Tell Me More, Mr. Science

My degree is in Psychology, and psychology was my chosen course of study for a number of reasons. Yes, easy class schedules, liberal professors and access to free thinking girls were factors, but I was also legitimately interested in some of the research surrounding human behavior.  Why do people do what they do?  I was genuinely curious, and I thought the research studies were interesting and fun.  I know, weird.

One of my favorite concepts from my Freshman year studies was cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance describes the mental conflict that occurs when beliefs or assumptions are contradicted by new information. Psychologist Leon Festinger and later researchers showed that, when confronted with challenging new information, most people seek to preserve their current understanding of the world by rejecting, explaining away, or avoiding the new information or by convincing themselves that no conflict really exists.  We make the world match our preconceived ideas of what it is in order to remove the uncomfortable dissonance.  This happens most often when far right Republicans are confronted with scientific information or reality in general.

As I moved from college into the working world, I became enamored with the Hawthorne Effect, named after a researcher named...Hawthorne (not really).  The Hawthorne Effect is the psychological theory that the behavior of an individual or a group will change to meet the expectations of the observer if they are aware their behavior is being observed.  This behavior was documented by a research team led by Elton Mayo in the 1920s at the Western Electric Company Hawthorne plant. In studying the effect of lighting on productivity, the researchers found that, regardless of the lighting conditions introduced, productivity improved.  We will supply what we are expected to supply.  This is useful in the workplace, and also when raising children.

As I grew into the role of parent, I started my fascination with the Stockholm Syndrome.  The Stockholm Syndrome refers to a group of psychological symptoms that occur in some persons in a captive or hostage situation. This helps explain behaviors in everyday family life. The term takes its name from a bank robbery in Stockholm, Sweden, in August 1973. The robber took four employees of the bank (three women and one man) into the vault with him and kept them hostage for 131 hours. After the employees were finally released, they appeared to have formed a paradoxical emotional bond with their captor; they told reporters that they saw the police as their enemy rather than the bank robber, and that they had positive feelings toward the criminal. We don't know more about this syndrome because it would be unethical to test theories about the syndrome by experimenting on human beings, but we know it happens.  The contestants on Survivor seem to like Jeff Probst, the host, so that supports the theory.

I love this stuff, I really do, and now I have a new favorite psychological concept to share: the Dunning-Kruger Effect. This theory states that the less you know, the more you think you know.  Charles Darwin once said, "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge".  Man, that guy was evolved.  In sum, Kruger and Dunning found during their 1999 research study that incompetent people overestimate their own skill level, fail to recognize the skill of others, and fail to recognize their own inadequacy.  Of course, if you don't believe any of this, or think you are the exception, perhaps the theory has just been proven.  Not a sermon, just a thought.

So next time someone expresses too much certainty about their position on anything, think about the Dunning-Kruger Effect, and silently pity the person. Chances are they know nothing at high volume, and it's better than 50-50 that they have their own show on cable.

Trust, but verify.

Driving Blind

To the driver of the car in front of me on my way to work this morning:

I did not think it would demonstrate good judgment on my part to get out of my car, knock on your driver’s side window, and respond to the question you posed on your bumper sticker. I would have preferred to have this conversation with you face-to-face. Since we were in traffic, I was headed to work, and your rear bumper was covered with NRA and other gun-related decals, I thought it best to respond this way – anonymously behind the security of my keyboard. I value honesty, but I value my personal safety more. Besides, it is possible that your bumper sticker was more of a rhetorical question, and no sense getting popped with a cap over a question that did not need an answer.

Your bumper sticker question to me, “Sorry Yet?”, with the Obama 2008 campaign symbol within the letter “o” of the word 'sorry', deserves an answer.

No, I am not sorry yet. Thanks for asking.

There are a few things that I would prefer Obama did differently. There are a few pieces of legislation that I wish Obama had pushed harder for, instead of outsourcing the job to his party leaders in Congress. I am guessing that those things about Obama’s presidency that disappoint me are quite different from the ones that disappoint you, but nonetheless, I am not 100% satisfied. That much is true.

