Seeing What Others Don't PDF Free Download

10/7/2021by admin

You help without thinking. You like seeing your employees succeed, so it's second nature to help them out. You pitch in automatically. And they do the same for you. You don't think about. Capture, edit and save them to PDF/JPEG/GIF/PNG, upload, print, send to OneNote, clipboard or email. Use the Evernote extension to save things you see on the web into your Evernote account. Best screen recorder for Chrome. Create, edit, and share your professional looking videos instantly. You might be butting heads with people in the same household because you don't see eye to eye on face masks, social distancing, vaccines or other issues. Or maybe you have friends and family. Start a free trial. With a free trial of our online PDF converter, you can convert files to and from PDF for free, or sign up for one of our memberships for limitless access to our file converter’s full suite of tools. You also get unlimited file sizes as well as the ability to upload and convert several files to PDF.

Leer en español
Ler em português

I don’t often start essays about leadership with insights from French novelists, but in this case it seems appropriate. “The real act of discovery,” Marcel Proust wrote, “consists not in finding new lands but in seeing with new eyes.” Today the most successful companies don’t just outcompete their rivals. They redefine the terms of competition by embracing one-of-a-kind ideas in a world of copycat thinking. Which means, almost by definition, that the best leaders see things that other leaders don’t see.

That’s not as easy as it sounds, especially for leaders who have spent years at the same company, or in the same industry, or as part of the same discipline. Without ever intending it, experienced leaders often allow what they know to limit what they can imagine going forward; their knowledge can actually get in the way of innovation. Which is why, to summon the spirit of Proust, it’s so important for leaders to see their company and industry with fresh eyes — which means looking at their work in new ways.

Art, it turns out, can be an important tool to change how leaders see their work. One fun exercise to encourage experienced leaders to challenge established ways of seeing took place recently in Providence, at the Rhode Island School of Design Museum, in an annual event called Cops and Docs. The program, which has been running for 10 years, gathers highly accomplished medical professionals and highly trained police officers, people who in their jobs have to quickly make sense of the world around them, size up problems, and devise effective solutions to complex (often life-threatening) problems. Over the course of the evening, mixed groups of cops and docs looked at paintings, sculptures, and other works of art, and shared their answers to a pretty basic question: What do you see?

Needless to say, what participants saw was a function of the jobs they did and the experiences they’d had — which explains why different people reached such different conclusions about the same pieces. Here’s how one article summarized what participants took away: “Make careful observation a habit. Learn to describe what you see. Allow a different interpretation of the observation. Understand that one scene can have several plausible explanations. Avoid tunnel vision. Exercise creative thinking skills.” Those are great lessons for doctors and detectives — not to mention executives, entrepreneurs, and leaders in any field.

As it turns out, Cops and Docs is not the only program that uses art as way to move accomplished leaders out of their comfort zones. Amy E. Herman, a consultant and educator trained as a lawyer and an art historian, has created an intriguing program, called The Art of Perception, that gets to the heart of the all-important difference between looking and seeing. In it, she takes police detectives, FBI agents, even high-ranking Secret Service and CIA executives to the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the Frick Collection, and other well-known museums and galleries. These grizzled observers of crime and terrorism, trained in certain ways to look for clues about murders and identify threats, instead set their sights on works by Picasso, Caravaggio, Edward Hopper, and other masters. The exercise is “not about looking at art,” Herman explains to the participants. “It’s about talking about what you see.”

Or, much of the time, what you don’t see. Time after time, skilled leaders miss critical elements of a painting that send an important message, overlook signposts in a scene that speak to what’s taking place, or can’t figure out how to describe what’s right in front of them. “Don’t be afraid to change your perspective,” she urges her participants, who report that the new ways of seeing that they develop through these museum visits have opened their eyes to new ways of evaluating evidence on the job. “In New York, the extraordinary is ordinary to us, so in training we’re always looking to become even more aware as observers,” a deputy chief explained in one of many approving accounts of the program.

