[Days of Broken Arrows]

I came across an article about a research study headlined "The More Confident You Are, The More Likely You’ll Be Successful" and subtitled on the Web as "Confidence Drives Mobility, Not Merit." (LINK)

This was really an eye-opener for me. To sum it up, the researchers said that over-confident people become successful because they're more likely to stick with things when the going gets rough, whereas the rest of us see that initial failure as confirmation that we're really the losers we think we are. (OK that last part was mine, but you get the idea.)

I thought this would make for good reading because it confirms some of the principles of game -- like being Alpha and "fake-it-till-you-make-it." And it does so in study form. It also influences the way people view us, which I'm sure we all know on one level, but it's nice to see it confirmed outside these parts:

"Overconfidence is perceived as actual ability, these people send out more “competence cues”; they talk louder, have more confidence in their opinions and use more emphatic gestures, all of which is wrongly interpreted as signs of actual ability."

Why was I looking such a study? Because this year I thought I'd try my hand at getting deeper into the stock market. I did research, listened to advice from people on here (all of which was 100 percent right) and made lots of money...

...on paper. Sad to say, I didn't actually buy any of the stocks except one. Had I bought even half, I'd be sitting pretty. Lesson learned: our achievements, like investing, are only one part intellect and another part having the confidence to act on what we know.

I've noticed with my nephews that some kids just seem to come into the world full of confidence. Some don't. I was one that didn't. I assume others of you are the same, and that's why you sought out the game/manosphere community.

This has been a consistent problem with me, so much so that it was pointed out when I once participated in a "group psychology" session at work. Maybe you all can apply the fix to your life better than I did. Becoming aware of it is a start.

[bacan]

Nice post. There is definitely value to giving off signals of confidence when you don't have it and persisting through hard tasks because you're confident you'll eventually get through it.

On the other hand, overconfidence has its own set of risks too.

If I had more time, I'd really go into the assumptions of the economic model and simulation they use.

[Menace]

Good post, but I would be cautious about applying confidence principles to the stock market.

[scorpion]

Overconfidence is a doubled-edged sword. It works out really well for some, but really poorly for others. It's as likely to send you to jail or an early grave as it is the executive boardroom. Basically, consider overconfidence the most extreme manifestation of the masculine quality of risk taking. It's like doubling down on every hand you get in life, which can work out well if you hit a hot streak, but not so well if you go cold.

I've known a few wildly overconfident guys in my life, and the common characteristic they all shared was a lack of introspection and reflection. They aren't the type to spend a lot of time thinking or planning, they typically just act and see what happens. I think the best results come when you combine an overconfident personality with a reasonably high IQ, because then you're at least smart enough to avoid the major fuckups that less intelligent guys will blunder into due to overconfidence.

[The Beast1]

There is a definite fine line.

I was born confident. I remember doing things and taking risks that were out of this world, but for some reason it was beaten out of me by my overzealous mother.

Since then, I've been rebuilding it slowly. You definitely need a high IQ to know when to leap. Because leaping without another pad is one of the riskiest things you can do. Gotta hedge your bets.

[The Lizard of Oz]

I think there are two separate things here: having a confident demeanor/attitude in your interactions with others, and being a risk taker in the decisions you make.

Confident demeanor is what is described in this quote in the OP:

Quote:

"Overconfidence is perceived as actual ability, these people send out more “competence cues”; they talk louder, have more confidence in their opinions and use more emphatic gestures, all of which is wrongly interpreted as signs of actual ability."

This is completely true -- talking louder, stating your opinions with confidence, using emphatic gestures, etc will be perceived by others as signs of leadership and competence and will help you be more successful (as long as it doesn't seem like a caricature or very obviously fake, though to a large extent you can make it a deliberate habit and fake it until it's second nature). There is really no downside to this; it's pure benefit.

Risk taking in your actual day-to-day decisions is a different thing, and is definitely a mixed bag. You want to have enough of it to be able to take opportunities that present themselves, but not so much that you're foolhardy and reckless. It's a matter of balance and intuition.

In other words, always act confident and even over-confident in front of other people; but find a balance between confidence and prudence in your actual decision-making.

[RouteBackwards]

(02-26-2014 07:59 AM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

I came across an article about a research study headlined "The More Confident You Are, The More Likely You’ll Be Successful" and subtitled on the Web as "Confidence Drives Mobility, Not Merit." (LINK)

This was really an eye-opener for me. To sum it up, the researchers said that over-confident people become successful because they're more likely to stick with things when the going gets rough, whereas the rest of us see that initial failure as confirmation that we're really the losers we think we are. (OK that last part was mine, but you get the idea.)

I thought this would make for good reading because it confirms some of the principles of game -- like being Alpha and "fake-it-till-you-make-it." And it does so in study form. It also influences the way people view us, which I'm sure we all know on one level, but it's nice to see it confirmed outside these parts:

"Overconfidence is perceived as actual ability, these people send out more “competence cues”; they talk louder, have more confidence in their opinions and use more emphatic gestures, all of which is wrongly interpreted as signs of actual ability."

Why was I looking such a study? Because this year I thought I'd try my hand at getting deeper into the stock market. I did research, listened to advice from people on here (all of which was 100 percent right) and made lots of money...

...on paper. Sad to say, I didn't actually buy any of the stocks except one. Had I bought even half, I'd be sitting pretty. Lesson learned: our achievements, like investing, are only one part intellect and another part having the confidence to act on what we know.