Sorry I am not.

I am happy that private sector employment is growing. I am happy that the Iraq War has been managed effectively since January 2009. I am pleased that inflation is low (nearly non-existent), that my taxes haven’t gone up, and that the markets have rebounded nicely since he took office. I am glad that an economy in free fall has been reversed, and stability has taken its place.

I am glad that we cut out the banks as the middle man in the student loan process. I am not pleased that an auto bail out was necessary, but glad he did the unpopular thing and saved those jobs.  I am glad that bail out funds are being repaid.  I am happy that health care reform was passed.

I am glad illegal immigration is down. I am not sorry that financial reform passed and has become law. I do not regret that insurance companies cannot discriminate because of pre-existing conditions, and that those who try to avoid paying their fair share will be forced to buy insurance, just like the GOP advocated for years as a way to promote personal responsibility.

I am not sorry that quiet diplomacy worked and we will have a peacefully transition from Mubarak in Egypt, and that divisions of our young soldiers were not required to accomplish that objective.

You should be happy that Obama has signed only one piece of gun legislation since taking office. Concealed weapons are now legal in our national parks.  Yup, that's it.  He's not taking your guns, regardless of what you have been told.

I am glad that a majority of Americans in recent polls approve of how Obama is handling his job, even during a time of high unemployment and overheated rhetoric about Muslims and Socialists.  I am glad that you are vocal through your stickers, yet still in the minority.

Your bumper sticker also read, “If you aren’t outraged, you are not paying attention”. I am paying attention, and I am outraged. Not for the same reasons you are, though.

Maybe I would have stopped to chat if I hadn't seen the "I (heart) our snipers" sticker.  Maybe some other time.

“Let Me In, Immigration Man”

I have spent the past several months immersed in the world of a single government form.  This form has given birth to a multi-million dollar cottage industry of human resource advisors, software compliance systems, legal advisory services and training courses.  The official government handbook that explains the proper use of the form is itself 69 pages, and it still doesn’t adequately explain every situation that could conceivably occur when completing the form.  (The manual for explaining the E Verify process is another 97 pages of rules and exceptions, by the way.)  I speak, of course, about every HR professional’s favorite bane of existence – USCIS Form I-9 (formerly DHS Form I-9 which was formerly INS Form I-9). 

 

For those blessed by ignorance of the form, USCIS Form I-9 is completed by newly hired employees to verify eligibility to work in the United States.  Work eligibility is verified by the employer viewing original identity and work authorization documents from the new employee.  For example, an unexpired US Passport can accomplish both goals - identity and work authorization.  Some employees present a photo driver’s license (identity) and a Social Security card (work authorization).  Second to border checkpoints, this is the front line of the battle against illegal immigration.  Government audits of these forms in on the rise, and businesses are scrambling to keep up.  If you are still with me, I have a more interesting observation to make.

I ran across this quote in an article, since I spend an inordinate amount of time reading about this stuff:

“In the past two years, the Obama administration has significantly changed the direction of Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s worksite efforts,” Kevin Lashus, an attorney with Greenberg Traurig in Austin, Texas, told SHRM Online. “The Bush administration was interested in taking the highest numbers of unauthorized workers into custody during any time frame. The Obama administration, on the other hand, is interested in targeting the employers that hired them.”

Two approaches from two administrations to accomplish the same objective of reducing the number of the undocumented in this country.  This sounded to me much like the differing approaches to drug enforcement.  The question is always do you lock up the users to reduce demand, or lock up the dealers and reduce supply?  In the immigration debate, it sounds like the Bush approach was to reduce supply; Obama’s approach is to eliminate demand.  On a more cynical note, the Bush approach was designed to create scarier photo ops for Fox & Friends; the Obama approach is designed to quietly dry up employment opportunities for the undocumented.

Reducing demand clearly seems to work.  Illegal immigration is down the past few years (if you believe the stats, which is another post for another day), and that makes sense.  When unemployment is high, there are fewer jobs.  Fewer jobs means less incentive to come to the states and drink from its fountain of plenty.  It is not clear that Obama’s new focus caused the reductions as much as underlying economic conditions and generalized xenophobia have reduce the numbers coming here.  If the financial incentive to come to America is gone, the problem won’t be eliminated, but it should be significantly reduced to a manageable level.

