Podcasts about Bandura

What is the most important thing I've done to support healing after breast cancer? Mindset work. Not positive thinking. Not pretending things are fine when they're not. Not forcing affirmations I didn't believe. I'm talking about the work of examining what I believed was possible for my body and my future and learning how to update those beliefs. In this episode, I share why mindset work became the foundation of my healing journey after a stage 4 breast cancer diagnosis and how neuroscience shows that our brains constantly predict what's possible based on past experiences, conditioning, fear, and environment. We talk about: • Why belief systems impact behavior and healing • The brain as a predictive machine • How fear and conditioning shape health decisions • The connection between self-compassion and consistency • Why changing habits starts with changing beliefs • How small actions help create new evidence for the brain This conversation is about learning to believe that healing, peace, health, and change may actually be available to you.   References Barrett, L.F. & Simmons, W.K. (2015). Interoceptive predictions in the brain. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 16(7), 419-429. Hutchinson, J.B. & Barrett, L.F. (2019). The power of predictions: An emerging paradigm for psychological research. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 28(3), 280-291. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: Freeman. Neff, K.D. (2023). Self-Compassion: Theory, Method, Research, and Intervention. Annual Review of Psychology, 74, 193-218.   Resources Mentioned: Work with Laura: https://www.thebreastcancerrecoverycoach.com/health  Download for iPhone:  https://apps.apple.com/us/app/kajabi/id1485646310 Download for Android:  https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=kajabi.kajabiapp&hl=en_US   Let's Connect! If this episode helped you breathe a little easier, please share it with a friend or leave a review. Every share helps spread this message of hope, healing, and whole-person wellness.

Dirk Daenen, the man who brought TEDx to Luxembourg, reveals the science and the secrets behind becoming a truly confident speaker. You'd think the man who coaches Luxembourg's most compelling public speakers would have been born fearless on stage. You'd be wrong. Professor Dirk Daenen, communication expert, TEDx Luxembourg organiser, and the person quietly responsible for some of the most-watched talks ever delivered on Luxembourgish soil started out as an introvert dreading the spotlight. In this candid conversation on The Lisa Burke Show, he opens up about fear, failure, the science of self-confidence, and why one talk filmed in front of 75 people in Wiltz went on to rack up 13 million views. If you have ever frozen in front of a room, gone blank at a podium, or quietly vowed to avoid public speaking for the rest of your life, this one is for you. TED vs TEDx: What's the Difference? Most people have heard of TED Talks. Far fewer know what the differential for TEDx is, or how accessible it really is. A standard TED conference ticket starts at around $20,000. You'll be sitting next to the world's most powerful minds, but the barrier is enormous. TEDx events, on the other hand, are independently organised under strict licence from TED, run entirely by volunteers, and designed to bring big ideas to local communities. Here in Luxembourg, that licence belongs to Dirk Daenen, and he has been running it for years. "I'm used to being the smartest person in the room as a teacher," Dirk says with a grin. "And then suddenly I'm surrounded by the most impressive people I've ever met: graffiti artists, photographers, scientists, a Belgian pop star. No money could pay for that.” "Luxembourg is a small country. But the ideas we spread are HUGE. Over 20 million views and counting." The Fear Is Real — and It Starts at School Up to 80% of people report some fear of public speaking. The academic figure sits closer to 40%. But according to Dirk, the number is almost beside the point, because wherever you land on that scale, the roots are almost always the same. "We are doing a quantitative survey right now," he explains, "asking people about their childhood experiences. And what we are finding is that most people who identify as having a fear of public speaking can point to a specific moment at school where it all started.” A teacher who snickered or a classroom that laughed at you. A presentation that went badly and was never properly supported. These are not trivial memories. Dirk calls them out for what they are: trauma. "If you do it badly, you end up with people carrying post-traumatic stress disorder because of something that happened in front of a classroom.” It is why his PhD research [yes, he is also completing a doctorate] focuses on finding the most effective way to teach public speaking to 16-year-olds, with the minimum possible trauma and the maximum boost to self-confidence. His dream: one full year of public speaking on the Luxembourg school curriculum. Not optional. A core subject, like French or German. "Europe's biggest social failure?" he asks. "We have an amazing education system. And yet we do not teach the one skill you need in every single job, every single day." The Science of Self-Confidence Dirk is a researcher as much as a coach, and he brings the science of psychology into every conversation about communication. The key framework he returns to is the work of psychologist Albert Bandura, whose four sources of self-efficacy - your belief in your own ability to do something - underpin everything Dirk teaches. The first and most powerful source is mastery: actually doing the thing and surviving it. The second is vicarious experience: watching someone just like you nail it, and thinking: if they can, so can I. The third is social encouragement: the right kind of feedback, delivered with care. And the fourth is physiological readiness: understanding that the butterflies you feel before speaking are not a warning signal. They are energy. "I still get the butterflies. But I have taught them to fly in formation.” Self-confidence, he explains, is not some vague quality you either have or don't. It is the sum of two measurable things: self-esteem (how much you value yourself) and self-efficacy (how capable you believe yourself to be). Public speaking, done well and in a safe environment, is one of the fastest ways to build both. What Actually Works on Stage So what does Dirk actually tell the people he coaches? Here are some of the most practical insights from the conversation. Your body will move whether you plan it or not. When you're nervous, adrenaline floods your system. Oxygenated blood pumps into your muscles. If you don't channel that energy intentionally, your body finds its own outlet: clicking pens, rotating wedding rings, crossing arms, hands shoved in pockets, the classic 'fig leaf.' The fix is not to stand rigid. It's to plan your gestures in advance. Identify your key words and decide how to show them physically. Do this for six months and those movements become automatic. Preparation is not the same as memorisation. One of the most striking stories in this interview involves Emma Bale, the Belgian pop star who had performed for 60,000 people at Dour Festival but was terrified of a TED Talk. She memorised her speech so perfectly it sounded robotic. The humanity disappeared. Dirk had to coach her to re-introduce vulnerability: a planned, spontaneous-sounding moment at the start. 'It takes a lot of preparation to be spontaneous,' he says. Tony Blair knew this. So did every great performer you have ever admired. The top 10 most-viewed TED Talks have no slides. Think about that the next time you spend three hours building a PowerPoint. Structure matters, yes. But the elements almost nobody teaches: voice, body language, audience engagement, are what people actually remember. The information-heavy slide culture in European education has produced presenters who hide behind their decks. Stop hiding. You are the presentation. Watch people who are like you. Bandura called this vicarious experience. You don't need to imitate a world-famous orator. You need to see a normal person, someone at your level, stand up and do it well. That is why TEDx Luxembourg matters. Local people, on a real stage, sharing real ideas. 13 million views from a room in Wiltz. Proof that it is possible. Just do it. There is no way around this one. Toastmasters. Improv classes. The TEDx stage. The school debate club your child has been avoiding. The skill builds only through exposure. 'I was a chef allergic to food,' Dirk says. 'I ate the food anyway. It wasn't poison. It was the best meal of my life.'

