Dialogic Design Science - User contributions [en]

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors

2020-12-09T19:42:11Z

Administrator:

[[Jeffrey Green]]

<youtube width="400" height="220">mmByL32G5mk</youtube>
<youtube width="400" height="220"> 4-TRCfMhCT8</youtube>

==Wisdom is defined along three components==

;Accurate [[Affective Forecasting|affective forecasts]] : Predicting correctly one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions.

;Accurate interpersonal affective forecasts : Predicting accurately the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically.

;Applying this knowledge : Choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

==Summary Points==

#His research has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. He found that {{Font color | individuals feel worse after competition and, better after cooperation than they would have predicted!}}
#Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that {{Font color | individuals are poor emotional time travelers.|red }}
#Series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions:
## Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined.
## Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated.
## Who is “wise”? Researchers attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.
#Colleagues: Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke

==Text from Wisdom Institute==

This project has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. The research has found that individuals feel worse after competition and better after cooperation than they would have predicted. For example, members of couples who have sacrificed for their partner report feeling better than they expected. Forecasting errors may lead to choices that make the self and others worse off. This approach to wisdom is consistent with classical Greek and Hebrew approaches that emphasize virtue, as well as recent psychological approaches (e.g., Baltes; Ardelt) that address the pragmatics of living amidst uncertainty. Future research will examine whether accurate forecasters are more likely to choose benevolent behaviors.

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors
Green proposes that wisdom involves an understanding of the moral consequences of our decisions, and applying that knowledge to those decisions. Socrates’ injunction Gnothi seauton (Know Thyself) notwithstanding, social scientists have catalogued the ways in which individuals do not know themselves. Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that individuals are poor emotional time travelers; they tend to overestimate the intensity and duration of their happiness after positive experiences and of their sadness after negative experiences. Almost all affective forecasting research has focused on events that simply happen to people. This research extends affective forecasting research into the realm of moral behavior, and suggests that wisdom includes three components. First, wisdom involves accurate affective forecasts: correctly predicting one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions. Second, wisdom involves accurate interpersonalaffective forecasts: accurately predicting the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically. Third, wisdom involves applying this knowledge: choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

This research includes a series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions. Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined. Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated. Finally, who is “wise”? Researchers will attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.

With colleagues, Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke, Green refined the method for a series of laboratory experiments. The first experiment involved predicting one’s affect regarding cooperation versus competition. The design was 2 (experiencer vs. forecaster) x 2 (cooperative, competitive) between-subjects. Participants in the experiencer condition were trained in the Prisoners Dilemma Game (PDG), and were told that they were going to play the PDG via computer with another participant in a different room. Individuals made choices very quickly on the PDG and then were given false feedback that they had cooperated with their partner (thus helping the partner win some money) or competed against their partner (thus preventing the partner from winning money). They then reported how they felt. Others simply predicted how they thought they would feel in that scenario, allowing a direct comparison between forecasters and experiencers.

A second lab experiment is underway in which individuals make a series of predictions about a variety of events, and then experience one of those events three weeks later in the lab. They unexpectedly receive $5 and have the option of keeping the money or donating it to charity. Individuals then report how they feel about acting more benevolently or selfishly; those feelings are compared to their predicted feelings.

https://wisdomcenter.uchicago.edu/about/project-1-defining-wisdom

[[Category:Wisdom Definitions]]

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors

2020-12-09T19:41:36Z

Administrator:

[[Jeffrey Green]]

<youtube width="400" height="220">mmByL32G5mk</youtube>
<youtube width="400" height="220"> 4-TRCfMhCT8</youtube>

==Wisdom is defined along three components==

;Accurate [[Affective Forecasting|affective forecasts]] : Predicting correctly one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions.

;Accurate interpersonal affective forecasts : Predicting accurately the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically.

;Applying this knowledge : Choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

==Summary Points==

#His research has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. He found that {{Font color | individuals feel worse after competition and, better after cooperation than they would have predicted!}}
#Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that {{Font color | | yellow | individuals are poor emotional time travelers. }}
#Series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions:
## Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined.
## Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated.
## Who is “wise”? Researchers attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.
#Colleagues: Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke

==Text from Wisdom Institute==

This project has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. The research has found that individuals feel worse after competition and better after cooperation than they would have predicted. For example, members of couples who have sacrificed for their partner report feeling better than they expected. Forecasting errors may lead to choices that make the self and others worse off. This approach to wisdom is consistent with classical Greek and Hebrew approaches that emphasize virtue, as well as recent psychological approaches (e.g., Baltes; Ardelt) that address the pragmatics of living amidst uncertainty. Future research will examine whether accurate forecasters are more likely to choose benevolent behaviors.

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors
Green proposes that wisdom involves an understanding of the moral consequences of our decisions, and applying that knowledge to those decisions. Socrates’ injunction Gnothi seauton (Know Thyself) notwithstanding, social scientists have catalogued the ways in which individuals do not know themselves. Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that individuals are poor emotional time travelers; they tend to overestimate the intensity and duration of their happiness after positive experiences and of their sadness after negative experiences. Almost all affective forecasting research has focused on events that simply happen to people. This research extends affective forecasting research into the realm of moral behavior, and suggests that wisdom includes three components. First, wisdom involves accurate affective forecasts: correctly predicting one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions. Second, wisdom involves accurate interpersonalaffective forecasts: accurately predicting the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically. Third, wisdom involves applying this knowledge: choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

This research includes a series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions. Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined. Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated. Finally, who is “wise”? Researchers will attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.

With colleagues, Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke, Green refined the method for a series of laboratory experiments. The first experiment involved predicting one’s affect regarding cooperation versus competition. The design was 2 (experiencer vs. forecaster) x 2 (cooperative, competitive) between-subjects. Participants in the experiencer condition were trained in the Prisoners Dilemma Game (PDG), and were told that they were going to play the PDG via computer with another participant in a different room. Individuals made choices very quickly on the PDG and then were given false feedback that they had cooperated with their partner (thus helping the partner win some money) or competed against their partner (thus preventing the partner from winning money). They then reported how they felt. Others simply predicted how they thought they would feel in that scenario, allowing a direct comparison between forecasters and experiencers.

A second lab experiment is underway in which individuals make a series of predictions about a variety of events, and then experience one of those events three weeks later in the lab. They unexpectedly receive $5 and have the option of keeping the money or donating it to charity. Individuals then report how they feel about acting more benevolently or selfishly; those feelings are compared to their predicted feelings.

https://wisdomcenter.uchicago.edu/about/project-1-defining-wisdom

[[Category:Wisdom Definitions]]

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors

2020-12-09T19:40:59Z

Administrator:

[[Jeffrey Green]]

<youtube width="400" height="220">mmByL32G5mk</youtube>
<youtube width="400" height="220"> 4-TRCfMhCT8</youtube>

==Wisdom is defined along three components==

;Accurate [[Affective Forecasting|affective forecasts]] : Predicting correctly one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions.

;Accurate interpersonal affective forecasts : Predicting accurately the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically.

;Applying this knowledge : Choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

==Summary Points==

#His research has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. He found that {{highlight | individuals feel worse after competition and, better after cooperation than they would have predicted!}}
#Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that {{Font color | | yellow | individuals are poor emotional time travelers. }}
#Series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions:
## Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined.
## Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated.
## Who is “wise”? Researchers attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.
#Colleagues: Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke

==Text from Wisdom Institute==

This project has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. The research has found that individuals feel worse after competition and better after cooperation than they would have predicted. For example, members of couples who have sacrificed for their partner report feeling better than they expected. Forecasting errors may lead to choices that make the self and others worse off. This approach to wisdom is consistent with classical Greek and Hebrew approaches that emphasize virtue, as well as recent psychological approaches (e.g., Baltes; Ardelt) that address the pragmatics of living amidst uncertainty. Future research will examine whether accurate forecasters are more likely to choose benevolent behaviors.

