How anger can make us more rational - study

[jtuck004]

...
Maia Young and her colleagues had 97 undergrads take part in what they thought were two separate experiments. The first involved them either recalling and writing about a time they'd been exceptionally angry (this was designed to make them angry), or a time they'd been sad, or about mundane events.

Next, all the participants read an introduction to the debate about whether hands-free kits make speaking on a mobile phone while driving any safer. All participants had been chosen because pre-study they believed that they do. The most important part came next, as the participants were presented with one-sentence summaries of eight articles, either in favour, or against, the idea that hands-free kits make driving safer. The participants had to choose five of these articles to read in full.

Which participants tended to choose to read more articles critical of hands-free kits and therefore contrary to their own position? It was the participants who'd earlier been made to feel angry. What's more, when the participants' attitudes were re-tested at the study end, it was the angry participants who'd shifted more from their original position on the debate.
...
What are the real-life implications of this result? The researchers conceded that it's unrealistic to make people angry as a way to improve their decision making. However, they said that in a work meeting, if someone is angry, they might be the one best placed to play the role of devil's advocate on behalf of the group. 'By encouraging angry group members to select information necessary for group discussion,' the researchers explained, 'the group as a whole may get the benefit of being exposed to diverse views and, as a result, achieve a more balanced perspective.'

More, Here.

Probably more useful when trying to make a group decision or research some new knowledge, rather than suggesting this might lead to change when trying to push a partisan political agenda or moral position, but it is interesting.

[valerief]

1. Ha! So all groups should be led by teabaggers? nt

[jtuck004]

2. HA. That was kind of my first thought on reading, this but they said angry, not irrational.

But there are different kinds of anger - say, anger from racial injustice vs anger from having to pay taxes for things that you actually use , with much of it boiling down to frustration, I think.

So maybe they are just saying it is one more tool we could use, and we have to be wise enough to figure out when that is tool that's needed, instead of just having a screwdriver to fix everything.

[PDJane]

3. All groups should be led by someone who can flex, ergo someone who has a positive opinion

on the discussion at hand, but when we have feedback from some really negative people. We managed to get the whole room to agree to try recycling odd things like candy wrappers and keurig pods...when we had some really opposed to sorting them out. (We already recycle plant and food materials, kitty litter and paper towels (anaerobic compost), cans, bottles, plastic containers, plastic bits, boxes and newspapers (blue and green bins), and cigarette butts. It's just one more thing to pull out of the trash, along with certain plastic bags. Clothes and fabrics go elsewhere. It has certainly cut down on waste. It was pointed out that the pods just need to go from the machine to a plastic bag....they are recycled by one person, who comes and collects them. *shrug* It's not as big a deal as it was to get people to sort stuff in the first place. It means a few more bags, and a little bit of effort, but it's not a major deal.

And, of course, recycling is picked up for free. The grey bins, which contain garbage, we have to pay to have hauled away.

[PowerToThePeople]

4. interesting.