The creativity of mind maps

Many of us - myself included - considered the concept map be the brain child of UK educator, Tony Buzan (1988), which we knew as a "mind map". However the idea was in fact being worked out across the pond in the 1960s and 70s USA at Cornell, by educator and professor Joseph Novak (Novak et al., 2005). While I have written about concept maps before (here), there is always a bit more to explore.

Novak formalised the idea of a concept map from two parts (Novak & Gowin, 1984). Firstly "concept as a regularity in events or objects designated by some label" ( p. 4), that we build a map or schema for: we fit new concepts into our "network of concepts and [...] rules" (p. 5), organising what is in our heads so we can create and identify patterns.

Concept maps begin as bare bones; naive, simple. As our concept map becomes more nuanced, we can create "meaningful learning" from it, able to "relate new knowledge to relevant concepts and propositions [we] already know" (Novak & Gowin, p, 7). Over time our process reaches mastery, and is an interconnected web of knowledge. Our understanding is greater.

It is worth taking a look at a range of mind/concept maps to see if any design type might suit our learning and exploration needs. Firstly - and truly top of the line, animation-wise - we have an example from RSA (2021):

Then an interview with Tony Buzan (Ayoa, 2015):

And lastly, the University of Guelph (U of G Library, 2017):

Sam

References:

Ayoa. (2015, Jan 27). How to Mind Map with Tony Buzan [video]. YouTube. https://youtu.be/u5Y4pIsXTV0

Buzan, T. (1988). Super-Creativity. St. Martin's Press.

Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning how to learn. Cambridge University Press.

Novak, J. D., Mintzes, J. J., & Wandersee, J. H. (2005). Chapter 1: Learning, Teaching, and Assessment: A Human Constructivist Perspective. In J. J. Mintzes, J. H. Wandersee, J. D. Novak (Eds.), Assessing Science Understanding: A human constructionist view (pp. 1-13). National Institute for Science Foundation.

RSA. (2021, May 25). RSA Minimate: A framework for change | Matthew Taylor [video]. YouTube. https://youtu.be/-54DxHlOMnc

U of G Library. (2017, April 28). How to Create a Concept Map [video]. University of Guelph/YouTube. https://youtu.be/sZJj6DwCqSU

UCLA Library. (2014, September 10). Mapping Your Research Ideas [video]. YouTube. https://youtu.be/jj-F6YVtsxI

read more "The creativity of mind maps"

The cult of toxic positivity

The idea of workplace toxicity "spans a wide spectrum that includes subtle and indirect signals" (Bhat et al., 2021, p. 2017). An Adam Grant emailer earlier this year explored the idea of 'toxic positivity'; a concept that resonated with me. He said "urging people to be positive doesn’t boost their resilience. It denies their reality. People in pain don’t need good vibes only. They need a hand to [...] steady [them] through all the [turmoil]. Strength doesn’t come from forced smiles. It comes from feeling supported" (Grant, 2024). 

This is a great point. I was particularly taken by the image accompanying this post (which I have reused in my post image, from Avamariedoodles (2024). These are great reframing comments, which allow people who are going through tough times to talk about their tough times without us denying their experience of these tough times. We allow them their suffering; we acknowledge that what they are going through is absolute crap. We ask them what we can do. Or if there is anything we CAN do to help. 

Funnily enough Adam Grant's post reminded me of a book I read a few years ago about a book which was centred around America's love affair with positive thinking (Ehrenreich, 2009). The author explores cancer diagnoses, America's mega churches, and the sanitising and de-iconising of Christian religion within the US, the financial sector, the US sub-prime mortgage market, and the 2008 global financial crisis; suggesting these may have been affected by positive thinking manifesting as a wilful disregard for economic reality (Ehrenreich, 2009). While this premise may be a bit of a stretch, positive thinking is - in my view - a fad that has grown into an almost cult-like passion, where no one is allowed to mention anything negative. 

I, like Adam Grant (2024), wonder if this 'fake' positivity cult may be amplifying workplace stress and emotional labour...? It was noted in the work by Moran and Nadir that a "uniquely American approach to service, work, and leisure creates a distinctive set of challenges" in their workplace (2021, p. 13) including oppression, "emotional labor, burnout and low morale" (p. 18), with "toxic positivity" adding "another slap" (p. 18). These authors argue that owning how we feel, particularly through the pandemic, is important for everyone's wellbeing (Moran & Nadir, 2021), with the suggestion "that 'negative' emotions need to be eradicated at all[, now] that is the problem" (p. 18; emphasis added).

Allowing us to own "the bad times and the good" also allow us to "praise you like I should" (Fatboy Slim, 1998). 

