"Buckets & Dippers"

Buckets & Dippers

by

John E. Valusek, Ph.D.

When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: 

but when I became a man, I put away childish things.           
-1 Corinthians 13:11

The world of the child is largely created for him by the adults in his environment. He has little or no control over the kind of input he receives. His self-concept is therefore quite dependent upon how he is treated and what is said and done to him. This is appropriate and necessary for the child.

Sad to say, most of us, as adults, continue to function in much the same manner as when we were children. We continue to expect others to make us feel good and we blame them for making us feel bad. This is not only inappropriate for and adult but it is also quite unnecessary.  While it appears to be true that most of us will always need and welcome support from those around us, it is not true that we are entirely dependent upon them. Yet, many of us never seem to discover this basic truth.

Because we apparently never eliminate many of our past learnings, even when harmed by them, it would be quite helpful if more people became aware of another way of thinking about the self that is, perhaps, a little easier to understand than some of the commonly accepted ways. A simple analogy is presented below which can be useful in helping to understand certain aspects of any personal relationship. However, it is particularly relevant when dealing with children or when observing many of the personal, emotional interchanges between and among children.

Let us imagine and conceive of the self as if it were a bucket. How we feel and how we will behave at any given moment is dependent upon how much or how little we have in our buckets. If our bucket is filled to overflowing, (which almost never happens), we will feel joy, have energy, and look forward to each day with enthusiasm. We will radiate warmth, be tolerant, forgiving, understanding and supporting of others. We will be glad we are alive and will exultantly proclaim, "Life is good." This is a well-developed pro-life viewpoint.

If our buckets are completely empty, (which almost never happens), we will feel and display all those characteristics which are opposite to those just stated. We will fell depressed, have little energy, and dread the coming of the next day. We will be unhappy, bitter, complaining, vindictive, and non-supporting of others. We will whine and miserably or angrily proclaim: "Life is lousy, purposeless, and hopeless." This is a well-developed anti-life viewpoint.

When faced with a person whose bucket is empty, most of us tend to become defensive---we feel threatened, fearful, hurt, or angry. It is likely that if we are strongly attacked verbally, we will respond in similar fashion. The emotional heat so generated is often not conducive to the development of healthy working relationships, not to the development of kindly feeling toward our attacker.

If we understood and applied the idea of the self as a bucket, we might discover that we would be able to behave quite differently than is usually expected. For example, when an attack is being directed toward us, rather than feeling hurt or counterattacking, we might find that we will be able calmly to view the upset person from a non-emotional vantage point. We could then say to ourselves: ‘Oh, you poor thing! You must have an empty bucket!" This places the attacker in an entirely different perspective. It can make us realize that his state of distress has very little to do with us, even though he seems to think it does. We will be able to realize that he is behaving that way because he feels so bad about himself. His bucket must be empty or else he wouldn’t be behaving that way. We might even be moved to feel genuine sympathy for him.

If we adopted the bucket view of self, we would understand that the motive underlying his attack is more directly attributable to his empty bucket than to anything we might have done to warrant criticism. We would realize that the person who is characteristically bitter is a person who has an empty or near-empty bucket. The bitterness is an expression of that emptiness.

The person with an empty bucket does not feel good about himself. He is actually upset with himself. In fact, he dislikes himself or else he wouldn’t be so consistently hateful toward others. This is axiomatic: anyone who consistently criticizes, finds fault with, demeans, ridicules, or maliciously gossips about another person actually dislikes himself. Furthermore, his behavior may be characterized as an attempt to engage in bucket dipping.

In addition to our buckets, each of us is equipped with a dipper. The consistently negative person keeps his dipper working overtime in a futile attempt to diminish another person and seemingly enhance himself. He may often succeed in the former, but he always fails miserably in the latter. It is impossible to fill one’s own bucket by dipping into another’s.

Knowing that each of us has a dipper as well as a bucket makes it possible to understand some otherwise fairly inexplicable behavior. It also becomes relatively easy to identify those who approach each day with dipper clutched firmly in hand, frantically engaged in attempting to empty the buckets of those around them. Finally, this view of behavior allows us to cast our own reactions in a different light.

The task then, for a concerned human being who is striving to become more pro-life and more positive, is to exercise every opportunity to help fill another’s bucket and to become intently alert to the spontaneously negative use of his own dipper.

How we go about attempting to fill buckets, to help another person feel better about himself, is actually already well known by most of us; although, we perhaps never realized quite how or why it was so significant. We fill others’ buckets by giving them sincere praise, compliments, accepting smiles, and displaying concerned interest. Strangely and inexplicably, we can add to our own buckets most directly and most mysteriously by working diligently to put drops into another person’s bucket. Under no circumstances do we ever add drops to our own by dipping into another bucket.

