Redirect: Changing People's. Behavior by Editing Their Stories. Timothy D. Wilson. University of . Can we redirect these interpretations? ▫ Participants: At risk. Redirect. THE SURPRISING NEW SCIENCE OF. PSYCHOLOGICAL CHANGE. Timothy D. Wilson. OB. LITTLE, BROWN AND COMPANY. New York Boston. Redirect: The surprising new science of psychological change, by Timothy D. Wilson. John McCaffrey School of Psychology, National.
|Language:||English, Spanish, French|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Register to download]|
In Redirect: The Surprising New Science of Psychological Change, social psychologist Timothy Wilson reveals insights from three decades of. Editorial Reviews. Review. There are few academics who write with as much grace and wisdom as Timothy Wilson. Redirect is a masterpiece -- Malcolm. There are few academics who write with as much grace and wisdom as Timothy Wilson. REDIRECT is a masterpiece. -Malcolm Gladwell What if there were a.
Trapped in a shared office, they've become entrenched in an addictive game of one-upmanship.
Lucy can't let Joshua beat her at anything - especially when a huge promotion is on offer. If Lucy wins, she'll be Joshua's boss. If she loses, she'll resign. So why is she questioning herself?
Maybe she doesn't hate him. And just maybe, he doesn't hate her either. Or is this just another game?
All of the story-editing techniques I review have been shown to work in rigorous experimental trials. Too often, government-backed programs are widely adopted before they are adequately tested.
One example is the D. Another example is Healthy Families America, which is a home visitation program designed to prevent child abuse in at-risk families. Well, I have two adult children who have turned out wonderfully, and while I am certainly not the perfect father, I like to think that my knowledge of story-editing techniques made me a better parent than I otherwise would have been.
I also think that my knowledge of social psychological research has made me more tolerant of people who have different points of view than I do, or disagree with me about something. As much as I want to believe that I am right and they are wrong, it helps to try to get inside their heads and understand how they are viewing things—how their story differs from mine.
That gives us a common place to start in working out our differences. Are you a scientist who specializes in neuroscience, cognitive science, or psychology? And have you read a recent peer-reviewed paper that you would like to write about?
He can be reached at garethideas AT gmail. How can parents use this? Get smart.
Sign up for our email newsletter. We can't know without experimental testing.
Second: a particular kind of approach cal Redirect started strong, got weak enough in the middle that I was debating between 2 and 3 stars as I trudged through, and then got quite strong again at the end. Second: a particular kind of approach called story-editing that depends on altering the way people construct their own narratives can be surprisingly helpful at solving psychological problem.
As far as story-editing goes, the results really are surprising. For example, if you take students who have done poorly on an early test in college and simply give them the information that lots of people struggle early on then--with that intervention alone--you can significantly improve their subsequent performance on tests, graduation rate, etc.
The theory is that you're helping them embrace a growth-narrative "if I work hard, I can get better" rather than a fixed-narrative "I must not be good enough. As as the emphasis on experimental design goes: it's a valuable point but Wilson hangs too much from it. He consistently holds out the ideal of controlled drug experimentation without recognizing that human trials of drugs are based on earlier experiments with laboratory animals.
There's no such phase with psychological testing; we can't run don't-do-drugs programs experimentally on rats first to make sure that there's no major danger before rolling the program out to high school kids.
This makes psychological experimentation fundamentally different from medical experimentation, which complicates his persistent use of medical experiments as the goal standard to which all social psychology should be held. Furthermore, experiments just aren't as magically distinct from observational studies as he would like us to believe. For one thing, he consistently cites experimental studies that illustrate the effectiveness of a certain approach, and then claims credit for story-editing, despite the fact that that last leap attributing the results to his pet theory is actually not a necessary result of the science.