Freud also considers “anxiety” the infant version of “depression”. Meaning that first we are anxious about those things we perceive we can’t control. Then after a series of behaviors to regain control, if we can not and we perceive that we have no control over a threatening force, we get depressed. (I find this interesting relative if we allow for a theory where we try everything to regain control is manifest as manic behavior being associated with a anxiety just before the crash that would become succumbing to the lack of control believed to be depression.)
I have a theory that I am not sure I have come across before in its entirety. It is that we are born into this world leaving a status where our baseline of nourishment, security, and constant 98.6 degrees was established. Every behavior we have is manifest from that drive to maintain that status. Nourishment and temp are easy to control. Security on the other hand has so many nuances. I believe “being wrong” is a threat to our outside security. (exaggerated this becomes narcissism). To be right there are only a few options when we are wrong. They all involve tweaking perception to regain the illusion of control.
As someone with depression, a great deal of my problem lies in the lack of control I have. The lack of control over myself, my emotions, my schedule, my day, my children, my life, my body, my illnesses…all the things that show up, out of nowhere and slap me in the face. I’m also infuriated by the imperfections I have.
Hi, Always Sick Chick. It can be really overwhelming to look at all of the areas of your life and to feel as if none of it is in your control. I’d gently argue that there are indeed some things you can control, though it might not seem like it at times. It’s definitely not an all-or-nothing thing. As for the “self-help gurus” – they typically have something to sell you, perhaps including the illusion of control.
You know what really bugs me about this? All the self-help gurus who tell ya to take control of your life. Make life happen instead of letting life happen to you. It’s very confusing.
Interesting article!
Ever heard the term ‘fake it till you make it’? That is also an illusion in itself that keeps many people feeling relevant in society. Without creating this illusion, fear, and hopelessness would set in. The thing is humans want to be in control, at least when it comes to their destiny and everything that affects them. Creating an illusion is just a way to stay sane, for some people.
“If we all treat each other like we treat ourselves – what a wonderful place earth would be.”
Hi, Genie. I agree that the illusion of control is not always a bad thing. Researchers have lumped it under the category of “positive illusions.” Some believe that it is adaptive, in the sense that it that it can contribute to an increased sense of self-efficacy. To me, it only becomes problematic when individuals feel more distress related to needing to control situations/outcomes/people.
Religious groomers of gullible children emphasize the absolute requirement for obedience, which can produce a child that has a slave mindset. We see the result of the groomers handiwork all around us in easily led people who will not think for themselves, actually are incapable of critical thought. The goal of the groomers is to destroy the normal human desire for autonomy, or freedom from outside control.
There are clearly different outcomes for children raised to enjoy intellectual autonomy (personal independence) and those burdened with intellectual heteronomy (the condition of being under the domination of an outside authority, either human or divine). In many churches, homes, and faith schools, children are taught intellectual heteronomy. I quote from Donald Capps’ book, “The Children’s Song, The Religious Abuse of Children”:
“What is at stake here is the freedom of children to think for themselves and to feel secure in the knowledge that adults will not hold their expressions of intellectual autonomy against them. Especially where biblical literalism is taught and practiced, and where punitive attitudes towards sinners are voiced and countenanced, children are unlikely to experience such freedom to think and reason for themselves. Rather, they are likely to feel that it is wrong for them to think for themselves and that, if they do, they are likely to incur the disapproval, if not the wrath, of precisely those adults who have power over them. Fearing the negative consequences of their exercise of intellectual autonomy, they are likely to overreact, to place even greater strictures on their own freedom of thought than these adults may have required of them.” (p. 59)
[/quote]
Do you agree there is a natural desire in humans to exert control over their lives? For those children who suffer intellectual abuse would that not hamper their ability to direct their lives as they see fit. In other words to have control of their lives? For such children the illusion of control is not even in the cards.