Why We Spiral
behavioralscientist.org
behavioralscientist.org
I think good emotional regulation stuff like this would ideally be taught starting in kindergarten along with "don't hit your classmates". Maybe in a better time.
Some people are indeed very good at picking up on specific behaviours. The problem is that requires maturity and self reflection, so it's not something you learn in a day.
The lesson here should be that trusting one's gut might be good, but acting out on it is bad. Don't spiral. Don't confront the possible charlatan. Don't react on your gut the second after the other guy stole your credit.
a) you don't see the doses of amphetamines and other drugs these people have consumed or are consuming regularly
but more importantly:
b) your gut is disturbed by what you eat and your brain by what you perceive, which is filtered by your personality and current/past state of mind. just a little of x and it's hard to trust a feeling that comes from a place of mixed feelings, some of which are more obviously bad than others, some of the time.
c) your peripheral gets your subconscious goat all the time.
people are bad at trusting their gut. highly intelligent and or educated people have especially grand issues with that because intuitive heuristics and intuitive cognitive logic get such a bad reputation while nobody ever (I'm exaggerating) speaks or writes about exceptions to common fallacies and bias, which are usually only presented to justify gears of economic rationales that tend to completely ignore side-effects (because "long-termisms", even before the term was coined), often enough due to irrationally high thresholds of relativity aka p-values.
And you start of with
> There’s so much “trust your gut!!” advice when the gut can be deeply wrong
and end on
> This results in anything like saying someone has “bad vibes” to be a reason to exclude them, to actively covering for someone with a known pattern of harming people simply because they are charming.
on purpose. Please, at least try to sound non-manipulative.
PS: clattering teeth
He’s here to take my job. The VP knows him and hired him directly. There’s so many signals each week that say I’m right. He’s trying to take credit for a decade of my hard work. He’s going to exploit me and everyone will believe him and not me.
The more likely reality: he’s new here and I’ve been here for a decade. He was hired to basically replicate my success for sibling teams. He’s feeling immense pressure. He’s probably terrified of failing. I probably make him feel threatened. My defensive posture makes this worse. I give him signals all the time that he probably reads as me wanting him to fail or not liking him.
In one situation for me, this was exactly the case. It became more clear as each week went by. It was a "bro" situation between the C-level and the new hire, and the C-level was a "30 under 30" so there was a high school mentality about it.
The problem isn't one person being over looked, it's that one person is being praised.
We all make contributions that we feel are noteworthy, but when someone else's noteworthy contributions are highlighted we then have to ask, why theirs and not ours.
I think this is where it’s important to know yourself.
If you’re having a constant stream of anxiety inducing thoughts and light paranoia, learning how to silence those and introduce a more objective view is helpful.
It can be taken too far, though. I had a friend whose company was showing all of the warning signs of financial problems, yet he was on a positivity kick and chose to substitute an “everything works out eventually” mentality. Instead, he rode the company right into their inevitable shutdown and missed some good opportunities to take other jobs along the way because he thought ignoring his gut was the right thing to do.
The problem is my rate of correct anxiety guesses is too high. I'm right a lot. But the ridiculous stuff sneaks in as well. This leads to me being constantly anxious and just hating my professional life.
How to fix? Sweet Lord in heaven. How to fix?
If it's truly correct, then I'd say it's not anxiety and that you're probably more attuned to subtle cues. You can learn to pay conscious attention to these cues, evaluate them, and decide strategically if you want to act on them. The idea is to keep your advantage without the negative emotional reaction.
If it's not that accurate, having proof can help you internalize that you're just going through some particular emotional process, without according it any undue weight. Having let go of that, you can start picking up mechanical tricks for anxiety management, like breathing techniques.
Also, a CBT (Cognitive behavioral therapy) with a professional helps a lot.
If none, wasn't it was just choosing one gut feeling over another gut feeling?
Nobody has to be a pessimist to make accurate forecasts. It doesn't even help. The more your emotions and personality influence the forecast the worse a forecast it is, the future does not rewarp itself because the viewer feels positive or negative.
