|
Key insights from
The Power of Habit: Why We Do What We Do
in Life and Business
By
Charles Duhigg
|

|
|
What you’ll learn
We are creatures of habit.
Our brains are routine-creating machines that establish patterns so that we
can automatically complete simple, repetitive tasks without giving them
much thought. This mindless automation allows us to reserve our mental
energies for more important tasks; it also helps us to effectively manage
the myriad decisions we face each day. But not all habitual behavior is
good. Sometimes we pick up habits we’re not proud of, like overeating,
procrastinating, smoking, angry outbursts, and alcoholism. The Power of Habit shows
us how habits form, how they become ingrained, and how they can be changed
so that you can master your habits before they master you.
Read
on for key insights from The Power of Habit: Why We Do What We Do in Life and
Business.
|
|
|
Sponsored
by Wise Bread
Highest Paying
Cash Back Card Of 2021

This no annual fee cashback credit card
has a $200 bonus offer, and 3% cashback on the category of your choice —
like online shopping, dining, travel, or home improvement. 0% interest for
15 months. 75% bonus reward for qualified customers.
Learn more today.
|
|
1. Habits form
subconsciously when routine behaviors are met with a reward.
Eugene Pauly catalyzed a
shift in our understanding of habits when he entered UC San Diego’s
laboratories in 1993. Eugene suffered from severe memory loss, the cause of
which remained a mystery until an ER hospitalization and
near-death-inducing fever. A battery of tests revealed that encephalitis
had infiltrated his brain and, with surgical precision, devoured his medial
temporal lobe, the portion of gray matter that houses thoughts and dreams.
To the doctor’s surprise, Eugene recovered from the high fever, but medical
personnel warned Eugene’s wife, Beverly, that he might never be the same
again. As Beverly cared for Eugene, she discovered the extent to which his
memory had been impaired. He had a clear memory of events before 1960, but
he was incapable of retaining new short-term memories.
The head scientist
overseeing Eugene was Larry Squire. Squire ran tests, conversed with
Eugene, and visited the Pauly residence frequently. Squire and Beverly
observed that while Eugene could no longer describe how to get to the
kitchen from his arm chair or tell you his address or what the house looked
like, he somehow knew where to look for the peanuts he would snack on each
day. He also took the same walk through the neighborhood every day and
always knew how to get back home. How was he able to consistently perform
these actions without having any memory of them?
The secret lay with a
small, walnut-sized portion of the brain near the spine called the basal
ganglia. Unlike the outer portions of the brain that facilitate more
complex thought, the basal ganglia serves the more primal function of
handling automatic reactions and storing habits. Around the same time that
Squire was working with Eugene, researchers at MIT’s Brain and Cognitive
Science Department were also making groundbreaking discoveries. Scientists
implanted microchips in the brains of rats that monitored their basal
ganglia activity as they ran through a simple maze, at the end of which was
a piece of chocolate. When first learning the course, the rats’ brains were
alive with intense activity, notably in the basal ganglia. As the rats got
used to the maze and learned where the chocolate was, their brains became
less and less active. The rats got to the chocolate faster and faster and
their brains worked less and less. The basal ganglia had stored the
information, enabling the rats to speed through the maze to the treat while
also conserving their mental energy. This process, know as chunking, is an
energy saver that enables rats or people to devote brainpower to other
activities.
The rats were operating on
what is called a “habit loop,” which consists of a cue, a routine, and a
reward. A cue can be anything from a sound to a sight or smell that
triggers a particular action. The routine is the action that is habitually
performed in response to the cue. The routine is compulsively performed
because there is some sort of reward anticipated. In the case of the rats,
the audible click associated with the maze door opening triggered the
routine of running through the maze that led to the reward of chocolate.
These discoveries at MIT
dovetailed seamlessly with the Eugene Pauly case in San Diego. Even though
Eugene’s short-term memory was flawed, his basal ganglia—unbeknownst
to him—was internalizing the routines he followed every day. Such
habits are powerful but fragile. Eugene walked the same route everyday, but
if there was a detour due to construction, he became completely
disoriented. If scientists moved the chocolate to another portion of the
maze, the rats’ basal ganglias would fire up again as they sought to
establish a new pattern.
|
|
2. By creating or
exploiting our cravings, advertisers have made the use of their products
habitual.
In many people’s
estimation—including his own—Claude C. Hopkins was a wizard in the world of
advertising. His trick was to convince people that they needed a product,
and that they needed to use it daily. He did this by identifying a simple,
readily “triggerable” cue and then clearly defining a reward. Using this
method, he made goods like Quaker Oats, Goodyear Tires, and Palmolive
common household products.
