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
How should we study sex differences in a polarized age?
A new study on brain differences between sexes sparks a persistent question.
31 July, 2020
Photo: Ink Drop / Shutterstock
- A new study found brain volume differences between men and women.
- The research focuses on regional grey matter volume, a contentious measurement in neuroscience.
- Without environmental conditions being considered, how trustworthy is our emphasis on biology?
<p>In his book, "Chemically Imbalanced," University of Virginia research professor, Joseph E. Davis, questions the 20th century paradigm shift that created the belief that the brain is the last scientific frontier in understanding ourselves and the world. Neuroscience is valuable—that isn't in dispute. An expectancy that this discipline alone holds the keys to enlightenment is what's under debate.</p><p>Davis warns of the dangers of using biological explanations for social and personal dilemmas—namely, suffering. The entire field of psychiatry has fallen (or rather, been pushed) under the spell of brain chemistry, as I've <a href="https://bigthink.com/mind-brain/antidepressants-dangers" target="_self">repeatedly</a> <a href="https://bigthink.com/surprising-science/antidepressant-effects" target="_self">written</a> <a href="https://bigthink.com/politics-current-affairs/pharma-lobbying" target="_self">about</a>. Davis writes, </p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"Many of the claims about the relation of mind and mental states to brain are not really scientific at all and cannot themselves be tested in any empirical way. They rest no so much on a theory as on changed assumptions about human being." </p><p>This doesn't mean we should abandon the relationship of our brains to our bodies. We just can't confuse correlation with causation. In some ways, we've been sheltering in place for two centuries, thanks to indoor climate control and electricity. This "control of nature" has caused researchers to overlook the importance of the environment on mental health. </p><p>What about actual genetic differences in brain composition, however? Are they dependent on environment? This brings us to one of the more contentious debates in biology: genetic differences between men and women. A <a href="https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020/07/14/1919091117" target="_blank">new study</a>, published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, is forcing us to again confront that question. </p><p>The basis of the study is sound. Armin Raznahan, Chief of the Section on Developmental Neurogenomics at the National Institute of Mental Health, has been studying sex differences since he was a PhD student. He knows the field is filled with landmines. His first study was <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704355304576214904139134080" target="_blank">cited</a> in an argument for same-sex schooling, which served as a wake-up call about the dangers of publishing on the subject. </p>
Men vs. women: Why we’re imagining equality all wrong | Heather Heying | Big Think
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="dd7ac9538bd187ab6f36bec7877b849f"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/nzqxjx5pgJI?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span><p>This new research not only found sex differences in terms of regional grey matter volume (GMV), but also tied those differences to sex chromosomes. Specifically, after discovering neuroanatomical sex differences, the team found "that sex differences in regional GMV are aligned with functional systems for face processing."</p><p>This sparked the question of the validity of using grey matter to measure social and physical functioning, as this <a href="https://www.wired.com/story/a-study-finds-sex-differences-in-the-brain-does-it-matter/" target="_blank">deep dive</a> in Wired details. Raznahan's research found larger volumes of grey matter in men than women, though previous research has found women are better than men at facial recognition. </p><p>Grey matter is often used as evidence of stronger neurological connections. The default example is the famous <a href="https://www.pnas.org/content/97/8/4398" target="_blank">London taxi driver study</a>, which found that drivers, who have to memorize the entirety of the city to pass a rigorous test, have larger GMV in the brain's posterior hippocampi (spatial memory and navigation) than non-taxi drivers. This line of argument has also been <a href="https://psychcentral.com/news/2015/01/24/meditation-shown-to-alter-gray-matter-in-brain/80342.html#:~:text=Meditating%20for%20just%20eight%20weeks,Massachusetts%20General%20Hospital%20(MGH)." target="_blank">used by meditation researchers</a>, who have extrapolated from GMV volume to argue that meditation helps increase memory and empathy while decreasing stress. </p><p>Back to correlation and causation. Taxi drivers must study street maps for years; mediation is a specific discipline that has measurable effects on the nervous system (beyond grey matter). In both cases, the subjects have changed their relationship to their environment, thus hinting at correlation. If anything, you can argue environmental changes <em>cause</em> changes in GMV. </p><p>Raznahan's study is looking at genetic differences, yet environment still plays a role. The data was pulled from the U.S. and UK, predominantly white, wealthy countries. Comparing that data to other sets in African or Asian countries, for example, could result in a Bell Curve-type controversy—gender studies are already controversial enough. How then do you study biology when everything is polarized? </p><img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzUyNjM0OS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyNzg2Njg4NH0.R-vYf8IfMgN9sgc-kajLwVQZ2L6JZolxLRqSVLiXVEs/img.jpg?width=1245&coordinates=0%2C76%2C0%2C30&height=700" id="09150" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="65be5fc0d93209c36a629ada9214d2e9" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="people at International Women's Day rally" />
Dozens of women and men attend a rally and march in Washington Square Park for International Women's Day on March 8, 2018 in New York City.
Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images
<p>One political party in America grows angry any time a connection between income disparity and ethnicity is made. We seem unable to move beyond this political wedge, especially since it fires up the base, yet it holds the key to freeing scientists to take a holistic approach. You can't <em>only</em> look at changes in brain function when contemplating social differences. But you can investigate such differences if you're trying to understand brain disorders—the focus of Raznahan's work.</p><p>The gender question might always be with us. In 2014, Fallon Fox, a transgender MMA fighter, <a href="https://www.bjjee.com/articles/transgender-mma-fighter-who-broke-female-opponents-skull-are-we-getting-too-politically-correct-with-reality/" target="_blank">broke Tamikka Brents's skull</a> during a match. Brents later said she had "never felt the strength that I felt in a fight as I did that night." There are real biological differences between men and women. Arguing against that is antithetical to good science. </p><p>Neuroscience will remain a sticky topic for some time, however. The methods for measuring blood flow and brain volume are, as Davis suggests above, more art than science. Until better measuring sticks are developed for understanding brain functionality, the field will be more speculative than declarative. That's okay: scientists need to fail in order to grow. In a time when even minor failures result in ostracism, however, that's a tough line to walk. </p><p>Environment always matters. Humans are the products of the spaces they inhabit. Genetic disorders aside, our chemistry is linked to our environment. When neuroscience is able to utilize brain scans in conjunction with sociology, real progress will be possible. Until then, controversies will abound, even where they should be none. </p><p>--</p><p><em>Stay in touch with Derek on <a href="http://www.twitter.com/derekberes" target="_blank">Twitter</a>, <a href="https://www.facebook.com/DerekBeresdotcom" target="_blank">Facebook</a> and <a href="https://derekberes.substack.com/" target="_blank">Substack</a>. His next book is</em> "<em>Hero's Dose: The Case For Psychedelics in Ritual and Therapy."</em></p>
Keep reading
Show less
Like it or not, you can't ignore how people look or sound
A new study from Ohio State University details implicit bias.
24 July, 2020
Photo: fizkes / Shutterstock
- New research from Ohio State claims we cannot separate how someone looks and sounds.
- Volunteers were asked to look at photos and listen to audio, and were told to ignore their face or voice.
- "They were unable to entirely eliminate the irrelevant information," said associate professor Kathryn Campbell-Kibler.