No, the way to “process” it was to start looking for new jobs, which would have avoided the completely avoidable employment and income gap.
I’ve also never worked at a company that had enough long term thinking to train up replacements. Several would only cut entire departments and/or only do layoffs.
So there isn’t really any point about worrying about being replaced (:>
I've lost count of the amount of times I've been driving to work thinking "oh shit I suck at my job I'm defo getting fired" to then be told " You're doing a good job keep it up"
Other time I think I'm doing a good job when everyone is actually very pissed off at me
I have two young kids though, so my wife thinks that's a bad idea.
This actually happened to me professionally.
A while back I was in a spot where for lots of good reasons, I decided I needed a 'reboot' of things; I had spent a lot of time listening to 'bad advice' and getting screwed over by bad people, and tried to have a bit of a clean slate.
I wound up finding a new job and a new girlfriend. Both felt weirdly stressful but I foolishly assumed it was just because they were both new things to me and I was 'out of my comfort zone'.
What I later discovered, was the 'boss' at my new job had actually tried to boast to certain people that he was trying to get me to quit, because he never wanted me on the team (He was sick for my first interview, and the person above him told him to hire me.)
He'd pull stunts like 'Oh I'm just gonna pull you into this meeting about our Crystal reports' (I was still new there and only knew that 'they existed in our legacy system') and then at the start of the meeting just a couple hours later, tried to claim that I was the subject matter expert on our Crystal reports! (Thankfully, I did use what little down-time I had, to do some basic digging and was able to at least speak to a potential solution to the problem they wanted to solve...)
Any time I wanted to get moved off the 'Support team' I would be given some seemingly impossible task to 'prove myself'; at one point I created a modular UI Frontend where different modules as ASP.NET MVC sites had backend logic to 'register' themselves with the main presentation service; thus delivering the ask, but he never even looked at a line of code.
And yeah they were a 'charmer'. He hoodwinked the whole board with empty promises and when he was finally found out (toxic behavior and all, the whole dev team had a 'group therapy' session or two b/c most folks were mistreated by him on some level) none of the code he produced ever really saw the light of day...
Couple that with partner that wasn't real, just using me to not feel lonely while her actual partner was busy in premed...
I suppose the irony being, that 'fake' partner is now a technical writer, working at the same company where the director who got me hired at the job with the shitty boss... (No that 'partner' didn't work at the place I worked at, but it's still just crazy as far as coincidences...)
In recent years the workplaces I’ve been involved with have actually had significant efforts to educate people to make overcome bias and override their feelings in decision making, but to be honest the outcomes haven’t been great.
When you forbid people from trusting their judgment and demand they use a shared, objective criteria instead, the grifters take notice. They become better at emulating the objective criteria than anyone else, because gaming that system is their goal and you just laid out a perfect roadmap for them to do it.
Of the few very bad hires I’ve had to work with in the past decade, all of them came with “bad vibes” during the interview process. They all had the right credentials and knew how to say the right things, though. I wouldn’t be surprised if they had taken classes or paid for coaching for how to act during interviews because what we got once they were hired didn’t match anything on their resume or that they claimed during interviews.
There is no spot on the committee-approved hiring rubric to indicate that the candidate was rude in their communication and left everyone feeling drained and in a bad mood after every interaction, though. But hey, they aced those LeetCode problems and they have FAANG on their resume, so we must focus on that.
I clearly remember people being scolded for raising concerns about the person that didn’t fit into the rigid hiring criteria that were supposed to eliminate our biases.
In most cases in my adult life where I’ve been instructed to ignore my gut feeling and substitute some alternate metric as my decision making guidance, I’ve regretted it later.
Ideas always sound better in the abstract when you avoid talking about what happens when they’re implemented.
