Learned Helplessnes  − 19 April, 2006

In early 1965, Martin E. P. Seligman and his collegues, while studying the relationship between fear and learning, accidentally discovered an unexpected phenomenon while doing experiments on dogs using Pavlovian (classical conditioning). As you may observe in yourselves or a dog, when you are presented with food, you have a tendency to salivate. Pavlov discovered that if a ringing bell or tone is repeatedly paired with this presentation of food, the dog salivates. Later, all you have to do is ring the bell and the dog salivates. However, in Seligman's experiment, instead of pairing the tone with food, he paired it with a harmless shock, restraining the dog in a hammock during the learning phase. The idea, then, was that after the dog learned this, the dog would feel fear on the presentation of a tone, and would then run away or do some other behavior.

Next, they put the conditioned dog into a shuttlebox, which consists of a low fence dividing the box into two compartments. The dog can easily see over the fence, and jump over if it wishes. So they rang the bell. Surprisingly, nothing happened! (They were expecting the dog to jump over the fence.) Then, they decided to shock the conditioned dog, and again nothing happened! The dog just pathetically laid there! Hey, what's going! When they put a normal dog into the shuttlebox, who never experienced inescapable shock, the dog, as expected, immediately jumped over the fence to the other side. Apparently, what the conditioned dog learned in the hammock, was that trying to escape from the shocks is futile. This dog learned to be helpless! This result was opposite to that predicted by B.F. Skinner's behaviorism, which argued that the dog must have been given a positive reward (like a yummy dog biscuit) to just lie there. (In order to salvage their position, they even went so far as to suggest that the cessation of pain acted as the reward for the dog to sit, but this was not a very good argument. One could alternately argue that when the shock went on while the dog was sitting, it was being punished for sitting. Reminds me of that old joke, "Q: Why did the man pound his thumb with a hammer? A: Because it felt so good to stop.) These observations started a scientific revolution resulting in the displacement of behaviorism by cognitive psychology. What you are thinking, determines your behavior (not only the visible rewards or punishments).

The theory of learned helplessness was then extended to human behavior, providing a model for explaining depression, a state characterized by a lack of affect and feeling. Depressed people became that way because they learned to be helpless. Depressed people learned that whatever they did, is futile. During the course of their lives, depressed people apparently learned that they have no control.

Learned helplessness explained a lot of things, but then researchers began to find exceptions, of people who did not get depressed, even after many bad life experiences. Seligman discovered that a depressed person thought about the bad event in more pessimistic ways than a nondepressed person. He called this thinking, "explanatory style," borrowing ideas from attribution theory.

For example, lets say you fail a math exam. How do you explain why? You could think: 1) I am stupid. 2) I'm not good in math. 3) I was unlucky, it was Friday the 13th. 4) The math teacher is prejudiced. 5) The math teacher grades hard. 6) I was feeling ill that day. 7) The math teacher gave an expecially hard test this time. 8) I didn't have time to study. 9) The teacher grades on a curve. Seligman found that these explanations could be rated along three dimensions: personalization: internal vs. external, pervasiveness: specific vs. universal, and permanence: temporary vs. permanent. He found that the most pessimistic explanatory style is correlated with the most depression: The statement "I am stupid" is classified as internal (use of I), universal, and permanent. This response conveys a sense of discouragement, hopelessness, and despair. On the other hand, a more optimistic person would blame someone or something else, such as "The math teacher gave an especially hard test this time." The most optimistic explanatory style is external, specific and temporary. Conversely, for a good event, the explanatory style reverses. For example, for a perfect score on the math exam, the depressive would say: "I was lucky that day," discounting his intelligence. The optimist would say something much more encouraging, such as "I am smart." We often learn explanatory styles from our parents.

Sugar, Spice and Everything Nice? Raising Emotionally Healthy Girls
By Katherine Nicklin, Ph.D.

Emotional challenges for growing young girls come in many guises--ranging from being left out of a birthday party to being excluded from the popular group at school to feeling different in any way.   We've all had some of these feelings and most of us would give a lot to protect our daughters from suffering the stings that might still feel raw to us, even though many years have intervened.  It is not possible, however, to protect our children from all the realities of life--nor is it desirable. 

Having been girls themselves, mothers often have a difficult time helping their daughters navigate the rocky terrain of childhood and adolescence. The adult perspective enables both mothers and fathers to see the potential pitfalls and hurts long before they eventuate. Some of this perspective might be good in that we can add a mature viewpoint to the discussion when and if some of the potentials become actual situations.  The long-range view, however, also has a negative side when the parent's anxiety becomes communicated, verbally or non-verbally, to the child who usually interprets the anxiety as, "You don't believe that I can handle the situation".  The child feels a lack of emotional support and a sense of diminished self-confidence--the two gifts the parents wanted to provide.