Children are relatively helpless. If more time and energy is spent dipping from their buckets than is spent putting drops into them, they have little recourse available to them other than to cringe in defeat or strike out in retaliation. Thus, the constant ever-present phenomenon of children tormenting one another (as well as aiming their dippers at adults), is a relentless quest to "get even." Of course they never succeed. But, their attempt can be understood as an unconscious understanding of at least one half of our concept of buckets and dippers . . . they realize that others have buckets which often contain considerably more than they, themselves, possess. They wrongfully believe that if they dip sufficiently deep enough and often enough, they will not only diminish the supply of the envied one, but will somehow add the stolen drops to their own impoverished supply. Their temporary smile of sadistic satisfaction is soon overcome by the stark reality of the barrenness of their internal environment and they repeat their foolish and harmful bucket-dipping behavior.

When you next look upon or have occasion to relate to a child who is angry, sullen, whining, belligerent, rebellious, obnoxious, cruel, tormenting, destructive or non-cooperative, know that you are witnessing the behavior of a person whose bucket is empty. Psychiatric, psychological, educational, or intuitive diagnosis is unlikely to add much to your knowledge about how to react or respond to him. If the diagnosis suggests a procedure or method of approach which is successfully employed and a positive change occurs in the child, you will know that his bucket must have been filled. Because his bucket was filled, he feels good about himself. When he comes to feel sufficiently good about himself, he will no longer need to respond as he did formerly.

The imperishable child within the adults you see all around you (as well as in your mirror), will respond likewise when his bucket contains a sufficient amount to tip the balance in favor of positive and pro-life attitudes.

 We nourish the bodies of our children, but how seldom we nourish their self-esteem.  We provide them with beef and potatoes, but neglect to give them words that would sing in their memories for years. 

                                                                                                                        -Gloria Pitzer

 Here’s a thought:   

When you run into someone who is disagreeable to others, you may be sure he is uncomfortable with himself.  The amount of pain we inflict upon others is directly proportional to the amount we feel within us! 

 

Not Understood (by anonymous)

Not understood.  We move along asunder,

            Our paths grow wider as the seasons creep

Along the years; we marvel and we wonder

            Why life is life, and then we fall asleep,

                        Not understood. 

Not understood.  We gather false impressions

            And hug them closer as the years go by,

Till virtues often seem to us transgressions;

            And thus men rise and fall and live and die,

                        Not understood. 

Not understood.  Poor souls with stunted vision

            Oft measure giants by their narrow gauge.

The poisoned shafts of falsehood and derision

            Are oft impelled ‘gainst those who mold the age,

                        Not understood. 

Not understood.  The secret springs of action,

            Which lie beneath the surface and the show,

Are disregarded; with self-satisfaction

            We judge our neighbors as they often go,

                        Not understood. 

Not understood.  How trifles often change us. 

            The thoughtless sentence or the fancied slight

Destroys long years of friendships, and estranges us,

            And on our souls there falls a freezing blight:

                        Not understood.

Not understood.  How many breasts are aching,

            For lack of sympathy?  Ah!  Day to day,

How many cheerless, lonely hearts are breaking! 

            How many noble spirits pass away,

                        Not understood. 

O God, that men would see a little clearer,

            Or judge less harshly where they cannot see!

O God, that men would draw a little nearer

            To one another!  They’d be nearer to Thee

                        And understood. 

I'm so EMOTIONAL! (aka-Sister Embree's blog on emotions...)

 Emotions!                                        

EMOTIONS ARE AN INTEGRAL PART OF OUR LIVES.  We literally experience millions every day, and have done since the day we were born.  So we should be pretty familiar with them by now right?  Imagine if someone from another planet were to come down and say “what are these emotion things that we hear so much about?  I don’t experience them.  What are emotions?”  Could you define emotions if you had to?  Would you say emotions are "feelings?"  Really?  I feel hungry right now, is that an emotion (actually in my case, it could very well be!)?  

When Yale University psychologist Robert Sternberg asked people to describe an "intelligent person," one of the main skills listed was the ability to understand and get along with others.  Psychologist Daniel Goleman calls it "emotional intelligence"; or "our ability to understand and manage one's own emotions and be sensitive to others'."  (HUH—so intellectual ability isn't the only way to measure one's talents--NO KIDDING!?)  In fact, emotions play a critical role in almost all of our interpersonal relationships.  I know what some of you are thinking:  “GREAT.  Emotions. UGH.  They’re so…..emotional. I’m not good at emotional.”  Sorry, but there’s no getting around it.  We better bone up on emotions if we are going to be effective and productive in our lives.   