Stoking your sense of adventure and kick-starting curiosity is so important as we get older – just ask seven-time world champion surfer Layne Beachley and clinical psychologist Dr Roy Sugarman, who explain how you, too, can embrace new experiences and redefine what's possible, at any age. About the episode – brought to you by Australian Seniors, in partnership with RSPCA. Join Jean Kittson for the seventh season of DARE: The Time of Your Life (formerly Life’s Booming), called Better With Age. Too often ageing is painted as decline. In reality, Australians are living longer, healthier lives and reshaping what “older” looks like. This series flips the script and shows how ageing is not a dirty word but rather a time to be embraced, featuring interviews with extraordinary over 50s refusing to slip quietly into the background. Layne Beachley is a seven-time world champion surfer, who has been pushing the boundaries of women’s surfing since she first stepped on a phone board aged four, going on to win a record breaking six consecutive world titles. Still hitting the waves every day, Layne continues to share her story and help others as a motivational speaker and co-founder of Awake Academy. Dr Roy Sugarman is a clinical psychologist and clinical neuropsychologist who works with professional athletes, special forces and corporate leaders. He is also head neuroscientist for education technology company, Box Play and a co-founder of the global technology research company, Transhuman Inc, where he holds the patient for how we capture human emotions on data files, as well as having developed a totally non-pathological model for online mental health applications for the Department of Health Services in the state of California together with Kooth USA. Watch DARE: The Time of Your Life on YouTube Listen to DARE: The Time of Your Life on Apple Podcasts Listen to DARE: The Time of Your Life on Spotify For more information visit seniors.com.au/podcast Produced by Medium Rare Content Agency with Myrtle & Pine -- TRANSCRIPT: Jean Kittson: Hello and welcome to a new season of DARE: The Time of Your Life, formerly Life’s Booming, brought to you by Australian Seniors, in partnership with RSPCA. For more episodes, visit seniors.com.au/podcast. In this episode, we're exploring our adventurous side and being bold and taking risks and how it’s not just for your formative years. It's for now, from scaling mountains and learning to surf, to taking a grey gap year and traveling solo. More Australians over 50 are embracing new experiences and pushing their limits. Proving there is no expiry date when it comes to adventure. So, how can we overcome the, ‘I'm too old for this’ mindset to achieve the confidence to try something new? I mean, it could be something you've always wanted to do or something you did in the past and would like to take up again or something you only just thought of. Fostering our sense of adventure and kick-starting our curiosity is so important as we get older and to help us understand why it is important is Dr Roy Sugarman. Dr Roy Sugarman is a clinical psychologist and clinical neuropsychologist who works with professional athletes, special forces and corporate leaders. He is also head neuroscientist for education technology company Box Play. And joining Roy, someone who needs no introduction. Seven time world champion surfer Layne Beachley. Layne has been pushing the boundaries of women surfing since she first stepped on a phone board aged four, and she has gone on to win a record breaking six consecutive world titles. Although she has been retired from competitive surfing for almost two decades, Layne still hits the waves every day. And Layne has ventured into another career altogether, sharing her story and helping others as a motivational speaker and co-founder of Awake Academy. Welcome Layne. Layne Beachley: Thanks Jean Jean Kittson: And welcome Roy.Welcome you both. Layne Beachley: Thank you. Lovely to be here. Jean Kittson: It's so great to have you both here with us and talking about this really important topic about, you know, keeping on pushing ourselves and challenging ourselves. Layne Beachley: It was interesting when you said in the intro about, am I too old for this? I had an experience this weekend, actually, you might be able to help me out with this Roy, where I was competing for my board rider’s club and I was one of the oldest in the whole field and I did come out of the water because it wasn't as enjoyable as it normally is, competing. I did have that mentality. I'm too old for this. Now, do you put that down to the fact that it's just 'cause I'm tired or can I just Are you allowed to be too old for this? Roy Sugarman: Well, absolutely. You can choose whatever time. Were you too young for it at four years old? Layne Beachley: I knew you… Roy Sugarman: So if you weren't too young for it at four years old, you Yeah, no, keep going. But what happens is, if I look at my athletes who keep training through 60 years old that don't show signs of ageing. So you've got 90 year olds who run triathlons and do Iron Men simply because they never stopped. I mean, you look at their muscles or you look at their hearts. They’re 30 years old. Layne Beachley: Right. Roy Sugarman: So what's the mindset? Mindset becomes your biggest thing. Doing the difficult thing. Layne Beachley: Mm-hmm. Roy Sugarman: That's the correct thing to do. When you have a choice and the point is you thought you have a choice. Layne Beachley: Well, I do have a choice, and I also believe it's the recovery process and the the space that you have around it. Because at 90 years old, there's not much else really going on in your life that's gonna distract you too heavily from being able to take good care of yourself. But that starts now. We don't wait till we're 90 before we start taking care of ourselves. So I'm just thinking now that you've said. Now that I'm in my fifties and I'm still competing, I need to actually have more space for preparation and recovery to enjoy it more. Roy Sugarman: Yeah. I think there are four pillars. There's the mindset pillar, there's nutrition and movement, and recovery is your fourth pillar. Jean Kittson: Okay. Right. Say that again. Recovery is your… Roy Sugarman: So mindset's your first important part of that. Jean Kittson: Yes. And then the next one Roy Sugarman: Movement and nutrition are critical as you get older. And even the rot starts early, so when you're young as well. And that fourth pillar is recovery time. So in other words, Jean Kittson: Where you rest and put your feet up, Roy Sugarman: don't overtrain. Jean Kittson: You don't have to work on recovery, do you? Layne Beachley: You do. You have to… Roy Sugarman: Oh yes, Jean Kittson: Oh, you have to work for recovery. Roy Sugarman: Well, there's active and passive, right? Layne Beachley: Exactly. Roy Sugarman: Yeah. Layne Beachley: Yeah. Jean Kittson: Oh gosh. Now we're getting technical. Alright. Can you say what active recovery and passive is in a few words that we, people who aren't sports people will understand, please! Layne Beachley: Well, active recovery would be things like massage and acupuncture and compression therapy and ice therapy and heat therapy Jean Kittson: Ah, Layne Beachley: Yeah. That would be the active Jean Kittson: And the passive is a glass of wine. Jean Kittson: The telly on, the feet up. Right? Layne Beachley: Well, preferably coconut water. Jean Kittson: Yeah. Layne Beachley: Not something that's all anti, well, not something that's inflammatory like alcohol. Roy Sugarman: So going for a walk. Layne Beachley: going for a walk. Roy Sugarman: Going for a walk, doing some stretching, doing some yoga. Very light stuff. Just keeping going, but being active, getting out of bed at the same time, going to sleep at the same time. There's more passive recovery, doing some heart rate variability training. Jean Kittson: Look, I'm feeling too old for this, as you say, I have never sort of worked in that way in a routine or with, you know, that much care. Layne Beachley: So television doesn't provide that, does it? Jean Kittson: Television? No. I don't really watch a lot of television. I do a little, just a lot of, I don't know what I do. Running around, I run around, a headless chook, and then sit down and, you know… Layne Beachley: With a glass of wine. Jean Kittson: Yeah, with a glass of wine. So when you have that pass through your mind – I'm too old for this – this is what happens to, I think a lot of people when, as they, as they get older in later life, they think ‘well, maybe I am too old for this.’ And I don't know whether it's their mindset or other people are putting it on it. You are out surfing with younger people. Did you get that impression that other people were looking at you like that? Or was, did it come from yourself? Layne Beachley: No, it came from myself. I don't care about how people look at me and the judgements that they make, cast upon me. It's more around my opinion of myself. That's the most important. I think it also came down to how my body was feeling and the energy that I was able to put into the performance. And just the mindset is also a reflection of how I'm feeling within myself. So I've been in a moon boot for a few weeks. Yeah, not ideal preparation either. And so I'm really conscious about allowing that injury to heal, but while still being able to do what I wanna do. And that's another thing that slows us down as we get older, is the injuries and the progression of injuries, and then honoring the injury and allowing it to heal. Roy Sugarman: Yeah. And the point that changes as you get older, which is something for younger athletes as well, is you can't be outcome focused. Cause that is going to be a negative for you. But the doctor says you have to lose weight. That's your outcome. Well, reactant theory, somebody's telling you what to do. But the important part of what Layne said is that, the opposite of a competitive mindset is psychological flexibility, which means I'm going to take my eyes off the end result. I'm going to just go for process. I'm going to enjoy what I'm doing. I'm going to love what I'm doing, how well I do. These other people can beat me. They're quicker, faster, stronger, younger. Which is very sad, but their rot’s… Jean Kittson: We hate them. Roy Sugarman: Their rot has already started, you know, and you know, people say, but you're 72, are you slowing down? The answer is, I hate old people, and I'm one of them, you know, some ageist as hell. But what Layne said very important is focus on the process of enjoying what you're doing. Forget about the outcome. The outcome may be beyond you, today. Jean Kittson: Well, this is expectations, isn't it? And the expectations we have on ourselves. So for instance, if you, we've been an elite athlete, like you have, your expectations of yourself must be enormous, and then you retired. How, how did you know when it was time to retire? Layne Beachley: Well. I knew because I wasn't willing to do the work outside of the water to generate the results that I expected of myself within it. If I have this expectation to perform well and win, then that has to be measured or correlated with the training, the preparation, the nutrition. All of the things that are, that need to be invested into performing my best. And I wasn't willing to do that work anymore. I was distracted. I was looking over the fence. I was craving a life outside of surfing. Knowing that I wasn't willing to do the work, I could have easily stayed there and just qualified and made up a number of the girls on tour, but that's not who I am. I perform and I prepare to perform well. I wasn't willing to do the preparation, so it was easy to make that decision. But to that point around expectation, I'm a seven times world champion. I won six in a row, but I won five in fear and two in love. And the two love-based titles were the process driven ones and the five fear-based world titles were outcome driven. So it's too easy to get stuck. And I say that because I've proven that you can succeed in both mentalities, but one costs you a lot more than the other. Jean Kittson: Yeah. Roy Sugarman: So, and that's where you find the values shift because you have to be valid and authentic as an athlete. And what you've described is how your values shifted and you became a valid and authentic version of yourself at whatever age. Which means you can do the difficult thing that's the correct thing to do. 'cause you had a choice. Layne Beachley: Right. Roy Sugarman: And when you have a choice, you choose according to your, what's valid for you. Those are your values and that gives you the psychological flexibility – competition doesn't matter so much. Being flexible and enjoying what I'm doing and the return on investment, and what it's gonna cost is a value-based decision. Layne Beachley: Right. Roy Sugarman: So if you're gonna be happy and cross the line, as we call it, right Layne Beachley: Yes. Roy Sugarman: You cross the line from being a pro to enjoying your life. [00:10:40] Layne Beachley: Can't you do both? Roy Sugarman: If you're lucky. But you know, I really love the authenticity and validity of what Layne said: I made a values-based decision. I was going to go now for the process, I loved two of those competitions 'cause I was in it for the love. Young athletes come up loving what they do, and then money or success or extrinsic motivators get there. Intrinsically, it wasn't motivating for you. You’d mastered it. Layne Beachley: Yeah. Roy Sugarman: So that sense of mastery, the idea of getting better and better at what's important to you shifted. And that's great. That's authentic. Layne Beachley: But to that point around choice, even when you say I don't have a choice, that in itself is a choice. Roy Sugarman: Yes. I choose not to choose. Layne Beachley: Yes. Jean Kittson: That's the easy way, right? Layne Beachley: Yeah. I don't have a choice. Jean Kittson: We all, I think we're all susceptible to extrinsic Layne Beachley: motivations. Jean Kittson: Do I say that? Extrinsic? Motivation and influences. And even in our everyday lives, it's very hard to sort of chill down and be true to yourself and make the choices that you want to make. We are all, even if we haven't been athletes, most people have made enormous sacrifices in their lives for their families or their partners, or maybe they've been, maybe they've had to deal with illnesses and trauma and this. So, to get to a stage in your life where you can understand yourself better, which is what I loved about hearing about your Awake Academy and hearing podcasts about how you have done a lot of work on self-awareness And how much that has informed the way you feel about yourself. You no longer when you win a game — when you win a competition, you feel like a winner. When you lose a competition, you feel like a loser. How that's gone from your life and now you're sharing that with others. And I think that's a wonderful thing you are doing. Is that giving you a lot of satisfaction. What's that bringing you? Why did you decide to do that? Layne Beachley: Well, when you become successful, as you know, (and as you know), I mean, everyone wants to know how you do it. And if you're able to deconstruct it and present it in a relatable way that people can take something from, that’s why I do it. I'm constantly doing the work on myself to then help people see themselves in me. I'm not putting myself up as the, the beacon and the light of perfection, because I'm as imperfect as you (and you) are. But what I am doing is saying I'm imperfect, but I'm also vulnerable and authentic in that, and I wanna help you become more vulnerable and authentic within yourself. So at Awake Academy, we're really inspired to help people be their best selves to live their best life. So to live your best life, you have to know who you are first. To achieve something great in the world, you have to know who you are because once you know who you are, then you can start working towards what you want. But sometimes, especially as kids, we put what we want ahead of ourselves and we lose ourselves in that. And I did that in those fear-based world titles. I won that first one and then went, okay, to be worthy of something else, I have to be more than what I am. And I lost that sense of self. And that taught me a lot about myself. So I love sharing those stories to help people feel less alone in their struggles, less isolated, less disconnected, and that they can relate to someone that they may be able to draw some knowledge and inspiration from. Because if you are getting inspiration from me, that's not me creating the inspiration in you, that's you creating the inspiration in you. And I think we put our self worth outside of ourselves too often. Jean Kittson: I think you'll provide the tools for people to manage themselves better. Which is what you do, Roy, and you are, you do it all based on the science of how humans behave and what motivates us. Roy Sugarman: Sure. Because in many ways we have a lot of similarities and differences from animals. So biologically it's quite easy to understand, and that takes the guilt away from people. The idea that when you're a young athlete and you don't get into the team or you don't succeed, I mean, Barcelona Academy will have 600 kids at any one time. None of them will play for Barcelona, apart from what their parents think, which is ‘all of them are going to play’, you know. So this expectation thing that said the drivenness to outcome, the forgetting, that self-reflection of what is valid and authentic for you is critical to the psychological flexibility of the young athletes or young medical students or young nursing students or otherwise, they start to look at suicide. We created an app a few years ago, 2017, we launched it, Time Magazine said we saved 23,000 lives. I don’t know how they got the figure, but you know… Layne Beachley: Go with it Roy Sugarman: My colleague Amanda, she, went with it, I hid! And she got under 30, you know, 30 influences of the year, and she became CEO of our startup in Delaware and everything else. The critical thing was vulnerability. We used the app to create vulnerability that people could experience without talking. They just had a swipe left and right to express vulnerability. And if you teach, vulnerability is good, that you self-reflect because every first year medical student, nursing student is taught to self-reflect on your values, what is valid and authentic. If you failed, you failed. It's okay, but did you fail on your own terms? If you left, you left on your own terms. Right? If you're going out of the door, it must be the door that you chose to leave, you know, so the crossing the line, the self-reflection that you talk about. So critical, but what are you reflecting on? What is valid and authentic for you at the time. And that's critical to an athlete mentality or success mentality. Jean Kittson: It must be critical to older people as well who have spent a life just fulfilling other people's expectations and succeeding in their business or whatever they've done without being elite athletes. I'm just trying to bring this back to what older people might experience when they retire and then suddenly they're left with themselves and looking at themselves maybe for the first time in their lives. And how are they going to deal with, how are they going to maintain a sense of self-esteem when how they valued themselves, maybe through their work or that has gone. Roy Sugarman: same with an athlete, same with an older person. It's your sense of identity. You have an athlete's identity. It's what you've been doing from four to whenever you give up. The same with being a lawyer. You started studying at 18 and you now finished at 70, and you are one of those people who goes into work, but the youngsters don't need you. So maintaining your sense, and you mentioned a very important word at the beginning of this whole thing, you said curiosity. The opposite of avoidance of all of this catastrophe of the loss of your identity is curiosity of being caught up now. Okay, What is valid and authentic for me now that I'm no longer a lawyer or a long distance athlete? As long as you true yourself, that's where the mindset comes in. That's where awake is so important – is wake up to the idea that you are not just an athlete. You are not just a lawyer, self-reflect on what's valid and authentic for you as a person, and then begin the next phase of your life. Layne Beachley: And ideally wake up to that before you become the athlete or before you become the lawyer. Roy Sugarman: Hopefully have that mindset about what is going to be your intrinsic mastery. That whole idea of getting better and better at what's important to you is critical, not what's important to the crowds or anybody. What's important to you? Now, get better at it. So human growth starts when a 72-year-old or an 80-year-old decides they're going to do a whole new and complex thing. Create the brain cell connections and off you go. Jean Kittson: Oh, so it's never too late to start a new and complex activity or interest. Roy Sugarman: You can't afford not to because you're starting that process of God's waiting room. You know, that older people tell me and when they come in miserable with highly successful lives, you know, perhaps thinking of the only one or two things they messed up. Then we go, what are you gonna do in the next five, 10, 15, 20, 30 years? Because if you can write a book like Eddie Jaku at 101, gets published in 26 languages, have your own TED talk, ageing, novel complexity. Start, go. You know why stop. Layne Beachley: Yeah. Why do we stop? Jean Kittson: Well, this is it. Is it our negative thoughts about ourselves and our capacity? Is it physical? I mean, we don't wanna break anything, that's for sure. I mean, is it purely, what is stopping us trying new things or having adventures or… Layne Beachley: Fear. Roy Sugarman: And I wanna bounce this off Layne. We have an interesting phenomenon in our brain as we compute emotions and logic separately. And emotions are stronger. When we look at a goal, we tend to see the big picture, which is overwhelming. And there are two aspects. How desirable is this change for you and what is your perceived ability and the interventions are – how desirable, love to do it; perceived ability, it's too hard, it's too big, it's gonna be too difficult. What happened to baby steps? What happened to micro goals? So the answer is we get this ambivalence. The clash between ‘I would really love to do it but it’s gonna be too hard. I'm too old.’ But what about the desirability? Well look at the emotional drivers, not the rational ones: I'm too old. The emotional ones: ‘I'd really love to do this’ (process based, might never get there). And second of all, your perceived ability is based on age? No, it's based on smaller goals that you can achieve all the way to the big one. So if I decide I'm gonna play Wimbledon next year, at 72. You'd say you're an idiot. On the other hand, if it's process based… Layne Beachley: Can you play tennis? Roy Sugarman: Not a chance, but I'll get a coach Layne Beachley: Then I think you're crazy. Roy Sugarman: I'll get a coach, I'll go every day and whatever else. Layne Beachley: Yeah. Roy Sugarman: And by the end of the year I'll be playing at a club maybe. Layne Beachley: Mm-hmm. Roy Sugarman: I'll be playing with other people and beating them, and I'll be loving tennis. I'm never getting to Wimbledon, but the process is gonna be great. Layne Beachley: Process will be the same too. Roy Sugarman: The goal's irrelevant, the process. Layne Beachley: But if we get ahead of ourselves. And I'd actually love to ask you a question about this. So, when we set these goals for ourselves, sometimes they can be more audacious than others. So perhaps we set ourselves a big goal, such as becoming a world champion at something. And there I think there's two trains of, there's two modes of motivation. There's of course the extrinsic and the intrinsic motivation. The extrinsic motivation can be a force of fear to a degree. Roy Sugarman: Yes. Layne Beachley: Right. So if I think about athletes who have a fear of failure versus athletes that have a fear of success, the outcome in my mentality, and you are the trained psychologist here, so you might be able to help me here, understand this even better. The outcome, the associated outcome of success is so scary that they end up sabotaging themselves. I had a fear of success. Fortunately, what you fear, you attract. Roy Sugarman: Yes. Layne Beachley: So I was, but I became aware of it so it no longer governed my behaviours versus the fear of failure, which gives us reason to just stop. Roy Sugarman: Yes. Layne Beachley: Because we've convinced ourselves over and over and over again that we're never gonna make it. So is the lesson here for anyone at any age when they hit that point of tension? That they become curious in that moment. And so what's the best question that they can ask themselves to step forward? Roy Sugarman: Why not me? The problem is we all have some kind of an image of ourselves and Scott Peltin from Tignum and I had this discussion for years in Arizona. We all have an image of ourselves. And to succeed, we have to exceed that image. We have to go past the image. As we do that, we become anxious. And elite athletes, as you’ll know, waiting for the right wave, you know, counting all of those, everybody catching their waves, you know, waiting and going through that first heat. Then you've got the second heat. You know, you're so close to success, the fear. The idea is the first question is, why not me? Because other people do it, and other people might always be more talented, quicker, whatever. But you have to exceed your own image to succeed. And every time you do that, every time you challenge yourself, you need to be curious about how anxious you're gonna be. 'Cause every change and every growth comes with anxiety. That's where you go for what's valid. I'm going to be curious just about how anxious this makes me. Then live with it and see. That means psychological flexibility, staying in the moment, being curious about the moment and not worrying about the outcome anymore. Jean Kittson: Not worrying, being vulnerable, taking a chance, you know, dispel fear as well. Roy Sugarman: Fear is natural, the fear of success, that fear of exceeding your image. The fear of most of the athletes I've trained will never win a gold medal. Not even come close to a medal at the Olympics and have been four times and loved every second of it. Even the cardboard beds! Whatever, whatever it is, why not me? If you want to change careers, if you want to become this, you wanna do that. We have the children headed for HSC and we say, well. So you don't get a great HSC. You can get into any course, you want to just go and do another degree and do well at it. Jean Kittson: Exactly. Roy Sugarman: Do something you enjoy and love. So the critical thing is you get older. There is no point going to a bootcamp that you're going to hate, where some young blonde, spray tan person with who counts your reps and and has a mobile phone available to prompt them with AI as to what you should be doing. They should be watching you very carefully. Do you love the exercise? Do you love what you're gonna do? Because if you love it, you're probably good at it. And if you're good at it, you probably love it. So now that you've finished your career, now that you've finished your whatever, and you crossed the line, why not you? The answer is be curious as to what this is going to demand from you. Do the difficult thing that's the right thing to do because you have a choice. The easy thing: not gonna work. Jean Kittson: What would you say to people whose family may say, ‘you shouldn't do this, Mum!’ Or ‘you shouldn't do this Dad,’ or ‘you are too old for this.’ What would you say to people who have external pressures about helping, about trying something new? Layne Beachley: Why not me? Jean Kittson: Yes, same. Layne Beachley: I have plenty of people in my family and friends circle that say that to me. Roy Sugarman: You should be slowing down. Layne Beachley: Yeah, of course. Jean Kittson: What do you mean? Layne Beachley: Well, you're too old for this, or you shouldn't be doing that. Roy Sugarman: Or you should slow down. You should slow down. The reason is they're scared for you. Layne Beachley: Yeah. Roy Sugarman: So they're trying to stop you doing what would make you happy, which is to be curious and take risks. Layne Beachley: Yeah. They're projecting their fears onto you. They're trying to protect themselves, not you. Jean Kittson: Well of course they don't wanna be a carer of someone. You know, in a wheelchair, if you jumped out of a plane or… No. Jump out of a plane. I know it sounds, you know, I wouldn't do it, but people love it. Layne Beachley: I love it. It's great fun. Roy Sugarman: If it was burning, I'd jump, but… Jean Kittson: Yeah! Roy Sugarman: But think you've gotta be positive. Layne was in a boot for quite a while. That means she could float better. You know, you could float if you came off the board I on that board Layne Beachley: I never surfed in a boot! Never swam in it either. Roy Sugarman: A flotation device. Layne Beachley: Yeah, don't need a flotation device! Roy Sugarman: So yeah, just think of fear and human fear and what it might be based on. And that self-reflection is, ‘what am I scared of? What am I afraid of? What have I got to lose?’ As you get older and older, you might feel that you have a lot to lose, that you are more vulnerable. But that's not true. Layne Beachley: Why isn't it true? Roy Sugarman: Why are you more vulnerable? You're more vulnerable to risk taking because of expectations of what people do because of ageism, because ‘old people don't do that’. Roy Sugarman: But, you know, the thing is about getting old and not doing things is, the excuses are like, ‘why don't we ride a bicycle?’ Well, I don't have a bicycle. Layne Beachley: Yeah. Roy Sugarman: Or I'm scared I might fall off or whatever else. So the critical reason is ‘why not me, is this valid and authentic for me?’ Because that will bolster your being older and ageing so-called gracefully. Yes, you are running against biology, you're running against everything. But the most critical thing is your mindset of what is authentic and valid for you, not for the next 72-year-old. Because by that nature I should not be, you know, running to Bondi 8kms there and back up hill, which I hate, but my dog loves it. So yeah. Jean Kittson: Well, keeping curiosity and challenges in your life is so important because we're always learning and otherwise, as you said, we're just waiting. What are we waiting for: the end. But when you said about fear, that is really important because it translates to so many different aspects of the lives of people as they get older, including, I always hear, you know, the family saying ‘oh, my mum doesn't want any help around the house, and, and I know she needs help.’ But that comes from fear too, that it's a thin edge of the wedge. If you let someone come in and help you with the washing up, it means that you're not coping and then, then your family will put you in a home. That's the outcome. You know, that's a big fear that you will lose your autonomy. But in this way, it sounds like to maintain your autonomy and your independence and maintain your confidence, it's important to have challenges and challenge yourself and make your own decisions. Layne Beachley: And being realistic about what those challenges are. Jean Kittson: Yes, Roy Sugarman: Because avoidance, the opposite of curiosity is avoidance. And avoidance is staying safe. But staying safe means learning nothing. We learn nothing from success. You learn from the times you fall off the board. Layne Beachley: I learned a little bit about success, from success. Roy Sugarman: I've never had any, so how would I know? Layne Beachley: Wow, rubbish. It's funny that you know that you say you learn nothing from success. I learned a lot from success, but learning how to lose taught me how to win. Roy Sugarman: Yes, Layne Beachley: And it's those failures that we fear as we get older because of a variety of different reasons. Yet if we maintain our sense of curiosity in those moments, then we get to ask ourselves, is it valid and is it authentic to me? So when I came outta the water last weekend, having failed, in my eyes, because I did not perform the way I wanted to perform, I was able to detach from that and just ask myself, is this still a valid and authentic place that I wanna be? Is this still a valuable and authentic environment that I wanna subject myself to? Jean Kittson: Yeah. Do you want to feel like you failed? Layne Beachley: Well, no, it's not about feeling like, is it still, do I keep competing, right? Jean Kittson: Yes. Layne Beachley: Yeah. Because failure is the stepping stone to success. Failure is the necessary part because understanding how you adapt and approach failure enables you to embrace success. But if we don't take the failures in our stride, then we stop trying and we stop putting ourselves, we stop it. We stop taking risks. Roy Sugarman: And being realistic is testing that. Layne Beachley: Yes. Yeah. Roy Sugarman: That curiosity is, I'm going to test and see if my daughter's right and I shouldn't be doing that. You know, I'm gonna test those limits, which is again, Scott Peltin's view of exceeding your own image is important. It comes with anxiety; living with that is the curiosity. Are we going to test those limits and see, because we don't know what we don't know. And if we do know, or you know, Lang’s dictum or whoever it was: if you don’t know you don't know, you think you do know. And if you don't know you do know, you think you don't! Layne Beachley: Yeah. Roy Sugarman: So test it and find out what you know about yourself, which [00:31:00] is that critical self-evaluation again. And then ask, ‘well, why not me? I'm going to test that.’ Layne Beachley: Jean, is there something that you are wanting to do that you're fearful of stepping into? Jean Kittson: Everything probably. Well there's something I've always wanted to do, and then I always swore I'd do it by the time I was 40 and then I didn't, and now I'm 70, and now I think it's probably too late. But I've always, but it may not be. I've always wanted to sculpt. I love doing things with my hands Layne Beachley: As in clay, sculpting? Jean Kittson: As in I think I would probably start with Clay and then move on to sort of ten storey bronzes. I dunno, I'd start small. Layne Beachley: Why do you think it's too late? Jean Kittson: I feel like I have lost capacity in like physical Layne Beachley: Oh, Jean Kittson: I feel like it's a physical thing, not a mental thing. I know what I would sculpt Layne Beachley: Right. Jean Kittson: I know what I would do, but I can, I feel like I couldn't do it physically and that's sad, because I… sculpture moves me when I see sculpture, I'm moved. But then it might be like, I do it and then I don't, I don't get moved except to tears. What a mess. You know? I suppose I'm scared of failing too. Layne Beachley: Ah, so Roy Sugarman: Well let's turn that around and say sculpting is going to strengthen your hands. Jean Kittson: Well, that would be good. I'm getting a little bit of arthritis. Roy Sugarman: Good. So you need to use your hands. Movement is really good for arthritis and clay, and then work your way to Italian marble and really terrorise yourself. Jean Kittson: Yes, just be a Michelangelo. That would be amazing. Layne Beachley: So as a psychologist, if Jean was sitting opposite you in your room, and she's telling you this story… Roy Sugarman: She has an image of the strength of her hands she hasn't tested, she hasn't been curious about testing her hands. I would get you to test the strength of your hands and to increase the strength of your hands and your range of movement, and deal with the arthritis and strengthen everything, and then get busy with clay. Why not? Layne Beachley: Because the first thing that I think about, yeah, it's all about me, is that I wanted to build the strength in my body again because menopause stripped me of my strength and I surrendered to menopause and just went, oh, that's my deal. Done. And then I thought, I wanna get strong. I need to go back to the gym. And going back to the gym terrified me because I didn't know what to do. Jean Kittson: Yes. Layne Beachley: I've always had a personal trainer. Jean Kittson: Yeah. Layne Beachley: So I rang a friend and said, I need a personal trainer. And then, I was afraid to fail in front of my personal trainer, but I was also afraid to feel weak, but I thought to feel strong, I have to embrace the fact that I am weaker right now, but if I keep doing the thing and showing up and building my capacity, then I will become stronger over time. Jean Kittson: Yeah. Layne Beachley: Same thing with your hands. Jean Kittson: Not look at the big picture. Yes. Because that's the other thing, you're afraid that what I make is not what I have in my mind. Layne Beachley: Yes. Right. But you can make it over time. Jean Kittson: Yes. Layne Beachley: But detach, as Roy said… Jean Kittson: maybe it's not important. Maybe the process is what we've been talking. Roy Sugarman: You'll find that out in the process. Jean Kittson: I'll find it out if I just do it. Just do it. Roy Sugarman: Why not you? Why not you? Jean Kittson: Yeah, why not? Layne Beachley: We're gonna ring a sculptor tomorrow. We're gonna get you booked in. Jean Kittson: Oh, I just had this, I felt like my heart just jumped into my throat! Roy Sugarman: Shows you how important it is to, to become that creative and see something growing outside of you and being able to change it. Jean Kittson: Manipulate it Roy Sugarman: Create a vision of what it should be. And you know, I mean, Michelangelo took, you know, this horrible piece of marble that somebody threw out and he saw David in it. Jean Kittson: Well, thank you so much for that encouragement. alright. I think I'll do it. I'll report back. Yeah. Layne Beachley: Please do. We'd love to, I wanna see the sculpture. Because if you think about the audience that's listening, they're probably saying, well, you know, it's all right for those two. You know, they've gone on and achieved greatness. Yeah. What about people who have predominantly lived a stagnant life or haven't really achieved anything that they consider to be big or audacious or great? Jean Kittson: I would say, first of all, I'll just challenge you on the word stagnant because most people live lives that have a whole lot going on. Layne Beachley: Yes, that's true Jean Kittson: All the time. Layne Beachley: Thank you. Jean Kittson: And dealing with lots of stuff. Layne Beachley: No such thing as stagnant. Jean Kittson: Yeah. Layne Beachley: No, not if you're still alive. You're not, you're not being stagnant. Jean Kittson: But it's a really good word because people encourage you to stagnation as you get older. Yes. They'll give you all these facts about what you can't do any longer or you shouldn't, and your bones and your brain and your reactions. So you're constantly getting this negative thing about ageing. You're not actually getting a lot of positive things, you know, facts where you are, you know, Roy, you've got all the facts and evidence. All the evidence seems to be, we should embrace ageing and just, you know, behave our age and sit down and be conversational and put your feet up and wear a dressing gown and listen to marching bands or something. You know, like… Roy Sugarman: I have three things to say to that - poo poo poo. Layne Beachley: Okay. Roy Sugarman: You know, heaven for forbid. Because yeah, the stereotyping and everybody's different. Everybody's life is different. Some people come to me at the end of their working careers and say, I don't believe I've achieved anything, and everything else, and everything else. So the issue’s across the lifespan – and the rot starts early – is to decide, especially you mentioned earlier, athletes or any human being, decide what's important to you. Self-reflect. It can change from minute to minute, hour to hour in a day, but if you're not being authentic and valid with yourself, you're gonna land up in the psychologist rooms, anxious or miserable. The first question I ask them is, ‘what's valid and authentic?’ Because when you get miserable after a life of maybe not doing much, what are you really saying is that what happened throughout your life wasn't valid for you, it wasn't authentic for you, and now you are old and you are Kentucky Fried Chicken Kernel Saunders at 65, and you are gonna make chicken. Well, Mrs. Fields’s husband has walked out the door and she's gonna make cookies. $400 million worth of cookies, you know? So the whole idea is if you are in that stasis, let's call it stasis, rather than… Layne Beachley: Yeah. I love that, statis Jean Kittson: Yes. Stasis. Roy Sugarman: Nice word from stagnation. Yes. And if you're not as spritely, bounding around beautifully being spritely, then think about the fact that it's never too late to go and look at what is valid and authentic and what isn't. Then have the courage to commit yourself to a committed life from that moment on. Give you a quick example, and have a client who is a great scientist. He was nominated for Nobel Prizes. God knows what, 84 years old decided it was time to die because all he wanted to do was play the violin [00:38:00] and he was good at it. So we found this bus in Israel that travels around to schools, introducing kids to classical music, the whole orchestra of old people like him. He spent the last nine years of his life doing that, playing to kids and nevermind his organic chemistry. It was never valid and authentic for him. Layne Beachley: What chemistry? Roy Sugarman: No, his whole life wasn't valid and authentic, but the violin or photography or people [in their] 70s start painting and yes, actually paint beautifully. So why not? Layne Beachley: I feel that the beauty in this conversation is inspiring people to embrace the challenge of embracing their passion and connecting with what that is. Then giving themselves permission to explore that. Without the expectation to be the best in it or to be great at it. And perhaps, you know, in childhood and trauma is trauma, pain is pain. We've all experienced moments within our childhood that are still playing out to this day. And if we can start to learn to tap into what those stories are, and there's about seven or eight of them that we keep coming back to, then we can start to disengage from them and detach from them and start to write a different story. But if we're allowing old behavioural patterns from childhood to dictate who we are today as an adult, then we are missing out the chance, we are delaying the opportunity to embrace those passions. And the number one regret of the dying is I wish I had the courage to live a life that I love. Roy Sugarman: And that means embracing a narrative that is your narrative. Not your kids, your family, whatever. You tell your own story and you make that story go where you want. It's your narrative, it's your story. And if the story of your last 50 years wasn't good enough, tell another story. Layne Beachley: Yes. Roy Sugarman: And that storytelling of the beginning and the middle and the end is yours to decide. So the courage and curiosity and exceeding the image that is the old story, why not? This is living. Jean Kittson: I feel that if you don't sort of confront your fears, either physical or emotional, psychological or spiritual, existential. If you don't confront them, then you're going to live a fearful life, and that's going to really limit you. And it's probably going to impact your family too, because as you get older, you may be a grandparent and you may have great influence on your grandchildren. You might have already made all your mistakes with your children, but it's never too late to learn about yourself and how… a better way of living. Layne Beachley: Well, fears are valid too. Roy Sugarman: Yeah, fears are valid and they're acceptable and they're part of life. And there are warning signs like pain, pain and fear, all the same thing. These are warning signs, but we don't have to necessarily live our lives according to them. Just think of pain: 30% is dealt with by medication. 70% is psychosocial. So the reason psychologists deal with pain is we've got a 70% window there to help someone get away from chronic pain. 30% is medication, 70% according to [Rachel] Zoffness and other researchers. 70% is the interaction with another human being that normalises the pain and anxiety and the sadness into the here and now. Now that you have the pain, accept it. What now becomes critical? However, your value shifted. What's important to you now? That's self-reflection. Again, what is important to me, given these circumstances. Yes. You're afraid I'm not worried about that. Jean Kittson: Well, that's great to, yeah. Not worried about fear. Not to be fearful of fear. Well, fear… Roy Sugarman: We have, yes Jean Kittson: Yes Roy Sugarman: Yes. Best statement by an American president. If you're afraid of fear, you are paralyzed. You are static. Jean Kittson: The other thing, I suppose for older people, and I keep saying older people later, life probably is, you know, I could say… Layne Beachley: Mature? Can you say that? Jean Kittson: Mature people. Layne Beachley: Yeah. What is the term? Jean Kittson: Well, some of us are mature! I like these… Those of us in later life maybe, rather than older because we don't feel it, is how to maintain a sense of purpose. And I know you speak about purpose being, I think I heard you, but please tell me it's values and people with the same values in your life. Roy Sugarman: That use mastery, like mindedness and growth. Jean Kittson: And growth. And that gives you purpose. Roy Sugarman: Yes. That's the model for the state of California, which is the thing we defend most, is the idea that what we do makes a difference. If we embark on actions that have no outcome for us at all, and we don't enjoy the process, then mastery disappears and a sense of autonomy disappears. So you can define purpose as this progressive realisation of ‘what I do makes a difference surrounded by people who have the same values as me.’ But the guiding, what is this autonomy? It's around the things that matter to me. So that defines your purpose, right. Layne Beachley: So values mastery Roy Sugarman: Like-mindedness, like-mindedness, you need people around you. You need your squad who think the same way, need your dreams as you do dreams. You need your team, your squad, you know? Layne Beachley: And it was course growth. Growth, of course. Roy Sugarman: Yes. Mastery getting better and better at what matters to you, Layne Beachley: Right? But if what matters to you is being comfortable, how do you grow in that state? Roy Sugarman: Well, you get really good at being comfortable, Layne Beachley: But if being comfortable is eating food that's not great and sitting on the couch and binge-watching television until like… People give up on life, as they get older. Roy Sugarman: They do the easy things. They do the easy that are the wrong things to do because they don't understand they have a choice, Layne Beachley: Right Roy Sugarman: When we get people who are miserable, depressed, whatever, we have to then motivate them. In other words, as you said, inspire some drive in them. But what it is is emotional. So we work on emotional drivers for someone like that. They have to find, you know, the why and then they can get the how. But it's not something we give them. We are just visiting people's lives. When they change, it is on their own terms. So we help them tell a story, and in that story, they become the hero who gets off the couch, who stops eating for the most part. They have to find that purpose driven by values. So we help them with values. We help them to make the argument. I can't make the argument for them. I'm just visiting people's lives. Layne Beachley: You're just providing the framework. Roy Sugarman: Yep. I paint a frame and they do the artwork themselves. Layne Beachley: They do the art. Jean Kittson: So can you actually, I was, because I was going to ask you, what would you say to people to help motivate them who are thinking of trying a new venture or adventure? The trying to challenge themselves. What would you say to people who were overcome with: I can't do this. What would each of you say? Layne Beachley: I'd like to hear the psychologist for this first. Roy Sugarman: So think of the big picture. I take them out of the big picture immediately, because if you're getting older, the big picture is not a good one. If you're going to look at it because you all go out the same way. Okay. So the whole idea is don't look at the big picture. When you're young. You can look at big pictures 'cause it seems endless. As you get older. You need to look at smaller and smaller bites of pictures, which will still get you. To the big picture. But if you look at the big picture, your own emotional sense of being overwhelmed comes in quickly. I want this, but it's too hard. Technically, ambivalence. So when they're sitting in my room, obviously they're not happy. When they are happy, well, I don't see them. I leave them alone. Layne Beachley: They leave you alone. Roy Sugarman: Yeah. But obviously, people come when what's happening in their life is not valid for them. And then we have that discussion of, ‘okay, what's gonna be important for you now?’ But don't look at the big picture. It's overwhelming and that sense of self-efficacy, that what I do makes a difference – Bandura 1952, whatever it was – that feeling of loss of control, of loss of self-efficacy is the scary thing that we have to address. Because then you're not living life according to values; other people's values are driving you and it's not working. Layne Beachley: And if you've lived your whole life according to other people's values, because you're conforming to fit in to belong, which is what our biggest driving force is with every one of us. We wanna belong. We wanna feel safe. If you don't feel safe, then you're gonna continuously find ways to manufacture or create that environment for yourself. Jean Kittson: Safety. Layne Beachley: Safety. Jean Kittson: Yeah. Which might be closing the door. Layne Beachley: It might, I mean, it could be Jean Kittson: Isolating yourself sometimes Layne Beachley: Yes. And sometimes we all need to Roy Sugarman: It’s avoidance. Layne Beachley: Yeah. It's avoidance. Yeah. Unless you're an introvert. Roy Sugarman: Which is good avoidance. Layne Beachley: But, I mean, everything comes at a cost, right? Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. And I look at, for example, my professional surfing career as when I reflect on those world title campaigns, the cost of doing, of winning world titles with an outcome focused mentality was significant. To the point now I'm in my fifties in constant pain management because I didn't listen. The body whispers before it screams, and my body was screaming and I still wasn't tuning in because I had this ‘must win at all cost’ mentality. And that's what cost us our joy, our connection, our sense of belonging, our sense of self, our health, our wellbeing. I compromised, I sacrificed it because the outcome was more important to me than my health and wellbeing. My ability to actually achieve the goal was put second. So to this, so to Roy's point about being really clear around who you are and getting outta the outcome driven mentality and just asking yourself what's valuable to me, that's the gold right there. Roy Sugarman: And when you look at that big picture that I mentioned earlier, and what you've just said is so critical with every elite person and every ordinary person, when you look at the big picture, what you're seeing is the sacrifices you would have to make. Layne Beachley: Yes. Roy Sugarman: And that can be really daunting Layne Beachley: Overwhelming Roy Sugarman: And that's where your negative emotions come in and you go, that's gonna be too hard. And that's where meaning and values and emotional drivers come in. Because if I'm going to sacrifice, if I'm going to give up things. I love for something I love more, I better be clear on why I'm doing it. Jean Kittson: It's really never too late. I mean, that's the point. There's no, what I'm getting from both of you with the science and the experience, there's no expiry date on pushing ourselves, challenging ourselves. And certainly it'll give us an expiry date if we don't maintain our curiosity and if we don't go out there and, and be true to ourselves. So I feel like we've just had the most amazing therapy session. I’ve really valued your experience and your expertise, both of you. And thank you for talking, speaking with us all today. Is there anything else you would like to say to add to this, something for the listeners… Is there anything that you would like to say? Layne Beachley: One last thing I'd like to say, one last piece of advice would be don't let the old person creep in. Jean Kittson: Yes. That's such a great expression. I love that expression. Roy Sugarman: I saw a video of a 95-year-old choreographer from New York. She said, if you give old age an inch, it takes all of you. And then they said to her, when you're gonna retire, she says, when it's a non-shockable rhythm. Jean Kittson: That's fantastic. That's really fantastic. Roy Sugarman: So thank you so much for having me. Certainly. And Jean Kittson: Thank you. Layne Beachley: Thank you Roy Roy Sugarman: Fantastic to have you, Layne. Jean Kittson: Thank you Dr. Roy Sugarman, and thank you Layne Beachley. Layne Beachley: Thank you, Jane Kittson. Jean Kittson: Thank you to this week's guests, Layne Beachley and Dr Roy Sugarman. You've been listening to DARE: The time of your life, brought to you by Australian seniors. Please leave a review and share this show with someone you know. Visit seniors.com.au/podcast for more episodes. May your life be DARING. I'm Jean Kittson.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Yesterday was media day at the gorgeous, brand-spanking new CarMax Park in Richmond. And, while taking in the beautiful new digs, I got to speak with players Maui Ahuna and Scott Bandura, and the long-time manager of the Flying Squirrels, Dennis Pelfrey, about the upcoming season. Enjoy!* Maui Ahuna (3:45)* Scott Bandura (11:40)* Dennis Pelfrey (21:30)There R Giants is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit rogermunter.substack.com/subscribe