The market forces that my friends on the Right trumpet as the solution to all that ails us are being allowed to work by this administration, and for that, I am certain they are being called anti-business.  If employers stop hiring all undocumented workers, the incentive to come to America will drop dramatically.  You can round up illegal aliens all day long, but American businesses want the most labor for the lowest price.  That’s the power of the marketplace, right?  If you ignore the employer side, demand will remain high, and the problem will never be solved.  Whether or not you believe that employers should be tasked with verifying employment eligibility in the first place is a different question.  At least since 1986, that’s the way it’s done.

And before you send me a nasty gram – I am calling for a diversified approach, not all one method of enforcement at the expense of another.

“Let Me In, Immigration Man”.  Crosby, Stills and Nash penned these words 40 years ago, and the topic of immigration still remains at the forefront of domestic politics and culture, primarily because those in power would prefer to have the issue as a battering ram against their opposition.  Resolution would rob each side of an effective wedge, and Lord knows we need a good wedge to spice up the 2012 election cycle.  Reagan worked with the Left to “solve” this issue once, in 1986, but that solution involved amnesty, the dirty little secret of the Reagan legacy.  I am sure my conservatives friends will explain to me why following Reagan’s lead on this would be wrong now. 

 

There is a solution.  We just need serious adults to agree on one imperfect, but better, solution.  In the meantime, when someone says “It’s jobs, jobs, jobs”, think about the I-9 form.  It is the gift that keeps on giving.  While its’ enforcement drives undocumented workers out of jobs, it is also creating high paying, technical jobs right here at home – figuring out how to complete the one page form without going to jail or drowning in fines.  

Burdens

I must begin with a disclaimer.  I am not a veteran.  I have never served in the military.  No one in my immediate family was in the military.  I have never even been a Cub or Boy Scout.  My closest affiliation with anything remotely military has been the occasional run in with Major Headaches and General Malaise, two close personal friends.  I had a bad experience with Corporal Punishment once, but that was a long time ago.  Otherwise, I am civilian through and through.  I respect the military, although I am the first to admit that don’t always understand its procedures, protocols, motivations, routines, etc.  I know the challenges faced by military personnel are beyond my comprehension, and that’s by my choice.  I was (am) too much of a free thinker during my enlistment eligible days of youth to consider such a regimented and potentially dangerous lifestyle. 

 

From this vantage point, I read the following from Congress.org (as reported in The Week):

For the second year in a row, in 2010 the U.S. military lost more troops to suicide than in combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.  At least 468 soldiers killed themselves in 2010.

Let that one sink in for a moment.  Tragic.  Unspeakably sad.  Avoidable?  I don’t know.

  

My healthy skepticism of all statistics got me to thinking that this presentation of a number without context could be misleading.  Shocking, right?  The questions kept coming: 

·         How does this number compare to the rate of suicide in the general population?

·         How does this number compare to peacetime suicide totals?

·         Is this above, below or the same as historical averages?

·         Do the military forces of other countries suffer from the same, worse or better numbers?

·         How does the survey define suicide?  I ask because the quote above refers to “at least” 468 suicides, which leads me to believe that the cause of death is sometimes in dispute.

·         How many happened in the theater of operations?  How many happened to individuals who had never seen combat missions? 

·         How many happened within 2 years of combat?  How many happened more than 20 years after combat?

·         Are those who join the military for the structure and the discipline more likely to drift into depression once that structure and discipline is removed post-active duty?

The easy answer, the lazy answer is that war is hell, and that these suicides in proportion to actual battlefield casualties represent nothing more than unavoidable collateral damage.  That view feels too cynical and too callous for me.  Another lazy answer is that more money and resources must be devoted to mental health resources for our military veterans, particularly those who have seen firsthand the horrors of war.  More resources may be needed, but I cannot base that opinion solely on the one dramatic statistic that started me down this path of curiosity in the first place.

