That explains where the initial positive reinforcement comes from, but it doesn’t explain the lack of negative reinforcement.
The act of avoidance is what causes a loop. No “reinforcement” is involved, positive or negative.
Replaying the memory of a traumatic event causes a great deal of stress and negative emotion, which, if stress and negative emotion were enough to inhibit thought patterns, would cause traumatic events to repress themselves quickly.
Exactly, which is why tying this to “reinforcement” in this way is a bad model. We don’t get reinforcement for our output thoughts, only our input thoughts: you’re confusing the reinforcer with the reinforcee.
In the case of the traumatic memory, you will avoid whatever reminds you of the memory, not the memory itself. Why would we ever have evolved a way to positively or negatively reinforce our own internal thoughts? That makes no sense. What we have is a memory mechanism that allows us to replay reinforcement in order to let us evaluate external things, including ones we’re just thinking about.
IOW, the negative memory is the reinforcement! The question is, what is it negatively reinforcing?
If everything reminds you of it, the answer is: everything. That’s how people get in fear/depression spirals that take over their entire lives: everything now negatively reinforces them.
There appears to be some confusion here due to a poor choice of terminology on my part; I was using positive reinforcement of a thought to mean that which causes someone to think it more, and negative reinforcement to mean that which causes someone to think it less. These terms conflict with common psych. terminology and brought in a bunch of statements about what sorts of things have that effect, which I did not intend.
We don’t get reinforcement for our output thoughts, only our input thoughts: you’re confusing the reinforcer with the reinforcee.
The brain knows no such distinction. However, this could be rephrased in terms of a time-offset—something along the lines of “a thought with strong negative affect inhibits whatever thoughts were active 3-5 seconds before”. That’s something biology could implement; and, interestingly, the time window suggests possible experiments.
But I don’t believe that thoughts with negative affect are the only things which trigger avoidance, or even the most common ones, and that is where our positions diverge. The early stages of my procrastination spirals do not include guilt, self-hate or any detectable emotion at all; those only appear later, well after the pattern has been firmly established. Avoidance is also triggered by getting stuck. In fact, I would say that thirty seconds of writer’s block will do more to induce procrastination than any amount of guilt can. This makes sense, because a lack of forward progress would normally be a sign that a line of thought isn’t worth pursuing further; it’s only when outside factors force us to continue that it becomes a problem. For me at least, this is the dominant factor, not guilt.
Of course it does. Otherwise, remembering something would be the same as experiencing it. And remembering a thought would be indistinguishable from having the thought.
But I don’t believe that thoughts with negative affect are the only things which trigger avoidance, or even the most common ones, and that is where our positions diverge. The early stages of my procrastination spirals do not include guilt, self-hate or any detectable emotion at all;
Have you actually tested that? Here’s how you can test:
At the first moment you put something off, ask yourself, “What happens if I don’t do this?” And observe your immediate, unconscious, non-verbal or pre-verbal response.
If you get nothing negative from that, try, “What happens if I do do this?”.
My guess: you will rarely need to go to the second question to find a negative response, but if you go to the second one anyway, you will find it surprisingly similar.
The catch of course is that in order to do this you have to be able to catch your non-verbal thoughts as they go by, which can be a tough skill to learn, because everybody thinks they already know the answers, so they never really listen to themselves after they ask the question: they jump straight to making up explanations.
As I said in another recent comment: here are some clues that you’re making something up instead of actually listening:
you’re using complex sentence structure or abstract/non-sensory words
the answer is something you “already knew” or expected to find
the answer makes you look good in some way (either by deflecting blame or trying to sound humble “i.e. poor stupid me” explanations)
any verbal portion of the answer is longer than a slogan or proverb shouted in anger or other intense emotional state
the answer is unemotional
The degree to which each of these suggests a made-up answer varies, but if you’re hitting two or more of these points, you’re almost certainly fooling yourself. The real machinery that runs your brain is non-verbal (feelings, images, and sounds), emotional, and fast (brief flickers of images, short sounds, and somewhat longer flinches and feelings). Most of the rest of our thought process is just verbalizing about those other bits, other verbalizations, or just making shit up.