Let’s begin with the closest thing to math that you will ever see from me:  A formula.  Since emotions involve a process, there is a formula that corresponds:    

STIMULUS + PHYSIOLOGICAL RESPONSE + COGNITIVE INTERPRETATION = EMOTIONS. 

Anyone who loves a good formula knows how to break it down.  So let’s do just that.   

Part 1:  Stimulus:  All emotions are caused by something (contrary to what you may think sometimes when your girlfriend breaks out in tears for no “apparent” reason).  That “something” could be an event—a thought—a hormone—whatever.  There has to be a stimulus in order for there to be an emotion. 

Part 2: Physiological response:  This is the way our body reacts.  This is the “feeling” part.  When we experience strong emotions, we may feel an increased heart rate, elevated blood sugar levels, a rise in blood pressure, a slowing of digestion, a dilation of pupils, and an increase in adrenaline secretions.  We may shake—or cry—or sweat—or have a churning stomach—or tense jaw—or break out in red splotches all over—(I used to get so nervous when I’d play the piano in public that I would break out in these horrible red splotches all over my neck and chest.  To this day when I have to play or perform in public I wear high-necked shirts.).  The physiological response is the physical way our body reacts to the stimulus.  This is the part that we feel physically. 

Part 3:  Cognitive interpretation:  Now this is the real key to the emotion.  Cognitive interpretation suggests we make a judgment, and that judgment determines the emotion.  For example, let’s say you are walking down the street, and you see a guy stick his head out of the window, and he just starts yelling swear words at you.  Very specific ones.  Then he starts calling you names, and yelling horrible personal insults.  What is your reaction?  How would you “feel?”  Angry?  Embarrassed?  Horrified?  Surprised?  Shocked?  Let’s say for the sake of argument you feel intense anger.  How dare someone do this to you!?   So just as you look back to give whomever the tongue-lashing of his life, you notice the sign on the building he’s in:  “Upper Valley Mental Institution.”  How do you feel now?   Your judgment of the situation just changed didn’t it?  Perhaps it’s not anger you’re feeling now—perhaps it’s sympathy, or relief, or understanding—certainly not anger. 

So here’s my next question:  CAN WE CONTROL (100%!) ANY OF THE PARTS OF THIS “EMOTION” FORMULA?   

Let’s break the formula down again to answer that question: 

Can we control the stimulus 100% of the time?  We can sometimes control the stimulus but not always.  For instance, we can avoid things that we tend to respond negatively to (i.e.-scary movies, snakes, or scary movies about snakes etc.), but we can’t control the stimulus 100% of the time.  To do that would be to control things outside of ourselves 100%.  So the bottom line for stimulus is this:  stuff happens, and sometimes we can control it, sometimes we can’t.   

Can we control our physiological response 100% of the time?   Again, we can sometimes.  We can learn techniques to deal with things like stress, or pain, or nervousness, etc., but the bottom line is the same.  We cannot control every single situation our bodies will come in contact with, so our body’s gonna do what our body’s gonna do. 

This leaves cognitive interpretation. 

Can we control our cognitive interpretation 100% of the time?  Yes, yes, and YES!  ONE HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE TIME, we can control what we think and feel.  THIS IS THE KEY to emotions!  And I’ve heard all the arguments…all the “what if’s,” and I still stand behind this one.  We can (100%!) choose what we feel.  I heard one such “what if” in one of my classes:  “What if someone had just murdered my child in cold-blood?  I would have no choice but to feel complete anger.  You can’t tell me I could control that!?”  Yes, I can tell you that actually.  You made a choice to feel anger.  Was it an awful thing?  Yes.  But did you have a choice in feeling that anger?  Yes.  “That cannot be possible!” some of you are thinking.  Let me remind you of a story to illustrate:    

October 2006:  A 32-yr old milk truck driver stormed into an Amish elementary school, tied up ten little girls and shot them all.  Five of them died.  Then he took his own life.  The Amish people felt great anguish, but chose not to feel anger.  They chose not to feel anger.  In fact, the Amish chose instead to reach out to the milkman’s tortured family, and it so touched the family that they released the following statement to the public:   

 “To our Amish friends, neighbors, and local community: Our family wants each of you to know that we are overwhelmed by the forgiveness, grace, and mercy that you’ve extended to us. Your love for our family has helped to provide the healing we so desperately need. The prayers, flowers, cards, and gifts you’ve given have touched our hearts in a way no words can describe. Your compassion has reached beyond our family, beyond our community, and is changing our world, and for this we sincerely thank you. Please know that our hearts have been broken by all that has happened. We are filled with sorrow for all of our Amish neighbors whom we have loved and continue to love. We know that there are many hard days ahead for all the families who lost loved ones, and so we will continue to put our hope and trust in the God of all comfort, as we all seek to rebuild our lives.” 

