August 3, 2023 • 42 mins
Join us for a fascinating conversation with my guest, Mike Rucker, an organizational psychologist and behavioral scientist. Mike unveils the intriguing science of happiness and warns us about the risk of 'ornamental hygiene' that can emerge from excessively pursuing this emotion. His book, 'The Fun Habit,' serves as a guide to experience a life filled with happiness without obsessively quantifying it. Mike shares his journey into the field of positive psychology that started with the International Positive Psychology Association.
As we delve deeper, we explore the importance of autonomy and time affluence. Mike emphasizes the need for personalized approaches to support psychological well-being when common interventions fall short. We further discuss reclaiming agency and developing cognitive reserve to combat burnout. Fostering pro-social behavior and creating meaningful memories take center stage in our conversation.
In the final segment, Mike enlightens us about the difference between passive and active leisure. He explains the Hedonic Flexibility Principle and how curtailing unenjoyable activities can make room for purposeful leisure. As someone mentored by Michael Jervais, Mike also gives us a peek into his personal life and how he uses behavioral science to make activities fun, thereby improving engagement. This is a great opportunity to uncover these riveting topics with Mike Rucker, a beacon in the field of positive psychology.
If you liked this podcast
- please tell your friends about it,
- subscribe to this podcast wherever you listen to podcasts and/or write a brief note on apple podcasts,
- check out my blogs on Psychology Today at
https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/contributors/thomas-r-verny-md
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
Good morning.
This is Pushing Boundaries, apodcast about pioneering
research, breakthroughdiscoveries and unconventional
ideas.
I'm your host, Dr Thomas RVerny.
My guest today is Mike Rucker,PhD with an MBA from the
University of SouthernCalifornia.
If I say anything that is wrong, don't hesitate to correct me.
(00:26):
Mike, okay, I'm sure you'll befine, don't be so sure.
He's a member of the AmericanPsychological Association, an
accredited member of theAmerican College of Sports
Medicine and charter member ofthe International Positive
Psychology Association.
Mike is an organizationalpsychologist and behavioral
(00:48):
scientist.
He currently serves as a seniorleader at Active Wellness in
San Francisco and is the authorof the Fun Habit, which was
recently published by Simon andSchuster.
According to Mike fun isn'tfrivolous.
It's vital for your well-being.
His book is a step-by-step planto bring more pleasure into
(01:13):
your busy life.
So before we get into the funhabit which I would like to, of
course, I read on your websitethat your interest in this
subject started in 2005, whenyou made a major commitment to
fun as an intentional way oflife, announcing the Live Life
Love Project.
Speaker 2 (01:31):
Intentional, not international.
Speaker 1 (01:35):
Intentional?
Yeah, I'm not.
Austin Powers no perhapsinternational too, who knows, I
know I like that Okay, I can'tchange it up.
We'll add that to your bio,please.
Please, tell me a little bitmore about that.
So what happened in 2005 thatgot you sort of on this journey?
Speaker 2 (01:53):
Yeah.
So I think that's theculmination.
You know, oftentimes when welook to creating bios, you know
sound bites or coalescing of alot of bullet points, right.
And so I think that more is anode to the fact that the
International PositivePsychology Association was
formed by a gentleman by thename of Dr Marty Sugglemann
(02:13):
around that time and I got aninvitation to be a part of that,
my mentor.
That got me into the world ofpsychology and again you said it
.
But oftentimes when I'm on apsychiatrist or psychological
podcast, I like to make surefolks know I'm an organizational
psychologist.
I don't have a clinicalbackground, although I've
studied autonomy in the sense ofthe workplace quite
(02:37):
significantly.
But I was really interested inpeak performance, my mentor,
michael Gervais, who's known inthat space.
He was a clinical psychologistfor the Seattle Seahawks and has
a popular podcast himselfcalled Finding Mastery.
I just serendipitously gotaccess to him when he was early
in his career and he very muchhas stayed on that track right,
(02:58):
and so I started drinking fromhis wisdom.
But I soon found that this ideaof peak performance didn't have
a high resonance for me,especially because I had met
Michael, because I was burnt outand so this budding field.
You know, cheeks at Me High'sflow is starting to become
popular and Sugglemann's work,obviously and you know I could
(03:21):
name drop a bunch of folks butpeople were starting to get
interested and so for folks thatdon't know what positive
psychology is, it's essentiallya way to look at psychological
tools for betterment, because upuntil that point right, we
primarily looked at these toolsof psychology to treat clinical
outcomes, and so Sugglemannbrought together folks from all
(03:43):
sorts of walks of life, you know, to create this association,
and that that happened in 2005.
So that that's the ode to thatdate.
When I started to look at, youknow, sort of the corpus of the
academic work and the other sortof, you know, a milestone
(04:04):
although it's horrible to kindof frame it in that realm was
2016, 2017.
I had essentially over optimizedthose tools, you know, where I
had really created this overly,this over concern about my own
happiness, and around that timemy brother unexpectedly passed
(04:27):
away from a pulmonary embolism,and so I was trying to use these
tools of optimism and gratitude, sort of will, myself out of
that malaise, to my owndetriment.
And so some of the book alsoimpacts that, because around
that time we've learned, andyou're probably aware of this,
but there's been a lot ofresearch that, especially in the
(04:47):
West, this over emphasis onhappiness and always trying to
be happy all the time hasactually led to some.
You know what we callornamental hygiene, and
certainly there's data suggestsclinical outcomes as well.
Speaker 1 (05:04):
Yes.
Speaker 2 (05:04):
Was that a lot, I'm sorry.
Speaker 1 (05:06):
No, that's fine, that's fine.
You said over-concerned aboutmy happiness.
I think you said that right,that's correct.
Speaker 2 (05:14):
And I really took that from the researcher in this
area that I really likealthough her work certainly been
replicated is Dr Iris Mouse outof University of California,
Berkeley, and so I always liketo clarify that the work in this
field isn't necessarily valuinghappiness or wanting people to
flourish, wanting people tothrive.
If you value happiness as anideal and you want to foster
(05:36):
that within your family unit,you want to design a life where
it's abundant in your life, andthat's certainly what I talk
about in the book.
There doesn't seem to beanything problematic in that
area.
It's that you know the kind ofto boil it down to an internet
meme, right, this idea of goodvibes only when you create this
dissonance, if you know you havea bad day and all of a sudden
(05:57):
you're like, well, I'm notsupposed to have bad days, right
.
Or you over quantify happiness,which we've done essentially
with subject to well being,right, and in academia, that
that serves a purpose, right.
But when lay people kind ofoverlay this academic work and
say, hey, let's look at yourhappiness on a scale of zero to
10.
What happens when you create alife where you're always in that
(06:19):
nine or 10 zone and you have ahealth event or you naturally
have loss, because that's a partof life, right, there's no way
to sort of go up.
And then so, all of a sudden,the space so that you really
enjoyed and you don't have theemotional flexibility to
navigate these rough waters allof a sudden, can you know, send
you down quite a downward spiral.
(06:41):
In fact, you know, I, eventhough it was quite academic in
nature your previous podcast was, you know, Steve out of UCLA
talked about that in a lot ofhis research.
Right, we know that this isn'tjust with regards to
psychological impact, itactually begins to have
physiological impact as well.
So in that context, it becomesquite important to make sure
(07:04):
that not only are we fosteringemotional flexibility, but we're
also finding a way where folkscan find joy in the things that
they do, rather than always kindof fixating, you know, on some
sort of outcome where they'regoing to quote unquote arrive at
happiness.
Speaker 1 (07:20):
So you are really advocating a more balanced view
as opposed to the tyranny ofpositivity.
That's correct.
I was.
I was reading the other dayspeaking of that.
I was reading the other dayabout Samantha Irby, author of
quietly hostile.
Are you familiar with her atall?
Speaker 2 (07:41):
Vaguely.
I'm not.
I don't have a deepunderstanding.
Speaker 1 (07:45):
Well, well, neither do I, but I know this, that
she's very overweight, and shesaid this is a quote.
My body doesn't work right.
It's hard to love it when itgives me so many issues.
Also, can I just say thetyranny around loving yourself
is bonkers to me.
Speaker 2 (08:04):
Well, and I think that's what's interesting in
context, we might be jumping alittle bit ahead, so feel free
to reel me in.
But I think another thing Iunpack in the book is that a lot
of us look at these broad basedinterventions, yeah, and can
find discomfort in the factthey're not working for us, and
don't realize that when we'retalking about applied science,
(08:26):
all of this is in a normal curve.
So the one that I think hasgotten highlighted the most from
the field of positivepsychology is Sonny Lubomirsky
out of University of Riversideexcuse me, uc Riverside looking
at gratitude and how we know,gratitude is an essential tool.