Have you actually tested that? Here’s how you can test
Yes, I have. Right now, there are two things I am procrastinating on. One of them produces a clear mental and physical response when I think about it. That one fits your model of procrastination perfectly. The other one doesn’t. When I think about it, I get no physical response whatsoever, and the only thoughts that come to mind are directly relevant details of the task. I’m completely unable to begin working on it. In general, if a task
Is internally generated
Can be ignored or abandoned without consequence,
Provides just enough upside if completed to prevent abandoning it, and
Requires a difficult or time consuming first step to start working on, which can’t be subdivided
Then it can trigger a procrastination spiral without generating an unconscious response. This combination of conditions is certainly atypical, which makes it a corner case, but I think it sheds some light on the general case as well.
Remember, all of your data comes from people who have sought help with their procrastination. That filters out people still in the early stages of a procrastination spiral, where it has not yet become a problem. And if the answer to “What happens if I do/don’t do this” is “not much”, then there is no reason to seek help, which filters out more cases. You only see the end result of procrastination spirals on important tasks; you don’t see the early stages, or procrastination on unimportant things.
When I think about it, I get no physical response whatsoever, and the only thoughts that come to mind are directly relevant details of the task. I’m completely unable to begin working on it.
Those two statements are, AFAICT, incompatible. How do you know you’re completely unable to begin working on it? What stops you? What would happen if you DID begin working on it?
Those two statements are, AFAICT, incompatible. How do you know you’re completely unable to begin working on it? What stops you?
Apathy. According to the attention-allocating part of my brain, it’s of lower priority than games and blogs, even though my conscious mind disagrees.
What would happen if you DID begin working on it?
Knowing what I know now, I’d make some progress. A week ago, I would’ve stared at my to-do list for awhile, unable to decide which item to start with, until the phone rang or something else diverted my attention.
Apathy. According to the attention-allocating part of my brain, it’s of lower priority than games and blogs, even though my conscious mind disagrees.
See this comment for an explanation of why that isn’t actually an answer. Brains don’t avoid things for reasons like “it’s of lower priority”—those are the explanations we use to avoid thinking about things we don’t like thinking about. Your real answer to this question won’t sound anywhere near as reasonable or logical.
The act of avoidance is what causes a loop. No “reinforcement” is involved, positive or negative.
Exactly, which is why tying this to “reinforcement” in this way is a bad model. We don’t get reinforcement for our output thoughts, only our input thoughts: you’re confusing the reinforcer with the reinforcee.
In the case of the traumatic memory, you will avoid whatever reminds you of the memory, not the memory itself. Why would we ever have evolved a way to positively or negatively reinforce our own internal thoughts? That makes no sense. What we have is a memory mechanism that allows us to replay reinforcement in order to let us evaluate external things, including ones we’re just thinking about.
IOW, the negative memory is the reinforcement! The question is, what is it negatively reinforcing?
If everything reminds you of it, the answer is: everything. That’s how people get in fear/depression spirals that take over their entire lives: everything now negatively reinforces them.
There appears to be some confusion here due to a poor choice of terminology on my part; I was using positive reinforcement of a thought to mean that which causes someone to think it more, and negative reinforcement to mean that which causes someone to think it less. These terms conflict with common psych. terminology and brought in a bunch of statements about what sorts of things have that effect, which I did not intend.
The brain knows no such distinction. However, this could be rephrased in terms of a time-offset—something along the lines of “a thought with strong negative affect inhibits whatever thoughts were active 3-5 seconds before”. That’s something biology could implement; and, interestingly, the time window suggests possible experiments.