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors
Green proposes that wisdom involves an understanding of the moral consequences of our decisions, and applying that knowledge to those decisions. Socrates’ injunction Gnothi seauton (Know Thyself) notwithstanding, social scientists have catalogued the ways in which individuals do not know themselves. Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that individuals are poor emotional time travelers; they tend to overestimate the intensity and duration of their happiness after positive experiences and of their sadness after negative experiences. Almost all affective forecasting research has focused on events that simply happen to people. This research extends affective forecasting research into the realm of moral behavior, and suggests that wisdom includes three components. First, wisdom involves accurate affective forecasts: correctly predicting one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions. Second, wisdom involves accurate interpersonalaffective forecasts: accurately predicting the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically. Third, wisdom involves applying this knowledge: choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

This research includes a series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions. Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined. Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated. Finally, who is “wise”? Researchers will attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.

With colleagues, Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke, Green refined the method for a series of laboratory experiments. The first experiment involved predicting one’s affect regarding cooperation versus competition. The design was 2 (experiencer vs. forecaster) x 2 (cooperative, competitive) between-subjects. Participants in the experiencer condition were trained in the Prisoners Dilemma Game (PDG), and were told that they were going to play the PDG via computer with another participant in a different room. Individuals made choices very quickly on the PDG and then were given false feedback that they had cooperated with their partner (thus helping the partner win some money) or competed against their partner (thus preventing the partner from winning money). They then reported how they felt. Others simply predicted how they thought they would feel in that scenario, allowing a direct comparison between forecasters and experiencers.

A second lab experiment is underway in which individuals make a series of predictions about a variety of events, and then experience one of those events three weeks later in the lab. They unexpectedly receive $5 and have the option of keeping the money or donating it to charity. Individuals then report how they feel about acting more benevolently or selfishly; those feelings are compared to their predicted feelings.

https://wisdomcenter.uchicago.edu/about/project-1-defining-wisdom

[[Category:Wisdom Definitions]]

Template:Font color

2020-12-09T19:39:16Z

Administrator:

{{{1}}}<noinclude>

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors

2020-12-09T19:33:12Z

Administrator:

[[Jeffrey Green]]

<youtube width="400" height="220">mmByL32G5mk</youtube>
<youtube width="400" height="220"> 4-TRCfMhCT8</youtube>

==Wisdom is defined along three components==

;Accurate [[Affective Forecasting|affective forecasts]] : Predicting correctly one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions.

;Accurate interpersonal affective forecasts : Predicting accurately the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically.

;Applying this knowledge : Choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

==Summary Points==

#His research has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. He found that {{font color || yellow | individuals feel worse after competition and, better after cooperation than they would have predicted!}}
#Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that {{Font color | | yellow | individuals are poor emotional time travelers. }}
#Series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions:
## Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined.
## Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated.
## Who is “wise”? Researchers attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.
#Colleagues: Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke

==Text from Wisdom Institute==

This project has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. The research has found that individuals feel worse after competition and better after cooperation than they would have predicted. For example, members of couples who have sacrificed for their partner report feeling better than they expected. Forecasting errors may lead to choices that make the self and others worse off. This approach to wisdom is consistent with classical Greek and Hebrew approaches that emphasize virtue, as well as recent psychological approaches (e.g., Baltes; Ardelt) that address the pragmatics of living amidst uncertainty. Future research will examine whether accurate forecasters are more likely to choose benevolent behaviors.

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors
Green proposes that wisdom involves an understanding of the moral consequences of our decisions, and applying that knowledge to those decisions. Socrates’ injunction Gnothi seauton (Know Thyself) notwithstanding, social scientists have catalogued the ways in which individuals do not know themselves. Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that individuals are poor emotional time travelers; they tend to overestimate the intensity and duration of their happiness after positive experiences and of their sadness after negative experiences. Almost all affective forecasting research has focused on events that simply happen to people. This research extends affective forecasting research into the realm of moral behavior, and suggests that wisdom includes three components. First, wisdom involves accurate affective forecasts: correctly predicting one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions. Second, wisdom involves accurate interpersonalaffective forecasts: accurately predicting the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically. Third, wisdom involves applying this knowledge: choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

This research includes a series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions. Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined. Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated. Finally, who is “wise”? Researchers will attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.

With colleagues, Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke, Green refined the method for a series of laboratory experiments. The first experiment involved predicting one’s affect regarding cooperation versus competition. The design was 2 (experiencer vs. forecaster) x 2 (cooperative, competitive) between-subjects. Participants in the experiencer condition were trained in the Prisoners Dilemma Game (PDG), and were told that they were going to play the PDG via computer with another participant in a different room. Individuals made choices very quickly on the PDG and then were given false feedback that they had cooperated with their partner (thus helping the partner win some money) or competed against their partner (thus preventing the partner from winning money). They then reported how they felt. Others simply predicted how they thought they would feel in that scenario, allowing a direct comparison between forecasters and experiencers.

A second lab experiment is underway in which individuals make a series of predictions about a variety of events, and then experience one of those events three weeks later in the lab. They unexpectedly receive $5 and have the option of keeping the money or donating it to charity. Individuals then report how they feel about acting more benevolently or selfishly; those feelings are compared to their predicted feelings.

https://wisdomcenter.uchicago.edu/about/project-1-defining-wisdom

[[Category:Wisdom Definitions]]

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors

2020-12-09T19:32:42Z

Administrator:

[[Jeffrey Green]]

<youtube width="400" height="220">mmByL32G5mk</youtube>
<youtube width="400" height="220"> 4-TRCfMhCT8</youtube>

==Wisdom is defined along three components==

;Accurate [[Affective Forecasting|affective forecasts]] : Predicting correctly one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions.

;Accurate interpersonal affective forecasts : Predicting accurately the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically.

;Applying this knowledge : Choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

==Summary Points==

#His research has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. He found that {{font color | fg=black | bg=yellow | text=individuals feel worse after competition and, better after cooperation than they would have predicted!}}
#Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that {{Font color | | yellow | individuals are poor emotional time travelers. }}
#Series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions:
## Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined.
## Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated.
## Who is “wise”? Researchers attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.
#Colleagues: Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke

==Text from Wisdom Institute==

This project has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. The research has found that individuals feel worse after competition and better after cooperation than they would have predicted. For example, members of couples who have sacrificed for their partner report feeling better than they expected. Forecasting errors may lead to choices that make the self and others worse off. This approach to wisdom is consistent with classical Greek and Hebrew approaches that emphasize virtue, as well as recent psychological approaches (e.g., Baltes; Ardelt) that address the pragmatics of living amidst uncertainty. Future research will examine whether accurate forecasters are more likely to choose benevolent behaviors.

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors
Green proposes that wisdom involves an understanding of the moral consequences of our decisions, and applying that knowledge to those decisions. Socrates’ injunction Gnothi seauton (Know Thyself) notwithstanding, social scientists have catalogued the ways in which individuals do not know themselves. Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that individuals are poor emotional time travelers; they tend to overestimate the intensity and duration of their happiness after positive experiences and of their sadness after negative experiences. Almost all affective forecasting research has focused on events that simply happen to people. This research extends affective forecasting research into the realm of moral behavior, and suggests that wisdom includes three components. First, wisdom involves accurate affective forecasts: correctly predicting one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions. Second, wisdom involves accurate interpersonalaffective forecasts: accurately predicting the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically. Third, wisdom involves applying this knowledge: choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

This research includes a series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions. Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined. Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated. Finally, who is “wise”? Researchers will attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.