Let me assert again:  We can 100% control our cognitive interpretation.  What does this mean? 

FACT:  You, and only you are responsible for your emotions (write this down and star it!).  No one can make you feel anything unless you let them. 

There are exceptions to this rule however.   Sickness (physical or mental), chemical abuse, phobias, depression…all these can rob a person of their ability to control their emotions.  Still, for a healthy person, THE RULE APPLIES.  

This fact also doesn’t negate the presence of emotional contagions.  We are influenced by the feelings of those around us. 

A million years ago when I attended Ricks College (now BYU-Idaho), I had a great psychology teacher.  Brother Maelstrom.  He taught that all emotions do four things: 

1.     Emotions always change.  You can’t maintain an emotion forever. 

2.     Emotions focus our perceptions on the stimulus of the emotion.  Therefore emotions make us see LESS clearly, not more clearly (i.e.:  you’re walking through a meadow and noticing the flowers.  Then you look up and see a bull..you immediately have a reaction?  FEAR!  RUN?  All of a sudden, you don’t notice the air, the flowers, the colors, etc…you notice the route outta there!)  Anyone ever hear of the term BLIND RAGE? 

3.     They make us self-centered.  It’s all about what I’M feeling. 

4.     They make us impulsive and reactive. 

 Taking the above into account, here is another extremely important rule never to forget: 

NEVER EVER MAKE AN IMPORTANT LIFE DECISION BASED ON EMOTION! 

(What is an important life decision that people make at BYUI every day?  Marriage!) 

Most emotions have the potential to be facilitative (positive) or debilitative (negative).  It’s all in how we interpret it.   

But many of us struggle with how to positively express emotions.  I’ve certainly had my share of “mom moments” for example (Bill Cosby called them “caniptions”), and I have had moments when I have most definitely “lost it.”  How can we learn to control or more positively express our emotions? 

First of all it’s important to know that expressing emotions is very culturally dependent.  In individualistic cultures like the United States, we feel more comfortable in expressing emotions than do collectivist cultures (like Japan & India for example).    

And while there aren’t any universal rules for the best way to communicate emotions, a wide range of research supports the fact that expressing emotions appropriately is healthy and valuable.  The following suggestions can help (if you live in an individualistic culture): 

1.     Recognize your feelings.  Be specific.  What exactly are you feeling?  Do you have a large “emotional vocabulary?”  If not, get to work on it!  Look at the chart below.  Ask yourself:  Do I use these specific words to describe my emotions?  (For example, I have this problem with things that I like.  I have a tendency to say “Oh, I love that,” or “I love him,” etc.  I throw the word “love” around to fit any range of feeling I have.  I sometimes do the same thing with “hate”).  Ask yourself:  What exactly am I feeling?  For example, am I “ecstatic,” or just “content?”  (See figures below from the 12^th edition of “Looking Out Looking In”)

2.     Tune in to your self-talk.  Learn to control it.  Your brain doesn’t know when you are “just kidding” when you self-depreciate.  So stop it!  The sub-conscious doesn’t know the difference—it will believe whatever your self-talk says. If you don’t control it, it will control you. 

3.     Dispute irrational thoughts or “fallacies.”  Do we spend an unnecessary amount of time and effort on illogical conclusions that turn into debilitative emotions?  There are 7 major fallacies that affect our emotional state.  How many times have we been “guilty” of  these?  

1.      The Fallacy of Perfection asserts that people should be able to handle every situation with complete confidence and skill.  Believing in the myth of perfection not only can keep others from liking you, but also can act as a force to diminish your own self-esteem. 

2.      The Fallacy of Approval is the mistaken belief that it is not just desirable but vital to get the approval of virtually every person.  In addition to the obvious discomfort that arises from denying your own principles and needs to gain acceptance and approval from others, the myth of approval is irrational because it implies that others will respect and like you more if you go out of your way to please them.  Striving for universal acceptance is irrational because it is simply not possible.  

3.     The Fallacy of Shoulds is the inability to distinguish between what is and what should be.  Becoming obsessed with shoulds has three troublesome consequences.  First, it leads to unnecessary unhappiness, for people who are constantly dreaming about the ideal are seldom satisfied with what they have or who they are.  A second drawback is that merely complaining without acting can keep you from doing anything to change unsatisfying conditions.  A third problem with shoulds that you impose on others is that this sort of complaining can build a defensive climate with others, who will resent being nagged.  

4.      The Fallacy of Overgeneralization occurs when we base a belief on a limited amount of evidence and use overgeneralizations.  

