How You Can Tell that Deep Down, Solitude Is Your Thing

What does it mean if you crave a lot of time alone?

If you are someone who likes having time to yourself and space to yourself, and just never felt in tune with all the relentless matrimania (the over-the-top hyping of marriage and weddings and coupling), there have always been other people like you. But now, more than ever before, those people are speaking out and getting heard. What’s more, what they have to say sometimes, in an instant, becomes wildly popular.

An example is an article first posted by John Warwick at EliteDaily in March of 2015, “Alone isn’t lonely: 10 signs you’re perfectly happy with solitude.” It has been shared more than 69,000 times. More than 2,300,000 people have Liked it.

I, too, appreciate Warwick’s 10 signs. I relate to many of them and I like how some of them dovetail with what I’ve learned about people who are single at heart. So I’ll share them first. But then I will share my reservations, not with the signs but with Warwick’s framing of what this says about the people who read the 10 signs and realize that yes, I am someone who is perfectly happy with solitude.

Here are the 10 signs that you are perfectly happy with solitude. (For Warwick’s discussion of each, take a look at the original article.)

  1. You love free weekends.
  2. You’ll go to the movies on your own.
  3. You’re comfortable with eating out by yourself.
  4. You prefer drinking on your own.
  5. You travel the world solo.
  6. You hate sharing beds.
  7. You find driving alone calming.
  8. You neglect your phone, a lot.
  9. You can be socially MIA for long periods of time.
  10. You see “clingy” as an unattractive trait.

A good example of the single-at-heart sensibility of some of these signs is what Warwick says about traveling alone: “The idea of discovering the world on your own doesn’t scare you – it exhilarates you.” Stereotypes of single people insist that they are alone and lonely, cowering in their apartments, too fearful to face the world. In real life, many singles fit Warwick’s description: they are exhilarated even by experiences that other people find intimidating.

Warwick’s discussion of #10 also resonates with the single-at-heart in important ways. For example, he notes: “You need that space to be alone, physically and mentally.” The “need” word is important here. People who vastly prefer living with other people and being with people a great deal of the time just don’t get it about how wanting to be alone can feel more like a need than a mere preference. But it can.

Also in the discussion of #10 is this: “Your decisions are wholeheartedly your decisions, and you love that.” There is research to support the significance of this preference for handling things on your own. In my preliminary research on people who are single at heart, I’ve found that they differ from people who are not single-at-heart by their desire to make their own decisions. And in a study of people who were 40 or older and had been single all their lives, the trait of self-sufficiency served them in a way that it did not serve comparable people who were married. For the always-single, the more self-sufficient they were, the less likely they were to experience negative emotions. For the married people, the more self-sufficient their personalities, the more likely they were to experience negative feelings.

Now for my reservations. Speaking of people who are perfectly happy with solitude, Warwick says that “there are a select few who don’t feel relationships are their top priority.” In fact, though, we have no idea how many people feel this way. No one has ever done the relevant research. And even if researchers were to approach a big, nationally representative sample of adults and ask them about such things, there would still be a huge impediment. Because craving time on your own is so rarely acknowledged or appreciated in our cultural conversations, because matrimania is rampant, and because wanting to be in romantic relationships is portrayed as normal and maybe even inevitable, it is difficult for people who love their solitude to own that. Too many of them are wondering whether they don’t really like their time alone, they just haven’t me the right person. Or maybe they have internalized the cultural narrative that if they are not goo-goo over romance and coupling, there’s something wrong with them. So I’m not sure how many people who really do love their solitude more than they love romantic relationships would say so to a researcher – or even to themselves.

My biggest objection, though, is with something else Warwick says about people who are perfectly happy with solitude: “Their focus is satisfying their needs, and their needs only.” But think about people who really need to be with other people. When they spend time with other people, they are satisfying their own need to do so. Are they fulfilling someone else’s similar need in the process? Most likely. But I don’t think that counts as something for which they deserve extra credit. If the other person isn’t fulfilling their needs, they will probably flee. (Unless they stay because they are scared of being alone.) And I think that means that what they are doing really is about their needs, and their needs only.

So who is more attentive to the needs of others: People who put romantic relationships at the center of their lives or those who are more inclined toward solitude? If we take the difference between married and single people as one (imperfect) way of assessing that, then we already know the answer. There are many relevant studies. Single people are more likely than married people to support, stay in touch with, and exchange help with their parents, siblings, neighbors, and friends. They are also more often the ones to provide the long-term intensive care that other people need when they are sick or disabled or elderly. Follow the same people over time as they go from being single to getting married, and you will see the development of insularity. The same people who were caring and connected as single people become focused mostly on their spouse (and children, if they have any) once they marry.

So don’t tell me it is the solitude lovers who are focused solely on their own needs.

-Bella DePaulo, PhD

Stop Numbing Out and Awaken to Your Life

To feel happier and more alive, wake up to the ways you habitually escape life

I used to jokingly describe myself as a hedonist. I wasn’t really joking, actually, as I passionately loved good food, good wine, dance, travel, life and passion itself.  These days, however, I don’t see myself as a hedonist.  I see myself, much more clearly, as an escape artist.

I wouldn’t say that I’ve had a dramatically difficult life, give or take some depression and anxiety and a few hard knocks over the years.  Nonetheless, it appears that I’ve gone through enough difficulty and loss that by my late twenties, like so many other people, I’d developed a chronic level of existential pain and wounding.    I wasn’t really aware of it, but what I was aware of was a constant drive to stimulate my senses, whether through sugar, fat, wine, TV, travel or highly distracting relationships.

Even though I first identified my issues with food (particularly sugar) as an addictive behavior quite early on, I failed to see the myriad of ways I sought to escape the depths of my self and the associated pain.  Can you relate?

I’ve worked on self-awareness, healing and personal growth for many years now.  This year, though, through a powerful program offered through my church, I realized that I am still running from unacknowledged pain (and the pain comes from both old and new sources).  I hadn’t seen some my favorite pastimes as being compulsive routes of escape, but they have been and often still are.

It’s easy to see that eating an entire cake, or drinking wine when stressed or anxious, could be an addictive form of behavior. But watching hours of Netflix? Living for the next vacation? Navigating  yet another stressful, tumultuous relationship? Check, check, check.

It is so very marvelous to wake up.

One of the basics that this program suggested was to intentionally sit with your pain.  Connect with it and acknowledge it instead of numbing it, and see if you can identify the source of it.  Pray for help in facing it and healing it, particularly if you have no idea where it’s coming from.