It's certainly fundamental tohelping folks support their
(08:48):
psychological well-being.
But this idea that you createan intervention where you force
someone or strongly suggest youfind three things a day to be
grateful for, if you findyourself in a position like the
person that you mentioned, andthat's not necessarily an
appropriate response to whatyou're dealing with you can
actually cause moral injury andpsychological harm.
(09:12):
So that's another thing I'mtrying to bring light to is that
if something's not necessarilyworking for you, then chuck it
right.
But ultimately, I believe thatmost of us do want to find joy
in the things that we're doingand if we look at those things
critically generally, we canimprove our circumstances.
Speaker 1 (09:31):
So in your book, the fun habit, what are some of the
sort of main points that youemphasize in your book?
What should people do to getinto the fun habit?
Speaker 2 (09:47):
Yeah, so at the broadest lens it's really about
time affluence, right, we knowfrom a lot of studies and, like
I said, my academic research wasprimarily in this idea of
autonomy.
So I looked at it first withina workplace environment and we
know there's a pretty directline.
There's some causal studies andcertainly a ton of correlative
(10:09):
studies that suggest when youlack autonomy within your work
life, you see both poorphysiological outcomes as well
as, obviously, psychologicaloutcomes.
So I was like what about thatconstruct within a broader sense
?
Right, because we look at funoftentimes in a lot of the
research is done in play in anacademic environment, whether
(10:30):
that be schools, both at thehigh school level and collegiate
level.
But with regards to hedonictone and how that can improve
sort of your understanding ofhow you have agency and autonomy
in your life, I saw a bigresearch gap and so in the book
I look at that one how can weincrease your time affluence?
(10:53):
Because we know that it has apositive correlation.
Again, looking back at thisconstruct of autonomy and to get
us to the starting line, itessentially is at a micro level.
How do you become aware of howyou're spending your time in any
given week?
Because I think a lot of adultsdon't realize how habitualized
their life is, especially folksin what we call the sandwich
(11:16):
generation.
Right, and for folks that arenot aware of that term, it's
people that are caring forchildren and also aging adults,
which is really a phenomenonthat is pretty unique to this
era.
We're having kids later than weever have, and we also have
parents that are living longerthan they ever have, and so
there's this cohort of folks inthe sandwich generation that
(11:37):
have never existed in modernhistory.
There's some of the most timefor and burnt out folks ever,
and so figuring out ways tomitigate that becomes important,
and one of the first things isto figure out how can you
reclaim agency and autonomy overhow you're doing things,
because a lot of times we can'treorganize your schedule in a
(12:00):
profound way.
That opens up a lot of theseopportunities.
But we can reframe the fact thatif you do take time off the
table for yourself, oftentimesyou'll approach the things that
you have to do with more vigorand vitality and the things that
you have to do as kind of asecond step.
Oftentimes you're doing itthrough the lens of I have to do
it.
Sometimes in the literaturewe'll call this through the lens
(12:23):
of a sense of duty, when reallyyou can reorganize those things
and still accomplish the taskoutcome, but do it in a way that
is enjoyable for you.
And so, you know, oftentimeswe'll talk about things like
passive and active leisure,right, and so an example that I
think that highlights this well,again, you know, through the
lens of parenting are folks thatwatch their kids just sitting
(12:45):
on a bench.
Essentially, you know, engagingin social media really just to
pacify the time when, instead,if they figured out something
that they would actually enjoydoing, because they don't like
spending time at the park, theycould find something that all
three of them could do, right,and so now it's an active
activity, it's creatingpro-social behavior with your
kids.
So, if you believe the work ofDr Paul Zach and others, it's
(13:08):
releasing more oxytocin whichmakes us feel connected and
really does sort of limit someof the limitations of the ego.
And then it creates an index ofmemories that you'll actually
remember, because what weunderstand from neuroscience is
that when you aren't really inthe moment so again you know,
kind of just mindlesslyscrolling social media or you
(13:29):
just don't want to be where yourfeet are you tend to not encode
those memories, right, and soyou lack any benefit of
neuroplasticity because you knowthat encoding is not happening.
And if you really havehabituated your behavior, where
everything is routine, we knowthat those memories tend to be
stored in sort of a singlecognitive unit, right, so you
(13:51):
know.
An example of that is do youremember the hundred times that
you drove to work?
Or do you remember the one wayand that you probably did it
about a hundred times, right?
But if you drive a hundreddifferent, unique ways to work,
you might not remember every one, but you're certainly creating
memories that we believe leadsto cognitive reserve, which
ultimately could stave offcognitive decline later in life.
(14:14):
So I just gave you a bulletlist of reasons why this becomes
fruitful, right?
One, potentially, you knowpro-social behavior, which leads
to a better balance ofneurochemicals, this idea that
we're connected to somethingbigger than ourselves, so that
experiences are meant to be feltas a unit, and you know, in
more of a collective experience.
(14:35):
And then also, you know,potentially, these cognitive
benefits as well.
Speaker 1 (14:41):
You said that those kinds of experiences create
cognitive reserve.
What is meant by that?
What is exactly meant by that?
Speaker 2 (14:50):
So again, it goes back to that encoding of
information, right?
If you look at your brain as ahard drive, if again you have a
single event, we'll go back toyou know, driving to work,
that's really.
You're only using a finite partof that of that hard drive,
right?
And so what we believe is thatif you don't have a ton of you
(15:12):
know sorry to use kind of acasual term but if we don't have
a host of interesting memorieswithin our brain that are all
stored in kind of differentplaces, then ultimately the
brain will start to whittle backbecause it doesn't need, you
(15:33):
know, all those neurons thatweren't put into play.
And so what cognitive reservemeans is that you have created
all of these neural pathways by,you know, learning new things,
by keeping an open mind, byhaving a host, this tapestry,
this mosaic of differentexperiences, and since all of
those things need to be stored,right, that we believe that
(15:53):
those neural pathways have abenefit later in life.
You know, if you are kind of inthe throes of cognitive decline
because they're, the body isable to put them to use, you
know, to stave off memorydeficiencies.
Speaker 1 (16:09):
Okay, that sounds reasonable and logical, but is
there any evidence for that?
Speaker 2 (16:15):
Yes, there absolutely is.
What's the evidence?
The evidence is this idea againof cognitive reserve right, and
so we know that people thathave this tapestry again you
know.
So it really does need to benovel.
When I first entered this space, I was working for a company
(16:36):
called Scientific Brain Training.
They were out of France butthey were competing with brain
game companies like Lemosody outof Stanford, and so we believe
that any sort of novelexperience would lead to this
kind of cognitive reserve right.
What was later found, becausethat work wasn't replicatable,
is that that specificity.
So again, going back to thatidea of routine, it wasn't
(16:57):
creating these neural pathways,it was essentially creating
strong neural pathways, not newones, but strong ones, and
because you were learning a task, specific skill.
And so what we now know islater in life that doesn't
necessarily lead to protectionagainst cognitive reserve.
We'll find folks that aresuffering from things like
(17:17):
cognitive decline or Alzheimer's, that will be able to do those
tasks really well but don'tnecessarily have the ability to
maintain their memory.
But the folks that have createda mosaic so learned a lot of
different things, adventurethrough life and have a host of
different experiences.
There's some science to suggestthat, also the ability to have
(17:40):
an empathetic view to others.
So I don't remember theresearch specifically, but I
believe the intervention and itcould be a small sample size.
I'm always careful here.
But I know that there was aninteresting study where they had
older adults go and listen toopposing political parties and
try and just sympathize withthat view rather than sort of
(18:02):
being trenched in theirviewpoint and kind of want to be
combative.
So with that prime and it wasshown to have a potential
benefit.
So but the main idea here is tohave a cluster of novel
experiences.
So again going back to thathard drive analogy right that
you're creating these neuralpathways that then can get used
(18:25):
later in life once things startto denigrate.
Speaker 1 (18:32):
So, just like we know that it's important to have
diverse bacteria in your gut, sowhat you're saying is that it's
important to have diverseexperiences in your life in
order to continue to functionwell in terms of your brain
(18:53):
activity.
Speaker 2 (18:55):
I would say it's more prophylactic.
I don't one.
I'm not a neuroscientist, soall I'm doing is regurgitating
essentially what was aliterature review for that
chapter of the book.
But it seems to be moreprophylactic.
I mean, we're really at thecusp of understanding cognitive
decline and certainly it's anemerging science.
I think just this year we hadreally the first drug that might
(19:20):
actually be impactful.
I mean, we're so far fromreally understanding.
At first we thought it was afacet of diabetes, then we
thought it was telomeres, thenwe thought it was DNA health.
So I think there's certainlysome really interesting schools
of thought.
I have a loose association withthe Buck Institute, the Bay Area
(19:41):
, that's doing interesting basicscience in that space, but
again it's kind of the wild,wild west.
But what we do seem to havedata to support the idea that,
again, if you have lived a lifewhere you've tried to learn new
things, you've tried to engagein activities that you enjoy, it
(20:03):
tends to be a prophylacticagainst this.
So there are correlativestudies to suggest that it can
add as a protectant.
Is that because it's aCedicoline issue?
Is it again strong neuralpathways and the variety of
(20:24):
those, rather than them beingstrengthened by action and
specificity.
I'm really butting up at theedge of my pay grade there.
Speaker 1 (20:33):
That's fine, you're doing great.
So, coming back to your bookand what you said about a few
minutes ago, so do you advise inyour book that your readers
should perhaps keep a log for aweek in terms of how they spend
their time and then look at itcarefully to see how they can
(20:56):
improve the fun time, thehappiness time?
Speaker 2 (21:00):
Yeah, so I have a basic model in there.
Us Orgps folks love fourquadrant models and so it's
really an exercise of hey, can Iborrow your watch so I can tell
you what time it is Right?
Yes, you know, there's only 168hours in any given week.
Hopefully you're sleeping atleast 50 to 56 hours of those,
(21:22):
and so you really only have tokind of log just over 100 hours
within that week.
And so, even though that's notthe most fun exercise in the
book, being mindful of howyou've habituated your activity
generally always yields lowhanging fruit, because many
adults, when you're like youknow I can pause it.
(21:42):
You know, based on stats, that70 to 80% of your week is
habituated and most people willpush against that, you know,
until they do this type ofexercise.
And often what is unearthed isthat there is an immense amount
of passive leisure within yourschedule.
And again, I'm not yieldingthis at any given listener,
right?
I'm just saying, as you know,kind of you know general
(22:06):
anecdotes that there's alwayssome sort of insight that comes
out of that exercise Like wow,you know, it could be that
you're habitually using socialmedia, it could be.
Wow, I didn't understand that.
I'm in email, you know, 15hours out of my week.
It could be.
I have a relationship ofconvenience where I just don't
(22:27):
want to do this.
It's just, I didn't realizethat I had a choice.
It could be the anecdote of theparent that realized you know,
I just don't like going to thepark.
It's just, that's been ourroutine.
Let me recapture my ability tochange that.
It could be wow, I don't have adate with my partner on the
schedule and we haven't doneanything together, you know, for
(22:49):
four months.
No wonder there might be somestrain, you know, within the two
of us.
So whatever the insight is foryou is going to be specific to
your situation.
But I have found very fewexamples where someone's like,
wow, this was reallyilluminating.
And then you know, you canfigure out, what can we do about
(23:10):
it.
And one of the first steps isgenerally you want to see what
you can stop doing.
Because I think another facet ofwhat you know sometimes is
referred to as positive.
You know toxic positivity islet's just pile more things on
your busy to do list.
Oh, you're burnt out.
Well, here, let's get you tomeditate five hours a week.
Right, I learned that doing mypracticum as a doctoral student.
(23:31):
I was brought in because of mybackground in positive
psychology to help physicianswith burnout and the CMO, and
earnest had, you know, the bestof intentions, but all of the
tools in our toolkit wereessentially overlaying more time
poverty on, you know, avocation that is one of the most
time poor, especially here inthe States, right when, you know
(23:53):
again, a lot of them areevaluated based on load rather
than outcome, although hopefullythat's slowly but surely
changing here with the CMS, andso that was something that I've
always taken to heart when weare looking to do this work.
How can we create the space sothat you don't feel like this is
something that you need to takeon?
(24:13):
It goes back to what DrLuba-Mursky uncovered when you
have, you deliver broad-basedinterventions that might not be
a good fit for your particular,for the person that you're
working with, how can we reducethe things that really aren't
bringing you joy?
I call these agonizing andyielding activities, some of the
(24:34):
activities that take a lot ofenergy, but what's more
insidious is what are the thingsthat don't take a lot of energy
but are essentially keeping youout of an extremely negative
valent state?
For folks that don't know thatword it's a fancy word.
In psychology that means are youenjoying things or you not?
When you're not enjoying yourtime, it can result in things
(24:58):
like boredom, mild annoyance.
If you can pacify thosefeelings, sometimes you're
tricked into feeling like youare enjoying your time.
When you really look at thatcritically, like I wasn't
enjoying my time, I was just outof boredom now, so it felt
better than boredom felt.
When you look at thatcritically, like well, let's
take those activities out andmove them into doing things that
(25:21):
really do bring you joy,because those tend to be
infectious.
The big light bulb moment forme when I was putting this work
together because I wasapproaching it more as a
behavioral scientist how can wemanipulate the variables of your
environment, the people thatyou're with the activities that
you're doing, or potentiallyeven the environment that you're
(25:42):
doing them in?
I landed on a piece of researchout of MIT, stanford and Harvard
that was like wow, okay, sothis isn't just conjecture.
This is clearly something thatdoes have an immense benefit,
but the benefit is down the roadand so it's hard to actualize.
The concept here is called theHadonic Flexibility Principle.
You can Google it.
(26:03):
I'll just give it a broadstroke right now.
What these researchers found isthat, if the crux of the
research was to look, are wetruly pleasure seeking animals?
Because that's always broughtup in philosophy from young on
out.
They wanted to see.
Is that true, or are most ofthe things that were motivated
(26:27):
to do truly through this lens ofpleasure?
What they found out is if youare in a state of malaise or
discomfort then yes,statistically you have a higher
propensity to seek out forms ofescapism, things like drinking,
poor uses of time.
But for the folks that weredeliberate about having fun, so
(26:50):
engaging things that really litthem up, these were the folks
that stopped looking for funthings because their fun cup was
full and actually were the onesthat showed up the next day
with more vigor and vitality totake on the harder challenges.
Paradoxically, they were waymore productive than the folks
that have filled their liveswith busy work.
(27:10):
But I think one of the reallyfun things about the study and
it was huge right, 20,000 samplesize it came from time use
studies.
But it's not one of thesecasual inferences thematic
analysis studies.
This was Dr Tuck, who's now atOxford as one of the leaders in
statistical analysis.
(27:32):
He did a lot of the work forCOVID out of the EU.
What they found is that thesefolks not only are more
productive, but they have thecognitive resilience to be
innovative.
What we know is when you'reburnt out sometimes it's
referred to as ego depletion youtend to have to go through life
using the heuristics andalgorithms that have served you.
(27:54):
It goes back to thatspecificity because those things
are really comfortable Throughdeliberate practice.
Folks that do know what they'redoing can do it very well.
But the idea to think outsideof the box, to think nonlinear,
to be creative, to be curious,to think of innovative solutions
becomes depleted because wedon't have the wherewithal to
(28:17):
engage in that type of activity.
The folks that are able to whatwe call in organizational
psychology have transitionrituals from work to their
leisure life, sometimes theirleisure life.
Again, I'm not villainizing theworkaholic.
Sometimes leisure life is work,but things that they want to do
, like for you and I writing abook.
Someone might look at us and go, wow, they still work all the
(28:40):
time, but at least it'ssomething that we want to do,
and so that's an importantdistinction.
For folks that are able to dothat deliberately, they live
this blended life.
A lot of folks don't like touse balance anymore, because
that suggests you have to dothis all the time.
It's more, how do you get toengage in the activities that
(29:03):
you're doing throughout yourweek in a joyful way, in a
manner that fills you up?
For me, that was like all rightnow I am backed by some
rigorous science as well.
Speaker 1 (29:17):
So you are working in San Francisco.
Is it At that wellness?
Speaker 2 (29:23):
Act of wellness correct.
Speaker 1 (29:24):
Yes, when you come across people who are simply not
curious, as I'm sure you have Ihave, in fact there seem to be
a lot of people who are notcurious, who don't want to learn
anything new, how do youmotivate them to move, as you
(29:47):
said, outside their box, outsidetheir box of comfort?
How do you motivate them?
Speaker 2 (29:58):
I approach most of those situations with a degree
of empathy.
I think again, what's becomeproblematic in our space is we
use these blunt instruments anddon't do them in a sequential
manner.
So any form of mastery isreally going to require someone
to understand the process, andso oftentimes if someone has a
(30:20):
packed schedule and they're likeI can't just find an hour in my
week, let alone maybe two orthree hours daily, okay, let's
start with that one day.
