Podcast appearances and mentions of james gross

Location: RPR Fargo, ND Studio Hosts: Lynne Devitt and Aaron Bosh Guests: Sunshine Diem, Fr. James Gross

Fr. Gross explains the Jubilee year of 2025 and how it affects our local parishes along with the church as a whole

Fr. James Gross and Fr. Jason Lefor answer you questions and discuss Christmas

Adani chats with Kate Petrova, one of the first hosts of the Stanford Psychology Podcast and a fourth-year Ph.D. student in psychology at Stanford University. In this special episode from our Meet the Host series, Kate shares her journey into research and science communication, and how she grappled with the ups and downs of graduate school! She also discusses the value and challenges of interdisciplinarity, what affective science is and could look like in the future, and what most excites her about that picture!If you found this episode interesting at all, subscribe on our Substack and consider leaving us a good rating! It just takes a second but will allow us to reach more people and make them excited about psychology.Kate's website: https://www.kpetrova.com/homeKate's twitter: @kate_ptrvKate's paper on The Future of Emotion Regulation Research: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42761-023-00222-0 Kate's first episode with her advisor, Dr. James Gross: https://open.spotify.com/episode/4pSGtdQmywj2ubmFAeaDL5?si=1ZFsw45OQGKvWClAG6VYQgAdani's website: https://www.adaniabutto.comAdani's Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/adani.bsky.socialPodcast Twitter @StanfordPsyPodPodcast Substack Stanford Psychology PodcastLet us know what you thought of this episode, or of the podcast! :) stanfordpsychpodcast@gmail.com

Ohio Trooper murdered.Come visit us on YouTube to see the pics, diagrams, maps and much more on this episode as well as many others.www.youtube.com/@jamesr.howell

RPR's own Heather Karrow and frequent RPL host Fr. James Gross join us via phone from the National Eucharistic Congress in Indianapolis, Indiana to report on what's happening at this historic event! (Fr. Gross joins in the second half of this segment)

Fr. Jason Lefor and Fr. James Gross answers your questions about cohabitation and the priesthood

Fr. Jason Lefor and Fr. James Gross answer your questions about what Easter means and more!

Leading up to Micromobility Europe, James Gross talks the state of micromobility in Europe with Prabin Joel Jones, Founder and CEO of Mayten along with Augustin Friedel, Senior Manager, MHP – A Porsche Company. Topics Discussed: Shared and Owned Micromobility Prabin takes us through the Tier and Dott merger: Tier/Dott deal  Background of the deal What the deal is Challenges in merging Where can they go from here What does this mean for the industry? Augustin predicts continued consolidation in the shared mobility space, with potential mergers or acquisitions among companies like Bold, Lime, and Voi. Prabin critiques Bolt's strategy and their future as the next Uber. Augustin also spoke about the struggles of owned ebike companies and the shift towards software-defined vehicles (SDVs) and AVs to enhance customer experience and safety. Software Defined Vehicles, AI and Regulation Augustin elaborates on Europe's position on AVs, noting a lag compared to the US and China due to a lack of investment and no existing tech giants. The potential for software-defined vehicles to improve user experience and safety, but recognizing Europe's fragmented approach to AVs and mobility tech. How government and local authorities could play a more significant role in advancing AVs and shared mobility through funding and regulatory support. Augustin speculates about Europe's potential to catch up in the AV space by pooling resources from major automotive players and focusing on local mobility solutions. Safety is discussed as a primary concern for micromobility users, with different European cities showing varying degrees of progress in creating safe infrastructure for cyclists and scooter users. Despite the challenges faced by shared mobility and AVs, there's optimism about the future, with emphasis on the need for innovation, better regulation, and strategic investments. The discussion concludes with a call for continued exploration and improvement in the mobility space, acknowledging the long journey ahead but recognizing the opportunities for impactful change. Trends to watch: - Software-Defined Vehicles and Artificial Intelligence - The Role of Government in mobility investments and Regulation - Safety and Infrastructure

The sports crew (Dylan, Josh and Aaron) run through last week's sporting event and turn off their computers in case James Gross' Y2K scare comes to light. Josh is off to greener pastures and has final thoughts. The C2BL girls and the EvCo boys are interesting, while their counterparts are largely decided. Kody has mic trouble.

Fr. Jason Lefor and Fr. James Gross answer your questions about baptism, St. Paul's letters, and the pope

Straight Talk with Fr. Jason Lefor and Fr. James Gross

In an emergency podcast episode of Ride On!, James Gross and guest Prabin Joel Jones discuss the Chapter 11 bankruptcy of Bird, one of the high flying shared micromobility companies over the last 5 years.. They delve into the financial challenges and strategic missteps of Bird and other companies in the shared micromobility space, considering the broader implications for the industry. They then turn their attention to how you could build a shared micromobility company today and the opportunities that are now present as capital and some of the existing industry heads for the exit. 

Fresh off Micromobility America, James Gross talks with Jimmy Standley, the Co-Founder and CEO of Solé Bicycles. Solé Bicycles was founded in 2009, with the initial concept being a class project to create affordable bicycles, specifically aiming for a price tag of $200-$300. They subsequently won an Alibaba business plan competition, and used the $25,000 grant won to create their first product. They sold their products directly to customers, offering a high-quality product at a competitive price. They used the Shopify platform early on, and utilized digital marketing strategies on platforms such as Facebook and Instagram to grow their business. The brand focuses on being relevant culturally, collaborating with various DJs and other artists for special products and promotions. Highlights

Meet Jason and Camilla Iftakhar of Swifty Scooters. Swifty Scooters is an innovative micromobility company that specilizes in foldable and portable scooters for adults. James Gross talks with Jason and Camila about winning the Startup Awards at Micromobility America 2023 and their brand new electric Scooter, the G500. You can see their Startup Awards pitch here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRKQrqI04mM Highlights of the Talk

At Micromobility America, James Gross and Levi Conlow, CEO of Electric Bikes, discuss the company's rapid growth to become the #1 ebike seller in the US. He also shared insights into the ebike market, Lectric's DTC strategy, plans for new products, and the need for industry regulation while also being concern with some of the current legislation being pushed.

In the debut episode of our second season, we delve into a thought-provoking conversation with Dr. James Gross of Stanford University, an esteemed authority in the psychology of emotions and emotion regulation. Our discussion penetrates the intricate world of human emotions, highlighting the significant effects of cultural nuances and elaborating on the diverse strategies individuals adopt for emotional regulation. Dr. Gross underscores the necessity of self-awareness and comprehension in identifying and understanding our emotional frameworks as well as those operating in others. He elaborates on the pivotal role this understanding plays in our mental health, interpersonal relationships, and communal well-being. The episode serves not only as an academic discourse but also as a practical guide, offering valuable insights for those seeking to enhance their emotional intelligence and navigate the often turbulent waters of human emotion. This in-depth exploration transcends a basic understanding of the subject, providing listeners with a richer appreciation of the psychological mechanisms at play and imparting essential knowledge that is applicable in both personal introspection and professional contexts. Tune in to listen to my discussion with Dr. Gross. 

Does anyone really know what they're doing? How do we reward the competent and not the confident? And what's wrong with using TikTok for research?  RESOURCES:"Why Everyone Feels Like They're Faking It," by Leslie Jamison (The New Yorker, 2023)."The Impostor Phenomenon Revisited: Examining the Relationship between Workplace Impostor Thoughts and Interpersonal Effectiveness at Work," by Basima Tewfik (Academy of Management Journal, 2022)."You're Not an Imposter. You're Actually Pretty Amazing," by Kess Eruteya (Harvard Business Review, 2022)."Workplace ‘Impostor Thoughts' May Have a Genuine Upside," by Meredith Somers (Ideas Made to Matter, 2022).The Light We Carry: Overcoming in Uncertain Times, by Michelle Obama (2022)."Prevalence, Predictors, and Treatment of Impostor Syndrome: a Systematic Review," by Dena M. Bravata, Sharon A. Watts, Autumn L. Keefer, Divya K. Madhusudhan, Katie T. Taylor, Dani M. Clark, Ross S. Nelson, Kevin O. Cokley, and Heather K. Hagg (Journal of General Internal Medicine, 2020)."What Is Imposter Syndrome and How Can You Combat It?" by Elizabeth Cox (TED-Ed, 2018)."Is Resilience Only Skin Deep?: Rural African Americans' Socioeconomic Status-Related Risk and Competence in Preadolescence and Psychological Adjustment and Allostatic Load at Age 19," by Gene H. Brody, Tianyi Yu, Edith Chen, Gregory Miller, Steven M. Kogan, and Steven R. H. Beach (Psychological Science, 2013).“Emotion Generation and Emotion Regulation: One or Two Depends on Your Point of View,” by James Gross and Lisa Feldman Barrett (Emotion Review, 2011)."Good C.E.O.'s Are Insecure (and Know It)," by Adam Bryant (The New York Times, 2010).Pour Your Heart Into It: How Starbucks Built a Company One Cup at a Time, by Howard Schultz (1997).EXTRAS:"Reading Dostoevsky Behind Bars," by People I (Mostly) Admire (2023)."Can a Moonshot Approach to Mental Health Work?" by People I (Mostly) Admire (2023)."Why Do We Get Angry?" by No Stupid Questions (2023).

