[HN Gopher] Anger is eliminated with the disposal of a paper wri...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Anger is eliminated with the disposal of a paper written because of
       provocation
        
       Author : geox
       Score  : 131 points
       Date   : 2024-04-09 12:24 UTC (10 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.nature.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.nature.com)
        
       | fylham wrote:
       | Cool result! But does it replicate?
        
         | fwip wrote:
         | Well, it was published today, so you'll have to wait a little
         | while to find out.
        
         | samatman wrote:
         | The replication crisis won't be over until everyone who matters
         | observes a social obligation to treat any unreplicated paper as
         | interesting fiction.
         | 
         | The first time is data. Only the second is science. Exceptions
         | can be made, but not for this one.
        
         | krastanov wrote:
         | It was published in "Scientific Reports", a known low-quality
         | journal. They are not necessary predatory like some of the
         | truly bad journals, e.g., work in this journal still is
         | supposed to pass the "not a low effort triviality and not
         | obviously wrong" check and there are even some really cool
         | things published in this journal. However, I generally take
         | publications in this journal with a significant grain of salt.
         | 
         | Also, just FYI, "Scientific Reports" is not in a specific
         | subfield -- I have published on quantum computing in this
         | journal. That is not too strange, there are plenty of
         | "generalist" journals that are good, but I thought it could
         | still be useful context to know.
        
         | lebean wrote:
         | It's totally legit. They made the participants sign an honesty
         | pledge before answering the questionnaire!
        
           | BeetleB wrote:
           | No doubt, with pictures of trusted, respected authority
           | figures on the walls in the room they were present in.
        
         | canadiantim wrote:
         | Give it a try yourself and let us know
        
         | dr_kretyn wrote:
         | Well, it's been hand wavily described on 50 students with
         | similar socio-economical backgrounds how much more replication
         | would you like? There are also some references to statistics
         | terms so it must have statistical power.
        
       | Fin_Code wrote:
       | I think this has more to do with putting your thoughts in order
       | but an interesting result.
        
       | junlegi wrote:
       | One of my favorite songs by one of my favorite artists is about
       | this phenomenon.
       | 
       | Inflammatory writ by Joanna Newsom.                   And as for
       | my inflammatory writ?         Well, I wrote it and I was not
       | inflamed one bit
       | 
       | https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DWsJDdyDK8M
        
         | alcide wrote:
         | You made my entire week. Years ago, I stumbled on a song of
         | theirs and could never find it again. After recognizing the
         | voice, I went through the catalogue and there it was: Peach,
         | Plum, Pear. Thank you!
        
           | junlegi wrote:
           | That makes mine!
           | 
           | I had a similar experience having first heard monkey and bear
           | on the radio, but the dj failed to name the track and artist.
           | 
           | Then some time later I heard Inflammatory Writ on an internet
           | radio provider so was able to see the artist's name.
           | 
           | In addition to immediately recognizing that distinct voice, I
           | also recognized her beautifully dense poetry.
           | 
           | A true bard.
           | 
           | https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cV6-aJlswCs
        
       | yosito wrote:
       | I suppose this method has its limits, but it is interesting to
       | study ways that anger can be eliminated. I wonder if there are
       | techniques for illuminating anger due to significantly injurious
       | behavior.
        
       | javier_e06 wrote:
       | On writing your feelings.
       | 
       | I remember a WAMU radio show talking about a woman who was abused
       | by her father.
       | 
       | She wrote the 5 steps of forgiveness which as I more or less
       | recall go something like this:
       | 
       | The 5 steps of asking for forgiveness.
       | 
       | The offender to the offended should:
       | 
       | 1. Describe in detail exactly what he/she/they did that cause the
       | offense. 2. Describe in detail how those actions made the
       | offended feel. 3. Explain in detail why he/she/they took such
       | actions. 4. Describe in detail what corrective actions
       | he/she/they should take. 5. Describe in detail what the offended
       | could do to move forward.
       | 
       | Now the interesting part is that the woman's father was already
       | dead when she wrote the steps. She wrote a letter using the 5
       | steps as if she was her father, who denied to his death that the
       | abuse ever happened, asking for forgiveness.
       | 
       | It helped her.
       | 
       | I wished I could remember the name of the book or the radio show
       | but it was years ago.
        
         | blastro wrote:
         | Yes, forgiveness is really for the offended, not the offender.
         | It can be a heavy weight to carry.
        
           | 0xdeadbeefbabe wrote:
           | Doesn't the offender carry a heavy weight anymore?
        
         | CooCooCaCha wrote:
         | I get confused by the way people use the word "forgiveness".
         | 
         | For me, forgiveness can only occur when I understand someone's
         | point of view and determine that there was information I wasn't
         | aware of or they made a mistake and what they did isn't really
         | who they are.
         | 
         | But when I read about forgiveness it seems like people also use
         | the term to refer to a process of gaslighting yourself and/or
         | making up a fake story to detach yourself from reality.
         | 
         | Frankly, I see a lot of therapy this way. Some people go
         | through terrible things, and some people's lives suck, but a
         | lot of therapy sounds like brainwashing yourself to deal with
         | it.
        
           | diputsmonro wrote:
           | I would say that "brainwashing yourself to deal with it"
           | actually is a useful therapeutic technique. Often the person
           | who committed the offense can't be made to understand or care
           | about the damage they've caused, and the next best thing then
           | is to help the injured person move on as best they can.
           | 
           | And while "brainwashing" sounds like an intellectually
           | dishonest technique, we need to remember that the brain is
           | not a perfectly logical instrument. The trauma that people
           | seek help for carries an emotional toll usually in excess of
           | the simple logical "disagreement". Therapy for such trauma is
           | usually an emotional process, not a logical one.
           | 
           | I would agree though that "forgiveness" is maybe not the best
           | term for this.
        