With colleagues, Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke, Green refined the method for a series of laboratory experiments. The first experiment involved predicting one’s affect regarding cooperation versus competition. The design was 2 (experiencer vs. forecaster) x 2 (cooperative, competitive) between-subjects. Participants in the experiencer condition were trained in the Prisoners Dilemma Game (PDG), and were told that they were going to play the PDG via computer with another participant in a different room. Individuals made choices very quickly on the PDG and then were given false feedback that they had cooperated with their partner (thus helping the partner win some money) or competed against their partner (thus preventing the partner from winning money). They then reported how they felt. Others simply predicted how they thought they would feel in that scenario, allowing a direct comparison between forecasters and experiencers.

A second lab experiment is underway in which individuals make a series of predictions about a variety of events, and then experience one of those events three weeks later in the lab. They unexpectedly receive $5 and have the option of keeping the money or donating it to charity. Individuals then report how they feel about acting more benevolently or selfishly; those feelings are compared to their predicted feelings.

https://wisdomcenter.uchicago.edu/about/project-1-defining-wisdom

[[Category:Wisdom Definitions]]

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors

2020-12-09T19:31:53Z

Administrator:

[[Jeffrey Green]]

<youtube width="400" height="220">mmByL32G5mk</youtube>
<youtube width="400" height="220"> 4-TRCfMhCT8</youtube>

==Wisdom is defined along three components==

;Accurate [[Affective Forecasting|affective forecasts]] : Predicting correctly one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions.

;Accurate interpersonal affective forecasts : Predicting accurately the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically.

;Applying this knowledge : Choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

==Summary Points==

#His research has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. He found that {{font color | fg=black | bg=yellow | individuals feel worse after competition and, better after cooperation than they would have predicted!}}
#Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that {{Font color | | yellow | individuals are poor emotional time travelers. }}
#Series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions:
## Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined.
## Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated.
## Who is “wise”? Researchers attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.
#Colleagues: Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke

==Text from Wisdom Institute==

This project has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. The research has found that individuals feel worse after competition and better after cooperation than they would have predicted. For example, members of couples who have sacrificed for their partner report feeling better than they expected. Forecasting errors may lead to choices that make the self and others worse off. This approach to wisdom is consistent with classical Greek and Hebrew approaches that emphasize virtue, as well as recent psychological approaches (e.g., Baltes; Ardelt) that address the pragmatics of living amidst uncertainty. Future research will examine whether accurate forecasters are more likely to choose benevolent behaviors.

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors
Green proposes that wisdom involves an understanding of the moral consequences of our decisions, and applying that knowledge to those decisions. Socrates’ injunction Gnothi seauton (Know Thyself) notwithstanding, social scientists have catalogued the ways in which individuals do not know themselves. Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that individuals are poor emotional time travelers; they tend to overestimate the intensity and duration of their happiness after positive experiences and of their sadness after negative experiences. Almost all affective forecasting research has focused on events that simply happen to people. This research extends affective forecasting research into the realm of moral behavior, and suggests that wisdom includes three components. First, wisdom involves accurate affective forecasts: correctly predicting one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions. Second, wisdom involves accurate interpersonalaffective forecasts: accurately predicting the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically. Third, wisdom involves applying this knowledge: choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

This research includes a series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions. Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined. Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated. Finally, who is “wise”? Researchers will attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.

With colleagues, Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke, Green refined the method for a series of laboratory experiments. The first experiment involved predicting one’s affect regarding cooperation versus competition. The design was 2 (experiencer vs. forecaster) x 2 (cooperative, competitive) between-subjects. Participants in the experiencer condition were trained in the Prisoners Dilemma Game (PDG), and were told that they were going to play the PDG via computer with another participant in a different room. Individuals made choices very quickly on the PDG and then were given false feedback that they had cooperated with their partner (thus helping the partner win some money) or competed against their partner (thus preventing the partner from winning money). They then reported how they felt. Others simply predicted how they thought they would feel in that scenario, allowing a direct comparison between forecasters and experiencers.

A second lab experiment is underway in which individuals make a series of predictions about a variety of events, and then experience one of those events three weeks later in the lab. They unexpectedly receive $5 and have the option of keeping the money or donating it to charity. Individuals then report how they feel about acting more benevolently or selfishly; those feelings are compared to their predicted feelings.

https://wisdomcenter.uchicago.edu/about/project-1-defining-wisdom

[[Category:Wisdom Definitions]]

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors

2020-12-09T19:31:15Z

Administrator:

[[Jeffrey Green]]

<youtube width="400" height="220">mmByL32G5mk</youtube>
<youtube width="400" height="220"> 4-TRCfMhCT8</youtube>

==Wisdom is defined along three components==

;Accurate [[Affective Forecasting|affective forecasts]] : Predicting correctly one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions.

;Accurate interpersonal affective forecasts : Predicting accurately the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically.

;Applying this knowledge : Choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

==Summary Points==

#His research has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. He found that {{font color || bg=yellow | individuals feel worse after competition and, better after cooperation than they would have predicted!}}
#Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that {{Font color | | yellow | individuals are poor emotional time travelers. }}
#Series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions:
## Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined.
## Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated.
## Who is “wise”? Researchers attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.
#Colleagues: Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke

==Text from Wisdom Institute==

This project has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. The research has found that individuals feel worse after competition and better after cooperation than they would have predicted. For example, members of couples who have sacrificed for their partner report feeling better than they expected. Forecasting errors may lead to choices that make the self and others worse off. This approach to wisdom is consistent with classical Greek and Hebrew approaches that emphasize virtue, as well as recent psychological approaches (e.g., Baltes; Ardelt) that address the pragmatics of living amidst uncertainty. Future research will examine whether accurate forecasters are more likely to choose benevolent behaviors.

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors
Green proposes that wisdom involves an understanding of the moral consequences of our decisions, and applying that knowledge to those decisions. Socrates’ injunction Gnothi seauton (Know Thyself) notwithstanding, social scientists have catalogued the ways in which individuals do not know themselves. Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that individuals are poor emotional time travelers; they tend to overestimate the intensity and duration of their happiness after positive experiences and of their sadness after negative experiences. Almost all affective forecasting research has focused on events that simply happen to people. This research extends affective forecasting research into the realm of moral behavior, and suggests that wisdom includes three components. First, wisdom involves accurate affective forecasts: correctly predicting one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions. Second, wisdom involves accurate interpersonalaffective forecasts: accurately predicting the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically. Third, wisdom involves applying this knowledge: choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

This research includes a series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions. Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined. Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated. Finally, who is “wise”? Researchers will attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.

With colleagues, Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke, Green refined the method for a series of laboratory experiments. The first experiment involved predicting one’s affect regarding cooperation versus competition. The design was 2 (experiencer vs. forecaster) x 2 (cooperative, competitive) between-subjects. Participants in the experiencer condition were trained in the Prisoners Dilemma Game (PDG), and were told that they were going to play the PDG via computer with another participant in a different room. Individuals made choices very quickly on the PDG and then were given false feedback that they had cooperated with their partner (thus helping the partner win some money) or competed against their partner (thus preventing the partner from winning money). They then reported how they felt. Others simply predicted how they thought they would feel in that scenario, allowing a direct comparison between forecasters and experiencers.

A second lab experiment is underway in which individuals make a series of predictions about a variety of events, and then experience one of those events three weeks later in the lab. They unexpectedly receive $5 and have the option of keeping the money or donating it to charity. Individuals then report how they feel about acting more benevolently or selfishly; those feelings are compared to their predicted feelings.

https://wisdomcenter.uchicago.edu/about/project-1-defining-wisdom

[[Category:Wisdom Definitions]]

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors

2020-12-09T19:30:36Z

Administrator:

[[Jeffrey Green]]

<youtube width="400" height="220">mmByL32G5mk</youtube>
<youtube width="400" height="220"> 4-TRCfMhCT8</youtube>

==Wisdom is defined along three components==

;Accurate [[Affective Forecasting|affective forecasts]] : Predicting correctly one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions.