James Gross interviews entrepreneur Dan Carr about the U.S. launch of Wombi, an all-inclusive electric cargo bike subscription, in Culver City and West LA: https://wombi.us/ Wombi aims to encourage people in Los Angeles to drive less, be more active, and enjoy their city. They offer electric cargo bikes as an alternative to cars, addressing issues like traffic, social isolation, and fluctuating gas prices. Wombi started in Australia as Lug+Carrie and has a history of helping people find car alternatives. Customers can pick a Wombi bike that suits their lifestyle, customize it with accessories, and enjoy free delivery. The subscription includes full bike maintenance, insurance, and the flexibility to adapt to changing needs, such as adding child seats or pet carriers. There are two ebikes to choose from, the Tern Quick Haul and Tern GSD, with over 20 accessories. Chapters: 00:00 - 03:50 Why subscription + cargo ebikes is a game-changer 03:50 - 07:12 Backstory of the brand in Australia (Lug+Carrie) 07:12 - 13:45 Wombi's launch in SoCal 13:45 - 18:12 Lowering the barrier to entry with subscription 18:12 - 20:55 Why Wombi uses ebikes from Tern 20:55 - 23:03 Improvements in theft prevention 23:03 - 30:46 Incentives for families, schools, cities 30:46 - 35:09 Future growth plans

Welcome to Week 4 of our REAIR SUMMER! From this week till September 21st, we will be revisiting some of our favorite episodes around topics related to personal development and self-improvement!Kate chats with James Gross, Professor of Psychology at Stanford University and the director of the Stanford Psychophysiology Lab. His work focuses on emotions: What they are, how they unfold over time, and how people regulate them in different contexts. In this episode, James shares insights from a recent study examining the effects of brief emotion regulation interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic across 87 countries. James also discusses the broader implications of his work and talks about how people can learn to work with their emotions instead of fighting against them. Paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-021-01173-x WE NOW HAVE A SUBSTACK! Stay up to date with the pod and become part of the ever-growing community :) https://stanfordpsypod.substack.com/If you found this episode interesting at all, consider leaving us a good rating! It just takes a second but will allow us to reach more people and make them excited about psychology.

James Gross and Micah Toll discuss Micah's latest article on Electrek: The 'New York Times' attacks e-bikes while ignoring the real danger all around us  The New York Times published a pair of articles this weekend highlighting the rising number of deaths of cyclists riding electric bikes. However, in one of the most impressive feats of victim-blaming I've seen from the publication in some time, the NYT lays the onus on e-bikes instead of on the things killing their law abiding riders: cars. By all accounts, the e-bike rider was correctly and legally using the roadway in the only way he could. In fact, according to eye-witnesses of the car crash that killed the e-bike rider, he “did everything right,” including signaling his turn.  The article goes on to detail how just three days later another teenage e-bike rider was pulled out from under a BMW – thankfully still alive – and taken to the same emergency room where the previous boy had been pronounced dead. Apparent praise is lauded on Encinitas for soon afterward declaring “a state of emergency for e-bikes,” which is a bit like saying we could just solve the school shootings crisis if kids would stop walking into all of those damn bullets. Two other points that the NYT didn't do research on:  El Camino is the most dangerous road in Encinitas. We also had a pedestrian fatality this year of a young man at another area of high crash count in Encinitas. The Encinitas City Council in 2020 voted out speed cameras on El Camino Real, which is one of the biggest deterrents to speeding and distracted driving. It also set a terrible precedent that we don't believe in enforcing traffic laws and using technology to help create a consistent standard that we won't tolerate dangerous and illegal driving in our city.  https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/communities/north-county/encinitas/story/2020-05-10/encinitas-pulls-the-plug-on-red-light-camera-program  This quote should have led the NYT piece with some more research: “Nothing has changed, and hundreds of people are still getting these ridiculous fines,” Mosca said, referring to the $490 court-set cost of a ticket. Credit to Mayor Kranz and Councilmember Hinze for both voting against taking out the speeding/RL cameras.  Finally, a 56 year old woman was killed and a 32 old man is in critical condition from car violence while on bikes this week in San Diego. One was hit by a Chevy Silverago and the other a F-150. Can you guess which two cars are responsible for killing the most Americans every year? Imagine if we looked to regulate safety for those vehicles? I know that is not going to happen anytime soon, in the meantime we can make our streets safer through slower speeds, traffic enforcement and safety education for riders (and drivers) and not through victim blaming. https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/e-biker-dies-after-collision-with-pickup-in-gaslamp-quarter-san-diego-police/3272854/  Micah on Electrek: https://electrek.co/author/micahltoll/ Micah's ebike school channel: https://www.youtube.com/@EbikeSchool

Fr. Jason Lefor and Fr. James Gross answer questions and discuss the films Sound of Freedom and Casablanca

We finish our time with Jeff and Audrey McGee and then Marie Vetter speaks with Fr. Jason Lefor and Fr. James Gross

Sisu is an interconnected matter. Rarely is your sisu only your sisu or my sisu solely my sisu. One of the main findings of the ultra run field work portion of my PhD on sisu is the idea of sisu that exists, and is born from, the space in-between you and I. This episode is about how we inspire strength and fortitude in each other. Furthermore, our own sisu can be inspired by the strength we see and witness in others and their actions, and this impact  can extend to drawing strength from even those dear to us who are long gone. I speak of Viktor Frankl, present Angela Duckworth and James Gross´ concept of superordinate life-goals and propose some journaling work.Enjoy, brave ones!Show notes and links Viktor Frankl: Man´ s Search for Meaning: https://www.amazon.com/Mans-Search-Meaning-Viktor-Frankl/dp/1416524282Bushkin H, van Niekerk R, Stroud L. Searching for Meaning in Chaos: Viktor Frankl's Story. Eur J Psychol. 2021 Aug 31;17(3):233-242. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35136443/Duckworth,  A.  L., Peterson, C., Matthews, M. D., & Kelly, D. R. (2007). Grit: Perseverance and passion for long-term goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(6), 1087–1101. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6290064_Grit_Perseverance_and_Passion_for_Long-Term_Goals (open access)Duckworth, A., & Gross, J. J. (2014). Self-control and grit: Related but separable determinants of success. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23(5), 319–325. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280771582_Self-Control_and_Grit_Related_but_Separable_Determinants_of_Successand to hear more about sisu and gentle power and find the books as audio as well as hard cover and kindle: https://resources.soundstrue.com/podcast/emilia-elisabet-lahti-sisu-embodying-gentle-power/Find more about sisu at www.sisulab.com or check my book 'Gentle Power: A Revolution in How We Think, Lead, and Succeed Using the Finnish Art of Sisu' (2023). Sisu is a reserve of inner strength but it is also a way for us to know ourselves and impact the world in a positive way. Cultivating these reserves of inner strength starts with self-care and continues through self-inquiry. its power then extends to the world through our inspired acts of deep courage and compassion.

Fr. Jason Lefor and Fr. James Gross answer questions on straight talk!

Fr. Gross answered Listener's questions... and a surprise appearance of a special guest!