             | steanne wrote:
             | closure?
        
             | Zolomon wrote:
             | I think part of the solution might be acceptance, that you
             | can accept the situation and "forgive" the offender - which
             | will relieve yourself of your feelings towards them,
             | allowing yourself to let go and move on.
             | 
             | Does that make sense?
        
             | bluefirebrand wrote:
             | > I would say that "brainwashing yourself to deal with it"
             | actually is a useful therapeutic technique
             | 
             | This is basically the foundation of Cognitive Behavioral
             | Therapy, or as I called it recently in another thread,
             | "self gaslighting"
        
               | thejazzman wrote:
               | And for anyone who doubts it, just think about how
               | effective marketing is on altering human
               | behavior/perception.
               | 
               | Imagine if all that effort was directed towards a
               | different intent.
        
           | EPWN3D wrote:
           | > Frankly, I see a lot of therapy this way. Some people go
           | through terrible things, and some people's lives suck, but a
           | lot of therapy sounds like brainwashing yourself to deal with
           | it.
           | 
           | If it works, then who cares? Maybe you were wronged, but
           | maybe you don't want to go through life feeling that way, so
           | you let it go by sympathizing with the person who wronged
           | you. And you move on. There's a limited amount of justice
           | you'll be able to get in life, so it's a good idea to pick
           | your battles and not stew on every single sleight because you
           | want to avoid "brainwashing" yourself.
        
             | CooCooCaCha wrote:
             | I think there are ways to address trauma that don't involve
             | divorcing yourself from reality or forgiving someone who
             | doesn't deserve it.
        
               | Y_Y wrote:
               | And you've been keeping these ways to address trauma from
               | the rest of the world? If people could feel better
               | without forgiving their trespassers don't you think
               | they'd be doing that instead?
        
             | anigbrowl wrote:
             | I don't think it does work for everyone. It probably has a
             | lot to do with their level of religiosity and proportion.
        
               | fragmede wrote:
               | If all therapy was, was telling yourself and accepting
               | that (a) god did it, it would be way less popular, so I
               | don't think it's that simple.
        
           | barrkel wrote:
           | You can't change the past. The opposite of forgiveness is
           | hanging on to a past hurt. Past hurt cannot be changed.
           | Forgiveness isn't gaslighting, making up a fake story, or
           | brainwashing. It's letting go of something you can't change.
        
           | dbspin wrote:
           | The route of the word forgive is from early German,
           | 'fragebana'. Meaning to release or give up. Forgiveness is
           | not about understanding the motivation of the person who's
           | hurt you. Nor is it about their penitence - although both can
           | make forgiveness easier. Forgiveness is about letting go of
           | the anger and resentment that continue to cause pain, long
           | after the offending action is over (and even after the
           | offender is dead). The purpose of forgiveness is not
           | 'brainwashing' or detachment from reality. It's about letting
           | go of suffering to proceed through life with less pain. Which
           | allows us to be kinder and more humane people, since we're no
           | longer at risk of externalising our own suffering.
        
             | barfbagginus wrote:
             | Forgiveness is about understanding the cause of the injury,
             | correcting the damage, mitigating future risks, and
             | restoring emotional stability /once those things are
             | resolved/. The first three are necessary conditions for
             | effective forgiveness.
             | 
             | For instance, it's ineffective to forgive a spouse who
             | continually beats you. It may allow you to paper over your
             | emotions and have a semblance of peace. However it doesn't
             | prevent the next attack or correct the damages. You need to
             | get to the bottom of why this person thinks it's okay to
             | beat you, or you need to get to a place where you'll be
             | safe. Delusional forgiveness can get you killed in this
             | situation.
             | 
             | So please do not advise people to deploy forgiveness
             | without the three necessary conditions: cause, correction,
             | and mitigation. Your advice may cause them to ignore
             | options for active forgiveness that will genuinely increase
             | their safety and prevent future harm
             | 
             | Example: Someone you care for has been raped, and feels the
             | need to seek justice. You tell them how that will just
             | cause them more pain and probably lead to no conviction,
             | and offer them the idea that they can simply forgive the
             | attacker and move on, as the more mature and healthy
             | alternative.
             | 
             | In that case you have not given advocacy to the person you
             | cared for. You have advocated on behalf of the rapist.
             | 
             | I'll reierate my thesis. Effective forgiveness has 3
             | material parts required to make emotional release safe and
             | effective:
             | 
             | 1. Modelling the cause of harm
             | 
             | 2. Compensating the harm done
             | 
             | 3. Mitigating future harm
             | 
             | Please do not advocate for forgiveness without advocating
             | for these three components. Forgiveness without material
             | changes creates further harm.
        
           | Lendal wrote:
           | If your history was so traumatic that you cannot forget and
           | you cannot move on, then your only option, assuming you want
           | to salvage what remains of your life, is to change it. Change
           | your history. Is it cheating? Yes. But what is the
           | alternative? You want to continue to live with the misery and
           | suffering? It's not ever going to go away. Those kinds of
           | memories do not fade. Time alone does not heal anything, and
           | you only get one life. Do whatever you can do to salvage it.
        
             | fragmede wrote:
             | Given the success of MDMA-assisted therapy for treating
             | PTSD in studies, there's hope that traumatic memories can
             | be made less traumatic.
        