It's nothing big: especially in a startup environment there will be situations where the product manager or another engineer will ask for changes, and I expect people to adapt, or at least to argue the merits of the change. Make no mistake, a lot of those people WERE able to adapt code-wise, and I was even praising them, but they did the changes while voicing concerns and complaining that my task "was badly defined, since I didn't tell them about possible future changes". One got very annoyed verbally at a small requisite change, even though we still had only used half the scheduled time, but we were almost finished with everything.
And this HAS paid off! This happened rarely, but more than half of those people got incredibly triggered by their rejections, and a couple even demanded talking directly with the team. In one case, we had someone coming to the company. It wasn't a lot, I must have interviewed over 200-300 people there, but it was significant.
Well exactly, but that’s “vibes” in the view of an extremely objective hiring criteria that tries to eliminate anyone’s subjective feelings about the candidate.
Otherwise it doesn't work, that knowledge is blocked off by anxiety, fear, anger etc.
Never once has this failed me
Again, not disagreeing. But if you're suffering from (C)PTSD, that advice might backfire by packing on even more feelings of shame onto your shoulders.
That's the in media res start to this reply. Let me go back to the beginning: our major societal vices seem to replicate in ways that we feel are benign, but that may feed the mindsets that allow major Bad Things to happen. For example, the polarized racial division that define(d/s) American life echoes in fights over which sports team, which SWE technology, which OS is "better" (or, rather, what is the default from which any deviation is anathema).
Back to Steve. A celebrated visionary who was noted for his "reality distortion field", wherein his perception took precedence over reality. A good thing, because it pushed Apple to innovate in ways most didn't think possible or practical. Right? Well, it should also sound familiar to anyone who has to deal with the headache of "fake news" (both disinformation and the people who proclaim any news they dislike to be so), propaganda, advertising. All of these are forms of putting the gut on a pedestal, and/or are targeted appeals to vibes rather than reason.
It's a bit "Broken Windows", but the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. We should be careful about the heuristics and patterns of thought that we allow to become so common that they fall from consciousness.
(The computer ate my original reply, so I had to do it over, and I had to do it quick so it wasn't as good.)
This is not easy, but I've found working on this every day is better than any form of traditional meditation or "mindfulness" work. It truly is work, like exercise, and the point is not how long you do it, but noticing more and more when my DMN engages and I can return to breathing and reactivating my parasympathetic nervous system.
I can't stress enough what a change occurs after two months of focusing on this.
We live in a culture where everything is gunning for our attention, trying to engage a dopamine loop and "relieve" us from dealing with often important but difficult emotions just below the surface. We have to train ourselves to deal with this environment.
It's not mindfulness training, it's how to operate our brains in the modern world.
To further add: being able to acknowledge an emotional response to a situation and then divert to objective thinking is a superpower. Sustained anger, sadness, or fear will quickly drain your energy and leave you unable to act with intent.
As part of this, I've been able to locate and work through stress and trauma activations in my body, where normally they'd cluster around my head and never actually get resolved.
Every time I go to work out, I pay attention to what areas of my body arent responding, are activating oddly; and I'll work to strengthen the foot-to-neck paths. It started with a back injury and has resulted in me finding I needed wide foot shoes and changing my entire stance, posture, complex movements, etc.
Some times I find it odd that I don't have that daemon running around yelling, because hes now activated in my body, and all I have to do is stretch.
Like many dogs, my dog gets bored and looks for something to bark at. He scans out the window like I scan social media. He’s got extra energy that seems to need to go somewhere, and that somewhere seems to be looking out the window scanning for threats, barking, sounding meaner than he actually is.
It’s like he manufactures anxiety out of nothing else to do.
You’ve just changed my perspective on my life (and my spaniel’s).
Thank you Doug.
This is the best analogy I've heard about social media, hope to remember it to use when needed.
I find it can be a great tool for creativity, but needs to be directed or at least given some task to chew on; then I can close my eyes in a half nap and all kinds of interesting associations and ideas bubble up.
