If you are interested in Dr. Rajkowska findings and my predictions regarding those discoveries, I can send you the e-amil interchange I had with her. Send an e-mail to my profile site (just click on my name or photo above).

The plasticity of the brain is amazing. Yes, depressives can recover what they lose. thank goodness for that!.

I love your final comment. Yes, until we change the “what is in for ME?” for “what is in for US?” we will be stuck in mediocrity. We never truly find ourselves unless we find ourselves in others. That’s why one of the critical balances in my model is that between self and other: Dissolving the “I” in the WE. It is worth noting that the “I” is not lost in the WE. The WE is its natural container.

Thank you very much for writing such detailed responses, they have added greatly to our understanding of the P/N ratio and the benefits of positive emotions – the gain in cerebral mass is a very exciting discovery, and as you say, illustrates the broaden-and-build theory very clearly. I was particularly interested in what you said about energy and about the oscillatory pattern. Oscillation gives me the impression of equal and opposite forces (1:1), but as you have shown, positive must outweigh the negative by at least 3:1. I wonder what switches the negative to positive and vice versa.

I had a look for Dr Rajkowska’s paper – sadly I found the scientific terminology used overwhelming. That might explain why, on average, papers are only read thoroughly by 7 people. Plus it would help if they were easily available outside academia ;-> It’s a tricky one isn’t it, there’s an art to being able to explain science in a way that the ordinary man or woman in the street can understand, whilst at the same time maintaining the scientific rigour.

I wonder whether, if one has lost brain mass due to depression, it can be re-gained when the depression is overcome?

Whilst I was looking at Richie Davidson’s work, I came across a reference to Hutcherson, Seppala and Gross (2008) – ‘Loving-Kindness Mediation increases social connectedness’, which nicely completes the circle. What is interesting is that the visualisation they used was only 7 minutes long, which must be do-able by the vast majority of people, even the very busy ones. It strikes me that to begin to practice LKM one must already be motivated to put others first, so I’m trying to see how it could be used in organisations which are by and large political systems and where the emphasis, more often than not, is on ‘what’s in it for me’.

Congratulations on the book BTW- I’m very much looking forward to reading it – when will it be published?

Bridget

Analogies aside, the emotional field is generated by the postivity/negativiy ratio. When I look at the actual time series of the teams that I observe it becomes patently clear the the P/N ratio over time is an oscillatory pattern, a vibration. Hence, energy.

There is a fascinating sudy by Dr. grazyna Rajkowska with chronic depressive patients who loose cerebral mass in the prefrontal cortex and hypothalamus. It turns out that the average chronic depresive has a P/N ratio of 0.5 (two negatives for every positive). I discovered a mathematical function that I call “gamma function” which predicts a 30% loss of cerebral mass in chronic depressives. These prediction was corroborated by Dr. Rajkowska who measures the loss quite precisely using laser interferometry.

In my view, the explanation goes back to Einstein formula relating energy to mass. To act on the cerebral mass we need energy (or lack of it to feed those cells). If this is so, we should be able to predict the opposite effect: a gain instead of a loss if the P/N ratio is aboube the Losada line. Richie Davidson did a famous study on Tibetan monks doing loving-kindness meditation whose P/N ratio is 4:1. The gamma function for that ratio is 30%, but this time is a gain, not a loss. Richie discovered that gamma synchrony in the monks is increased by about 30%. Gamma waves are the fastest (higher frequency, hence higher enrgy) and they connect different parts of the cerebral hemisphere which makes creativity and intuition available to us. This might be the explanation at the brain activity level of Barb’s findings that P/N broadens our though-action repertoires.

Actually, the data I gathered doing consulting with them was preceded by work I did previously in the U.S. where I worked with teams from information technology and car manufacturing. It was then that I was startled to realize that the top teams had a much greater focus on the emotional field than “orientation” to the task. Not that they didn’t do their tasks; on the contrary, they didn’t “worry” about it. It wasn’t a “pre-occupation” but an occupation. The worst teams were worried, pre-occupied with their tasks, generating emotional fields that were quite restrictive, because there was a lot of fear. Contrating with that, the prevailing emotion in the best teams was enthusiasm. The analyses we did on these data was quite sophisticated: we used something we called “eigensystem analysis,” that we derived from the Perron-Frobenius theorem with the help of mathematicians from the University of Michigan. I remember when I first looked at this data, I could hardly believe my eyes, because it was so so cunterintuitive.

I haven’t published these results yet, because I decided to write about them in my forthcoming book instead. I believe the impact these findings will have in the business world required a wider audience than an academic paper–which I learned is THOROUGHLY read, on average by seven people. Many people may cite you, but not all of them read the whole paper carefully, as I am sure you are aware.

Thank you so much for your comments and questions. Firstly, I’d say that Tom Rath is the one who has really brought friendships into the workplace to our attention in his book ‘Vital Friends’ – it’s an easy read, rather than an academic text, and worth getting hold of. Secondly, I’m sure many people feel overawed when in the presence of those they look up to, but even great professors were students at some point. And the really great ones are those who never stop being students ;-> I suppose the thing to remember is that, underneath it all, we are all human, even if some of us act as if we aren’t some of the time (which kind of proves the point anyway!). Your question about what happens when a relationship becomes too close is interesting; I think positive psychology has so far emphasised the importance of creating or developing positive relationships at work on the assumption that this will always be beneficial, but as you say, they may tip over into something more. It’s a bit like the argument about strengths which are overdone becoming weaknesses. I’m not aware of any research on the ‘boundaries’ around positive relationships, but maybe some other readers are, and would be willing to comment?

Bridget

Thank you so much for your comments; your findings on the contribution of the emotional field and co-ordination of action to creating strong bonds are fascinating. I can imagine that the vast majority of people in business would never guess that the balance is weighted so heavily in favour of emotions. And that they would probably be at a complete loss when it comes to acting on this startling information.

I was wondering whether orchestras are different to your average business team however, in that the aim or purpose of an orchestra is probably more emotional (“touching the hearts of the audience”) than rational (“playing the score perfectly”), whereas business teams lean towards the rational. Does that make a difference to the 95/5 split?

I liked the engine metaphor – so if co-ordination of action is the car key, is emotion the oil which keeps everything ticking along smoothly? Or possibly the gas? It provides a new slant on the phrase “running on empty”.

Bridget

PS Can you direct me to your latest research paper on the 95/5 split – I’d like to read more about it.

I have read several of your articles and there is always much depth and meaning in them. This one on social bonds at the workplace particularly resonates with me.

One of my latest findings is that connectivity–the key paramenter in my model–is made up of two ingredients: emotional field and coordination of actions. Let me give you an example. I have worked with orchestras and what differentiates a superb one from a good one, is not coordination of actions (all the good ones coordinate quite well) but the creation of emotional fields among musicians, conductor and the public. Sir Simon Rattle, the current conductor of the Berlin Philharmonic realized that long ago with his City of Birmingham Orchestra in England that won many international awards.

What I find remarkable is that when you look at the percentages played by the emotional field and coordination of actions in creating bonds (connectivity), the emotional field accounts accounts for 95% of connectivity on the average. Coordination of actions is only 5% (plus minus two percentage points is the variation). It is critical, no doubt, like the car key is essential to start the motor running, but, unfortunately, many organizations spent too much money in the 5% and forget the 95% which would have a much greater return on their investment.