<p>Postmates is a way of life in Los Angeles. So when a young Black driver recently <a href="https://twitter.com/davenewworld_2/status/1286254750573514753?s=10" target="_blank">crossed paths with a woman</a> outside of her building while delivering food to another apartment, you might initially be shocked at her response. While the woman claims her reaction is not racist—not only does she refuse him entry, but after he calls the apartment and talks to the man on other line, she even denies that he lives in the building—her use of the term "boy" says it all. </p><p>Would she have reacted similarly if the driver was white? While no definitive answer can be given, a <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/josl.12418" target="_blank">new study</a> from Ohio State University finds that his race is not only an issue, the woman would have not been able to ignore it even if she wanted to. </p><p>The distance between implicit and explicit bias has been studied for years. In this research, published in Journal of Sociolinguistics, Associate Professor <a href="https://linguistics.osu.edu/people/campbellkibler.1" target="_blank">Kathryn Campbell-Kibler</a>, in the Department of Linguistics at OSU, asked 1,034 volunteers to look at photos and listen to audio of people speaking to determine if they immediately judged someone by their looks or accents. </p><p>Almost across the board, they did.</p>
8 powerful speakers that might make you think differently about racism | Big Think
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="310eb2418d44ed9aed7fb66364904aaa"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ox04P7Gy2eY?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span><p>In some cases, volunteers were told to evaluate how "good-looking" the people in the photos were; in others, they were asked to judge their accents. One cohort was not given guidance; they looked at a photo and listened to a voice. Others were told to ignore the face while listening, and vice-versa. Some were even told that the voice was not from the same person they were looking at. </p><p>It didn't matter. In most cases, volunteers expressed critical judgment of either their face or voice. As Campbell-Kibler <a href="https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/07/200722083758.htm" target="_blank">says</a>, </p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"Even though we told them to ignore the voice, they couldn't do it completely. Some of the information from the voice seeped into their evaluation of the face."</p><p>Detaching face from voice is a difficult endeavor. The first time I heard Welsh actor Matthew Rhys' <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bu77rb0mww4" target="_blank">true accent</a> was while watching "The Wine Show," which he filmed shortly after wrapping up work on "The Americans." It took me a few minutes to rationalize what I was seeing. Now I can't get his actual speaking voice out of my head while watching the drunken private investigator transform into the lawyer we knew Perry Mason would become.</p><img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzUxMTM3OS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0NDU1OTM5NH0.kYNUbYpz6NJzKRb3TeOl7dh3mHv_Id2XsqYKliToCVw/img.jpg?width=1245&coordinates=0%2C8%2C0%2C116&height=700" id="51d52" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="23d9370cd92738127a30c593d22b5030" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
Jonathan Gartrelle (L), participating in a protest against police brutality, confronts a demonstrator taking part in a counter demonstration advertised as a Law and Order Rally that was also supporting President Donald Trump on June 14, 2020 in Miami, Florida.
Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images
<p>Rhys is paid to speak English with an American accent. The stakes are low for me as a viewer. Out in the real world, where racism is as prevalent as ever, the situation is different. Implicit bias affects everyone, which means racism and xenophobia are conditions we have to work at correcting in ourselves. It won't come natural. Campbell-Kibler continues,</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"We found that people could exercise some control over what information to favor, the voice or the face, depending on what we told them to do. But in most cases, they were unable to entirely eliminate the irrelevant information."</p><p>She notes that even though most participants were white, they were careful to not racially stereotype. Volunteers told to ignore faces while listening to accents performed best for this reason, though some admitted they had to make a conscious effort to do so. </p><p>Volunteers took no issue with judging the photos good-looking, believing looks to be subjective. Campbell-Kibler wants to follow up this research using videos instead of photographs to observe the impact of watching others on the screen. </p><p>The takeaway: we are influenced by all of the information available to us at all times. Our biases will make themselves apparent. Course-correcting is not natural, but thankfully, it is possible. </p><p>--</p><p><em>Stay in touch with Derek on <a href="http://www.twitter.com/derekberes" target="_blank">Twitter</a>, <a href="https://www.facebook.com/DerekBeresdotcom" target="_blank">Facebook</a> and <a href="https://derekberes.substack.com/" target="_blank">Substack</a>. His next book is</em> "<em>Hero's Dose: The Case For Psychedelics in Ritual and Therapy."</em></p>
Keep reading
Show less
"Forced empathy" is a powerful negotiation tool. Here's how to do it.
Master negotiator Chris Voss breaks down how to get what you want during negotiations.
15 July, 2020
Credit: Paul Craft / Shutterstock
- Former FBI negotiator Chris Voss explains how forced empathy is a powerful negotiating tactic.
- The key is starting a sentence with "What" or "How," causing the other person to look at the situation through your eyes.
- What appears to signal weakness is turned into a strength when using this tactic.