       | growingkittens wrote:
       | I have always found analog writing to be a powerful cognitive
       | tool.
       | 
       | Writing changes your thoughts from abstract to concrete - and
       | once a thought is "out of your head" on paper, it becomes an
       | entity that you can perform additional thought operations on
       | (which you can then write down...etc.).
       | 
       | Analog writing also leaves visual evidence of your thought
       | process across a page. Most digital writing tools allow you to
       | make the thought process disappear completely as you work. Having
       | evidence of your thought process allows you to _evaluate_ your
       | thought process. Very important in any kind of problem solving
       | exercise.
       | 
       | As a child, I found that writing down a thought that bothered me
       | made it go away and freed my brain up to do kid stuff.
        
         | BeetleB wrote:
         | The study found that merely writing it on paper was
         | insufficient, though. The point of the study is crumpling it up
         | and throwing it is superior.
        
           | growingkittens wrote:
           | The study looked at keeping a paper around (underlying
           | situation: a reminder active in a workspace) vs. throwing it
           | away (underlying situation: removing a constant reminder).
           | 
           | They didn't study anything in-between, such as removing the
           | reminder without throwing it away.
        
             | malfist wrote:
             | Yeah, to your point, I'm curious how writing about
             | frustrations/anger in a journal that you never revisit
             | would compare to their treatment. It seems to help me.
        
               | dotancohen wrote:
               | Would you mind telling more about your journaling? If you
               | would prefer in private, my Gmail username is the same as
               | my HN username. Thank you!
        
       | wrp wrote:
       | This seems related to a much-replicated result from the practice
       | of "expressive writing," also referred to informally as the
       | "writing cure." Broadly, you feel better about things after
       | having written about them. Remarkably, even physical ailments
       | seem to be affected.
        
         | dotancohen wrote:
         | Physical ailments? What keywords should I be googling to read
         | more about this? I'm not finding anything.
        
       | Trasmatta wrote:
       | > Anger suppression is important in our daily life, as its
       | failure can sometimes lead to the breaking down of relationships
       | in families. Thus, effective strategies to suppress or neutralise
       | anger have been examined
       | 
       | This attitude is a problem in our society. Anger ends up being
       | destructive because we think we have to suppress it or neutralize
       | it. This just increases its strength over time until it explodes
       | out violently. I doubt the strategy in the paper is any more than
       | a temporary suppression of the emotion.
       | 
       | We need to recognize that anger is a valid emotion just like any
       | other. Anger becomes dangerous because we demonize it without
       | trying to understand it, which just gives it strength in the long
       | run.
        
         | webstrand wrote:
         | Often it is simply impossible to do anything constructive with
         | anger. So techniques like the one in the article are useful,
         | it's not a dismissal of anger as a valid emotion. The goal is
         | to reduce redirected aggression.
        
           | Trasmatta wrote:
           | Anger becomes unproductive because we shame it and suppress
           | it over and over and over. If we knew how to express anger in
           | a healthy way, we wouldn't need to do that (with the
           | exception of edge cases, like a physical hormonal imbalance)
        
             | mzs wrote:
             | It is literally impossible for me to think objectively
             | while angry.
        
               | Trasmatta wrote:
               | Because of this, do you believe anger should always be
               | suppressed, and never expressed or engaged with?
        
               | tehnub wrote:
               | Could you give examples of healthy expressions of or
               | engagements with anger?
        
               | jimkleiber wrote:
               | Not the person you replied to, but yes. "I feel angry
               | that you keep touching my leg. Maybe you're even unaware
               | that you're doing it, I don't know. Will you stop
               | touching my leg?"
        
               | droopyEyelids wrote:
               | Anger can give you the energy to address an uncomfortable
               | issue that would otherwise remain suppressed. For example
               | your partner doesn't do the dishes. You become angry and
               | confront your partner on the subject.
               | 
               | Now there is an opportunity for you two to work through
               | the issue, and the partner has to feel some of the
               | emotional impact of their behavior, preventing them from
               | dismissing it.
               | 
               | If that issue remained unaddressed, you might deal with
               | the stress by reducing your view of your partner as a
               | capable thoughtful individual, which is a much harder
               | situation to address than a difficult emotional
               | conversation.
        
               | jimkleiber wrote:
               | Is it possible for you to think objectively when you're
               | feeling sad? Or afraid? Or tired? Or horny? Or in love?
        
             | 2devnull wrote:
             | The world is nothing but edge cases. Expressing anger
             | requires cooperation. If someone doesn't want to listen,
             | and you express anger at them anyway, is it not abuse?
        
               | jimkleiber wrote:
               | I appreciate you pointing this out. If we force someone
               | to listen to our anger, we can see it as abuse. If we
               | force someone to suppress their anger, we can see it as
               | normal. It's almost as if we might normalize suppression
               | and demonize expression.
               | 
               | And it's not just anger. If I want to express verbal
               | affection towards someone and they don't want to hear it,
               | we often call it abuse. But if they want me to suppress
               | verbal affection towards them and I don't want to, we
               | celebrate it as them having boundaries.
               | 
               | And I think sometimes being forced to not say something
               | can hurt as much as being forced to hear something, yet
               | we don't seem to see how it harms people.
        
               | Trasmatta wrote:
               | I mean I think it depends on how the anger surfaces to
               | determine whether its abuse. Yelling and screaming and
               | throwing things, absolutely. But the reason we're scared
               | of anger is because we don't know how to communicate and
               | express it in a healthy way.
               | 
               | But you can also process anger solo with the right tools,
               | or with a good therapist that doesn't shame anger. It
               | doesn't always have to involve another person.
        
               | anigbrowl wrote:
               | That depends on whether they're a legitimate object of
               | your anger. If someone injures you and then ignores your
               | complaints, no it's not abuse to be angry with them.
        
