Self-Motivation
David Goggins
Former Navy Seal
Career Development
Bryan Cranston
Actor
Critical Thinking
Liv Boeree
International Poker Champion
Emotional Intelligence
Amaryllis Fox
Former CIA Clandestine Operative
Management
Chris Hadfield
Retired Canadian Astronaut & Author
Learn
from the world's big
thinkers
Start Learningfrom the world's big
thinkers
Subscribe to our Surprising Science newsletter
NASA observes a black hole feasting on a star
The TESS satellite captures rare images of a cataclysmic event in a faraway galaxy.
TESS Catches its First Star-destroying Black Hole
- TESS, a NASA planet-hunting satellite takes images of a black hole shredding apart a star.
- This phenomenon, called a tidal disruption event, is very rare.
- The star was the size of our sun.
NASA's planet-finding TESS satellite captured groundbreaking images of a black hole pulling apart a star.
TESS, which stands for Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite, was able to observe what's called a tidal disruption event, during which a passing star (in this case the size of our sun) got too close to a black hole and was shredded into a stream of gas. What happens next in such events is that the tail of the stream escapes into space while the rest forms an accretion disk.
Tidal disruptions are very rare, happening at the rate of once every 10,000 to 100,000 years in a Milky-Way-sized galaxy. Since seeing one is extremely difficult, only about 40 such events have been observed so far by scientists in various galaxies.
Astronomers estimate that the supermassive black hole that produced this particular event (thanks to its extreme gravitational pull) weighs about 6 million times more than our Sun. It's located at the center of the 2MASX J07001137-6602251 galaxy, which is about 375 million light-years away from us in the constellation Volans.
NASA's Neil Gehrels Swift Observatory and instruments from around the world provided more details about the finding, which was first captured on January 29th by ASAS-SN, an international network of 20 robotic telescopes. The network's name, if you're wondering, doesn't stand for "assassin," but is actually an acronym for the "All-Sky Automated Survey for Supernovae". TESS actually saw the event even earlier, on January 21st, but its data was not transmitted to Earth until March 13th.
Thomas Holoien, a Carnegie Fellow at the Carnegie Observatories in Pasadena, California, said that data from TESS allowed scientists to see exactly when the event, dubbed ASASSN-19bt, began to get brighter – something they've never been able to spot previously.
"Because we identified the tidal disruption quickly with the ground-based All-Sky Automated Survey for Supernovae (ASAS-SN), we were able to trigger multiwavelength follow-up observations in the first few days," said Holoien. "The early data will be incredibly helpful for modeling the physics of these outbursts."
Learn more about TESS, a mission led by MIT and managed by NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center here.
You can also read the paper on the amazing findings online in The Astrophysical Journal.
How to make a black hole
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Remote learning vs. online instruction: How COVID-19 woke America up to the difference
Educators and administrators must build new supports for faculty and student success in a world where the classroom might become virtual in the blink of an eye.
14 July, 2020
Credit: Shutterstock
Sponsored by Charles Koch Foundation
- If you or someone you know is attending school remotely, you are more than likely learning through emergency remote instruction, which is not the same as online learning, write Rich DeMillo and Steve Harmon.
- Education institutions must properly define and understand the difference between a course that is designed from inception to be taught in an online format and a course that has been rapidly converted to be offered to remote students.
- In a future involving more online instruction than any of us ever imagined, it will be crucial to meticulously design factors like learner navigation, interactive recordings, feedback loops, exams and office hours in order to maximize learning potential within the virtual environment.