How can we figure out what itis that would potentially bring
you joy?
And so having that invitationto sort of quote unquote, be
playful, I think is an importantstep, and sometimes it might
(30:42):
take two or three interactionswith that individual.
But once you get them to kindof be mindful of the benefits of
this generally, you can getthem on board.
Another thing is I show grace tofolks that just don't want to
be curious or not have fun.
I think, in the spirit ofgetting wiser as I get older
(31:02):
when I was first starting thiswork, everyone has to be fun
I've unearthed to kind of loopback to the beginning of the
podcast.
It is clear that fun andpleasure and getting hedonic
value out of things that we dois sort of a restorative path to
(31:22):
be really productive.
It might not be for some folks,so I don't need 100% conversion
rate into these ideals, but forfolks that do feel that that's
missing, I think having thatinvitation is an important first
step, as pedestrian as thatsounds Because a lot of folks
(31:45):
are in that context because oftheir busy lives have created so
many heuristics and algorithmsand systems to just get through
their day.
They haven't thought aboutbeing curious, so they really do
need that invitation.
Speaker 1 (32:01):
Yes, yes, very good.
So was there anything in yourown background that you think
contributed to your interest inthis subject?
Speaker 2 (32:11):
Yeah.
So going back to my work inautonomy, I think that was the
natural progression Again theloss of my brother.
I kept trying to will myselfout of that malaise.
I essentially became an onlychild so I had to navigate the
feelings of my parents and dothat as now sort of the
(32:32):
figurehead as they were workingout that traumatic experience.
Through that process of beingpolyana about my situation and
lacking the emotionalflexibility to navigate it, I
got pretty close to a clinicaloutcome myself.
I did become quite passionateabout what is happening here
(32:53):
because it was clear that a lotof folks we're also in the same
space for a host of differentreasons, whether that to be
divorce, job change, the loss ofa loved one, the change of a
significant situation or evenjust burnout and loneliness,
which we know are prevalent inthe Western world, the fact that
(33:14):
so many people were sufferingthis ill fate of essentially
time poverty, it became reallyimportant for me to figure out
not only what was the issue here, but how could we solve it.
Speaker 1 (33:28):
So what made you become a psychologist?
Speaker 2 (33:32):
Again my mentor, michael Jervais.
So I had a really bigentrepreneurial win coming out
of USC At that time I thought mycareer path was going to be
marketing and I had a successfulexit out of that company.
Then I tried to start a secondcompany that failed miserably.
So I had a lot of big feelingsthen.
(33:53):
I think there's always thiscurse when you hit a significant
success at the onset becauseyou feel like you're invincible.
So being able to work with sucha figure head in psychology
like Michael Jervais, that was ablessing and an invitation to
be curious about the fieldmyself.
Speaker 1 (34:15):
So are you currently in an intimate relationship?
Speaker 2 (34:19):
Yes, I'm married to my partner, anna, and have two
children that I adore.
How?
Speaker 1 (34:26):
old are your children , 11 and 8.
Would you like them to followin your footsteps?
Speaker 2 (34:32):
As an organizational psychologist?
Yes, I don't know.
That's a great question.
I think they're always jokethat because I talk about fun in
such scientific terms, eventhough I have a very endearing
relationship with my daughter.
And, to answer your question ata more personal level, we're
(34:54):
flexing our curiosity all thetime.
One of the funnest things I'dlove to do with her is take
different classes.
I talk about that publicly.
Right now we're enjoyingcooking classes together, but
she always quips that somehowI've been able to take the fun
out of fun science because I usewords like propellants and
hedonic tone and things of thatnature.
I don't know.
(35:15):
My daughter really excels as animpasse.
If she went into clinicalpsychology I'm sure she would
make her own dent in theuniverse.
My son is very analytical, likehis mother An engineer, an
architect.
It's really hard to fathom whatmight be ahead for him, but
right now certainly he's showingthose type of attributes.
Speaker 1 (35:39):
How do you yourself have fun in life?
Speaker 2 (35:43):
I'm really leaning into engagement that involves
other folks.
Again, like I said, I talkquite publicly about making sure
that I'm deliberate spendingtime with my kids in ways that's
not just fun for them but funfor myself.
I still make sure there'sintermittent date nights with my
wife so that we're connectingon that level.
(36:05):
From an activity standpoint,I'm trying to get to the beach
as much as I can because I'vealways been a fan of surfing.
Then, at a professional level,really trying to use this
crossroads of psychology andbehavioral science to create
environments that draw people inSometimes we call them
honeypots but that give themaccess to ways of betterment, so
(36:28):
that you're creating anenvironment that's really
scaffolding For folks that wantto better themselves but, to
your point, feel lost in theprocess.
How can we create tools thatreduce that cognitive barrier to
entrance?
For example, I'm working withone company called EGEN because
we realized that and it's quiteprofound when you think about it
(36:49):
because a lot of folks, if youask them in qualitative surveys
so you do focus groups do youknow how to work out?
Unfortunately, this is what youlearn as a behavioral scientist
.
A lot of those upstream toolsreally aren't helpful.
People are going to tell youthey know how to work out, but
then you watch them on theequipment and that intimidation
and the mild cognitivedissonance of not really knowing
(37:10):
how to use it leads toattrition.
You see huge dropouts in mostof these wellness studies unless
they're formulated withselection bias, which is a real
problem, especially in workplacewellness, which is the RAND
Corporation shine the light onthat.
But if you find ways to make itfun, the engagement to be
self-serving, you enable peopleto use their autonomy and
(37:33):
explore the space and science.
We call it the territory,instead of giving them a map
that's really discreet.
You see all of these metrics goup in a positive way and so
I've really been enjoying thatside of the science of how do we
use behavioral science so thatwe're not just doing broad-based
interventions because we knowthey work, but we're making
these interventions moreinviting and more fun so that
(37:56):
people stick to them and even ifthey do need to attrit out, we
increase the rates of recidivismback into the programs.
Speaker 1 (38:03):
So, is there another book in the future for you.
Speaker 2 (38:08):
I think so.
As I mentioned, I just got tovisit your lovely country, and
one of the ideas in positivepsychology that I found
fascinating, that was brought upin the Congress this year, is
the difference betweenpsychological thriving and
psychological flourishing, andso thriving is the type of work
(38:28):
you do.
How do we take an individual andgive them a better toolbox so
that they can thrive in anygiven situation?
They can either get themselvesout of bad marriage or, if they
have a biological predispositionto a clinical issue, we can
support them on a path towardsbetterment, where flourishing is
(38:49):
really more population-basedinterventions.
How do we create an environmentthat allows people to thrive
despite their circumstance?
And so, even though it's asubtle distinction, one that fit
well with the work that I amdoing, because I don't
necessarily want to treat folksat the individual level but if I
can have an impact by creatingspaces that allow anyone to come
(39:12):
into those environments andenjoy the benefits of betterment
, that would be something that Ithink I could spend the rest of
my life doing.
So that's an area of impactthat I'd like to foster and, I
think, the gaining wisdom inthat area, especially because
there is yet again a bigresearch gap in how we do that,
(39:34):
since these constructs arefairly new kind of delineating
thriving from flourishing, Ithink would make an interesting
book.
Speaker 1 (39:42):
Sounds interesting.
Yes, so my final question whatis the most important lesson you
have learned about life as oftoday?
Speaker 2 (39:53):
I think to not be so.
Outcome focused, right, andthat's really hard, you know,
oftentimes we talk about propermental hygiene, being able to
hold two conflicting ideals andbe comfortable with that, right.
Yet when we conceptualize that,it's really hard to sort of get
(40:14):
that skill into play.
And so so much, especially inthe Western world, of our
motivation.
The underpinning is meritocracy, right, Because we want the
best podcast.
Right, we want to be the mostprolific researcher.
Both my parents were professors,and so you know perish or you
(40:35):
know publish or perish.
Publish or perish, yes, butthat bleeds into everything we
do, right, If we're not havingthe most fun, if we're not
ranked well against the Joneseswithin our social structure, we
can really live these unhappylives, right, Even though we say
that that's not something wewant to do.
And so, for me, how do youdecouple the outcome and so
(40:58):
still thrive to be the best youcan?
But if that doesn't work out,you know, allow yourself to move
on and really have enjoyed theprocess, rather than, you know,
deriving all of your enjoyment.
You know, through this sort ofend note Because, one, it's a
lot more sustainable.
Two, it goes back to what wewere talking about You're gonna
encode a lot more memoriesBecause, instead of the trophy
(41:21):
or the finish line being thething that you remember, you
remember, you know every workoutwith your friend or your
partner.
You remember the last, youremember the times it didn't
work out but it still turnedinto an amazing experience,
right?