I don’t know all of the answers to my questions.  Ultimately, I don’t know what drives someone to consider such a permanent solution to temporary problems.  What I do know is that these numbers represent real people, people who decided for whatever personal reason to join our fighting forces and spend time defending our nation.  For that, they should never be forgotten.  The causes of their descent are likely unique, but that should never be an excuse for not finding out the answers and addressing the problem of military suicides aggressively and in the light of day.

God rest their souls.  

Institutionalization Guidelines

I have a nephew getting married this month, and I can’t make the trip all the way to California for his big day.

I remember the day he was born. I was 15 years old, just finished my first year of high school. One summer morning, I went downstairs into the kitchen and there was a note on the table with my first nephew’s name, time and date of birth, and other vitals. My first reaction was “Casey? OK, what did they really name him?” It took a few minutes to convince me that his name was in fact Casey. Remember, I came from a background where the only viable naming convention was to choose the name of a saint. Prior to this morning, I knew of only 2 other Caseys. The first was mighty, but he struck out too much. The second was an engineer who needed to “watch his speed”, because there was “trouble ahead, trouble behind.” Now the name Casey is much more common (but still not the name of a saint, at least not yet).

While I can’t attend, I can forward some unsolicited advice on the whole marriage scene. While the instinct to make sly comments and tasteless jokes about the institution of marriage (I mean, who wants to spend their life in an institution?) is strong, I will resist for a few rambling paragraphs. That is my gift to Casey and Laura – I will spare you the poorly crafted puns and obscure comedy movie quotes that are the foundational pieces of any Sherrier humor. You’re welcome.

Spouse is Number One. Cherie and I, like many couples, were required to attend pre-marriage classes by the church. Like many couples, we giggled through too much of it; however, 20 years later, some of the messages stay with me. The first message was that in a marriage, your spouse is Number One. This was a key message throughout the engagement classes. Your new spouse is ahead of your friends, your parents, your future children. All things good will flow from understanding that and living it. This message will be challenged along your journey, and sometimes you may not remember why this is so vital. I would encourage you to return to this message throughout your lives together.

You are the patriarch/matriarch of your future family. It is helpful in making early decisions in married life to picture yourselves as the patriarch and matriarch of your as yet undeveloped family tree. Cherie and I were challenged to visualize ourselves as the elderly grandparents, or great-grandparents, of our extended family, with branches extending in multiple directions. When you recognize your place in that future family photo, every daily decision about your small family (of only 2 people on your wedding day) takes on greater significance. Stephen Covey wrote that we should “begin with the end in mind.” This mentality provides clarity and perspective to everyday situations. Thinking about your final place on your family tree helps you to do that.

One last piece of unsolicited advice: On your wedding day, expect that three things will go wrong. I’m not being negative, just realistic. Keep in mind that a wedding is a major event, and few major events go off without some hitches. Assume there will be hitches, and when they do occur, you can allow them to roll off your back a little easier. Someone may be sick and unable to attend. The florist may forget one boutonniere. The cake may have vanilla icing when you requested chocolate. It will seem large at the moment, but life’s best memories are sometimes those mishaps and how we handle them. Oh, I forgot to mention – it’s a lock that your father (my brother) will embarrass you at some point during the weekend. But you already knew that. He means well…

I hope you appreciate this gift of sage advice. I know it wasn’t on your registry, but here it is anyway. I might send a check, too.

Casey and Laura, best of luck and a world of happiness on your special day and beyond. We love you and you will be in our thoughts as you begin the Great Adventure.

31 Flavors

It's a day of the Big Game (as noted in previous posts, I cannot use the phrase "Super Bowl" since I have not paid the NFL for the rights), so I cannot reasonably expect any heavy thinking from the readers today...or myself for that matter.  So here is a random collection of thoughts, platitudes, mission statements, rantings, musings, and other emissions that have occurred to me and from me over the past few weeks.  I think it is more efficient to list them here than to provide these sweet treats as daily Facebook updates.  Happy Big Game Sunday!