5.     The Fallacy of Causation is based on the belief that emotions are caused by others rather than by one’s own self-talk.  This fallacy causes trouble in two ways.  The first plagues people who become overly cautious about relating because they don’t want to “cause” any pain or inconvenience for others.  The second is when we believe that others cause our emotions.  It’s our thinking, not the actions of others, that determines how we feel.  

6.     The Fallacy of Helplessness suggests that satisfaction in life is determined by forces beyond your control, that we are only helpless victims.   

7.     The Fallacy of Catastrophic Expectations operates on the assumption that if something bad can possibly happen, it will

(Fallacies information from “Looking Out Looking In,” 12^th edition).

4.     Accept responsibility for your own feelings.  No more saying & thinking “You make me so angry!” 

5.     Let it go.  I have a friend that will not go to our class reunions because “so-and-so” might be there.  They did not like each other & had a huge fight in high school.  This year I will be out of high school for 25 years.  TWENTY-FIVE YEARS.  I asked my friend if she even remembered why her and this other person were mad at each other in high school.  She doesn’t remember.  Holding things like this in is what my dad used to say is like holding a rattlesnake in your coat.  “Others might be affected, but ultimately, you’re the only one that gets bit.”  Let go of those debilitative emotions that are dragging you down. 

6.     Teach yourself to see things and people in more Christ-like ways.  Give people the benefit of the doubt.  Assume the highest motives in others.  Learn to respond with compassion rather than anger.  Be forgiving. 

7.     Ask Heavenly Father for help.  The Atonement doesn’t just apply to sin.  Christ can heal our hearts as well as our souls. 

 

My next post will include Dr. John Valusek’s wonderful analogy of “Buckets & Dippers.”  It will give you something to think about. 

Now Ricky, go get me a tissue.  I’m getting emotional. 

Ch 4-Emotion's Group Presentation

Who would have thought that three guys could actually tackle the topic of emotions.....But Brandon Keck, Chase Riepl, & Jared Neibaur did it!  Great job guys!  Chase, your facial expressions in your movie was CLASSIC.

Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. And also look fantastic....a theme to live by! :-) 

Ch 3-Perception's Group Presentation!

I love my students!  They are so awesome.  this is Jack Nukaya, David McNary & Sabrina Blake. They did a GREAT presentation on Chapter 3 Perception.

You don't want to know what they were going for in this picture....;-)

Perception! February 4 2011

It was six men of Indostan

To learning much inclined

Who went to see the elephant

Though all of them were blind

That each by observation

Might satisfy his mind

The first approached the elephant 

   And, happening to fall

Against the broad and sturdy side

At once began to bawl:

“Why, bless me! But the elephant

Is very much like a wall!”

The second, feeling of the tusk,

Cried:  “Ho!  What have we here

So very round and smooth and sharp?

To me, ‘tis very clear,

This wonder of an elephant

Is very like a spear!”

The third approached the animal,

And, happening to take

The squirming trunk within his hands

Thus boldly up he spake:

“I see,” quoth he, “the elephant

Is very like a snake!”

The fourth reached out his eager hand

And felt about the knee:

“What most this wondrous beast is like

Is very plain,”  quoth he:

“Tis clear enough the elephant

Is very like a tree!”

The fifth who chanced to touch the ear

Said:  “E’en the blindest man

Can tell what this resembles most—

Deny the fact who can:

This marvel of an elephant

Is very like a fan!”

The sixth no sooner had begun

About the beast to grope

Than, seizing on the swinging tail

That fell within his scope,

“I see,”  quoth he, “the elephant

is very like a rope!”

And so these men of Indostan

Disputed loud and long,

Each in his own opinion

Exceeding stiff and strong;

Though each was partly in the right,

And all were in the wrong.

John G. Saxes “The Men of Indostan & the Elephant.”  

Do any of us have a clue what reality really is?   Will we ever? 

(These are questions I ask myself when all my chores are finished for the evening, there's nothing good on TV, and my Farmville crops are all harvested.)

Anais Nin said, "We don't see things as they are.  We see things as we are."  How true!  My perception of the world and everything in it comes from the perception lenses I am looking through.  And my lenses have all sorts of things already on it:  My prejudices, my religious beliefs, my gender, my personal experiences, my roles in society, my age, etc etc etc!  How in the world can I truly tell what reality really is?  All I can do is hope for a consensus.   A shared perception. And even that differs.  

Perception is a process.  And that process involves selection, organization, interpretation, and negotiation.  First, we must select what it is that we perceive. Sometimes that's done for us, other times we get to choose.   But it has to be selected before we can perceive it.  Our senses are literally feeding us too much information all the time for us to perceive everything, so choices have to be made.  Think about how much you're missing right now by reading this.  Are you hearing the buzz of the computer?  The taste and coldness of the ice cream you dished up for yourself to eat while surfing the net (oh wait, that was me)?  How your clothes feel on your body?  Probably not. Why? Because you've selected something else.  Make sense? 