Sam

References:

Avamariedoodles. (2024, February 12). Beyond Toxic Positivity. https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fe73a7974-1d72-44ea-922c-d96abca68c81_1080x1080.jpeg

Bhat, M. M., Hosseini, S., Hassan, A., Bennett, P., & Li, W. (2021, November). Say ‘YES’to positivity: Detecting toxic language in workplace communications. In Conference Proceedings, Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2021 (pp. 2017-2029). https://aclanthology.org/2021.findings-emnlp.173.pdf

Ehrenreich, B. (2009). Bright-sided: How the Relentless Promotion of Positive Thinking Has Undermined America. Metropolitan Books.

Fatboy Slim. (1998). Praise You. You've Come A Long Way Baby [CD]. Skint.

Grant, A. (2024, February 12). Beyond Toxic Positivity. Granted. https://substack.com/app-link/post?publication_id=1285137&post_id=141578152&utm_source=post-email-title&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=15zho&token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjoxOTU4ODkyLCJwb3N0X2lkIjoxNDE1NzgxNTIsImlhdCI6MTcwNzY2OTg3NCwiZXhwIjoxNzEwMjYxODc0LCJpc3MiOiJwdWItMTI4NTEzNyIsInN1YiI6InBvc3QtcmVhY3Rpb24ifQ.iTFZpHNIEbdPZeHybxN9WgsNtRTepP4mmlLKqMF_ZTU

Moran, V., & Nadir, T. (2021). The Caustic Power of Excessive Positivity: How vocation and resiliency narratives challenge librarianship. ACRL 2021, Ascending into an Open Future, 13-16 April, online conference. https://alair.ala.org/bitstream/handle/11213/17590/moran_causticpowerofexcessivepositivity.pdf?sequence=1

read more "The cult of toxic positivity"

Mindset and the mind-body connection

Mindset can be defined as an “implicit theor[y] of intelligence [which] distinguishes people who believe intelligence is unchangeable (i.e., those who have a fixed mind-set) from people who believe intelligence is malleable and can be developed through learning (i.e., those who have a growth mind-set)” (Moser et al., 2011, p. 1484). Further, a “growth mindset is based on the belief that [...]our basic qualities are things [we] can cultivate through [...]our efforts” (Dweck, 2006, p. 7), and our mindset changes “what [we] strive for and what [we] see as success” (p. 12).

What is really interesting is that now mindset is being explored in many more and varied ways than I expected to see on first reading Carol Dweck's book in the mid-noughties. Roll the clock forward almost twenty years, and it is now being proposed that we can "harness [this] mind-body connection", with our mindset enabling us to improve our lives (RNZ, 2022). This works for anti-ageing, for weight loss, for exercise, and for pain management.

From a book on the topic written this year by David Robson (RNZ, 2022), I found the following mindset example, on diet, very interesting:

“Some neuroscientists say the reality we experience is this kind of controlled hallucination because about 90 percent is created from within and then 10 percent of what we’re experiencing is coming from that data hitting our senses.”

For example, our mindset on dieting can also determine how we read the signals from our gut, affect how hungry we feel, and change our hormonal hunger response, he says.

“When we’re on a diet we often ignore every element of what we’re eating apart from the calorie count and we focus so much on the number of calories that we’re missing out.

“This creates this mindset of scarcity, you know, you’re telling your brain that actually you’re going to be really depleted in the important nutrients and energy that you need to get through the day and then that has a physiological effect on the body.”

That’s why cultivating an indulgent attitude to food can help you lose weight, he says.

“If you’re expecting food to have fewer calories, you see higher levels of that crucial hormone [ghrelin] after eating so your body is still expressing the hormone that’s telling it to seek new food because you’ve got this mindset of scarcity.

“What we want to do is to avoid the mindset of scarcity and the best way to do that is to actually stop focusing so heavily on what you’re missing out on your food … so you really want to focus even more than when you weren’t dieting on things like the flavours and textures and making sure they feel really satisfying for you.”

I know people have said we can think ourselves well, but the science appears to be telling us that this aphorism has some truth in it. It will be interesting to see how the science shapes up.

Sam

References:

Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. Baltimore Books.