Maybe that wrong turn on thehike that led to a majestic view
and that sense of awe Insteadof I just did it, all you know,
to try to place it, you know, atthe end of life, and so for me,
(41:44):
that's been the most profoundhow do you decouple the outcome
but then still honor the outcomeas something that's an
honorable thing?
Speaker 1 (41:54):
Very wise words, very , very wise.
Thank you, Mike.
My guest today was Mike Rucker,and he is the author of the Fun
Habit, recently published.
A great book, not just aboutfun, but about how to live well
and live happily and joyfully.
So thanks again, and until wemeet again, take care.
(42:16):
Thank you for having me.
It was a pleasure.
Bye-bye.
Good morning.
This is Pushing Boundaries, apodcast about pioneering
research, breakthroughdiscoveries and unconventional
ideas.
I'm your host, Dr Thomas RVerny.
My guest today is Mike Rucker,PhD with an MBA from the
University of SouthernCalifornia.
If I say anything that is wrong, don't hesitate to correct me.
(00:26):
Mike, okay, I'm sure you'll befine, don't be so sure.
He's a member of the AmericanPsychological Association, an
accredited member of theAmerican College of Sports
Medicine and charter member ofthe International Positive
Psychology Association.
Mike is an organizationalpsychologist and behavioral
(00:48):
scientist.
He currently serves as a seniorleader at Active Wellness in
San Francisco and is the authorof the Fun Habit, which was
recently published by Simon andSchuster.
According to Mike fun isn'tfrivolous.
It's vital for your well-being.
His book is a step-by-step planto bring more pleasure into
(01:13):
your busy life.
So before we get into the funhabit which I would like to, of
course, I read on your websitethat your interest in this
subject started in 2005, whenyou made a major commitment to
fun as an intentional way oflife, announcing the Live Life
Love Project.
Speaker 2 (01:31):
Intentional, not international.
Speaker 1 (01:35):
Intentional?
Yeah, I'm not.
Austin Powers no perhapsinternational too, who knows, I
know I like that Okay, I can'tchange it up.
We'll add that to your bio,please.
Please, tell me a little bitmore about that.
So what happened in 2005 thatgot you sort of on this journey?
Speaker 2 (01:53):
Yeah.
So I think that's theculmination.
You know, oftentimes when welook to creating bios, you know
sound bites or coalescing of alot of bullet points, right.
And so I think that more is anode to the fact that the
International PositivePsychology Association was
formed by a gentleman by thename of Dr Marty Sugglemann
(02:13):
around that time and I got aninvitation to be a part of that,
my mentor.
That got me into the world ofpsychology and again you said it
.
But oftentimes when I'm on apsychiatrist or psychological
podcast, I like to make surefolks know I'm an organizational
psychologist.
I don't have a clinicalbackground, although I've
studied autonomy in the sense ofthe workplace quite
(02:37):
significantly.
But I was really interested inpeak performance, my mentor,
michael Gervais, who's known inthat space.
He was a clinical psychologistfor the Seattle Seahawks and has
a popular podcast himselfcalled Finding Mastery.
I just serendipitously gotaccess to him when he was early
in his career and he very muchhas stayed on that track right,
(02:58):
and so I started drinking fromhis wisdom.
But I soon found that this ideaof peak performance didn't have
a high resonance for me,especially because I had met
Michael, because I was burnt outand so this budding field.
You know, cheeks at Me High'sflow is starting to become
popular and Sugglemann's work,obviously and you know I could
(03:21):
name drop a bunch of folks butpeople were starting to get
interested and so for folks thatdon't know what positive
psychology is, it's essentiallya way to look at psychological
tools for betterment, because upuntil that point right, we
primarily looked at these toolsof psychology to treat clinical
outcomes, and so Sugglemannbrought together folks from all
(03:43):
sorts of walks of life, you know, to create this association,
and that that happened in 2005.
So that that's the ode to thatdate.
When I started to look at, youknow, sort of the corpus of the
academic work and the other sortof, you know, a milestone
(04:04):
although it's horrible to kindof frame it in that realm was
2016, 2017.
I had essentially over optimizedthose tools, you know, where I
had really created this overly,this over concern about my own
happiness, and around that timemy brother unexpectedly passed
(04:27):
away from a pulmonary embolism,and so I was trying to use these
tools of optimism and gratitude, sort of will, myself out of
that malaise, to my owndetriment.
And so some of the book alsoimpacts that, because around
that time we've learned, andyou're probably aware of this,
but there's been a lot ofresearch that, especially in the
(04:47):
West, this over emphasis onhappiness and always trying to
be happy all the time hasactually led to some.
You know what we callornamental hygiene, and
certainly there's data suggestsclinical outcomes as well.
Speaker 1 (05:04):
Yes.
Speaker 2 (05:04):
Was that a lot, I'm sorry.
Speaker 1 (05:06):
No, that's fine, that's fine.
You said over-concerned aboutmy happiness.
I think you said that right,that's correct.
Speaker 2 (05:14):
And I really took that from the researcher in this
area that I really likealthough her work certainly been
replicated is Dr Iris Mouse outof University of California,
Berkeley, and so I always liketo clarify that the work in this
field isn't necessarily valuinghappiness or wanting people to
flourish, wanting people tothrive.
If you value happiness as anideal and you want to foster
(05:36):
that within your family unit,you want to design a life where
it's abundant in your life, andthat's certainly what I talk
about in the book.
There doesn't seem to beanything problematic in that
area.
It's that you know the kind ofto boil it down to an internet
meme, right, this idea of goodvibes only when you create this
dissonance, if you know you havea bad day and all of a sudden
(05:57):
you're like, well, I'm notsupposed to have bad days, right
.
Or you over quantify happiness,which we've done essentially
with subject to well being,right, and in academia, that
that serves a purpose, right.
But when lay people kind ofoverlay this academic work and
say, hey, let's look at yourhappiness on a scale of zero to
10.
What happens when you create alife where you're always in that
(06:19):
nine or 10 zone and you have ahealth event or you naturally
have loss, because that's a partof life, right, there's no way
to sort of go up.
And then so, all of a sudden,the space so that you really
enjoyed and you don't have theemotional flexibility to
navigate these rough waters allof a sudden, can you know, send
you down quite a downward spiral.
(06:41):
In fact, you know, I, eventhough it was quite academic in
nature your previous podcast was, you know, Steve out of UCLA
talked about that in a lot ofhis research.
Right, we know that this isn'tjust with regards to
psychological impact, itactually begins to have
physiological impact as well.
So in that context, it becomesquite important to make sure
(07:04):
that not only are we fosteringemotional flexibility, but we're
also finding a way where folkscan find joy in the things that
they do, rather than always kindof fixating, you know, on some
sort of outcome where they'regoing to quote unquote arrive at
happiness.
Speaker 1 (07:20):
So you are really advocating a more balanced view
as opposed to the tyranny ofpositivity.
That's correct.
I was.
I was reading the other dayspeaking of that.
I was reading the other dayabout Samantha Irby, author of
quietly hostile.
Are you familiar with her atall?
Speaker 2 (07:41):
Vaguely.
I'm not.
I don't have a deepunderstanding.
Speaker 1 (07:45):
Well, well, neither do I, but I know this, that
she's very overweight, and shesaid this is a quote.
My body doesn't work right.
It's hard to love it when itgives me so many issues.
Also, can I just say thetyranny around loving yourself
is bonkers to me.
Speaker 2 (08:04):
Well, and I think that's what's interesting in
context, we might be jumping alittle bit ahead, so feel free
to reel me in.
But I think another thing Iunpack in the book is that a lot
of us look at these broad basedinterventions, yeah, and can
find discomfort in the factthey're not working for us, and
don't realize that when we'retalking about applied science,
(08:26):
all of this is in a normal curve.
So the one that I think hasgotten highlighted the most from
the field of positivepsychology is Sonny Lubomirsky
out of University of Riversideexcuse me, uc Riverside looking
at gratitude and how we know,gratitude is an essential tool.
It's certainly fundamental tohelping folks support their
(08:48):
psychological well-being.
But this idea that you createan intervention where you force
someone or strongly suggest youfind three things a day to be
grateful for, if you findyourself in a position like the
person that you mentioned, andthat's not necessarily an
appropriate response to whatyou're dealing with you can
actually cause moral injury andpsychological harm.
(09:12):
So that's another thing I'mtrying to bring light to is that
if something's not necessarilyworking for you, then chuck it
right.
But ultimately, I believe thatmost of us do want to find joy
in the things that we're doingand if we look at those things
critically generally, we canimprove our circumstances.