In western culture, there's been a long held view that our ability to reason should be placed above our emotions. But the hard truth is that our emotions are there and they're non-negotiable— and If you don't know how to work with them, they can own you.The good news is that you can work with them and that there are many systems for doing so. To boot, you can learn a ton by listening to your emotions in the right ways. Today's guests, Shinzen Young and James Gross will help us understand how to work with our emotions and offer both techniques in modern science and ancient wisdom in order to do so. Gross is the Ernest R. Hilgard Professor of Psychology at Stanford University, where he directs the Stanford Psychophysiology Laboratory. Young is an American mindfulness teacher and neuroscience research consultant. He teaches something called Unified Mindfulness, which you will hear him describe in this conversation.This is part one in a series we're calling The Art and Science of Keeping Your Sh*t Together. In each episode we bring together a meditative adept or Buddhist scholar and a respected scientist. The idea is to give you the best of both worlds to arm you with both modern and ancient tools for regulating your emotions. In this episode we talk about:James's “modal model” for understanding what emotions are and how they workJames's five different types of strategies you can use for regulating your emotionsShinzen's contention that emotions have two sides to themHow we can experience emotions with more fulfillment and less suffering via a mindfulness training he calls “focus factors”James's “process model of emotion regulation” What James believes are the elements that unite science and BuddhismShinzen's contention that anyone can experience massive benefits of mindfulness training if their meditation practice has four key componentsFull Shownotes: https://www.tenpercent.com/podcast-episode/shinzen-young-james-gross-519See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This week Oliver interviews James Gross, one of the co-founders of Micromobility Industries (which host this very podcast and the conference) to talk about the launch of Ride Review, the new source of reviews and ratings for all vehicles in the micromobility universe, from Onewheels to escooters/bikes, to golf carts and pods. As this space undergoes a Cambrian explosion of new vehicle models and types, Ride Review seeks to cover them and provide help riders who are trying to find the best option for them. Specifically they dig into: - What is Ride Review and why is it important? - The significance of discovery in a fast changing environment - The origin of why Micromobility Industries was uniquely placed to roll this out - The wider mission of Micromobility Industries and what they're trying to achieve in supporting the industry. You can follow James on Twitter and LinkedIn Catch us on Twitter @MicromobilityCo. Horace and Oliver are also active on their personal accounts and would love to hear from you. Our newsletter is completely free, and you can subscribe to have it in your inbox every Tuesday morning here! And for those who want more, we offer our Micromobility membership (mmm — “Triple M”) which includes exclusive content, swag, and conference discounts, as well as live calls with Horace and team! We're also on LinkedIn and Instagram.

Hosts Fr. Jason Lefor & Fr. James Gross visit with Stacey Hanson & the new Underwriting Coordinator at Real Presence Radio, Cody Klamm.

Eric chats with Carol Dweck and Matt Dixon. Carol is the Lewis and Virginia Eaton Professor of Psychology at Stanford, world-renowned for her work on fixed and growth mindsets. Her nearly 40-page long CV could not possibly be summarized here and includes prestigious awards such as the Yidan Prize for Education Research and the Distinguished Scientific Contribution Award from the American Psychological Association. Matt is a postdoc at Stanford working with Carol and James Gross. He studies the psychological and biological basis of motivation, decision-making, and emotion regulation strategy use in healthy and clinical populations.In this episode, Carol and Matt discuss their recent paper on the neuroscience of intelligent decision-making. Have we misunderstood – and underestimated – the role of the amygdala? Is our prefrontal cortex as important as we think? What even makes a decision intelligent? Throughout the chat, Carol and Matt propose a new conceptualization of intelligence that includes human motivation, not just abstract problem-solving skills. Eric asks them about clinical applications and how their work casts a more positive, a more understanding light on why adolescents are the way they are. Finally, they share advice for young scholars.WE NOW HAVE A SUBSTACK! Stay up to date with the pod and become part of the ever-growing community :) https://stanfordpsypod.substack.com/If you found this episode interesting at all, consider leaving us a good rating! It just takes a second but will allow us to reach more people and make them excited about psychology.Links:Paper: https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Frev0000339Carol's book Mindset: https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/44330/mindset-by-carol-s-dweck-phd/ Eric's websiteEric's Twitter @EricNeumannPsyPodcast Twitter @StanfordPsyPodPodcast Substack https://stanfordpsypod.substack.com/Let us know what you think of this episode, or of the podcast! :) stanfordpsychpodcast@gmail.com

Fr. Gross & Fr. Lefor answer your questions on the Catholic faith!

Hosts Fr. Jason Lefor & Fr. James Gross answered your questions!

Fr. Jason Lefor & Fr. James Gross answer your questions!

Fr. Jason Lefor & Fr. James Gross tool calls on the angels and archangels, experiences during Holy Week and more!