I started noticing that during certain stressful moments, often while having a conversation with someone, I would get a “pop-up” in my brain that urged me to stop at a bakery on the way home and buy some cake.  Rather than just knee-jerkedly responding to the call for cake, I learned to understand that this was a sign that stress or pain was being triggered in me, even if it wasn’t obvious.

It actually had nothing to do with cake, though cake and other sweet treats had been a way of numbing my discomfort and loss since I was a girl.  Instead of obediently marching to the store, I have learned that the proper response to the “pop-up” is to go home, sit on my sofa, and try to connect with what I’m truly concerned or grieved about.  And pray about it.  Or journal about it.

It’s not about entirely avoiding food or wine or entertainment, but rather to notice when you’re using it as a means to numb out or escape. If you’re honest with yourself, you’ll start to notice this.  In the last couple of years I’ve been going through a particularly stressful situation, and without realizing it had pushed me into habitually using various behaviors as means of escape.  Other than when I was working or actively engaged with key people in my life, it had recently gotten to the point where most of my free time was spent escaping reality in some form or another.

This month, one of my closest friends suggested that we “fast”.  She is fasting social media.  I am fasting Netflix, which had become my favorite way of relaxing and escaping reality.

I feel so awake, so free. Not always comfortable, though.  When a difficult day’s events bring up that familiar ache in my chest, I long to boot up a great movie and escape.  Accountability is a powerful tool, as knowing that I’d let down my friend by caving in is usually what stops me from giving in. I also really don’t want to lose the fresh awareness, and the feeling of participating in real life that I’ve recovered.  I’m quite sure that my escapist patterns have progressively been shutting down my creativity and other gifts, and now that I’ve woken up I refuse to let that happen again.

In addition, I am doing my best to only use food as nourishment, not as a form of distraction or numbing out.  If I suddenly crave a glass of wine, I ask myself why.

It feels weird, and it’s hard, but it’s so exciting.

I am reading lots of books again.  I am eating sustaining, healthy meals and focusing just on the food itself, not zoning out in front of the screen.  I’m enjoying the cooking, not just the eating. You see a lot more when your head is lifted up instead of focused down or inward, transported away from life and blinded to it by some numbing pleasure.

As I write this I am on a plane going on vacation.  I am intentionally planning a very quiet break, not one filled with lots of distracting escapist plans or busy-ness.  I am going to read books, relax, reflect, think and be with people I love.  No screen time, no Netflix, except the bare minimum of social media, texts and email to stay in touch with people at home. I am very excited about what I might realize about myself and my life, given enough space to think and feel.

What about you?  Do you numb yourself and escape things you don’t want to feel or face by hiding behind food, or social media, or other chronic distractions?  Do you have any time in your life where you can just be and feel, even if those feelings are uncomfortable?

I heard someone speak the other day about how we no longer have gaps of quiet in our life where life has the opportunity to speak to us, where we have the chance to just be.  If we’re sitting in a waiting room or at a transit stop, we pick up our phones and start scrolling through stuff. We don’t see and feel our surroundings, we don’t have a chance to feel ourselves and our lives.

I invite you to join me in becoming more present. In facing your demons and discovering the healing and presence that is on the other side of detaching from escapist distractions. I am so thrilled to slowly be reawakening to life, this is the best thing I’ve done in years.

This is something you can decide, something you can control.  Become aware, notice why you do things. Life is too precious to lose yourself in all manner of distractions and escapes. I challenge you to be present and feel what you need to feel, and live how you truly long to live.

Dr. Susan Biali, M.D. is a medical doctor, health and happiness expert, life and health coach, professional speaker, flamenco dancer, and the author of Live a Life You Love: 7 Steps to a Healthier, Happier, More Passionate You, dedicated to helping people worldwide get healthy, find happiness and enjoy more meaningful lives that they love. Dr. Biali has been featured as an expert on the Today Show as well as many other major media outlets, and is available for keynote presentations, workshops/retreats, media commentary, and private life and health coaching.

How to Stop Passing Unfairness to Your Partner

You will do unto others the unfairness that is done to you…unless you do this

Once upon a time, my wife backed out of a parking space at a big box store. . . directly into the passenger-side door of a car behind her. She stepped out to fess up and apologize, but was met with a frothing tirade as the other driver demanded that she immediately pay $1,000 in cash for damages. Kristi cowered and cajoled and somehow managed to give her insurance information and drive home. . . at which point she nearly killed me for feeding the kids a frozen pizza that she was saving for later in the week. All I saw was that my lovely wife had gone temporarily bat-guano crazy. But it wasn’t my fault—and it wasn’t hers, either.

We were the unwitting victims of trickle-down unfairness.

Science actually has a name for this—generalized negative reciprocity. Basically, it means that when someone is unfair to you, you are likely to turn around and be unfair to other people in return, even if the person you treat unfairly had nothing to do with how the other person treated you.

Economists can see this in an experiment called the Dictator Game. In the game, one person is the “dictator” and can choose how to split a sum of money between himself/herself and another player. The second player is required to accept the split. That’s it. Not very complicated. Only the results get a little nuanced.

Most dictators offer at least a little bit of cash to the other player, even though giving away cash offers the dictator no economic benefit. (This drives economists crazy, as it implies that there is more to the human experience than “maximizing utility.”) However, while five-year-olds tend to split the pot evenly, even when they could keep it all for themselves, most adult dictators are a little less altruistic. A recent study in the journal Scientific Reports showed that when splitting 25 euros, 83 percent of dictators kept most of the money for themselves. Here’s the important part: Like my lovely wife passing along the unfairness she had experienced to me, people who find themselves on the short end of the dictator’s stick are more likely to offer unfair distributions when it is their turn to dictate.

You do unto others the unfairness that is done to you—and unfairness trickles down.

The question in the Scientific Reports paper was how to stop the flow. Specifically, they wanted to find a strategy that resulted in people who had been treated unfairly not treating people unfairly when they played the role of dictator. Specifically, this would mean a higher number of players who got stiffed in the first round going on to offer a more even distribution in the second round.

The researchers evaluated four strategies—writing an undelivered message to the dictator who wronged them; writing a delivered message to the unfair dictator; writing a description of a neutral picture; or relaxing for three minutes. The implication is kind of big: When someone treats you unfairly, should you do something proactive about it or should you breathe deep and try to move on?

