We are doing ok. My husband and I both have jobs. I work at home. He goes in every day as an essential employee. Our twins are protected as much as we can from this virus. We don't know if we need special precautions and we are not going to risk it.
So I get to spend a little extra time wondering why some folks want to open up businesses like YESTERDAY when it is not in the public health's interest to do so.
I can make the fundamental attribution error and claim that they are individually selfish assholes or I can look at the environment as say they are good righteous people and they are not being adequately supported during the pandemic. As a human, I make the first attributional error and think Jerks! As a professor, I take a breath and think about what is going on in our country that people can't survive in a health crisis and are willing to die (or cause someone else to die) to make money for themselves or someone else? Have you seen the latest about COVID-19 and premature births? Heard about Boris Johnson's premature baby?
The environmental factors here in America:
We don't have adequate healthcare.
We don't have an adequate safety net.
Our tax dollars are going to support large corporations and not the small businesses that actually need the money.
Our tax dollars are not helping the people who actually paid the taxes.
Creative solutions like extending rent or home loans by three months on the back end of the lease or loan are not being created. (that I know of)
Where is the student loan forgiveness right now?
People cannot get the unemployment they have been promised because the staff cuts have left the agencies with no one to answer the phones.
The growing disparity between average income and the rich means that the working class in America needs to put their lives on the line so that the super rich's portfolio stays sound. Have you seen this about lobbyists' funding the Open Now protests?
For folks who arguing (even screaming) that there is no pandemic and this is not a real threat, you are wrong. The facts and the science don't back you up.
It's ok to be angry that you are not being supported right now when you need it most. You are NOT being supported right now when you need it most.
But it's not going back to normal anytime soon. It is magical thinking to believe that if the stay-at-home orders are opened your business will automatically start back where we left off and people will gather and laugh and interact and spend money like we did in February. That is not going to happen. We are not going back to a February type of living and thriving at any time soon.
So direct your anger where it ought to go: You paid taxes. Who is benefiting from the taxes you paid? Why do executives at cruise lines, hotels, and large airlines need money right now when their employees and the owners of small businesses and the employees of small businesses need unemployment and healthcare benefits?
Karl Weick's advice to Trust and Doubt what you think you know as a truth in this world is a beneficial skill for everyone to develop.
Thursday, April 30, 2020
Tuesday, April 28, 2020
Backward and Present Sensemaking
It's been stressful, y'all. I don't think I feel anything differently than you do and I'm going to suggest you are feeling stressed, too.
I've noticed a lot of different responses to how folks are handling this time and, honestly, it's unnerving for me to see so many different coping styles. There is denial ("This is so stressful, I cannot read the news") and then there's denial ("There is not a real problem going on"). There's information-seeking ("I will search all the data and research and look for information the experts") and then there's information-seeking ("I will only believe the research that supports the way I see things").
We all want to know the Truth: How bad is this going to get? Am I going to die? Is someone I love going to die? Am I going to lose my house? Will I be able to make this financially? OH MY GOD, IS THIS LIKE THE FREAKING PLAGUE AND NO ONE IS EVER GOING TO GET IMMUNITY FROM IT UNTIL THEY GET IT BAD ENOUGH TO DIE??? ((Or maybe that last one is just me))
The problem is this: we are only going to know these answers, really know these answers, 2 years from now, when everything has settled down, we have figured out how to survive, life has come to a new normal, and we have collected and analyzed all the data. That's the backward sensemaking. That's when the real "Truth" will be established. ((Although, y'all know as well as I do there are still going to be different interpretations of the facts.))
But right now, we're right smack dab in the sensemaking as-it's-happening process. And that feels crummy. Because that's why sensemaking happens and why we grab on to some truth so quickly. I'm paraphrasing Weick, obviously, but we are in a crisis situation that is ambiguous with a future that is uncertain. We are talking with, at, and to each other to figure out a reality we can enact that is less stressful for us. We are likely to choose truths that fit our world views instead of choosing truths that are actually, well, true.