Send us Fan MailMotivation isn't missing—it's miswired. We dive into a practical, humane way to rebuild drive by treating motivation as a system you can design, not a feeling you wait to feel. Drawing on decades of NLP practice, we unpack why willpower fizzles, how vague goals quietly sabotage action, and what to change when progress plateaus. Along the way, we contrast corporate SMART goals with a richer approach that connects outcomes to values, identity, and clear sensory language your brain can actually use.We break down eight structural elements that move people from stuck to steady: well-formed outcomes, criteria and values that supply the emotional “why,” beliefs that either unlock or block capability, and metaprograms like move away versus move toward, options versus procedures, and internal versus external reference. You'll hear how the Bandura curve explains early wins, mid-journey stalls, and the identity shift required to break through. We also explore the biology underneath motivation—stress, sleep, nutrition, and dopamine—and how to engineer small wins and anchors so hard tasks feel lighter and momentum returns.Then we tune the challenge-skill balance to find flow, use reframing to turn setbacks into guidance, and edit submodalities—the brightness, distance, and sound of your inner pictures—to make goals feel compelling instead of abstract. The result is a repeatable blueprint: align your outcomes with what you value, install beliefs that support who you are becoming, match strategy to your patterns, and let feedback refine your route. If you're ready to replace push with pull and build resilience that survives real life, this conversation will give you the tools to start today.Enjoying the show? Subscribe, share with a friend who needs a motivation reset, and leave a quick review to help others find us. Contact use for additional help at susan@nlptrainingconcepts.comSupport the show

Have you ever watched a client fall off track and chalked it up to a lack of motivation? What if that's not actually what's going on?Clients who can't seem to stick to the plan might have nothing to do with motivation and everything to do with this: lack of discomfort tolerance. The process of behavior change requires staying resilient when things get uncomfortable, and this is something coaches are almost never taught how to help their clients build. Until now.In this episode, Dr. Kasey Jo Orvidas breaks down the real reason clients struggle to stick to the plan and shares practical strategies coaches can start using right away. She covers:Why clients don't struggle because they don't know what to do (they struggle because they can't tolerate the discomfort that comes with doing it)The research behind self-efficacy, stress mindset, and psychological flexibility and why it all matters for behavior change5 coaching strategies to build discomfort tolerance, including urge surfing, stress reappraisal, and reflective debriefingThe coaching mistakes that accidentally keep clients stuckIf you want to help clients push through the hard stuff and actually see results that last, this episode is for you. Connect with me on Instagram! Grab 5 Free Lessons in Mindset and Behavior Change Coaching [HMCC WAITLIST]LEAVE A REVIEW, WIN A WORKSHOP! After you leave your review, take a screenshot and upload it to this form to be entered to winWant me to answer your questions on my next Q&A episode? Drop your questions here!Sources:Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The Exercise of Control.Feltz, D. L. (1982). Path analysis of the causal elements in Bandura's theory of self-efficacy and an anxiety-based model of avoidance behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.Jamieson, J. P., Mendes, W. B., Blackstock, E., & Schmader, T. (2010). Turning the knots in your stomach into bows: Reappraising arousal improves performance on the GRE. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(1), 208–212. Crum, A. J., Salovey, P., & Achor, S. (2013).Rethinking stress: The role of mindsets in determining the stress response. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(4), 716–733.

The Paradox Of Prophetic Rejection © 2026 ISBN 978-976-97826-5-5ABSTRACTOver the years I have discovered that my cognitive Influences on Writing and Communication as a writer, cultural theorist, podcaster, media arts specialist, and doctor of divinity was shaped by several key factors. These include Cognitive Process Theory, which highlights the mental processes behind writing, such as stylistic imitation and curiosity about text structure (Smith, 2003). Social Cognitive Theory emphasizes the role of social contexts in writing development, suggesting that cultural norms and values influence how individuals interpret and create written works (Bandura, 1986). Additionally, Cultural Contexts play a significant role in shaping social cognition, affecting how individuals approach social interactions and relationships based on the values of their respective cultures (Gergen, 2009). Lastly, Analytic vs. Holistic Thinking suggests that cognitive styles vary across cultures, with analytic thinking often associated with Western cultures and holistic thinking more common in collectivist societies (Nisbett, 2003). Together, these factors form the cognitive frameworks that influence writing, theorizing, and communication in these professional fields.Dr.William Anderson Gittens, D.D.ReferencesAesop. (n.d.). Aesop's Fables. Retrieved from https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/11339Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall.Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall.Barclay, W. (1975). The Gospel of Matthew. The Daily Study Bible Series. Westminster John Knox Press.Brown, R. E. (1993). The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. Doubleday.Chaucer, G. (c. 1386). Tale of Melibee. In The Canterbury Tales (trans. Nevill Coghill, 2003). Penguin Classics.Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press.Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press.Gergen, K. J. (2009). An invitation to social construction (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.Gergen, K. J. (2009). An invitation to social construction. Sage Publications.Gittens, W. A. (2023). The paradox of prophetic rejection: Familiarity, honor, and human psychology in Matthew 13:57. In Cognitive Influences on Writing and Communication (pp. 1–27). Doctoral dissertation, University of XYZ.Ladd, G. E. (1959). The Gospel of the Kingdom: Scriptural Studies in the Kingdom of God. Harper & Row.Matthew 13:57. (n.d.). New International Version. BibleGateSupport the showCultural Factors Influence Academic Achievements© 2024 ISBN978-976-97385-7-7 A_MEMOIR_OF_Dr_William_Anderson_Gittens_D_D_2024_ISBNISBN978_976_97385_0_8 Academic.edu. Chief of Audio Visual Aids Officer Mr. Michael Owen Chief of Audio Visual Aids Officer Mr. Selwyn Belle Commissioner of Police Mr. Orville Durant Dr. William Anderson Gittens, D.D En.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lifelong_learning Hackett Philip Media Resource Development Officer Holder, B,Anthony Episcopal Priest, https://brainly.com/question/36353773 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lifelong_learning#cite_note-19 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lifelong_learning#cite_note-:2-18 https://independent.academia.edu/WilliamGittens/Books https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=william+anderson+gittens+barbados&oq=william+anderson+gittens https://www.academia.edu/123754463/ https://www.buzzsprout.com/429292/episodes. https://www.youtube.com/@williamandersongittens1714. Mr.Greene, Rupert

High performers are getting trapped in a modern loop of overdoing + cortisol + information overload, chasing “biohacks” while skipping the inner foundation (hope, self-worth, presence) and the recovery that makes performance sustainable. Dr. James Rouse's work in this episode is about reclaiming control: building purpose-driven rituals, creating contrast (hard effort + deep rest), and protecting nervous-system regulation so you can perform better without burning out. In today's conversation James Rouse explores why hope isn't passive—it's a personal responsibility you practice daily. He and Dr. Wells unpack the physiology of overdoing (especially living on cortisol), and why sustainable high performance depends on contrast: peak effort paired with deep rest. James shares practical frameworks—“do the one thing,” build self-efficacy, start your day inside (heart coherence before the phone), and close your day with rituals that help you land and recover. You will learn… • How James defines hope as an “inclination of possibility” you choose and cultivate. • Why “biohacking” only works when it's built on self-love, intention, and responsibility (not shortcuts). • A simple performance strategy: do one thing, witness it, and build self-efficacy (Bandura-style). • The “contrast lifestyle” idea: peak performance + deep rest, plus hot/cold and recovery practices. • James' real-world morning and evening bookends (heart coherence first; “landing” routine + self-recognition). You will discover that your best performance doesn't start with more intensity—it starts with more regulation. When you protect peace and presence first, the physiology of focus, energy, and recovery becomes much easier to access. One big challenge this episode solves: This episode helps the listener stop living in the “35–80% zone” of constant effort and constant stimulation—and instead build a repeatable rhythm of all-in effort followed by real recovery, so performance climbs while stress load drops.

In this special episode of Psych Sessions, hosts Eric Landrum and Garth Neufeld sit down with the legendary psychologist Albert Bandura at his home in Stanford, California. At 94, Bandura reflects on his groundbreaking work in observational learning, the famous Bobo doll experiments, and the development of key concepts like self-regulation, agency, and moral disengagement. The conversation delves into Bandura's personal journey from humble beginnings in Canada to becoming one of the most influential figures in psychology Note: Portions of the show notes were generated by Descript AI.

Tem palavra que funciona como anestesia. Suaviza o impacto, alivia a consciência e permite que a gente siga em frente sem encarar o estrago. Albert Bandura chamou isso de linguagem eufemística: trocar o nome das coisas para facilitar o desengajamento moral. Invasão vira ocupação. Censura vira regulação. Abuso vira interpretação. Neste Cafezinho, a provocação é simples e desconfortável: quando você muda a palavra, o fato muda mesmo — ou só o seu conforto? Porque sociedades só começam a se recuperar quando param de se enganar. Começando pelas palavras. MUNDO CAFÉ BRASIL: https://mundocafebrasil.com Curso Merdades e Ventiras - Como se proteger da mídia que faz sua cabeça? https://merdadeseventiras.com.br/curso/ Conheça o Podcast Café com Leite: https://portalcafebrasil.com.br/todos/cafe-com-leite/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lucianopires/ Para conhecer minhas palestras: https://lucianopires.com.br Vem dar uma olhada na nossa loja: https://lucianopires.com.br/loja Edição e animação: Daniel Pires ....................................................................................................................................................................

Tem palavra que funciona como anestesia. Suaviza o impacto, alivia a consciência e permite que a gente siga em frente sem encarar o estrago. Albert Bandura chamou isso de linguagem eufemística: trocar o nome das coisas para facilitar o desengajamento moral. Invasão vira ocupação. Censura vira regulação. Abuso vira interpretação. Neste Cafezinho, a provocação é simples e desconfortável: quando você muda a palavra, o fato muda mesmo — ou só o seu conforto? Porque sociedades só começam a se recuperar quando param de se enganar. Começando pelas palavras. MUNDO CAFÉ BRASIL: https://mundocafebrasil.com Curso Merdades e Ventiras - Como se proteger da mídia que faz sua cabeça? https://merdadeseventiras.com.br/curso/ Conheça o Podcast Café com Leite: https://portalcafebrasil.com.br/todos/cafe-com-leite/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lucianopires/ Para conhecer minhas palestras: https://lucianopires.com.br Vem dar uma olhada na nossa loja: https://lucianopires.com.br/loja Edição e animação: Daniel Pires ....................................................................................................................................................................

Application pour EV0360 : https://hlperformance.caRéférences scientifiques :Bandura, A. (1997). Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. W. H. Freeman.Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1998). On the Self-Regulation of Behavior. Cambridge University Press.Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “What” and “Why” of Goal Pursuits. Psychological Inquiry.Diamond, A. (2013). Executive Functions. Annual Review of Psychology.Fuster, J. M. (2015). The Prefrontal Cortex. Academic Press.Powers, W. T. (1973). Behavior: The Control of Perception. Aldine.Seligman, M. E. P. (1975). Learned Helplessness. W. H. Freeman.

Welcome to the Social-Engineer Podcast: The Doctor Is In Series – where we will discuss understandings and developments in the field of psychology.   In today's episode, Chris and Dr. Abbie explore cognitive dissonance, focusing on its impact on self-concept and emotional regulation. They discuss how dissonance occurs when actions conflict with core beliefs, creating psychological tension. Emphasizing self-awareness and reflection, they warn against rationalizing harmful behaviors and highlight the importance of embracing discomfort for personal growth and identity development. [Dec 1, 2025]     00:00 - Intro 00:26 - Dr. Abbie Maroño Intro 00:43 - Intro Links -          Social-Engineer.com - http://www.social-engineer.com/ -          Offensive Security Vishing Services - https://www.social-engineer.com/offensive-security/vishing/ -          Offensive Security SMiShing Services - https://www.social-engineer.com/offensive-security/smishing/ -          Offensive Security Phishing Services - https://www.social-engineer.com/offensive-security/smishing/ -          Call Back Phishing - https://www.social-engineer.com/offensive-security/call-back-phishing/ -          Adversarial Simulation Services - https://www.social-engineer.com/offensive-security/adversarial-simulation/ -          Social Engineering Risk Assessments - https://www.social-engineer.com/offensive-security/social-engineering-risk-assessment/ -          Social-Engineer channel on SLACK - https://social-engineering-hq.slack.com/ssb -          CLUTCH - http://www.pro-rock.com/ -          innocentlivesfoundation.org - http://www.innocentlivesfoundation.org/                 02:40 - The Topic of the Day: What is Cognitive Dissonance? 05:53 - A Threat to Self-Concept 07:49 - Commitment to Consistency 09:51 - Freedom to Choose 10:51 - Changing Beliefs 14:19 - Trying to Escape 18:21 - Going From Bad to Worse 21:53 - Self-Awareness is Key! 24:55 - Growth Hurts 28:49 - Everything, Not All At Once 29:43 - It's Not A Flaw 31:11 -  Wrap Up 31:36 - Next Month's Topic: Is Everyone a Psychopath? 31:52 - Outro -          www.social-engineer.com -          www.innocentlivesfoundation.org   Find us online: -          LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/dr-abbie-maroño-phd -          Instagram: @DoctorAbbieofficial -          LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/christopherhadnagy     References: Aronson, E. (1969). The theory of cognitive dissonance: A current perspective. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 4, 1–34. Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(3), 193–209. Brehm, J. W. (1956). Postdecision changes in the desirability of alternatives. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 52(3), 384–389. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press. Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 480–498. Schumann, K., & Dweck, C. S. (2014). Who accepts responsibility for their transgressions? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(12), 1608–1622. Sherman, D. K., & Cohen, G. L. (2006). The psychology of self-defense: Self-affirmation theory. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 183–242. Staub, E. (1990). Moral exclusion, personal goal theory, and extreme destructiveness. Journal of Social Issues, 46(1), 47–64. Steele, C. M. (1988). The psychology of self-affirmation: Sustaining the integrity of the self. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 21, 261–302. van Veen, V., Krug, M. K., Schooler, J. W., & Carter, C. S. (2009). Neural activity predicts attitude change in cognitive dissonance. Nature Neuroscience, 12(11), 1469–1474.

Modern parenthood wasn't meant to be a solo project, yet so many new moms and dads are trying to figure it out in isolation. We scroll, read, and listen to every parenting podcast, but at the end of the day, it still feels lonely. The truth is, no amount of information can replace the transformation that happens in community.In this episode of the Better Relationships After Baby Podcast, Chelsea and Mike dig into the power of group connection — why real change happens faster when parents have support, accountability, and belonging. They unpack what science and psychology show us about group learning and why joining a Mom Group or Dad Group can radically shift how couples communicate and cope in early parenthood.Why you can't self-help your way out of postpartum lonelinessThe science of co-regulation and why community calms your nervous systemHow group learning builds real-life communication skills (thanks, Bandura!)The difference between therapy and postpartum coaching and how they work togetherWhy peer support and accountability make new habits stickHow virtual groups for parents create connection, even when you can't leave the houseWhat happens when one partner spirals, and how community creates a ripple of healing for the whole familyChelsea and Mike also share personal stories from their own experience running online parent groups for the past five years. From the first-time mom who finally said, “I'm not broken , I just needed other women who get it,” to the new dad who realized that he didn't have to fix everything, just show up...these are the moments that remind us we were never meant to do this alone.Research continues to show that new parent support groups lower rates of postpartum depression and anxiety for both mothers and partners. Group coaching allows couples to learn and practice new skills in a safe, encouraging environment. Unlike anonymous online threads, a guided virtual group combines real relationships, evidence-based tools, and accountability that actually creates growth.In a season where life can feel like a blur of bottles, diapers, and exhaustion, having a space that's just for you, one that helps you regulate, reflect, and reconnect, isn't a luxury. It's a necessity.Chelsea and Mike explain how postpartum coaching helps couples after baby rebuild their foundation. When stress runs high, our brains go into survival mode — fight, flight, or freeze. But in a group setting, you learn how to interrupt those patterns, communicate effectively, and show up as teammates instead of adversaries. It's where you can practice the conversations you've been avoiding, get feedback from peers who are in the same season, and walk away with language you can use that same night at home.If you've ever ended the day back-to-back with your partner, each on your phones, wondering why connection feels so hard, then this episode is for you. Whether you're an expecting couple, new parents in the thick of it, or a few years in and still trying to find your rhythm, community is the missing piece most families are craving.Chelsea and Mike's Mom Group (Mondays at 7PM ET) and Dad Group (Tuesdays at 7PM ET) are small, virtual groups designed for real-life parents who want practical tools, a sense of belonging, and conversations that go deeper than social media highlight reels.Week One is free so there's no pressure, no performance, just a chance to see what it feels like to be part of a community built around growth and honesty.Tune in and learn why the future of strong families starts with strong communities.Questions? Email us chelsea@postpartumtogether.comonline parent group | mom group | dad group | new parent support group | virtual parent group | postpartum coaching | couples after baby | postpartum relationship coaching | parenting after baby | online parenting community | group coaching for parents | postpartum connection | support for new dads | support for new moms

In questa live esploriamo un tema che riguarda moltissime persone: l'ansia legata al lavoro e al successo.Partendo dal caso di una persona che, nonostante una carriera brillante, viveva un costante senso di ansia, cerchiamo di capire perché il raggiungimento degli obiettivi non sempre porta serenità.Parliamo del concetto di locus of control, interno ed esterno, introdotto in psicologia da Julian B. Rotter, e riflettiamo su come la percezione del controllo possa influenzare il nostro benessere emotivo.ILibri e autori citati:libro “Antifragile” di Nassim Nicholas Taleb, per capire come imparare a trarre forza dall'incertezza e dalle difficoltà.