;Accurate interpersonal affective forecasts : Predicting accurately the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically.

;Applying this knowledge : Choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

==Summary Points==

#His research has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. He found that {{font color || fg=text yellow | individuals feel worse after competition and, better after cooperation than they would have predicted!}}
#Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that {{Font color | | yellow | individuals are poor emotional time travelers. }}
#Series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions:
## Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined.
## Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated.
## Who is “wise”? Researchers attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.
#Colleagues: Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke

==Text from Wisdom Institute==

This project has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. The research has found that individuals feel worse after competition and better after cooperation than they would have predicted. For example, members of couples who have sacrificed for their partner report feeling better than they expected. Forecasting errors may lead to choices that make the self and others worse off. This approach to wisdom is consistent with classical Greek and Hebrew approaches that emphasize virtue, as well as recent psychological approaches (e.g., Baltes; Ardelt) that address the pragmatics of living amidst uncertainty. Future research will examine whether accurate forecasters are more likely to choose benevolent behaviors.

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors
Green proposes that wisdom involves an understanding of the moral consequences of our decisions, and applying that knowledge to those decisions. Socrates’ injunction Gnothi seauton (Know Thyself) notwithstanding, social scientists have catalogued the ways in which individuals do not know themselves. Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that individuals are poor emotional time travelers; they tend to overestimate the intensity and duration of their happiness after positive experiences and of their sadness after negative experiences. Almost all affective forecasting research has focused on events that simply happen to people. This research extends affective forecasting research into the realm of moral behavior, and suggests that wisdom includes three components. First, wisdom involves accurate affective forecasts: correctly predicting one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions. Second, wisdom involves accurate interpersonalaffective forecasts: accurately predicting the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically. Third, wisdom involves applying this knowledge: choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

This research includes a series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions. Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined. Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated. Finally, who is “wise”? Researchers will attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.

With colleagues, Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke, Green refined the method for a series of laboratory experiments. The first experiment involved predicting one’s affect regarding cooperation versus competition. The design was 2 (experiencer vs. forecaster) x 2 (cooperative, competitive) between-subjects. Participants in the experiencer condition were trained in the Prisoners Dilemma Game (PDG), and were told that they were going to play the PDG via computer with another participant in a different room. Individuals made choices very quickly on the PDG and then were given false feedback that they had cooperated with their partner (thus helping the partner win some money) or competed against their partner (thus preventing the partner from winning money). They then reported how they felt. Others simply predicted how they thought they would feel in that scenario, allowing a direct comparison between forecasters and experiencers.

A second lab experiment is underway in which individuals make a series of predictions about a variety of events, and then experience one of those events three weeks later in the lab. They unexpectedly receive $5 and have the option of keeping the money or donating it to charity. Individuals then report how they feel about acting more benevolently or selfishly; those feelings are compared to their predicted feelings.

https://wisdomcenter.uchicago.edu/about/project-1-defining-wisdom

[[Category:Wisdom Definitions]]

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors

2020-12-09T19:29:44Z

Administrator:

[[Jeffrey Green]]

<youtube width="400" height="220">mmByL32G5mk</youtube>
<youtube width="400" height="220"> 4-TRCfMhCT8</youtube>

==Wisdom is defined along three components==

;Accurate [[Affective Forecasting|affective forecasts]] : Predicting correctly one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions.

;Accurate interpersonal affective forecasts : Predicting accurately the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically.

;Applying this knowledge : Choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

==Summary Points==

#His research has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. He found that {{font color || fg=yellow | individuals feel worse after competition and, better after cooperation than they would have predicted!}}
#Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that {{Font color | | yellow | individuals are poor emotional time travelers. }}
#Series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions:
## Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined.
## Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated.
## Who is “wise”? Researchers attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.
#Colleagues: Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke

==Text from Wisdom Institute==

This project has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. The research has found that individuals feel worse after competition and better after cooperation than they would have predicted. For example, members of couples who have sacrificed for their partner report feeling better than they expected. Forecasting errors may lead to choices that make the self and others worse off. This approach to wisdom is consistent with classical Greek and Hebrew approaches that emphasize virtue, as well as recent psychological approaches (e.g., Baltes; Ardelt) that address the pragmatics of living amidst uncertainty. Future research will examine whether accurate forecasters are more likely to choose benevolent behaviors.

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors
Green proposes that wisdom involves an understanding of the moral consequences of our decisions, and applying that knowledge to those decisions. Socrates’ injunction Gnothi seauton (Know Thyself) notwithstanding, social scientists have catalogued the ways in which individuals do not know themselves. Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that individuals are poor emotional time travelers; they tend to overestimate the intensity and duration of their happiness after positive experiences and of their sadness after negative experiences. Almost all affective forecasting research has focused on events that simply happen to people. This research extends affective forecasting research into the realm of moral behavior, and suggests that wisdom includes three components. First, wisdom involves accurate affective forecasts: correctly predicting one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions. Second, wisdom involves accurate interpersonalaffective forecasts: accurately predicting the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically. Third, wisdom involves applying this knowledge: choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

This research includes a series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions. Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined. Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated. Finally, who is “wise”? Researchers will attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.

With colleagues, Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke, Green refined the method for a series of laboratory experiments. The first experiment involved predicting one’s affect regarding cooperation versus competition. The design was 2 (experiencer vs. forecaster) x 2 (cooperative, competitive) between-subjects. Participants in the experiencer condition were trained in the Prisoners Dilemma Game (PDG), and were told that they were going to play the PDG via computer with another participant in a different room. Individuals made choices very quickly on the PDG and then were given false feedback that they had cooperated with their partner (thus helping the partner win some money) or competed against their partner (thus preventing the partner from winning money). They then reported how they felt. Others simply predicted how they thought they would feel in that scenario, allowing a direct comparison between forecasters and experiencers.

A second lab experiment is underway in which individuals make a series of predictions about a variety of events, and then experience one of those events three weeks later in the lab. They unexpectedly receive $5 and have the option of keeping the money or donating it to charity. Individuals then report how they feel about acting more benevolently or selfishly; those feelings are compared to their predicted feelings.

https://wisdomcenter.uchicago.edu/about/project-1-defining-wisdom

[[Category:Wisdom Definitions]]

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors

2020-12-09T19:27:19Z

Administrator:

[[Jeffrey Green]]

<youtube width="400" height="220">mmByL32G5mk</youtube>
<youtube width="400" height="220"> 4-TRCfMhCT8</youtube>

==Wisdom is defined along three components==

;Accurate [[Affective Forecasting|affective forecasts]] : Predicting correctly one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions.

;Accurate interpersonal affective forecasts : Predicting accurately the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically.

;Applying this knowledge : Choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

==Summary Points==

#His research has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. He found that {{font color | black | yellow | individuals feel worse after competition and, better after cooperation than they would have predicted!}}
#Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that {{Font color | | yellow | individuals are poor emotional time travelers. }}
#Series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions:
## Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined.
## Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated.
## Who is “wise”? Researchers attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.
#Colleagues: Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke

==Text from Wisdom Institute==

This project has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. The research has found that individuals feel worse after competition and better after cooperation than they would have predicted. For example, members of couples who have sacrificed for their partner report feeling better than they expected. Forecasting errors may lead to choices that make the self and others worse off. This approach to wisdom is consistent with classical Greek and Hebrew approaches that emphasize virtue, as well as recent psychological approaches (e.g., Baltes; Ardelt) that address the pragmatics of living amidst uncertainty. Future research will examine whether accurate forecasters are more likely to choose benevolent behaviors.

