Do Conscious Thoughts Cause Behavior?
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Annual Review of Psychology, in press for 2011 Do Conscious Thoughts Cause Behavior? Roy F. Baumeister1, E. J. Masicampo1, and Kathleen D. Vohs2 1Department of Psychology, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306; email: [email protected], [email protected] 2Marketing Department, Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455; email: [email protected] K ey Words consciousness, action, control, automaticity, dual process Abstract Everyday intuitions suggest full conscious control of behavior, but evidence of unconscious causation and automaticity has sustained the contrary view that conscious thought has little or no impact on behavior. We review studies with random assignment to experimental manipulations of conscious thought and behavioral dependent measures. Topics include mental practice and simulation, anticipation, planning, reflection and rehearsal, reasoning, counterproductive effects, perspective taking, self- affirmation, framing, communication, and overriding automatic responses. The evidence for conscious causation of behavior is profound, extensive, adaptive, multifaceted, and empirically strong. However, conscious causation is often indirect and delayed, and it depends on interplay with unconscious processes. Consciousness seems especially useful for enabling behavior to be shaped by nonpresent factors and by social and cultural information, as well as for dealing with multiple competing options or impulses. It is plausible that almost every human behavior comes from a mixture of conscious and unconscious processing. www.annualreviews.org ± Conscious Thoughts and Behavior 1 Contents PRGHO RI EHKDYLRU WKH\ DVVLJQ ³Qo role for FRQVFLRXVQHVV´ S ). A similarly negative DEFINITIONS AND assessment led Bargh (1997a) to speculate that THEORETICAL ISSUES««««. 3 ³WKHUH XOWLPDWHO\ LV QR IXWXUH IRU FRQVFLRXV MENTAL SIMULATION, processing in accounts of the mind, in the sense of MENTAL 35$&7,&(««««««. 5 IUHH ZLOO DQG FKRLFH´ S :LOVRQ ANTICIPATING, PLANNING, VXPPDUL]HG D ZLGHVSUHDG YLHZ E\ VD\LQJ ³7KH INTENDING«««««««««« 6 causal role of conscious thought has been vastly REPLAYING, INTERPRETING, oYHUVWDWHG´ S DQGDOWKRXJKKHVWRSSHGVKRUW REFLECTING ON PAST EVENT6« 8 of saying it is zero, he clearly thought it was slight. REASONING, DECIDING, As to how slight, only Bargh (1997b) has been bold SOLVING PROBLEMS«««««« 10 HQRXJK WR IXUQLVK D SUHFLVH HVWLPDWH ³2XU COUNTERPRODUCTIVE, SV\FKRORJLFDOUHDFWLRQV IURPPRPHQWWRPRPHQW« MALADAPTIVE EFFECTS««« 12 are 99.DXWRPDWLF´ S MENTALLY SIMULATING What then is conscious thought all about? OTHERS PERSPECTIVES««««. 14 7KRPDV +X[OH\ DUWLFXODWHG WKH ³VWHDP ZKLVWOH MANIPULATIONS OF K\SRWKHVLV´ RYHU D FHQWXU\ DJR ,W VD\V SELF-REGARD, conscious thought resembles the steam whistle on a SELF-AFFIRMATION«««««. 15 train locomotive: it derives from and reveals MENTAL FRAMING AND something about activity inside the engine, but it has GOAL SETTING««««««««.. 16 no causal impact on moving the train. This view was COMMUNICATION AND HFKRHG E\ :HJQHU %DUJK ³FRQVFLRXV MUTUAL UNDERSTANDING««« 17 intentions signal the direction of action ² but OVERRIDING ZLWKRXW FDXVLQJ WKH DFWLRQ´ S WKRXJK AUTOMATIC RESPONSES««. 18 elsewhere these authors took a more nuanced view. DISCUSSION««««««««««« 20 Wegner himself (2002) revived the steam whistle K\SRWKHVLV EXW ZLWK D GLIIHUHQW PHWDSKRU ³-XVW DV compass readings do not steer the boat, conscious Consciousness is one of the defining features of H[SHULHQFHVRIZLOOGRQRWFDXVHKXPDQDFWLRQV´ S human life and experience, yet a perennial challenge 318). Dijksterhuis et al. (2005) calculated that to explain. In recent years there has been a sharp rise conscious thought cannot accomplish much in in evidence of unconscious, automatic processes that comparison to the unconscious mind. They has led some to question whether conscious thought FRQFOXGHGWKDW³VWULFWO\VSHDNLQJFRQVFLRXVWKRXJKW has any influence on behavior at all. The assumption GRHV QRW H[LVW´ S EHFDXVH ZKDW VHHPV WR EH that conscious thought is an epiphenomenon was conscious thought is merely some calculations asserted aggressively during the behaviorist era and performed unconsciously that happen to cross into has had a resurgence due to recent studies of awareness. Jeannerod (2006) concluded that in automaticity and the brain. UHODWLRQ WR DFWLRQ FRQVFLRXVQHVV LV ³D SRVW KRF The detractors have dominated recent debates SKHQRPHQRQ´ EHLQJ WRR VORZ WR LQLWLDWH RU FRQWURO about consciousness. Dijksterhuis et al. (2007) DFWLRQDQGWKHUHIRUHPDLQO\XVHIXO³IRUWKHFRJQitive DVVHUWHGWKDWWKHTXHVWLRQRI³ZKDWEHKDYLRUUHTXLUHV rearrangement after the action is completed, e.g., for a conscious decLVLRQ DQG ZKDW EHKDYLRU GRHV QRW´ MXVWLI\LQJ LWV UHVXOWV´ OLNH WKH VWHDP ZKLVWOH ³LW KDVEHHQUHVRXQGLQJO\DQVZHUHG³%HKDYLRUGRHVQRW UHDGVEHKDYLRUUDWKHUWKDQVWDUWLQJLW´ -7). RULJLQDWHZLWKDFRQVFLRXVGHFLVLRQ´ p. 52). In their Skepticism about consciousness was particularly www.annualreviews.org ± Conscious Thoughts and Behavior 2 IXHOHG E\ /LEHW¶V UHVHDUFK ,Q KLV VWudies, whether conscious thought is the commanding force, participants watched a highly precise clock and an occasional resource, or a mere steam whistle. recorded when they made a conscious decision to Moral and legal judgments of responsibility initiate a finger movement. Brain wave activity sometimes depend on whether there was conscious showed a sharp increase prior to the conscious causation. C.D. Cameron, B.K. Payne & J. Knobe decision. Although the interpretations of these (unpublished data) found that participants mostly findings have been debated sharply (e.g., Mele condemned people whose judgments and decisions 2009), many have taken them as further support for were tinged by racial bias, but such condemnation the steam whistle theory. Roediger et al. (2008), for was muted among participants who had been led to H[DPSOHVDLG/LEHW¶VILQGLQJVFRQWUDGLFWWKH³QDwYH regard racial bias as unconscious. YLHZ´ WKDW ³FRQVFLRXV LQWHQWLRQ FDXVHV DFWLRQ Clearly conscious intention cannot cause an action if D E F INI T I O NS A ND T H E O R E T I C A L a neural event that precedes and correlates with the ISSU ES DFWLRQ FRPHV EHIRUH FRQVFLRXV LQWHQWLRQ´ S 208). Writing in a volume entitled Does Some debates become interminable because Consciousness Cause Behavior?, Pockett (2006) questions are ambiguously phrased and concepts VDLG /LEHW¶V ZRUN OHDGV WR WKH ³UHDVRQDEOH inadequately defined, so that debaters talk past each conclusion that consciousness is not the immediate other. Although our limited space precludes a FDXVH RI WKLV VLPSOH NLQG RI EHKDYLRU´ S DQG rigorous consideration of all concepts, several points then went on to say it does not cause complex are crucial to our approach. behavior either. First, nearly all theories about consciousness Another line of work suggests that conscious distinguish two forms or levels. The more basic one, thoughts may have effects on behavior but these are phenomenal awareness, corresponds roughly to what largely maladaptive or at best unreliable. For humans share with most other mammals, including example, many emotion theories still assume that the subjective experience (e.g., of sensations). The other, purpose of emotion is to instigate behavior directly, conscious thought, is assumed to be mostly unique but evidence of such effects is weak and ambiguous, to humans, and it includes reflection, reasoning, and and many of the effects suggest that emotion makes temporally extended sense of self. Our focus is on people do impulsive, stupid, and self-defeating conscious thought. Functions of phenomenal things (see Baumeister et al. 2007a). awareness have been discussed elsewhere (e.g., Thus, the conscious mind seemingly has many Morsella 2005). HQHPLHV DQG IHZ IULHQGV LQ WRGD\¶V SV\FKRORJ\ Second, we suspect conscious processes work in Although the skeptics and critics have been highly concert with unconscious ones. The proximal causes vocal, evidence supporting a causal role for of muscle movements are neuronal firings, which are consciousness has quietly accumulated in various XQFRQVFLRXV 0RUH EURDGO\ WKH DUJXPHQW WKDW ³LI places. The present review undertakes to assemble unconscious thoughts cause X, then conscious the best such evidence that we could cover within WKRXJKWVGRQRW´LVIDOODFLRXV7KHSURSHUTXHVWLRQLV the limited space and then evaluate it. If the evidence whether the conscious processes can play any causal we could find can be dismissed, then perhaps victory role. A related point concerns indirect causation should be conceded to the skeptics. If our review (control) of behavior. Many criticisms have focused does provide valid evidence of conscious causality, on whether conscious thoughts, choices, and then perhaps the next generation of theory can build intentions directly cause behavior. We searched for on this evidence to understand how conscious both direct and indirect causation. thoughts cause behavior. Third, any evidence that conscious thoughts are The question of conscious influence is important in themselves the results of other causes (presumably multiple spheres. Philosophical and psychological including unconscious processes and brain events) is efforts to understand the mind turn heavily on irrelevant. We are skeptical of uncaused causes. www.annualreviews.org ± Conscious Thoughts and Behavior 3 Hence arguments of the sort exemplified by the it still does not help move the train. Hence we focus above quotation from Roediger et al. (2008) ² that on behavior. Moreover, the