Televizyon ve medya araçlarının ‘sosyal öğrenme etkisi' 60'lı yıllardan itibaren sosyal bilimlerin çalışma alanı oldu. Fransız bilim adam A. Bandura çocukların, şiddet davranışını televizyon içerikleri ile öğrendiğini ispatlamıştır. Bandura'nın sosyal öğrenme kuramı, özellikle gözlem ve taklit yoluyla gerçekleşir.

Comment motiver ses élèves à l'école primaire ? Dans cette vidéo, découvrez des stratégies pédagogiques efficaces pour renforcer l'engagement, la participation et l'envie d'apprendre chez les élèves en élémentaire.

Chris Bandura from Dave & Adam's on merchandise sales this Bills season, and how much pricing may be impacted by tariffs this year full 240 Mon, 06 Oct 2025 08:30:00 +0000 YlJP7bPKx4adylmtPe4gfIGaExQHFGWC nfl,football,buffalo bills,news,wben,dave & adam's WBEN Extras nfl,football,buffalo bills,news,wben,dave & adam's Chris Bandura from Dave & Adam's on merchandise sales this Bills season, and how much pricing may be impacted by tariffs this year Archive of various reports and news events 2024 © 2021 Audacy, Inc. News

No beco de Cidade de Deus, a prova para “entrar na turma” custa dor e culpa. No nosso, o preço é outro: tempo, presença e palavra. Este episódio investiga por que pertencimento vence coerência na adolescência: Bronfenbrenner (ambiente), Bandura (modelagem), Harris (pares), Baumeister/Leary (necessidade de pertencer) e Marcia (identidade). Traz práticas: tribo antes de tela, liturgias da casa, inoculação semanal e liderança nutritiva. Fechamos com: pertencer sem se perder. O comentário do ouvinte é patrocinado pela Vinho 24 Horas. Já pensou em ter um negócio que funciona 24h, sem precisar de funcionários? Uma adega autônoma instalada no seu condomínio, com vinhos de qualidade, controle pelo celular e margem de 80%. Com apenas R$ 29.900, você inicia sua franquia e ainda ganha 100 garrafas de vinho. Acesse Vinho24.com.br e comece seu novo negócio! A Terra Desenvolvimento revoluciona a gestão agropecuária com métodos exclusivos e tecnologia inovadora, oferecendo acesso em tempo real aos dados da sua fazenda para estratégias eficientes. A equipe atua diretamente na execução, garantindo resultados. Para investidores, orienta na escolha das melhores atividades no agro. Com 25 anos de experiência, transforma propriedades em empreendimentos lucrativos e sustentáveis. Conheça mais em terradesenvolvimento.com.br. Inteligência a serviço do agro! ...................................................................................................................................................................

Darren looks at how we apply Bandura's self efficacy theory to teachers to consider whether our practice impoves as we get older.

On this special episode of the Black Baseball Mixtape podcast, I sat down with Giants' prospect Scott Bandura. Scott split his 2025 season between Eugene (High A) and Richmond (AA). He held a 271/367/400 slash line between the two divisions, along with 41 stolen bases, 65 RBIs, and 10 home runs. Scott is from inner-city Philadelphia and played on the Taney Little League team that went to the Little League World Series, featuring Mo'ne Davis (Scott was the catcher). He then went on to play at Princeton, where, despite spending three years on campus, he only played one full season before being drafted by the Giants in the 7th round of the 2023 MLB Draft. Scott's superpower is his character and leadership qualities. He learned those at an early age from his parents (Steve and Robin) and carries them with him everywhere he goes. He is a natural leader and wears the title well. Being a leader and team uniter is something he takes great pride in. And it may be those leadership attributes - along with his on-field performance - that take him to the Major Leagues. The Black Baseball Mixtape is in partnership with the Players Alliance, Numbers Game Scorecards, Rebellion Harvest (Sunflower Seeds), and Minority Prospects. Want to join the BBM Discord? Message the show at BlackBaseballMixtape@gmail.com.

Application pour EV0360 : https://hlperformance.ca/Références : Bandura (1977)Borkovec, Alcaine et Behar (2004)Bronfenbrenner (1979)Goldberg (1990)Papalia ; Psychologie du développement de l'enfant, 10e édition Ryan et Deci (2000)Hofmann et Hay (2018)Hyde, Ryan et Waters (2019)

Application pour EV0360 : https://hlperformance.ca/Références : Bandura (1977)Borkovec, Alcaine et Behar (2004)Bronfenbrenner (1979)Goldberg (1990)Papalia ; Psychologie du développement de l'enfant, 10e édition Ryan et Deci (2000)Hofmann et Hay (2018)Hyde, Ryan et Waters (2019)

Fake It Till You Make It... or Do It Till You True It?In this episode, we challenge one of the most common self-help mantras: “Fake it till you make it.” Instead, we explore a more sustainable, honest, and empowering approach—“Do it until you true it.”Through personal stories, psychological insight, and practical advice, we break down why faking confidence can sometimes do more harm than good, and how small steps can lead to real transformation.Top Topics Covered:The Problem with Faking It: We talk about how pretending to know something can lead to broken trust, missed opportunities, and internal stress, especially when the stakes are high.The Power of Small Steps: Real confidence is earned through repeated actions. Whether it's learning first aid or public speaking, each small action builds a foundation for long-term success.Psychological Frameworks: We explore concepts like cognitive behavioral theory, James-Lange theory, and Bandura's idea of self-efficacy to support why behavior can shape belief.Honesty vs. Performance: There's a fine line between boldness and deception. We discuss how to be honest about your capabilities while still stepping up to new challenges.Takeaways:This episode reminds us that confidence isn't a magic switch—it's something you build. You don't need to fake your way into anything. You just need to take the next honest, actionable step. Whether you're tackling a new role at work, facing anxiety, or just trying to grow in life, the habit of small, intentional actions will carry you farther than any performance ever could. “Do it until you true it” means showing up, learning, growing—and in time, becoming the kind of person you once only hoped to be.Jill's Linkshttp://jillfromthenorthwoods.comhttps://startwithsmallsteps.comhttps://www.youtube.com/@startwithsmallstepshttps://www.buymeacoffee.com/startwithsmallstepshttps://twitter.com/schmernEmail the podcast at jill@startwithsmallsteps.comBy choosing to watch this video or listen to this podcast, you acknowledge that you are doing so of your own free will. The content shared here reflects personal experiences and opinions and is intended for informational and inspirational purposes only. I am not a licensed healthcare provider, psychiatrist, or counselor. Any advice or suggestions offered should not be considered a substitute for professional medical or mental health advice. You are solely responsible for any decisions or actions you take based on this content.

In this episode of Breakaway Wealth Podcast, Jim sits down with Jill Schulman—US Marine veteran and positive psychology expert—to break down the science of bravery and why action - not motivation - moves outcomes. They map a practical path to confront fear, build daily reps, and apply courage to business and money decisions. 3 Key Takeaways: Bravery reframed: not heroics, but voluntary action in the presence of fear toward a worthwhile goal; most modern fear is social (failure, rejection, embarrassment), amplified by a comfort-first culture. Action over fear: use graded exposure and “mastery experiences” (Bandura) to build self-efficacy; schedule the hard task early, track behaviors not outcomes, and let consistency—not motivation—carry the work. Environment and systems: build a “brave tribe” to leverage conformity effects; apply PERMA (Positive emotion, Engagement/flow, Relationships, Meaning, Accomplishment) to raise performance; treat early failures as required feedback on the way to results. Thanks to Jill for outlining a clear model for building bravery and putting it to work! If this episode moved you to act, take one small step today and track it. Subscribe to Breakaway Wealth, leave a review, and share the show with a colleague who leads others.  Connect with Jill: take her Bravery Assessment and download the Bravery Blueprint at her site; read The Bravery Effect for the full framework. Connect with Jill Schulman: Facebook: www.facebook.com/jill.schulman.5 Instagram: www.instagram.com/jillschulman LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/jillaschulman/  

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On July 8th, in what can only be described as an act of reckless clarity, we published a white paper (grab it here—>) Unified Behavioral Model™ — Read more… listen now.Disclaimer: The following is a bit tongue-in-cheek. Just a bit.I have the utmost respect for the behavioral science community and its vast contributions—including the many scientists whose work has directly shaped my own.That said, the more I learn about the history of attempts to unify behavioral science (and, by association, psychology)—and then set those challenges alongside the Unified Behavior Model (UBM) as it now exists—formally published (elemental and falsifiable), 500+ downloads later—the more peculiar the entire situation becomes.To be clear: it's only in hindsight that these “obvious” errors and omissions—both in behavioral science (BS) and in its unification efforts—come into focus.Subscribe nowTip #1: Make Sure Only True Insiders Get to PlayWhatever you do, don't approach this unification challenge from the outside. That's where troublemakers and fresh ideas tend to arise—reportedly.

Passage: Philippians 1:12-14 Date: 17 August 2025 Speaker: Igor Bandura Summary: On the launch day of Bangor Worldwide Bangor 2025, we explore how the Apostle Paul’s imprisonment became a powerful platform for the gospel, reminding us that even our toughest times can serve a greater purpose. As we reflect on the ongoing struggles faced by our brothers and sisters in Ukraine, we’re encouraged to trust God’s plan and see our own challenges as opportunities for growth and resilience. Together, let’s embrace our hardships as a chance to shine God’s light in the world. Links: Church Website Watch on YouTube Contact Us

In this class series, Rabbi Shmuly will explore the Torah of the mind. We will explore how Jewish thought intersects with modern psychological studies and theories by examining thinkers like Freud, Piaget, Maslow, Frankl, and so many others over 50 interactive sessions. Looking at consciousness, moral reasoning, ego, love, learning, and evil, how can we better understand why humans act as they do? Considering our relationships, traumas, memories, conflicts, and self-esteem, how can reflecting on the deep complexity of our minds help us live more meaningful lives? Further, how might Jewish ethics and Jewish philosophy help us ask not just “how do we live” but “how might we live?” Join us for a deep dive into the collective, individual, and Jewish mind.Attend these classes live over Zoom by becoming a member for just $18 monthly: https://www.valleybeitmidrash.org/become-a-member.------------------Stay Connected with Valley Beit Midrash:• Website: https://www.valleybeitmidrash.org• Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ValleyBeitMidrash ★ Support this podcast ★

We had a little reunion of former Eugene outfielders last week in Richmond, when the Portland Sea Dogs came to town. I was able to talk to Scott Bandura, who was just settling in from his recent promotion to Double-A, and Portland outfielder, James Tibbs III about the crazy month he's had adjusting to a new organization, a new league, new teammates, and a new time zone! Bandura talks about the impact that COVID had on his baseball journey, and why he thinks the best is still to come for him, while Tibbs gives some real insight into the human side of the game, and how difficult these transitions can be for players.There R Giants is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit rogermunter.substack.com/subscribe

This week, our trusted child psychologist, Dr. Faye Pool is back, to talk about a parenting skill every parent needs: how to manage your own stress before you handle your child's meltdown.In this episode, we cover:Why staying calm is the best parenting tool you haveHow stress affects you and your child's developing brainSimple regulation techniques to use when your child is out of controlReal-life tips for handling public tantrums and parenting pressure abroadMentioned in this episode:Social learning theory, by Bandura.Dr Hillary - the Raised Resilient podcast.Kate Silverton - there's no such thing as naughty book.

In this episode of our Around the World summer series, we're traveling to Ukraine, a country with a deep love of singing, a powerful history, and some truly fascinating folk instruments! Join me as we: Discover the meaning of folk music and why it matters.  Learn about Ukraine's journey to independence and how music has helped preserve its culture. Explore the beautiful three-part harmonies often sung a cappella by Ukrainian choirs. Hear traditional instruments like: Bandura – a harp-like instrument with up to 60 strings. Trembita – one of the world's longest instruments used in mountain villages. Tsymbaly – a hammered dulcimer that creates rhythmic dance music. Understand how folk music varies from region to region in Ukraine. You'll hear snippets of folk songs throughout the episode and learn how modern Ukrainian artists are keeping these traditions alive today.

¿Y si la razón por la que sigues estancada no es falta de fe… sino exceso de autosuficiencia?Muchas mujeres cristianas creen que solo necesitan orar, leer la Biblia y tener fe para sanar. Pero lo que a veces parece madurez espiritual… puede ser miedo disfrazado de independencia.En este episodio reflexionamos juntas sobre:Por qué la autosuficiencia es una trampa peligrosa (aunque parezca fe).Qué nos enseña la Biblia sobre sanidad en comunidad (con textos clave y autores como C.S. Lewis y Timothy Keller.).Por qué la psicología confirma que no fuimos diseñadas para sanar solas (con aportes de Bandura y Brené Brown).Y cómo mi historia cambió cuando dejé de vivir aislada y me permití ser guiada, mentoreada y acompañada.Dios puede hablarte en lo íntimo…Pero casi siempre te sana en comunidad.Si estás lista para dejar atrás el “yo puedo sola” y caminar acompañada hacia tu sanidad emocional y espiritual, este episodio es para ti.Además, te cuento cómo funciona FLORECE, mi mentoría para mujeres que buscan sanar con propósito, guía y comunidad. Las postulaciones a la edición 2025 ya están abiertas y cerramos el 27 de junio.Si quieres postularte a FLORECE, accede al siguiente link: https://extravagantemente.com/florece/Si quieres suscribirte a mi newsletter, puedes hacerlo en el siguiente link:https://extravagantemente.com/Instagram: @extravagante.mente

Ross wants to talk about the gray areas where we might hold back to build children's capacity for care. When we step back, children can learn how to give the kindness to themselves and each other. Mike shares an experience of toy dumping chaos and a child's power to repair. Joey tells a story of a child who built her sense of agency bit by bit. Mike tries to remember Bandura's elements of agency and everyone likes the metaphor of trees growing stronger in the wind.

On this episode of Mind the Gap, Jon Hutchinson is joined by educator, researcher, and author Neil Gilbride to explore the powerful concept of self-efficacy—and why it matters now more than ever in schools. Drawing from his new book, Neil delves into the psychological foundations of self-efficacy, its relationship to agency, and the practical ways it can transform classroom practice. He shares insights from his own diverse career, from play schemes to academia, and explains how educators can help pupils—and themselves—navigate complexity, build resilience, and believe in their capacity to succeed. Together, Jon and Neil discuss Bandura's legacy, the critical importance of managing failure, and why effective modelling is about more than just showing how—it's about lending belief. “If we're not proactively thinking hard about using our capacity to share knowledge and ways of being and working,” Neil says, “then we're not using one of the most powerful weapons in our arsenal.” This episode offers a compelling and deeply human lens on what it means to teach, lead, and learn in today's education landscape.Dr Neil Gilbride CPSychol is an Honorary Senior Research Fellow at University of Worcester and Associate Dean at Ambition Institute, one of the largest professional development providers in England. He has amassed 20 years of experience working across education as an academic, practitioner and knowledge mobiliser. Neil's research interweaves adult developmental psychology and complexity theory to better understand educational leadership and practitioner development. His most recent book is Bandura's Self-Efficacy Theory in Action. Follow him on Bluesky @neilgilbride.bsky.socialJon Hutchinson is a former assistant headteacher of Reach Academy Feltham and is now a Director at the Reach Foundation. He has taught across primary and secondary and HE. In his spare time, Jon runs ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.meno.acacdemy⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, a platform with free videos to support primary teachers to build their subject knowledge. Follow Jon on X ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@jon_hutchinson_⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or Bluesky ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@jonhutchinson.bksy.social⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.This podcast is produced by Haringey Education Partnership. Find out more at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://haringeyeducationpartnership.co.uk/

Dr Neil Gilbride makes a compelling case for how Bandura's self efficacy theory can help refine how we understand and support our students AND how we design and teach our lessons. There are plenty of pedagogy ‘how tos' alongside reflections about our role in shaping how students feel about their ability to ‘do it' in our particular domain - be that maths, English or cake baking. Along the way Neil shares his views on the dangers of PowerPoint, the ultimate purpose of teaching - and who he'd invite (along with Bandura) to a pedagogical dinner party. This show is brought to you in partnership with John Catt Educational, get Neil's book and explore the full range of titles here. 

