Are we bad at forecasting our emotions? It depends on how you measure accuracy

Source: Association for Psychological Science

Summary: How will you feel if you fail that test? Awful, really awful, you say. Then you fail the test and, yes, you feel bad — but not as bad as you thought you would. This pattern holds for most people, research shows. The takeaway message: People are lousy at predicting their emotions.

How will you feel if you fail that test? Awful, really awful, you say. Then you fail the test and, yes, you feel bad — but not as bad as you thought you would. This pattern holds for most people, research shows. The takeaway message: People are lousy at predicting their emotions.

“Psychology has focused on how we mess up and how stupid we are,” says University of Texas Austin psychologist Samuel D. Gosling.  But Gosling and colleague Michael Tyler Mathieu suspected that researchers were missing part of the story. So the two reanalyzed the raw data from 11 studies of “affective forecasting” and arrived at a less damning conclusion: “We’re not as hopeless as an initial reading of the literature might lead you to think,” says Gosling. The study is published in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

If you look at it in absolute terms, says Gosling, it’s true. Take a group of people, ask them to make an emotional prediction, and on average they will get it wrong. “But there’s also a relative way of looking at it,” he explains. You thought you’re going to feel really, really awful when you saw that red F on the top of the paper — and you ended up feeling only awful. I guessed I’d feel moderately bummed and, after flunking, felt only mildly so. You forecast you’d feel worse than I forecast I was going to feel — and relative to each other, we were both right.

The authors combed through the literature with two criteria in mind: the study had to be “within-subject,” meaning the same person did the forecasting and reported the later feeling; and the two reports had to be about the same event. They ended up analyzing the raw data of 11 articles, comprising 16 studies and 1,074 participants. The results: Indexing relative affective forecasting — that is, looking at individuals and their positions in the group — we’re better predictors than if you measure only the average absolute accuracy.

One way of thinking about it is not objectively better than the other, says Gosling. But relative accuracy might be useful in real life. His example: An HIV clinic has learned that its clients are generally less upset than they thought they’d be at receiving a positive HIV test. But rather than throw counselors at clients at random, the clinic might serve people better if they know in advance who is going to have the worst time of it, and prepare those people for possible bad news.

“The story here is not, ‘are we bad forecasters or aren’t we?’ For me, the story is that past literature says we’re bad at this. And in truth we are bad at it in some ways, but not in others.” The central finding: “It’s complicated.”

Story Source:

The above post is reprinted from materials provided by Association for Psychological Science.Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.

Journal Reference:

  1. Samuel D. Gosling and Michael Tyler Mathieu. The Accuracy or Inaccuracy of Affective Forecasts Depends on How Accuracy Is Indexed: A Meta-Analysis of Past Studies.Psychological Science, 2012

About briandmahan

Following a catastrophic automobile accident several years ago, I began suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). I was hit by one of two cars that were racing on the 10 freeway in Los Angeles. And, although I walked away from the accident, I began to have several FULL-BLOWN panic attacks a day (I didn’t even know they were panic attacks; I just thought I was going crazy). But, after just a few sessions with a Somatic Experiencing Practitioner, my anxiety and panic attacks ceased and I haven't had one in 9 years. In fact, my life changed so dramatically and quickly, I decided to train in the same technique. Upon completing a three-year training program studying Somatic Experiencing, the work of Peter Levine, PhD., my self-obsessed passion for healing and personal transformation shifted. I've been blessed to be able to help and assist other survivors of unresolved past traumatic events, who suffer from PTSD, Anxiety, Panic Attacks, Depression and Stress to feel safe, joyful and to take take control of their lives again. And, now, I consider that car wreck to be one of the best things that ever happened to me. It’s my passion for the past 9 years to share my story, experience, and know-how with others, like you, who may simply have been trying to heal with the wrong approaches. (You can’t heal a toothache by getting a massage.) I am not a psychologist, a medical doctor or a spiritual healer. I am a trauma survivor. And I have come to understand that PTSD, anxiety, panic, stress and depression are physiological conditions more so than they are psychological disorders. I hold retreats, workshops and free seminars, focused on establishing a sense of safety and re-awakening embodiment through healing stress and trauma. I also offer one-on-one sessions both face-to-face for local clients and by Phone and SKYPE for clients nationwide and internationally.
This entry was posted in PTSD. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s