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors
Green proposes that wisdom involves an understanding of the moral consequences of our decisions, and applying that knowledge to those decisions. Socrates’ injunction Gnothi seauton (Know Thyself) notwithstanding, social scientists have catalogued the ways in which individuals do not know themselves. Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that individuals are poor emotional time travelers; they tend to overestimate the intensity and duration of their happiness after positive experiences and of their sadness after negative experiences. Almost all affective forecasting research has focused on events that simply happen to people. This research extends affective forecasting research into the realm of moral behavior, and suggests that wisdom includes three components. First, wisdom involves accurate affective forecasts: correctly predicting one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions. Second, wisdom involves accurate interpersonalaffective forecasts: accurately predicting the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically. Third, wisdom involves applying this knowledge: choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

This research includes a series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions. Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined. Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated. Finally, who is “wise”? Researchers will attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.

With colleagues, Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke, Green refined the method for a series of laboratory experiments. The first experiment involved predicting one’s affect regarding cooperation versus competition. The design was 2 (experiencer vs. forecaster) x 2 (cooperative, competitive) between-subjects. Participants in the experiencer condition were trained in the Prisoners Dilemma Game (PDG), and were told that they were going to play the PDG via computer with another participant in a different room. Individuals made choices very quickly on the PDG and then were given false feedback that they had cooperated with their partner (thus helping the partner win some money) or competed against their partner (thus preventing the partner from winning money). They then reported how they felt. Others simply predicted how they thought they would feel in that scenario, allowing a direct comparison between forecasters and experiencers.

A second lab experiment is underway in which individuals make a series of predictions about a variety of events, and then experience one of those events three weeks later in the lab. They unexpectedly receive $5 and have the option of keeping the money or donating it to charity. Individuals then report how they feel about acting more benevolently or selfishly; those feelings are compared to their predicted feelings.

https://wisdomcenter.uchicago.edu/about/project-1-defining-wisdom

[[Category:Wisdom Definitions]]

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors

2020-12-09T19:26:42Z

Administrator:

[[Jeffrey Green]]

<youtube width="400" height="220">mmByL32G5mk</youtube>
<youtube width="400" height="220"> 4-TRCfMhCT8</youtube>

==Wisdom is defined along three components==

;Accurate [[Affective Forecasting|affective forecasts]] : Predicting correctly one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions.

;Accurate interpersonal affective forecasts : Predicting accurately the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically.

;Applying this knowledge : Choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

==Summary Points==

#His research has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. He found that {{font color|black|yellow|individuals feel worse after competition and, better after cooperation than they would have predicted!}}
#Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that {{Font color | | yellow | individuals are poor emotional time travelers. }}
#Series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions:
## Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined.
## Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated.
## Who is “wise”? Researchers attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.
#Colleagues: Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke

==Text from Wisdom Institute==

This project has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. The research has found that individuals feel worse after competition and better after cooperation than they would have predicted. For example, members of couples who have sacrificed for their partner report feeling better than they expected. Forecasting errors may lead to choices that make the self and others worse off. This approach to wisdom is consistent with classical Greek and Hebrew approaches that emphasize virtue, as well as recent psychological approaches (e.g., Baltes; Ardelt) that address the pragmatics of living amidst uncertainty. Future research will examine whether accurate forecasters are more likely to choose benevolent behaviors.

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors
Green proposes that wisdom involves an understanding of the moral consequences of our decisions, and applying that knowledge to those decisions. Socrates’ injunction Gnothi seauton (Know Thyself) notwithstanding, social scientists have catalogued the ways in which individuals do not know themselves. Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that individuals are poor emotional time travelers; they tend to overestimate the intensity and duration of their happiness after positive experiences and of their sadness after negative experiences. Almost all affective forecasting research has focused on events that simply happen to people. This research extends affective forecasting research into the realm of moral behavior, and suggests that wisdom includes three components. First, wisdom involves accurate affective forecasts: correctly predicting one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions. Second, wisdom involves accurate interpersonalaffective forecasts: accurately predicting the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically. Third, wisdom involves applying this knowledge: choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

This research includes a series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions. Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined. Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated. Finally, who is “wise”? Researchers will attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.

With colleagues, Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke, Green refined the method for a series of laboratory experiments. The first experiment involved predicting one’s affect regarding cooperation versus competition. The design was 2 (experiencer vs. forecaster) x 2 (cooperative, competitive) between-subjects. Participants in the experiencer condition were trained in the Prisoners Dilemma Game (PDG), and were told that they were going to play the PDG via computer with another participant in a different room. Individuals made choices very quickly on the PDG and then were given false feedback that they had cooperated with their partner (thus helping the partner win some money) or competed against their partner (thus preventing the partner from winning money). They then reported how they felt. Others simply predicted how they thought they would feel in that scenario, allowing a direct comparison between forecasters and experiencers.

A second lab experiment is underway in which individuals make a series of predictions about a variety of events, and then experience one of those events three weeks later in the lab. They unexpectedly receive $5 and have the option of keeping the money or donating it to charity. Individuals then report how they feel about acting more benevolently or selfishly; those feelings are compared to their predicted feelings.

https://wisdomcenter.uchicago.edu/about/project-1-defining-wisdom

[[Category:Wisdom Definitions]]

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors

2020-12-09T19:26:16Z

Administrator:

[[Jeffrey Green]]

<youtube width="400" height="220">mmByL32G5mk</youtube>
<youtube width="400" height="220"> 4-TRCfMhCT8</youtube>

==Wisdom is defined along three components==

;Accurate [[Affective Forecasting|affective forecasts]] : Predicting correctly one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions.

;Accurate interpersonal affective forecasts : Predicting accurately the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically.

;Applying this knowledge : Choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

==Summary Points==

#His research has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. He found that {{font color|black|yellow|individuals feel worse after competition and, better after cooperation than they would have predicted! }}
#Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that {{Font color | | yellow | individuals are poor emotional time travelers. }}
#Series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions:
## Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined.
## Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated.
## Who is “wise”? Researchers attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.
#Colleagues: Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke

==Text from Wisdom Institute==

This project has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. The research has found that individuals feel worse after competition and better after cooperation than they would have predicted. For example, members of couples who have sacrificed for their partner report feeling better than they expected. Forecasting errors may lead to choices that make the self and others worse off. This approach to wisdom is consistent with classical Greek and Hebrew approaches that emphasize virtue, as well as recent psychological approaches (e.g., Baltes; Ardelt) that address the pragmatics of living amidst uncertainty. Future research will examine whether accurate forecasters are more likely to choose benevolent behaviors.

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors
Green proposes that wisdom involves an understanding of the moral consequences of our decisions, and applying that knowledge to those decisions. Socrates’ injunction Gnothi seauton (Know Thyself) notwithstanding, social scientists have catalogued the ways in which individuals do not know themselves. Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that individuals are poor emotional time travelers; they tend to overestimate the intensity and duration of their happiness after positive experiences and of their sadness after negative experiences. Almost all affective forecasting research has focused on events that simply happen to people. This research extends affective forecasting research into the realm of moral behavior, and suggests that wisdom includes three components. First, wisdom involves accurate affective forecasts: correctly predicting one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions. Second, wisdom involves accurate interpersonalaffective forecasts: accurately predicting the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically. Third, wisdom involves applying this knowledge: choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

This research includes a series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions. Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined. Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated. Finally, who is “wise”? Researchers will attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.

With colleagues, Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke, Green refined the method for a series of laboratory experiments. The first experiment involved predicting one’s affect regarding cooperation versus competition. The design was 2 (experiencer vs. forecaster) x 2 (cooperative, competitive) between-subjects. Participants in the experiencer condition were trained in the Prisoners Dilemma Game (PDG), and were told that they were going to play the PDG via computer with another participant in a different room. Individuals made choices very quickly on the PDG and then were given false feedback that they had cooperated with their partner (thus helping the partner win some money) or competed against their partner (thus preventing the partner from winning money). They then reported how they felt. Others simply predicted how they thought they would feel in that scenario, allowing a direct comparison between forecasters and experiencers.