Was ist Gehirnwäsche wirklich und wie funktioniert sie? Wie nutzen Sekten und Kulte diese Techniken, um Menschen zu manipulieren und zu kontrollieren? Wie wird heute „zeitgemäß“ unser Denken manipuliert? Anhand gut erforschter psychologischer Phänomene erklären Franca und Christian, wie Menschen durch charismatische Führungsfiguren, psychologische Effekte, soziale Dynamiken und gezielte Beeinflussung ihre Meinung und ihr Denken radikal ändern sollen. In dieser Folge werden Geheimnisse der Manipulation gelüftet und vor allem erklärt, wie man sich davor schützen kann. Kritisches Denken auf wissenschaftlicher Basis ist der Schlüssel! Weiterführende Literatur: • Lifton, R. J. (1961). Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism. Norton. • Festinger, L. (1957). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford University Press. • Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations. Nelson-Hall. • Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. Prentice Hall. • Asch, S. E. (1951). Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distortion of judgments. In H. Guetzkow (Ed.), Groups, leadership, and men. Carnegie Press. • Hasher, L., Goldstein, D., & Toppino, T. (1977). Frequency and the conference of referential validity. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 107-112. • Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175-220. • Hassan, S. (1988). Combatting Cult Mind Control. Park Street Press. • Lynn, S. J., Kirsch, I., & Hallquist, M. (2002). Social cognitive theories of hypnosis. In G. A. Jamieson (Ed.), Hypnosis and conscious states: The cognitive neuroscience perspective (pp. 13-24). Oxford University Press. • Marks, J. (1979). The Search for the Manchurian Candidate: The CIA and Mind Control. Times Books. Podcasts zum Thema: Die "Seelenfänger"- Serie: https://www.br.de/mediathek/podcast/seelenfaenger/alle-staffeln/888 "Sekten und Kulte": https://plus.rtl.de/podcast/sekten-kulte-im-namen-des-boesen-ux1eydy9kcla9 Für ein intensives Familiencoaching mit Franca kannst du dich hier beim Produktionsteam melden: familiencoaching@drive-beta.de Du möchtest mehr über unsere Werbepartner erfahren? Hier findest du alle Infos & Rabatte: https://linktr.ee/psychologietogo Du möchtest Werbung in diesem Podcast schalten? Dann erfahre hier mehr über die Werbemöglichkeiten bei Seven.One Audio: https://www.seven.one/portfolio/sevenone-audio

In today's episode of The Root Cause Medicine Podcast, we explore the nuances of endometriosis and fertility with Dr. Alexis Gonzales. You'll hear us discuss: 1. How to diagnose endometriosis 2. Surprising symptoms of endometriosis 3. Natural solutions for endometriosis 4. Essential lab tests for assessing your health 5. Lifestyle changes to tackle endometriosis Dr. Alexis Gonzales is a renowned functional and naturopathic medicine expert specializing in endometriosis and fertility. With a rich educational background from Bastyr University, Johns Hopkins University, and Saint Mary's College of California, Dr. Gonzales brings a wealth of knowledge and experience. She is also a Clinical Content Developer at the Institute for Functional Medicine and a passionate advocate for personalized, holistic care. Kaitii is the Technical Support Specialist of Labs at Fullscript. Before that, she held various roles in operations, customer service, and management throughout companies such as Posies Bakery & Cafe, Consign Couture, Verizon Wireless, and Target. Order tests through Rupa Health, the BEST place to order functional medicine lab tests from 30+ labs - https://www.rupahealth.com/reference-guide

What is Imposter syndrome? Explaining away your accomplishments and success and doubting your abilities1.     What are common examples of imposter syndrome?2.     How can you assess if you have imposter syndrome Take the quiz:Do you chalk your success up to luck, timing, or computer error?Do you believe that if I can do it, anyone can?Do you agonize over small flaws in your work? Are you crushed by even constructive criticism, seeing it as evidence of your ineptness?When you succeed, do you feel like you fooled them again?Do you worry that it's a matter of time before you're found out?3.     What are some statements or excuses often made by people suffering from imposter syndrome? 4.     Where does I.S. come from?5.     Mastery vs Performance – Dweck. 6.     What are some NLP Techniques used to Overcome Imposter SyndromeConflict of identities, Belief changes, trauma processes, auditory swishes for neg. Self-talk. Anchoring and resource anchoring, changing the history of a problem (anchoring),  reframing, modeling (understanding the model of success in your field,) meta programs, Foreground, background process - create a strong association between what is most important in the person's awareness (foreground) and something that they are not attending to (background).7. Bandura curve – 1st part, beliefs of capability; 2nd part beliefs of identity.8. In time/ through time 9.     recap Support the show