EDIT: that said, the default mode network should not be unjustly demonized. Its purpose is crucial for reprioritising our goals based on what is important to us at any given time, and the problem with modern living is that we never have enough idle time to ourselves, always distracted by our smartphones, and in the long run it is easy to lose sight over what drives us forward. A simple exercise, harder than it should be for most, is to be idle yet undistracted for 30 minutes. You’ll soon get into a “big picture” view of your life, what is missing, what you wish for yourself; into a kind of goal-oriented view that only kicks in in this mode.
Yeah, scrolling tiktok is pretty good at silencing the DMN. This practice does not seem to be particularly beneficial.
This is mindfulness work, what you just described.
I've had varying success with other "mindfulness" work and meditation like you have mentioned that I employ to help with spinning/stewing/looping thought cycles. The process you are describing seems like it may be more helpful so I'm curious to learn more and try something new.
> What is the 4-2-6 breathing technique?
> The 4-2-6 breathing technique is a calming exercise. First, inhale slowly for four seconds. Then, hold your breath for two seconds. Finally, exhale slowly and steadily for six seconds. This technique helps by making your exhale longer than your inhale, which is a signal to your body to relax. It's particularly useful when you need to settle your mind before sleep or if you're feeling anxious and need to steady your nerves.
Source: https://www.calm.com/blog/breathing-exercises-for-anxiety
I wonder if some of this could also be related to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_attribution_bias where some people simply see ambiguous or benign behavior they don't like and interpret it as hostile.
> A friend once told me of an ingenious class demonstration that helped her begin to understand this process. A professor split the class in two and then spoke to the first half alone, telling them of his love for travel and a recent trip to Libya. Next, he spoke to the second half about shopping and how hard it was to find the right size shoe. Last, he brought the class together and said a single word. He asked the students to write it down. Students in the first group wrote, “Tripoli.” Those in the second wrote, “Triple E.”
The key insight: when you're surrounded by people who genuinely create an atmosphere of belonging and want you to succeed, you know their feedback comes from good intentions. This creates a virtuous cycle. You want to take their advice, and once you improve you naturally want to give the same back to others.
Reminds me of this Simon Brodkin video perfectly capturing startup energy: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/q_FmhWARJ7Q
But unlike my partner, there is no little voice that keeps following that thought. The thought comes, is considered, then moved onto something else.
Honestly, having a negative inner voice sounds miserable. But I agree, by not really considering these sorts of things, I do think I wound up with a low EQ. Working on addressing it, but it takes time and experience
Or just don't. What a near guaranteed way to mangle the meaning of a title.
I don’t have time to ruminate like I did previously and I’ve also come to understand people better. It’s funny to see how often we all act like toddlers.
It’s also made working in corporate easier, as it turns out telling a toddler no it’s surprisingly good practice for the real world.
Somebody seems out of place in a group = killed or left starving or even sacrificed to the Gods in order to please them and get a good harvest.
Now we are in a different time not every moment is a do or die moment, we also only have a certain amount of "do or die cognition" built within us, when we run out of it , that's bad because we might need it in the future.
The problem is that we used to live very short and violent lives so the rational thing to do was to always be in "do or die" mode until you eventually ran out of luck and died around 30, or if you were lucky 35. And so it is the same happening right now.
At this point I think that people are justified when they load up on alcohol, weed and XanaX (America is one nation under XanaX). As the calming chemicals are used to fight the "do or die" tendencies that harass us daily.
- If they aren't being friendly this will irritate them in a way they cannot object to too openly.
- If they are friendly it will avoid damage and even start an upward spiral.
Finally, remember that lots of people feel like you - so try to do little things that start them on an upward spiral. The more you do this for other people, the more they will be glad to see you.
That's not a given. That's the rational response on their end, but not only is no one perfectly rational, but some people are very, very irrational.
It can sometimes[1][2] be the case that the best option is to be among those who don't attract any attention at all.
Separately:
The spiraling described in this post is worth consideration, but equally worthy are the odd disparities in professional life (or life in general) and the negative consequences that aren't the result of internal forces like paralyzing self-doubt.