Speaker 1 (09:31):
So in your book, the fun habit, what are some of the
sort of main points that youemphasize in your book?
What should people do to getinto the fun habit?
Speaker 2 (09:47):
Yeah, so at the broadest lens it's really about
time affluence, right, we knowfrom a lot of studies and, like
I said, my academic research wasprimarily in this idea of
autonomy.
So I looked at it first withina workplace environment and we
know there's a pretty directline.
There's some causal studies andcertainly a ton of correlative
(10:09):
studies that suggest when youlack autonomy within your work
life, you see both poorphysiological outcomes as well
as, obviously, psychologicaloutcomes.
So I was like what about thatconstruct within a broader sense
?
Right, because we look at funoftentimes in a lot of the
research is done in play in anacademic environment, whether
(10:30):
that be schools, both at thehigh school level and collegiate
level.
But with regards to hedonictone and how that can improve
sort of your understanding ofhow you have agency and autonomy
in your life, I saw a bigresearch gap and so in the book
I look at that one how can weincrease your time affluence?
(10:53):
Because we know that it has apositive correlation.
Again, looking back at thisconstruct of autonomy and to get
us to the starting line, itessentially is at a micro level.
How do you become aware of howyou're spending your time in any
given week?
Because I think a lot of adultsdon't realize how habitualized
their life is, especially folksin what we call the sandwich
(11:16):
generation.
Right, and for folks that arenot aware of that term, it's
people that are caring forchildren and also aging adults,
which is really a phenomenonthat is pretty unique to this
era.
We're having kids later than weever have, and we also have
parents that are living longerthan they ever have, and so
there's this cohort of folks inthe sandwich generation that
(11:37):
have never existed in modernhistory.
There's some of the most timefor and burnt out folks ever,
and so figuring out ways tomitigate that becomes important,
and one of the first things isto figure out how can you
reclaim agency and autonomy overhow you're doing things,
because a lot of times we can'treorganize your schedule in a
(12:00):
profound way.
That opens up a lot of theseopportunities.
But we can reframe the fact thatif you do take time off the
table for yourself, oftentimesyou'll approach the things that
you have to do with more vigorand vitality and the things that
you have to do as kind of asecond step.
Oftentimes you're doing itthrough the lens of I have to do
it.
Sometimes in the literaturewe'll call this through the lens
(12:23):
of a sense of duty, when reallyyou can reorganize those things
and still accomplish the taskoutcome, but do it in a way that
is enjoyable for you.
And so, you know, oftentimeswe'll talk about things like
passive and active leisure,right, and so an example that I
think that highlights this well,again, you know, through the
lens of parenting are folks thatwatch their kids just sitting
(12:45):
on a bench.
Essentially, you know, engagingin social media really just to
pacify the time when, instead,if they figured out something
that they would actually enjoydoing, because they don't like
spending time at the park, theycould find something that all
three of them could do, right,and so now it's an active
activity, it's creatingpro-social behavior with your
kids.
So, if you believe the work ofDr Paul Zach and others, it's
(13:08):
releasing more oxytocin whichmakes us feel connected and
really does sort of limit someof the limitations of the ego.
And then it creates an index ofmemories that you'll actually
remember, because what weunderstand from neuroscience is
that when you aren't really inthe moment so again you know,
kind of just mindlesslyscrolling social media or you
(13:29):
just don't want to be where yourfeet are you tend to not encode
those memories, right, and soyou lack any benefit of
neuroplasticity because you knowthat encoding is not happening.
And if you really havehabituated your behavior, where
everything is routine, we knowthat those memories tend to be
stored in sort of a singlecognitive unit, right, so you
(13:51):
know.
An example of that is do youremember the hundred times that
you drove to work?
Or do you remember the one wayand that you probably did it
about a hundred times, right?
But if you drive a hundreddifferent, unique ways to work,
you might not remember every one, but you're certainly creating
memories that we believe leadsto cognitive reserve, which
ultimately could stave offcognitive decline later in life.
(14:14):
So I just gave you a bulletlist of reasons why this becomes
fruitful, right?
One, potentially, you knowpro-social behavior, which leads
to a better balance ofneurochemicals, this idea that
we're connected to somethingbigger than ourselves, so that
experiences are meant to be feltas a unit, and you know, in
more of a collective experience.
(14:35):
And then also, you know,potentially, these cognitive
benefits as well.
Speaker 1 (14:41):
You said that those kinds of experiences create
cognitive reserve.
What is meant by that?
What is exactly meant by that?
Speaker 2 (14:50):
So again, it goes back to that encoding of
information, right?
If you look at your brain as ahard drive, if again you have a
single event, we'll go back toyou know, driving to work,
that's really.
You're only using a finite partof that of that hard drive,
right?
And so what we believe is thatif you don't have a ton of you
(15:12):
know sorry to use kind of acasual term but if we don't have
a host of interesting memorieswithin our brain that are all
stored in kind of differentplaces, then ultimately the
brain will start to whittle backbecause it doesn't need, you
(15:33):
know, all those neurons thatweren't put into play.
And so what cognitive reservemeans is that you have created
all of these neural pathways by,you know, learning new things,
by keeping an open mind, byhaving a host, this tapestry,
this mosaic of differentexperiences, and since all of
those things need to be stored,right, that we believe that
(15:53):
those neural pathways have abenefit later in life.
You know, if you are kind of inthe throes of cognitive decline
because they're, the body isable to put them to use, you
know, to stave off memorydeficiencies.
Speaker 1 (16:09):
Okay, that sounds reasonable and logical, but is
there any evidence for that?
Speaker 2 (16:15):
Yes, there absolutely is.
What's the evidence?
The evidence is this idea againof cognitive reserve right, and
so we know that people thathave this tapestry again you
know.
So it really does need to benovel.
When I first entered this space, I was working for a company
(16:36):
called Scientific Brain Training.
They were out of France butthey were competing with brain
game companies like Lemosody outof Stanford, and so we believe
that any sort of novelexperience would lead to this
kind of cognitive reserve right.
What was later found, becausethat work wasn't replicatable,
is that that specificity.
So again, going back to thatidea of routine, it wasn't
(16:57):
creating these neural pathways,it was essentially creating
strong neural pathways, not newones, but strong ones, and
because you were learning a task, specific skill.
And so what we now know islater in life that doesn't
necessarily lead to protectionagainst cognitive reserve.
We'll find folks that aresuffering from things like
(17:17):
cognitive decline or Alzheimer's, that will be able to do those
tasks really well but don'tnecessarily have the ability to
maintain their memory.
But the folks that have createda mosaic so learned a lot of
different things, adventurethrough life and have a host of
different experiences.
There's some science to suggestthat, also the ability to have
(17:40):
an empathetic view to others.
So I don't remember theresearch specifically, but I
believe the intervention and itcould be a small sample size.
I'm always careful here.
But I know that there was aninteresting study where they had
older adults go and listen toopposing political parties and
try and just sympathize withthat view rather than sort of
(18:02):
being trenched in theirviewpoint and kind of want to be
combative.
So with that prime and it wasshown to have a potential
benefit.
So but the main idea here is tohave a cluster of novel
experiences.
So again going back to thathard drive analogy right that
you're creating these neuralpathways that then can get used
(18:25):
later in life once things startto denigrate.
Speaker 1 (18:32):
So, just like we know that it's important to have
diverse bacteria in your gut, sowhat you're saying is that it's
important to have diverseexperiences in your life in
order to continue to functionwell in terms of your brain
(18:53):
activity.
Speaker 2 (18:55):
I would say it's more prophylactic.
I don't one.
I'm not a neuroscientist, soall I'm doing is regurgitating
essentially what was aliterature review for that
chapter of the book.
But it seems to be moreprophylactic.
I mean, we're really at thecusp of understanding cognitive
decline and certainly it's anemerging science.
I think just this year we hadreally the first drug that might
(19:20):
actually be impactful.
I mean, we're so far fromreally understanding.
At first we thought it was afacet of diabetes, then we
thought it was telomeres, thenwe thought it was DNA health.
So I think there's certainlysome really interesting schools
of thought.
I have a loose association withthe Buck Institute, the Bay Area
(19:41):
, that's doing interesting basicscience in that space, but
again it's kind of the wild,wild west.
But what we do seem to havedata to support the idea that,
again, if you have lived a lifewhere you've tried to learn new
things, you've tried to engagein activities that you enjoy, it
(20:03):
tends to be a prophylacticagainst this.
So there are correlativestudies to suggest that it can
add as a protectant.
Is that because it's aCedicoline issue?
Is it again strong neuralpathways and the variety of
(20:24):
those, rather than them beingstrengthened by action and
specificity.