Moser, J. S., Schroder, H. S.; Heeter, C., Moran, T. P. & Lee, Y. (2011). Mind Your Errors: Evidence for a Neural Mechanism Linking Growth Mind-Set to Adaptive Posterror Adjustments. Psychological Science, 2(12), 1484-1489. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611419520

RNZ. (1 May 2022). How your mindset can change your world. Radio New Zealand. https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/sunday/audio/2018840130/how-your-mindset-can-change-your-world

read more "Mindset and the mind-body connection"

The meh meh meh voice

We all get that voice in our heads from time to time: you know, the "Meh meh meh" voice with a nasally whine which tells us we 'shouldn't', 'don't deserve', are 'over-reaching', or are 'getting above ourselves'. This voice has theoretical construct; "self-talk", defined as a “dialogue [through which we interpret] feelings and perceptions, regulates and changes evaluations and convictions, and [give ourselves] instructions and reinforcement” (Hackfort & Schwenkmezger, 1993, p. 355).

A friend of mine thinks of the meh meh meh voice as a little goblin that sits on his shoulder. He is allowed out for a major complain from 8am. Then at 8.05am he has to go back in his box. That's control!

However, for we mere mortals who find ourselves unable to wrestle the meh meh meh goblin back into his box, I have another idea to try.

This particular solution is for when things have gone pear-shaped. This is when the meh meh meh goblin is usually in full cry, wailing that "we should have known', we 'are a fool', we 'knew it wouldn't work'. Instead of beating ourselves up, we could imagine that we are debriefing a client who has done what we have done. We ask them a couple of questions, aiming to lower our internal voice of self-criticism (Billan, 2022):

• How could you have improved the result?
• What could you have improved?

We answer them as if we are our own client. As we get practiced, we can ask them of ourselves:

• What could I have done better?
• How could I have improved the result?

And hopefully this helps us, over time, to quieten our meh meh meh voice.

Sam

References:

Billan, R. (2022). Keynote Address | Allocution: Redefining Resilience [video]. CANNEXUS22 Virtual Conference 25 January - 5 February. https://cannexus22.gtr.pathable.com/meetings/virtual/prczg7FhBvbNczsYn

Hackfort, D., & Schwenkmezger, P. (1993). Chapter 14: Anxiety. In R. N. Singer, M. Murphey, & L. K. Tennant (Eds.) Handbook of Research on Sport Psychology (pp. 328–364). Macmillan Publishing Company.

read more "The meh meh meh voice"

The vagaries of memory

We have all heard how eye witness testimony can be wrong: where witnesses can go from 100% sure to being proven to be gob-smackedly incorrect in the light of later DNA, or video, evidence. Having just watched a documentary from Deutsche Welle (DW) on memory which goes into the mechanics of how this happens, I thought I would share the documentary's thinking with you.

Apparently our memories start - for the first twelve months or so - being quite 'plastic'. Our memories evolve with how often we revisit them, and in how many times we rehearse each memory, what confirmation we are offered as to 'correctness', and how each memory fits into our group, or societal, meta-memory (if you will). The documentary talked about a longitudinal study run by memory scientists following the Al Qaeda attacks in the US on 11 September 2001. Survey participants could remember where they were and what they were doing soon after the event itself. However, after one year, participant memories of what they were doing and where they were had often changed. From that point on - a point of 'concreteness', in a way, the memory stayed consistent, even out to ten years. It seems that once we have crafted a story that we can live with, we hold it close and nurse it (DW Documentary, 2020).

I resonated with the 11 September 2001 event, but remain sure (!) that I remember my initial thoughts correctly. I awoke to my alarm radio station talking about the first plane having flown into one of the World Trade Center towers, thinking "This is the last time I am listening to The Rock: their practical jokes are simply not funny anymore". Then I got curious and turned on the TV, to find that The Rock was reporting real events as they unfolded. Then I felt guilty for assuming they were pulling the listeners' legs. Shades of The Shepherd's Boy Who Cried Wolf (Aesop, 1912).

Apparently 30% of North American witness testimony is accurate (DW Documentary, 2020). Logically then, the other 70% is inaccurate. That is a fairly scary percentage: consider how many people must have been convicted or fined based on dodgy memory.

While the documentary talks about police practices which help to ensure that we do not edit our memories when it counts, I think we need to do things that help us to remember our lives in all their joyful, and all their shame-filled moments.

I was thinking then that we could keep a diary, and record daily those events which happen to us, along with our thoughts and our feelings. Today's fresh thoughts may be more accurate than those we have self-massaged, or have been manipulated from the outside by others.

Sam

References:

• Aesop (1912). Aesop's Fables: a new translation by V. S. Vernon Jones. William Heinemann.
• DW Documentary (21 December 2020). When our minds play tricks on us. https://youtu.be/MmlXY-hzgm0

read more "The vagaries of memory"

Super Mario and Mindset

While looking for something completely different, recently I ran across this TEDx talk by Mark Rober, on - what he calls - the "Super Mario effect" (2018). As I watched the clip, I was struck by how similar his idea was to Carol Dweck's theory of mindset (2006).

Mark outlined an experiment where he had recruited fifty thousand participants from his pool of YouTube followers and set them a computer programming challenge, ostensibly to 'prove' that anyone could learn to code (Rober, 2018).

However, this was a deception experiment: Mark had split his participants into two groups. Group A got a version of the challenge where each time their code failed to run, they 'lost' 5 points from an assigned 200 points at the beginning. Group B did not lose any points, regardless of the numbers of failures. The challenge was identical in all other aspects (Rober, 2018).



So what happened? As Mark says, for "those who were penalized for failed attempts, their success rate was around 52%. For those who were not penalized, their success rate was 68%" (Rober, 2018, 1:47). That's fairly significant, when we consider that n=50,000... though granted, from a potentially skewed data pool.

The result? In Mark's words: "those who didn't see failing in a negative light [attempted] two and a half times more [times] to solve the puzzle" (Rober, 2018, 2:12). I like how this ties in with Carol Dweck's findings on mindset, more than a decade earlier (2006). However, while Mark does mention mindset, it seems to me that he thinks he has discovered something new in his results. I am not so sure.

What I do like is what Mark is proposing to do next. He is suggesting that we remove grades, and gamify education (Rober, 2018). While plenty of people have talked about this before, I think the intersection between Mark's ideas and mindset creates a different niche, and different reasons for changing how we do things. I think this is a worthy idea. Hard to do, but it would change how we teach and learn. We would have no more social promotion in schools, but take a Montessori-style approach: stick at elements until we gain mastery.

For some reason, Rober's proposal to education put me in mind of an artwork that a former colleague of mine had on their wall: "what would you attempt to do if you knew you could not fail". I wonder if we would no longer see the failure of education, but only the success. However long it took.

That would be epic.


Sam

References:

• Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. Baltimore Books.
• Rober, M. (1 June 2018). TEDxPenn: The Super Mario Effect - Tricking Your Brain into Learning More. https://youtu.be/9vJRopau0g0

read more "Super Mario and Mindset"

Fixed Mind vs Growth Mind

(Winkler, 2014)

Stanford University professor Carol Dweck has identified the growth mindset as being one where efforts are praised in place of intelligence (Dweck, 2006).

The concept of the growth mind-set as opposed to the fixed mind-set is a variation on the age-old question of nature vs. nurture. The idea behind this concept is sound; praising people's effort, rather than their cleverness, will result in greater motivation, and better results.

Those praised for success through effort are encouraged to continue this effort and improve. Tackling new challenges is not so intimidating when success is not linked to intelligence.

The opposing mind; that intelligence is the factor to be recognised in success, can have a demotivating effect. Often, those who recognised their achievement as a primary result of their intellect were apprehensive about facing obstacles where their failure could be attributed to less intelligence.

I find this theory particularly relevant to my own life. Too often, I find myself looking externally for reasons I have failed, rather than focussing my efforts on what steps I could have taken to improve outcomes. Personally, due to suffering from two chronic illnesses, I am often lacking in energy and feel unable to complete course-work to a standard I find acceptable. It is very easy for me to shift blame for any under-par work on my health, rather than owning the results. Exploring the growth mindset has interested me as I believe I would benefit from growing a growth mindset, and instead of looking for past reasons for times when I haven’t achieved as I would like, to looking for future solutions, actions I could take, and efforts I could improve.

A growth mindset places the locus of control internally, leading to solution-orientated thought, focusing on how obstacles can be overcome through effort, and believing that their success or failure will be attributed to how they deal with these obstacles. A fixed mindset places the locus of control externally, shifting ‘blame’ for failures on factors outside of their control such as other people, unfair practices, or even the weather. Such thought patterns lead fixed mindset individuals to lack motivation, as they view their results as something they have no ability to change.

Those with a growth mindset can be inspired by the successes of others, seeing their achievements as demonstrations of how great effort leads naturally to achievement. With a mindset that determination has gone into others success, it is simple to see how the same effort applied by themselves could achieve desired results. By contrast, those with fixed mindsets can feel threatened by the success of others. As they perceive the result of others as having to come from a deep-rooted intelligence or innate skill, other’s success undermines their own, the successful party must therefore be of superior intelligence. This mindset can lead to a defeatist attitude as it is believed that no amount of effort will ever change the ‘status quo’ of intelligence dealt (Dweck, 2006).