So why do we select things?  

·         We may select things because we need it (you might not notice an emergency call box on the freeway until you get a flat tire for example), or 

·         We may select things when we are perceptually ready for them (how many things do we miss because we're literally not "ready" to perceive them), but we still need to select them.  

·         We may be influenced to select something because of its intensity (the loudest voice in the room), 

·         its repetition (reference SHAM WOW commercials! UGH), 

·         its familiarity (you notice a McDonalds in Japan because it's like home), 

·         its novelty (put your keys in the refrigerator and see who notices. The ones who notice will be the same people who cannot find the gallon of milk when it’s staring them in the face). 

·         or its proximity (has someone ever been physically closer to you than you're comfortable, and you notice things because you can't seem to help it?  Example-I noticed my high school sports coach had really bad breath most of the time.  Why? Because he was always in my face!).

After we select what it is we perceive, we have to organize it.  Contrary to what your car, your house, or your room looks like, human beings are incredibly organized.  We have to be!  Otherwise nothing would make sense to us.  This is where perceptual schemas come in. How do we organize others for example?  The perceptual schemas we use shape the way we think about and communicate with others.  It doesn’t make it right or wrong, it just helps us organize.   We classify others:

·         by their appearance (male, female, beautiful, average, young, old, etc)? 

·         by social roles (student, teacher, wife, husband, etc)?

·         by interaction style (friendly, helpful, aloof, sarcastic, etc.)?

·         by psychological traits (curious, nervous, insecure, etc.)? 

·         by membership (Mormon, Catholic, BYU-I student, Cowboys fan, etc.)?  

I do this activity in class where I have someone with a relatively good self concept come and just stand in the middle of the room.  Then I say to the students:  "Tell me what you see--just shout it out."  In every class that I have done for years and years, they have always shouted out things in this order:  1.  appearance/physical characteristics. 2. behavioral or psychological descriptors (interaction style, psychological traits), and 3.  social roles or membership.  Isn't that interesting?  Every single class, every single time.  Interesting!

Picture your brain as a huge filing cabinet.  And in that filing cabinet we have a file for everything that we perceive.  The reason the file even exists in the first place represents selection.  Where we have it filed is organization.  And what we choose to put in that file is interpretation.  

Then after we organize what it is we perceive, we have to attach meaning to it all--interpretation.    Another activity I do in class is play portions of all different kinds of music, and have students free write what comes into their minds as each music clip is played.  While some of us will share a perception, we all have individual interpretations of each selection of music.  Why?  Why, with the same music, do we all have different interpretations?  Why do we interpret the same stimuli (people, music, movies, experiences, events, etc etc etc) so differently?  Consider applying any of these factors to any thing that we would perceive: 

                Our degree of involvement.  (IE-Is it George Strait that’s playing?  To me, George is my favorite singer.  I have invested a lot of time and money to make that known.  Therefore, I have different perceptions of him than others do. And of course, I had to put an image of George Strait on here, because it's my blog after all!.)

Our own personal experiences.  (IE-Michael Jackson’s song “Billie Jean” sure means more to me than to the students in my class.  Why?  I remember the Mo-Town awards show in 1984 where he performed that song and the moonwalk for the very first time.  IT WAS A BIG DEAL.)

Assumptions.  (IE-The opening bars of “The Age of Aquarius” sounds very “Star-Trekky,” so a lot of my students start writing about space-related things.  They assume it’s the soundtrack to some space adventure.  Then when they find out that this was a song popular in the 60s, perceptions change.)

Attitudes.  (IE-When I play a good solid bluegrass music clip, I cannot tell you how many times I have heard “I don’t like country music.”  Our attitudes can certainly affect how we perceive something.) 

Expectations. (IE-I also play some really hard music by Atreyu.  Not the “normal” kind of music that a BYUI teacher would have on her iPod.  So when it comes blaring out, I always get interesting comments.  “I don’t expect that to come from your I-Pod!” comments). 

Knowledge.  (IE-One of the pieces I play is Moonlight Sonata by Beethoven.  I enjoy that piece probably more than most because I know the story behind it.  Therefore, it impacts my interpretation of it). 

Self-Concept. (The way we feel about ourselves impacts everything we choose to perceive.  Perceptions of music clips are most definitely impacted by how you feel about yourself.  Music is so expressive—that’s why we like it right!?  If more negative terms creep in during this exercise, it may mean a more negative self-concept.)

Relational Satisfaction. (Yep. Your relational happiness level can impact everything.  Unhappy people in relationships are more likely than happy ones to make negative interpretations of things..including music pieces).   

