Check out how we’re fulfilling our commitment to #worklifebalance, #careergrowthandlearning, and #diversityequityandinclusion.

Neurodiversity Movement and New Paradigms. One quote out of many pearls of wisdom. “During turbulent times, the tension people feel from interdependent pairs lead to problem-solving confusion. Confusion causes alarming system paradoxes. System paradoxes mean people, teams, and system leaders have stopped addressing real causes of their problems. It’s a lot like a doctor addressing symptoms and ignoring a disease.” “The science of change suggests that lots of paradoxes exist in highly regulated systems. One reason this happens is because of the separation between powerful system decision-makers and tensions they unknowingly create. I have known for about 15 years that schools, academic institutions, and some types of healthcare organizations are well-known for these system problems. “

Knowing the impact of social pressure on perception allows us to reflect better on our behavioural influence. https://bit.ly/47yoGq4

#Change #DecisionMaking #HabitChange #ChangeManagement #HowBrainsDecide #AvoidResistance #SharonDrewMorgen #ChangeFacilitation #AvoidBias #HOW? #Genius #BestPractices I’ve been developing systemic decision-making models for decades. Change is a brain thing, not a choice thing. Read my article. https://bit.ly/3Ab6KC9

#Change #DecisionMaking #HabitChange #ChangeManagement #HowBrainsDecide #AvoidResistance #SharonDrewMorgen #ChangeFacilitation #AvoidBias #HOW? #Genius #BestPractices I’ve been developing systemic decision-making models for decades. Change is a brain thing, not a choice thing. Read my article. https://bit.ly/3Ab6KC9

🕵🏽Pathological Internet use (PIU) which is characterized by excessive or poorly-controlled preoccupations, urges or behaviors regarding Internet use that lead to impairment or distress. 🧑🏽🏫A hypothesis published in Frontiers in Science points to the following key facts; 🔅Chronic Inflammation and Cognitive Dysfunction: Chronic stress and inflammation can impair cognitive functions, suggesting that societal decision-making and behaviors could be affected on a large scale. 🔅Transmission Through Digital Communication: The hypothesis points to social media and digital platforms as accelerators for spreading stress and chronic inflammation, contributing to global cognitive impairment. 🔅Need for Comprehensive Solutions: The research advocates for interventions at individual and societal levels, such as lifestyle changes, reduction in social media exposure, and educational initiatives to promote societal stability. #socialandemotionaldevelopment #4IRperils

My problems with DiClemente and Prochaska’s Stages of Change Model Everybody refers to the Stages of Change Model. You have to. But I don’t actually believe it. For starters, there’s Uncle Ozzie, who quit his four-pack-a day, 25-year unfiltered cigarette habit when a fellow employee told him he was a “sucker for the tobacco companies.” My uncle said she was right, announced that he was going to quit, refused to give that pack of cigarettes to the woman (who asked for it), then never smoked another cigarette until his death almost fifty years later. Ozzie claimed to me that he had never once thought about quitting before that moment (no “precontemplation” and all that jazz). Oh, Ozzie was a shop steward and union organizer at General Electric. So whenever I write about the stages of change, I say something like this: “People don’t really have to go through all those stages in that order. Like sometimes something just strikes them and they quit.” Flash forward a few decades. I was asked to review a research paper that tested and proved the “stages” model. It did nothing of the sort. So I rejected the paper. (The journal was “Addiction Research & Theory,” for which I was an editor at the time.) FOR THE ONLY TIME IN MY CAREER the authors wrote back attacking the reviewer (me) — “How dare you question our theory,” they fulminated. 😘 *Here is one pretty standard critique of the model <https://lnkd.in/egFqxz49> Limitations of the Transtheoretical Model There are several limitations of TTM, which should be considered when using this theory in public health. The theory ignores the social context in which change occurs, such as SES and income. The lines between the stages can be arbitrary with no set criteria for how to determine a person's stage of change. The questionnaires that have been developed to assign a person to a stage of change are not always standardized or validated. There is no clear sense of how much time is needed for each stage, or how long a person can remain in a stage. The model assumes that individuals make coherent and logical plans in their decision-making process when this is not always true.

Imagine you're living in a world where not just 5G or 10G, but the internet and encyclopedias are embedded into your brain. Your body is enhanced, youth is eternal, and you can live anywhere you choose. Problems related to transport, healthcare, terrorism, and crime are non-existent. Envision a bright, pristine, almost sterile, and very comfortable world inhabited by friendly people—or rather, those striving to be. This world is predictable and stable. It operates on clear and explicit rules that everyone follows without fail. It's a world of total control. In this world, your robot psychotherapist connects with you well before any foolish thoughts arise in your mind. How does it know? It doesn't really 'know'—it's just that every person corresponds to a virtual model that predicts all scenarios and developments, marking indicators. When a specific marker is triggered, all stability-maintenance services immediately switch to the corresponding protocol. If it doesn't trigger? The next level of protocol kicks in, up to compulsory treatment to prevent any negative impact on the healthy members of society. Imagine a blessed world of prevention, predictability, and subtle micro-influences. It's a world where stability is maintained by a system so complex that humans can no longer manage it, and control has long been handed over to computers. It's a world—a vast, happy farm for contented cattle, a world of universal inclusion, veganism, and healthy living. A world where pain and suffering are outlawed, and you can only choose a meaning of life that is approved by your artificial personal political officer, who also serves as your mentor, psychologist, teacher, priest, confessor, sexual partner, and, incidentally, your friend. What's there to seek in this wall, where not even a blade can find the tiniest of cracks? How does one live and what should one do, who suddenly wakes up and finds themselves in this plastic prison with a neon glow? Where to run from the intrusive electronic companion? Where to hide from the all-seeing eye of the toilet, which scrutinizes your backside with every defecation?

Learn about cognitive distortions. https://lnkd.in/dm375iQv

Buzzwordification is a term I coined (without realizing it) to refer to the cycle of turning poorly understood concepts into something to get capitalized on. I have watched this cycle repeat in both education and behavior analysis. The most recent victims of this cycle have been DEI, burnout, compassionate care, trauma-informed care, and Neurodiversity Affirming care. There are others, but these three are critical because they interrelated. How are they related? Each of these deal with vulnerable populations that are systemically taken advantage of. Each of these requirements specific actions that must occur in order for things to change. Let's take Neurodiversity Affirming practice. This is touted as being a big selling point for companies large and small. I have see organizations, both private equity and not, push the ideas of Neurodiversity Affirming practice without actually understanding what Neurodiversity is or why it matters. I have watched people who are literally antagonistic to Neurodiversity present on the topic to capitalize on the good PR. Neurodiversity is a movement that is meant to address inequities in our society. Neurodiversity Affirming practice should actually be neurodivergent affirming practice (and I own the copyright on that term so misuse will not be tolerated). Neurodivergent refers to people whose neuro-biology diverges from the accepted norm. ACCEPTED norm. So to tout Neurodiversity Affirming Care without actually changing your practices towards neurodivergent people, both clients and staff, is simply capitalization on the buzz of the concept. Re:Buzzwordification. So how does this get addressed? It starts with understanding the core concepts! I and others are working on resources, but in the meantime, I recommend reading up on the topic from one of the critical contributors to the Neurodiversity Movement. Neuroqueer Heresies by Nick Walker https://amzn.to/3FarfSE