More news from:  Science  |  Environment  |  Health
Science Digest

Science Digest: Positive Thinking May Be a Negative

Network News

X Profile
View More Activity
Monday, June 22, 2009

Positive Is Negative

Despite what all those self-help books say, repeating positive statements apparently does not help people with low self-esteem feel better about themselves. In fact, it tends to make them feel worse, according to new research.

Joanne Wood of the University of Waterloo in Ontario and two colleagues conducted experiments in which they asked students to repeat statements to themselves such as "I am a lovable person" -- then measured how it affected their mood.

"From at least as far back as Norman Vincent Peale's "The Power of Positive Thinking" (1952), the media have advocated saying favorable things to oneself," the researchers wrote in a recent issue of the journal Psychological Science. "At this moment, thousands of people across North America are probably silently repeating positive statements to themselves."

But in one of their studies involving 32 male and 36 female psychology students, the researchers found that repeating the phrase did not improve the mood of those who had low self-esteem, as measured by a standard test. They actually ended up feeling worse, and the gap between those with high and low self-esteem widened.

The findings did not change even if participants were instructed to focus on how the statement might be true about them, as they were in a second study involving 12 men and 39 women.

The results "suggest that for certain people, positive self-statements may not only be ineffective, but actually detrimental," the researchers wrote. More research is needed to understand that effect. "One possibility is that, like over-positive praise, they can elicit contradictory thoughts" and prompt people to focus on how the positive statement is not true about them.

-- Rob Stein

Missing Digits

Scientists have long believed that birds inherited their three-fingered claws from dinosaurs. The transition from five fingers to three took place while dinosaurs still roamed the earth, but a long-running controversy has centered on which two fingers were lost through natural selection. The conventional wisdom has long been that the most advanced species of therapods, the dinosaurs who are the ancestors of today's birds, lost the last two fingers on their hands -- or, to anthropomorphize, the "ring finger" and the "little finger."

A new dinosaur find in China suggests a different answer: The first and fifth fingers were lost. Scientists said that a dinosaur found in a 159-million-year-old deposit in a mine in northwestern China was a transitional beast between five-fingered and three-fingered creatures, and that the fossil revealed an animal whose first finger had shrunk sharply and whose second finger had greatly increased in size.

James Clark at the George Washington University and his colleagues said each subsequent finger on the dinosaur took on the shape of the digit next to it, eliminating the last finger as well.

The recently discovered dinosaur paid a nasty price for its contribution to science: It has been dubbed Limusaurus inextricabilis -- as in "mire lizard that could not escape" -- because it was found in a pit where several dinosaurs apparently died stacked above one another.

CONTINUED     1        >

© 2009 The Washington Post Company

Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity