It seemed that people either started in a mean-spirited way, a critical way, started talking about a disagreement, started talking about a problem as just a symptom of their partner's inadequate character, which made their partner defensive and escalated the conflict, and people started getting mean and insulting to one another. That predicted the relationship was going to fall apart. 96% of the time the way the conflict discussion started in the first 3 minutes determined how it would go for the rest of the discussion.
Psycho-physiology is an important part of this research. It's something that Bob Levenson brought to the search initially, and then I got trained in psycho-physiology as well. And the reason we're interested in what was happening in the body is that there's an intimate connection between what's happening to the autonomic nervous system and what happening in the brain, and how well people can take in information — how well they can just process information — for example, just being able to listen to your partner — that is much harder when your heart rate is above the intrinsic rate of the heart, which is around a hundred to a hundred and five beats a minute for most people with a healthy heart.
At that point we know, from Loren Rowling's work, that people start secreting adrenalin, and then they get into a state of diffuse physiological arousal (or DPA) , so their heart is beating faster, it's contracting harder, the arteries start getting constricted, blood is drawn away from the periphery into the trunk, the blood supply shuts down to the gut and the kidney, and all kinds of other things are happening — people are sweating, and things are happening in the brain that create a tunnel vision, one in which they perceive everything as a threat and they react as if they have been put in great danger by this conversation.
Among most people, particularly biophysical scientists, there is considerable skepticism expressed when it is proposed to try to use mathematical modeling in the psychological arena. Even when such an endeavor has been shown to be extremely useful as, for example, in the case of Zeeman (1977) in his seminal work on anorexia, the prejudice remains. Initially the research here was no exception. Interestingly, during the original discussions and meetings, without exception all of the mathematicians involved were initially skeptical (as was I). Also, without exception everyone involved became totally convinced in a very short time as o is relevance and practical use. Perhaps no one likes to believe that their emotions and reactions can be so starkly predicted with such simple mathematical models.
« Older NPR article and slide show... | Sarah Palin understands the im... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Buy a Shirt