Building strong girls

Instead of focusing on preventing or protecting daughters from what life might hand them, let us instead concentrate on building strong girls who can deal with obstacles and challenges effectively.  Self-confidence is built on competence, a quality that cannot be given to another but rather is earned in many small incremental steps of success and failure.  If we prevent the failures, we limit opportunities to learn.  A child will never learn to walk if we never let her fall because her inner gyroscope will not be fine-tuned to the realities of balance.  What we learn to do as parents is to let a child fall over a toy in her path but not let her fall over a curb into the street.  In the same way, we don't angst unduly over every disappointment our child might experience but instead help her express her feelings and develop a constructive plan to deal with the situation.

Control and responsibility

Dr. Martin Seligman (author of The Optimistic Child) has researched how the qualities of control and responsibility intersect.  If the parent maintains dictatorial control but holds the child responsible for performing according to the parent's rules, the child feels hopeless, that no matter what she does, it will be her fault if things don't work out.  If the parent maintains control but also accepts responsibility for the child's actions by always rescuing the child from consequences, a learned helplessness results with a "whatever" attitude.  A child who wants control without accepting any responsibility is helpless and immature, much like a two-year-old who demands their way.   Helplessness and hopelessness are the two prime ingredients in depression, a condition implicated not only in mood disorders but also in eating disorders.  For a child to feel competent and successful, she requires an increasing sense of "self in control" in addition to self as responsible for her actions.  Self in control does not mean that a 10 year old should make the rules for herself but rather that she should be involved in the discussions and helped to learn the parameters of good problem-solving.  When she leaves for college, an 18 year old should have years of personal problem-solving experience packed to take along.

 Help girls avoid becoming destructive

 One pitfall we want to avoid and help our children avoid is that of becoming destructive in response to feelings of vulnerability.  Unfortunately, we have all had the human tendencies to be tempted by the dictum: "The best defense is a good offence."  Girls especially can guard their own feelings of vulnerability by tearing down others, being cliquey, exposing confidences, abandoning friends, and all the variations on the theme of trying to be popular or accepted.

We do our girls no favors by promoting or allowing these tendencies to go unchecked.  From a practical standpoint, diminishing others results in diminishment of our own sense of self-respect.  Ultimately, confidence does not result. 

Sensitivity and social competence is fostered by trying to understand why others might be behaving poorly, not by doing all in one's power to belong to a group that treats others poorly. 

Guidelines

The following dozen guidelines, culled from a variety of sources including Dr. Mary Pipher (author of Reviving Ophelia and many other books) and Dr. Dan Kindlon, (author of several books including Too Much of a Good Thing: Raising Children of Character in an Indulgent Age) represent a synopsis of good strategies for promoting competence, self-control and responsibility:

·        Model emotional connectedness and empathy.  Try not to react immediately to                difficult situations involving your child.  First, understand (not necessarily agree with) your child's perspective.  Get on the same side with your child, the side of solving a problem. - "you want to sit here in the living room and eat your lunch infront of the DVD wouldn;t you - that would be ALOT of fun for you wouldn't it...... "

·          Allow expression of both positive and negative emotions. Having negative feelings about others does not mean the child is "not nice". However, the child does have a choice about how to express those emotions constructively rather than destructively.

·          Keep self-esteem intact while in school by fostering competencies.  Get whatever help is needed to support your child's academic self-confidence.

·          Listen, ask questions, respect both positive and negative viewpoints.  Teach problem-solving skills and critical thinking.  Instead of telling her how to solve a problem, ask how SHE could solve it, using the five-step problem-solving model:  identify the problem, brainstorm possible strategies, evaluate positive and negative consequences of each strategy, choose the best strategy, develop an action plan to implement the strategy.

·          Encourage and support all types of activity, from competitive sports to doll-playing, allowing the child to lead the way with her interests.

·          Discipline (teach) with clarity and  consistency, providing explanations, inviting the girl into the discussion as  a consultant.  What's your understanding? What do you need to solve this problem?

·          Handle your own competitive feelings and don't get into a struggle for power or domination with your daughter.  When you give a chore or responsibility, accept the way the child does it.

·          Learn who your child is by listening actively, valuing differences, respecting strengths.  Avoid vicarious thrills. - she just wants u to pay attention, be with, listen to, be present.. the trips, the rides this constant busy-ness is not time spent but just distractions and a vicarious thrill.. 

·          Develop rituals.  SPEND TIME, whether talking with each other, sharing ideas, discussing  relationships or being actively involved in a mutually enjoyable pastime.