<p>If there is one thing that the COVID-19 pandemic should teach educators, it's the fragility of long-cherished assumptions about what is best or desirable for learning. It seems like just yesterday that the arguments were raging about whether colleges were going to be diminished if they relied too much on technology and online learning. Access to college classes, it seemed at the time, was something that must be added carefully to an existing way of learning. One thing that drew nods at faculty meetings was the conviction that making college accessible would not be at the expense of a quality residential experience. It never occurred to any of us (even those of us who were actively promoting online learning as an alternate but equally effective educational experience) that traditional residential classrooms would disappear, not because they had been destroyed by online courses, but because they might become obsolete in a world in which congregating in groups of dozens or hundreds is simply not possible.</p><p>Your child may now be staring at their computer screen instead of going to a physical classroom, but that doesn't mean that they are necessarily participating in quality, online learning. Your student is more than likely learning through emergency remote instruction, <em>which is not the same as online learning</em>. As we face this new era of remote instruction for everyone from K-12 students to graduate students and adult learners, it's essential that we properly define and understand the difference between a course that is designed to be taught in an online format and a course that has been rapidly converted to be offered to remote students. It is also critical that we examine the respective roles of these two forms of instruction in the future of education.</p>
<blockquote>[T]here have always been and continue to be skeptics of online learning and many of their fears are not unfounded. ... However, we often find that these concerns are due to a misunderstanding of the difference between high-quality, online instruction and emergency remote education. </blockquote>
<p>In 2014, Georgia Tech partnered with AT&T and Udacity to launch what has now become the world's largest and most affordable (costing the average student around $8,000), accredited Online Master's of Science in Computer Science (known as <a href="https://omscs.gatech.edu/" target="_blank">OMSCS</a>). The design and development of this degree program was a massive undertaking involving countless faculty members, online instruction specialists, educational technologists, and instructional designers. Due to the immense work and expertise poured into the OMSCS program and its curriculum, it has become a global success and has produced hundreds of successful alumni.<br></p><p>The remote courses offered by universities across the globe as a result of COVID-19 are not the same as online courses offered by a program, like OMSCS, that has been designed from inception to be offered in a fully digital format. For example, in Ashok Goel and David Joyner's popular Knowledge-Based Artificial Intelligence course, every detail from the user experience of navigating the virtual course content, to the highly interactive, pre-recorded video lessons, to the approach to peer feedback, exams, and office hours have been meticulously designed to maximize learning potential within the virtual environment. This course has been iterated upon and honed over many semesters of offerings.</p><p>A course in, for example, physics, that has never before been offered in the online environment but has been converted to remote learning due to COVID-19 does not have the luxury of many phases of design and iteration. A faculty member teaching a course like this unexpectedly needs to rapidly determine how to offer the best possible course to remote students, even if said faculty member has never before taught an online course. Universities need to be prepared to successfully equip and support the efforts of these faculty members. In the new normal, a university must provide a framework for both online learning and emergency remote education.</p><p>This will be one of the defining questions for the future of higher education: How do we properly equip educators for a future involving more remote and online instruction than any of us ever imagined?</p>
<p>Since campuses began to shutter due to COVID-19, faculty and university staff across the country have worked around the clock to convert on-campus courses into remote learning experiences for upcoming semesters. New research data shows us that at Georgia Tech, students have generally been accepting of the newly remote experience and what the university has been able to offer as a substitute for on-campus learning, with only 30% reporting dissatisfaction.</p><p>Yet, there have always been and continue to be skeptics of online learning and many of their fears are not unfounded. Concern about the quality of instruction, the lack of human-to-human interaction, the restrictions placed on instructional methods are more than reasonable--these are the types of concerns that excellent faculty and instructors should be asking of any new approach lauded as a game changer for education. However, we often find that these concerns are due to a misunderstanding of the difference between high-quality, online instruction and emergency remote education. Research has shown that students in an online variation of one of Georgia Tech's on-campus computer science classes do just as well in the course as their in-person counterparts and also take less time to achieve comparable learning outcomes (<a href="http://www.davidjoyner.net/blog/toward-cs1-at-scale-building-and-testing-a-mooc-for-credit-candidate/" target="_blank">Joyner 2018</a>). Yet, students in online courses that are simply recordings of their in-person lessons can find success more difficult because their remote course was not designed for the digital format from inception. For example, in face-to-face classes there is an immediate feedback loop between instructors and students. If a student doesn't understand something, the instructor can instantly try a different approach to help foster understanding. In remote classes that loop is weakened or even missing entirely. Understanding the differing natures of the two modes of instruction is the first step in building a bridge between the quality of programs like Georgia Tech's online master's degrees and the immediate need for a course to be available to students who thought they would be spending those class hours in a lecture hall.</p>
<p>There is no question that we need quality online and remote instruction now more than ever. What we as educators and administrators must do is take a close look at the challenges (and successes) we've experienced over the past few months, overlay that with what we know about meaningful online learning experiences, and build new supports for faculty and student success in a world where the classroom might become virtual in the blink of an eye.</p><p>Beyond that, we need to look past the traditional curriculum, instruction, and assessment aspects of a course and try to develop the less obvious (but perhaps just as important) intangible elements that make up a high-quality educational experience. It can be difficult to build community, establish relationships between students and faculty, and find motivation and career guidance in a totally online environment. But these things are at the heart of the higher education experience and we need to look for a way to bring these intangibles to our students, regardless of instructional delivery mode and even in the midst of unthinkable and unexpected change. </p>
Keep reading
Show less
Popular
Octopus-like creatures inhabit Jupiter’s moon, claims space scientist
A leading British space scientist thinks there is life under the ice sheets of Europa.