             | mcphage wrote:
             | David Whyte has a excellent passage about anger, from his
             | book "Consolations". I'm not sure if this is an excerpt or
             | the full thing (don't have the book on me to check), but in
             | either case it's worth reading:
             | https://www.dannabeal.com/understanding-anger-david-whyte/
        
           | waterhouse wrote:
           | The evolutionary use of anger is to disincentivize others
           | from mistreating you.
        
             | unbalancedevh wrote:
             | I wish my computer understood this when I get angry at it.
             | Unfortunately, many (most?) times that I get angry are
             | because things outside my control aren't working the way I
             | feel that they should, whether they're human, animate, or
             | inanimate. Or even me.
             | 
             | Aside from academic interest, I struggle to see the
             | practical benefit of this study. When I'm angry, in the
             | heat of the moment, there's no way I'm going to stop and
             | write an essay about my feelings. By the time I am in a
             | frame of mind to do so, the anger has passed and not a
             | problem anymore.
        
         | rightbyte wrote:
         | > Anger ends up being destructive because we think we have to
         | suppress it or neutralize it. This just increases its strength
         | over time until it explodes out violently.
         | 
         | Dunno.
         | 
         | One are going to end up in alot of avoidable verbal and
         | physical fights if ones anger is not suppressed.
         | 
         | Just such a simple thing as the comment answer timer on HN
         | helps alot.
        
           | Trasmatta wrote:
           | Anger results in verbal and physical fights because it gets
           | suppressed and shamed for long enough until it explodes out.
           | A better route is understanding the anger and the underlying
           | emotion it's protecting (often shame) before it becomes a
           | problem.
        
           | jimkleiber wrote:
           | Yes possibly there will be more fights. Anger is a fighting
           | emotion. But that doesn't mean fighting is bad either. We
           | often suppress fights and conflict, especially verbal ones,
           | and avoid them until they accumulate so many facets and get
           | so loud that we can't ignore them and then hit each other
           | with years of grievances.
           | 
           | I think it's not only ok to verbally fight but helps us
           | resolve conflict instead of avoid it.
           | 
           | And I think if we can resolve it at the verbal level it
           | doesn't have to become physical.
           | 
           | But I think the cultural suppression of fighting/conflict is
           | even deeper than the suppression of anger. A friend just
           | asked for our definitions of peace and I said I currently
           | believe it's a mythical concept where conflict doesn't exist.
        
           | chaos_emergent wrote:
           | The very fact that you believe that anger leads to verbal and
           | physical fights proves OP's point. When anger can be let out
           | without the culture at large thinking of it as a threat that
           | needs to be neutralized, and instead a charge that needs to
           | be addressed, anger isn't harmful, it's constructive and
           | instrumental.
           | 
           | Anger normally points out a boundary that's being breached in
           | which valuable things to a self - like autonomy, comfort,
           | connection - are compromised. That we have so many angry
           | people and that our culture encourages anger _management_
           | rather than anger _processing_ points to its rejection writ
           | large
        
             | jimkleiber wrote:
             | And maybe it does lead to fights when it's let out but
             | little and contextually appropriate fights, and then the
             | people dig deeper and gain a better understanding of their
             | situations.
             | 
             | Anger can tell people that we want them to stop doing an
             | activity and sometimes people don't even know their
             | behavior is breaching those boundaries. One time an ex
             | visited me in a park. I juggled the soccer ball then kicked
             | it to her. She rolled it back and said she didn't want to
             | play. I juggled it for 15 more minutes and then kicked it
             | to her again. She stood up and kicked it with me for like 5
             | minutes.
             | 
             | Three weeks later, she got angry and said "And you don't
             | respect my boundaries!" And I was really confused. She
             | said, "I TOLD you I didn't want to kick the ball and you
             | still kicked it to me."
             | 
             | I wished she had expressed more anger when I kicked it the
             | second time. I wasn't trying to make her angry. Kicking the
             | ball with her wasn't that important to me. I just didn't
             | know that it bothered her that much and if I did, I
             | immediately would have stopped.
        
               | chaos_emergent wrote:
               | totally. Smaller conflicts are much more manageable and
               | keep people in connection so much more than repressing
               | it.
        
               | jimkleiber wrote:
               | Exactly that, "keep people in connection." I love how you
               | framed it. When we suppress the conflict, we distance
               | more and more from each other and from ourselves,
               | disconnecting more and more.
        
         | suduxhdvc wrote:
         | Plenty of counterexamples. Road rage is one
        
           | jimkleiber wrote:
           | I think road rage is a prime example of what OP mentioned:
           | anger bottling up because it repeatedly wasn't expressed and
           | then it shoots out like a hose, 100% of the anger being
           | directed at someone who maybe contributed 2% to the person's
           | underlying anger.
        
           | Trasmatta wrote:
           | Why does anger become so bad that it results in road rage?
           | Because we suppress it and shame it, until it has no choice
           | but to surface destructively. And then rather than try to
           | understand the anger, we just double down on suppressing it
           | more, which leads to ever increasing levels of explosive
           | anger
        
           | Etheryte wrote:
           | I would say exactly the opposite, road rage is a classic
           | example of what the parent comment means. Bottling up anger
           | as if it's somehow wrong to feel angry or express it is
           | exactly how you get to people blowing up in a colossal manner
           | once the lid goes off. Road rage happens when someone
           | overreacts to a small transgression which is exactly what you
           | get with bottled up rage.
        
           | jeremywho wrote:
           | You don't think road rage can be the a manifestation of
           | suppressed anger from other parts of ones life?
        