Perhaps Hopkin’s greatest
success was Pepsodent, a brand of toothpaste that took off in the 1920s. By
making people feel self-conscious about the naturally occurring film that
develops on the teeth, he created a cue that could be easily triggered and
offered a routine that would lead to the reward of a beautiful smile.
Hopkins understood the power of the habit loop. He also understood how to
create a craving.
Experiments with Julio the
monkey help us better understand how cravings develop and strengthen. When
scientists monitored the chimp’s brain signals, they found that, initially,
the brain’s pleasure centers would light up the moment the blackberry juice
hit his tongue. But after Julio identified the pattern of actions required
to get juice (pulling a lever when certain shapes appeared on a monitor),
his brain activity spiked in anticipation of receiving his reward. Over
time, this expectation had become a craving. When Julio performed the
action, but researchers withheld the juice, he would express anger or
dejection. Images on the screen cued a routine (pulling the lever), which
led to juice. This love of juice became the craving that drove Julio’s
habit loop.
Craving is what drives and
strengthens a habit loop. When Proctor and Gamble, one of the largest
consumer goods companies on the planet, was trying to market a new product
called Febreze, they initially thought that bad odors were the obvious cues
to exploit in order to sell a sweet-smelling disinfectant spray. But if a
woman with nine cats rarely smells the vile feline fumes because she’s
become accustomed to them, then what would make her—let alone anyone
else—use the product consistently? Eventually they realized that instead of
using odor as a cue, a clean house would be a better cue to advertise. If a
post-cleaning spritz became the reward for cleaning a room, the product
would be a hit. The altered approach was wildly successful. It turns out
that no one craves a scentless room, but people do crave a sweet-smelling,
clean room.
|
|
3. Habits can be
altered by inserting a new routine that delivers a similar reward.
We have seen how habits
form and how cravings drive and strengthen habits, but how do they change?
Contrary to the conventional wisdom that advocated a complete lifestyle
change as the path to breaking habits, the more effective way to change
habits is not a complete overhaul, but the implementation of new routines
that deliver a desirable reward.
The Golden Rule of habit
change is to alter the routine while keeping the cues and rewards the same.
For years, the organization Alcoholics Anonymous received criticism from
academic quarters for ignoring the physical and biochemical dimensions of
addiction. More recently, however, top universities have begun to recognize
that AA methodology aligns neatly with recent discoveries about habit
formation and habit change.
Steps four and five of the
Twelve Step Program challenge participants to perform a thorough, critical
self-examination and acknowledge the nature of their wrongs to themselves,
to God, and to another person. Essentially, people identify their triggers.
Later steps delve into the reasons why they drink. It is rarely to feel
drunk. Typically, people drink to forget, to feel safe, to say the things
they are afraid to say otherwise, to find comfort, or companionship. Wilson
understood that it is not enough to break old habits—one must create new
ones. By identifying the reasons why people drink (reward) and the places
and images that trigger the craving (cues), people can insert a new routine
to get the same reward when the craving arises. The sponsor element of AA
is designed to be the routine replacement by giving people an outlet to
talk about their problem with a trusted other, thereby achieving, say, the
reward of companionship and comfort that they would otherwise search for at
the bottom of a bottle.
This approach to
identifying triggers and rewards that drive bad habits is called awareness
training. It’s used in habit reversal therapy to help people substitute
routines and alter patterns in areas as diverse as obesity, nail biting,
depression, smoking, procrastination, and OCD.
|
|
4. Identifying and
addressing a keystone bad habit is better than trying to fix all your bad
habits at once.
We now understand how
habits are formed, ingrained, and changed. But instead of attempting to
upend all your old routines, a more effective approach is to identify and
adjust the routine of keystone habits. Changing a keystone habit is the
initial shift that frees up other habits to be refashioned more readily.
Changing keystone habits creates a structure in which other changes happen
more naturally and a climate in which those habits can become ingrained.
When Paul O’Neill assumed
the position of CEO at the struggling Aluminum Company of America (Alcoa)
in 1987, people were shocked that the board had picked a bureaucrat from
Washington. The shock became horror when his first remarks at the Alcoa
gala were about improving workplace safety instead of the vague claptrap
that everyone expected of high hopes for improving profit. Company
executives figured it was an obsession that would fade in a few weeks, but
they were wrong.