Consider an article that starts just like this one, except it focuses on the different consequences experienced by Dawn who is regularly forgiven for things like tardiness and mistakes in her work in contrast to more severe outcomes for Hila, who after arriving late—perhaps for the first time, even—is perceived to be fucking up because that's in her irresponsible nature[3]—even if a sober, objective analysis would reveal that Hila is actually exceeding the expectations one would have for any employee (and her transgressions are well behind the line of courtesy that is extended to Dawn)—for no other reason than Hila being younger or newer to the company.
This can result in a similar spiral of defeat, but it's a kind of defeat by external forces rather than self-defeat.
1. Depending on your environment/experience, you could even say "very often"
2. See also <https://hn.algolia.com/?query=copenhagen%20strikes%20again&t...>
3. See also <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_attribution_error>
I also notice that whatever negativity I output to someone, it tends to come back to me multiplied by 1.5. So e.g. with my wife, I find myself in some argument but I can trace it back to some smaller negative thing I said earlier. ie. we get into arguments and the arguments spiral. So IMO it is important to remember to be just slightly more upbeat and neutralise things at the point where they are small if possible.
This doesn't work with people who see you as a threat in some way. They are not appeased, but not everyone is like that and you can at least try to make life reasonable for some being - even if it's just your dog.
And yes, of course there are things outside your control. Is that really “equally worthy” of your consideration and energy?
Really, though, my comment was rather more intended to prompt introspective questions like, "Even if I'm personally on safe footing at my company, is it afflicted by this sort of thing in a way that impacts people who aren't me? And what can I do to either neutralize or minimize the negative consequences those people might experience?" (Readers who are paying attention will notice that this is a form of creating spirals of success for others, as the person I responded to recommended, but an emphasis on the fact that the targets of those actions can be people who have a lesser standing, rather that aiming laterally or upwards.)
Dzerzhinsky liked to say "Trust but verify", and I think that sums it up - if you look at the world entirely from his point of view, head of the Soviet secret police, then you will suspect everyone and if you act on that you'll end up hurting lots of innocents in amongst the people who would really do you harm. If you're in a situation where this is a good survival strategy it seems to me that one should try to leave rather than play the game.
That means not one-upping snark, but also keeping a healthy default distance with people you deal with professionaly.
One might miss some genuinely heartful exchanges, but it also makes the worst times way easier to deal with. Compensating for keeping too much distance is usually easy, repairing problematic exchanges is way way harder.
Staying positive and not letting (potential) negative feedback derail you, works like magic in the long run.
If someone is really picking on you, or they genuinely disapprove of your work, you will find out in due time.
So assuming someone is friendly even if they aren't is a better strategy than assuming everyone dislikes you.
How does this help? For all you know they’re a snarky something to people beneath them but not to the right people. Or they are snarky to everyone but they’re the kind of pointy-elbow go-getter that got to where they are inspite or even because of that. Are any of these alternatives good?
And now they get to be snarky to people beneath them and only get a tiny sliver of pushback because the mind of the underling has all the time to ruminate but no incentive to push back with anything.
Just more Polyanna HN job advice.
I think this is the kind of reason people emigrate from countries where they feel dominated by whatever group was in power to various newer countries where it is still possible to make their fortune.
If you're early in your career, do everything you can to set yourself up for financial stability. If you're already there, work on your confidence and your skills. The biggest positive changes in my career came from doing what felt right and not backing down. If there was ever an industry in need of more courage and wisdom, it's software.
Anyway, I also hate when articles try to popularize vocabulary that makes information less accessible. It's not "spiral", but "ruminate".
In LLM/agent lingo, those are prompts that we inject based on similarity search
My first thought when seeing links to studies adjacent to pop psychology is "what are the chances this will replicate?". The replication crisis raised the skepticism bar considerably.
Even the smallest overflow — a kind word, a patient gesture — can ripple outward. One person softens, then another, and soon an entire current of interaction changes course.
In this way, what begins as overflow in one heart can become a tide that lifts many.
It is the way.
Luckily I have found a spiral going the other way now to get out of it.