Sample<\/a><\/p>\n Permanent change<\/a>\u00a0is a very achievable goal. But we\u2019re approaching the problem from the wrong angle. In this essay I will explain what a behavior is, what change is, how our\u00a0brain<\/a>\u00a0governs them both, and introduce the steps needed to form habits. Believe it or not, it\u2019s mechanical.<\/p>\n THE PROBLEM WITH BEHAVIOR MODIFICATION<\/p>\n Lately I\u2019ve heard several Behavioral Scientists on the radio, all offering Behavior Modification techniques to habituate new behaviors by, well, habituating new behaviors. They \u2018remove barriers\u2019, suggest \u2018momentum\u2019, offer \u2018promoting forces\/restraining forces\u2019, and propose \u2018behavioral interventions\u2019 such as keeping weights at your desk so you can \u2018lift\u2019 during Zoom calls. All meant to motivate behavior change \u2013 through\u00a0behavior change<\/a>.\u00a0I suspect Einstein might have something to say about that.<\/p>\n The problem is the premise.\u00a0Behavior Mod\u2019s<\/a>\u00a0core assumptions are actually contrary to brain science. It assumes that by merely repeating (and repeating and repeating) new ways to accomplish something that’s been problematic, permanent change will result that can be maintained over time. But it doesn\u2019t. And it can\u2019t.<\/p>\n Certainly we\u2019ve all tried. We\u2019ve learned the hard way that we can\u2019t lose weight permanently by trying to lose weight. Or stop smoking by trying to stop smoking. We promise ourselves we\u2019ll be disciplined \u2018this time\u2019.\u00a0But our discipline isn\u2019t the problem.\u00a0We have no circuits to translate our wishes into actions automatically. Our brain makes us fail.<\/p>\n DIFFERENT THINKING REQUIRED<\/p>\n The reason we fail is simple: we\u2019re not making the necessary adjustments to the neural pathways that prompt behaviors to begin with.<\/p>\n I\u2019ll start with an analogy. Let\u2019s say you purchase a forward-moving robot, use it for a while, then decide you want it to move backward. You tell it why a \u2018backwards\u2019 functionality would enhance it, show it slides and presentations of other robots that move backwards, and attempt to push, cajole, and offer rewards. Nope. It won\u2019t move backward. But if you program it differently, it will.<\/p>\n What about changing a chair into a table. You put red plastic into a machine that is programmed to spit out a red plastic chair. Once the chair is produced, you can\u2019t make it a table. But you can create a table if you program the machine appropriately at the start.<\/p>\n Changing habits by trying to change habits is merely attempting to change the outcome \u2013 the output, the habit, the behavior, the robot, the chair \u2013 but failing to\u00a0reprogram the brain<\/a>\u00a0with different instructions to create something new.<\/p>\n Sounds obvious. But that\u2019s not what behaviorists do: the Behavior Mod approach suggests we get the robot to move backward by pushing it (and pushing it and pushing it) assuming the repetition will cause permanent change. As you know, it doesn’t work.<\/p>\n WHAT IS A BEHAVIOR?<\/p>\n To understand the full scope of the problem it\u2019s helpful to understand what, exactly, a behavior is. They don\u2019t just arise because we want them to. Behaviors are the output of our\u00a0brain\u2019s signaling system<\/a>, the response to input instructions that travel as electrochemical signals down a fixed neural pathway and hook up with a set of circuits that translates the signals into something tangible.<\/p>\n Where do behaviors originate? Behaviors are Beliefs in action, physical representations of our core identity factors. Our politics represent our Beliefs. The way we dress, talk; the professions we choose; where we travel and who we marry. Everything we do represents who we are.<\/p>\n As the foundational factor in what we do and think,\u00a0Beliefs<\/a>\u00a0must be factored in when considering change or forming a new habit. Current Behavior Mod approaches circumvent Beliefs and therein lie the problem.<\/p>\n There is actual science on how behaviors get generated\u00a0and why we automatically repeat behaviors even when we don’t want to.\u00a0Here’s a quote from noted Harvard neuroscientist Richard Masland in\u00a0We Know It When We See It\u00a0<\/em><\/strong>to set the stage:<\/p>\n Our brain has trillions of cell assemblies that fire together automatically. When anything incoming\u00a0bears even some of the characteristics<\/em>\u00a0[of operational circuits], the brain automatically fires the same set of synapses [triggering the same behavior]. (pg 143).<\/p>\n Here’s a simplified version of how to convince the brain to make the changes that lead to new habits. It explains\u00a0how behaviors occur and where change comes from<\/a>.\u00a0For a more complete explanation and tools to actually create new brain circuitry for change, watch for my new book\u00a0HOW?<\/em><\/strong>\u00a0coming out soon.<\/p>\n NEUROLOGICAL PATHWAY FROM INPUT TO OUTPUT<\/p>\n Generally, each\u00a0behavior<\/a>\u00a0starts off as an input – an idea or command, thought or story \u2013 that enters our brain as a meaningless puff of air, an electrochemical vibration (a \u2018message\u2019). To keep us congruent, the input gets evaluated against our Mental Models and Beliefs before going further. Is this input a risk? Is it congruent with our values?<\/p>\n If the idea goes against who we are, it gets rejected or resisted. If the vibration is accepted, it gets turned into signals that then seek out (among our 100 trillion synapses) similar-enough circuits that translate them into action or output – a behavior. Specifically, our brains:<\/p>\n As you can see, whichever neural circuits receive the signals are the translators that determine what we hear, see, know, and do.\u00a0Simply stated it looks like this:<\/p>\n Input -> Risk check -> Signal creation and Dispatch -> Output<\/p>\n The time it takes a message to go from an input to an output takes\u00a05 one-hundredths of a second<\/strong>. It\u2019s pretty automatic. And obviously, once an output, it can’t be changed. Change begins when initiated from the input.<\/p>\n THE NEED FOR VALUES-BASED CONGRUENCY<\/p>\n The next important piece is why repetition won\u2019t cause new (permanent) habits.\u00a0When a wholly new input enters, it requires\u00a0a\u00a0new relevancy check. Sadly \u2013 and the reason new activity fails when Behavior Mod is attempted – if anything tries to change the status quo without being checked for relevance, our brain\u00a0discards the new input because it may carry risk!<\/strong>\u00a0The new isn\u2019t sustainable without new circuitry.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/staticapp.icpsc.com\/icp\/resources\/mogile\/193273\/dfe67cd4e9ce7d9d4d9e657a3fc42f93.jpeg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n\n
\n