Scientists say: some people really can not have bosses

Scientists say: some people really can not have bosses

Scientists say: some people really can not have bosses

In every company there is such a person : tell him to do something – and he will stop doing it, limit his choice to five options – and he will certainly demand the sixth. Aversion to control is one of our (and probably feline) evolutionary traits, which affects the most diverse spheres of life. But if in most people it is expressed by slight discontent, then in some people it dominates and subordinates itself.

A new study published in the journal Neuroscience says that a person behaves as a minimum for two reasons. The first is when they perceive control as a sign of distrust. The second is when he knows little about the behavior and personality of someone who is trying, albeit with good intentions, to limit his freedom.

Having looked at what is happening to the brain at this time, scientists from the University of Berne (Universität Bern) discovered amazing things. In particular, they managed to see that the aversion to control in any of its forms is reflected in the brain as synchronization of activity in its two areas.

To do this, they monitored the brain activity of university students (51 in total) who played a simple financial game , where each participant was invited to share money with other participants. Students interacted with each other in pairs, and the moderators allowed them to designate some minimum amount that they would like to receive from a partner in the game if they wanted to. The rules of the game at the same time assumed that if the minimum amount was still indicated, another student did not have the right to not give his partner money, although he could reduce the amount at his discretion.

According to Live Science, the majority of the participants in the game turned out to be rather generous, so they easily shared with the partners even larger amounts than they had as a result. However, if the partner required a minimum, then all but 10 participants, as a rule, gave him less money than usual.

The analysis of the questionnaires that the students filled after allowed to say that the statement of the minimum amount of many of them was perceived just as an act of mistrust from the partner in the game. And the brain scan , carried out in the third stage of the experiment, supplemented this picture. Here, scientists saw that the participants prone to control showed higher simultaneous activity in the lower parietal lobe and the dorsolateral part of the prefrontal cortex of the brain.

Obviously, it is the activity of the two regions that determines how well we transfer control and how much we are inclined to resist. But this puzzle, however, has not yet been solved. Therefore, for example, that two regions have different functional. And while the sphere of influence of the lower parietal lobe extends to mathematical operations , reorientation of attention and processing of distance, part of the prefrontal cortex is associated with cognitive control, acceptance of moral decisions and resolution of conflicts.

Scientists explain that disgust for management is not necessarily something bad. But when this primary instinct is triggered at the wrong time and in the wrong place (for example, during business negotiations), an understanding of the mechanisms that determine it, can help smooth out acute angles in this or that situation. And if business meetings with a negative outcome harm the company’s maximum, then in the case of more important things, such as abandoning the necessary medical procedures and failing to comply with the law, the consequences can be really serious.

While the research team can not say exactly why these brain regions are activated and, most importantly, how their activity is related to the denial of any control. One of the existing interpretations, however, says that people not prone to control perceive controlling behavior from the outside as a conflict between their general motivation and the unconscious desire to act against any restrictions.

  • 1.4K