A first study showed that, indeed, when the dictator kept an unfair amount of the 25 euros, it made the partner unhappy. It also demonstrated that when participants wrote notes to the unfair dictator, they ended up happier than people who had been equally shorted but had written descriptions of a picture or simply sat around for three minutes. The effect was even a little more powerful when the notes were actually delivered. Interestingly, it also mattered what people wrote. Those who expressed their emotions earned the biggest bump in happiness, while individuals who questioned the dictator’s motive, offered understanding, or disparaged the dictator’s mother missed the happiness train.

A second experiment took the obvious next step, testing how people who had been treated unfairly acted when it was their turn to be dictator. Lo and behold, people who were stiffed in the first round but then wrote messages explaining their emotions were not only happier, but also chose to give their second-round partner a bigger share of the pot. In fact, the people who wrote notes to the dictator went on to give half again as much money as people who had tried other interventions. Granted, even these note-writing, happiness-enhanced participants didn’t equally share the experiment’s 25 euros—the median amount these dictator’s gave away was still a paltry four-and-a-half—but it was more than the average of three euros shared by people who tried the other strategies.

To the researchers, this more altruistic split after writing messages that expressed emotions showed evidence of a “decrease in generalized negative reciprocity.” For the rest of us, these results imply that it’s better to do something proactive about being treated unfairly. If you’re looking for something specific to do, try writing a note that expresses your emotions to the person who wronged you. Not only is it likely to make you feel happier; it’s also the best strategy science knows to avoid passing on unfairness to the people in your life.

-Garth Sundem

5 Psychological Habits That Limit Your Ability to Think

4. Overanalyzing rejection

Our brain is like a computer processor: It has a finite amount of processing power, or intellectual resources, that can be used in a given moment. Any competing task (or emotional state) that occupies too much of our intellectual firepower impacts our ability to concentrate, focus, problem-solve, be creative, or use other cognitive abilities; as a result, our functioning IQ is temporarily lowered.

To demonstrate this principle, try walking while counting down from 1000 by sevens (1000, 993, 986, etc.). You will soon stop walking. Why? Your brain has to work so hard to do this math that it doesn’t have enough resources left to tell your legs to put one foot in front of the other.

Most common competing tasks do not have a significant impact on our ability to work or study. Most of us can do homework while listening to music and can become absorbed in a book while eating.

However, some psychological habits consume such huge amounts of intellectual resources that they diminish our cognitive capacities. Few people are aware that these psychological habits have such a detrimental effect, so they are unlikely to pause what they’re doing—and this can seriously affect a person’s ability to perform a task at full capacity.

5 Common Psychological Habits that Impair Intellectual Functioning

1. Brooding

Replaying upsetting, frustrating, or distressing events over and over again—especially when doing so frequently or habitually—can make our minds race with thoughts or stir us up emotionally, severely taxing our intellectual resources. In addition to impacting our cognitive functioning, brooding (also known as ruminating) can present real dangers to our emotional and even our physical health. (See The Seven Hidden Dangers of Brooding.)

2. Unresolved Guilt

We all feel guilty from time to time. When we do, we typically apologize or take some kind of action to resolve our guilty feelings. However, when guilt is not addressed and repeatedly pops into your mind, it creates a huge cognitive distraction that seriously impairs cognitive functioning. The solution is to put guilty feelings behind you as best you can. (See The Secret of Effective Apologies.)

3. Ineffective Complaining

Most people are likely to share their frustrations with friends than discuss them with someone who could help to resolve them. The problem is that, each time we tell our tale, we become frustrated and annoyed. Anger and frustration require significant processing power and enable ineffective complaints to become a regular drain on our brainpower.

4. Overanalyzing Rejection

Rejection creates emotional pain that significantly impacts our mood and has a serious impact on cognitive functioning. It also causes us to become self-critical, a habit that further damages our self-esteem, extending the duration of our emotional distress—and with it, our compromised cognitive abilities. (See 10 Surprising Facts about Rejection.)

5. Worrying

Many people don’t consider worrying harmful. “I’m just a bit of a worrier,” we might say with a wry smile. But worrying creates an uncomfortable and unpleasant emotional state, and it can be seriously distracting. When we’re worried about something, it tends to take priority in our minds, and push everything else to the side. Fortunately, it’s easier to address and resolve worry (by thinking through potential solutions) than it is anxiety. (See The Difference between Anxiety and Worry.)

Guy Winch, PhD

Get a Grip on Guilt in Three Simple Steps

A guilt loop can sap your energy if you don’t know how to stop it

Do you feel like you should be working when you’re at home, but when you’re at work you feel guilty about something at home? You know this loop saps your energy but you don’t know how to stop it. These three steps will blast away your guilt loop.

1. Accept
Guilt is natural because your brain is designed to scan for threats, and social threats are survival threats to the brain we’ve inherited from earlier mammals. So as soon as you relieve a threat, your brain goes looking for the next most pressing threat. Does this sound like a no-win situation? The more successful you are at putting out fires, the more your brain searches for another fire to put out. If you hate your brain for doing this, you will be at war with yourself forever. Instead, simply accept the primal operating system inside you and thank it for its concern. Your inner mammal wants you to be safe, so pet it and remind it that you’re okay.

2. Celebrate
When you put out a fire, pause to celebrate before you rush to the next fire. This may feel risky or selfish at first. You may have learned that it’s wrong to feel good when others feel bad. If that were true, no one in human history would ever have felt good. You can feel good in a world full of threats if you give yourself permission to enjoy your accomplishments. Not just the big “someday” accomplishments—you can accomplish something worth celebrating every hour. Celebrating doesn’t mean putting something in your mouth that has long-term side-effects. It means dwelling on the pleasure of having solved a problem.

Author's Image
Source: Author’s Image

3. Evaluate
We are often told not to judge, but judging is how the brain works. It constantly takes in new information and decides whether an adjustment is warranted. If you don’t make a judgment, you’re stuck. Frozen. So the next time you feel a guilt loop coming on, find the new information that triggered it and evaluate it for one minute. Just one. That’s long enough to decide whether to persist in the direction you were headed or shift course. You can’t solve the problem in one minute, but you will know whether to interrupt your current priorities or persevere in what you were doing. If the guilt lingers, pull out your ACE and Accept and Celebrate again before you allow yourself one more minute to Evaluate.