Amy Herman’s program, like Cops and Docs, is an elegant departure from the tired routines of leadership, a fun and clever use of art to sharpen skills and clear heads. But there are simpler and more “businesslike” ways to achieve the same eye-opening ends. Years ago, in Fast Company, we profiled a highly creative leader at Royal Dutch/Shell named Steve Miller. One of his techniques was to assemble diverse teams of colleagues — longtime veterans, corporate newcomers, marketers, technologists — put them on buses, and tour various locations across Europe, where his business unit was based. They’d visit Shell operations, customer sites, and other settings. “Then we got back on the buses and talked about what we’d seen,” Miller explained. “ We all wrote down our impressions, and when we got back, we went over what we’d learned from the visits.”

Needless to say, what people saw was a function of who they were and what they specialized in. And what everybody learned together was far richer and deeper than what any individual would have learned on their own. That’s the real point, of course, whether the subject being observed is a timeless piece of art or a customer facility. For leaders who want to see with new eyes, remember that how you look at something shapes what you see — and you see more creatively when you look at the world with other leaders who have different backgrounds and experiences.

It’s a rare person who goes out of their way to spend time with psychopaths, and a rarer one still who repeatedly calls a prison to do so. But after more than a year of meetings and negotiation, Arielle Baskin-Sommers from Yale University finally persuaded a maximum-security prison in Connecticut to let her work with their inmates, and to study those with psychopathic tendencies.

Psychopaths, by definition, have problems understanding the emotions of other people, which partly explains why they are so selfish, why they so callously disregard the welfare of others, and why they commit violent crimes at up to three times the rate of other people.

But curiously, they seem to have no difficulty in understanding what other people think, want, or believe—the skill variously known as “perspective-taking,” “mentalizing,” or “theory of mind.” “Their behavior seems to suggest that they don’t consider the thoughts of others,” says Baskin-Sommers, but their performance on experiments suggests otherwise. When they hear a story and are asked to explicitly say what a character is thinking, they can.

On the face of it, this makes sense: Here are people who can understand what their victims are thinking but just don’t care. Hence their actions. But Baskin-Sommers found that there’s more to their minds than it seems.

Most of us mentalize automatically. From infancy, other minds involuntarily seep into our own. The same thing, apparently, happens less strongly in psychopaths. By studying the Connecticut inmates, Baskin-Sommers and her colleagues, Lindsey Drayton and Laurie Santos, showed that these people can deliberately take another person’s perspective, but on average, they don’t automatically do so to the extent that most other people do. “This is the first time we’re seeing evidence that psychopaths don’t have this automatic ability that most of us have,” Baskin-Sommers says.

She started studying psychopaths around 10 years ago, “before the time when ‘psychopath’ was a term used in every TV show,” she says. “I’ve become fascinated with how complex their minds are. They rarely show a complete deficit in things. There’s interesting nuance. Sometimes, they seem to show good cognition, sometimes they don’t. Sometimes they show theory of mind, and sometimes they don’t. That’s an interesting puzzle.”

The U.S. prison system doesn’t assess psychopathy at intake, so Baskin-Sommers administered a standard test herself to 106 male inmates from the Connecticut prison. Of them, 22 proved to be psychopaths, 28 were not, and the rest fell in a gray zone. Baskin-Sommers did all the interviews in a makeshift psychology lab within the prison itself—a simple room with a desk, computer station, and no barriers.

“There’s security, but it’s outside because what we do is confidential,” she says. “We do a lot of training and we’re always sitting closer to the door. But we’ve never had an incident, or come close. For many of the inmates, it’s the first time anyone even asked them to talk about their lives.” The psychopaths proved to be “glib, narcissistic, and conniving,” she adds. “They can be aggressive, and they like to tell us gruesome details of murders, I think to shock us. But it’s not like that all the time. They do a lot of impression management.”

Seeing What Others Don' T Pdf Free Download Windows 10

After assessing the 106 volunteers, she then gave them a computer-based task. They saw a picture of a human avatar in prison khakis, standing in a room, and facing either right or left. There were either two red dots on the wall in front of the avatar, or one dot in front of them and one dot behind them. Their job was to verify how many dots either they or the avatar could see.

Normally, people can accurately say how many dots the avatar sees, but they’re slower if there are dots behind the avatar. That’s because what they see (two dots) interferes with their ability to see through the avatar’s eyes (one dot). This is called egocentric interference. But they’re also slower to say how many dots they can see if that number differs from the avatar’s count. This shows how readily humans take other perspectives: Volunteers are automatically affected by the avatar’s perspective, even when it hurts their own performance. This is called altercentric interference.