         | Agingcoder wrote:
         | Well, I'll take both fixing the symptoms ( loved one can't
         | control their anger and hurts everyone around them ) and the
         | syndrom ( therapy sessions to understand the cause of the anger
         | ).
         | 
         | Now, based on my experience dealing with such situations around
         | me, some people have difficulties considering they should even
         | talk to a therapist. They will violently reject the very idea
         | they might have a problem, and will keep hurting people around
         | them. Controlling anger allows having a discussion in the first
         | place, which then can turn into the understanding you're
         | talking about.
        
         | jimkleiber wrote:
         | I strongly agree. I don't think it's only anger that we
         | suppress, but rather emotions in general, especially higher
         | intensity ones. I think emotions are one of the most powerful
         | tools we have for communicating with each other, especially
         | when we pair the physical expression with words detailing the
         | deeper contexts, and yet we seem to somehow think emotional
         | expression is maladaptive. It confounds me and frustrates me
         | and saddens me all at the same time.
        
           | Trasmatta wrote:
           | Yes, strong emotions are almost always shamed. We need to
           | learn to process those emotions and accept them, not suppress
           | them. Suppressing never works forever, because the emotion is
           | still there, and it will surface one way or another
           | eventually.
        
             | jimkleiber wrote:
             | And also to express them to others. This is where I think
             | it gets tricky, or has for me. I built an app for micro-
             | journaling how I felt and I got really good at answering
             | "How do I feel?" "What's happening?" And yet when I say
             | these things to others, it can cause huge conflicts because
             | they don't want us to talk about how we feel and I do. A
             | suppression vs expression fight and it seems to happen with
             | almost everyone I meet.
             | 
             | So for me, I feel confident to process and accept them by
             | myself, it's when I communicate them with others it can
             | bring lots of conflict, and yet, if I only express them to
             | myself and not to others, they don't often achieve their
             | function of communication, which I think may be one of the
             | core functions of emotions.
        
         | dasudasu wrote:
         | Monks of various religious dispositions, or even just secular
         | meditation adepts, seem to disprove this easily.
        
           | Trasmatta wrote:
           | I see it exactly opposite. A Buddhist monk would learn to
           | experience, feel, observe, and detach from their anger, not
           | suppress it or shame it. This is more in line what what I
           | think we need to do.
           | 
           | The more you resist the anger the more it will persist.
        
             | slowmovintarget wrote:
             | There are neurological studies that show that anger cycles
             | can escalate and become amplified with practice. That's not
             | what we want.
             | 
             | Acknowledge your anger, yes. Then acknowledge your control,
             | not only over how you express it, but even over whether you
             | feel angry or not. It is possible to develop the skill to
             | _stop being angry_. This is far more important than going
             | with the flow.
             | 
             | It's often a bitter pill to swallow, because it means the
             | people that act out of anger, or are always angry, are
             | ultimately responsible for how they feel. It is not someone
             | else's fault you feel angry.
        
               | 2devnull wrote:
               | "the skill to stop being angry"
               | 
               | Often that amounts to changing the people or
               | circumstances in one's life. That's the point of therapy.
               | A good therapist wouldn't help a sexually abused child
               | stay in a bad situation and just learn to suppress
               | emotion. Well maybe a cbt therapist would. But a good
               | therapist would try to help catalyze a change in the
               | situation causing the trauma.
        
               | chaos_emergent wrote:
               | The neurological studies to which you refer point to the
               | neurological phenomenon, but you're mapping that to a
               | single possibility for the psychological process that is
               | coupled with the physical phenomenon, namely, that anger
               | monotonically amplifies over time when reinforced,
               | perhaps to some asymptotic steady state that's greater
               | than a normative baseline
               | 
               | An equally valid narrative is that, especially in our
               | society where most people have repressed anger, once
               | anger is tapped into, there's an overwhelm of backlogged
               | emotion that is also released. Anger as an emotion is
               | energetically expensive for a biological system, and it
               | doesn't make any sense that it would continue to be
               | reinforced indefinitely.
        
               | Trasmatta wrote:
               | It's a lot more nuanced than that. You can't just
               | "control your anger". You can layer a controlling part of
               | your mind on top of the anger to try to swat it down
               | every time it surfaces, but this is a temporary solution.
               | Especially when the anger is rooted deeply in things like
               | trauma or shame.
               | 
               | The path forward is to understand the anger with
               | compassion, and the trauma or painful emotions below it,
               | or the boundaries that are being crossed. Rather than
               | just trying to force yourself not to feel it.
               | 
               | It's not that different from telling a depressed person
               | that they should just think positively to cure
               | themselves.
        
           | 2devnull wrote:
           | Monks are doing it on easy mode. They have nothing to anger
           | them, zero triggers. It's the whole point of hermeticism.
           | Remove all sources of stress. Desire nothing. Of course they
           | aren't angry, they have nothing; nothing to feel angry about.
        
           | chaos_emergent wrote:
           | A friend of mine went to a Zen Buddhist monastery for a month
           | to start practicing to deal with his anger. After the month
           | he told his teacher the reason why he came - to dissipate his
           | anger - and his teacher told him that he had nothing to teach
           | him because the fact that he _was_ feeling his anger was the
           | practice of mindfulness. The teacher told him he'd be better
           | off leaving the monastery and working on the object of his
           | anger (human-induced climate destabilization).
           | 
           | I think you're appealing to the boiled down and stripped away
           | "mindfulness" movement in the west that focuses on creating
           | what I call "Vipassana Zombies" - people who can feel their
           | sensations just enough to recognize and ignore them. A lot of
           | Buddhist teachings are about empowerment and action, and
           | they've been grossly misunderstood.
        