This is one of the reasons I feel so angry and agitated: I see people quickly cherry-picking one data point that supports their view and ignoring the preponderance of data that do not. I feel myself doing it, especially when ONE study says something that seems unusual. But when there are three different studies that find the same thing (e.g., we're possibly up to 6% exposure in population-dense communities), well then dammit I believe it. I take that as a new truth. So while that seems like good news, another story arises that we may be underestimating the deaths by 60%. I don't take that as a truth yet, but I take it as a data point.
That said, it's difficult to trust and doubt what you "know" at the same time. (Another bit of advice from Weick) But it's important that you do not use data like a drunk uses a light pole: For support instead of illumination. Also, since I stole that phrase from her, you should just follow Dr. Laurel Rose on Instagram (KingGutterBaby for an expert's take on the current data.
For me, it requires following a few basic life policies, including "Science is true whether you believe in it or not." Look for the facts. Look for convergence of science. Nothing (for me) is worse than when all the models predict vastly different outcomes. It means, truly, that the models likely have very different assumptions and very different calculations and probably they are all wrong or have serious errors. Science is true. Truth converges. Science converges onto a truth. Remember models that predict the future are never as accurate as models that analyze the past. And never trust one model that is so different than all the others.
Another policy I learned on my first job from my best boss: A big number times a small number is still a big number. Do you know any identical twins? The probability of identical twins is a fraction of a percentage: .45%. But over the large number of pregnancies each year, people have identical twins. In fact, there are enough identical twins that you know some. Do you know any fraternal twins? The probability for fraternal twins is much higher: 1 to 2%. But it's still very low. YOUR pregnancy is not likely to be a twin pregnancy. (98% not likely) But over 1 million pregnancies, there are going to be 10,000 to 20,000 fraternal twins born.
Use those numbers (identical and fraternal twins) to understand the COVID death rates and you might have a better understanding of why public health officials are so concerned. By the way, there are 3,79 million births a year in the US currently. Honestly, looking at Worldometer and knowing the twins stats freaks me out even more. ((Adding to this post: This Washington Post article does a great job of reconciling the different death and infection rates for a good comparison to the flu)) Also, this article? That there are different strains emerging and some are more deadly than others (Washington State from China and NYC from Italy)? YIKES.
Anyway, I hope this helps you understand your need to constantly talk about the "truth" with other people and to want everyone to converge upon an agreed understanding about WTF is going on right now. It's sensemaking (at least as I learned it from Weick). And what sucks mightily is that we are going to be in this ambiguity for a long time to come. So maybe use this as a time to learn the life lesson of dealing with ambiguity and to begin trusting and doubting what you know at the same time: You may be wrong, you may be right. We won't know the real truth for a few more years.
I've noticed a lot of different responses to how folks are handling this time and, honestly, it's unnerving for me to see so many different coping styles. There is denial ("This is so stressful, I cannot read the news") and then there's denial ("There is not a real problem going on"). There's information-seeking ("I will search all the data and research and look for information the experts") and then there's information-seeking ("I will only believe the research that supports the way I see things").
We all want to know the Truth: How bad is this going to get? Am I going to die? Is someone I love going to die? Am I going to lose my house? Will I be able to make this financially? OH MY GOD, IS THIS LIKE THE FREAKING PLAGUE AND NO ONE IS EVER GOING TO GET IMMUNITY FROM IT UNTIL THEY GET IT BAD ENOUGH TO DIE??? ((Or maybe that last one is just me))
The problem is this: we are only going to know these answers, really know these answers, 2 years from now, when everything has settled down, we have figured out how to survive, life has come to a new normal, and we have collected and analyzed all the data. That's the backward sensemaking. That's when the real "Truth" will be established. ((Although, y'all know as well as I do there are still going to be different interpretations of the facts.))