A big part of making sense of our own perceptions happens as we communicate with others.  We can influence one another’s perceptions to try and share a perspective.  This is negotiation.    Picture life as an exchange of stories.  We get opportunities to share our own personal story…our own autobiographies—throughout our lives (in our “novels,” our own personal stories would be called narratives).  But a lot of times we don’t agree on the “details,” so we clash.  For instance:  picture an event in your life where other people were involved.  Would they describe things like you did?  Ask two kids who are fighting with each other the reason they’re fighting, and I guarantee you will get different responses.  When we clash with our perceptual narratives, we have a choice to make.  We can either hang on to our own (which is human nature, yet is usually not productive), or we can try to negotiate a narrative that all parties can agree on.  That doesn’t mean however, that what you come up with is the truth!

Aren’t humans complex?  J 

So what influences our perceptions?  Good question, I’m glad you asked.  J   

Physiological Influences: 

1.        Senses.  Each of us smells, hears, sees, tastes, & touches things differently.  Now think about how that can impact our interpersonal relationships.  For example – my husband Eric is always warm.  He would be as happy as a clam sleeping in our room in December with the windows open and only a sheet.  I, on the other hand, still have my electric blanket turned on in July.  We constantly have conversations on what temperature is acceptable, each of us having our own perceptions. 

2.       Biological cycles.  Yep, I’ll just go ahead and get it out there.  But women aren’t the only ones to have cycles (take that guys)! For instance, we all know whether we are a “morning person” or a “night person.”  That is part of a biological cycle, and can totally influence the way we relate to one another.  So guys, you’re not off the hook on this one (however, my husband says that there are a few days each month where he just retreats to his “man-cave”). 

3.       Age.  With age comes experience that shape perceptions  (yes, Mom, that means you’re right).

4.       Hunger. I know I get grouchy when I haven’t eaten, which totally impacts my decisions and perceptions.  So get mama some food!

5.       Health. Remember the last time you had the flu?  Hopefully you didn’t have to make any life-changing decisions at that time, because I bet your decisions would have been impacted by the way you felt. 

6.       Fatigue.  Ever seen the reality show “Bridezilla?”   Most of those women aren’t really that awful, they are just tired & need a serious nap. 

7.       Psychological issues.  The National Institute of Mental Health estimates that between 5-7 million of Americans are affected by ADD/ADHD or Bi-Polar disorder. That’s just two disorders—that’s not even counting the multiple other psychological issues that can influence people’s perceptions. 

Cultural Influences.  Every culture has its own way of looking at the world and the people in it.  Keeping this in mind can help us understand others’ perceptions.  The range of differences in cultural perceptions is endless.  For example:  In Middle Eastern countries, personal scents plan an important role in interpersonal relationships.  Arabs consistently breathe on people when they talk. As anthropologist Edward Hall explains: 

“To smell one’s friend is not only nice, but desirable, for to deny him your breath is to act ashamed.  Americans, on the other hand, trained as they are not to breathe in people’s faces, automatically communicate shame in trying to be polite.  Who would expect that when our highest diplomats are putting on their best manners they are also communicating shame? Yet this is what occurs constantly, because diplomacy is not only “eyeball to eyeball” but breath to breath.”

Even the value cultures put on talk varies so drastically, it’s amazing we get any diplomacy accomplished at all.  According to the 12^th edition of “Looking Out, Looking In” (a great Interpersonal Communication textbook),

Western cultures view talk as desirable and use it for social purposes as well as for task performance.  Silence has a negative value in these cultures.  It is likely to be interpreted as lack of interest, unwillingness to communicate, hostility, anxiety, shyness, or a sign of interpersonal incompatibility. Westerners are uncomfortable with silence, which they find embarrassing and awkward.

On the other hand, Asian cultures perceive talk differently. For thousands of years, Asian cultures have discouraged the expression of thoughts and feelings. Silence is valued, as Taoist sayings indicate: “In much talk there is great weariness,” or “One who speaks does not know; one who knows does not speak.”  Unlike most North Americans who are uncomfortable with silence, Japanese and Chinese believe that remaining quiet is the proper state when there is nothing to be said. It Asian cultures, a talkative person is often considered a show-off or insincere. 

Social Roles. We all know the “rules” don’t we?  Nobody sat us down and made us learn them, but we know them.  We know what’s acceptable in our society and what is not.  Gender is impacted greatly by these “rules” for instance.  In today’s world, if women in our culture want to be firefighters, or construction workers, nobody thinks twice.  “You go girl,” is what the “rules” say (I mean, after centuries of fighting for social equality, we’ve earned the “rule” change right?).  Ok, going with that whole social equality idea:  If men want to be hair-dressers, or interior designers in today’s society—what is thought then?  In fact, I bet you thought it just now didn’t you?  Why is that?  Why are the “rules” different for women & men? The “rules” or our social roles have a HUGE impact on our perceptions.    

