Just listened to a fab radio show from The Really Big Questions about emotion. talks about some of the science and implications for us individually and collectively. The just forgot to say, “and if you want to learn how to effectively use these incredible resources, contact Six Seconds”

Definitely listen to this one and let me know what you think – and feel about it!!!

http://trbq.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=16&Itemid=43

Found this fascinating – they don’t talk about emotional intelligence per-se, but a lot about emotions and trust — amazing that top economists are admitting that the science of economics is NOT RATIONAL, that there is an “animal spirit” that drives the economy (perhaps we could say take the radical step of using the word “emotion”?) — trust is a feeling!

The Science of Trust: Economics and Virtue [Speaking of Faith® from American Public Media]

In the car yesterday when Patty, my wife, accidentally pressed the little red button on her keys.  Lots of loud noise ensued, with Patty jumping out of her skin and jabbing at every button she could find to turn off the caterwauling.

When she finally managed to silence the alarm: “Good name for this button,” she said, “I press it and it makes me panic!”

Patty’s cortical thinking (analysis, sequencing) was shut down due to the flood of emotions pushing her to protect herself in this “dangerous” situation.  This reaction, which Goleman called “Hijacking the Amygdala” after Joesph LeDoux’s scientific research on the process, is often described as a “primitive” or even “bad” emotional response.  Yet it beautifully illustrates the primacy of emotion and the way feelings drive us.  The trick, as Patty found, is to learn — in advance — how to push the “un panic” button.

Dear Josh,
I’m a little confused with this issue, someone at my workshop asked me this question so need more explanation on this!  She said that: usually we use a hearts as an icon to express love and feelings and now you said feelings come from brain (amygdala) not heart?
So please help me to understand this, I have another workshop in Riyadh this week.
Look forward hearing from you, Regards,
- Manal

Hi Manal!
It is true that our emotions seem to be primarily produced and regulated in the brain – the limbic region.  Emotion chemicals are assembled in the hypothalamus and then released through the pituitary gland, they then flow through the blood and then into EVERY cell in the body.  The picture (to the right) illustrates an important point — when we’re talking about chemicals that are released from the brain in the blood, notice how important the heart is!  The Amygdala responds to certain “distress” or “danger” feeling chemicals and amplifies the flight/fright/freeze reaction – it is the regulator of our defensive patterns — again leading to a cascade of chemicals (one leading to another leading to another) that floods through brain & into body… and back and forth.

Neurotransmitters (brain cells) function through chemicals + electricity – so there are also electrical currents flowing around the brain tied to emotion.

However, the SAME kinds of brain cells and chemicals which exist in the limbic brain surround our hearts – and around our stomachs and in our spines — so people often talk about our “four brains”: head, heart, gut, and spine.

Important to note:  The neuropeptides that we experience as emotion (“the molecules of emotion” as Candace Pert says) are also produced throughout our bodies!  So sometimes a feeling could start in our toes!  These chemicals form a feedback loop between brain and body — constantly cycling around and regulating the function of our systems.  One major function is to direct attention — our emotions tell us what’s important in our environment (and in our internal landscape).

And finally:  There is emerging research on the link between the heart and emotions.  The heart beat becomes more regular when we’re in a calm, focused state.  The heart itself produces electromagnetic energy which seems also to become more even and smooth when we’re in an optimal state of emotional-mental-physical function.

Thanks for asking – I’ll post this on the blog as well!
=:-)
- Josh

Fascinating post by Jonah Lehrer about colors and problem solving

2 key points:

1.  different colors stimulate different types of thinking… red for analysis, blue for creativity

2.  relaxation is key to innovation… as Tessy Britton blogged before (here) there is a critical link between emotional states and creative problem solving.  People do, in fact, need to be “in the right mood” to be effective innovators… so if you want to be an emotionally intelligent organization or school, get the feeling right!!

This guy’s blog is GREAT for those neuroscience fans – check it out: The Color of Creativity : The Frontal Cortex

My sister works in a highly competitive, political environment. She calls it the “hall of mirrors” because of the constantly shifting alliances and schemes of her colleagues. Soon after her employment, “Jill” discovered that the charming banter of her co-workers hid stealth campaigns of character assassination and departmental warfare. Despite the risks, Jill dedicated herself toward transparency and integrity. She decided to trust her co-workers. She said it was easier on her than assuming the worst.

Jill’s tender and playful attitude helps others relax and brings out the best in them. Recently she gently obtained support from a famously uncooperative co-worker. “Ralph” even seemed delighted to assist. That’s Jill’s brilliance, she brings out goodness and then people feel good about themselves. I could see this in the supportive culture that has blossomed between Jill and her new friends. They are happily working together, despite the tumult all around.

I thought of Jill’s workplace while reading The Futurist’s lead story about an “ethical” area of the brain. Scientists are exploring if our brains are wired to develop an ethical awareness just as we are wired to develop language. If this is so, then even if moral beliefs (like languages) differ according to culture, we may share a deeper programming toward principled behavior. Are we structured to inwardly desire “goodness?” If we betray our own better selves, do we suffer inwardly? Jill’s warring coworkers do seem stressed and unhappy. Is being “good” part of our intended design?