But right now, we're right smack dab in the sensemaking as-it's-happening process. And that feels crummy. Because that's why sensemaking happens and why we grab on to some truth so quickly. I'm paraphrasing Weick, obviously, but we are in a crisis situation that is ambiguous with a future that is uncertain. We are talking with, at, and to each other to figure out a reality we can enact that is less stressful for us. We are likely to choose truths that fit our world views instead of choosing truths that are actually, well, true.
This is one of the reasons I feel so angry and agitated: I see people quickly cherry-picking one data point that supports their view and ignoring the preponderance of data that do not. I feel myself doing it, especially when ONE study says something that seems unusual. But when there are three different studies that find the same thing (e.g., we're possibly up to 6% exposure in population-dense communities), well then dammit I believe it. I take that as a new truth. So while that seems like good news, another story arises that we may be underestimating the deaths by 60%. I don't take that as a truth yet, but I take it as a data point.
That said, it's difficult to trust and doubt what you "know" at the same time. (Another bit of advice from Weick) But it's important that you do not use data like a drunk uses a light pole: For support instead of illumination. Also, since I stole that phrase from her, you should just follow Dr. Laurel Rose on Instagram (KingGutterBaby for an expert's take on the current data.
For me, it requires following a few basic life policies, including "Science is true whether you believe in it or not." Look for the facts. Look for convergence of science. Nothing (for me) is worse than when all the models predict vastly different outcomes. It means, truly, that the models likely have very different assumptions and very different calculations and probably they are all wrong or have serious errors. Science is true. Truth converges. Science converges onto a truth. Remember models that predict the future are never as accurate as models that analyze the past. And never trust one model that is so different than all the others.
Another policy I learned on my first job from my best boss: A big number times a small number is still a big number. Do you know any identical twins? The probability of identical twins is a fraction of a percentage: .45%. But over the large number of pregnancies each year, people have identical twins. In fact, there are enough identical twins that you know some. Do you know any fraternal twins? The probability for fraternal twins is much higher: 1 to 2%. But it's still very low. YOUR pregnancy is not likely to be a twin pregnancy. (98% not likely) But over 1 million pregnancies, there are going to be 10,000 to 20,000 fraternal twins born.
Use those numbers (identical and fraternal twins) to understand the COVID death rates and you might have a better understanding of why public health officials are so concerned. By the way, there are 3,79 million births a year in the US currently. Honestly, looking at Worldometer and knowing the twins stats freaks me out even more. ((Adding to this post: This Washington Post article does a great job of reconciling the different death and infection rates for a good comparison to the flu)) Also, this article? That there are different strains emerging and some are more deadly than others (Washington State from China and NYC from Italy)? YIKES.
Anyway, I hope this helps you understand your need to constantly talk about the "truth" with other people and to want everyone to converge upon an agreed understanding about WTF is going on right now. It's sensemaking (at least as I learned it from Weick). And what sucks mightily is that we are going to be in this ambiguity for a long time to come. So maybe use this as a time to learn the life lesson of dealing with ambiguity and to begin trusting and doubting what you know at the same time: You may be wrong, you may be right. We won't know the real truth for a few more years.
Monday, April 13, 2020
The End of The World As We Know It: I Feel Fine
Surely, you are saying this at some point. We are. I know my husband and I are old farts, but this song is right on. And, indeed, I spent more than a few nights dancing to this song with the special R.E.M. dance moves (mostly straight arms, snapping hands, shuffling feet) on top of the coffee table in the apartment over ours.
But that's another story.
This post is about generations. I wrote a rambling post two years ago about my doubt that there are actually generational cohorts in our society. My premise is, basically, that something dramatic has to happen to have a generation. Something dramatic like a world war, the first booming economy, the start of communism, the end of communism. I don't buy that a new decade starts a new generation. So I'm skeptical that Gen-X, Gen-Z, Millenials, etc are really generations instead of just old people looking at young people, shaking their wrinkled fists, and saying "GET OFF MY LAWN."