I'm really butting up at theedge of my pay grade there.
Speaker 1 (20:33):
That's fine, you're doing great.
So, coming back to your bookand what you said about a few
minutes ago, so do you advise inyour book that your readers
should perhaps keep a log for aweek in terms of how they spend
their time and then look at itcarefully to see how they can
(20:56):
improve the fun time, thehappiness time?
Speaker 2 (21:00):
Yeah, so I have a basic model in there.
Us Orgps folks love fourquadrant models and so it's
really an exercise of hey, can Iborrow your watch so I can tell
you what time it is Right?
Yes, you know, there's only 168hours in any given week.
Hopefully you're sleeping atleast 50 to 56 hours of those,
(21:22):
and so you really only have tokind of log just over 100 hours
within that week.
And so, even though that's notthe most fun exercise in the
book, being mindful of howyou've habituated your activity
generally always yields lowhanging fruit, because many
adults, when you're like youknow I can pause it.
(21:42):
You know, based on stats, that70 to 80% of your week is
habituated and most people willpush against that, you know,
until they do this type ofexercise.
And often what is unearthed isthat there is an immense amount
of passive leisure within yourschedule.
And again, I'm not yieldingthis at any given listener,
right?
I'm just saying, as you know,kind of you know general
(22:06):
anecdotes that there's alwayssome sort of insight that comes
out of that exercise Like wow,you know, it could be that
you're habitually using socialmedia, it could be.
Wow, I didn't understand that.
I'm in email, you know, 15hours out of my week.
It could be.
I have a relationship ofconvenience where I just don't
(22:27):
want to do this.
It's just, I didn't realizethat I had a choice.
It could be the anecdote of theparent that realized you know,
I just don't like going to thepark.
It's just, that's been ourroutine.
Let me recapture my ability tochange that.
It could be wow, I don't have adate with my partner on the
schedule and we haven't doneanything together, you know, for
(22:49):
four months.
No wonder there might be somestrain, you know, within the two
of us.
So whatever the insight is foryou is going to be specific to
your situation.
But I have found very fewexamples where someone's like,
wow, this was reallyilluminating.
And then you know, you canfigure out, what can we do about
(23:10):
it.
And one of the first steps isgenerally you want to see what
you can stop doing.
Because I think another facet ofwhat you know sometimes is
referred to as positive.
You know toxic positivity islet's just pile more things on
your busy to do list.
Oh, you're burnt out.
Well, here, let's get you tomeditate five hours a week.
Right, I learned that doing mypracticum as a doctoral student.
(23:31):
I was brought in because of mybackground in positive
psychology to help physicianswith burnout and the CMO, and
earnest had, you know, the bestof intentions, but all of the
tools in our toolkit wereessentially overlaying more time
poverty on, you know, avocation that is one of the most
time poor, especially here inthe States, right when, you know
(23:53):
again, a lot of them areevaluated based on load rather
than outcome, although hopefullythat's slowly but surely
changing here with the CMS, andso that was something that I've
always taken to heart when weare looking to do this work.
How can we create the space sothat you don't feel like this is
something that you need to takeon?
(24:13):
It goes back to what DrLuba-Mursky uncovered when you
have, you deliver broad-basedinterventions that might not be
a good fit for your particular,for the person that you're
working with, how can we reducethe things that really aren't
bringing you joy?
I call these agonizing andyielding activities, some of the
(24:34):
activities that take a lot ofenergy, but what's more
insidious is what are the thingsthat don't take a lot of energy
but are essentially keeping youout of an extremely negative
valent state?
For folks that don't know thatword it's a fancy word.
In psychology that means are youenjoying things or you not?
When you're not enjoying yourtime, it can result in things
(24:58):
like boredom, mild annoyance.
If you can pacify thosefeelings, sometimes you're
tricked into feeling like youare enjoying your time.
When you really look at thatcritically, like I wasn't
enjoying my time, I was just outof boredom now, so it felt
better than boredom felt.
When you look at thatcritically, like well, let's
take those activities out andmove them into doing things that
(25:21):
really do bring you joy,because those tend to be
infectious.
The big light bulb moment forme when I was putting this work
together because I wasapproaching it more as a
behavioral scientist how can wemanipulate the variables of your
environment, the people thatyou're with the activities that
you're doing, or potentiallyeven the environment that you're
(25:42):
doing them in?
I landed on a piece of researchout of MIT, stanford and Harvard
that was like wow, okay, sothis isn't just conjecture.
This is clearly something thatdoes have an immense benefit,
but the benefit is down the roadand so it's hard to actualize.
The concept here is called theHadonic Flexibility Principle.
You can Google it.
(26:03):
I'll just give it a broadstroke right now.
What these researchers found isthat, if the crux of the
research was to look, are wetruly pleasure seeking animals?
Because that's always broughtup in philosophy from young on
out.
They wanted to see.
Is that true, or are most ofthe things that were motivated
(26:27):
to do truly through this lens ofpleasure?
What they found out is if youare in a state of malaise or
discomfort then yes,statistically you have a higher
propensity to seek out forms ofescapism, things like drinking,
poor uses of time.
But for the folks that weredeliberate about having fun, so
(26:50):
engaging things that really litthem up, these were the folks
that stopped looking for funthings because their fun cup was
full and actually were the onesthat showed up the next day
with more vigor and vitality totake on the harder challenges.
Paradoxically, they were waymore productive than the folks
that have filled their liveswith busy work.
(27:10):
But I think one of the reallyfun things about the study and
it was huge right, 20,000 samplesize it came from time use
studies.
But it's not one of thesecasual inferences thematic
analysis studies.
This was Dr Tuck, who's now atOxford as one of the leaders in
statistical analysis.
(27:32):
He did a lot of the work forCOVID out of the EU.
What they found is that thesefolks not only are more
productive, but they have thecognitive resilience to be
innovative.
What we know is when you'reburnt out sometimes it's
referred to as ego depletion youtend to have to go through life
using the heuristics andalgorithms that have served you.
(27:54):
It goes back to thatspecificity because those things
are really comfortable Throughdeliberate practice.
Folks that do know what they'redoing can do it very well.
But the idea to think outsideof the box, to think nonlinear,
to be creative, to be curious,to think of innovative solutions
becomes depleted because wedon't have the wherewithal to
(28:17):
engage in that type of activity.
The folks that are able to whatwe call in organizational
psychology have transitionrituals from work to their
leisure life, sometimes theirleisure life.
Again, I'm not villainizing theworkaholic.
Sometimes leisure life is work,but things that they want to do
, like for you and I writing abook.
Someone might look at us and go, wow, they still work all the
(28:40):
time, but at least it'ssomething that we want to do,
and so that's an importantdistinction.
For folks that are able to dothat deliberately, they live
this blended life.
A lot of folks don't like touse balance anymore, because
that suggests you have to dothis all the time.
It's more, how do you get toengage in the activities that
(29:03):
you're doing throughout yourweek in a joyful way, in a
manner that fills you up?
For me, that was like all rightnow I am backed by some
rigorous science as well.
Speaker 1 (29:17):
So you are working in San Francisco.
Is it At that wellness?
Speaker 2 (29:23):
Act of wellness correct.
Speaker 1 (29:24):
Yes, when you come across people who are simply not
curious, as I'm sure you have Ihave, in fact there seem to be
a lot of people who are notcurious, who don't want to learn
anything new, how do youmotivate them to move, as you
(29:47):
said, outside their box, outsidetheir box of comfort?
How do you motivate them?
Speaker 2 (29:58):
I approach most of those situations with a degree
of empathy.
I think again, what's becomeproblematic in our space is we
use these blunt instruments anddon't do them in a sequential
manner.
So any form of mastery isreally going to require someone
to understand the process, andso oftentimes if someone has a
(30:20):
packed schedule and they're likeI can't just find an hour in my
week, let alone maybe two orthree hours daily, okay, let's
start with that one day.
How can we figure out what itis that would potentially bring
you joy?
And so having that invitationto sort of quote unquote, be
playful, I think is an importantstep, and sometimes it might
(30:42):
take two or three interactionswith that individual.
But once you get them to kindof be mindful of the benefits of
this generally, you can getthem on board.
Another thing is I show grace tofolks that just don't want to
be curious or not have fun.
I think, in the spirit ofgetting wiser as I get older
(31:02):
when I was first starting thiswork, everyone has to be fun
I've unearthed to kind of loopback to the beginning of the
podcast.
It is clear that fun andpleasure and getting hedonic
value out of things that we dois sort of a restorative path to
(31:22):
be really productive.