<p>How am I supposed to do that?</p><p>There's a lot wrapped up in that seemingly simple question. First off, it's an admission of ignorance—it invites further explanation. Questions often hold more power than declarations. </p><p>More importantly, it provokes what <a href="https://www.blackswanltd.com/our-team/chris-voss" target="_blank">Chris Voss</a> calls "forced empathy." Voss's resume includes a stint as the lead international kidnapping negotiator for the FB1 and 14 years in the New York City Joint Terrorist Task Force. He knows how to have a conversation in difficult situations.</p><p>Voss now <a href="https://bigthink.com/videos/chris-voss-on-how-to-gain-the-upper-hand-in-negotiations" target="_blank">teaches negotiation skills</a> to business leaders as the CEO and founder of the Black Swan Group. Whether chatting with terrorists or corporate heads, his main tactic is similar: Make the other person empathize with you. </p><p>His seven-word question accomplishes this. What seems to be an admission of uncertainty or weakness is actually a show of strength. In jujitsu, sometimes being on your back is an advantage; in business, the same rule applies. Chris Voss explains in an interview with Big Think:</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"You conveyed to them you have a problem. It's something that we also referred to as <em>forced empathy</em>. One of the reasons why we exercise tactical empathy is because we want the other side to see us fairly. We want them to see our position; we want them to see the issues we have; we want them to see the constraints that we have."</p>
<p>This question forces a response, and—this is the key—the other person has to consider your side of the argument. They have to look at the situation from your perspective if they hope to offer a solution.</p><p>Offering a real-world example, Voss mentions coaching a high-end real estate agent. They were leasing an expensive home in the Hollywood Hills. The first time the negotiators asked the "how" question, the leasing agent relented on a number of terms. A little while later, they asked again. This time, the agent said, "If you want the house you're going to have to do it," signaling that the end of negotiations had been reached. That kind of response tells you something useful: You've gotten as much as you can from the deal.</p><p>Voss says that "how" is not the only word that works. "What" is also a powerful entry into negotiations, such as "What am I supposed to do?" Again, you're forcing the other person to empathize. </p><p>This is a particularly tricky skill during a time when most conversations are online. Nuance is impossible without the immediacy of pantomimes and vocal fluctuations. Whataboutism is too easy an escape. This particular forced empathy tactic might be one that's best employed face-to-face or on the phone.</p>
Choose your battles
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzQ1OTQ2NC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxNDgwMTA5OH0.BP2vZe7gZdiaE_KA5Otr4pzYmAqpFQUGSRSVr28Bipo/img.jpg?width=1245&coordinates=0%2C90%2C0%2C32&height=700" id="46a4d" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="912a183929345986b45c3455a6f369f5" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="Aikido Morihei Ueshiba" />Aikido Morihei Ueshiba (1883 - 1969, standing, centre left), founder of the Japanese martial art of aikido, demonstrating his art with a follower, at the opening ceremony of the newly-opened aikido headquarters, Hombu Dojo, in Shinjuku, Tokyo, 1967.
Credit: Keystone/Hulton Archive/Getty Images
<p>Online debates often amount to little more than frustrated individuals pulling out their hair. In his book, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/0062339346?tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1" target="_blank">"Against Empathy,"</a> Yale psychology professor Paul Bloom writes that effective altruists are able to focus on what really matters in everyday life.</p><p>For example, he compares politics to sports. Rooting for your favorite team isn't based in rationality. If you're a Red Sox fan, Yankees stats don't matter. You just want to destroy them. This, he believes, is how most people treat politics. "They don't care about truth because, for them, it's not really about truth."</p><p>Bloom writes that if his son believed our ancestors rode dinosaurs, it would horrify him, but "I can't think of a view that matters less for everyday life." We have to strive for rationality when the stakes are high. When involved in real decision-making processes that will affect their life, people are better able to express ideas and make arguments, and are more receptive to opposing ideas. </p><p>Because we "become inured to problems that seem unrelenting," it's imperative to make the problem seem immediate. As Voss says, giving the other side "the illusion of control" is one way of accomplishing this, as it forces them to take action. When people feel out of control, negotiations are impossible. People dig their heels in and refuse to budge. </p><p>What seems to be weakness is actually a strength. To borrow another martial arts metaphor, negotiations are like aikido: using your opponent's force against them while also protecting them from injury. Forcing empathy is one way to accomplish this task. You may get more than you ask for without the other side ever realizing they surrendered anything.</p><p>--</p><p><em>Stay in touch with Derek on <a href="http://www.twitter.com/derekberes" target="_blank">Twitter</a>, <a href="https://www.facebook.com/DerekBeresdotcom" target="_blank">Facebook</a> and <a href="https://derekberes.substack.com/" target="_blank">Substack</a>. His next book is</em> "<em>Hero's Dose: The Case For Psychedelics in Ritual and Therapy."</em></p>3 Tips on Negotiations, with FBI Negotiator Chris Voss
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="b86d518e9f0c9f9d7a7c686e07798152"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-FLlBchonwM?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
Has science made religion useless?
