Thank God I Didn't Bet On It

It has been shown that we as humans aren't very good at predicting how intense or how long a future feeling will last. Specifically, we overestimate; we tend to think we will be happier for a longer time due to good events, and sadder for a longer time due to depressing events. In reality we bounce back from both positive and negative emotions more quickly than we imagine. This is what we call a failure in affective forecasting, the ability to predict how we will react or feel in future emotional events (Wilson & Gilbert, 2003).

When I drove by myself to New Hampshire over this past winter break to campaign for Obama, I was very emotionally invested in the campaign. When we lost New Hampshire, and in particular the town I had been working in, I wasn't so much depressed and in despair that all my work was for nothing as I was angry. This was unexpected, and probably due to some kind of defense mechanism where I would rather be angry than sad. And by the time I got back to my home in Texas, I was so happy to be home that all distress due to losing New Hampshire was nearly gone.

I kept up with the campaign and obsessively read news articles online to see how the primaries were going. I soon saw, however, that the campaign was beginning to change in response to attacks from Hilary, and I didn't like where it was going.

So when Hilary dropped out I was surprised to find myself relieved more than anything. I didn't feel elated or justified or celebratory at all. I just felt that we had dodged one more bullet. I never would have guessed I would lack enthusiasm for that victory.

So in conclusion, back at New Hampshire I thought I would be off the walls if Obama won the primary- and all I could say about that now is I'm glad I didn't bet on it.

Wilson, T. D., & Gilbert, D. T. (2003). Affective forecasting. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 345-411.

Family Discussion

I can recall a time where I experienced the defensive bias due to the belief in a just world. This is where people explain away others' suffering as due to those people's personal actions and disregard the situation, in order to feel safe that it couldn't simply 'happen to anyone'.

I was talking to my mother about my job at College Forward and how the kids sometimes lose focus. She reminded me that she got through college as a single mother raising two kids and thought that anyone who couldn't get a higher education was lazy, or at the least that it was no one's fault but theirs.

I told asked her if it was okay to blame an addicted homeless drunk for the situation he was in. She thought it was okay, there's plenty of help to get out of that, most people just don't want to. Then I asked her if it was okay for someone who won the Nobel Prize or an Oscar to go up on stage and say, "I don't want to thank anyone other than me, because I'm here because of me, and don't owe anybody anything. All me, yep, thanks."

She obviously thought that wasn't okay, and I simply pointed out that the reason why she believed such a thing was because she wasn't giving enough thought to social factors in the homeless persons life and past life, and was giving that consideration to those who got somewhere great. Maybe there is another effect where people look at those who are more successful than themselves and automatically attribute that success to situational factors, so as not to feel bad that they themsleves haven't achieved as much.

TV Shows

Looking back at the readings we've had this week I see that I have an example of a concept to share that I have encountered in my life. It is the false-consensus effect, where it is easy for you to overestimate how many people think the things you think, do the things you do, believe the things you believe (Kreuger, 1998). Oddly enough, I think of Firefly the television show. Why? Well, have you ever been in the position of having a favorite television show, and learning to your dismay that not enough people are watching it so it's taken off the air? You might be left wondering why everyone isn't watching this amazing show. Surely there are plenty more people watching it out there, right? I find it a classic example of the false-consensus effect.