5

However, Timler and colleagues also discovered a way to counteract these negative external pressures. The authors explain that increasing someone’s perception of competency is to give them more chances to solve similar problems. In other words, give people the ability to explore their physical interests in social settings (Timler, et al., 2019). Doing so, led to an improvement of cognitive functioning. With improved prefrontal functioning individuals were better able to deal with their stress. With that being said why don’t people who suffer from deficits in EF functioning just go and exercise more? To answer this question it is important to look at the social context where this behavior occurs. As humans, we gain or lose social approval based upon our ability to behave appropriately in any context. In the context of motor movements, humans gather social approval for having high motor competence and thus lose approval when individuals have low motor competence. The repeated occurrence of meeting this physical demand and thus the social approval associated with this will then be internalized into their personal narrative via the working memory. Furthermore, in their study Timler and colleagues showed the inverse of that statement was true. That is, they showed that individuals who were categorized as having low motor control or not having sufficient motor competence (EF functioning) suffered maladaptive formation of identity. That is repeated failures of meeting the cognitive demand resulted in decreased social approval which then reverberated into their identity. While this is true there is a caveat, the researchers found a factor that can negate this negative outcome. There is a strong correlation between having strong friendships and having a more positive sense of self despite not having extreme motor competence.

With this in mind, I have designed activities that will give individuals the ability to explore their competencies while reducing the implications of associated social approval. Moreover, I have designed my activities to take into account 3 principles of Executive function training. The distal goal of these activities then is to refresh individuals’ EF functioning enough so they can regulate their behavior appropriately (exhibit safe Covid-19 behavior). The first principle states that for there to be significant improvement the activities should push the user’s limits. That would mean challenging individuals to selectively hold their attention on a specific task for a specified amount of time. Or possibly asking individuals to creatively conjure a solution given information out of its intended context. The second and equally important principle is, for growth to occur the demands of the activities need to get progressively harder and require higher and higher EF functioning. This would mean that the activities are not a one-off event that magically alleviates cognitive distress. But rather, the continual rigor put upon the EF forces it to recruit more and more energy. This is exactly what the third principle states, that all of the other principles mean very little if the task is not repeated. Thus repeated practice of using your Executive function is the key to improving its functioning. A way to think about this is similar to that of a muscle, the functioning of the Executive Function improves the more and more you use it. In fact, this metaphor is congruent with what Timler’s research showed, those kids who had more opportunities to work their Executive Function (through motor movements) showed improved functioning. Hence my activities are focused on improving EF functioning through tasks that shouldn’t require high motor competence. The intent behind this was to give more opportunities to those adolescents who may be categorized as low motor competence and thus theoretically can benefit the most from cognitive training. These activities will give adolescents an avenue to fight against the feelings of loneliness and isolation that are so present in quarantine. This will hopefully refresh their Executive Function and thus will allow adolescents to easily choose to abide by Covid-19 protocols.

Moreover, these activities are designed with George Miller’s famous work ‘Psychology as a means of promoting human welfare in mind “The most urgent problems of our world today are problems we [humans] have made for ourselves” (Miller,1989, pg.1063). That is, although many people had no control over the manifestation of Covid-19, we all alike face similar conditions in quarantine. However, there is an axis we can manipulate to the main suspect at hand is language and how we use it to describe events such as Covid-19. Moreover, Lera Boroditsky in her Ted Talk ‘How language shapes the way we think’ explains how language is used to make sense of the world around us. Dr. Boroditsky explains “Language can shape things that have personal weight to us–ideas like blame and punishment” (Ted talk, 2017). This is the key point, we use language to describe ourselves within a setting. How we describe potential dangers in our environment ultimately shapes the behaviors we exhibit in that context. It may be as simple as readdressing our language from “it’s dangerous outside” to “it’s dangerous when I’m outside”. Shifting the blame and the magnitude of dangerous actions from an external locus into an internally focused locus. But is it that easy?

If you went to your local bookstore you would be able to find a ‘self-help’ book that guarantees a 100% success rate at changing undesirable behaviors. However, that is not true, as stated by Craig Schamel “An analogy is the difference between ‘self-help’ literature and rigorous social science. The former, like information, exists as unmediated data; it involves the digestion of large amounts of unexamined facts as experienced by individuals” (Schumel, 2020). This states the limitations of ‘self-help’ books as a whole, at their very root, they are interpretations of how one should improve their life. Self-help doesn’t scientifically operationalize the ‘self’ and therefore has little scientific reliability. It is very limited in the scope of its practice, it does little to address the social constraints that inhibit individuals. As a great professor of mine would always reiterate “Behavior doesn’t happen in a Vacuum” (Klienknecht, 2021). To her point, it is not that easy to just reframe the way someone speaks or thinks of themselves and expect significant results. The context and psychosocial background of individuals matter just as much if not more than the behaviors themselves.

While that may seem like it leaves little room to work with, George Miller discussed how the sciences can be used in real-world applications to help individuals. “Social science is already at a stage where successful applications are possible. Careful planning and astute planning based on what we already know can often resolve problems that at first glance seemed insurmountable” (Miller,1989, pg.1072). Planning on what context the problem is situated in and combining sound psychological principles, change can occur. Miller states that change is possible, but he hardly discusses how to implement such plans. This is where Dr. Walton and Dr. Wilson fill in Miller’s gap, in their paper ‘Wise interventions: Psychological remedies for Social and Personal problems” they discuss the Wise application of sound psychological principles to promote change.

In this paper, the term wise is not used to represent “right” but rather to be synonymous with informed decision-making. The goal of wise interventions is to redirect people’s understanding of themselves and the circumstances around them to improve overall trajectories. However, what is an improved trajectory? It’s an ongoing change that is self-sustaining and can be easily embedded into the users’ life. This is a tall order, but Walton and Wilson give readers a blueprint on how to implement Wise practices. The first thing they recommend is to change the meaning of specific behaviors within a specific context. “Wise interventions alter specific ways people make sense of themselves or social situations” (Walton & Wilson, 2018, pg. 619). That way there is no ambiguity, the users will know when and where to apply the psychological principles. The meaning of that specific social situation is then changed and the user can be fulfilled by performing acts that they see as beneficial to themselves. This then creates a positive feedback loop that facilitates the occurrence of the behavior. But fulfillment is not an automatic process, someone can’t pick and choose what others are fulfilled by. But what can be done is making Wise interventions in the zone of proximal development or the goldilocks zone. People tend to be motivated to accomplish tasks that are difficult but not too difficult that the task frustrates them. This is the zone of proximal development and the authors suggest that Wise interventions should take place in this zone. That way individuals’ feel a sense of pride in accomplishing said tasks, which then feeds into fulfillment and ultimately leads to changed behavior.

In this context, changed behavior would be practicing proactive Covid-19 protocols without having to be publicly ridiculed or given a golden star. While that may seem like an insurmountable hill to climb, there is the groundwork laid before us that serves as a blueprint to promote change. After all the saying that has stood the test of time is true “The pen is mightier than the sword” (Bulwer-Lytton,1839).