What You Can Change _. And What You Can't - Martin E. Seligman [6]
In the collision between self-improvement and biological psychiatry, the two sides have until recently used different sorts of evidence. The biological psychiatrists started with case histories but then built up to outcome studies—comparing a treated group with a group given a sugar pill, a placebo. The self-improvement and psychotherapy advocates still rely, for the most part, on single case histories and testimonials: before and after snapshots of some formerly obese person, a dramatic case report from a professional football player in Alcoholics Anonymous, a case of sudden recovery from profound depression following an angry confrontation with Mother. Case histories make absorbing reading, but they are clinically very weak, and, usually, self-serving evidence. The seller presents the case history that testifies to his product’s effectiveness. You never know how many failures there were.
The evaluation of change has improved recently. When the late Gerald Klerman became director of ADAMHA (the Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration of the federal government) under President Jimmy Carter, he argued that psychotherapies should be evaluated in the same hard-nosed way that the Federal Drug Administration evaluates drugs. He funded comparisons of drugs and of psychotherapies. Much of what psychology and psychiatry professionals now know comes from many such careful and costly studies. But little of this has filtered down to the general public, partly because of the power of the drug and psychotherapy guilds. For many problems, we can now assert with confidence that some therapies work and some do not. Little of this technology has found its way into the self-improvement industry, but when I make claims about effectiveness, I will lean heavily on outcome studies. I will often use case histories to illustrate important points, but only when they are backed by more substantial evidence.
These, then, are my biases. Now that you know them, you should also know your own. What are your underlying prejudices about self-improvement? Do you think that therapy can change almost all of your personality traits? Or do you think that character is fixed? Do you think that what you do is the product of choice, of the environment, or of genes?
Lisa Friedman Miller, the author of the following survey, has obtained responses from thousands of people in order to explore how different views of change relate to emotions and politics. There are no right or wrong answers, but your score will tell you where you stand on the crucial issue of change. Circle the choice that best fits your view. This survey will take you less than five minutes.
HUMAN PLASTICITY QUESTIONNAIRE3
Tom is shopping at a department store when he spots a sweater that he likes. He goes into the dressing room to try it on but notices that it costs too much money. Tom steals the sweater by covering it with his jacket and then walking out of the store.
What accounts for Tom stealing the sweater from the department store?
Your opinion:
1. How much is Tom’s behavior influenced by the immediate situation?
Not at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Very much
2. How much is Tom’s behavior influenced by more removed situations (e.g., childhood, race, the system)?
Not at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Very much
3. How much is Tom’s behavior influenced by the kind of person he is? Not at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Very much
4. How much is Tom’s behavior influenced by his own decision to act that way?
Not at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Very much
Now suppose that you explained to Tom that what he had done was wrong. You suggested that he change. He agreed that he should change and that he wants to change.
5. How completely could Tom change?
Not at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Completely change
Now suppose that you