Have you ever wondered WHO exactly YOU are? We are more than our name, our job title or perhaps how we are viewed in our personal lives. Whatever part of the world you are listening to this podcast from, today's episode is going to stretch your mind, like it did mine, as we expand our field of view from our individual schools or workplaces to our cities, to go far outside of where we operate on a day-to-day basis to think on a different level than we usually think about ourselves, or those around us. We are going to use a brilliant article written by author, Chevening Alumnus (MSc in Psychology of Education--University of Bristol) and former National Geographic Learning Consultant, Andre Hedlund[i] called Learning Cosmos: A Voyage into the Learner's Universe[ii] to help take our imaginations on a trip, where we will “consider the multitude of principles, theories and frameworks that address learning, and compare (them) to the expanding universe. Different spheres, each one influencing the others.” Watch this interview on YouTube with visuals here https://youtu.be/wsJ8NpYawdM On this episode you will learn: ✔︎ How Andre Hedlund compared learning to the Cosmos for a Macro vs Micro view of learning. ✔︎ How the 6 SEL Competencies compare to the Cosmos and Larger Universe. ✔︎ How Andre took the most current and well-known educational frameworks and theories and mapped them to the Cosmos for a deeper look at learning. ✔︎ How looking at something from a new angle (Macro vs Micro) can give you a new perspective, solve problems, and open your eyes to new possibilities. Today Andre will look at neuroscience and psychology and try to bring together principles about cognition, emotion, attitudes and beliefs, motivation, learning design, and context (many of the topics we have been talking about on this podcast for the past 3 years) into an illustration that resembles the universe so we can see how we fit into our world, from a different point of view, and Andre's hope is that this “Learning Cosmos Angle can help students, teachers, schools, families and policymakers admire and reflect on the amazing universe surrounding our learners.” (Hedlund). Welcome back to The Neuroscience Meets Social and Emotional Learning podcast, EPISODE #205, I'm Andrea Samadi, author and educator from Toronto, Canada, now in Arizona, and today's guest is an expert in Education, the Science of Learning, Neuroscience, Psychology, Pedagogy, and the Methodology Behind how we learn. If you are interested in neuroscience and learning, which I'm sure you are,  if you've been tuning into our podcast, I know this episode will expand your thinking, like it did mine, as we hear from Andre's perspective why neuroscience alone cannot tell us how we learn. We must look at psychology and education for these answers, but next, he takes it a step further with an empowering, mind-boggling thought. Imagine this if you will… “The Cosmos is within us. We are all made of star stuff. We are a way for the Universe to know itself.” –Astrophysicist, Carl Sagan[iii] This quote opens Andre's article, and it took me back to the day I was first introduced to this topic of neuroscience, before I knew how the brain and learning were connected. I had many questions. How on the earth (pun intended) is the learning connected to Cosmos? Wait, what is the Cosmos again? It's been a while since I studied the planets and I never really got into Star Trek or those out of space shows. What does it mean when he says “the cosmos is within us?” I've been wrapped up in the brain for the past few years and had to look up what exactly this means. The funny part of researching and coming up with some questions for Andre to help us to dive deeper into this topic, was that I shared on LinkedIn that I was looking forward to this interview, as I spent Friday night reading Andre's new book, The Owl Factor: Reframing Your Teaching Philosophy A Reflective and Practical Guide for Teachers and Trainers, and Greg Link, who I've mentioned before on this podcast, who took Stephen Covey's  7 Habits book to great heights, commented on the post and got me to think even harder about the questions I was going to come up with. I don't think there are any accidents in life, and when Andre caught Greg's attention, I felt like I had better dig deep into this topic and see if we can all reframe our teaching philosophy with this new perspective. Let's meet Andre Hedlund, and take this Voyage into the Learner's Universe.[iv] Welcome Andre, all the way from Brazil.  We do have a good number of listeners from your past of the world, and after reading your article, it really did make sense to me, showing me how someone in another country, can hold so much passion for this topic, (like I think I do) but with a different angle. Thank you very much for contacting me and sharing your work that I know will help us to all see things in a different way today. INTRO Q: So, this podcast is The Neuroscience Meets Social and Emotional Learning Podcast, as you know, and I clearly remember when we made the connection with Neuroscience and the SEL competencies that we talk about all the time on this podcast. How on the earth did you make the connection with learning and the cosmos? Q1: Where do we begin? What is the science of learning? What should we all know about how our genetics and epigenetics impact our learning? (for ourselves, our own children, and our students?). What does this mean for the future? Gene editing? Q2: I like the idea of looking at things from a different perspective to learn something new but I've got to say that using diagrams, or frameworks have been a key component for me to break down difficult concepts. Even Greg Link mentioned it to me when looking for ideas to promote my book to schools, and he asked me “are the concepts in your book clear like Covey's 7 Habits?” and it made me think of the importance of using frameworks or images to convey what I wanted to teach. So I picked these 6 SEL Competencies that we have been focused on throughout this podcast. How did you take ALL the theories and frameworks connected to learning and compare it to the Universe/Cosmos? What is the first competency that's important? Is it our SELF-AWARENESS (who we are), our identity? To me, you've put the self-worth or identity first, with The Four Pillars of Learning (attention, engagement, error feedback, and consolidation) (Dehaene 2020) which overlaps with the Engage, Build, Consolidate Framework (Paul Howard Jones 2018). 4 Pillars of Learning -How do these make us self-aware? Do you have examples or ideas to build on this? Then you compare the cognitive sphere to earth's conditions to support life (like the presence of liquid water or breathable air). Do you mean that self-awareness that comes with motivation, attitudes and beliefs, emotional and cognitive skills is integral for us, like water and air is on the planet? (Do I understand this correctly?) Q3: Is Self-regulation next? With the research on Emotional Intelligence by Salovey and Mayer (1990S) popularized by Daniel Goleman (1995), Emotion Regulation by James Gross and Ross Thompson and the Theory of Constructed Emotion (Lisa Feldman Barrett 2017). Then you compare our emotions to our planet's climate and say “our mood is like earth's weather.” Q4: Next is our attitudes and beliefs about learning (or how learning works)  that should include Metacognition, (thinking about thinking or learning how to learn), Growth Mindset (one's belief they can improve their intelligence through commitment and effort) and Self-Efficacy (one's ability to set and achieve goals). Q5: Motivation is important and must include autonomy, relatedness and competence. Daniel Pink believes what drives people is autonomy, mastery and purpose. Q6: Macrocosm vs Solar System Level? Earth and why it's perfect for life. Design our lessons so student's flourish. Flexible, active and desirable difficulties. Q7: Interstellar Level? Systems Theory (we just mentioned this with Joshua Freedman Interview). What impacts an individual's development. Q8: Environmental? Q9: Conclusion--What was your purpose/goal of creating this theory? What feedback have you received so far? Q10- What's next? Andrea closes this episode with her thoughts on how thinking "macro vs micro" can help us to look at things in a different way, like André did with education, to solve problems, create new ideas, and innovate.  FOLLOW ANDRÉ HEDLUND Twitter https://twitter.com/andrelshedlund  LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/andr%C3%A9-hedlund-msc-he-him-83411621/  Instagram https://www.instagram.com/andre_hedlund/?hl=en  Website https://edcrocks.com/ BIO: Andre Hedlund is a Chevening Alumnus (MSc in Psychology of Education - University of Bristol) and former National Geographic Learning Consultant and Materials Reviewer. His work includes teacher education for Academy of Distinction (Italy), Gallery Teachers (Europe), and Amolingua, with several international projects including LINGO+(awarded Erasmus+ funding). Andre is a Bilingual Program Mentor for Edify Education and a guest lecturer on Multilingualism, Global Education, and Neuroscience at PUCPR. He is also a member of the BRAZ-TESOL Mind, Brain, and Education (MBE) SIG, and he blogs at edcrocks.com REFERENCES: [i] https://edcrocks.com/ [ii] https://www.academia.edu/49459091/Learning_Cosmos_Article [iii] We Are Made of Star Stuff Published on YouTube Nov. 3, 2014 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bm479V8qPs [iv] Learning Cosmos by Andre Hedlund Published on YouTube March 13, 2022 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yuv5g71wiEQ&t=1067s

Fr. Lefor & Fr. Gross answered your questions!

Hi everyone and thanks for taking the time to join me today! Today's topic is all about emotional regulation in youth academy football.   To highlight the degree of complexity in this area, I have pinched a quote from my guests PhD, from the influential scientist James Gross, which reads “The ambitious study of emotion has been described as trying to catch butterflies, only harder”. So, If you work with adolescents, or have adolescent children, then you will undoubtedly have encountered a pupil, athlete, son or daughter who is navigating  through this tumultuous time of emotional challenges.  The question is how do we mange these challenges and why do they occur in the first place? To answer these questions, my guest today is Dr Philippa McGregor, who is a performance psychology consultant, who has worked with youth players at Fulham FC, Man city FC and currently works with the U17 England Football Women's team. Philippa wrote a great PhD titled ‘The development, implementation and evaluation of an emotion focussed intervention in youth academy football'.  In my conversation with Philippa, we discussed how well-being and performance are intertwined, focussing on the person first and foremost,  normalising emotional experiences and the emotional, cognitive and social challenges during the 3 stages of adolescence. I really hope you gain some nuggets from our conversation so without further ado please welcome Dr Philippa McGregor.   Resources Philippa McGregor twitter: @Philippa1606 Philippa's PhD:  The development, implementation and evaluation of an emotion-focused intervention in youth academy football (lboro.ac.uk) Message in a bottle – life is a journey and full of highs and lows, embrace the ride, no limits on what you can achieve except the limits your put on yourself   Once again thank you for taking the time to listen. If you enjoyed todays conversation, please leave a review on Apple Podcasts/iTunes as well as sharing with a friend or colleague who you think would benefit from the episode. It's been great to hang out with you today and as always keep believing, moving, and growing!    Follow Dan:   Twitter: Twitter.com/believemovegrow   Track: Down the street — Vendredi [Audio Library Release] Music provided by Audio Library Plus Watch: https://youtu.be/FU0IiZj3H2g Free Download / Stream: https://alplus.io/down-the-street   

Fr. Gross & Fr. Lefor answered your questions!

IN THIS EPISODE, WE COVER: [0:55] – Intro to James [5:37] – What's important for the future of work   [13:23] – A shifting workforce [19:35] – The power of automation [21:07] – Variance [27:39] – The future of sales [38:32] – James' professional mantra MORE ON JAMES:James Gross is a sales and marketing leader with emphasis in emerging trends and technologies. He currently focuses on working at the intersection of media, culture, and technology and how to bring safe and scalable platforms and solutions to brand marketers.MORE ON RAMPED: Check us out at www.rampedcareers.com Interested in becoming a Ramped Professional? Sign up here: https://rampedcareers.com/candidate-form/ Interested in becoming a Ramped Corporate Partner? Email us at sales@rampedcareers.com

Fr. James Gross & Fr. Jason Lefor answered your questions!

Fr. Jason Lefor & Fr. James Gross answer your questions on the Christmas season!

Hosts Fr. Jason Lefor & Fr. James Gross share their thoughts on this morning's show.