You will always be torn in different directions because your brain is designed to make wise decisions about where to invest your energy. If you were a gazelle, you’d be torn between the dry patch of grass that’s safely near the herd and the lush greener pasture that puts you in an exposed position. Fortunately, evaluating these options is exactly the job your brain evolved to do. Much more about our mammalian neurochemistry in my book Habits of a Happy Brain: Retrain Your Brain to Boost Your Serotonin, Dopamine, Oxytocin, & Endorphin Levels.

-Loretta G. Breuning, PhD

How to Recognize the Signs of Posttraumatic Stress (PTSD)

Posttraumatic stressPerson sits on sofa in dark room, covering eyes with one hand, or PTSD as it is more commonly referred to, is a serious condition that affects many people worldwide. As June is PTSD Awareness Month, learning more about this condition can be helpful in order to gain a better understanding of the struggles that many individuals deal with on a daily basis.

Although PTSD affects numerous people, military service members tend to be more often affected by this condition than others due to the nature of their jobs. They are frequently exposed to traumatic events on a routine basis, especially during tours of duty in combat zones. The peace we take for granted in our country can be shattered in an instant through the life-and-death situations they encounter every day. Even if they are not physically wounded in battle, their psychological wounds can be deep and long-lasting. Trying to pick up the pieces after their return to “normal” life can be difficult, both for themselves as well as their friends and loved ones, who often have trouble understanding what they have gone through and the ways in which they have changed.

A study conducted by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs between 1999 to 2010 revealed that about 22 veterans lost their lives to suicide every day—a higher number than those who die on the battlefield (Kemp, J., and Bossart, R., 2012). With statistics this alarming, learning to look for warning signs of PTSD can be an important first step toward addressing it.

Although being exposed to a war zone is a common cause of PTSD, many other situations can cause ongoing trauma. Other experiences that commonly lead to symptoms of posttraumatic stress include both natural and man-made disasters, abuse or assault, and serious accidents. Individuals who have learned about a traumatic situation involving a loved one can also experience PTSD, as can people who are exposed to many other types of experiences.

Some of the most common symptoms of PTSD in a person include (American Psychiatric Association, 2013):

  1. Recurrent intrusive thoughts and memories of the traumatic event and/or difficulties remembering some aspects of the event.
  2. Insomnia and difficulties sleeping, which often includes having frequent nightmares about the event.
  3. Flashbacks and hallucinations that lead the individual to believe the event is recurring.
  4. Feelings of panic or extreme distress whenever something reminds them of the event.
  5. Increased irritability or anger.
  6. Hypervigilance and preoccupation with the possibility of the event happening again.
  7. Avoidance of anything or anyone that reminds the individual of the traumatic event.
  8. A sense of isolation from other people, including family and loved ones.
  9. An inability to enjoy activities that used to be significant to them.
  10. Feelings of numbness and detachment from their emotions.

Any of the above may be warning signs that should be taken seriously. As mentioned earlier, individuals who have experienced traumatic events are at greater risk than the general population of dying by suicide. They may also have a greater likelihood of self-medicating through the use of alcohol or drugs, if they do not receive treatment.

Although trauma can have devastating effects on many, receiving appropriate treatment can help to alleviate many of the symptoms experienced and assist individuals with returning to happy and productive lives. Recognizing there is a problem and assisting the individual with obtaining help are the first steps in the healing process.

-Wendy Salazar, MFT

It’s Not All About You!

Not only will the experience of awe make us feel alive, it might also help us conquer our daily self-absorption. All this by simply paying attention to nature and the world around us.

Learning about the universe—and our place in it—is one of the most mind-blowing experiences of childhood (that and realizing parents are just, well, people). Few children go on to explicate nature’s greatest mysteries, but Michio Kaku, now a theoretical physicist and science popularizer, did. When awe first struck him, Kaku was 8 years old, and his teacher had just announced that a great scientist had died. She held up a classic photo of Albert Einstein at his desk and pointed out his unfinished manuscript in the picture. Kaku said to himself, “I want to have a crack at it.” His feeling of awe came not just from the formation of this grandiose goal but from the idea that the universe is knowable. The world might seem unfathomable, he says, but, astonishingly, “you can summarize it on a sheet of paper, using the formulas of physics.”

Physicists struggled to reconcile Einstein’s theory of general relativity with quantum physics. As one of the originators of string field theory—which posits the existence of multiple universes and unknown dimensions, as well as one-dimensional extended objects known as strings—Kaku met his goal of carrying on Einstein’s work. Strings vibrate in space, not unlike the strings on a violin, and when they do, at different frequencies, they manifest as different particles and forces of nature. Gravity, then, would be like an F-sharp, while electro-weak interactions (part of quantum physics) would be like an E-flat. Kaku’s was a sublime achievement, especially for someone from humble and challenging origins—he was the son of a gardener and a maid, both of whom spent time in internment camps during WWII. That first moment of wonder, his youthful epiphany, is, he says, “ still the well from which I draw water when I’m tired and need refreshment.”

“There are thousands of papers on string theory,” he says. “Once in a while, one is beautiful.” To a physicist, Kaku says, symmetry is beauty: “It’s turning mounds and mounds of formulas into a simple, elegant, symmetrical equation. It’s symmetry that emerges out of chaos, like a diamond formed after years spent putting together pieces of shattered crystal.” Our drive to seek out beauty in the universe, Kaku says, has allowed humans to probe its most puzzling questions.

This kind of beauty also allows us to zoom the camera lens far out from our tiny settings. “All your selfish little concerns mean nothing next to the grandeur of the universe,” says Kaku. “Awe gives you an existential shock. You realize that you are hardwired to be a little selfish, but you are also dependent on something bigger than yourself. Einstein was a tremendous influence on us because he was a messenger from the stars. We look at the stars and think, ‘My problems are so trivial compared to the majesty of the night sky.’”

Kaku, who explains tricky concepts with witty metaphors and similes, appears on news programs as often as pundits and Hollywood celebrities. His popularity—along with that of colleagues like Neil deGrasse Tyson, TV shows such as The Big Bang Theory that celebrate nerds, and online entities like “I F*cking Love Science” that package scientific delight with an overlay of hipness—reflects our thirst for knowledge. But it also reveals a strong desire for staggering, eye-opening insights, a craving for awe in a jaded world.