A second lab experiment is underway in which individuals make a series of predictions about a variety of events, and then experience one of those events three weeks later in the lab. They unexpectedly receive $5 and have the option of keeping the money or donating it to charity. Individuals then report how they feel about acting more benevolently or selfishly; those feelings are compared to their predicted feelings.

https://wisdomcenter.uchicago.edu/about/project-1-defining-wisdom

[[Category:Wisdom Definitions]]

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors

2020-12-09T19:23:57Z

Administrator:

[[Jeffrey Green]]

<youtube width="400" height="220">mmByL32G5mk</youtube>
<youtube width="400" height="220"> 4-TRCfMhCT8</youtube>

==Wisdom is defined along three components==

;Accurate [[Affective Forecasting|affective forecasts]] : Predicting correctly one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions.

;Accurate interpersonal affective forecasts : Predicting accurately the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically.

;Applying this knowledge : Choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

==Summary Points==

#His research has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. He found that {{Font color| |yellow|individuals feel worse after competition and, better after cooperation than they would have predicted! }}
#Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that {{Font color | | yellow | individuals are poor emotional time travelers. }}
#Series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions:
## Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined.
## Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated.
## Who is “wise”? Researchers attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.
#Colleagues: Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke

==Text from Wisdom Institute==

This project has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. The research has found that individuals feel worse after competition and better after cooperation than they would have predicted. For example, members of couples who have sacrificed for their partner report feeling better than they expected. Forecasting errors may lead to choices that make the self and others worse off. This approach to wisdom is consistent with classical Greek and Hebrew approaches that emphasize virtue, as well as recent psychological approaches (e.g., Baltes; Ardelt) that address the pragmatics of living amidst uncertainty. Future research will examine whether accurate forecasters are more likely to choose benevolent behaviors.

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors
Green proposes that wisdom involves an understanding of the moral consequences of our decisions, and applying that knowledge to those decisions. Socrates’ injunction Gnothi seauton (Know Thyself) notwithstanding, social scientists have catalogued the ways in which individuals do not know themselves. Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that individuals are poor emotional time travelers; they tend to overestimate the intensity and duration of their happiness after positive experiences and of their sadness after negative experiences. Almost all affective forecasting research has focused on events that simply happen to people. This research extends affective forecasting research into the realm of moral behavior, and suggests that wisdom includes three components. First, wisdom involves accurate affective forecasts: correctly predicting one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions. Second, wisdom involves accurate interpersonalaffective forecasts: accurately predicting the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically. Third, wisdom involves applying this knowledge: choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

This research includes a series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions. Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined. Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated. Finally, who is “wise”? Researchers will attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.

With colleagues, Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke, Green refined the method for a series of laboratory experiments. The first experiment involved predicting one’s affect regarding cooperation versus competition. The design was 2 (experiencer vs. forecaster) x 2 (cooperative, competitive) between-subjects. Participants in the experiencer condition were trained in the Prisoners Dilemma Game (PDG), and were told that they were going to play the PDG via computer with another participant in a different room. Individuals made choices very quickly on the PDG and then were given false feedback that they had cooperated with their partner (thus helping the partner win some money) or competed against their partner (thus preventing the partner from winning money). They then reported how they felt. Others simply predicted how they thought they would feel in that scenario, allowing a direct comparison between forecasters and experiencers.

A second lab experiment is underway in which individuals make a series of predictions about a variety of events, and then experience one of those events three weeks later in the lab. They unexpectedly receive $5 and have the option of keeping the money or donating it to charity. Individuals then report how they feel about acting more benevolently or selfishly; those feelings are compared to their predicted feelings.

https://wisdomcenter.uchicago.edu/about/project-1-defining-wisdom

[[Category:Wisdom Definitions]]

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors

2020-12-09T19:23:15Z

Administrator:

[[Jeffrey Green]]

<youtube width="400" height="220">mmByL32G5mk</youtube>
<youtube width="400" height="220"> 4-TRCfMhCT8</youtube>

==Wisdom is defined along three components==

;Accurate [[Affective Forecasting|affective forecasts]] : Predicting correctly one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions.

;Accurate interpersonal affective forecasts : Predicting accurately the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically.

;Applying this knowledge : Choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

==Summary Points==

#His research has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. He found that {{Font color | tan | yellow | individuals feel worse after competition and, better after cooperation than they would have predicted! }}
#Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that {{Font color | | yellow | individuals are poor emotional time travelers. }}
#Series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions:
## Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined.
## Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated.
## Who is “wise”? Researchers attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.
#Colleagues: Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke

==Text from Wisdom Institute==

This project has focused on affective forecasting for moral behaviors. The research has found that individuals feel worse after competition and better after cooperation than they would have predicted. For example, members of couples who have sacrificed for their partner report feeling better than they expected. Forecasting errors may lead to choices that make the self and others worse off. This approach to wisdom is consistent with classical Greek and Hebrew approaches that emphasize virtue, as well as recent psychological approaches (e.g., Baltes; Ardelt) that address the pragmatics of living amidst uncertainty. Future research will examine whether accurate forecasters are more likely to choose benevolent behaviors.

Wisdom as Learning from Life Experiences: Affective Forecasting for Benevolent and Selfish Behaviors
Green proposes that wisdom involves an understanding of the moral consequences of our decisions, and applying that knowledge to those decisions. Socrates’ injunction Gnothi seauton (Know Thyself) notwithstanding, social scientists have catalogued the ways in which individuals do not know themselves. Recent work on affective forecasting suggests that individuals are poor emotional time travelers; they tend to overestimate the intensity and duration of their happiness after positive experiences and of their sadness after negative experiences. Almost all affective forecasting research has focused on events that simply happen to people. This research extends affective forecasting research into the realm of moral behavior, and suggests that wisdom includes three components. First, wisdom involves accurate affective forecasts: correctly predicting one’s emotional reactions following one’s moral decisions. Second, wisdom involves accurate interpersonalaffective forecasts: accurately predicting the emotional reactions of others to one’s moral choices. This is an important component of many traditional definitions of wisdom, but has been largely neglected empirically. Third, wisdom involves applying this knowledge: choosing benevolent (over hurtful) actions because they will yield the greatest positive affect both for the self and for others.

This research includes a series of experimental laboratory studies and a six-month longitudinal study of couples designed to investigate the following three questions. Do affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between predicted and actual emotional consequences of benevolent behavior (e.g., forgiving a dating partner) versus hurtful behavior (e.g., retaliating against a dating partner) are examined. Do interpersonal affective forecasting errors occur for moral decisions? Differences between individuals’ predictions about the emotional experiences of others and others’ actual emotional experiences as a consequence of individuals’ benevolent or hurtful behavior are investigated. Finally, who is “wise”? Researchers will attempt to identify the wisest (i.e., most accurate affective forecasters) individuals via a series of personality measures.

With colleagues, Jody Davis, Eli Finkel, and Glenn Lucke, Green refined the method for a series of laboratory experiments. The first experiment involved predicting one’s affect regarding cooperation versus competition. The design was 2 (experiencer vs. forecaster) x 2 (cooperative, competitive) between-subjects. Participants in the experiencer condition were trained in the Prisoners Dilemma Game (PDG), and were told that they were going to play the PDG via computer with another participant in a different room. Individuals made choices very quickly on the PDG and then were given false feedback that they had cooperated with their partner (thus helping the partner win some money) or competed against their partner (thus preventing the partner from winning money). They then reported how they felt. Others simply predicted how they thought they would feel in that scenario, allowing a direct comparison between forecasters and experiencers.