Research into the outcomes of growth vs fixed mindset has revealed fascinating result. Carol Dweck undertook an investigation of children’s study habits, asking groups of children a range of 10 questions:

1. Group A was praised for their intelligence after the first round of questioning. The feedback for this group included words such as ‘smart, clever, and intelligent’. After the initial testing, the performance of this group fell. The group were reluctant to take on new challenges as they did not want appear less intelligent if they were to fail.
2. Group B were praised for their effort. Words such as ‘hard-working, diligent, and tenacious were used in their feedback. Contrasted with Group A, Group B excelled in further testing. Their performance improved, and 90% of participants sought out new challenges.

Personally, I would find it helpful to follow the growth mindset both as a leader and when being led. I have learned that the fixed mindset has been pervasive in my thinking for much of my professional and academic life, and that this may have hindered my confidence to face new challenges at times. Using the growth mindset would allow me to enable myself, and those around me to meet greater potential than that which is capped with a fixed mindset. Using this theory of leadership, previous tasks which appear to be insurmountable or beyond the limitations of my intelligence are conquerable with an attitude that the effort put in is the determining factor on whether I achieve success, rather than an arbitrary genetic limitation beyond my control.

Encouraging others by the strength of their efforts, and acknowledging the effort that I have exerted, will allow me to see the fruits of my labours as precisely that; the end result of my effort rather than a set outcome of whether or not I am ‘smart enough’ for the challenges ahead. When praising the work of myself and others, using words such as ‘hard-working, full of effort, and tenacious', will encourage a growth mindset. Conversely when considering where things have gone less well, looking for solutions, identifying areas where more effort could have been expended, and searching for internal explanations which can be overcome, will be far more helpful than adopting a defeatist attitude where my results are out of my control.

The growth mindset theory is definitely one I would use in my future, both at work and in my private life. In my current role, the growth mindset could be beneficial in several areas. Dealing with complaints is a reality of my job, using the growth mindset, instead of thinking of the customer as being impatient or unreasonable, I would instead look at how I can make a difference to their experience, and how I can meet their needs more effectively in the future, such as offering alternatives, remaining patient, and remaining assertive without crossing into passive aggressiveness.

Cat

This post was written by Cat James, used with permission.

References:

• Dweck, Carol (2006). Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. USA: Baltimore Books. 
• Winkler, Dan (2014). The Growth Mindset: The Important Concept NOT Taught Under the Common Core. Retrieved 25 November 2015 from http://blog.mimio.com/the-growth-mindset

read more "Fixed Mind vs Growth Mind"

Time to Reflect

Using time is an interesting way of thinking about practice.

Chris Argyris and Donald Schön did that in 1978, proposing a two stage process of reflection based on problem-solving in the present and in the future. Their model has strongly influenced the education, health and architecture professions.

There are two parts to Argyris and Schön's model: reflection-in-action, and reflection-on-action.

1. Reflection-in-action is our ability to "think on [our] feet" or 'felt-knowing' (Argyris & Schön, 1974, p. 203). When we are faced with a professional issue, we usually connect with their feelings, emotions and prior experiences to attend, to be present in that situation.
   
   
2. Reflection-on-action is the idea that AFTER the experience we analyse our reaction in that situation and we explore the reasons around, and the consequences of, our actions. The ‘normal’ way is through writing up our reflection afterwards, or by talking about it with a supervisor. However, this is not simply reviewing the experiences and poking at our reasoning for those actions.
   
   As Sharpiro puts it, it is "responding to problematic situations, problem framing, problem solving, and the priority of practical knowledge over abstract theory” (2010, p. 311).

Argyris and Schön think that our professional growth really only begins when we start to use a critical lens, and to doubt our actions. That doubt means that we think there is something else we can learn and hone.

Doubt allows us to think in questions, and helps us to frame situations as "problems". If we plan carefully and systematically get rid of other possibilities, then our doubt is settled. If instead we can ask "what if?", then that opens us up to other possibilties. We can re-explore the landscape. We may well still find that, “OK, we did that pretty well” and affirm our knowledge of what happened was roughly right (because we always know that we can never get it perfectly correct). But if we go in with no doubts, then we are unable to learn from that experience.

Reflection LETS us think about other possibilities and their likely outcomes, and to really openly consider whether we carried out the right actions (Argyris & Schön, 1978).

It closes our learning loop (Kolb, 1984).

And feeds into a growth mindset (Dweck, 2006).


Sam

References:

• Argyris, Chris & Schön, Donald A. (1978). Organizational Learning: A theory of action perspective. USA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company
• Argyris, Chris & Schön, Donald A. (1974). Theory in practice: increasing professional effectiveness. USA: Jossey-Bass Publishers
•  Dweck, Carol (2006). Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. USA: Baltimore Books
• Kolb, David A (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. USA: Prentice Hall, Inc.

read more "Time to Reflect"