03 May, 2020
Jupiter's moon Europa has a huge ocean beneath its sheets of ice.
Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/SETI Institute
Surprising Science
- A British scientist named Professor Monica Grady recently came out in support of extraterrestrial life on Europa.
- Europa, the sixth largest moon in the solar system, may have favorable conditions for life under its miles of ice.
- The moon is one of Jupiter's 79.
<p>Alien hunting is a hopeful activity, and one reason behind our space programs that the public generally supports. Looking for other life is a strong incentive to be venturing out into space, despite having found none so far. A top British space scientist,<strong> Professor Monica Grady,</strong> gave all cosmic explorers a big dose of such hope in a recent speech. She is certain there's some form of life on Jupiter's moon, <strong>Europa</strong>.</p><p>This life would not look human, but more like an "octopus," and is likely residing in the cold waters under the moon's sheets of ice. </p><p>Grady, a Professor of Planetary and Space Science and Chancellor at Liverpool Hope University, thinks there's a great likelihood of undiscovered life somewhere in our galaxy.</p><p>She also supposes that the deeper caves and cavernous space of Mars could be harboring some subterranean creatures, likely bacteria, there to escape the solar radiation. They could be getting water from the ice buried deep down. </p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"When it comes to the prospects of life beyond Earth, it's <strong>almost a racing certainty </strong>that there's life beneath the ice on Europa," <a href="https://phys.org/news/2020-02-certainty-life-europa-mars-uk.html" target="_blank">she said</a> in a February address.</p>
<p><span style="background-color: initial;">She thinks these life forms on Europa, </span><span style="background-color: initial;">390 million miles from Earth, could be higher in sophistication than the Martian bacteria, possibly having "the intelligence of an octopus."</span><br></p><p>Where would the creatures live on this moon of Jupiter? Somewhere below the very thick layer of ice, which goes 15 miles deep in some places. It's possible there is liquid water beneath all that ice, keeping whatever lives inside protected against radiation and the impact of asteroids and similar smashing bodies.</p><p><span></span><span style="background-color: initial;">The likelihood of life on Europa is bolstered by </span><span style="background-color: initial;">the possible <a href="https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011AGUFM.P23D1743G/abstract" target="_blank">hydrothermal vents</a> on its ocean floor. Such vents are cradles of life on Earth.</span></p><p>Grady thinks that our solar system doesn't have to be particularly special and that statistically speaking, as we explore other stars and galaxies, we should be able to find conditions for life. "I think it's highly likely there will be life elsewhere—and I think it's highly likely they'll be made of the same elements," <a href="https://phys.org/news/2020-02-certainty-life-europa-mars-uk.html" target="_blank">stated</a> the professor.</p>
Neil deGrasse Tyson wants to go ice fishing on Europa
<div class="rm-shortcode" data-media_id="GLGsRX7e" data-player_id="FvQKszTI" data-rm-shortcode-id="f4790eb8f0515e036b24c4195299df28"> <div id="botr_GLGsRX7e_FvQKszTI_div" class="jwplayer-media" data-jwplayer-video-src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/GLGsRX7e-FvQKszTI.js"> <img src="https://cdn.jwplayer.com/thumbs/GLGsRX7e-1920.jpg" class="jwplayer-media-preview" /> </div> <script src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/GLGsRX7e-FvQKszTI.js"></script> </div><p>Grady did not want to guess whether we will contact extraterrestrials any time soon, citing the fact that distances between us and likely aliens might be gigantic. </p><p>On the other hand, she added, if you look at a grain of sand, you "can see that most of it is made up of silicates, but it's also got little patches of carbon in it—and that carbon is extra-terrestrial, because it also contains nitrogen and hydrogen, which is not a terrestrial signature."</p><p>This tiny sample, says Grady, shows it was hit by meteorites, asteroids, and interstellar dust, pointing out "It's giving us an idea of how complex the record of extra-terrestrial material really is."</p>
<p>As for Europa, it has certainly figured in conversations about alien life previously. As <a href="https://europa.nasa.gov/mission/why-europa/" target="_blank">NASA explains</a>, scientists call Europa an "ocean world" due to decades of observations that predict an ocean under its sheets of ice. </p><p><span style="background-color: initial;">In 2019, water vapor was confirmed there by NASA for the first time. While it might just have the right conditions for life, </span><span style="background-color: initial;">does this moon have little octopus E.T.s swimming about? Future studies will tell. </span></p>
Water Vapor Above Europa’s Surface Deteced for First Time
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="9c4abc8473e1b89170cc8941beeb1f2d"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/WQ-E1lnSOzc?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
Keep reading
Show less
Supporting climate science increases skepticism of out-groups
A study finds people are more influenced by what the other party says than their own. What gives?