But I don’t believe that thoughts with negative affect are the only things which trigger avoidance, or even the most common ones, and that is where our positions diverge. The early stages of my procrastination spirals do not include guilt, self-hate or any detectable emotion at all; those only appear later, well after the pattern has been firmly established. Avoidance is also triggered by getting stuck. In fact, I would say that thirty seconds of writer’s block will do more to induce procrastination than any amount of guilt can. This makes sense, because a lack of forward progress would normally be a sign that a line of thought isn’t worth pursuing further; it’s only when outside factors force us to continue that it becomes a problem. For me at least, this is the dominant factor, not guilt.
Of course it does. Otherwise, remembering something would be the same as experiencing it. And remembering a thought would be indistinguishable from having the thought.
Have you actually tested that? Here’s how you can test:
At the first moment you put something off, ask yourself, “What happens if I don’t do this?” And observe your immediate, unconscious, non-verbal or pre-verbal response.
If you get nothing negative from that, try, “What happens if I do do this?”.
My guess: you will rarely need to go to the second question to find a negative response, but if you go to the second one anyway, you will find it surprisingly similar.
The catch of course is that in order to do this you have to be able to catch your non-verbal thoughts as they go by, which can be a tough skill to learn, because everybody thinks they already know the answers, so they never really listen to themselves after they ask the question: they jump straight to making up explanations.
As I said in another recent comment: here are some clues that you’re making something up instead of actually listening:
you’re using complex sentence structure or abstract/non-sensory words
the answer is something you “already knew” or expected to find
the answer makes you look good in some way (either by deflecting blame or trying to sound humble “i.e. poor stupid me” explanations)
any verbal portion of the answer is longer than a slogan or proverb shouted in anger or other intense emotional state
the answer is unemotional
The degree to which each of these suggests a made-up answer varies, but if you’re hitting two or more of these points, you’re almost certainly fooling yourself. The real machinery that runs your brain is non-verbal (feelings, images, and sounds), emotional, and fast (brief flickers of images, short sounds, and somewhat longer flinches and feelings). Most of the rest of our thought process is just verbalizing about those other bits, other verbalizations, or just making shit up.
Mostly making shit up.
I so want an anti-confabulation patch for my wetware.
Yes, I have. Right now, there are two things I am procrastinating on. One of them produces a clear mental and physical response when I think about it. That one fits your model of procrastination perfectly. The other one doesn’t. When I think about it, I get no physical response whatsoever, and the only thoughts that come to mind are directly relevant details of the task. I’m completely unable to begin working on it. In general, if a task
Is internally generated
Can be ignored or abandoned without consequence,
Provides just enough upside if completed to prevent abandoning it, and
Requires a difficult or time consuming first step to start working on, which can’t be subdivided Then it can trigger a procrastination spiral without generating an unconscious response. This combination of conditions is certainly atypical, which makes it a corner case, but I think it sheds some light on the general case as well.
Remember, all of your data comes from people who have sought help with their procrastination. That filters out people still in the early stages of a procrastination spiral, where it has not yet become a problem. And if the answer to “What happens if I do/don’t do this” is “not much”, then there is no reason to seek help, which filters out more cases. You only see the end result of procrastination spirals on important tasks; you don’t see the early stages, or procrastination on unimportant things.
Those two statements are, AFAICT, incompatible. How do you know you’re completely unable to begin working on it? What stops you? What would happen if you DID begin working on it?
Apathy. According to the attention-allocating part of my brain, it’s of lower priority than games and blogs, even though my conscious mind disagrees.
Knowing what I know now, I’d make some progress. A week ago, I would’ve stared at my to-do list for awhile, unable to decide which item to start with, until the phone rang or something else diverted my attention.
See this comment for an explanation of why that isn’t actually an answer. Brains don’t avoid things for reasons like “it’s of lower priority”—those are the explanations we use to avoid thinking about things we don’t like thinking about. Your real answer to this question won’t sound anywhere near as reasonable or logical.