A second lab experiment is underway in which individuals make a series of predictions about a variety of events, and then experience one of those events three weeks later in the lab. They unexpectedly receive $5 and have the option of keeping the money or donating it to charity. Individuals then report how they feel about acting more benevolently or selfishly; those feelings are compared to their predicted feelings.

https://wisdomcenter.uchicago.edu/about/project-1-defining-wisdom

[[Category:Wisdom Definitions]]

Wisdom and the Life Story: How Life Experiences Foster Wisdom

2020-09-25T06:55:16Z

Administrator:

==Judith Glück==

<youtube width="400" height="220">cP0V_xnqPjU</youtube>
<youtube width="400" height="220">B9cSIzUcnEs</youtube>

==Short Definition==

The current project is the first psychological study of the development of wisdom in the context of individual lives.

==Summary Points==

#"Wisdom and the Life Story" looks at how life events and challenges aid in the development of wisdom.
#The current main goal is to develop categories for content-coding of the interview transcripts in order to test predictions concerning the MORE wisdom model.
#Surprisingly, hardly any empirical studies have investigated how wisdom develops through the challenges one faces as part of the human experience. The current project is the first psychological study of the development of wisdom in the context of individual lives.
#The theoretical foundation of the study is the MORE Wisdom model
#In short, the model proposes that four personal resources interact with challenging life experience to foster the emergence of wisdom: a sense of Mastery, Openness to experience, a Reflective attitude, and Emotion regulation skills.
#Wise participants are expected to show higher levels of the four MORE resources than control participants in how they describe life challenges, how they have dealt with them, and how they have integrated them in their life stories.

==Text from Wisdom Institute==

"Wisdom and the Life Story" looks at how life events and challenges aid in the development of wisdom. Though the data collection for the project is still underway, it currently has two main findings: 1) Participant scores in multiple measures of wisdom are virtually uncorrelated, so project members are working on a heuristic for deciding which nominees to consider wise; and 2) Individuals nominated on account of being wise tend to have less stereotypical, more reflection-based views of the events of their lives. The current main goal is to develop categories for content-coding of the interview transcripts in order to test predictions concerning the MORE wisdom model. This model predicts wise participants will possess a heightened sense of Mastery, Openness to experience, a Reflective attitude, and Emotion regulation skills.

Wisdom and the Life Story: How Life Experiences Foster Wisdom
Why do certain individuals develop high levels of wisdom in the course of their lives, while others do not? What is the role of life events and challenges in the development of wisdom? Understanding how wisdom emerges in individuals’ lives is critical for refining scholarly theories, but also lays the foundation for engendering wisdom through intervention in educational, healthcare, and business settings. Surprisingly, hardly any empirical studies have investigated how wisdom develops through the challenges one faces as part of the human experience. The current project is the first psychological study of the development of wisdom in the context of individual lives. The theoretical foundation of the study is the MORE Wisdom model that Judith Glück and her collaborator Susan Bluck have derived from a review of the literature on wisdom and related fields such as growth from negative experiences. In short, the model proposes that four personal resources interact with challenging life experience to foster the emergence of wisdom: a sense of Mastery, Openness to experience, a Reflective attitude, and Emotion regulation skills. Wise individuals approach their individual life challenges with higher levels of these resources, and through dealing with challenges wisely, the resources and wisdom itself are developed further. In order to test the MORE Wisdom model empirically, forty individuals will be recruited who fulfill high standards of wisdom; they are nominated by others as wise and score high on standard measures of wisdom. They will be compared to forty age- and gender-matched control participants who perform in the typical range for their age group in wisdom measures. All participants will complete scales measuring the four personal resources and participate in a structured Life Challenges Interview which includes open accounts, specific questions, and rating scales concerning the most important challenges in participants’ lives. Interviews are transcribed and content analyzed. Wise participants are expected to show higher levels of the four MORE resources than control participants in how they describe life challenges, how they have dealt with them, and how they have integrated them in their life stories.

Doctoral student Uwe Redzanowski was hired to help conduct the project in cooperation with a second project entitled, “The Development and Manifestation of Wisdom”, funded by the Austrian research fund, in which two more doctoral students are working. Thus far, scales for assessing (a) most important life events, (b) MORE resources, (c) wisdom (Ardelt, Webster, Levenson scales), and (d) important predictors (intelligence) have been selected and, if necessary, translated into German. A first call for wisdom nomination was issued in the fall of 2008; a second call is being prepared. Those nominators who responded to the first call are being interviewed by telephone about their reasons for nomination and characteristics of the nominee. In preparation for life-story interviews with wisdom nominees, a pilot study of the interview manual is being conducted with elderly individuals (not nominated for wisdom). Recruitment of the control group is still in progress.

https://wisdomcenter.uchicago.edu/about/project-1-defining-wisdom

[[Category:Wisdom Definitions]]

Wisdom and the Life Story: How Life Experiences Foster Wisdom

2020-09-25T06:54:10Z

Administrator:

Judith Glück

<youtube width="400" height="220">cP0V_xnqPjU</youtube>
<youtube width="400" height="220">B9cSIzUcnEs</youtube>

==Short Definition==

The current project is the first psychological study of the development of wisdom in the context of individual lives.

==Summary Points==

#"Wisdom and the Life Story" looks at how life events and challenges aid in the development of wisdom.
#The current main goal is to develop categories for content-coding of the interview transcripts in order to test predictions concerning the MORE wisdom model.
#Surprisingly, hardly any empirical studies have investigated how wisdom develops through the challenges one faces as part of the human experience. The current project is the first psychological study of the development of wisdom in the context of individual lives.
#The theoretical foundation of the study is the MORE Wisdom model
#In short, the model proposes that four personal resources interact with challenging life experience to foster the emergence of wisdom: a sense of Mastery, Openness to experience, a Reflective attitude, and Emotion regulation skills.
#Wise participants are expected to show higher levels of the four MORE resources than control participants in how they describe life challenges, how they have dealt with them, and how they have integrated them in their life stories.

==Text from Wisdom Institute==

"Wisdom and the Life Story" looks at how life events and challenges aid in the development of wisdom. Though the data collection for the project is still underway, it currently has two main findings: 1) Participant scores in multiple measures of wisdom are virtually uncorrelated, so project members are working on a heuristic for deciding which nominees to consider wise; and 2) Individuals nominated on account of being wise tend to have less stereotypical, more reflection-based views of the events of their lives. The current main goal is to develop categories for content-coding of the interview transcripts in order to test predictions concerning the MORE wisdom model. This model predicts wise participants will possess a heightened sense of Mastery, Openness to experience, a Reflective attitude, and Emotion regulation skills.

Wisdom and the Life Story: How Life Experiences Foster Wisdom
Why do certain individuals develop high levels of wisdom in the course of their lives, while others do not? What is the role of life events and challenges in the development of wisdom? Understanding how wisdom emerges in individuals’ lives is critical for refining scholarly theories, but also lays the foundation for engendering wisdom through intervention in educational, healthcare, and business settings. Surprisingly, hardly any empirical studies have investigated how wisdom develops through the challenges one faces as part of the human experience. The current project is the first psychological study of the development of wisdom in the context of individual lives. The theoretical foundation of the study is the MORE Wisdom model that Judith Glück and her collaborator Susan Bluck have derived from a review of the literature on wisdom and related fields such as growth from negative experiences. In short, the model proposes that four personal resources interact with challenging life experience to foster the emergence of wisdom: a sense of Mastery, Openness to experience, a Reflective attitude, and Emotion regulation skills. Wise individuals approach their individual life challenges with higher levels of these resources, and through dealing with challenges wisely, the resources and wisdom itself are developed further. In order to test the MORE Wisdom model empirically, forty individuals will be recruited who fulfill high standards of wisdom; they are nominated by others as wise and score high on standard measures of wisdom. They will be compared to forty age- and gender-matched control participants who perform in the typical range for their age group in wisdom measures. All participants will complete scales measuring the four personal resources and participate in a structured Life Challenges Interview which includes open accounts, specific questions, and rating scales concerning the most important challenges in participants’ lives. Interviews are transcribed and content analyzed. Wise participants are expected to show higher levels of the four MORE resources than control participants in how they describe life challenges, how they have dealt with them, and how they have integrated them in their life stories.

