Society & Culture - Posted by Adam Gorlick-Stanford on Friday, October 15, 2010 9:48 - 7 Comments 
(2 votes, average: 4.00 out of 5)
Loading ...
(2 votes, average: 4.00 out of 5) Loading ...Is willpower just a mind game?
A new study challenges the long-held theory that willpower is a limited resource that can only be replenished with a break. (Credit: iStockphoto)
STANFORD (US) — Burning the candle at both ends? Think a break would help? The urge to refresh (or just procrastinate) might be all in your head.
Share this article
Email
Republish this article
The text of this article by Futurity is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives License.
In a paper published this week in Psychological Science, researchers challenge a long-held theory that willpower—defined as the ability to resist temptation and stay focused on a demanding task—is a limited resource.
A long held argument says that when willpower is drained, the only way to restore it is by recharging our bodies with rest, food, or some other physical distraction that takes you away from whatever is burning you out.
Not so, says the new study.
It is a person’s mindset and personal beliefs about willpower that determine how long and how well they’ll be able to work on a tough mental exercise.
“If you think of willpower as something that’s biologically limited, you’re more likely to be tired when you perform a difficult task,” says Veronika Job, the paper’s lead author, who conducted her research at Stanford University and is now a postdoctoral scholar at the University of Zurich.
“But if you think of willpower as something that is not easily depleted, you can go on and on.”
Researchers designed a series of four experiments to test and manipulate students’ beliefs about willpower. After a tiring task, those who believed or were led to believe that willpower is a limited resource performed worse on standard concentration tests than those who thought of willpower as something they had more control over.
They also found that leading up to final exam week, students who bought into the limited resource theory ate junk food 24 percent more often than those who believed they had more control in resisting temptation. The limited resource believers also procrastinated 35 percent more than the other group.
“The theory that willpower is a limited resource is interesting, but it has had unintended consequences,” says Carol Dweck, professor of psychology at Stanford.
“Students who may already have trouble studying are being told that their powers of concentration are limited and they need to take frequent breaks. But a belief in willpower as a non-limited resource makes people stronger in their ability to work through challenges.”
The findings could help people who are battling distraction or temptation: diabetics following strict diets, people trying to overcome addictions, employees facing a tight deadline.
“This is an example of a context where people’s theories are driving outcomes,” says assistant professor Greg Walton. “Willpower isn’t driven by a biologically based process as much as we used to think. The belief in it is what influences your behavior.”
More news from Stanford University: http://news.stanford.edu/
Please wait
7 Comments
rodrigo
Paul
Isn’t this an extrapolation of a “truth” about the length of the term of a process, based on a short term experiment? Given that we have decades of experience linking mental focus to neural transmittors and chemistry, this hypothesis seems to deserve many caveats. Perhaps, it is just the news release that is so all encompassing.
J
What about ACTUAL differences in will power – some people have more, some people have less and probably experienced their whole lives that way before this experiment.
So, if you believe in willpower limitiations, or can easily be LED to believe willpower has limitations through experimental manipulation – could this not be because you have experienced limitations in willpower?
Or conversely, if you have spent your whole life experiencing strong willpower and ability to concentrate, would you not be more likely to either believe in no limits to willpower, or be more easily led to believe there are no limits to willpower through the experimental manipulation?
I find it really difficult to believe that biological bases are unimportant, given the nature of impulsivity and the differences in neurotransmission that have been documented among those with high and low impulsivity.
k
Wow, in the middle of a recession with 10% unemployment, these guys are trying to figure out a way to squeese out the last juice out of those still with a job. I am impressed.
k
and yes, you should be thinking of this in the context of Hitler trying to cultivate the Ubermensch and the whole “Arbeit macht Frei” thing, and Mao Tzedong’s “Great leap forward” thing. People sure can go without food and on the premise that willpower alone can keep them going for a while, it is a proven fact. I said for a while.
Our beliefs about ourselves completely define who we are. Strangely enough, many of our self-beliefs do not match others’ opinions of us. Believing yourself to be “a different person” (even if it’s an improvement) requires leaving behind who you are now. A difficult task at best, but certainly worth the effort.
When you’re willing to give up the protection and safety of your current, limited self, you can finally be bigger and better than you are now. Let us know when you’re ready.
The best boost I’ve found is a mind trick (detailed in “The Secret Code of Success” by Noah St. John). Ask yourself very good questions that have the answer *that you choose* for your future. “What would happen if I didn’t eat this dessert?” “What would my life be like if I did ____ ?” “How well could I do this if I chose to be the best in town at it?”
Paul
Philosophically, it is questionable whether there are any absolutes that can be applied to life and behavior over time.
Personalities are affected by experiences and the resulting feelings. Choosing to not feel those feelings does not lead to freedom from them. In fact, it is quite the opposite. It interferes with making other choices such as those that exhibit will power. So, if nothing else, will power can be affected by competing human realities.
How do you know it is not biological? Did you include any experiments on the biological aspect of it?