14 July, 2020
Protesters demanding action against climate change
Photo by Chris J Ratcliffe/Getty Images
Politics & Current Affairs
- A new study has found evidence suggesting that conservative climate skepticism is driven by reactions to liberal support for science.
- This was determined both by comparing polling data to records of cues given by leaders, and through a survey.
- The findings could lead to new methods of influencing public opinion.
<p>Among citizens of major Western nations, Americans' acceptance of the science of climate change is relatively <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/04/18/a-look-at-how-people-around-the-world-view-climate-change/" target="_blank">low</a>. It is also highly tied to their party <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2019/11/25/u-s-public-views-on-climate-and-energy/" target="_blank">affiliation</a>. While members of the Democratic Party accept the scientific consensus on climate change at rates similar to citizens in other countries, members of the Republican Party express an unusual skepticism towards that consensus and generally do not believe that human-made climate change is an important <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/04/16/u-s-concern-about-climate-change-is-rising-but-mainly-among-democrats/" target="_blank">issue</a>. </p><p>But it wasn't always this way. Polling data from the late 20<sup>th</sup> century shows that conservative Americans once expressed a similar agreement with the scientific consensus as their more liberal peers. The shift towards skepticism has been more recent. </p> A new <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/9B173B1C904EC70361BBBF51C456A343/S0007123420000113a.pdf/party_cues_in_the_news_democratic_elites_republican_backlash_and_the_dynamics_of_climate_skepticism.pdf" target="_blank">study</a> published in The British Journal of Political Science suggests that this decline is related not to the barrage of denialists on television or an inability to access the data, but rather to the tendency of members of one party to say they support the science and the backlash against them. <p><br></p>
Mind the cues
<div class="rm-shortcode" data-media_id="CabkeAzx" data-player_id="FvQKszTI" data-rm-shortcode-id="169377c88f392a86f6c42180b74820a5"> <div id="botr_CabkeAzx_FvQKszTI_div" class="jwplayer-media" data-jwplayer-video-src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/CabkeAzx-FvQKszTI.js"> <img src="https://cdn.jwplayer.com/thumbs/CabkeAzx-1920.jpg" class="jwplayer-media-preview" /> </div> <script src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/CabkeAzx-FvQKszTI.js"></script> </div> <p>The gulf in accepting the science behind climate change also exists among party elites. It is well known to any American who is attentive to the news, as party leaders are often more than willing to discuss their take to journalists.</p><p>Using polling data going back to the 1980s, the researchers were able to create a chart showing the aggregate amount of climate skepticism among the general population. A similar diagram showing the Republicans' skepticism dating back to 2001 was sourced from a previous, similar study. It was shown to be highly correlated with the one produced for this study.</p><p>These charts were compared with media content from prominent newspapers that included implicit or explicit stances on climate change by significant political figures. These thousands of articles were classified by using key terms and which major political figures were quoted or referenced. The researchers compared the number of cues over time to measured skepticism and looked for "<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granger_causality" target="_blank">Granger causality</a>," the tendency for one variable to predict the future value of another variable.</p><p>The model shows evidence of both in and out-group cue effects, though the repulsion to out-group cues was much more evident. A significant increase in Democratic cues in favor of climate science was followed by a rise in skepticism among Republican voters. Importantly, the cues lead, rather than follow opinion, and do so with consistency. Changes in view did not predict changes in the number or direction of cues. </p><p>The researchers also surveyed nearly 3000 adults to demonstrate the concept. This involved showing them a statement on the scientific consensus around climate change and a cue from either a Republican or a Democrat. This test confirmed the previous observation and provided further support for the notion that signals from leaders cause an increase in skepticism among some respondents.</p><p>Before my left-leaning and Democratic readers get too smug, this research references previous studies demonstrating a similar effect in the lead up to the Iraq War. However, in that case, the Democratic Party elites' mixed messages were countered by a Republican Party united behind the idea of invasion. The effect on the Democratic party rank and file was similar to that observed in this case. </p><p>Several other studies have examined effects similar to this for other issues. This study's importance is its focus on out-group cues and the effort placed into demonstrating a causal relationship between the statements of certain party elites and public opinion. Most previous studies focused purely on in-group cues or failed to differentiate between the two. </p>