Doctoral student Uwe Redzanowski was hired to help conduct the project in cooperation with a second project entitled, “The Development and Manifestation of Wisdom”, funded by the Austrian research fund, in which two more doctoral students are working. Thus far, scales for assessing (a) most important life events, (b) MORE resources, (c) wisdom (Ardelt, Webster, Levenson scales), and (d) important predictors (intelligence) have been selected and, if necessary, translated into German. A first call for wisdom nomination was issued in the fall of 2008; a second call is being prepared. Those nominators who responded to the first call are being interviewed by telephone about their reasons for nomination and characteristics of the nominee. In preparation for life-story interviews with wisdom nominees, a pilot study of the interview manual is being conducted with elderly individuals (not nominated for wisdom). Recruitment of the control group is still in progress.

https://wisdomcenter.uchicago.edu/about/project-1-defining-wisdom

[[Category:Wisdom Definitions]]

Wisdom and the Life Story: How Life Experiences Foster Wisdom

2020-09-25T06:53:48Z

Administrator:

Judith Glück
<youtube width="400" height="220">cP0V_xnqPjU</youtube>

<youtube width="400" height="220">B9cSIzUcnEs</youtube>

==Short Definition==

The current project is the first psychological study of the development of wisdom in the context of individual lives.

==Summary Points==

#"Wisdom and the Life Story" looks at how life events and challenges aid in the development of wisdom.
#The current main goal is to develop categories for content-coding of the interview transcripts in order to test predictions concerning the MORE wisdom model.
#Surprisingly, hardly any empirical studies have investigated how wisdom develops through the challenges one faces as part of the human experience. The current project is the first psychological study of the development of wisdom in the context of individual lives.
#The theoretical foundation of the study is the MORE Wisdom model
#In short, the model proposes that four personal resources interact with challenging life experience to foster the emergence of wisdom: a sense of Mastery, Openness to experience, a Reflective attitude, and Emotion regulation skills.
#Wise participants are expected to show higher levels of the four MORE resources than control participants in how they describe life challenges, how they have dealt with them, and how they have integrated them in their life stories.

==Text from Wisdom Institute==

"Wisdom and the Life Story" looks at how life events and challenges aid in the development of wisdom. Though the data collection for the project is still underway, it currently has two main findings: 1) Participant scores in multiple measures of wisdom are virtually uncorrelated, so project members are working on a heuristic for deciding which nominees to consider wise; and 2) Individuals nominated on account of being wise tend to have less stereotypical, more reflection-based views of the events of their lives. The current main goal is to develop categories for content-coding of the interview transcripts in order to test predictions concerning the MORE wisdom model. This model predicts wise participants will possess a heightened sense of Mastery, Openness to experience, a Reflective attitude, and Emotion regulation skills.

Wisdom and the Life Story: How Life Experiences Foster Wisdom
Why do certain individuals develop high levels of wisdom in the course of their lives, while others do not? What is the role of life events and challenges in the development of wisdom? Understanding how wisdom emerges in individuals’ lives is critical for refining scholarly theories, but also lays the foundation for engendering wisdom through intervention in educational, healthcare, and business settings. Surprisingly, hardly any empirical studies have investigated how wisdom develops through the challenges one faces as part of the human experience. The current project is the first psychological study of the development of wisdom in the context of individual lives. The theoretical foundation of the study is the MORE Wisdom model that Judith Glück and her collaborator Susan Bluck have derived from a review of the literature on wisdom and related fields such as growth from negative experiences. In short, the model proposes that four personal resources interact with challenging life experience to foster the emergence of wisdom: a sense of Mastery, Openness to experience, a Reflective attitude, and Emotion regulation skills. Wise individuals approach their individual life challenges with higher levels of these resources, and through dealing with challenges wisely, the resources and wisdom itself are developed further. In order to test the MORE Wisdom model empirically, forty individuals will be recruited who fulfill high standards of wisdom; they are nominated by others as wise and score high on standard measures of wisdom. They will be compared to forty age- and gender-matched control participants who perform in the typical range for their age group in wisdom measures. All participants will complete scales measuring the four personal resources and participate in a structured Life Challenges Interview which includes open accounts, specific questions, and rating scales concerning the most important challenges in participants’ lives. Interviews are transcribed and content analyzed. Wise participants are expected to show higher levels of the four MORE resources than control participants in how they describe life challenges, how they have dealt with them, and how they have integrated them in their life stories.

Doctoral student Uwe Redzanowski was hired to help conduct the project in cooperation with a second project entitled, “The Development and Manifestation of Wisdom”, funded by the Austrian research fund, in which two more doctoral students are working. Thus far, scales for assessing (a) most important life events, (b) MORE resources, (c) wisdom (Ardelt, Webster, Levenson scales), and (d) important predictors (intelligence) have been selected and, if necessary, translated into German. A first call for wisdom nomination was issued in the fall of 2008; a second call is being prepared. Those nominators who responded to the first call are being interviewed by telephone about their reasons for nomination and characteristics of the nominee. In preparation for life-story interviews with wisdom nominees, a pilot study of the interview manual is being conducted with elderly individuals (not nominated for wisdom). Recruitment of the control group is still in progress.

https://wisdomcenter.uchicago.edu/about/project-1-defining-wisdom

[[Category:Wisdom Definitions]]

Ankur Gupta

2020-09-25T06:52:41Z

Administrator:

Lecturer, Computer Science
Butler University, United States

Ankur Gupta is an Assistant Professor of Computer Science and Software Engineering at Butler University. He finished his PhD from Duke University in 2007 under the guidance of Dean Jeffrey Scott Vitter. Prior to that, he finished a Bachelors in Mathematics, a Bachelors in Computer Science, and a Masters in Computer Science from the University of Texas at Dallas in 2000. His research interests are broadly in the area of design and analysis of algorithms and data structures, with recent application to such topics as data compression, text indexing, and dynamic and streaming data.

Source: [[Center for Practical Wisdom]], University of Chicago

[[Category: Wisdom Scientists]]

Ankur Gupta

2020-09-25T06:52:13Z

Administrator:

Lecturer, Computer Science
Butler University, United States

Ankur Gupta is an Assistant Professor of Computer Science and Software Engineering at Butler University. He finished his PhD from Duke University in 2007 under the guidance of Dean Jeffrey Scott Vitter. Prior to that, he finished a Bachelors in Mathematics, a Bachelors in Computer Science, and a Masters in Computer Science from the University of Texas at Dallas in 2000. His research interests are broadly in the area of design and analysis of algorithms and data structures, with recent application to such topics as data compression, text indexing, and dynamic and streaming data.

<youtube width="200" height="120">CCz1kmfqL7g</youtube>

Source: [[Center for Practical Wisdom]], University of Chicago

[[Category: Wisdom Scientists]]

User talk:Laouris

2018-09-09T08:17:57Z

Administrator: Welcome!

'''Welcome to ''Dialogic Design Science''!'''
We hope you will contribute much and well.
You will probably want to read the [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Help:Contents help pages].
Again, welcome and have fun! [[User:Administrator|Administrator]] ([[User talk:Administrator|talk]]) 02:17, 9 September 2018 (MDT)

User:Laouris

2018-09-09T08:17:57Z

Administrator: Creating user page for new user.

Laouris was born in Pafos, Cyprus in 1958. Son of teacher Christodoulos Laouris, he lived and attended schools in various districts of Cyprus including The English School, Nicosia, the Pancyprian Gymnasium and the Acropolis Gymnasium. In 1974 he became a refugee. He served in the Cypriot National Guard as the first Cypriot senior cryptographer in the Headquarters after the 1974 Cypriot coup d'état of the Greek military junta and the Turkish invasion of Cyprus in 1974.