Austin Improv

How We Decide by Jonah Lehrer

I found the ideas in this book really interesting as they relate to Improv.

It talks a lot about how the subconscious is superior to the conscious, rational mind in a lot of ways. The rational mind can only hold between 5 and 9 distinct pieces of information so it is pretty unreliable when it comes to more complicated decisions like buying a car or deciding which move to make in an improv scene.

Complicated decisions are best left to the subconscious, which can process a vast amount of information and then makes its decision known by what feels right.

I just read this line from Truth in Comedy that ties into this idea: "The subconscious is a lot smarter than most people think."

I really enjoyed this book and wanted to share. Has anybody else read this, or any of Jonah Lehrer's other books or articles? I have his previous book, Proust was a Neuroscientist, and plan on reading it after I finish Truth in Comedy.

I should hate Jonah Lehrer, since he's young, good-looking, brilliant, an accomplished scientist, and a prolific AND proficient writer. But I love him. In addition to everything else, he maintains an excellent blog on neuroscience called The Frontal Cortex.

I haven't read either of his books yet, but the new one seems to bolster the premises of Malcolm "No Generalization Too Sweeping" Gladwell's Blink, namely that we make better decisions when we don't try to rationalize them.

Even scarier: if you rationalize a decision, you start changing your behavior to conform to the rationalization . . . even though the rationalization may in no way correspond to what actually happened. (Yes, this has been borne out by several studies.)

For a while I've been telling students that in the discussion of a scene I don't want to hear about why they did what they did, primarily because I don't think they know why they did what they did. I'm even more leery of it now that I know it's likely to change their future behavior.

As a world-class rationalizer myself, I shudder to think how much of my behavior and self-image have been shaped by lame, self-serving, inaccurate explanations of my actions after the fact. At this point, all I can do is try to avoid piling on more of them.

I picked up this book the other day. Can't wait to start it. From what I've heard and read about it, I think elements of it definitely tie into Kareem's current fascination with discovering the story that's already there in scenes.

John, I agree with you about Jonah Lehrer. I just found out he's 26! Did he start his career in the womb?

It seems like a lot of people are comparing this to Blink. I found a review titled "How We Decide, by Jonah Lehrer: The thinking person's Blink" http://scienceblogs.com/bookclub/2009/0 ... lehrer.php

There are so many good anecdotes and studies in this book that can probably apply to Improv. The even more interesting thing to me is how a lot of disciplines already have an innate understanding of how the brain works and now we are starting to get the science to back it up. I think this is the premise of Proust was a Neuroscientist.

I wish I had the powers of summarization to give some of the really good stories from the book.

Thanks for the responses! I'm really interested to see what other people think about how this book relates to Improv.

bradisntclever, Let me know when you finish and we can discuss.

bradisntclever wrote: I think elements of it definitely tie into Kareem's current fascination with discovering the story that's already there in scenes.

add me to the list of people also fascinated with this concept.

ratliff wrote: For a while I've been telling students that in the discussion of a scene I don't want to hear about why they did what they did, primarily because I don't think they know why they did what they did.

Do subconscious decisions and thought processes begin as conscious, though? In other words, is it a good thing to analyze those decisions early on so that they later become subconscious?

York99 wrote:...is it a good thing to analyze those decisions early on so that they later become subconscious?

According to the evidence, it's a great idea to analyze those decisions AFTER the fact, so that they later become subconscious.

In the moment during a complicated situation (such as Improv) where there are an almost limitless number of choices, your rational mind doesn't have the ability to compute the best choice. In these situations the subconscious mind knows the right choice based on past experience and lets us know with feelings, like the "Ah-ha" moment of insight when you just know, without being able to explain why you know, the right answer.

By going over the choices after the fact and rationally analyzing them, we are able to internalize the best choice and respond intuitively in the future. This is why quarterbacks analyze game tapes, pilots practice in simulators and improvisers get notes.

ratliff wrote:For a while I've been telling students that in the discussion of a scene I don't want to hear about why they did what they did, primarily because I don't think they know why they did what they did.

It seems like if a player does know why they made a particular choice, they aren't using the right kind of thinking, so they almost certainly didn't make the best choice.

Shea wrote:
According to the evidence, it's a great idea to analyze those decisions AFTER the fact, so that they later become subconscious.

Yeah, that's what I meant... in the notes. I don't think someone should really analyze the situation during that scene.

Slippery slope. Obviously, you have to think about what you did in order to change it, but most improvisers start telling themselves a story about WHY they did something the second they start talking about WHAT they did.

I think one of the most valuable things a coach can do is to identify individual patterns of behavior in a player. When I was first starting, I was constantly arguing with my scene partners, first with outright denials, and then later with subtle "corrections" to their offers, instead of just saying YES. (Not that I've stopped doing this, but, y'know, baby steps.)

Here's the thing: none of those decisions were wrong in themselves. They were all legitimate choices, and I could ALWAYS produce a completely coherent explanation as to why they made sense in the scene. But astute teachers made me aware that this was a pattern, and therefore possibly not really a choice at all. No choice is wrong, but if you're making the same choice in every scene, you might be doing so out of fear or convenience rather than playing freely in the moment.

I don't think you can create your own subconscious. My feeling is that the principles we try to embody -- yes-anding, not arguing, knowing instead of asking, etc. -- are not creating a new subconscious so much as making it more likely that the existing subconscious can express itself freely.

I strongly believe that learning improv is much more a process of tearing down old structures than it is about building new ones. I'm pretty sure some of my favorite teachers would disagree with me. I'm cool with that.

My apologies. I misread "analyze those decisions early on" as meaning in the moment.

Shea wrote:...This is why quarterbacks analyze game tapes, pilots practice in simulators and improvisers get notes.

I'm an advocate of taping and watching my improv shows. I think I've gotten a lot out of doing this. I can view my choices as an outsider and evaluate how they worked. ha, and the notes I give myself are generally easy to remember because they're reinforced by moments of me cringing at some of the moves I made. I miss having a camera here for this very reason.

Shea wrote:It seems like if a player does know why they made a particular choice, they aren't using the right kind of thinking, so they almost certainly didn't make the best choice.

I dunno about this... I believe that there are moments where not thinking is the best policy. Where the best option is to allow yourself to react honestly and be genuinely affected by what is going on. However, I think that some moves to require conscious thought. Particularly show moves. you may not know all of the reasons behind why you felt compelled to make a choice, but things like realizing what the theme is and deciding to do an edit that ties in with the theme of the show...stuff like that comes more from the conscious mind. While there are sometimes happy accidents, I think you have to know why you're doing something if you're intentionally making these connective moves.

Its probably not black and white. You can spontaneously make connections based on a subconscious impulse. You can also react in the moment, and consciously remind yourself to heighten your emotion, or to hit a pattern again.

TexasImprovMassacre wrote: Its probably not black and white. You can spontaneously make connections based on a subconscious impulse. You can also react in the moment, and consciously remind yourself to heighten your emotion, or to hit a pattern again.

I think you're right about this. I'm a total Improv noob and I'm prone to saying the first thing I think. This can lead to pronouncements that don't hold up under much scrutiny

Shea wrote: ... I'm prone to saying the first thing I think. This can lead to pronouncements that don't hold up under much scrutiny

I smell the beginnings of a great improviser.

It's nice to know that there's at least one activity where impulsiveness can be an asset rather than a liability.

I don't want want to poop all over your impulse party, but I think it's important to distinguish that not every decision is better made by the "subconsious". In fact, a lot of decissions, especially in improv, definitely warrent a bit of thought. Also, rationalizing can be helpful. If you made a subconscious, feely type move that got killed by lack of support from your team, it might be okay to think, "That might have worked under different circumstances."

I don't know.... devil's advocate. He's not that bad by the way. All bark and no bite.