             | barfbagginus wrote:
             | I am choosing to imagine that the monk called your friend
             | to take up the battle of climate justice and revolutionary
             | struggle, which is indeed a very mindful way to utilize
             | anger over injustice.
             | 
             | "You will find peace in action. Join an eco-guerilla cell.
             | Use your rage to guide your contribution to the cause - it
             | is a valid emotion driven by a need for change. Long live
             | the revolution! For Victory! For Justice! For Peace!"
        
               | chaos_emergent wrote:
               | haha not far off. He believes that we should be doing
               | carbon capture by rebuilding our top soil, as that's the
               | most sustainable way of pulling it down while continuing
               | to feed people. He's starting a school to teach
               | regenerative techniques to farmers.
        
         | chaos_emergent wrote:
         | Totally agree, and I'd go further to say that the reason we
         | don't want to go near anger as a society is because we don't
         | know how to grieve. To tap into grief means allowing people to
         | need resources like time and human attention that we've over
         | leveraged into economic activity.
        
           | jimkleiber wrote:
           | My mom passed away about 15 months ago, and while I have
           | worked in emotional expression for 12 years, her passing had
           | me feeling the most raw. I think one main thing that happened
           | with grief for me is that I felt things so intensely, the
           | full spectrum, and it became really hard to not suppress
           | those feelings.
           | 
           | So I think the broader picture is not just grief, but
           | feelings, especially intense feelings. If I feel sad, I want
           | to cry, not work. If I feel tired, I want to sleep, not work.
           | If I fall in love, I want to be with that person, not work. I
           | think many if not most feelings can get in the way of our
           | maximum productivity states. Maybe low level anger and focus,
           | with a little bit of playfulness, can keep us productive, but
           | stray too far outside of that and we don't look as
           | productive.
           | 
           | I would argue, however, that we might be more productive in
           | the long-term, because otherwise we may burn out, communicate
           | less effectively, and become more desensitized to what people
           | need and want, both from consumers and fellow producers.
        
         | omoikane wrote:
         | > This attitude is a problem in our society
         | 
         | Need to clarify which society is meant by "our".
         | 
         | The authors of this paper are Japanese, and the participants
         | are local university students. I would assume suppression of
         | anger is the norm for most people involved in this study, since
         | Japanese culture generally aims to preserve harmony.
         | 
         | This is in contrast with some cultures that are more direct in
         | their communications and perhaps not suppressing much at all.
         | It's possible that they would see different results when the
         | experiment is done with a more diverse group of participants.
        
         | pompino wrote:
         | If you wish to convince others of your views, you'll have to
         | provide a lot more than assertions.
         | 
         | As per the article - [..] can sometimes lead to [..]. I don't
         | know how clearer the article can be, there is no proposed
         | "solution" here that solves everything in every scenario. Its
         | simply testing a hypothesis.
        
       | nprateem wrote:
       | I've been doing this for years. It's a twist on writing a letter
       | you never send. Scribbling it out or chucking it away is an
       | obvious next step.
        
       | CodeWriter23 wrote:
       | So many comments here focused on the writing component. So few on
       | the letting go component.
        
         | mzs wrote:
         | Yup, I do this thing where I imagine myself writing down the
         | thought, but not actually the contents of what I am writing,
         | and then throw it in the bin, and here I actually perform the
         | action. It's a little hard to do the throwing away motion when
         | others are around, but I can discreetly move my hand. For
         | whatever reason this work very well for me.
        
       | rcthompson wrote:
       | It's an interesting idea, but they really made that title as
       | unparseable as they possibly could.
        
       | AnimalMuppet wrote:
       | Just throw it away? This looks like much more fun:
       | https://signalvnoise.com/svn3/the-making-of-a-dumpster-fire/
       | 
       | You send it an email. It prints it out, dumps the printout into a
       | dumpster, and burns it in the dumpster.
       | 
       | I don't know if it's still online though...
        
       | kiechu wrote:
       | I often write an angry comment just to not send it.
        
       | csours wrote:
       | I'll sometimes write a post or comment and then delete it. It's
       | probably not as good as writing on paper, but it helps.
       | 
       | I wonder how well it would work to have a placebo button that
       | only shows on your own session
        
         | EvanAnderson wrote:
         | I do this, both purposefully (on HN) and, in a manner,
         | inadvertently.
         | 
         | Writing an email and saving it as a draft gives me a memory of
         | having sent the message. Occasionally I get asked about emails
         | I've committed to sending, felt certain I already did, and
         | subsequently found them saved as unsent drafts (inevitably
         | because I got interrupted while I was writing).
        
       | pierrebai wrote:
       | I suppose it may also apply to voodoo dolls. Make an effigy, put
       | pins in it, burn it for emotional release.
        
       | drpossum wrote:
       | Fine, but when I delete PR comments about my code that upset me
       | it just makes my coworkers mad.
        
         | theonething wrote:
         | Am I the only to think that most PR comments are just people
         | bike shedding to make themselves seem useful in code review?
        
           | WizardClickBoy wrote:
           | I not infrequently find myself prefixing my own code review
           | comments with some variant of "I'm mostly asking this to make
           | myself sound smart, but..." and then usually (not always) I
           | delete the comment. But it's not a high proportion of my
           | total review output, assuming I'm impartial enough to tell
           | the difference.
           | 
           | My point is, it definitely happens, but if it applies to
           | _most_ PR comments I think the code review practices of your
           | project may need improving. My experience has been that most
           | code review comments are either seeking to impart or gain
           | knowledge that the commenter genuinely finds useful.
        