James Gross Co-Founder, Variance and Rhett Power discuss letting your product speak for itself and is that the right approach. #lisbon2021

Chris Newbold: Hello, Well-Being friends. Welcome to the Path to Well-Being in Law podcast, an initiative of the Institute for Well-Being in Law. I'm your co-host, Chris Newbold, executive vice-president of ALPS Malpractice Insurance. As you know, our goal here on the podcast is to introduce you to though† leaders doing meaningful work in the well-being space within the legal profession and in the process, build and nurture a national network of well-being advocates intent on creating a culture shift within the profession. I'm very excited to be welcomed by my co-host, Bree Buchanan. Bree, how are you today? Bree Buchanan: I'm doing great, Chris. It's great to be back with you. We've taken a little break. Chris Newbold: It is. We are heading into the holidays here. Bree, I think you and I have been on almost a three-month hiatus from the podcast, but that does not mean that we have not been busy and active on the well-being front. I thought we'd take a couple minutes here in the beginning, just to talk about some of the things, Bree, that are happening at the national level, particularly with respect to the Institute for Well-Being and Law. Bree Buchanan: Absolutely, Chris. Yeah, the absence of us from the podcast actually indicates that we've been very busy in the kitchen cooking up and creating this new national think tank. So over the past couple of months, we have done amazing things. We've constituted and oriented a 21-member advisory board of some of the best minds around the country and the well-being movement. We've also opened up applications for our committee structure and God, we had so much interest. It was amazing that there were actually people that we had to turn away, and we now have over 110 people on our committees. So we have really filled out the people that are working on this movement and it's exciting to have so many new folks on board and a little scary, too. Chris Newbold: Yeah. I think it's fair to say that, again, as the topic of well-being continues to take on, it's been in the national forefront for quite a while, but I think one of the things as leaders that we've been looking to do is to welcome more leaders and ambassadors into the movement. Boy, I know it was heartwarming for me to see the level of individuals out there around the country and oftentimes, worldwide, who are saying, "I want to be a part of this. I want to engage in it." When you put out a call for volunteers to join the movement, the fact that we had over 100 responses certainly, to me, indicated that, again, there are folks that really want to work on this issue and we are certainly, encouraging both them to do that and for us to continue to join the movement and there's lots of different ways to be able to do that. Bree Buchanan: Yeah. Absolutely. Another thing that's an indicator of what's going on our first annual conference, which is going to be virtual, is coming- Chris Newbold: Yeah. Big deal, huh? Big deal. Bree Buchanan: It is January 19th through the 21st, three days, three tracks, pricing, so people can pick a day or pick the whole thing. Again, just like with the committees, we put out the RFP and we got so many people wanting to be a presenter at the conference. I know it was incredibly difficult to choose, and so I think that bodes well also just for the quality of what we're going to end up having. So if people are listening to this, please go check out our website at lawyerwellbeing.net and register because it's coming up. By the time you're hearing this, it's around the corner. Chris Newbold: Yeah. Let's say that one more time, so lawyerwellbeing.net. I think that is really the welcoming mat to the movement. Again, there's still opportunities in there to fill out and join the movement to learn more about news and resources going on around the country. The conference that's coming up in January, many of the folks and listeners of this podcast are also very actively involved in Well-Being Week in Law, which was another great success back in May. So as we, Bree and I very much take pride in the fact that we're a little bit facilitating and being dot connectors of the movement. I think that is the glue that still keeps this movement together. Bree Buchanan: Absolutely. Absolutely. Chris Newbold: So, well, let's get into the podcast today. Today, I want to circle back to the influence of research and scholarship in the real realm of well-being. We're really excited to welcome Professor Terry Maroney from Vanderbilt University, who specifically has explored, I'm super excited to be able to hear about the intersection of law, emotion and the judiciary, which I don't think we've had a conversation about those particular intersections. Bree, would you be so kind to introduce Professor Maroney to the listeners? Bree Buchanan: Absolutely. I've worked with Terry on a variety projects in the past, so I have the honor of also a part of her introduction is saying that she's a friend and a colleague. So the official introduction is that Terry Maroney is a professor of law and a professor of medicine, health, and society, and the Robert S. and Teresa L. Reder Chair of Law at Vanderbilt University in Nashville. She's been a fellow at the Center for the Advanced Study in Behavioral Sciences at Stanford, and she researches the interaction of emotion and law with a focus on the role of emotion and judicial experience and behavior, which I just find fascinating. As a leader in state and federal judicial education on these topics, she graduated from Oberlin College and NYU School of Law, summa cum laude; clerked for Honorable Amalya Kearse of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, and was a litigator at the and are Urban Justice Center and at Global Firm, WilmerHale. So Terry, welcome. So glad you're here with us today. Terry Maroney: Thank you. It's really wonderful to be here. Bree Buchanan: So just before we get started, the idea of judges and their emotions and I think who is listening to this and those phrases who's been in a courtroom, probably has a story to share about the emotional regulation or that lack thereof in the judiciary. But it's not something you hear discussed, and so I'm delighted that we're going to really talk about this today, but Terry, I'm going to start you off with a question that we start all of our guests off, just to give us its view and to our guests and their background. So are there, were there experiences in your life that's really a driver of the passion you have for this work in general, and particularly, in the Well-Being and Law Movement? Terry Maroney: Absolutely. Before I became a lawyer, I was a social services professional, and also worked in community activism in New York City in the early '90s, almost all around the HIV-Aids crisis at that time. Clearly, my passion for people and their experiences and what can make their lives better didn't originate during that era of my life, but it certainly solidified during that era of my life. When I faced a bit of crossroads professionally, when I knew I'd reached a level where I wanted to go to grad school and pursue some different kind of work I really was choosing between, say, a public health career or a social work psychology career or law. Terry Maroney: Really, I could have gone in any those ways, so what I have done is I chose law, but I've circled my way back to all of those things. So I've managed to do them all at once in some way. So I was always very, very interested in psychology and counseling and what makes people tick, how I can, again, be an agent for positive change in people's lives, and in communities then and after a very satisfying career as a litigator, and then also, as a law professor have found a way, I think, to weave all those interests together. Chris Newbold: Yeah. I enjoyed reading your career arc, which was law student to law clerk, law clerk to litigator, litigator supplemented with teaching and then to academia. I'm just curious what your reflections on that and the impact that you're having, and from there, researching the judiciary, how did you get into that particular area? Terry Maroney: Yeah, those are all good questions. Again, the arc of one's life always looks quite tidy and in the rear view mirror it never looks like that in the living of it. But I've described to you one crossroads I took, which result to me going into law at all. A second crossroads was once I was a number of years into my litigation career, I really needed to decide was that what I wanted to stay in for the foreseeable future, or did I want to move into academia? Pardon me, and I chose to go into academia for a number of reasons. One is that I found myself always being intrigued by the big issues and litigation provided me many wonderful opportunities to engage with big issues. I was very lucky in the kind of practice I had, but I found that that's where I was happiest. I thought, "Well, if I go into academia, I can do that all the time." I also love teaching and wanted to be able to build that into my day-to-day life, so that's the choice I made. Terry Maroney: I have to say, just like my first choice was actually a difficult one, because there are aspects of legal practice that I quite miss, and I miss, again, the human element of it, the human stories. So that gets to how I got to researching the judiciary. So there's a long story and there's a short story. I shall endeavor to tell you the short story. When I was still in practice, I had the privilege of working on an insanely interesting case involving a white-collar criminal defendant, who, as we had discovered had suffered a very serious form of brain injury from a medical incident. This brain injury from this medical incident had seriously impaired some of the emotional processing aspects of her brain function. So she was cognitively and intellectually intact, but emotionally, extremely disabled in a way that actually directly contributed to the behavior for which she been [inaudible 00:11:35] a very small part of a very, very large Ponzi scheme, exactly the kind of scheme that somebody [inaudible 00:11:45] Terry Maroney: So working on that case, I became absolutely fascinated by the interaction at the psychological and at the neurological level between emotion and reason. I became very puzzled about why law, unlike the fields I had been in before, for example, psychology and social work, why law had this very entrenched, very strange idea that emotions and rationality are separable and opposing forces and that law existed for the purpose of privileging one at the expense of the other. I thought that was weird. I thought, to use a technical term, it didn't match up with anything I knew about human behavior and human life and what creates a good and flourishing human life. The more I read about the science, I realized that I wasn't alone in that, and if anything was alone, it was law that held onto this very irrational idea about the role of emotion. Terry Maroney: So when I went into academia, that was the first thing I started writing about and it's like a minor hits of vein. I hit vein and I've literally just never left it, and as I've gotten deeper and deeper into it, just because it's such an incredibly rich vein to say, "What are all the implications for the legal