Placing science and religion at opposite ends of the belief spectrum is to ignore their unique purposes.
15 July, 2020
- Science and religion (fact versus faith) are often seen as two incongruous groups. When you consider the purpose of each and the questions that they seek to answer, the comparison becomes less black and white.
- This video features religious scholars, a primatologist, a neuroendocrinologist, a comedian, and other brilliant minds considering, among other things, the evolutionary function that religion serves, the power of symbols, and the human need to learn, explore, and know the world around us so that it becomes a less scary place.
- "I think most people are actually kind of comfortable with the idea that science is a reliable way to learn about nature, but it's not the whole story and there's a place also for religion, for faith, for theology, for philosophy," says Francis Collins, American geneticist and director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). "But that harmony perspective doesn't get as much attention. Nobody is as interested in harmony as they are in conflict."
Why are sitcom dads still so inept?
Yet, the real-world roles and expectations of fathers have changed in recent years.
20 June, 2020
From Homer Simpson to Phil Dunphy, sitcom dads have long been known for being bumbling and inept.
<p>But it wasn't always this way. Back in the 1950s and 1960s, sitcom dads tended to be serious, calm and wise, if a bit detached. In a shift that media scholars <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/15295039009360179" target="_blank">have documented</a>, only in later decades did fathers start to become foolish and incompetent. </p><p>And yet the real-world roles and expectations of fathers have changed in recent years. Today's dads are putting more time into caring for their children and see that role <a href="https://theconversation.com/dads-are-more-involved-in-parenting-yes-but-moms-still-put-in-more-work-72026" target="_blank">as more central to their identity</a>.</p><p>Have today's sitcoms kept up? </p><p>I study gender and the media, and I specialize in depictions of masculinity. <a href="https://doi.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Fppm0000289" target="_blank">In a new study</a>, my co-authors and I systematically look at the ways in which portrayals of sitcom fathers have and haven't changed.</p>
<h2>Why sitcom portrayals matter</h2><p>Fictional entertainment can shape our views of ourselves and others. To appeal to broad audiences, sitcoms often rely on the shorthand assumptions <a href="http://resourcelists.falmouth.ac.uk/items/A1C1A85B-4CEA-012B-D5CD-39585556B65C.html" target="_blank">that form the basis of stereotypes</a>. Whether it's the way they portray <a href="https://www.doi.org/10.1177/1097184X06291918" target="_blank">gay masculinity</a> in "Will and Grace" or <a href="https://www.degruyter.com/view/journals/humr/23/2/article-p229.xml" target="_blank">the working class</a> in "Roseanne," sitcoms often mine humor from certain norms and expectations associated with gender, sexual identity and class.</p><p>When sitcoms stereotype fathers, they seem to suggest that men are somehow inherently ill-suited for parenting. That sells actual fathers short and, in heterosexual, two-parent contexts, it reinforces the idea that mothers should take on the lion's share of parenting responsibilities.</p><p>It was Tim Allen's role as Tim "the Tool Man" Taylor of the 1990s series "<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0101120/?ref_=ttfc_fc_tt" target="_blank">Home Improvement</a>" that inspired my initial interest in sitcom dads. Tim was goofy and childish, whereas Jill, his wife, was always ready – with a disapproving scowl, a snappy remark and seemingly endless stores of patience – to bring him back in line. The pattern matched <a href="https://www.today.com/popculture/changing-roles-tv-fathers-1C9406531" target="_blank">an observation</a> made by TV Guide television critic Matt Roush, who, in 2010, wrote, "It used to be that father knew best, and then we started to wonder if he knew anything at all."</p><p>I published <a href="https://doi.org/10.1207/s15506878jobem4501_3" target="_blank">my first quantitative study on the depiction of sitcom fathers</a> in 2001, focusing on jokes involving the father. I found that, compared with older sitcoms, dads in more recent sitcoms were the butt of the joke more frequently. Mothers, on the other hand, became less frequent targets of mockery over time. I viewed this as evidence of increasingly feminist portrayals of women that coincided with their growing presence in the workforce.</p>