       | debacle wrote:
       | Most modern anger is derived from helplessness. I don't get angry
       | when I spill my coffee or someone cuts me off on my commute, but
       | I recently discovered that I've been overcharged for my cell
       | phone plan for the last 18 months and it made me seethe, mostly
       | because I know that it's going to take a half dozen phone calls
       | over at least as many hours to come to any real resolution, and
       | that millions of people are likely in the same predicament.
       | 
       | Writing all that down made me more, not less, angry.
        
         | fwip wrote:
         | Well, the study does say that you've got to shred it to reduce
         | the anger levels.
        
         | jimkleiber wrote:
         | An exercise (whether writing or verbal) that helps me redirect
         | or alleviate some of the anger is to simply ask "How do I
         | imagine that person might be feeling?"
         | 
         | The trick is, when I'm feeling angry, I don't often want to
         | answer. But when I do, it can help me realize that the current
         | situation may also be hurting or frustrating the people who had
         | been the targets of my anger, and then maybe we can work
         | together to get rid of the problem. This seems to help me when
         | calling customer service, because now I'm not fighting against
         | them but fighting alongside of them.
        
         | fragmede wrote:
         | Anger is only a problem when it shortcircuits logic and reason
         | and makes you behave irrationally and in ways you later regret.
         | But used effectively, it can give you the energy you need to
         | get through all 18 of those really frustrating phone calls
         | before you give up.
        
       | ChainOfFools wrote:
       | "The great thing is to prevent his doing anything. As long as he
       | does not convert it [his purpose] into action [...]"
       | 
       | "Let him, if he has any bent that way, write a book about it;
       | that is often an excellent way of sterilizing the seeds which the
       | Enemy plants in a human soul..." - Screwtape
        
         | 0xdeadbeefbabe wrote:
         | > Let him, if he has any bent that way, write a book about it
         | 
         | Hah, the down voters probably feel the same way about writers
        
       | Y_Y wrote:
       | Contrary to the poorly-written title, the subjects did not write
       | a whole academic paper about the provocation.
        
         | anigbrowl wrote:
         | Are you sure? Maybe this is it
        
       | peterfirefly wrote:
       | Will it replicate? I somehow doubt it.
        
         | oneepic wrote:
         | Readers can always try this technique for themselves. It costs
         | $0.
        
           | fragmede wrote:
           | yes but it'll only work for the readers that believe it'll
           | work.
        
       | throwaway74432 wrote:
       | It doesn't appear that they separated those who believe it would
       | work from those who didn't, to see if there was a placebo effect.
       | That would have been useful.
        
       | A_D_E_P_T wrote:
       | Though not mentioned in the paper, Lincoln was famously aware of
       | this technique.
       | 
       | > "Whenever Abraham Lincoln felt the urge to tell someone off, he
       | would compose what he called a "hot letter." He'd pile all of his
       | anger into a note, "put it aside until his emotions cooled down,"
       | Doris Kearns Goodwin once explained on NPR, "and then write [on
       | the rear side of the sheet of paper]: 'Never sent. Never signed.'
       | " Which meant that Gen. George G. Meade, for one, would never
       | hear from his commander in chief that Lincoln blamed him for
       | letting Robert E. Lee escape after Gettysburg."
       | 
       | From: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/23/opinion/sunday/the-
       | lost-a...
        
         | lIl-IIIl wrote:
         | According to the paper setting the letter aside did not subdue
         | anger in the participants. The anger subsided in those who
         | threw it away or shredded it.
        
           | midnightmonster wrote:
           | ...did not subdue anger in the participants _as much as
           | throwing it away did_.
           | 
           | Just writing it down and filing it also seemed to help, just
           | not as much.
        
         | wesleychen wrote:
         | It sounds like he retained the paper rather than disposing it.
        
           | red-iron-pine wrote:
           | when you're a public figure notes like this are a CYA
        
             | gumby wrote:
             | Maybe not in 1860s culture?
             | 
             | I don't know, this is just speculation. Mainly because the
             | cost of producing a duplicate letter (for ones actually
             | sent, not this case) was sufficiently high that I assume
             | there wasn't a culture that could make use of such
             | duplicates.
        
       | porompompero wrote:
       | Doing it for decades. It works better if you burn the letter. I
       | even jump over the fire. No joke.
        
         | tommiegannert wrote:
         | Have you considered flash paper? It would be difficult to jump
         | over it in time, so just wondering... :)
        
         | dotancohen wrote:
         | If you are serious, I would love to ask you something that
         | could possibly help me. My Gmail username is the same as my HN
         | username if you don't mind.
        
       | psunavy03 wrote:
       | "Dost thou think in a moment of anger,
       | 
       | 'tis well with thy seniors to fight?
       | 
       | They prosper who burn in the morning
       | 
       | the letters they wrote overnight.
       | 
       | For some there be, shelved and forgotten,
       | 
       | With nothing to thank for their fate,
       | 
       | Save that (on a half-sheet of foolscap,)
       | 
       | Which a fool 'Had the Honour to state.'"
       | 
       | - Capt. R. A. Hopwood, Royal Navy (Retired), "The Laws of the
       | Navy," 1898
        
       | huitzitziltzin wrote:
       | I thought this kind of small-sample, theory-free, tell-any-story-
       | you-want statistical significance mining exercise was out of
       | style! This study is like an unwelcome blast from the 2010's or
       | earlier!
        
       | taylorius wrote:
       | I wonder if that technique could apply more broadly.
       | 
       | For example, if a person suffering from a bout of depression,
       | were to write their depressed feelings "there is no point, no
       | hope" etc.. then rip the paper up and throw it away, might it
       | have any effect on their mood?
        