system, for legal theory, for legal practice of us believing some version of a big lie about the way humans function? What are all the implications of that?" That's the work of many lifetimes for many people, I'm just doing my bit. As I continued on that vein, the bit that I found that has been the most personally satisfying has been judges that I realized that if there's a big lie going around about emotion and reason being separable and emotion being the enemy of reason, nowhere is that stronger than with judges and judging. They are what historically have been thought of as the paragons of should be emotionless, or what I've called 'the cultural script of judicial dispassion.' Terry Maroney: That's a very definition of a good judge is a judge who has eradicated all emotions in the course of his or her work, and that just can't be right. So there you go. That was the medium-size story, but again, I've hit that sub-vein probably about 10 years ago and, again, just never left it. It has led me into an incredibly satisfying research agenda, but even more importantly, into a very satisfying work with individual judges and with the judiciary, which has just really deepened my regard and affection for the profession and my commitment to trying to make them live happier, healthier lives. So, Bree, you'll appreciate this, but shortly after the presentation that you and I were both a part of at a circuit court conference recently, a judge came up to me and said, "You know what? I'm glad we're talking about this, because healthy judges make for healthy courts and healthy courts make for a healthy, fair society." I said, "That's it, in a nutshell. That's my life. There you go." Chris Newbold: There you go. Terry Maroney: Right? Really, I felt seen and heard. I said, "Exactly." Bree Buchanan: Oh, wow. Terry Maroney: Yeah. Bree Buchanan: Yeah, and it is really meaningful. Just, again, going back to my days as a litigator, there were so many times when I was in the courtroom where I saw the exact opposite going on of what you would expect or would want. You just really have to worry about the impact that it has on people, the litigants, who were there and saying, "This is what the civil justice or the criminal justice system is about." But I don't want to get ahead of ourselves. Let's continue laying things out here, Terry. Talk to us some more about the research you've conducted of the judiciary. What has been your [crosstalk 00:15:58] Terry Maroney: Absolutely. [crosstalk 00:15:59] Yeah. So for a long time, I was just trying to set the theoretical foundation and just trying to bring into legal theory the idea that is so prominent in virtually every other discipline these days, which is that you can't understand human behavior without understanding emotion, and the end goal is not emotional eradication. That's actually not a sensible or possible or productive target to aim for. So this big lie or the cultural script of dispassion is not something that, of course we can't ever get there, but the trying to get there will do good things for us. The trying to get there actually does bad things for us. It does bad things for judges. It does bad things for the court. It does bad things for society because what I bring in my research and research of primarily from affective science and from the sociology of emotion shows is that the effort it takes for judges to try to divest themselves of a normal range of human emotion is itself, counterproductive. Terry Maroney: So I could have a much longer conversation with you about that, but the core message is the most important thing that judges can do is to notice, name, and understand their work-related emotions and not assume that they're a bad thing. Assume that they're a relevant and interesting thing that should be interrogated so you can decide what to do with them. Some you're going to want to try to set aside some, you're going to follow, some you're going to try to morph in some way, again, much longer conversations, but that's the core message. So what I have done in addition to just bringing in research, again, primarily from affective psychology and sociology and showing how it sheds light on judges and judging about how we should encourage judges to notice, name, and understand their emotions. Terry Maroney: In the more recent years, I've moved on from that theoretical foundation and started doing empirical research of my own, and that has two, well, I guess at this point, I should say three main prongs. So the largest prong is that for a number of years now, I have been conducting a national purposive sample qualitative interview study with federal judges, both districts, judges, and judges in the courts of appeal, where I go and I talk to a diversity of judges from all over the country with different geographies, different types of dockets, different number of years on the bench, a diversity in terms of gender, race, political party of the appointed president, et cetera, and just invite them to educate me about their work-related emotions; what they are, why they think they have them, what impact they think they have, but in a very biologic way, trying to get past the party line or generalities and get very, very specific like, "Let's talk through an instance in which you are unhappy with how you handled a particular situation, for example." Terry Maroney: So these are very deep, and I dare say, intimate conversations and I feel extremely privileged to have had so many of them. So that is prong number one, which is a serious qualitative deep dive, just into the mental maps that judges have of the kinds of emotional experiences they have at work, what they think they're about, how they try to manage them and why, and what impact they have on them and their families. So that's prong one. Prong two is more squarely about wellness, and I see these things as quite intertwined. In fact, I came to the wellness game a little late. I was very much about emotion and emotion regulation in judges. I found that I kept going to judicial conferences and being put in the wellness programming section of the conference. I'd be like, "No, no, no, I don't do wellness work. I do high-level theoretical work about the interplay of cognition emotion." Terry Maroney: Then after a few years of that, I was like, "Oh no, wait. I am doing all this work," and that's a good thing. So I'll just give you one snippet about why I think this is such an important connection is I've focused for a long time on the ways in which judges try to regulate their emotions at work, which means why are they motivated to do so? How are they trying to do it? Are they using regulation strategies that have been shown to be productive to decision making or that cause undue cognitive load or are counterproductive, et cetera. It turns out that one of the biggest predictors of burnout, for example, in workers, and I think of judges as a species of worker, is basically how well or how poorly they do with their emotion regulation. So I'm drawing on work on the concept of emotional labor, for example. I started to see that all these things are intertwined. Terry Maroney: So if judges can notice, name, and understand their work related emotions and treat them with a curiosity and a value-neutral perspective that enables to figure out again, what are they about? Are they appropriate? What should I do with them? Why? If they can do that, not only is there judging better because it's a factor that if unacknowledged could have impact that you're not conscious of, right? It gives judges more tools with which to choose what they do and do not incorporate into their behavior and decision making. It allows emotion to enrich that decision making in some instances and it allows them to space and time to set them aside in others, if they can do that, in my view, then they're at far lesser risk of some of the well-being impacts that we worry about such as burnout, compassion fatigue, right? People who are more granular with their emotions are better at emotion regulation. People who are more granular with their emotions have better health outcomes. These things are interconnected. They drink less when they're upset. So again, I've stopped resisting the wellness pull. Bree Buchanan: Good. Good. Terry Maroney: Okay. I've forgotten, I lost track now. I'm in prong number two or three? It doesn't really matter. Here's the wellness prong. So what I've started doing most recently is literally to study the judicial wellness movement. I have had a small army of really wonderful research assistants and some great colleagues in the qualitative research core at Vanderbilt. We have been, basically, trying to figure out what is this quote/unquote movement? Why now? Why are we focusing on not just lawyer wellness, but specifically now judicial wellness? What do we think the problem is? Why do we think that and what are we trying to do about it and why? So we've literally just been scrubbing the internet for any and all evidence of pamphlets, conferences, articles, YouTube videos, judicial education seminars about judicial wellness and also interviewing judicial wellness leaders and are trying to figure out what is this movement? What's it trying to do and why? And mapping that data onto wellness research to see if there are obvious gaps or areas of growth. So that's been a lot of fun. Bree Buchanan: Wow. That's fascinating. Awesome. Listen, I wanted to ask you, Terry, just a little bit digging down in the specific area around compassion fatigue, which is also known as secondary PTSD [crosstalk 00:24:43]. Terry Maroney: Mm-hmm (affirmative), or secondary trauma. Yeah. Bree Buchanan: Yeah, in my work with a judiciary in education, et cetera, that seems to be a really big topic. Can you unpack that a little bit about a little bit what it is and what you are seeing within the judiciary these days? Terry Maroney: Yeah. Absolutely. I don't want to make any grand claims about where the judiciary, in general, is with compassion fatigue, but I definitely believe it to be a problem for many, and a severe problem for some. So the way I think about it is very similar to what you just said, Bree. It's a secondary form of trauma, it like a contact trauma and those sorts of things that I hear judges talk to me about that are relevant to this, I think are, for example, a lot of them talk about being exposed to really traumatic evidence. Think about the role of a judge. Let's think for a moment about trial judges in cases at might involve traumatic evidence, which could be in a civil case, like with a gruesome injury, or it could be in a criminal case. For example, a lot of judges are exposed to direct evidence of extreme child sexual abuse and child pornography. Terry Maroney: So the role of a trial judge is to look at all that stuff and figure out what can and can't go to the jury, and part of that determination is how traumatic is this going to be for the jury? Is it going to be so, so overwhelming that they can't get whatever the intended informational value is out of it? Well, in order to make that determination, the judge has to look at it herself. Then she has to guess, based on her own level of shock and trauma, what the average juror's level of shock and trauma is going to be. That's just one example, but it's a job that literally requires you to become traumatized so that you can do your job. That's a really hard thing to