It might not be for some folks,so I don't need 100% conversion
rate into these ideals, but forfolks that do feel that that's
missing, I think having thatinvitation is an important first
step, as pedestrian as thatsounds Because a lot of folks
(31:45):
are in that context because oftheir busy lives have created so
many heuristics and algorithmsand systems to just get through
their day.
They haven't thought aboutbeing curious, so they really do
need that invitation.
Speaker 1 (32:01):
Yes, yes, very good.
So was there anything in yourown background that you think
contributed to your interest inthis subject?
Speaker 2 (32:11):
Yeah.
So going back to my work inautonomy, I think that was the
natural progression Again theloss of my brother.
I kept trying to will myselfout of that malaise.
I essentially became an onlychild so I had to navigate the
feelings of my parents and dothat as now sort of the
(32:32):
figurehead as they were workingout that traumatic experience.
Through that process of beingpolyana about my situation and
lacking the emotionalflexibility to navigate it, I
got pretty close to a clinicaloutcome myself.
I did become quite passionateabout what is happening here
(32:53):
because it was clear that a lotof folks we're also in the same
space for a host of differentreasons, whether that to be
divorce, job change, the loss ofa loved one, the change of a
significant situation or evenjust burnout and loneliness,
which we know are prevalent inthe Western world, the fact that
(33:14):
so many people were sufferingthis ill fate of essentially
time poverty, it became reallyimportant for me to figure out
not only what was the issue here, but how could we solve it.
Speaker 1 (33:28):
So what made you become a psychologist?
Speaker 2 (33:32):
Again my mentor, michael Jervais.
So I had a really bigentrepreneurial win coming out
of USC At that time I thought mycareer path was going to be
marketing and I had a successfulexit out of that company.
Then I tried to start a secondcompany that failed miserably.
So I had a lot of big feelingsthen.
(33:53):
I think there's always thiscurse when you hit a significant
success at the onset becauseyou feel like you're invincible.
So being able to work with sucha figure head in psychology
like Michael Jervais, that was ablessing and an invitation to
be curious about the fieldmyself.
Speaker 1 (34:15):
So are you currently in an intimate relationship?
Speaker 2 (34:19):
Yes, I'm married to my partner, anna, and have two
children that I adore.
How?
Speaker 1 (34:26):
old are your children , 11 and 8.
Would you like them to followin your footsteps?
Speaker 2 (34:32):
As an organizational psychologist?
Yes, I don't know.
That's a great question.
I think they're always jokethat because I talk about fun in
such scientific terms, eventhough I have a very endearing
relationship with my daughter.
And, to answer your question ata more personal level, we're
(34:54):
flexing our curiosity all thetime.
One of the funnest things I'dlove to do with her is take
different classes.
I talk about that publicly.
Right now we're enjoyingcooking classes together, but
she always quips that somehowI've been able to take the fun
out of fun science because I usewords like propellants and
hedonic tone and things of thatnature.
I don't know.
(35:15):
My daughter really excels as animpasse.
If she went into clinicalpsychology I'm sure she would
make her own dent in theuniverse.
My son is very analytical, likehis mother An engineer, an
architect.
It's really hard to fathom whatmight be ahead for him, but
right now certainly he's showingthose type of attributes.
Speaker 1 (35:39):
How do you yourself have fun in life?
Speaker 2 (35:43):
I'm really leaning into engagement that involves
other folks.
Again, like I said, I talkquite publicly about making sure
that I'm deliberate spendingtime with my kids in ways that's
not just fun for them but funfor myself.
I still make sure there'sintermittent date nights with my
wife so that we're connectingon that level.
(36:05):
From an activity standpoint,I'm trying to get to the beach
as much as I can because I'vealways been a fan of surfing.
Then, at a professional level,really trying to use this
crossroads of psychology andbehavioral science to create
environments that draw people inSometimes we call them
honeypots but that give themaccess to ways of betterment, so
(36:28):
that you're creating anenvironment that's really
scaffolding For folks that wantto better themselves but, to
your point, feel lost in theprocess.
How can we create tools thatreduce that cognitive barrier to
entrance?
For example, I'm working withone company called EGEN because
we realized that and it's quiteprofound when you think about it
(36:49):
because a lot of folks, if youask them in qualitative surveys
so you do focus groups do youknow how to work out?
Unfortunately, this is what youlearn as a behavioral scientist
.
A lot of those upstream toolsreally aren't helpful.
People are going to tell youthey know how to work out, but
then you watch them on theequipment and that intimidation
and the mild cognitivedissonance of not really knowing
(37:10):
how to use it leads toattrition.
You see huge dropouts in mostof these wellness studies unless
they're formulated withselection bias, which is a real
problem, especially in workplacewellness, which is the RAND
Corporation shine the light onthat.
But if you find ways to make itfun, the engagement to be
self-serving, you enable peopleto use their autonomy and
(37:33):
explore the space and science.
We call it the territory,instead of giving them a map
that's really discreet.
You see all of these metrics goup in a positive way and so
I've really been enjoying thatside of the science of how do we
use behavioral science so thatwe're not just doing broad-based
interventions because we knowthey work, but we're making
these interventions moreinviting and more fun so that
(37:56):
people stick to them and even ifthey do need to attrit out, we
increase the rates of recidivismback into the programs.
Speaker 1 (38:03):
So, is there another book in the future for you.
Speaker 2 (38:08):
I think so.
As I mentioned, I just got tovisit your lovely country, and
one of the ideas in positivepsychology that I found
fascinating, that was brought upin the Congress this year, is
the difference betweenpsychological thriving and
psychological flourishing, andso thriving is the type of work
(38:28):
you do.
How do we take an individual andgive them a better toolbox so
that they can thrive in anygiven situation?
They can either get themselvesout of bad marriage or, if they
have a biological predispositionto a clinical issue, we can
support them on a path towardsbetterment, where flourishing is
(38:49):
really more population-basedinterventions.
How do we create an environmentthat allows people to thrive
despite their circumstance?
And so, even though it's asubtle distinction, one that fit
well with the work that I amdoing, because I don't
necessarily want to treat folksat the individual level but if I
can have an impact by creatingspaces that allow anyone to come
(39:12):
into those environments andenjoy the benefits of betterment
, that would be something that Ithink I could spend the rest of
my life doing.
So that's an area of impactthat I'd like to foster and, I
think, the gaining wisdom inthat area, especially because
there is yet again a bigresearch gap in how we do that,
(39:34):
since these constructs arefairly new kind of delineating
thriving from flourishing, Ithink would make an interesting
book.
Speaker 1 (39:42):
Sounds interesting.
Yes, so my final question whatis the most important lesson you
have learned about life as oftoday?
Speaker 2 (39:53):
I think to not be so.
Outcome focused, right, andthat's really hard, you know,
oftentimes we talk about propermental hygiene, being able to
hold two conflicting ideals andbe comfortable with that, right.
Yet when we conceptualize that,it's really hard to sort of get
(40:14):
that skill into play.
And so so much, especially inthe Western world, of our
motivation.
The underpinning is meritocracy, right, Because we want the
best podcast.
Right, we want to be the mostprolific researcher.
Both my parents were professors,and so you know perish or you
(40:35):
know publish or perish.
Publish or perish, yes, butthat bleeds into everything we
do, right, If we're not havingthe most fun, if we're not
ranked well against the Joneseswithin our social structure, we
can really live these unhappylives, right, Even though we say
that that's not something wewant to do.
And so, for me, how do youdecouple the outcome and so
(40:58):
still thrive to be the best youcan?
But if that doesn't work out,you know, allow yourself to move
on and really have enjoyed theprocess, rather than, you know,
deriving all of your enjoyment.
You know, through this sort ofend note Because, one, it's a
lot more sustainable.
Two, it goes back to what wewere talking about You're gonna
encode a lot more memoriesBecause, instead of the trophy
(41:21):
or the finish line being thething that you remember, you
remember, you know every workoutwith your friend or your
partner.
You remember the last, youremember the times it didn't
work out but it still turnedinto an amazing experience,
right?
Maybe that wrong turn on thehike that led to a majestic view
and that sense of awe Insteadof I just did it, all you know,
to try to place it, you know, atthe end of life, and so for me,
(41:44):
that's been the most profoundhow do you decouple the outcome
but then still honor the outcomeas something that's an
honorable thing?
Speaker 1 (41:54):
Very wise words, very , very wise.
Thank you, Mike.
My guest today was Mike Rucker,and he is the author of the Fun
Habit, recently published.
A great book, not just aboutfun, but about how to live well
and live happily and joyfully.
So thanks again, and until wemeet again, take care.
(42:16):
Thank you for having me.
It was a pleasure.
Bye-bye.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.