         | nxobject wrote:
         | Anecdotally, whenever I keep a journal through difficult times,
         | my handwriting's so bad that I can't read it after a while, and
         | the journal ends up being "write-only" as well. I wonder
         | whether the ripping-it-up would be more cathartic.
        
         | puppable wrote:
         | I've had times where I've written those sorts of thoughts on a
         | small sheet of notepad paper, which I would then tear out and
         | burn in the kitchen sink. More frequently, I'll just write what
         | I'm thinking into an empty, personal use chat window in lieu of
         | venting to others. In either case, I think they definitely have
         | some effect.
        
         | DFHippie wrote:
         | I wish my son had tried this.
        
         | technolo-g wrote:
         | Writing down "distorted thoughts" to visually recognize them as
         | a bit out of whack (or not) and measure the level of distortion
         | is the one of the premises of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy
         | (CBT).
        
       | CraftingLinks wrote:
       | I do that with reactionary tweets. I either delete them before
       | posting, or sometimes shortly after. It definitely works.
        
       | fny wrote:
       | Is there a reason why so many studies (this included) fail to
       | report the effect size? The way "significant" is used in
       | literature, readers (even the educated ones) interpret the
       | research as suggesting some groundbreaking result.
       | 
       | Here, for example, only a 1-ish point change occurred on a six
       | point scale from 3 to 2. I say 1-ish because the confidence
       | intervals are rather wide and even intersect somewhat (see
       | discussion.)
       | 
       | So anger is _not_ eliminated rather you 'll be somewhat less
       | angry.
        
         | aftoprokrustes wrote:
         | In my experience (10 years in academia), people who understand
         | statistics enough do look at effect size rather than
         | significance levels. But unfortunately, even in one of the top
         | european universities, a lot of researchers (who are ~70% PhD
         | candidates with only basic stats training) tend to misinterpret
         | significance as meaning "large effect".
         | 
         | There is another cause, more pernicious, which is that in the
         | absence of a big effect, "a significant effect of X on Y was
         | found" sells better than "no large effect was found", because
         | there is a bias towards reporting positive effects in the
         | litterature. In my field, it is actually usual for people to
         | take big surveys, iterate dozens of statistical models with any
         | kind of interactions, and only report one where some
         | interesting parameters end up being significant, and derive
         | policy recommendations based on this. Which is a recipe for non
         | reproducible results.
        
         | SerpentJoe wrote:
         | There are at least two reasonable readings of "anger is
         | eliminated", with one being true if anger is reduced at all,
         | and both being true if anger is reduced to zero.
        
         | Lerc wrote:
         | I think the reason is rather simple. Funding.
         | 
         | I feel this is one of the two basic tricks that many many
         | papers do to preemptively justify their existence. The other
         | being the shoehorning of the hotbutton issue of the day and
         | imagining some way the study addresses that issue.
         | 
         | It was kind of weird watching the transition from when every
         | second paper could obliquely assist in the fight against AIDS
         | to now when they seem to assist in the fight against climate
         | change.
         | 
         | I feel like it is a minor dishonesty committed to combat the
         | unreasonable requirement for every scientific discovery to be
         | immediately applicable.
        
       | d--b wrote:
       | I think this kind of tricks definitely work the first time. But
       | my gut feeling is that if you do it several times the effect
       | decreases as the mental image of throwing the thing in the bin
       | becomes more familiar.
        
       | tudorw wrote:
       | ilinx
        
       | ketanmaheshwari wrote:
       | Haven't read the paper but it reminds me of a popular scene in a
       | Bollywood movie where the leading lady tells her acquaintance to
       | physically burn the picture of his ex and flush it down the
       | toilet. To which the guy says it is silly but still does it on
       | insistence from the lady. After the act, he says he actually felt
       | better doing what felt silly at first!
        
       | progrus wrote:
       | Also works with the drafts folder
        
       | rlue wrote:
       | Has no one noticed that there seems to be no control group in
       | this study? Every participant wrote a statement that got torn to
       | shreds; every participant had to write their emotions about it.
       | 
       | It's not outside the realm of possibility that watching cartoons
       | for ten minutes or just sitting in silence would produce a
       | comparable reduction in anger. Really disappointing that a pair
       | of career academics could get away with such an astounding
       | oversight (and get published in Nature, no less).
        
         | galleywest200 wrote:
         | Based on the graphs presented in this study, it seems not
         | everyone had one shredded or destroyed. Some had the letters
         | retained.
        
         | resource_waste wrote:
         | Ouch, Nature publishing pop science. A few years ago my
         | PhD/Academia Engineer path cousin validated if a study was
         | 'real' by simply looking at the word Nature.
         | 
         | I thought this was absurd and scrolled down to methods/data. I
         | had never heard of Nature before, or rather, I had no reason to
         | trust it.
         | 
         | I find it interesting/unfortunate Academia can get away with
         | being Authority based.
        
         | bdjsiqoocwk wrote:
         | If the effect you're testing is that throwing away a piece of
         | paper subdues anger, then those who don't are the control
         | group.
        
       | gillesjacobs wrote:
       | Always beware these type of Social Science studies that make for
       | great popsci headlines.
       | 
       | The kind of result that makes careers: seemingly elegant and
       | simple study design, common sense hypothesis and overall great
       | marketability.
       | 
       | Diederik Stapel was one of the largest science fraudster in
       | history and this kind of stuff was his bread and butter. More
       | recently Francesca Gino was caught falsifying the data of the
       | "honesty pledge at the top of form" that is highly similar in
       | concept to this.
       | 
       | Now for the career-ending question: Will it replicate?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-04-09 23:01 UTC)