The 2015 New Horizons expedition to Pluto, vistas atop the Himalayas, and Michaelangelo’s Creation of Adam ignite intellectual curiosity and provide aesthetic pleasures, but they also pull us out of our default mode of self-absorption and could even be the antidote for our self- (and selfie-) obsessed age, in which taking and posting photos of oneself is a completely acceptable practice. Even solitary artists and thinkers are expected to “brand” themselves and share their private lives with the wider public in order to sell their wares. Cue the “emotion of self-transcendence, a feeling of admiration and elevation in the face of something greater than the self,” as awe is defined by a team of University of Pennsylvania researchers. And recent research shows that in the wake of marvel, people feel more connected to their social groups and motivated to act for the greater good. Wonder pulls us together—a counterforce to all that seems to be tearing us apart.

Depending on your particular interests, you might be stunned by an intricately designed mosaic or, like Kaku, a graceful equation. Paul Piff, assistant professor of psychology and social behavior at the University of California, Irvine, says that though some people are predisposed to feel awe more often than others, there are common elicitors of marvel. “An awe-inspiring thing can be literally large or just conceptually large, but in either case your current understanding or frame of reference can’t accommodate it.” He points to funny videos of babies riding through tunnels for the first time, their faces twisting into confusion and surprise. “No wonder we have the intuitive sense that awe mimics a childlike wonder at the world and all its novelties.” An early magnificent moment for Piff took place when he was 11 and went on a safari in Kenya with his family. “I had no conception of real wildlife. We were in a big national park, and like a cloud morphing across the landscape, thousands of wildebeests charged toward us.”

Robert Leahy, Ph.D., a clinical psychologist, the director of the American Institute for Cognitive Therapy, and the author of The Worry Cure, sees awe as a cousin to appreciation and gratitude, and links these to the experiences often found in places of worship, where architecture, music, and prayer conspire to draw attendees outside of themselves. In a recent paper, Piff and colleagues echo the thought by describing religious institutions as places that “elicit, organize, and ritualize awe.” (A not particularly religious friend of mine recalls walking down the street when, precisely as the sun burst through the clouds, an organ at the nearby church bellowed out a glorious soundtrack. She was wonderstruck.)

Photo by Adam Levey

Nature, of course, is a frequent awe-generator. “What is the first window into wonder?” asks journalist Richard Louv, the author of The Nature Principle: Reconnecting With Life in a Virtual Age. “It’s crawling out to the edge of the grass, listening to the wind and the trees, turning over a rock, and realizing that you’re not alone in the world.” Louv has come to think that the immune-system boost, improved cognitive functioning (such as increased attention span), and other consequences of being in the great outdoors are all elements of this one essential gift of awe: feeling truly alive.

The link between exposure to nature and well-being is strong. Urbanites are more likely to be anxious and depressed and to suffer from other mental illnesses. But city dwellers who visit nature-rich environments see an immediate reduction in stress hormones. In one of many such studies, Stanford researcher Gregory Bratman found that college students who walked through green, leafy parts of their campus were happier and more attentive afterward than those assigned to hang out near heavy traffic.

A 2014 review study by David Pearson and Tony Craig concluded that the cognitive benefits of being in nature are due to “restorative environments,” which provide the experience of escape from daily demands and a perception of vastness. The authors note that greater attention spans and less mental fatigue are found after people just watch films or view photographs of natural scenes—good news for urbanites who don’t have a chance to flee home. And as long as the key elements of “being away and fascination” are present, monasteries, museums, art galleries, and urban scenes containing water are all suitable alternatives to the countryside.

When anxiety strikes, its sufferers are overwhelmed by, and hyperfocused on, their own worrisome, dark thoughts. It’s a state that infuses an often misleading sense of “realness” or “correctness” to those thoughts, says Leahy.

Rumination—or mulling over worries—is the biggest predictor of depression and anxiety, according to a large-scale British study published in 2013. “Awe is the opposite of rumination,” says Leahy. “It clears away inner turmoil with a wave of outer immensity.” Whether it’s a sunset with colors more vivid than you’ve ever seen or a rapidly expanding sense of love felt when staring into another’s eyes, “being in awe is losing yourself in something or someone else. The anxious person’s sense that ‘it’s all about me; I must control my situation’ disappears.”

Hallucinogenic trips often produce mystical sensations of awe, so it’s perhaps not surprising that in study trials, psilocybin—the active ingredient in “magic mushrooms”—relieved cancer patients’ anxiety and fear of death. Psilocybin can even change people’s personality, making them more open-minded. This kind of awe, researchers speculate, can change the brain’s chemistry over the long haul.

Daniel Smith, the author of Monkey Mind: A Memoir of Anxiety, recalls panicking as a kid in the face of the realization that the universe is overwhelmingly vast—an anxious person could conceivably be made to feel too small by something so big, after all. But lately, looking for wonder has relieved him of “morbid self-involvement.” During a time of personal upheaval, he sought out reverential experiences by sitting under a linden tree near his Brooklyn apartment every day for months.

“I would just hang out there for about 15 minutes and gaze up at its branches,” Smith says. “I needed something to remind me that my concerns were temporary, local, minute. I wasn’t blissed out in a trance, and it wasn’t a cure-all, but it was a very good remedy. The tree is large and old, and it is just wonderful, in a literal sense. It’s a reminder of the kind of strange, ridiculous wonder of creation.” Living in a city full of people with “faces that I have to constantly interpret as friendly or not,” he says, can exhaust a generally anxious person—or any person for that matter. The tree was imposing, yet posed no threat.

At first thought, wonder-as-therapy might seem to be in opposition to standard talk therapy. Seeing a therapist requires focusing on and sharing your thoughts and feelings. It’s an inward dive. As Leahy sees it, though, cognitive behavioral therapy is about, yes, examining your thoughts, but also learning to take them less seriously, to look at how they might be inaccurate or silly or useless, to stop taking what happens around you so personally, to realize it’s not all about you. 

Smith also sees chasing awe as complementary to psychotherapy: “Therapy is about finding new perspectives and forming new habits. Learning to seek out amazement is a good habit. And a good therapist is telling you to gaze at your navel to get you to stop gazing at your navel and to actually see what was before unconsidered, or automatic. Therapy helps us accept reality, and awe is a component of reality: It’s a way to remove the tyranny of ego.” As a writer, Smith appreciates how the experience is often sensory, providing a break from hyper-developed verbal capabilities that can “imprison us in the logical world.” Awe leaves us speechless.

Photo by Adam Levey

A decade ago, when Paul Piff said that he wanted to study the psychology of awe, his mentor cautioned, “Good luck.” While he and other researchers suspected that awe has an impact on human behavior and were well aware of the attention philosophers have given the subject, “it’s a hard thing to stick in a test tube,” he says.