put on normal human beings. So that's just one example, but a lot of judges say the hardest thing about what they do, and this goes for trial and appellate judges is just being exposed to how broken the world is. Terry Maroney: They often say things like "I see people at their worst. I never hear a good story. Federal judges love doing naturalization ceremonies, because it's such a happy day. State court judges love to do adoption, consent adoption because they finally get to do something good." It can be a real grind. I hear judges say, "I basically process evictions all day and I can't do anything about it." So it's that combination of requiring the judge to have emotionally difficult experiences. It's being exposed to a very disproportionately negative account of human reality because most reasons why people are in court are not good reasons. Somebody's usually very unhappy, and then the sense frustration that can be the nail in that coffin I think, and that, "I can't really do anything about it. I can't solve the problem of child pornography. I can just handle this one case. I can't really solve the housing crisis. All I do is inflict pain by processing evictions and I have no choice." Terry Maroney: So I think that's the danger zone for judges is that if they're getting those negative inputs without any opportunities to feel elevated or to feel a sense of agency, I think that's when you get into compassion fatigue and that can just make people shut down. One judge who was interviewed by some colleagues of mine in Australia at one point said, "You have a choice of remaining open to it all, which you can't do because then your emotions are essentially too raw at all times, or just growing a skin on you thick as a rhino," and this judge's words, in which case you can't be a good judge because he lost the feeling for humanity. So there's this feeling of a rock and hard place, and I'm interested in the third way, what's not the rock and what's not the hard place? How can you notice them even understand the things that are hard and process them and think about them and work through them in a way that allows you to be healthy and to do your job well, but also take care of yourself. Chris Newbold: All right. Let's take a quick break right here. Terry, I think you've done a wonderful job setting the table about all the different areas that you've been involved with. I'd love to continue to drill down in the second half about where do we go and what you've found and what you advise, as we think about the confidence in the legal system is so important in terms of the wellness of our judges is to the public's confidence and its effectiveness. I just love the work that you're doing. I got to imagine that there's not a lot of people doing what you do, which is, I think another really interesting part of- Terry Maroney: That is true. [crosstalk 00:30:15] Chris Newbold: ... who you are and [crosstalk 00:30:15]. Terry Maroney: I wish there were more. Maybe they'll hear this podcast. Chris Newbold: That's right. That's right. So let's take a quick break. — Advertisement: Meet VERA, your firm's Virtual Ethics Risk Assessment Guide developed by ALPS, VERA's purpose is to help you uncover risk management blind spots from client intake to calendaring, to cybersecurity, and more. Vera: "I require only your honest input to my short series of questions. I will offer you a summary of recommendations to provide course corrections if needed, and to keep your firm on the right path." Generous and discreet, VERA is a free and anonymous risk management guide from ALPS to help firms like yours be their best. Visit VERA at alpsinsurance.com/vera. — Chris Newbold: All right. Welcome back. We are joined by Professor Terry Maroney from Vanderbilt University, and we are exploring law and emotion and the judiciary. Terry, I want to pick up a little bit about just how you see your own personal role. Obviously, you've done a lot of work as you've done, you're working to understand the forces that are affecting judicial effectiveness, and ultimately, confidence in the system. Do you see yourself as an insider or outsider to the wellness movement as you've observed? Do you see yourself as an advocate after you've conducted the research? Are you building the trail map to a better judicial outcome and a better way of going about the work from the bench? I just love the fact of what got you involved in this movement, that's to help people. I certainly can see that the way that you're going about it is a very interesting one, in which there can't be many others in your space who are actually doing what you're doing. Terry Maroney: Yes, that's true. Again, I wasn't joking when I said I hope some people join me after hearing this podcast, because we need more people in this strange, little world that I inhabit. But so to answer your question, though, Chris, can I just choose all of the above? There's not a thing you said that I don't identify with in some way. I am an insider to both the lawyer/judge Well-Being Movement, and I'm an insider, to some degree, within the judiciary because I think I've earned their trust and they've earned my respect. I work directly with courts and with judges on trying to strengthen capacity for judges to be able to notice, name, and understand their emotions and service of being better judges and more satisfied people. Terry Maroney: Sometimes, I'm a bit like an embedded anthropologist, but I think one benefit of being a scholar in addition to all those of other things, is I'm very, very committed to correct paths, which sounds perhaps a little opaque, so let me say what I mean. I do not want to be in a position of advocating well-being practices, for example, that are not productive in the way judges need them to be productive, or I'm not interested in forcing a particular account of how judges' emotions ought to infuse their work and their work product. I think it's very important to actually have that academic distance to follow the evidence and to follow the stories and try to see what's true. Terry Maroney: I think that's something that scholars can really bring to this field is saying, "Let's not assume, for example," I'll pick a random example," that conventional anger management sessions "work," or that they're going to work for judges with anger regulation problems in the way that will be most productive for them, and best for the courts, and best for public trust in the judiciary. Do we know that?" I don't think we know that, so I would like to know that. I'd like to know what works, and in order to know what works you have to know what you're aiming for, right? What do we see as the new model of the good judge if it's not the person who's divested of all emotion, but a person who is conscious of his or her emotions then uses them in certain ways and not in others? Terry Maroney: That's a more complicated view, and it's not completely obvious what it is. So I'm giving a long answer to a short-ish question, which is, "Who am I in these spaces?" I think I'm, I'm a fellow traveler. I think I'm an advocate for things that increase the public's face in the courts, because the courts deserve it. I'm not interested in artificial inflation of their brand, but I am absolutely in favor of helping the public, see what it is that they do and what they do well and help them do it better. But I'm also just an academic who wants to make sure that we're collectively not just following well worn paths, assuming that certain things are or are not true, certain things will or will not "help" in a certain way, just to bring that of discipline and some distance to it. So yes, all of the above. Chris Newbold: Yeah. But based upon your research, though, it certainly feels like you would be at the potential epicenter of also being helpful in writing the prescription. Is that fair to say? Terry Maroney: I hope that's true. Again, this is where it's an all of the above answer. I do you work specifically with courts to help them implement real changes and real things. I talk to real judges in groups about how, for example, to help their appellate court achieve a higher level of productive collegiality, which requires a lot of emotion regulation in a group, and avoiding toxic behavior patterns, et cetera. So not all academics make that journey into helping to write and implement the solution, but I do. Again, as long as I always can feel comfortable that I haven't talked myself into something without adequate basis or that I'm not pushing an agenda without real things behind it, as long as I'm not crossing that line, I think that's really, the best and highest use of that scholarly set of skills, the discipline and the distance. What are we all here on earth to do really, if not to try to help our fellow human beings do a better job for each other. Right? Chris Newbold: Mm-hmm (affirmative). Terry Maroney: So that is my somewhat grandiose hope for this research is that I have this little sticky note on my computer monitor that I scratched out a little while ago that said, "Strengthening democracy, one judge at a time." It's a little silly, but in some ways that that's how I like to think of myself. Bree Buchanan: That's wonderful. So when you're talking to judges around the country, and it sounds like you do talk to them about what to do for themselves individually to support their staff, maybe the lawyers that come in their courts, what do you talk to them about and how are those messages received? Terry Maroney: So I definitely want to make clear that I'm not a therapist. I'm not a judge whisperer, and that's not what I'm trying to do here, but I am somebody who sits at the center of a Venn diagram, that again, not that many people have, which is I really, really understand legal culture and I really, really understand courts and judging to some degree, and I understand affective science and sociology of emotion. So it's translational, I guess, what I do. What I try to do when I'm working specifically with judges or with groups of judges, which is, of course, more are common, is try to take lessons, for example, about productive and non-productive forms of emotion regulation. For example, the difference between learning to think about things differently, which leads one to feel differently about them. That's called cognitive appraisal. Terry Maroney: The difference between cognitive appraisal or reappraisal, which is a very high order, intellectually-challenging, but very productive emotion regulation. It tends to, again, buy a person a whole lot of perspective on what their emotion is about. It gives them room to work with. It helps them distinguish good reasons and bad reasons. It can elevate positive emotion, minimize negative emotion. It's an all-around really great emotion regulation tool. Contrast that with suppression and denial, which is actually what we encourage judges to do through our cultural narrative, which are disasters. They don't work very well. They don't actually minimize the emotions you want and minimize, and they backfire and they eat up all sorts of your cognitive glue. One of my good friends, James Gross, an affective psychologist at Stanford once quipped, "Suppression and denial make you temporarily stupider," and it's true. Terry Maroney: We don't want our judges to be the temporarily stupider, nor do they, right? They don't either. So I think what I try to do at my core