Baskin-Sommers found that the psychopathic inmates showed the usual level of egocentric interference—that is, their own perspective was muscling in on the avatar’s. But they showed much less altercentric interference than the other inmates—the avatar’s perspective wasn’t messing with their own, as it would for most other people.

Seeing What Others Don' T Pdf Free Download Free

Seeing what others don' t pdf free download mac

Of course, not all psychopaths are the same, and they vary considerably in their behavior. But Baskin-Sommers also found that the higher their score on the psychopathy-assessment test, the less they were affected by what the avatar saw. And the less affected they were, the more assault charges they had on their record.

Psychopaths may be conniving, but it’s unlikely that they could have deliberately gamed the task to engineer interesting results. “The task is too fast, and we see no differences in accuracy between them and others lower in psychopathy,” Baskin-Sommers says.

Seeing what others don' t pdf free download windows 10

To her, the results show that psychopaths (or male ones, at least) do not automatically take the perspective of other people. What is involuntary to most people is a deliberate choice to them, something they can actively switch on if it helps them to achieve their goals, and ignore in other situations. That helps to explain why they behave so callously, cruelly, and even violently.

But Uta Frith, a psychologist at University College London, notes that there’s some controversy about the avatar task, which has been used in other studies. “What does it actually measure?” she says. It’s possible that the avatar is acting less as a person and more as an arrow—a visual cue that directs attention. Perhaps instead of perspective-taking, the task simply measures how spontaneously people shift their attention.

Baskin-Sommers argues that the task is about both attention and perspective-taking, and “for research on psychopathy, that is a good thing.” That’s because, as she and others have shown, psychopaths pay unusually close attention to things that are relevant to their goal, but largely ignore peripheral information. “It’s like they’re the worst multitaskers,” Baskin-Sommers says. “Everyone’s bad at multitasking but they’re really bad.” So, it’s possible that their lack of automatic perspective-taking is just another manifestation of this attentional difference. The two things are related.

Seeing What Others Don' T Pdf free. download full

Other groups of people also show differences in their theory of mind. For example, in one study, Frith asked people to predict where a girl might search for a marble that had been moved without her knowledge. The onlookers knew the marble’s whereabouts, so could they override their own knowledge to step into the girl’s shoes? Eye-tracking software revealed that neurotypical adults look at the same place the girl would, but people with Asperger’s syndrome are less likely to. They don’t seem to spontaneously anticipate others’ actions. “It is a bit worrying if [Baskin-Sommers and her colleagues] are proposing the very same underlying mechanism to explain callousness in psychopathy that we used previously to explain communication problems in autism, albeit based on a different test,” Frith says. “These are very different conditions, after all.”

But there are subtle and important differences between the two studies, Baskin-Sommers says. Frith’s task didn’t look at whether another person’s perspective affects your own—and that’s what differs in psychopaths. They can take the perspectives of other people, but those perspectives don’t automatically impinge on their own. “This isn’t the typical pattern shown when identifying theory-of-mind deficits,” she says.

Recommended Reading

  • When Your Child Is a Psychopath

    Barbara Bradley Hagerty

Seeing What Others Don' T Pdf Free Download Mac


These new findings do not “explain” psychopathy; no single study would. Like most psychiatric problems, it’s a complex mess of genetic and environmental influences, all affecting our most complex (and perhaps least understood) organ—the brain. Psychopaths may show a lack of automatic perspective-taking, but “the interesting question is: Why?” says Essi Viding from University College London. “What in the genetic makeup and rearing environment of a person makes them like that? We need [long-term studies] to answer these questions and to investigate how malleable these processes are.”

Seeing What Others Don't PDF Free Download

Meanwhile, Baskin-Sommers adds that there are ways of using what we already know. “We’re thinking about training prison officers in how to talk to inmates with psychopathy, and force a more deliberate perspective-taking,” she says. After altercations within the prison, “it’s normal to say ‘You did something wrong’, or ‘What happened here?’ These data suggest that psychopaths won’t be able to answer that question. Unless you force them to take another inmate’s perspective on what happened, they won’t understand.”

Comments are closed.