That said, I think we can all reasonably say that for kids coming of age and young adults right now, this has the potential to create a new generation. The world is sharing social isolation. We are relying on technology to connect us in ways we never have before. I honestly don't think one to two weeks will do it. But if the rest of the world continues down that paths that China, South Korea, and Italy are going down, well, yeah. We may look back and call these the Coronakids.
HOWEVER, what just about breaks my heart is my parents' experience. They were born right after a worldwide depression. They are hitting their twilight years during a worldwide pandemic. That is a sucky-ass set of bookends to their lives. Fortunately, they don't read this blog and I'm not going to point this fact out to them.
So, yeah. Also, I also kind of hate this blogging platform. The letters (at "normal") have been too small for me to read. I'm hoping this looks a bit better at "medium" and if so, I'm going to go change the rest of my posts so I can actually read them (cf., old farts). I'm not sure the university web platform is really set up for blogging
But that's another story.
This post is about generations. I wrote a rambling post two years ago about my doubt that there are actually generational cohorts in our society. My premise is, basically, that something dramatic has to happen to have a generation. Something dramatic like a world war, the first booming economy, the start of communism, the end of communism. I don't buy that a new decade starts a new generation. So I'm skeptical that Gen-X, Gen-Z, Millenials, etc are really generations instead of just old people looking at young people, shaking their wrinkled fists, and saying "GET OFF MY LAWN."
That said, I think we can all reasonably say that for kids coming of age and young adults right now, this has the potential to create a new generation. The world is sharing social isolation. We are relying on technology to connect us in ways we never have before. I honestly don't think one to two weeks will do it. But if the rest of the world continues down that paths that China, South Korea, and Italy are going down, well, yeah. We may look back and call these the Coronakids.
HOWEVER, what just about breaks my heart is my parents' experience. They were born right after a worldwide depression. They are hitting their twilight years during a worldwide pandemic. That is a sucky-ass set of bookends to their lives. Fortunately, they don't read this blog and I'm not going to point this fact out to them.
So, yeah. Also, I also kind of hate this blogging platform. The letters (at "normal") have been too small for me to read. I'm hoping this looks a bit better at "medium" and if so, I'm going to go change the rest of my posts so I can actually read them (cf., old farts). I'm not sure the university web platform is really set up for blogging
Love in the Time of Cholera
My lab had our second online meeting this week. Part of our discussion was keeping socially connected even while practicing social isolation. A 21st century Love in the Time of Cholera as it were. ((Or maybe not. I'm rereading the wiki summary and clearly, I did not understand it the first time I read it))
In any case, a few thoughts are bubbling up on Day 3 of the family and work isolation. First, my family is not nearly settled into any sort of routine. We started homeschooling yesterday and I'm about to go wake everyone to start Day 2 but we are not anywhere close to a new normal.
Second, a great idea from my lab: do something "normal" (in our case, research-related) every day. Right now, I'm writing a response to the reviewers on a Revise and Resubmit and I cannot fully state how much I do not give a flying fig newton about trying to convince these folks why my changes meet their critiques. They do. Suck it. ((Hmmmm, my tone on my professional blog has become much more aligned with my tone on my personal one)) We just read Silvia's book on How to Write a Lot and right now, his advice to do something work-related every single workday seems like it can help with mental health as well as productivity
Finally, for today, be gentle with your friends who seem unattached to reality regarding this pandemic. Psychology has done a lot of research on people's attitudes about their health. Believe it or not, not everybody approaches their health, their healthcare, and their relationship to health authorities the same way that you do! Also, denial is not just a river in Egypt. ((And I'm going to digress for a minute and say that I am so old that when I said that tired cliche to my lab students, they thought I was clever and had invented it on my own. Le sigh))
OK. Hang in there, folks. Don't forget to make a live connection with someone outside of your home today. I know some friends have said it's still too soon for them to do that (i.e., it's still too overwhelming and their heads are still spinning), but keep it in your mental health toolbox for now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)