Rounding Up Season 3 | Episode 1 – Grouping Practices That Promote Efficacy and Knowledge Transfer Guest: Dr. Peter Liljedahl Mike Wallus: We know from research that student collaboration can have a powerful impact on learning. That said, how we group students for collaboration matters—a lot. Today we're talking with Dr. Peter Liljedahl, author of “Building Thinking Classrooms in Mathematics,” about how educators can form productive, collaborative groups in their classrooms. Mike: Hello, Peter. Welcome to the podcast. Peter Liljedahl: Thanks for having me. Mike: So, to offer our listeners some background, you've written a book, called “Building Thinking Classrooms in Mathematics,” and I think it's fair to say that it's had a pretty profound impact on many educators. In the book, you address 14 different practices. And I'm wondering if you could weigh in on how you weigh the importance of the different practices that you addressed? Peter: Well, OK, so, first of all, 14 is a big number that publishers don't necessarily like. When we first started talking with Corwin about this, they were very open. But I know if you think about books, if there's going to be a number in the title, the number is usually three, five or seven. It's sometimes eight—but 14 is a ridiculous number. They can't all be that valuable. What's important about the fact that it's 14, is that 14 is the number of core practices that every teacher does. That's not to say that there aren't more or less for some teachers, but these are core routines that we all do. We all use tasks. We all create groups for collaboration. We all have the students work somewhere. We all answer questions. We do homework, we assign notes, we do formative, summative assessment. We do all of these things. We consolidate lessons. We launch lessons. Peter: These are sort of the building blocks of what makes our teaching. And through a lot of time in classrooms, I deduced this list of 14. Robert Kaplinsky, in one of his blog posts, actually said that he thinks that that list of 14 probably accounts for 95 percent of what happens in classrooms. And my research was specifically about, “How do we enact each of those 14 so that we can maximize student thinking? So, what kind of tasks get students to think, how can we create groups so that more thinking happens? How can we consolidate a lesson so we get more thinking? How can we do formative and summative assessments so the students are thinking more?” So, the book is about responding to those 14 core routines and the research around how to enact each of those to maximize thinking. Your question around which one is, “How do we put weight on each of these?” Peter: They're all important. But, of course, they're not all equally impactful. Building thinking classrooms is most often recognized visually as the thing where students are standing at whiteboards working. And, of course, that had a huge impact on student engagement and thinking in the classroom, getting them from sitting and working at desks to getting them working at whiteboards. But in my opinion, it's not the most impactful. It is hugely impactful, but the one that actually makes all of thinking classroom function is how we form collaborative groups, which is chapter two. And it seems like that is such an inconsequential thing. “We've been doing groups for forever, and we got this figured out. We know how to do this. But … do we really? Do we really have it figured out?” Because my research really showed that if we want to get students thinking, then the ways we've been doing it aren't working. Mike: I think that's a great segue. And I want to take a step back, Peter. Before we talk about grouping, I want to ask what might be an obvious question. But I wonder if we can talk about the “why” behind collaboration. How would you describe the value or the potential impact of collaboration on students' learning experiences? Peter: That's a great question. We've been doing collaborative work for decades. And by and large, we see that it is effective. We have data that shows that it's effective. And when I say “we,” I don't mean me or the people I work with. I mean “we, in education,” know that collaboration is important. But why? What is it about collaboration that makes it effective? There are a lot of different things. It could be as simple as it breaks the monotony of having to sit and listen. But let's get into some really powerful things that collaboration does. Number one, about 25 years ago, we all were talking about metacognition. We know that metacognition is so powerful and so effective, and if we get students thinking about their thinking, then their thinking actually improves. And metacognition has been shown time and time again to be impactful in learning. Some of the listeners might be old enough to remember the days where we were actually trying to teach students to be metacognitive, and the frustration that that created because it is virtually impossible. Peter: Being reflective about your thinking while you're thinking is incredibly hard to do because it requires you to be both present and reflective at the same time. We're pretty good at being present, and we're pretty good about reflecting on our experiences. But to do both simultaneously is incredibly hard to do. And to teach someone to do it is difficult. But I think we've also all had that experience where a student puts up their hand, and you start walking over to them, and just as you get there, they go, “Never mind.” Or they pick up their book, and they walk over to you, and just as they get to you, they just turn around and walk back. I used to tell my students that they're smarter when they're closer to me. But what's really going on there is, as they've got their hand up, or as they're walking across the room toward you as a teacher, they're starting to formulate their thoughts to ask a question. Peter: They're preparing to externalize their thinking. And that is an incredibly metacognitive process. One of the easiest forms of metacognition, and one of the easiest ways to access metacognition, is just to have students collaborate. Collaborating requires students to talk. It requires them to organize their thoughts. It requires them to prepare their thinking and to think about their thinking for the purposes of externalization. It is an incredibly accessible way of creating metacognition in your classroom, which we already know is effective. So, that's one reason I think collaboration is really, really vital. Peter: Another one comes from the work on register. So, register is the level of sophistication with which we speak about something. So, if I'm in a classroom, and I'm talking to kindergarten students, I set a register that is accessible to them. When I talk to my undergraduates, I use a different register. My master's students, my Ph.D. students, my colleagues, I'm using different registers. I can be talking about the same thing, but the level of sophistication with which I'm going to talk about those things varies depending on the audience. And as much as possible, we try to vary our register to suit the audience we have. But I think we've also all had that instructor who's completely incapable of varying their register, the one who just talks at you as if you're a third-year undergraduate when you're really a Great Eight student. And the ability to vary our register to a huge degree is going to define what makes us successful as a teacher. Can we meet our learners where they're at? Can we talk to them from the perspective that they're at? Now we can work at it, and very adept teachers are good at it. But even the best teachers are not as good at getting their register to be the same as students. Peter: So, this is another reason collaboration is so effective. It allows students to talk and be talked to at their register, which is the most accessible form of communication for them. And I think the third reason that collaboration is so important is the difference between what I talk in my book about the difference between absolute and tentative knowledge. So, I'm going to make two statements. You tell me which one is more inviting to add a comment to. So, statement number one is, “This is how to do it, or this is what I did.” That's statement number one. Statement number two is, “I think that one of the ways that we may want to try, I'm wondering if this might work.” Which one is more inviting for you to contribute to? Mike: Yes, statement number two, for many, many reasons, as I'm sitting here thinking about the impact of those two different language structures. Peter: So, as teachers, we tend to talk in absolutes. The absolute communication doesn't give us anything to hold onto. It's not engaging. It's not inviting. It doesn't bring us into the conversation. It's got no rough patches—it's just smooth. But when that other statement is full of hedging, it's tentative. It's got so many rough patches, so many things to contribute to, things I want to add to, maybe push back at or push further onto. And that's how students talk to each other. When you put them in collaborative groups, they talk in tentative discourse, whereas teachers, we tend to talk in absolutes. So, students are always talking to each other like that. When we put them in collaborative groups, they're like, “Well, maybe we should try this. I'm wondering if this'll work. Hey, have we thought about this? I wonder if?” And it's so inviting to contribute to. Mike: That's fascinating. I'm going to move a little bit and start to focus on grouping. So, in the book, you looked really closely at the way that we group students for collaborative problem-solving and how that impacts the way students engage in a collaborative effort. And I'm wondering if you could talk a little bit about the type of things that you were examining. Peter: OK. So, you don't have to spend a lot of time in classrooms before you see the two dominant paradigms for grouping. So, the first one we tend to see a lot at elementary school. So, that one is called “strategic grouping.” Strategic grouping is where the teacher has a goal, and then they're going to group their students to satisfy that goal. So, maybe my goal is to differentiate, so I'm going to make ability groups. Or maybe my goal is to increase productivity, so I'm going to make mixed-ability groups. Or maybe my goal is to just have peace and quiet, so I'm going to keep those certain students apart. Whatever my goal is, I'm going to create the groups to try to achieve that goal, recognizing that how students behave in the classroom has a lot to do with who they're partnered with. So that's strategic grouping. It is the dominant grouping paradigm we see in elementary school. Peter: By the time we get to high school, we tend to see more of teachers going, “Work with who you want.” This is called “self-selected groupings.” And this is when students are given the option to group themselves any way they want. And alert: They don't group themselves for academic reasons, they group themselves for social reasons. And I think every listener can relate to both of those forms of grouping. It turns out that both of those are highly ineffective at getting students to think. And ironically, for the exact same reason. We surveyed hundreds of students who were in these types of grouping settings: strategic grouping or self-selected groupings. We asked one question, “If you knew you were going to work in groups today, what is the likelihood you would offer an idea?” That was it. And 80 percent of students said that they were unlikely or highly unlikely to offer an idea, and that was the exact same, whether they were in strategic groupings or self-selected groupings. The data cut the same. Mike: That's amazing, Peter. Peter: Yeah, and it's for the same reason it turns out; that whether students were being grouped strategically or self-selected, they already knew what their role was that day. They knew what was expected of them. And for 80 percent of the students, their role is not to think. It's not to lead. Their role is to follow, right? And that's true whether they're grouping themselves socially, where they already know the social hierarchy of this group, or they're being grouped strategically. We interviewed hundreds of students. And after grade 3, every single student could tell us why they were in the group this teacher placed them in. They know. They know what you think of them. You're communicating very clearly what you think their abilities are through the way you group them, and then they live down to that expectation. So, that's what we were seeing in classrooms was that strategic grouping may be great at keeping the peace. And self-selected grouping may be fabulous for getting students to stop whining about collaboration. But neither of them was effective for getting students to think. In fact, they were quite the opposite. They were highly ineffective for getting students to think. Mike: So, I want to keep going with this. And I think one of the things that stood out for me as I was reading is, this notion that regardless of the rationale that a teacher might have for grouping, there's almost always a mismatch between what the teacher's goals are and what the student's goals are. I wonder if you could just unpack this and maybe explain this a bit more. Peter: So, when you do strategic grouping, do you really think the students are with the students that they want to be with? One of the things that we saw happening in elementary school was that strategic grouping is difficult. It takes a lot of effort to try to get the balance right. So, what we saw was teachers largely doing strategic grouping once a month. They would put students into a strategic group, and they would keep them in that group for the entire month. And the kids care a lot about who they're with, when you're going to be in a group for a month. And do you think they were happy with everybody that was in that group? If I'm going to be with a group of students for a month, I'd rather pick those students myself. So, they're not happy. You've created strategic groupings. And, by definition, a huge part of strategic grouping is keeping kids who want to be together away from each other. Peter: They're not happy with that. Self-selected groupings, the students are not grouping themselves for academic reasons. They're just grouping themselves for social reasons so that they can socialize, so they talk, so they can be off topic, and all of these things. And yes, they're not complaining about group work, but they're also not being productive. So, the students are happy. But do you think the teacher's happy? Do you think the teacher looks out across that room and goes, “Yeah, there were some good choices made there.” No, nobody's happy, right? If I'm grouping them strategically, that's not matching their goals. That's not matching their social goals. When they're grouping themselves in self-selected ways, that's matching their social goals but not matching my academic goals for them. So, there's always going to be this mismatch. The teacher, more often than not, has academic goals. The students, more often than not, have social goals. There are some overlaps, right? There are students who are like, “I'm not happy with this group. I know I'm not going to do well in this group. I'm not going to be productive.” And there are some teachers who are going, “I really need this student to come out of the shell, so I need to get them to socialize more.” But other than that, by and large, our goals as teachers are academic in nature. The goals as students are social in nature. Mike: I think one of the biggest takeaways from your work on grouping, for me at least, was the importance of using random groups. And I have to admit, when I read that there was a part of me thinking back to my days as a first-grade teacher that felt a little hesitant. As I read, I came to think about that differently. But I'm wondering if you can talk about why random groups matter, the kind of impact that they have on the collaborative experience and the learning experience for kids. Peter: Alright, so going back to the previous question. So, we have this mismatch. And we have also that 80 percent of students are not thinking; 80 percent of students are entering into that group, not prepared to offer an idea. So those are the two problems that we're trying to address here. So, random groups … random wasn't good enough. It had to be visibly random. The students had to see the randomness because when we first tried it, we said, “Here's your random groups.” They didn't believe we were being random. They just thought we were being strategic. So, it has to be visibly random, and it turns out it has to be frequent as well. About once every 45 to 75 minutes. See, when students are put into random groups, they don't know what their role is. So, we're solving this problem. They don't know what their role is. When we started doing visibly random groups frequently, within three weeks we were running that same survey. Peter: “If you know you're going to work in groups today, what is the likelihood you would offer an idea?” Remember the baseline data was that 80 percent of students said that they were unlikely or highly unlikely, and, all of a sudden, we have a hundred percent of students saying that they're likely or highly likely. That was one thing that it solved. It shifted this idea that students were now entering groups willing to offer an idea, and that's despite 50 percent of them saying, “It probably won't lead to a solution, but I'm going to offer an idea.” Now why is that? Because they don't know what their role is. So, right on the surface, what random groups does, is it shatters this idea of preconceived roles and then preconceived behaviors. So, now they enter the groups willing to offer an idea, willing to be a contributor, not thinking that their role is just to follow. But there's a time limit to this because within 45 to 75 minutes, they're going to start to fall into roles. Peter: In that first 45 minutes, the roles are constantly negotiated. They're dynamic. So, one student is being the leader, and the others are being the follower. And now, someone else is a leader, the others are following. Now everyone is following. They need some help from some external source. Now everyone is leading. We've got to resolve that. But there is all of this dynamicism and negotiation going on around the roles. But after 45 to 75 minutes, this sort of stabilizes and now you have sort of a leader and followers, and that's when we need to randomize again so that the roles are dynamic and that the students aren't falling into sort of predefined patterns of non-thinking behavior. Mike: I think this is fascinating because we've been doing some work internally at MLC around this idea of status or the way that … the stories that kids tell about one another or the labels that kids carry either from school systems or from the community that they come from, and how those things are subtle. They're unspoken, but they often play a role in classroom dynamics in who gets called on. What value kids place on a peer's idea if it is shared. What you're making me think is there's a direct line between this thing that we've been thinking about and what happens in small groups as well. Peter: Yeah, for sure. So, you mentioned status. I want to add to that identity and self-efficacy and so on and so forth. One of the interesting pieces of data that came out of the research into random groups was, we were interviewing students several weeks into this. And we were asking them questions around this, and the students were saying things like, “Oh, the teacher thinks we're all the same, otherwise they wouldn't do random groups. The teacher thinks we're all capable, otherwise they wouldn't do random groups.” So, what we're actually talking about here is that we're starting—just simply through random groups—to have a positive impact on student self-efficacy. One of the things that came out of this work, that I wrote about in a separate paper, was that we've known for a long time that student self-efficacy has a huge impact on student performance. But how do we increase, how do we improve student self-efficacy? Peter: There are a whole bunch of different ways. The work of Bandura on this is absolutely instrumental. But it comes down to a couple of things. From a classroom teacher perspective, the first thing, in order for a student to start on this journey from low self-efficacy to high self-efficacy, they have to encounter a teacher who believes in them. Except students don't listen to what we say. They listen to what we do. So, simply telling our students that we have confidence in them doesn't actually have much impact. It's how we show them that we have confidence in them. And it turns out that random groups actually have a huge impact on that. By doing the random groups, we're actually showing the kids that we believe in them and then they start to internalize this. So that's one thing. The work of Bandura about how we can start to shift student self-efficacy through mastery experiences, where they start to, for example, be successful at something. And that starts to have an impact that is amplified when students start to be successful in front of others, when they are the ones who are contributing in a small group. And that group is now successful. And that success is linked in some small or great part to your contributions; that self-efficacy is amplified because not only am I being successful, I'm being successful in a safe environment, but in front of others. Peter: Now, self-efficacy contributes to identity, and identity has an interesting relationship with status. And you mentioned status. So, self-efficacy is what I think of myself. Status is what others think of me. I can't control my status. I can't shift my status. Status is something that is bestowed on me by others. And, of course, it's affected by their interactions with me in collaborative spaces. So, how they get to see me operate is going to create a status for me, on me, by others. But the status gets to be really nicely evenly distributed in thinking classrooms when we're doing these random groups because everybody gets to be seen as capable. They all get to be someone who can be mathematical and someone who can contribute mathematically. Mike: I want to shift back for a moment to this idea of visibly random groups. This idea that for kids, they need to believe that it's not just a strategic grouping that I've called random for the sake of the moment. What are some of the ways that you've seen teachers visibly randomize their groups so that kids really could see the proof was right out there in front of them? Peter: So, we first started with just cards. So, we got 27 kids. We're going to use playing cards, we're going to have three aces, three 2S, three 3s, three 4s, and so on. We would just shuffle the deck, and the kids would come and take a card. And if you're a 4, you would go to the board that has a 4 on it. Or maybe that fourth 4 is there, so to speak. We learned a whole bunch of things. It has to be visible. And however way we do it, the randomization doesn't just tell them what group they're in, it tells them where to go. That's an efficiency thing. You don't want kids walking around the classroom looking for their partners and then spending 5 minutes deciding where they want to work. Take a card, you got a 7, you go to the 7 board. You got an ace, you go to the ace board. Peter: And that worked incredibly well. Some teachers already had Popsicle sticks in their classroom, so they started using those: Popsicle sticks with students' names. So, they would pull three Popsicle sticks and they would say, “OK, these students are together. These students are together.” At first, we didn't see any problems with that. That seemed to be pretty isomorphic … to using a playing card. Some teachers got frustrated with the cards because with a card, sometimes what happens is that they get ripped or torn or they don't come back. Or they come back, and they're sweaty or they're hot. And it's like, “OK, where were you keeping this card? I don't want to know. It's hot, it's dirty.” They got ink on it. The cards don't come back. The kids are swapping cards. And teachers were frustrated by this. So, they started using digital randomizers, things like Flippity and ClassDojo and Picker Wheel and Team Shake and Team Maker. Peter: There were tons of these digital randomizers, and they all work pretty much the same. But there was a bit of a concern that the students may not perceive the randomness as much in these methods. And you can amplify that by, for example, bringing in a fuzzy [die], a big one, and somebody gets to roll it. And if a 5 comes up, they get to come up and hit the randomized button five times. And now there's a greater perception of randomness that's happening. With Flippity, that turns out actually it'd be true. Turns out that the first randomization is not purely random, and the kids spot that pattern. And we thought, “OK, perfect. That's fine. As long as the students perceive it's random, that it is truly random, that the teacher isn't somehow hacking this so that they are able to impose their own bias into this space.” So, it's seemingly random, but not purely random. And everything was running fine until about six to eight months ago. I was spending a lot of time in classrooms. I think in the last 14 months I've been in 144 different classrooms, co-teaching or teaching. So, I was spending a lot of time in classrooms, and for efficiency's sake, a lot of these teachers were using digital randomizers. And then I noticed something. It had always been there, but I hadn't noticed it. This is the nature of research. It's also the nature of just being a fly on the wall, or someone who's observing a classroom or a teacher. There's so much to notice we can't notice it all. So, we notice the things that are obvious. The more time we spend in spaces, the more nuanced things we're able to notice. And about six to eight months ago, I noticed something that, like I said, has always been there, but I had never really noticed it. Peter: Teacher hits a randomized button, and all the students are standing there watching, waiting for the randomized groups to appear on the screen. And then somebody goes, “Ugh.” It's so small. Or somebody laughs. Or somebody's like, “Nooo.” And it's gone. It's in a moment, it's gone. Sometimes others snicker about it, but it's gone. It's a flash. And it's always been there, and you think it's not a big deal. Turns out it's a huge deal because this is a form of micro-bullying. This is what I call it, “micro-bullying.” Because when somebody goes, “Ugh,” everybody in the room knows who said it. And looking at the screen, they know who they said it about. And this student, themself, knows who said it, and they know that they're saying it about them. And what makes this so much worse than other overt forms of bullying is that they also are keenly aware that everybody in the room just witnessed and saw this happen, including the teacher. Peter: And it cuts deeply. And the only thing that makes bullying worse is when bullying happens in front of someone who's supposed to protect you, and they don't; not because we're evil, but because it's so short, it's so small, it's over in a flash. We don't really see the magnitude of this. But this has deep psychological effects and emotional effects on these students. Not just that they know that this person doesn't like them. But they know that everybody knows that they don't like them. And then what happens on the second day? The second day, whoever's got that student, that victimized student in their group, when the randomization happens, they also go, “Ugh,” because this has become acceptable now. This is normative. Within a week, this student might be completely ostracized. And it's just absolutely normal to sort of hate on this one student. Peter: It's just not worth it. It cuts too deeply. Now you can try to stop it. You can try to control it, but good luck, right? I've seen teachers try to say, “OK, that's it. You're not allowed to say anything when the randomization happens. You're not allowed to cheer, you're not allowed to grunt, you're not allowed to groan, you're not allowed to laugh. All you can do is go to your boards.” Then they hit the random, and immediately you hear someone go, “Ugh.” And they'll look at them, and the student will go, “What? That's how I breathe.” Or “I stubbed my toe where I thought of something funny.” It's virtually impossible to shut it down because it's such a minor thing. But seemingly minor. In about 50 percent of elementary classrooms that I'm in, where a teacher uses that digital randomizer, you don't hear it. But 50 percent you do. Almost 100 percent of high school classrooms I'm in you hear some sort of grunt or groan or complaint. Peter: It's not worth it. Just buy more cards. Go to the casino, get free cards. Go to the dollar store, get them cheap. It's just not worth it. Now, let's get back to the Popsicle stick one. It actually has the same effect. “I'm going to pull three names. I'm going to read out which three names there are, and I'm going to drop them there.” And somebody goes, “Ugh.” But why does this not happen with cards? It doesn't happen with cards because when you take that card, you don't know what group you're in. You don't know who else is in your group. All you know is where to go. You take that card, you don't know who else is in your group. There's no grunting, groaning, laughing, snickering. And then when you do get to the group, there might be someone there that you don't like working with. So, the student might go, “Ugh.” But now there's no audience to amplify this effect. And because there's no audience, more often than not, they don't bother going, “Ugh.” Go back to the cards, people. The digital randomizers are fast and efficient, but they're emotionally really traumatizing. Mike: I think that's a really subtle but important piece for people who are thinking about doing this for the first time. And I appreciate the way that you described the psychological impact on students and the way that using the cards engineers less of the audience than the randomizer [do]. Peter: Yeah, for sure. Mike: Well, let's shift a little bit and just talk about your recommendations for group size, particularly students in kindergarten through second grade as opposed to students in third grade through fifth grade. Can you talk about your recommendations and what are the things that led you to them? Peter: First of all, what led to it? It was just so clear, so obvious. The result was that groups of three were optimal. And that turned out to be true every setting, every grade. There are some caveats to that, and I'll talk about that in a minute. But groups of three were obvious. We saw this in the data almost immediately. Every time we had groups of three, we heard three voices. Every time we heard groups of four, we heard three voices. When we had groups of five, we heard two voices on task, two voices off task, and one voice was silent. Groups of three were just that sort of perfect, perfect group size. It took a long time to understand why. And the reason why comes from something called “complexity theory.” Complexity theory tells us that in order for a group to be productive, it has to have a balance between diversity and redundancy. Peter: So, redundancy is the things that are the same. We need redundancy. We need things like common language, common notation, common vocabulary, common knowledge. We need to have things in common in order for the collaboration to even start. But if all we have is redundancy, then the group is no better than the individual. We also have to have diversity. Diversity is what every individual brings to the group that's different. And the thing that happens is, when the group sizes get larger, the diversity goes up, but redundancy goes down. And that's bad. And when the group sizes get smaller, the redundancy goes up, but the diversity goes down. And that's bad. Groups of three seem to have this perfect balance of redundancy and diversity. It was just the perfect group size. And if you reflect on groups that you've done in your settings, whatever that setting was, you'll probably start to recognize that groups of three were always more effective than groups of four. Peter: But we learned some other things. We learned that in K–2, for example, groups of three were still optimal, but we had to start with groups of two. Why? Because very young children don't know how to collaborate yet. They come to school in kindergarten, they're still working in what we call “parallel,” which means that they'll happily stand side by side at a whiteboard with their own marker and work on their own things side by side. They're working in parallel. Eventually, we move them to a state that we call “polite turn-taking.” Polite turn-taking is we can have two students working at a whiteboard sharing one marker, but they're still working independently. So, “It's now your turn and you're working on your thing, and now it's my turn, I'm working on my thing.” Eventually, we get them to a state of collaboration. And collaboration is defined as “when what one student says or does affects what the other student says or does.” Peter: And now we have collaboration happening. Very young kids don't come to school naturally able to collaborate. I've been in kindergarten classrooms in October where half the groups are polite turn-taking, and half the groups are collaborating. It is possible to accelerate them toward that state. But I've also been in grade 2 classrooms in March where the students are still working in parallel or turn-taking. We need to work actively at improving the collaboration that's actually happening. Once collaboration starts to happen in those settings, we nurtured for a while and then we move to groups of three. So, I can have kindergartens by the end of the year working in groups of three, but I can't assume that grade 2s can do it at the beginning of the year. It has a lot to do with the explicit efforts that have been made to foster collaboration in the classroom. And having students sit side by side and pair desks does not foster collaboration. It fosters parallel play. Peter: So, we always say that “K–2, start with groups of two, see where their level of collaboration is, nurture that work on it, move toward groups of three.” The other setting that we had to start in groups of two were alternate ed settings. Not because the kids can't collaborate, but because they don't trust yet. They don't trust in the process in the educational setting. We have to nurture that. Once they start to trust in working in groups of two, we can move to groups of three. But the data was clear on this. So, if you have a classroom, and let's say you're teaching grade 6, and you don't have a perfect multiple of three, what do you do? You make some groups of two. So, rather than groups of four, make some groups of two. Keep those groups of two close to each other so that they may start to collaborate together. Peter: And that was one of the ironies of the research: If I make a group of four, it's a Dumpster fire. If I make two groups of two and put them close to each other, and they start to talk to each other, it works great. You start with groups of two. So, having some extra groups of two is handy if you're teaching in high school or any grade, to be honest. But let's say you have 27 students on your roster, but only 24 are there. There's going to be this temptation to make eight groups of three. Don't do it. Make nine groups, have a couple of groups of two. Because the minute you get up and running, someone's going to walk in late. And then when they walk in late, it's so much easier to plug them into a group of two than to have them waiting for another person to come along so that they can pair them or to make a group of four. Mike: Yeah, that makes sense. Before we close, Peter, I want to talk about two big ideas that I really wish I would've understood more clearly when I was still in the classroom. What I'm thinking about are the notion of crossing social boundaries and then also the concept of knowledge mobility. And I'm wondering if you could talk about each of them in turn and talk about how they relate to one another. Peter: Certainly. So, when we make our groups, when we make groups, groups are very discreet. I think this comes from that sort of strategic grouping, or even self-selected groupings where the groups are really separate from each other. There are very well-defined boundaries around this group, and everything that happens, happens inside that group, and nothing happens between groups. In fact, as teachers, we often encourage that, and we're like, “No, do your own work in your group. Don't be talking to the other groups.” Because the whole purpose of doing strategic groups is to keep certain kids away from each other, and that creates a very non-permeable boundary between the groups. But what if we can make these boundaries more porous, and so that knowledge actually starts to flow between the groups. This is what's called “knowledge mobility,” the idea that we don't actually want the knowledge to be fixed only inside of a group. Peter: The smartest person in the room is the room. We got to get that knowledge moving around the room. It's not groups, it's groups among groups. So, how can we get what one group is achieving and learning to move to another group that's maybe struggling? And this is called “knowledge mobility.” The easiest way to increase this is we have the students working at vertical whiteboards. Working at vertical whiteboards creates a space where passive knowledge mobility is really easy to do. It's really easy to look over your shoulder and see what another group is doing and go, “Oh, let's try that. They made a table of values. Let's make a table of values. Or they've done a graph, or they drew a picture” or whatever. “We'll steal an idea.” And that idea helps us move forward. And that passive can also lead to more active, where it's like, “I wonder what they're doing over there?” Peter: And then you go and talk to them, and the teacher can encourage this. And both of these things really help with mobilizing knowledge, and that's what we want. We don't want the only source of knowledge to be the teacher. Knowledge is everywhere. Let's get that moving around the room within groups, between groups, between students. And that's not to say that the students are copying. We're not encouraging copying. And if you set the environment up right, they don't copy. They're not going to copy. They'll steal an idea, “Oh, let's organize our stuff into a table of values,” and then it's back to their own board and working on that. And the other way that we help make these boundaries more porous is by breaking down the social barriers that exist within a classroom. All classrooms have social barriers. They could be gender, race. They could be status-based. Peter: There are so many things that make up the boundaries that exist within classrooms. There are these social structures that exist in schools. And one of the things that random groups does is it breaks down these social barriers because we're putting students together that wouldn't normally be together. And our data really reveals just how much that happens; that after three weeks, the students are coming in, they're socializing with different students, students that hadn't been part of their social structure before. They're sitting together outside of class. I see this at the university where students are coming in, they almost don't know each other at all. Or they're coming in small groups that are in the same class. They know each other from other courses, and within three, four weeks, I'm walking through the hallways at the university and I'm seeing them sitting together, working together, even having lunch together in structures that didn't exist on day one. There are so many social structures, social barriers in classrooms. And if we can just erode those barriers, those group structures are going to become more and more porous, and we're creating more community, and we're reducing the risk that exists within those classrooms. Mike: I think the other piece that jumps out for me is when I go back to this notion of one random grouping, a random grouping that shifts every 45 to 75 minutes. This idea of breaking those social boundaries—but also, really this idea that knowledge mobility is accelerated jumps out of those two practices. I can really see that in the structure and how that would encourage that kind of change. Peter: Yeah. And it encourages both passively and actively. Passive in the sense that students can look over the shoulder, active that they can talk to another group. But also passively from the teacher perspective, that random groups does a lot of that heavy lifting. But I can also encourage it actively when a group asks a question. Rather than answering their question, looking around the room going, “You should go talk to the sevens over there.” Or “We're done. What do we do next?” “Go talk to the fours. They know what's next.” That, sort of, “I as a teacher can be passive and let the random groups do a lot of the heavy lifting. But I can also be active and push knowledge around the room. By the way, I respond to students' questions.” Mike: Well, and I think what also strikes me is you're really distributing the authority mathematically to the kids as well. Peter: Yeah, so we're displacing status, we're increasing identity. We're doing all sorts of different things that are de-powering the classroom, decentralizing the classroom. Mike: Well, before we go, Peter, I'm wondering if there are any steps that you'd recommend to an educator who's listening. They want to start to dabble, or they want to take up some of the ideas that we've talked about. Where would you invite people to make a start? Peter: So, first of all, one of the things we found in our research was small change is no change. When you make small changes, the classroom as a system will resist that. So, go big. In building thinking classrooms, random groups is not a practice that gets enacted on its own. It's enacted with two other practices: thinking tasks, which is chapter one of my book, random groups, which is chapter two. And then, getting the students working at vertical whiteboards. These are transformational changes to the classroom. What we're doing in doing that is we're changing the environment in which we're asking students to behave differently. Asking students to behave differently in exactly the same environment that they behaved a certain way for five years already is almost impossible to do. If you want them to behave differently, if you want them to start to think, you're going to have to create an environment that is more conducive to thinking. Peter: So, that's part of it. The other thing is, don't do things by half measures. Don't start doing, “Well, we're going to do random groups on Mondays, but we're going to do strategic groups the rest of the days,” or something like this. Because what that communicates to students is that the randomness is something that you don't really value. Go big. We're doing random groups. We're always doing random groups. Have the courage. Yes, there's going to be some combinations that you're going to go, “Uh-oh.” And some of those are going to be really uh-oh combinations. But you're also going to have way more situations where you go and then it turns out to be amazing. So, have that courage. Go with the random groups and do it persistently and consistently. Because there is going to be resistance. The students are going to resist this thing because at least when you're being strategic, you're being thoughtful about it. Peter: But this feels like too much chance. And they start to attribute, they start to map their emotions around being placed in strategic groups, which were often for a month, into this setting. And what we need to do is, we need to show that this is not that by being consistent, doing it randomly, doing it frequently, so they start to realize that this is different. This is not the kind of grouping structures that have happened in the past. And do it. Do it consistently, persistently. Do it for at least 10 days before you start to really see and really reap those benefits. Mike: I think that's a really great place to stop. Thank you so much for joining us on the podcast, Peter. It really has been a pleasure chatting with you. Peter: Thanks so much. It's been a great conversation. Mike: This podcast is brought to you by The Math Learning Center and the Maier Math Foundation, dedicated to inspiring and enabling all individuals to discover and develop their mathematical confidence and ability. © 2024 The Math Learning Center | www.mathlearningcenter.org

