Seeking, Wanting and Liking

I came across this Slate piece that describes the dopamine system in the brain as the center of "seeking or wanting" and relates that to our seemingly insatiable desire for information on the internet. I think there may be something to this, in re: google searching, twitter, etc., but I'm really more interested in this construct generally: how seeking is its own reward so to speak, separate from the "liking" of the sought results; that liking or satisfaction is related to an entirely different set of chemical processes in the brain - the opioid system.

I, for one, have always thought of these two systems as the same: you seek chocolate, let's say, in order to experience the pleasure of eating chocolate. Or cigarettes, or cocaine, etc... But, what they are saying here is that the seeking behavior is stimulating in itself, and that its result is not necessarily pleasure, but more seeking behavior. And this makes sense to me, most clearly as an ex-smoker; there were certainly many times that I KNEW a cigarette would not make me feel better - when I had a cold, for instance - and yet was driven to go out and get cigarettes anyway.

This leads me to think that it may be helpful when trying to interrupt destructive behavior, or to create new more positive habits, to parse out the "seeking" from the "liking." I can think of some great potential applications for this approach around money and spending, child-rearing, self-destructive behavior, etc. What do you think?

Management "Science" Exposed!

While it would make me feel like a hypocrite to suggest that there's no value behind all those powerpoint slides and spreadsheets, maybe there's less than we like to think.

The part of this New Yorker review that caught my attention is the description of the difference between "leading" workers and "driving" them - a difference that eluded Taylor and Gilchrest, and still seems to elude many in management. Taylor, in particular, seemed to think that most workers were simply loafers. I particularly liked this passage, describing Taylor's performance in 1912, when called before a House committee:

"The ordinary pig-iron handler” is not suited to shovelling coal, Taylor said. “He is too stupid.” But a first-class man, who could lift a shovelful weighing twenty-one and a half pounds, could move a pile of coal lickety-split. “You have told us the effect on the pile,” an exasperated committee member said, but “what about the effect on the man?” Wilson wanted to know what happened to workers who weren’t “first-class men”:

THE CHAIRMAN: Scientific management has no place for such men?

MR. TAYLOR: Scientific management has no place for a bird that can sing and won’t sing. . . .

THE CHAIRMAN: We are not . . . dealing with horses nor singing birds, but we are dealing with men who are a part of society and for whose benefit society is organized.

Right on. The book looks fascinating. I'll get it and report back.

Expected rewards decrease motivation?

Kids who expected rewards for drawing - an activity they previously liked - drew less long, and less well, than kids who had no expectation of reward. Counter-intuitive? Or, does it point to the idea that intrinsic meaning is a better motivator than extrinsic reward?