There are safer places to
work than an aluminum plant, where operating enormous machinery that pours
molten metal are daily occupational hazards. Still, O’Neill was committed
to the ambitious goal of zero injuries. Alcoa’s injury toll was the cue
that spurred the creation of the new routine of sending any injury reports
up the chain of command to O’Neill himself within twenty-four hours of the
incident. Promotions would only be given to those who cooperated with the
new initiative, which ensured managerial cooperation. Anyone who didn’t
cooperate would be fired. Workers on the floor were glad about the change
because the routine showed that the new CEO cared about all of his
employees. Morale improved, as did communication, which led to safer, more
streamlined processes. The injury count dropped significantly, which led
not only to better press, but ultimately higher rates of productivity. Of
course, higher productivity led to substantial company growth.
O’Neill understood what
success literature refers to as “small wins.” These small wins do not
necessarily follow a predictable linear path, but they accumulate and
eventually provide unexpected breakthroughs and improvement. For most of
his life, O’Neill had a knack for identifying an organization’s bad habits
and recommending routines that would improve the keystone habit. He did
this with federal government agencies in D.C. for years and then with
Alcoa. By focusing on one keystone habit—worker safety—he created a
structure in which other positive habits flourished.
|
|
5. Willpower is
like a muscle that can grow with use, get tired, or atrophy.
In the past, willpower was
understood as a skill that some had but others did not. But this fails to
account for why someone could resist a sugary snack at the beginning of the
day but succumb to the temptation later that night. The increasingly
popular view is that willpower is a muscle that grows as it is exercised.
The moments when you fail to use willpower are likely the result of the
muscle being too small or exhausted.
In one experiment,
researchers found that, when they placed a bowl of radishes and a bowl of
cookies before subjects, the group of subjects whom they asked to eat the
radishes but refrain from eating cookies were often unable to complete
difficult puzzles that they were given right after the radish feast. They
often grew impatient and were sometimes even rude to the researchers who
entered the room. By contrast, those who were told to eat the cookies and
avoid the radishes happily worked on the puzzles and stuck with it far
longer. Eating oven-fresh chocolate chip cookies requires no willpower; so
the unused willpower could then be devoted to solving the puzzles.
Another study investigated
the role of willpower in hip replacement outpatients. In addition to the
standard packet detailing basic do’s and don’ts of the recovery process,
the experiment conductor included blank sheets for the patients to write
down the daily steps they would take to aid in their recovery process. Those who wrote
down intentional, detailed steps recovered two to three times faster than
those who did not. The written goals often included strategies for
overcoming anticipated inflection points, or junctures where a patient’s
willpower might flag or dissipate. The patients who recovered most quickly
identified simple cues (specific moments of pain) and strategic routines
that would be rewarded with the feeling of accomplishment and recovery.
These studies overturn the
conventional wisdom regarding willpower. It’s more like a muscle than a
talent or innate skill. Exercise your willpower and it will get stronger.
|
|
6. Our brains
crave familiarity, making it easy for corporations and the government to
predict and shape our behavior.
Andrew Pole is a
statistician. Target hired him in 2002 to examine shoppers’ spending habits
and discern patterns in the heaps of data from Target rewards cards and
credit cards, email addresses, coupons used, and online shopping. In the
past, corporations would base their produce arrangements and store layout
on broad generalizations in consumer psychology, but within the past twenty
years, companies have shifted to intense number crunching and personalized
analysis to maintain a competitive edge. Most people would be shocked and
unnerved to learn the amount of personal information companies have access
to, as well as what mathematicians like Pole can divine from the consumer
information they receive.
Perhaps one of Pole’s most
challenging assignments was to design an algorithm that would help Target
predict whether women are pregnant—even before they’d told anyone. In
retail, pregnant women and parents with young children are a veritable
goldmine. Parents spend an average of $6,800 on their child before their
first birthday, and the baby market in North America brings in a almost
forty billion dollars per year.
What is more, researchers
find that it generally takes a significant life event—having a baby, for
example—to dramatically alter consumer spending habits. Target wanted to
identify this demographic before their competitors did. Once
in their fold, these women would likely continue shopping at Target
throughout their baby’s childhood. Using information from the online
registry that some women had completed (which included the baby’s due
date), Pole was able to identify twenty-five products that women tended to
buy in a certain sequence. Depending on which products they bought, Pole
was able to guess with a high degree of certainty how far into gestation a
woman was.