Education News Headline Roundup [00:08:10]The Free Application for Federal Student Aid is once again majorly delayed. On August 7th the U.S. Department of Education announced a rollout process for the 2025-2026 form that includes an October 1st date for limited testing, with the application set to open to all students on December 1 2024, two months later than the typical release date for the application. A federal appeals court has allowed an Iowa law that bans books with sexual content from K-12 school libraries and restricts instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity before seventh grade to take effect. This overturns a previous injunction that had paused the law, signed by Republican Governor Kim Reynolds in 2023.An update to a previously discussed story: in the wake of former Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse announcing his resignation from the University of Florida presidency, the UF student newspaper, the Independent Florida Alligator, has reported that Sasse may have been forced out over escalating tensions with the university's board chairman, Morteza “Mori” Hosseini.Social Learning Theory: Bandura, Bobo, and Beyond [00:15:16]Social Learning Theory (SLT) seeks to explain how we learn behaviors by observing and imitating others. This episode explores SLT's unique position between behaviorism, which focuses on observable behaviors, and cognitive psychology, which emphasizes internal processes like memory and perception.We'll discuss how Albert Bandura revolutionized psychology by developing new theories on aggression and modeled behaviors, challenging the dominant behaviorist views of the time. We'll cover Bandura's famous Bobo Doll experiment and its groundbreaking findings on observational learning, and we'll also introduce you to other key figures in the development of SLT, like Julian Rotter, who developed the concept of locus of control, and Walter Mischel, known for the marshmallow test on delayed gratification. We'll also tease apart the core concepts of SLT (modeling, self-efficacy, and vicarious reinforcement) to show how they work together to shape behavior. Finally, we'll discuss the broader applications and criticisms of SLT in areas like education, media, and even advertising, where the power of observed behavior is leveraged in both positive and controversial ways.Sources & Resources:The rollout for the updated FAFSA application has been delayed again : NPRAfter Botched Rollout, FAFSA Is Delayed for a Second Year - The New York TimesFAFSA Rollout Delayed Again: Here's What to Know | Paying for College | U.S. NewsU.S. Department of Education Announces Schedule and New Process to Launch 2025-26 FAFSA Form‘There's nothing more important right now': Cardona commits to fixing FAFSA disaster - POLITICOFederal judges allow Iowa book ban to take effect this school year | AP NewsObama addresses healthcare website glitches - BBC NewsFederal appeals court rules Iowa's book ban law can take effectSasse's spending, exit leave lingering questions at UFUniversity of Florida Pres. Kent Fuchs addresses Sasse allegations, plans for futureSasse stepped down. Donors and top officials say he was forced out. - The Independent Florida AlligatorBen Sasse Appears to Have Turned the University of Florida Into a Gravy Train for His PalsFormer UF President Ben Sasse defends spending after Gov. DeSantis raises concernsSocial cognitive theory | psychology | BritannicaSocial learning | Secondary Keywords: Imitation, Observational Learning & Reinforcement | BritannicaObservational learning | Psychology, Behavior & Cognitive Processes | BritannicaSocial learning theory - WikipediaAlbert Bandura | Biography, Theory, Experiment, & Facts | BritannicaAlbert Bandura, Leading Psychologist of Aggression, Dies at 95 - The New York TimesSelf-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change - A. Bandura - APA PsycNetSocial learning and clinical psychology : Rotter, Julian B : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet ArchiveJulian Rotter - WikipediaTheories of Emeritus Professor Julian Rotter Still Relevant to Field of Clinical Psychology - UConn TodayDecision Making Individual Differences Inventory - Internal-External ScaleIn Memoriam: Walter Mischel, Psychologist Who Developed Pioneering Marshmallow Test | Department of PsychologyWalter Mischel | Stanford Marshmallow Experiment, Cognitive Delay of Gratification | BritannicaHow many users visit Wikipedia daily? - Quora.The Bobo Doll Experiment - PsychestudyBiological Mechanisms for Observational Learning - PMCAlbert Bandura's experiments on aggression modeling in children: A psychoanalytic critique - PMCRemembrance For Walter Mischel, Psychologist Who Devised The Marshmallow Test

Unveiling the power of the unexpected, McKay ushers listeners into yet another captivating episode of the Open Your Eyes podcast here today. As he conducts his exploration into life's unpredictable nature, our host showcases how seemingly random events can spark profound change. Through the inspiring journeys of Olympic gymnasts Bart Conner and Nadia Comaneci, the episode highlights the impact of chance encounters that led to not only athletic brilliance but also an enduring partnership. From tales of paleontologist Sue Hendrickson's hunch leading to the most complete T-Rex skeleton, to Tom Selleck's fortuitous television appearance launching his acting career, the podcast emphasizes the importance of embracing life's detours. By remaining open to the whispers of intuition and unexpected encounters, McKay empowers listeners to find joy, forge connections, and discover their own extraordinary path in the ever-unfolding story of life.Episode Highlights:The importance of sticking with goals and overcoming challengesTrusting intuition and taking chances on seemingly random opportunitiesHow chance encounters can lead to profound life changesPersonal anecdotes of life-changing moments triggered by random eventsAlfred Bandura's studies on the impact of chance encounters and their role in shaping our livesEmbracing the unpredictable nature of life and remaining open to unexpected opportunitiesExamples such as a father's daily post-it notes to his daughter, showing how small actions can have a profound impactThe remarkable achievements and perseverance of such individuals as Bart Conner and Nadia Comaneci, who overcame significant challengesKey Takeaways:"You are filled with immense potential, and sometimes seeing things in a new way can unlock that potential.""From a chance meeting at a gymnastics competition to building a life together, their journey is a reminder that the future is often unpredictable.""Bandura believes that chance encounters with people and circumstances are the prominent forces that shape our life.""Sue Hendrickson found one of the most complete T-Rex skeletons ever discovered because she followed a hunch."“The journey of life is a tapestry woven with threads of uncertainty, possibility, and resilience.”“Embracing the idea that ‘you never know' empowers us to navigate life's challenges with courage and curiosity.”“So today, take a chance, introduce yourself, try something new, follow a hunch, listen to the voice inside that gives you a little inspiration.”Links:https://www.mckaychristensen.org/

本集節目由【君綺漾】贊助播出 ✏️填表立即預約：https://jc-young.com/WN056 「肉毒6u方案」

When God manifests his presence to believers in Christ, revival happens. Author Steve Gaines joins the program to share from his book "Revival: When God Comes to Church" as he describes how to experience true revival like we see in the book of Acts. Later, Ukrainian Pastor and speaker Igor Bandura joins Bill to discuss the depths of persecution in Ukraine and shares how we can pray and help those in harm's way. Faith Radio podcasts are made possible by your support. Give now: Click here

There is not much I enjoy more than sitting down with one of the innovative thinkers in compliance, Carsten Tams to find out what is on his mind regarding compliance. I recently had the opportunity to do so on the topic of making compliance training memorable. Over this short five-part series we will introduce the problem and challenges and then provide you with four proven strategies for success in your compliance training. In this Episode 4, we discuss making learning social and collaborative so that learners work together to search for understanding, meaning, or solutions. Social learning refers to learning with each other, from each other, and about each other. Social Learning Theory tells us that a lot of learning consist of observing and emulating others. Collaborative learning also affords participants with the opportunity to gain unique insights and skills. Cooperative learning allows participants to develop their social-emotional and interpersonal skills. They can practice ethical voice, simply by discussing an ethical situation with each other.  Tom and Carsten explore the concept of social learning, referencing theories by Lev Vygotsky on social constructivism and Albert Bandura on vicarious learning and self-efficacy, to explain how behaviors and ethical values are acquired through social interaction. They emphasize that learning ethics and compliance can be more effective in a social context, whether it is through discussing ethical dilemmas, observing others' behaviors, or learning from shared experiences. The dialogue also touches on the importance of building social capital through ethical discussions, which helps in crafting solutions to ethical challenges as a team. Furthermore, they argue that every aspect of work has an ethical dimension and that recognizing the ethical implications of seemingly minute actions can significantly contribute to an organization's ethical resilience. The episode concludes with anticipation for the next episode focusing on making compliance training fun.  Highlights and Key Issues Discussed ·      Introduction to Social Learning in Ethics and Compliance ·      Exploring Social Learning Theory ·      The Impact of Social Learning on Ethical Behavior ·      Social Learning's Role in Organizational Culture ·      Practical Examples of Social Learning in Action ·      Deep Dive into Safety and Ethics in the Workplace  Resources Articles and Books ·      Boyd, R., Richerson, P. J., & Henrich, J. (2011). The cultural niche: Why social learning is essential for human adaptation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(Supplement_2), 10918–10925. doi:10.1073/pnas.1100290108 ·      Reed, M., Evely, A. C., Cundill, G., Fazey, I., Glass, J., Laing, A., Newig, J., Parrish, B., Prell, C., Raymond, C., & Stringer, L. C. (2010). What is social learning? Ecology and Society, 15(4), [r1].  ·      Marjan Laal, Seyed Mohammad Ghodsi, Benefits of collaborative learning, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Volume 31, 2012, Pages 486-490, ISSN 1877-0428, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.12.091. ·      Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.  ·      Bauman, Z. (2000). Special essay. Am I my brother's keeper? European Journal of Social Work, 3(1), 5–11. doi:10.1080/714052807   Carsten Tams on LinkedIn Emagence Consulting Tom Fox Instagram Facebook YouTube Twitter LinkedIn

Jennifer Farris, owner of Bandura Design, discusses hiring and retaining employees.

We had something of a scheduling snafu this week and our guests didn't show! Don't worry, they'll be back. Bun in the mean time, Nikki and Pete carried on an impromptu AMA-QA show with members in the live chat and we decided to share a piece of it with you. The question that sparks the answer is, “how do you help others with transitions when you suck at them yourself?” Great question, and that gets us talking all about Bandura's thoughts on self-efficacy, how pride can help you learn hard things, and more! If you want to hear the whole conversation, head over to https://patreon.com/theadhdpodcast and sign up to get your very own member-edition podcast feed! Thanks everyone!Links & Notes Archive.org • Bandura's Original Publication Dig into the podcast Shownotes Database (00:00) - Welcome to Taking Control: The ADHD Podcast ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

For 18 year old Katie Rackliff it was just a normal night out. She had recently split up with her boyfriend and her friends thought it would do her good to get out for the evening. But there was confusion at the end of the evening after the nightclub and Katie didn't go home with her friends as planned. Instead, she met a brutal and terrifying death. In this episode of the UK true Crime podcast I look at the terrible murder of Katie Rackliff. Writing Credit: Megan Grant. See Megan's work on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/megathachristie/?igshid=MmIzYWVlNDQ5Yg%3D%3D Find out more about the UK True Crime Podcast: https://uktruecrime.com Buy my book 'Gone Fishing' about serial killer Angus Sinclair https://www.amazon.co.uk/Gone-Fishing-Unsolved-Crimes-Sinclair/dp/1914277201 Bloodhound Gin Please head to persiedistillery.com/uktc to find about more about UK True Crime Bloodhound Gin. Remember to use the special discount promo code UKTC (UK adults only). Sources 1.       https://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/museum-celebrates-140-years-camberleys-12484314  2.       https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/i-was-born-to-be-a-killer-every-night-i-see-the-devil-in-my-dreams-1275032.html 3.       https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/real-life-stories/25-years-ago-12-year-11293419 4.       https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-4996588/Sharon-Carr-murdered-Katie-Rackliff-just-12.html  5. https://www.thefreelibrary.com/GIRL+ACCUSED+OF+MURDER+AT+AGE+12%3B+Four-year+mystery+over+stabbed...-a061319669 6.       https://www.mylondon.news/news/south-london-news/britains-youngest-female-murderer-who-25103597 7.       https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5e6f684d2c94e038e9f35f1e  8.       https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/release-psycho-kill-again-18059871 9.       https://www.independent.co.uk/news/the-girl-who-killed-aged-12-1275008.html 10.     Crime & Investigation (European TV channel) (22 October 2017). Jo Frost on Britain's Killer Kids: Sharon Carr (Television documentary). Series 1, episode 3. 11.     https://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/local-news/katie-killer-set-fight-murder-4853422 12.     https://www.mind.org.uk/information-support/types-of-mental-health-problems/schizoaffective-disorder/about-schizoaffective-disorder/#:~:text=Schizoaffective%20disorder%20is%20a%20mental,Affective'%20refers%20to%20mood%20symptoms 13.https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Katie+killed+for+kicks+by+girl+aged+12%3B+CAGED%3A+Britain%27s+youngest...-a061018205 14.     https://www.independent.co.uk/news/murder-charge-girl-s-chilling-diary-of-death-1280819.html 15.     https://www.pressreader.com/uk/sunday-people/20200329/281891595372842 16.     https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11282267/sharon-carr-killer-faces-life-jail/ 17.     https://www.getsurrey.co.uk/britains-youngest-murderer-seeks-released-25104647 18.   Rodway, C., Norrington-Moore, V., While, D., Hunt, I.M., Flynn, S., Swinson, N., Roscoe, A., Appleby, L., & Shaw, J. (2011). A population-based study of juvenile perpetrators of homicide in England and Wales. Journal of Adolescence, 34(1), 19-28. 19.   Hill-Smith, A.J., Hugo, P., Hughes, P., Fonagy, P., & Hartman, D. (2002). Adolescents murderers: abuse and adversity in childhood. Journal of Adolescence, 25(2), 221-230. 20.    Gerard, F.J., Jackson, V., Chou, S., Whitfield, K.C. and Browne, K.D., 2014. An exploration of the current knowledge on young people who kill: A systematic review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 19(5), pp.559-571. 21.   Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. 22.   http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/3254806.stm 23.https://www.thefreelibrary.com/PASSION+KILLERS%3B+Cons+cancel+wedding+after+hearing+of+each+other%27s...-a077740168 24.   https://www.morrlaw.com/article/10-things-you-might-not-know-about-camberley/ 25.   https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-4996588/Sharon-Carr-murdered-Katie-Rackliff-just-12.html 26.   https://lionessrue.medium.com/the-youngest-killer-in-britain-wished-to-kill-her-victim-again-slowly-this-time-because-her-5d794e34679b

In the month of May, which is Mental Health Awareness Month, we're focusing on five different mental habits that you can have or adopt that either worsen depression, create depression, or are part of a relapse occurring. Last week, we focused on what is termed “internal orientation” – meaning that you fall into the habit of believing what your depression is telling you, either through your thoughts or your emotions. And depression often lies to you frankly. Today we're focusing on what's termed “stress generation.” What is that? When you're actually making choices and decisions that cause more stress for you. We'll talk more about it! It's when the “don't care” or “don't know” of depression leads to even more stress which then leads to more depression. And it's a bad habit. The SpeakPipe voicemail today is from an older woman who says that her grown adult children don't see her as a “person.” She doesn't feel included in their lives as important or viable. I hear this from all ages so it could be ageism… but we'll see if we can widen our lens a bit to discuss. Vital Links:  Link to Bandura's research on self-efficacy Click Here for the fabulous offer from Athletic Greens - now AG1 - with bonus product with your subscription! We welcome back BiOptimzers and Magnesium Breakthrough as a returning sponsor to SelfWork and they have a new offer! Just click here! Make sure you use the code "selfwork10" to check out free product! You can hear more about this and many other topics by listening to my podcast, SelfWork with Dr. Margaret Rutherford. Subscribe to my website and receive my weekly newsletter including a blog post and podcast! If you'd like to join my FaceBook closed group, then click here and answer the membership questions! Welcome! My book entitled Perfectly Hidden Depression has been published and you can order here! Its message is specifically for those with a struggle with strong perfectionism which acts to mask underlying emotional pain. But the many self-help techniques described can be used by everyone who chooses to begin to address emotions long hidden away that are clouding and sabotaging your current life. And it's available in paperback, eBook or as an audiobook! And there's another way to send me a message! You can record by clicking below and ask your question or make a comment. You'll have 90 seconds to do so and that time goes quickly. By recording, you're giving SelfWork (and me) permission to use your voice on the podcast. I'll look forward to hearing from you!