<div class="rm-shortcode" data-media_id="v9hCmxo2" data-player_id="FvQKszTI" data-rm-shortcode-id="c2b5cd116329e99889d7094d148962b2">
<div id="botr_v9hCmxo2_FvQKszTI_div" class="jwplayer-media"
data-jwplayer-video-src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/v9hCmxo2-FvQKszTI.js">
<img src="https://cdn.jwplayer.com/thumbs/v9hCmxo2-1920.jpg" class="jwplayer-media-preview" />
</div>
<script src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/v9hCmxo2-FvQKszTI.js"></script>
</div>
<p><strong>Okay, so I might rely on a cognitive bias that assumes certain other people are wrong because of what club they're in. How do I fix that?</strong><br><br>The mechanism that the authors attribute this result to, the tendency to use cues from party leaders as shortcuts in decision making, is something that anybody can find themselves falling back on. Like most of the logical fallacies that people fall victim to, it is a time and energy-saving process that <em>seems </em>useful when getting more information and you don't feel like working things out for yourself.</p><p>Also, like many other <a href="https://bigthink.com/scotty-hendricks/ten-logical-mistakes-you-make-everyday-and-what-to-instead" target="_blank">logical fallacies</a>, knowing about it is half the battle in defeating it.<strong></strong></p><p>The next time that you find yourself trying to form an opinion about a complex issue, do what you can to look to primary sources rather than politicians. Remember that maintaining that a stance is correct or incorrect because somebody of importance holds it is just the appeal to authority fallacy. Lastly, remember that whatever political club you're in isn't infallible, and that sometimes people on your team can be mistaken just like people on the other side can be correct.</p><p>For anybody trying to increase the widespread acceptance of the scientific consensus in the United States, the authors suggest a few takeaways. They warn that party elites must weigh the positives and negatives of making public statements on their stances as that stance will generate at least some backlash. </p><p>On a more positive note, they point out that ideology was less important in decision making than many people suppose, suggesting that routes towards influencing popular opinion may face less difficulty when going against doctrine than is often feared. Similarly, they suggest that investment in forming consensus among party elites from both the left and right may be the best way to bring public opinion in line with the science. It would both benefit from the power of cues and work around the strong reaction against out-group stances.</p><p>The polarization of science in the United States has drastic consequences on scientists' ability to convince large portions of the population that climate change is real and that something should be done about it. A similar problem exists with the science around COVID-19. However, an improved understanding of the problem may allow us to solve it. By being aware of the biases that hinder our thinking, we may triumph over them.</p><p>Now we just have to be sure that the presentation of this information isn't done by someone who is considered to be part of an out-group. </p>
Keep reading
Show less
What is counterfactual thinking?
Can thinking about the past really help us create a better present and future?
14 July, 2020
Jacob Lund / Shutterstock
Personal Growth
- There are two types of counterfactual thinking: upward and downward.
- Both upward and downward counterfactual thinking can be positive impacts on your current outlook - however, upward counterfactual thinking has been linked with depression.
- While counterfactual thinking is a very normal and natural process, experts suggest the best course is to focus on the present and future and allow counterfactual thinking to act as a motivator when possible.
<p><em>"To some extent, your life can be thought of as the sum of the choices you have made. Of course, some choices are better than others. Looking back at past decisions (i.e., engaging in counterfactual thinking) is only natural in humans." </em>- <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/darwins-subterranean-world/201809/the-psychology-what-if" target="_blank">Psychology Today</a></p><ul class="ee-ul"></ul>
“Upward” versus “downward” counterfactual thinking
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzQ1NDYxOS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0NDM2MDY2OX0.njWs1qrV1vDBxU1V75tUduUW4TjJvEHglDWsK8ZF2l4/img.jpg?width=1245&coordinates=0%2C556%2C0%2C209&height=700" id="a15fa" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="98314d4d2b256ed08f42d369fe4ae080" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="concept of man thinking about the past one line drawing counterfactual thinking" />What are upward and downward counterfactual thinking?