The challenge was how to
advertise these pregnancy-related products to pregnant women without
seeming invasive and downright creepy. Instead of sending a catalog
advertising vitamin supplements, large bottles of unscented lotion, and
maternity clothing, they broke up the sequence of relevant items with other
items that were completely irrelevant. The solution that Target used is
called “sandwiching.” It is the same technique that the music industry
utilizes to make new songs feel familiar quickly. The government also uses
this tactic to introduce nutrition campaigns. The sandwiching technique is
used to manipulate habits by giving the sense of familiarity, a feeling
that the human brain craves.
|
|
7. Habit change is
the foundation of history’s social movements.
When Rosa Parks was
arrested in 1955 for refusing a white man her seat, it struck a more
resonant chord than other individual acts of civil disobedience had. Parks
was deeply intertwined in the social fabric of Montgomery, Alabama, and her
arrest activated social habits that were key to effecting change. Friends
rallied around her and spread the word through social clubs and church
communities—including the church of a twenty-six-year-old minister named
Martin Luther King Jr. King reluctantly agreed to open his church to
activists and eventually became part of planning the citywide boycott of
the Montgomery bus line on the day of Park’s hearing. The press got wind of
the boycott and effectively alerted those members of the black community
who had not yet heard about the protest. The commotion galvanized the
broader community into action, to the point where it would have meant
marring one’s social standing not to participate. As is often the case,
peer pressure tends to be more effective among weak ties than strong ties.
Three elements that foster
habit change were present in this historic social movement: Rosa’s arrest
was the cue that activated the routines of sympathetic friendship (strong
ties) and of responding to peer pressure by joining the boycott (weak
ties). By harnessing these habits, King and other leaders instilled a habit
change by creating a new routine that the crisis of Rosa’s arrest had
stirred up.
|
|
8. We cannot be
held responsible for unconscious or automatic behavior—but once we become
aware of our habits, we bear responsibility for changing them.
It was boredom that
motivated Angie Bachmann’s first trip to the casino. Her husband worked
long hours and all three daughters were now attending school, which meant
that she was alone all day for the first time in almost twenty years. At
first, her visits to the casino were infrequent and her bets modest, but as
she became better at blackjack, she went more often and began placing more
ambitious bets. Sometimes she would walk away with thousands, but over the
years, she accrued massive amounts of debt. Her gambling became compulsive,
and, despite her attempts to curb her habits, she eventually felt powerless
to resist the tantalizing personal invitations that the casinos would
dangle in front of her, like free concerts and all-inclusive stays at
resorts in Las Vegas. The casino eventually sued Bachmann when she couldn’t
pay back the hundreds of thousands of dollars she owed. She counter-sued
the casino for aggressively exploiting an area of vulnerability.
Around the same time that
these lawsuits were going to court, Welsh law enforcement got a call from a
brokenhearted man named Brian Thomas. “I think I just killed my wife,”
Thomas sobbed. While Thomas and his wife were on vacation at a campground
on the coast of Wales, a young man broke into the camper where they were
sleeping. When the man began to attack Thomas’s wife, Thomas jumped on him
and began to strangle him. Thomas was devastated to discover that the
attack had been a dream—the “attacker” he strangled had actually been his
wife. He went on to plead guilty to murder.
As the trial proceeded, it
came out that Thomas had been a sleepwalker since he was a boy and also
suffered from night terrors. The defense maintained that because the crime
was an act of “automatism”—performing an unconscious behavior—Thomas should not be held
responsible. The defense’s case gained force as neighbors and coworkers
testified that Thomas’s marriage was a loving one, and that he had never
harmed his wife before, waking or sleeping. Moreover, Thomas was genuinely
devastated by the event. “I’ll never forgive myself,” he told the jury. Even
the prosecution’s psychiatrists argued that there was no reason to think
that Thomas would respond violently to his night terrors. Not only the
defense, but eventually the prosecution, advised the jury to return a
not-guilty decision. The judge cleared Thomas of charges and even offered
some consoling words before the final gavel strike.
Angie Bachmann’s gambling
ruined her life and tore her family apart. Brian Thomas’s night terrors led
to his wife’s death. Why do we hold Bachmann responsible for her actions,
but not Thomas? They both acted out of habits over which they claimed they
had no control. Cognizance is perhaps the chief reason that the cases
required different verdicts: Bachmann was aware of her destructive habit,
whereas Thomas had no reason to suspect that his habit was destructive
beforehand and was unaware that he was killing his wife.
It has been argued in this
book that habits are powerful, but they are not destiny. People have faced
far more challenging struggles than
Bachmann
and managed to chart and follow different courses. As you
become aware of your habits, you bear responsibility for changing them. Now
that you know how habits form, what drives them, and that it is within your
power to change them, you are free to choose a different course of action.
You can replace the habits that hinder and harm with ones that edify both
you and others.
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment