Showing posts with label decisions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label decisions. Show all posts

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Tripp: weak hearts

In times of trial, it is our hearts that are under attack, and it is our hearts that get revealed. It is important to know our hearts, to assess where they are weak and vulnerable to temptation, and to do what we can to guard them. Remember, the decisions we make in moments of difficulty are not forced on us by the situations we are in but by what our hearts think and desire in the middle of them.

Lost in the Middle, p.67

Thursday, November 13, 2008

Tripp: bad decisons

This, too, is a danger of the midlife struggle. In moments of disappointment and disorientation, in the grief of regret and the sadness at the death of our dreams, we are very vulnerable to making decisions that will add further trouble to the trouble we are already experiencing.

Lost in the Middle, p.66

Monday, November 03, 2008

Apparant activity

Faced with a player sending the ball towards them at 80 m.p.h. or more, the goalkeeper has only a fraction of a second to decide how to block the shot. It’s a fearful challenge: 4 out of 5 penalty kicks score a goal.

By analyzing data on more than 300 kicks, the researchers calculated the action most likely to prevent a goal being scored. Surprisingly, it is standing in the center of the goal and doing nothing until the trajectory of the ball can be seen. This resulted in a 1 in 3 success rate — far higher than the average.

Yet goalkeepers almost never act in this way. They typically try to guess the ball’s direction before the player’s foot has actually made contact with it, diving left or right to try to be in the right spot when the ball arrives. Neither is a good option. Diving left resulted in success 14% of the time; diving right only 12.6%.

Why then is it so common to act in a way that is even less successful than the average?

The researchers suggest that the answer lies in the goalkeepers’ emotions and the response they meet from others after failing. By taking action — even if it’s neither rational nor likely to be successful — they can at least be seen to have done something.

If they stand and wait until the ball is kicked and then fail to stop it, they feel worse because of their inaction; and others are far more likely to criticize them for not appearing even to try. It’s better to try a poor action than try a better — but seemingly passive — response if both fail; even though the “inactive” response is more rational and based on a better likelihood of success.

Lifehack March 5th 2008