Image by one line man on Shutterstock
<p><strong>What is upward counterfactual thinking?</strong></p><p>Upward counterfactual thinking happens when we look at a scenario and ask ourselves "what if" in terms of how our life could have turned out better. </p><p>Examples of upward counterfactual thinking are: </p><ul><li><em>"I wish I had taken that other job instead of this one 10 years ago - my life would be so much better if I had." </em></li><li><em>"I wish I would have gotten the part in that high school play, maybe I could have gotten into a theatre school and became an actor…"</em> </li></ul><p>Both of these examples have the ideology that if you had made different choices, your life right now would be improved. </p><p><strong>What is downward counterfactual thinking?</strong></p><p>Downward counterfactual thinking is, naturally, the opposite of upward counterfactual thinking in that we think about how things could have been worse if other decisions had been made. </p><p>Examples of downward counterfactual thinking are: </p><ul><li><em>"I'm so thankful I studied secondary education in university instead of psychology like I had originally planned - I love teaching high school kids and I never would have gotten to do that…" </em></li><li><em>"I'm so happy I left David when I got the chance, I can't imagine still being in an unhappy marriage with someone who doesn't support me…"</em> </li></ul><p>In these examples, we see the idea that if you had made different choices your life would not be as good as it is right now. </p>How counterfactual thinking can impact your life
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzQ1NDYxNy9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyNjI2MDQxOX0.DIVQ-Yk0d6yE3tc743MH1Fz2pOg1TGHLmhp8dPp9UdY/img.jpg?width=1245&coordinates=0%2C0%2C0%2C0&height=700" id="522d7" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="da7df6ad916b043e3610223900d0f8df" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="man thinking what if written on chalkboard" />How do upward and downward counterfactual thinking impact your life?
Photo by Brasil Creativo on Shutterstock
<p>While many people don't see the point in "what if" scenarios, various studies have found that downward counterfactual thinking can be more associated with psychological health compared with upward counterfactual thinking. Not only that, but research has also shown upward counterfactual thinking can be linked with current and future depression.</p> <p><strong>Downward counterfactual thinking tends to be more associated with psychological health </strong></p><p>According to a <a href="http://journal.sjdm.org/jdm06136.pdf" target="_blank">2000 study</a>, downward counterfactual thinking can be linked with better psychological health compared to upward counterfactual thinking. More importantly, in cases where downward counterfactual thinking did lead to negative feelings, those feelings acted as something of a motivator for people to take productive actions to better their current situation. </p> <p><strong>Upward counterfactual thinking tends to be more associated with depression </strong></p><p><a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272735816301714#:~:text=An%20upward%20counterfactual%20(as%20opposed,Markman%20and%20McMullen%2C%202003)." target="_blank">According to a 2017 study</a> that pooled a sample of over 13,000 respondents, thoughts about "better outcomes" and regret (upward counterfactual thinking) were associated with current and future depression. </p> <p><strong>Downward counterfactual thinking can actually improve your relationships and is more often engaged in by women than men.</strong></p><p>In a <a href="https://dspace.sunyconnect.suny.edu/bitstream/handle/1951/67589/Studer_Thesis.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y" target="_blank">2016 research paper submitted</a> to the Department of Psychology at the State University of New York at New Paltz, downward counterfactual thinking in regards to romantic relationships was associated with relatively positive relationship outcomes. Interestingly, women were more likely than men to engage in downward counterfactual thinking about their romantic life. </p> <p><strong>Upward counterfactual thinking can have some benefits in certain scenarios. </strong></p><p>When we look back after a failed test and think "I wish I would have studied more" - this motivates us to study harder the next time a test comes up. In this way, upward counterfactual thinking (or the negative version of "what if") can actually benefit us. </p> <p><strong>This can be difficult, though, because much of the time upward counterfactual thinking is more associated with a pessimistic outlook that can be unmotivating. </strong></p> <p>Thinking in the past tense can be motivational (and even healthy) at times, but the best thing to do is look forward. </p><p>While counterfactual thinking as a whole can be used to motivate us to make better choices or appreciate where we are in life, <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/darwins-subterranean-world/201809/the-psychology-what-if" target="_blank">this Psychology Today</a> article suggests that we should come up with ways to move on and focus on the present and the future instead of the past. Using counterfactual thinking as a motivational tool can be very helpful if we don't get stuck in the "what if" mindset that tends to pull us out of the present and back into the past, where things will always remain the same. </p>
Keep reading
Show less
Politics & Current Affairs
Anti-vax disinformation spreads unchecked on Facebook
Despite fact check campaigns, anti-vaccination influence is growing.
Scroll down to load more…