is I try to take these lessons from the sciences, including the social sciences and I translate them into the context that judges understand, which is the context of their daily work. So we try to work towards identifying moments of work- related emotion that they're experiencing, identifying the kinds of emotion regulation tools that a person can throw at such a thing, educating them about what these different tools are, and giving them the data on, basically, what's going to work out well for them in the long run and why, and how can they practice those things? Hopefully that gives a sense of what I do. Chris Newbold: Terry, what are you seeing in terms of judicial involvement in terms of leaning into the Well-Being and Law Movement? Are you seeing barriers, and if so, how do you think that we can overcome some of those and are there generational elements to that? Terry Maroney: Yeah, that's a great question. Actually, it makes me realize it's connected to the last part of your last question, which I didn't quite answer, which is, how are these messages being received? So I think, in my experience, judges overwhelmingly have been very hungry for this kind of information and this kind of recognition. It's a weird thing to walk through a very, very important job as a human being and yet, be treated as if you're not really supposed to be a human being. I think it really stifles a lot of judges' ability to interact productively with peers, to reach past the isolation inherent in the job. We're not doing judges any favor by treating them as some like super beings that are supposed to pull off something that no ordinary human being can pull off. Terry Maroney: So judges, I have been very surprised, well, I'm not surprised anymore, when I started, I was very surprised just how excited they would get about it. It wasn't particularly breaking down along any demographics, like judges that I might have predicted would not be open to the message have been open to the message, because it reflects the reality. Who doesn't crave having their lived experience seen and recognized, and given the space to actually talk about it in a non-judgmental way and give tools to try to do a better job, be a better judge, be a happier person? So the reception has been great. That said, that's the sunny part. That said, there are very real barriers. So I would not be telling the truth if I didn't say that there's also a very significant element of pushback. Though, again, I don't personally experience a lot of it. Terry Maroney: The people who come to my workshops, for example, either choose to be there, so there are self-selected groups, or they're forced to be there and they just don't say anything about it, and they just walk out of the room and think, "Well, that was a lot of bunk, great?" So I'm often not exposed to the pushback personally, but judges tell me about it. So I'll give you a couple for examples. Once I was doing a very small workshop with a particular court. So I was, basically, at a court retreat and I was doing an emotional granularity session, basically, and presenting data on the kinds of work-related emotional experiences that judges, have giving a lot of examples and stories, and it could get pretty sad. It's like "Here are the things that are making people sad. Here's what disgusts them. Here's why they're angry. This is when they feel hopeless," et cetera. Terry Maroney: At one point in the granularity session, one of the judges, now keep in mind is this small group I think is fewer than 20 people, all of whom know each other very well, just shouts right in the middle of me saying something shouts, "What is the point of all of this?" Just yells it out. He just could not tolerate it for one single second. I took it in stride and I treated it as an interesting moment. I said, "You know what? That's a good question. What is the point of this, folks?" What happened then, was what I thought was one of the best discussions that we could possibly have had, because the other judges were so mortified that he had done that, that they were like, "Here's why this is important because we really need to notice what we're feeling," and they taught themselves what I was trying to teach them. So that was a very dramatic moment of pushback. Terry Maroney: More broadly, judges talk to me about, there are a lot of their judicial peers, well, I'll tell you, one said to me once, "I would talk to you," meaning me, this is in an interview, "I'll tell you all these things, but I'm never going to tell the judge down the hall. I just wouldn't do it. I don't want to be perceived as weak or as squishy or as flawed," or like, "I'll talk to you, but I won't talk to them." That's, I think, the deepest form of pushback is when you don't feel like you can have honest, supportive conversations with your peers who are the only other humans on the planet who know what your job is like, right? Bree Buchanan: Right. Terry Maroney: That's, I think, the deepest barrier that I'd like eventually to see completely dismantled. Chris Newbold: Yeah. Well, we certainly appreciate it. We just a couple minutes remaining, terry. Do you feel like the judiciary understands the impact and the role that they have had and can continue to have on this movement as a whole? Obviously, Bree was at the forefront of getting our report in front of The Conference of Chief Justices, which I think was- Terry Maroney: Right. Chris Newbold: A really big deal in terms of catapulting- Terry Maroney: It is. Chris Newbold: ... this movement. Terry Maroney: Yep. Chris Newbold: Do think that they, as a collective group, understand how important this is to the future of the profession.? Terry Maroney: Yes and no. One, it's hard to say anything about the judiciary as a whole, especially in a Federalist system like we have. We have so many different types of judges spread out and so many different types of judging. So I'm always slow to group together judges with wildly different jobs who work in wildly different places, and we're talking tens and tens and tens of thousands of people. So that's my huge caveat, as I would never say the judiciary block. That said, I have definitely seen change among both the state and the federal judiciary, that there is absolutely an increased awareness of, pardon me, the need for a wellness programming and the need for a broad range of wellness supports. I think that's because of not just the amazing work that y'all have done with building up awareness of lawyer well-being, but also just pioneers within the judiciary. Terry Maroney: So I would be remiss. For example, not to call out the Wellness Committee of the U.S. Court of Appeals For the Ninth Circuit, which in the federal system is really the pinnacle of a court that got it early and leaned in early and has continued to do just terrific work and people look at them as a model, and that's starting to proliferate. It hasn't proliferated completely through the federal judiciary, of course not, but you don't hear anybody making fun of it anymore, which you would have as recently as five, 10 years ago. On the state level, again, I have seen even more movement in this direction often as an outgrowth of what started as, say, a Lawyer Assistance Program, or a LAP, and is now a Judges and Lawyer's Assistant Program, or a JLAP, which is a really important move. Terry Maroney: Again, there have been some states that have really been leaders in this space, some that are still catching up, but absolutely. I think, especially as public attention just continues to be focused on the courts, more and more court proceedings are being recorded. It's so easy to find evidence of, for example, anger displayed by judges on YouTube. I wrote this article years ago called Angry Judges and had these research assistants who I basically said, "Go on the internet and find me salient examples of judges losing their temper." We couldn't even keep up with the volume of it, because our culture loves that stuff, and it's terrible for the image of the judiciary, that we love that stuff. So I feel like there is more attention now to the human beings in these positions and a recognition that when they're regulating their emotions poorly it has very negative impacts, not just on them, but also on justice and on the fairness of our court system. Terry Maroney: I think courts live in some fear of having such an incident within their system because, again, it's obviously bad for the litigants, but it's just bad, generally. I think there have also been quite a lot of cases, of course, have had to confront colleagues who are experiencing, say, severe cognitive decline, but aren't realizing it and really shouldn't be hearing cases anymore, but they are, it's a very delicate situation. So yes, the short answer is yes, judges and judicial leaders see this and they want to make sure that judges are being given every single opportunity and encouragement to live the longest, happiest, healthiest lives they possibly can because their individual flourishing is crucial to the court flourishing, which is crucial to our societal flourishing. These things cannot be separated. The one grows from the other. Chris Newbold: Excellent. Excellent. Well, we've been joined today by professor Terry Maroney. Terry, we, again, thank you so much for your insights and your research and the work that you're doing in the judicial environment. Obviously, when you go to work every day and your professional mission statement is, "Strengthening democracy one judge at a time," that's a pretty cool lifelong pursuit, for sure. So again, Terry, thanks for joining us. That wraps up a three-part series on the research and scholarship side of well-being, and I think Bree and I are talking about moving into the diversity, equity, and inclusion side of well-being as we head into the new year. So again, thanks everyone for joining us and thank you, Terry. Terry Maroney: Thank you so much for having me. Chris Newbold: All right. Thanks.  

In this episode, Jared was inspired by James Gross to take action and reach out to more venues and planners in order to book more gigs.

In this final episode of his interview, James Gross, bandleader of the Shirts and Skins band drops some truths about being a bandleader. He also answers the question, “If you lose everything and had to get your new band a paid gig in 30 days, what do you do?”

In this episode, James Gross, bandleader of the Shirts and Skins band shares his approach to bookings. He shares a crazy story where his band faked an event to get that perfect promo shot. Let's take a listen!

In this episode, James Gross, bandleader of the Shirts and Skins band shares his background as a musician and how he started his group. Topics discussed include pay rates for gigs, booking agents, original music, and more.

Its something that we could all use at times - an increase in will-power or self-control. In this episode, I go into some iconic research studies in this area that reveal just how much of an influence that it has on our success in life. Then, more importantly, I go into a number of proven strategies for enhancing our self-control, under the structure of Angela Duckworth and James Gross 'Process model of self-control'.Read more on Roy Baumeister here.Check out the Dundein study that I reference here.Check out the paper by Duckworth and Gross here. Check out this useful article on strategies.