I’ve been thinking about mirror neurons after seeing a wonderful video at the PBS/Nova site. These specialized brain cells help us relate to our surroundings and other people. Mirror cells build empathy and connection. They are activated when we watch and listen to others.

The video suggested that mirror neurons function even more profoundly when we witness an emotion or activity that we ourselves have experienced. This explains why my husband can feel intensely involved when simply watching a football game and I am unmoved. Could this also explain why women are more often affected by “chick flicks” that explore subtle or complicated emotional situations? (Sorry for the stereotypes in this entry, I use them only to offer simple examples!) In this case, young girls and women in our culture seem to practice and explore these “complicated emotional situations” more than men.

For example, I recently met a manager who was supervising a team of eight women: “Tom’s” struggle to relate to his team compelled him to attend one of my EI seminars. Tom confessed that he wasn’t comfortable expressing emotions. He also acknowledged that the women on his team seemed like an alien species. If Tom isn’t emotionally literate, are his mirror neurons less able to help him relate to the “emotional” women at work?

Learning about brain structure continues to help me understand how emotional intelligence offers practical assistance in daily life. I see the benefit of constantly developing our awareness of emotional states. For Tom, recognizing his own fears and angers could help his mirror neurons fulfill their function–helping Tom connect with his team so he can actually lead.

New drugs may help to enhance people’s mental powers . But a study carried out by Pamela Smith, of Radboud University Nijmegen in the Netherlands, and her colleagues suggests a less pharmacological approach can be taken, too. Their work, just published in Psychological Science, argues that simply putting someone into a weak social position impairs his cognitive function. Conversely, “empowering”him, sharpens up his mind. Dr Smith focused on those cognitive processes that help people maintain and pursue their goals in difficult and distracting situations. She suspected that a lack of social power may reduce someone’s ability to keep track of information and make plans to achieve his goals.

When the stakes are high, life and death for the people or the company, change will happen – right? Fast Company senior writer Alan Deutschman was surprised that the answer is “no.” He was attending a conference on the future of healthcare where the dean of Johns Hopkins talked about what happens to cardiac patients when they’re told to “change or die.” The incident led to an in-depth analysis of individual and organizational change with a startling conclusion: While change is possible, the usual approach doesn’t work.

There’s a podcast that goes with this article!

 

 Standard Podcast [27:25m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

How often have you heard an executive pull out the “change or die” rhetoric, attempting to rally the forces by enjoining them to take up a last-ditch effort to save the company? The “common sense” notion is that a forceful presentation of facts will instill fear causing employees to take the transformation seriously. Confronted with this hard-edged urgency, there will be no room for dissent. The trouble is that even in real “change or die” situations, people don’t change. Real change requires a much more subtle, relationship-driven approach.

Take the case of a cardiac patient just after a bypass: “You’re in a change or die situation,” Deutschman explains, “You have to switch to a much healthier lifestyle or you’re going to be killed by this terrible disease that you have. And even when doctors tell these patients you have to change or die, study after study has shown that two years later, nine out of ten of the heart patients have not changed. We like to think that crisis and fear motivate people to change. And yet the studies have shown that even in the change or die situation most people can’t change. That just really blew me away and made me want to understand the psychology.”

Read the rest of this entry »

Even before she was chief of brain biochemistry at the National Institutes of Health, Candace Pert made a breakthrough discovery that changed the way scientists understand the mind-body connection. She found the opiate receptor, the mechanism by which a class of chemicals (peptides) alters the mind and body. Her research led her to an understanding of the way emotions function as a regulatory system in the body. Since that discovery she’s been focused on developing an AIDS treatment using peptides, first at the University of Georgetown Medical Center, and now as scientific director of RAPID Pharmaceuticals (see www.candacepert.com for more).

Because of her work on emotions, Dr. Pert was featured in the film, What the Bleep Do We Know, and frequently speaks on the role of emotions in the mind-body. Pert’s work helped shift the paradigm from “emotions as neuroscience” to “emotions as biology.” In her new book, Everything You Need to Know to Feel Go(o)d, she’s taking the science of feeling a step further to present “emotions as physics.”

Read the rest of this entry »

 

 The Physics of Emotion - interview with Candace Pert [5:58m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Since the 1995 publication of Daniel Goleman’s international bestseller Emotional Intelligence, Why It Can Matter More Than IQ, a global movement has developed to bring “EQ” into practice in businesses, schools, and communities around the globe.  How did it start, what does it mean – and where is it going?

From American Express to Avon, businesses have begun to embrace the concept. Jack Welch has begun discussing EQ [1] and the Harvard Business Review calls it “the key to professional success.”[2] Schools, hospitals, and government agencies world-wide are adopting EQ practices. From elementary school students to army officers, a curriculum of emotional awareness is providing a new perspective on people.

According to Dr. Goleman, it all began with two psychology professors on a summer’s day. “John Mayer and Peter Salovey invented the whole field,” Goleman explains, “when they were chatting about politics while painting a house.” Salovey (now Dean of Yale College and Professor of Psychology at Yale University) and Mayer (now Professor at University of New Hampshire) were talking about their research on cognition and emotion, and got to discussing a politician. They wondered: How could someone so smart act so dumb? Their conclusion: Smart decision-making requires more than the intellect as measured by traditional IQ.

Read the rest of this entry »