Piff noticed that awe arises in very different contexts—from the ocean’s edge to the hospital birthing room—but he wondered if, even though we often feel it while alone, it could serve an important collective function. When the constant buzzing of “me, me, me” recedes, we might become sensitive to loftier principles. Could awe make us better citizens?

Previous research has shown that awe expands people’s notion of available time, which in turn increases their well-being; that those high in “dispositional” awe are less likely to call themselves “special” and more likely to identify themselves as a member of a group or larger category; and that subjects primed to remember an awe-filled moment in their past feel less significant and less focused on day-to-day concerns.

In their recent set of five experiments, Piff and colleagues hypothesized that if awe does cause pro-social tendencies, the mechanism for doing so is the small self—a “relatively diminished sense of self vis-à-vis something deemed vaster than the individual.” This isn’t smallness in the sense of feeling ashamed or humiliated, Piff says. It’s that relieving notion that “I’m not that important or big, but I am a part of something much bigger.”

Piff found that people who are dispositionally inclined to awe were less selfish. Subjects who saw an awe-inspiring video also identified with the small self more than both those who were induced to feel pride or amusement and those in a control group. They were also more generous (behavior triggered by the small-self state, specifically) than those who watched a humorous video, and they behaved more ethically in lab experiments. Awe-filled subjects helped the study’s investigator pick up more pens that were “accidentally” dropped than did other subjects, for example. In addition, they showed less of a sense of entitlement.

Even those who watched “negative” awe-inspiring videos of tornadoes and volcanoes exhibited the pro-social behavior. So did those who watched a video showing droplets of colored water “colliding with a bowl of milk” in super-slow motion.

The pièce de résistance was the final experiment, where subjects were taken to the tallest hardwood grove in North America. They were asked to look up at the eucalyptus trees, some exceeding 200 feet, for one minute. The control group set their sights on a plain, tall building for the same amount of time. Sure enough, the tree-gazers felt more awe and were happier precisely because of what they felt. They also acted more generously in a lab test and reported feeling less entitled than the building-gawkers.

Why do we tend to find wonder in nature and in contexts that make us feel small, and why does awe stir us to behave more charitably toward others? Evolutionary psychology may provide clues. “It makes sense that beautiful landscapes, or even paintings depicting nature, produce awe,” says Glenn Geher, a professor of psychology at State University of New York at New Paltz, “because people who were well-connected to landscapes, animals, and water sources were more likely to survive.” Survival and, later, achievement have always rested on our creating cohesive non-kinship-based groups. “We needed mechanisms for coordinating these groups,” says Geher, “and a shared belief in something bigger than the individual is an effective one. The catalyst for adopting such beliefs was awe. Awe-inspiring sacred spaces connect expansive emotions with religious iconography.” Because of the cooperation it fostered, “awe has gone on to help us create universities, symphonies, and voyages to the moon.”

Photo by Adam Levey

Erika Strand, chief of social policy at UNICEF Mexico, has sung in choirs since she was 12. She recalls a performance, with her college choir, of Verdi’s Requiem that stands out years later: “Everything just came together and clicked,” she says. “It starts with the Day of Wrath. Verdi is a sinner, and he’s terrified because it’s Judgment Day. The feeling of fear we conjured was so powerful. The music united all of us with the audience— we all have fears and regret not having been the person we wanted to be—as the piece expresses something so human.”

Strand’s director used to tell his singers that they needed to continually adjust themselves to be perfectly in tune and balanced with each other. “If the choir is a bit flat, you have to make yourself a little flat. If everyone is behind, you have to join them by compromising your pace. And if your voice sticks out, even if it’s pretty, the whole thing is ruined,” says Strand. When the Requiem was over, no one had to say anything—everyone knew they’d nailed it, escaping the mundane and achieving transcendence. “Moments like that give life meaning,” she says.

A few years ago, Jonah Berger and Katherine Milkman, two professors at the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania, undertook an elaborate study of the most-emailed articles in The New York Times. Emotional articles in general were often shared, but awe-inspiring pieces topped the list. At the time, Berger explained (in the Times) that the motive for forwarding an awe-inspiring article to family and friends was not to show off or inform them, as might be the case with other types of articles, but rather to seek “emotional communion.” Just as Piff discovered that experiencing awe by ourselves rather paradoxically makes us feel more connected to others, reading to ourselves about beauty compels us to reach out. “If I’ve just read this story that changes the way I understand the world and myself…I want to proselytize and share the feeling of awe. If you read the article and feel the same emotion, it will bring us closer together,” Berger said.

While Piff concurs that vicarious experiences of wonder can be powerful, he suspects that people are drawn to such breathtaking content because we are generally awe-deprived. “We have less time on our hands and fewer windows onto wonder,” he says, pointing to decreased funding for the arts and a decline in attendance at cultural events, increased urbanization, runaway materialism that keeps us working instead of stopping to take in sunshine and an intermittent breeze. Then there’s the attitudinal stance of our time—cynicism. A few recent cases in point: When Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, announced that they would be giving the bulk of their fortune away to charity, commenters wasted no time putting the couple down and questioning their “true” motives. And when a married media executive was cruelly outed by the website Gawker, a longtime leader in snark, for attempting to solicit a prostitute, its publisher reacted to the backlash by asking his scribes to be a mere “20 percent nicer,” a figure he reportedly later adjusted to “10 to 15 percent.”

“It’s an insult to say, ‘That’s sentimental,’” agrees Leahy. “There is almost an enjoyment of making things profane, and all the cynicism takes away our propensity to feel awe.” Louv also points out that irony and cynicism are more aligned with depression and defeatism, as in “been there, done everything.”

Yet we need awe more than ever. Leahy points to research on how young people—a group more anxious than the youth of 40 years ago—are more likely to believe that they must attain special status in life, or even celebrity, to be happy. “Narcissism leads to unrealistic expectations,” he says.

How then, can we tip the seesaw to raise marvel and lessen self-centeredness? Keith Campbell, a professor of psychology at the University of Georgia and the co-author of The Narcissism Epidemic: Living in the Age of Entitlement, finds the idea that awe could reduce narcissism “totally reasonable because awe reduces some aspects of the ego,” and he would like to carry out experiments to test the theory.

