Author Archives: bryanvillalobos

A closer look into road rage: How and why it happens

As we were discussing driving the other day, I noticed that almost everyone raised their hand when Dr. Rettinger asked whether we had been driving for more than five years. This leads me to assume that at some point within those five years we have all, at least once, been the victim of road rage or have been the source of someone else’s road rage. In simple terms, rage road is angry or aggressive behavior displayed by a driver as a result of something that negatively impacted their driving experience. Road rage can simply be an unkind hand gesture, insult, or even physical violence.

In an attempt to better understand why road rage exists, Dr. Reidbord looked our perception. Perception, another important topic with have discussed in class, essentially describes our mental interpretation and representation of the stimuli we perceive.  What Dr. Reidbord found is that the cause of road rage is almost never the actual offensive that the victim experiences. In other words, road rage is rarely the result of being cut off, slow drivers, or almost crashing. Instead, it is the interpretation of our perception of the offensive that causes road rage. To exemplify this, when you get passed on I-95 and the driver almost hits your car as he passes, you immediately view that driver as having no respect for you. One assumes that the other driver just views his or her own time as being more valuable and that they do not care about anyone else’s wellbeing. It turns out this mindset is very commonly the cause of road rage.

One factor that furthers our road rage is that there is no easy way to communicate with the aggressive driver. There is no easy way to tell whether the driver that just cut us off did so because they are a terrible human being or because they are trying to rush to the hospital. Since we tent to paint the actions of other drivers as being intentional and malicious, it’s rather easy to see how most road rage is a self-product of our own mind.  This knowledge of our tendency to assume the worst of other drivers can help us control our road rage. It is research like that of Dr. Reidbord and many others that are actually influencing how driver’s education courses are being taught.

A couple summers ago, I had to take a driver’s improvement course for a speeding ticket I received. One of the things I vividly remember the instructor discussing in the course was the different methods for reducing road rage. The first tip was to change how we perceive the actions of others. This program urged drivers to shift from an accusatory mindset to one that gives other drivers the benefit of the doubt. This goes back to the idea of being able to find positive reasoning for the actions of other drivers.

I think the influence of perception is very interesting. Much like Dr. Reidbord states, further examining our perception can also help us understand why we get angry when someone brings more than 15 items into the 15 items or less lane at Walmart. Overall, I believe that by devoting more time to studying perception we can advance our understanding with regards to why human beings respond to the world around them in the way that they do.


Learning Through Failure

Although the term “learning from your mistakes” has become a bit of a cliché, it turns out there is actually truth behind the phrase. Nate Kornell was interested in clearing up misconceptions about ways to better store information in our memory.  According to this article by Nate and Sam Kornell, our mistakes provide unique opportunities to further our understanding of the subject in question in a way that long and repetitive studying can not.  In this study, Nate challenged the education theory, which is the idea that the best learning occurs when we learn something the right way from the start. Nate opposed the education theory because his data revealed that mistakes actually improve learning instead of hindering it.

In order to exemplify his hypothesis, Nate conducted an experiment in which he made one group of students take an extremely hard test without giving them the answers until after they completed the test. He gave the second group of students the questions and answers at the same time. On a later test, Nate found that these first group of students scored significantly better because they were able to think more critically about each question, were allowed to make mistakes, and then learn from those mistakes. In other words, Nate claims that we are able to learn more from errors due to the fact that we pay much more attention and focus on difficult questions that we do not know the answer to. In addition, our innate frustration with failure and making errors motivates us to find a solution to whatever we do not know.

Related image

Although I would never enjoy taking a course in which the professor purposely makes the exams extremely difficult, I do see how they prove to be useful in aiding to our ability to learn information in a more effective way. In my own experience, I typically study for my big exams in a way that allows me to fail during my studying so that I will not make that mistake when taking the actual exam. To exemplify, I begin my studying by listing off all the things I remember about the material and then I go back and look at the things I failed to remember; these mistakes are what I spend a great deal of my studying on. Although it may seem like a very simplistic and obvious strategy, I know plenty of students who spend hours upon hours looking at every little thing without first testing themselves on areas where they fall short.

I am also able to learn a lot when I get my exams back. Even before professors began incorporating material from old test into new one, like Dr. Rettinger does when he puts one question from last week’s quiz into the current week’s quiz, I would always go back to my old exams and figure out what I got wrong before I even thought about studying for the next test. It is a method that I have found to be extremely useful in my academic life and it is one that is supported by Nate’s research. In addition to the already stated reasoning, I think Nate’s theory of the benefits of learning from mistakes also comes from the fact that it is easier to remember things we got wrong than to remember things we got right because these mistakes imprint themselves into our brains in a very similar way that many active learning methods do.

Even though the main focus of Nate’s theory was rather specific to students and their academic, I think his research could prove to have extremely useful applications in the real world. Not only could it change the way teachers create assessments, it could change how we consume and memorize information on a much larger scale.