1.       I never want to have a 5K named after me.

2.       If I ever have a hernia, I would like it to be a sports hernia.

3.       Those colorful, shiny orbs that people place on pedestals in their gardens are proof that we as a nation will buy anything if enough of our neighbor’s own it, too.

4.       With the exception of Ivy League schools, if your alma mater has a nationally recognized football team, you have a better chance of landing a job.

5.       Everyone is on a diet.  Some diets are lousy; some are healthy, but whatever we eat is our diet.

6.       The number of pages in a particular piece of legislation should not be allowed to define its merits.  The Bible has quite a few pages, and it is generally considered to be a valuable book.

7.       It still amazes me that in my adult lifetime, there used to be smoking and non-smoking sections on airplanes, and the only barricade between the two sections was your row number.

8.       Stephen King should really be locked up somewhere.  No sane person could think all those thoughts and write them down.

9.       Sometimes if you wait, a problem does go away by itself.

10.   I believe with all my heart that if Mike Piazza had rushed the mound after ‘Roid-Rage Clemens threw the broken bat at him, the Mets would have at least made the 2000 World Series a 7 game series.  

11.   I thought we’d all be driving Hovercrafts by now.

12.   Justice and revenge are not the same thing.

13.   I don’t know anyone personally who bought those X-ray glasses that were advertised in the back of magazines years ago.  I do know a lot of people who gave it serious consideration, though.

14.   By far the toughest day of work is the morning after you don’t win the $300 million Mega Millions Jackpot you were counting on.

15.   If I won the lottery, I would buy really nice and expensive sunglasses, and not care if they got lost or broken.

16.   Do we really need both AM and FM stations anymore?  We stopped selling black and white TVs at some point.

17.   Everyone has something wrong with them – pimples, acid reflux, bad hearing in one ear – something.  It may not be obvious, but everyone has a flaw, a weakness, and this is our great equalizer.

18.   When will the cursive signature be added to the dust heap of history?  I will miss it when it’s gone.

19.   Work gives me energy, and laziness makes me tired.  Shouldn’t it be the other way around?

20.   Spending is spending and investing is investing.

21.   Those little sliding windows in the confessional booth were designed by the same guy who devised the sliding windows in solitary confinement prison cells.  That should tell you something.

22.   I learned recently that Bambi was a boy deer.  Bambi never really took off as a boy name, though, for some reason.

23.   I would hope that advances in medical research will finally prove that the handkerchief must be banned.  Once nasal exhaust becomes dry and crusty, the germs are still alive with the power to infect again, particularly when stored in a dark, warm and linty pocket.

24.   I think defibrillators in the workplace are taking the entire self-service culture a bit too far.  It’s a slippery slope before a full array of surgical tools are available everywhere, and we’ll all be expected to know how to use them.

25.   Is allowing Budweiser to sponsor race cars sending a bad message to the kids?

26.   I am surprised, given the American obsession with NASCAR and the automobile in general, that more red-necks don’t drive cabs for a living.

27.   Celsius or Fahrenheit – make up your mind already.

28.   We play the Super Bowl in February, the World Series in November, the Stanley Cup in June.  It is only a matter of time before March Madness rolls into May.

29.   I have never met anyone who regrets having learned a musical instrument as a child.

30.   There is nothing more disappointing about a home than poor water pressure from the shower (thanks, Greg).

31.   Potvin sucks.

Super America

Nothing says American Exceptionalism quite like the Big Game. (Editor’s Note: I am reluctant to refer to the Super Bowl directly, given that the name “Super Bowl” is licensed by the NFL, and I do not want to be sued for its’ unauthorized use). Unlimited fatty foods, free flowing domestic beers, illegal gambling, underage prostitution, and corporate sponsored violence truly defines our exceptional place in world history. This sounds more like the storyboard for an episode of The Sopranos than a football game. The use of Roman numerals to describe this annual orgy of excess seems perfectly appropriate, since unsuspecting QBs are often substitutes for the human sacrifice portion of the program. The only thing missing is the lions, and I am pretty confident that we won’t see Lions at the Big Game any time soon.