Meanwhile, Louv’s primary mission is to create more “nature-rich” parks, schools, and homes. “As of 2008, more people live in cities than in the countryside for the first time in human history,” he says. “Studies of urban parks show that those with the highest biodiversity are the best for our health. We need to bring nature into our lives, not only to slow down the biodiversity collapse, but to make ourselves healthier—mentally, physically, spiritually.” Rather than use completely un-awe-inspiring terms such as “energy efficiency,” “sustainability,” or “survivability,” Louv says, we need to paint a positive, detailed picture of what our planet could be like in the future—in contrast to the postapocalyptic world so resonant with teenagers, as evidenced by the dystopian books and movies they devour (The Hunger Games, Divergent).

Educators would do well to add wonder to their lessons. Kaku says that teens, even those who had life-changing conceptual realizations about the universe as children, often lose interest in science in high school, where postulating hypotheses and collecting data are emphasized. “The scientific method is necessary, of course,” he says, “but at the cutting edge of science, the big breakthroughs and paradigm shifts are rarely based on it. Those come with a lightning bolt, a thunderclap, a moment of awe. That’s what drives the history of science.” Kaku’s passion for cultivating scientific literacy among grown-ups also helps us experience awe, as the more deeply we understand things, the more we have to continually accommodate our current notions of reality—via those exciting cognitive shifts that spark wonder.

Those shifts and their life-affirming, anxiety-quelling, narcissism-squashing, and generosity-upping effects can happen anytime and anywhere, simply by thinking about our world and our universe. Take Kaku’s quest to complete Einstein’s dream of a Theory of Everything: A few years ago, to great fanfare, the Large Hadron Collider in Switzerland found the Higgs boson particle, the first of a series of particles physicists aim to discover. Kaku hopes the Collider will next find evidence of dark matter, an invisible form of matter, and then, eventually, even evidence of parallel universes and higher dimensions, all predicted by string theory. Despite such advancements, though, most of the universe is beyond our current understanding. And all of us here on Earth who are composed of the “higher elements” make up a minuscule percentage of the universe. As Kaku puts it, we are the exception, specks of dust, but ones that, as part of a rare universe with intelligent life, are the byproduct of countless miraculous accidents. Mind. Blown.

-Carlin Flora

Do You (or Your Partner) Always Need to Have the Last Word?

The last word may not always be the best word when you argue with your partner.

Whether it’s in an angry exchange of text messages, a face-to-face dispute, or a shouting match over the phone, it’s natural to want to be the one who gets in that last, definitive word. However, during the heat of an argument, that last word may be the worst- not the best- way to close off debate. Perhaps we’ve all been too heavily influenced by mental images from on-screen romances in which the offended partner provides the perfect retort before making a dramatic exit and slamming the door. The partner who’s left behind comes to the stunning realization that he or she is in the wrong, and then contritely seeks forgiveness.

In real life, arguments rarely follow this nice and neat, scripted pattern. Conflict can be messy, hurtful, and damaging to the relationship, but particularly so when partners play a one-upmanship game during the battle. You figure that if you can just come up with that phenomenal statement of the “truth,” you can set your partner straight. Unfortunately, strategizing during a romantic dispute can only erode feelings of trust and good faith. You may be “right,” but you’ve only caused your partner to feel that you care less about the relationship and more about scoring the game-winning point.

There is ample relationship research to show that destructive conflict resolution is the most damaging way to handle the inevitable differences that arise between people who otherwise love each other. Wanting to have the last word is very much related to the attack mode mentality central to destructive conflict resolution in which you take on your partner rather than the difference in viewpoints the two of you have. Conflict doesn’t have to be damaging at all to a relationship and, according to recent research, it may even help keep the relationship healthy and vital.

University of California Berkeley psychologists Amie Gordon and Serena Chen (2016) decided to examine the factors that allow couples to argue without destroying their relationship quality or perhaps even improving it. Their central thesis is that because “Misunderstanding between partners often lies at the heart of conflicts,” then “conflict between romantic partners is detrimental to relationship quality only when people do not feel understood by their partners” (p. 240). That feeling of being understood, then, not only reduces the chances you’ll argue with your partner, but can mitigate against the negative feelings that accompany a fight.

Following from Gordon and Chen’s main hypothesis, then, focusing on how you game the argument will detract from your ability to hear what your partner is saying which, in turn, shows that you understand your partner. Having the last word could make you feel temporarily better, but because your partner will feel shot down, he or she will emerge unhappier and less trusting of you as the two of you eventually try to restore the equilibrium that preceded the argument.

Gordon and Chen investigated their hypothesis through a series of seven studies, ranging from correlational to experimental, in which they assessed whether partners who felt more understood could emerge from a conflict retaining their previous feelings of satisfaction. Rather than rely on the typical college student sample alone (although they did for one of the studies), they sampled from a nationally recruited range of adults in long-term relationships.

Their approach to understanding focused on the way that partners felt during conflict. Although the behavioral approach of counting types of communication used in many studies of conflict resolution has certain advantages, it fails to capture the perceived feelings of being understood that Gordon and Chen hypothesized to be so central to successful conflict resolution. In other words, a researcher may count the number of negative statements you hurl at your partner, but if your partner doesn’t take them seriously, do they really count as attack? On the other hand, if your partner knows just how to jab at you, the researcher may not even record certain statements as accusatory or derogatory. That “last word” may qualify as one of these successfully camouflaged attacks. It doesn’t sound bad to an outsider, but it cuts you to the core.

The most intriguing study in the Berkeley series involved creating, experimentally, the feeling of being understood during an argument. Participants were asked to imagine themselves in a fight with their partner under one of two conditions. In the “understood” condition, they were told to “imagine that you and your partner are having a fight about [a topic identified by the participant]. During this fight, we would like you to imagine that your partner is able to understand your thoughts, feelings, and point of view. That is, you feel understood by your partner. Please take a moment to imagine this fight. Picture where you are, what you and your partner are saying, how you are feeling.” In the other condition, participants were told to imagine their partner did not understand them.

Across the entire set of studies, the results consistently pointed to that sense of perceived understanding as counteracting the potentially negative effects of conflict. Indeed, Gordon and Chen maintain that perceived understanding becomes the buffer that allows partners to argue without feeling hopeless about their relationship. Perhaps this is why, when you see couples staying together despite what looks to you like a miserable relationship, you’re not getting the full picture. They may bicker constantly all day long but they can still go to bed feeling content with each other.

-Susan Krauss Whitbourne, PhD

Talking Out Military Sexual Trauma

Sexual abuse led one vet to a VA career counseling other MSA victims.