Relational Roles.  I sure changed my perception of the world and the people in it when I became a parent! 

Occupational Roles.  The kind of work we do influences our view of the world and the people in it.  Again from the “Looking Out Looking In” text:

Imagine five people taking a walk through the park. One, a botanist, is fascinated by the variety of trees and other plants. Another, a zoologist, is looking for interesting animals. The third, a meteorologist, keeps an eye on the sky, noticing changes in the weather. The fourth companion, a psychologist, is totally unaware of nature, instead concentrating on the interaction among the people in the park. The fifth person, being a pickpocket, quickly takes advantage of the others’ absorption to make some money.

There are two lessons in this little scenario. The first, of course, is to watch your wallet carefully. The second is that our occupational roles shape our perceptions.

In 1971, Philip Zimbardo, a Stanford psychologist set up a mock prison.  He recruited a bunch of middle-class, well-educated young men, and randomly chose half of them to serve as “guards,” and the other half to serve as “prisoners.”  He gave the “guards” uniforms, handcuffs, and other stuff prison guards would use. The “prisoners” were put in cells with metal bars, a bucket for a toilet and camp cots. Zimbardo let the guards establish their own rules for the experiment:  “No talking during meals, rest periods, and after lights out. Head count at 2:30am.” If you didn’t follow the rules, your food was cut.  The “prisoners” started to rebel. Some barricaded their doors with their cots, others went on hunger strikes. Some of the “guards” physically and/or verbally started abusing the “prisoners.” Some of the “prisoners” were put into solitary confinement, or were forced to call each other names or clean out toilets with their bare hands.

This experiment had quickly become a reality for all of the men. Several of the “prisoners” had stomach cramps, headaches, rashes, and wept uncontrollably.  Zimbardo had planned to do his experiment for two weeks but had to stop after six days.  “I knew by then that they were thinking like prisoners and not like people,” he said.  “If we were able to demonstrate that pathological behavior could be produced in so short a time, think of what damage is being done in ‘real’ prisons…”

These were well-educated men who came from similar walks of life who, in less than six days, were turned into abusers and demoralized victims. What does this experiment tell us?  That how we think is a function of our roles in society. What we are is largely decided by what society tells us we are.

Self  Concept.  Extensive research has proven that a person with high self-esteem is more likely to have a high opinion of others, whereas a person with low self esteem is likely to have a low opinion of others (R.C. Savin-Williams, 2001). 

William James said, "To the infant the world is just a big blooming, buzzing confusion."   Does that really change?  I know that a lot of times I still see the world as a big blooming, buzzing mass of confusion!  And it seems like with all these things—progress—or understanding—or diplomacy—or just a casual conversation might be near impossible!  So what do we do?  The same thing we do when we eat Oreos. We check ourselves afterwards (and if you don’t check your teeth after eating Oreos, prepare to be laughed at).

HUGE problems can arise when we treat our perceptions as fact. Especially in relationships.  Consider these two phrases in a clash between partners: 

Person 1: “Why are you mad at me?”             Person 2 thinks: (Who said I was mad?)

Person 2:  “What’s the matter with you?”      Person 1 thinks: (Who said anything was the matter?) 

What happens?  They probably resent the other jumping to conclusions even if the conclusions are accurate. 

In our culture, a better way perhaps to handle situations where perceptions clash is by doing what’s called perception checking. Perception checks include: 

•1. A description of the behavior you noticed. 

•2. At least two possible interpretations of the behavior.

•3. A request for clarification of the behavior. 

Rewind the partner clash tape to just before person 1 says “Why are you mad at me?”.  Then insert this: 

“When you stomped out of the room and slammed the door (1), I wasn’t sure if you were mad at me, or just in a hurry. (2) What’s up? (3)

Wow, how much better might that communication transaction go? 

Ok disclaimer here:  This isn’t a sure fire way to perfectly understand each other (sorry!).  If anyone comes up with one of those sure-fire ways, they are going to be rich beyond belief.  Sometimes a simple “what’s up?” may suffice. Sometimes you aren’t ready to be the calm one who is doing the perception checking, and your non-verbal behavior shows it.  That may come across as condescending.  Also, consider culture.  Perception checking will probably be most effective in cultures that value talk & directness. 

So the moral of this story?  It is unrealistic to expect others to see the world the way we do. So rather than spending a lot of time and heartache on crying “why can’t you see things the way I do?”, perhaps our time would be much better spent by saying “Please explain to me how you see the world.” 

Perhaps then we could see more of the elephant.