American exceptionalism has become quite the topic of discussion in the echo chamber, but not as it relates to the Packers or Steelers. It has become the new litmus test for aspiring politicians, according to Kathleen Parker, and I think she is correct. In a recent op-ed piece, she compared the utterance of the phrase “American exceptionalism” to other arbitrary hurdles for pols, such as the wearing of a flag pin and using the phrase “Islamic terrorism”. In this bizarro world, symbolism trumps actions, and words equal results. Sometimes reality doesn’t even matter.

President Obama has apparently not jumped convincingly enough onto the exceptionalism bandwagon, at least not convincingly enough for the Right wing. The problem here is that regardless of what Obama says or does, the Right will flog him with claims that he does not accept the tenets of American exceptionalism. This makes sense to the Right, since they aren’t even convinced he is a citizen, despite facts to the contrary.

Here’s the most recent example, post-SOTU speech. House Speaker Boehner and CNN’s Kathleen Parker had this exchange after the Obama address to Congress:

PARKER: You know one of the words that I listened out for in his speech last night was the word "exceptional." ... But I didn't hear him say it and I thought at a time when you're building a speech around sort of defining the common purpose of America, that seemed to me a rather -- you know, a simple direct line, fairly -- pretty much a no-brainer, but he didn't say it.

BOEHNER: Well, they -- they've refused to talk about America exceptionalism. We are different than the rest of the world. Why? Because Americans have -- the country was built on an idea that ordinary people could decide what their government looked like and ordinary people could elect their own leaders.

And 235 years ago that was a pretty novel idea. And so we are different. Why is our economy still 20 times the size of China's? Because Americans have had their freedom to succeed, the freedom to fail. We've got more innovators, more entrepreneurs, and that is exceptional but you can't get the left to talk about it. They don't -- they reject that notion.

PARKER: Why do you think that is?

BOEHNER: I don't know. I don't know. I don't know if they're afraid of it, whether they don't believe it. I don't know.

I heard Obama’s speech, and I am not sure that either of these characters did. My mama taught me that I have 2 ears and one mouth for a reason – listen more than talk. Boehner and Parker have skipped the listen part in a dramatic and blindly partisan way.

During the State of the Union, Obama talked about the qualities that "set us apart as a nation" and the things we do "better than anyone else." And his belief that America is "not just a place on a map, but the light to the world" and "the greatest nation on Earth." And his reminder that "as contentious and frustrating and messy as our democracy can sometimes be, I know there isn't a person here who would trade places with any other nation on Earth."

Boehner specifically whined that "they" don't understand that "the country was built on an idea," a day after Obama explained, "What's more, we are the first nation to be founded for the sake of an idea -- the idea that each of us deserves the chance to shape our own destiny."

This is all in the public record. These Right wing claims are silly and insulting to those who listen and read. How can anyone sit on TV and pretend that none of this was said during his address? The sad fact is that the truth cannot be allowed to get in the way of a good story, and the GOP’s story is that Obama is anti-American and not like us. If Obama tomorrow gives a speech titled “American Exceptionalism”, the Right will question his inflection, the red color of his tie, and his reliance on a teleprompter instead of speaking from the heart. The goal post will continue to move.

Think I’m kidding? Fox News posted an article about an Obama “gaffe” during the National Prayer Breakfast. The President used a quote from the Bible during his remarks, and Fox News reported that he has misquoted the Bible. Blasphemy, right? Except there are dozens of translations of the Bible, all legitimate in their own way. Fox News relied on the King James version – Obama’s quote was from the New International version. Have these litmus tests for public office gotten so ridiculous that use of a different translation of the Bible becomes a disqualifying event? Or is the only litmus test really in play questioning Obama at every turn, regardless of merit?

On the question of American Exceptionalism, Obama will never win over his Right wing critics that harbor a transparent agenda. After tomorrow, Green Bay fans will never be able to convince Pittsburgh fans that they are the better team, even when the scoreboard says otherwise at the end of the game.

Green Bay 26 – Pittsburgh 22