<h2>Studying the disparaged dad</h2><p>In our new study, we wanted to focus on sitcom dads' interactions with their children, given how fatherhood has changed in American culture.</p><p>We used what's called "<a href="https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=nMA5DQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=content+analysis&ots=pGUmt8gs8p&sig=yz1P2Yv8FzYddMN4JCMZ1cn5biE#v=onepage&q=content%20analysis&f=false" target="_blank">quantitative content analysis</a>," a common research method in communication studies. To conduct this sort of analysis, researchers develop definitions of key concepts to apply to a large set of media content. Researchers employ multiple people as coders who observe the content and individually track whether a particular concept appears.</p><p>For example, researchers might study the racial and ethnic diversity of recurring characters on Netflix original programs. Or they might try to see whether demonstrations are described as "protests" or "riots" in national news.</p><p>For our study, we identified 34 top-rated, family-centered sitcoms that aired from 1980 to 2017 and randomly selected two episodes from each. Next, we isolated 578 scenes in which the fathers were involved in "disparagement humor," which meant the dads either made fun of another character or were made fun of themselves.</p><p>Then we studied how often sitcom dads were shown together with their kids within these scenes in three key parenting interactions: giving advice, setting rules or positively or negatively reinforcing their kids' behavior. We wanted to see whether the interaction made the father look "humorously foolish" – showing poor judgment, being incompetent or acting childishly.</p><p>Interestingly, fathers were shown in fewer parenting situations in more recent sitcoms. And when fathers were parenting, it was depicted as humorously foolish in just over 50% of the relevant scenes in the 2000s and 2010s, compared with 18% in the 1980s and 31% in the 1990s sitcoms.</p><p>At least within scenes featuring disparagement humor, sitcom audiences, more often than not, are still being encouraged to laugh at dads' parenting missteps and mistakes.</p>
<h2>Fueling an inferiority complex?</h2><p>The degree to which entertainment media reflect or distort reality is an enduring question in communication and media studies. In order to answer that question, it's important to take a look at the data.</p><p><a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/06/12/fathers-day-facts/" target="_blank">National polls by Pew Research Center</a> show that from 1965 to 2016, the amount of time fathers reported spending on care for their children nearly tripled. These days, dads constitute 17% of all stay-at-home parents, up from 10% in 1989. Today, fathers are just as likely as mothers to say that being a parent is "extremely important to their identity." They are also just as likely to describe parenting as rewarding.</p><p>Yet, there is evidence in the Pew data that these changes present challenges, as well. The majority of dads feel they do not spend enough time with their children, often citing work responsibilities as the primary reason. Only 39% of fathers feel they are doing "a very good job" raising their children.</p><p>Perhaps this sort of self-criticism is being reinforced by foolish and failing father portrayals in sitcom content.</p><p>Of course, not all sitcoms depict fathers as incompetent parents. The sample we examined stalled out in 2017, whereas TV Guide presented "<a href="https://www.tvguide.com/news/features/sitcom-dads-manhood/" target="_blank">7 Sitcom Dads Changing How we Think about Fatherhood Now</a>" in 2019. In our study, the moments of problematic parenting often took place in a wider context of a generally quite loving depiction.</p><p>Still, while television portrayals will likely never match the range and complexity of fatherhood, sitcom writers can do better by dads by moving on from the increasingly outdated foolish father trope.</p><p><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/erica-scharrer-349453" target="_blank">Erica Scharrer</a>, Professor of Communication, <em><a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-massachusetts-amherst-1563" target="_blank">University of Massachusetts Amherst</a></em></p><p>This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com/" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-are-sitcom-dads-still-so-inept-139737" target="_blank">original article</a>.</p>
Keep reading
Show less
Popular