            Jennifer Sluga,  six-year veteran of the Wisconsin National Guard, originally participated in the VA’s new oral history program to help her caregivers understand her military sexual trauma, but her ordeal made her a strong advocate for others who had been assaulted.

“In the beginning, telling about my story helped me heal,” she told me recently. “But now I want everyone else who has ever experienced sexual trauma to know that they are not alone. By talking about it, we can get back the power that was taken from us.”

Now a psychotherapist at the Vet Center in Madison, Sluga estimates that 90 percent of her patient caseload also suffers from MST.

Sluga spent 17 months with the National Guard in Kosovo, but she told Thor Ringler, the “poet-in-residence” who runs the VA’s pilot “My Life, My Story” program in Madison, that her PTSD probably started well before her deployment from her military sexual trauma during her military training. (For more about the oral history program, see my previous blog, “An Oral History Program to Tell Veterans’ Stories.”)

“When he started that program, I told him it was the most amazing program ever,” she said. “Talking this trauma out of my system and using it to help others is just an amazing and powerful experience. It’s important for medical personnel to know that when I’m in those situations, I’m gonna be a little uptight, that I wonder whether I can trust that person, and that I’d prefer work with female doctor.”

Her ordeal started in boot camp when she and her “battle buddy” both reported to sick call. Her buddy was sent to the hospital, and that left her alone with the doctor.

“He had lot of rank on his chest and expected me do anything he said,” Sluga said. “He wanted me get undressed, then he began touching me and it became pretty obvious that this was nothing in the realm of anything medical.”

Sluga finally managed to push him away and ran to her barracks, only partially dressed.

“I ran to our barracks because I wanted to shower and cry, but another woman saw the marks on my body, asked about them, and then called the drill sergeant,” she said. “He ran over to sick call, and I thought he was going to kill the medic. It was really cool to be validated like that.”

But it didn’t stop there.

Several members of Sluga’s unit reported also sexual abuse during their deployment, and she began advocating for them.

Finally, the medic was charged with sexually assaulting his patients, and Sluga, her battle buddy and her drill sergeant were all required to testify at his court martial. “He finally admitted to sexually assaulting more than 70 soldiers and excused it by saying he had been raped as a child,” she said.

No wonder Sluga was severely traumatized. But she didn’t realize it until after she had left the National Guard and returned to college.

“I didn’t recognize that I wasn’t doing well until I went from an A student and I was failing all my classes, not attending classes, sleeping 20 hours a day,” she said. “I just wanted to go hide.”

Her breaking point came after she and her classmates got an exam back, and one of the girls was complaining about a bad grade.

“She said, ‘It really raped me,’” Sluga remembered.  “And I just wanted to jump over the chairs and scream at her: ‘Did it really rape you? Did it make you feel completely out of control?  Did it actually hurt you?’”

That led to counseling and therapy. It led to Ringler and the “My Life, My Story” program, which has now spread to six other VA facilities across the country. And it led Sluga to a career helping others as a psychotherapist.

More men than women are sexually assaulted in the military, she said.

“One of four women reports she has been sexually assaulted,” said Sluga. “The rate for men is one in ten, but since there are so many more men than women, the number of male victims is greater. Females are assaulted by men and other females, and males are assaulted by males and females as well.”

Rape and sexual assault are not about sexual gratification, she added. It’s all about power and control.

“In the military, you have no control over much of anything, so if you can find an area you can control, you take it,” Sluga explained. “A lot of people bully up and take advantage of other people—it’s almost like a sport.”

Now look at Sluga’s ordeal in light of our previous discussions on moral injury. She was betrayed by virtually everyone in her chain of command: the medical officer who sexually assaulted her, the officers who let such conduct go unchecked.  Those fellow soldiers who are supposed to save your life if necessary and have your back should be the last individuals anyone should need to protect themselves against.

VA psychologist Jonathan Shay argues that moral injury is present when there has been a betrayal of what is right by a person in a position of legitimate authority in a high-stakes situation. “Moral injury impairs the capacity for trust and elevates despair, suicidality and interpersonal violence,” he wrote in an article, “Moral Injury,” published last year in the journal of Psychoanalytic Psychology.

Sluga would agree that military sexual trauma can lead to PTSD.

When you lose your sense of self, especially from someone who’s supposed to be helping you, and they take your power and use it against you, to me that’s combat,” she said. And we all know that combat trauma leads to PTSD.

-Eric Newhouse

Why Are Some Soldiers With Combat Stress More Resilient ?

Genetic differences may explain the difference, two new studies find.

Scientists in San Diego, Calif., think they have at least one of the answers to a question that has puzzled psychologists for years: why some soldiers are more resilient to combat stress than others.

They believe the answer is in their genes.

After studying the DNA of 13,000 American soldiers, researchers have found two genetic variants that they believe may explain why some combat vets are afflicted with PTSD, but others are not.

“The first, in samples from African-American soldiers with PTSD, was in a gene (ANKRD55) on chromosome 5,” said Dr. Murray Stein, Distinguished Professor of Psychiatry at the University of California-San Diego. “In prior research, this gene has been found to be associated with various autoimmune and inflammatory diseases, including multiple sclerosis, type II diabetes, celiac disease, and rheumatoid arthritis. The other variant was found on chromosome 19 in European-American samples.”

A team from the UC-San Diego School of Medicine, the VA San Diego Healthcare System, and the Uniformed Services University compared the genomes of 3,167 combat vets diagnosed with PTSD and another 4,607 combat vets who had not been diagnosed with PTSD.  A second study involved 947 diagnosed vets compared with 4,969 combat vets without PTSD.

“We compared the two groups in all markers for all genes and found differences that were distinctly different between the two groups,” Dr. Stein told me. “But it wasn’t a 100 percent difference. The group with the variant was about 60 percent more likely to develop PTSD.”

Their hope is that one day in the future a DNA test during basic training will tell commanders which soldier will be more able to withstand combat stress and which might be better suited for an administrative role.

“In theory, that is how this could be used, but we’re nowhere near there yet,” Dr. Stein said. “We have a lot of work yet to do to be sure of these findings. But we may be able in the future to analyze this data and say someone would be very good at combat, while someone else might be better as a supply sergeant – or may need additional training to boost his resilience.”

In addition, further testing is needed to determine whether other racial groups – Asian Americans or American Indians, for example – express the same difference with different genes.

-Eric Newhouse