I've noticed with my nephews that some kids just seem to come into the world full of confidence. Some don't. I was one that didn't. I assume others of you are the same, and that's why you sought out the game/manosphere community.

This has been a consistent problem with me, so much so that it was pointed out when I once participated in a "group psychology" session at work. Maybe you all can apply the fix to your life better than I did. Becoming aware of it is a start.

It sounds weird, but I dislike crediting game theory with my successes because one half of the manosphere has made my ideas about things, like traditional mystery method, seem so lame. However, game theory really changed me in a good way, especially motivation wise, because I brought on a mentality that I can tackle anything if I put the work into it.

I have a lot of hobbies that have become more then that, because I've put in so much work into them, and to some level, become over confident with them and mastered them.

I've approached things with the mentality that, "If the risk is high and that's why I fear it, if that fear isn't going physically kill me, then I'm going to give it a try." In some way, I think it's normal to have an ego, but being over confident is a matter of side stepping your ego for a minute; in addition, I think it's excellent to master your anxiety, look at it as something that's preparing your body physiologically to get ready for a situation you're not used to, and realize that until you give it a try, and keep trying, that even if you fail, you're one step closer to success.

If I ever wrote a game book, I think 90% of it would not be practice and applying said practices to approaching women, but to understanding yourself and trying to build confidence. Rex Style, my favourite pick up book, focused on this to some level, but missed the point in others - Rex Style applied more to gentlemen of game who were high energy extroverts a lot, but the focus that did apply to me that worked - learning that your fears are irrational, facing your fears, and generally doing what you want because you want, really impacted me for the better because it pushed me to adapt to this mentality of "if it's not going to kill me, then I have to give it a try" ideology.

[OkStudies]

Our society: Emotions first, reason second

[Bad Hussar]

That confidence is king is very much the idea of our time. An alternative view was presented to me the other day when I watched a documentary on Abe Lincoln on the history channel. During the first 20 minutes or so of the show I was thinking to myself: "Jeez, this guy was one of the most annoying, self-pitying cry-babies I've ever heard of. THIS was the greatest president the USA has ever had?"

Basically Lincoln suffered severely from depression (just depression, not even manic-depression) throughout his life and this is pretty much the central idea of the documentary. The commentators claim is that it is precisely this depression and self-doubt that resulted in Lincoln greatness since it made him more empathetic. Another idea that was presented, which I had heard before, is that according to research depressed people have a better grasp of reality than normal or happy/confident people. I mean, any buffoon can just pretend to be confident, and usually get away with it, but as a president you are tested much more than the average man. It's more important that you have a grasp on reality. You are the top of the heap. No one else to defer to when it hits the fan.

One of the directors conclusions was that there's no way Lincoln, or someone like him, would get elected POTUS today. The people would rather have a seemingly confident clown, rather than an introspective depressive, even if the later would do a much better job. Not necessarily progress...

But for everyday life I generally agree with the confident, "fake it till you make it" stance. It's just that it has limitations. The higher up you go, the less it can do for you.

[samsamsam]

Weird, I generally avoid dealing with people who are loud and have emphatic gestures. I generally don't consider them confident, I consider them working hard to cover insecurities.

Experience has told me hype people generally fail to deliver. There are some exceptions.

I generally respond to humble folks who seem to have a strong work ethic, they usually get my money when I am investing money. Not they hype guys.

I put some money into a movie once. Guess who stuck around and who bolted? The straight forward, humble one who couldn't promise me that the money would be earned back (I wouldn't have invested if the person had guaranteed success). The talker and his talker buddy bolted long ago. But I knew he wasn't reliable from the beginning. I bet on the hard working one. It will probably work out - just taking longer than expected.

[The Lizard of Oz]

(02-26-2014 01:51 PM)samsamsam Wrote:  

Weird, I generally avoid dealing with people who are loud and have emphatic gestures. I generally don't consider them confident, I consider them working hard to cover insecurities.

Experience has told me hype people generally fail to deliver. There are some exceptions.

I generally respond to humble folks who seem to have a strong work ethic, they usually get my money when I am investing money. Not they hype guys.

I put some money into a movie once. Guess who stuck around and who bolted? The straight forward, humble one who couldn't promise me that the money would be earned back (I wouldn't have invested if the person had guaranteed success). The talker and his talker buddy bolted long ago. But I knew he wasn't reliable from the beginning. I bet on the hard working one. It will probably work out - just taking longer than expected.

Yeah -- guys who overdo it seem try-hard and project insecurity rather than confidence. It all depends on the context. If you're trying to sell someone on something it's better to seem reliable, trustworthy and not glibly over-confident. In fact part of what makes a great salesman is someone who doesn't seem like a salesman and doesn't seem to have any hype.

But for a lot of guys who are naturally shy and retiring, there can be a huge benefit in forcing themselves to speak up more, carry themselves with more confidence and have a somewhat more aggressive body language. All within reason.

[samsamsam]

(02-26-2014 02:00 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  

But for a lot of guys who are naturally shy and retiring, there can be a huge benefit in forcing themselves to speak up more, carry themselves with more confidence and have a somewhat more aggressive body language. All within reason.

100% agree. I would have someone humble and "make" them a bit more animated than trying to take an animated one and calm them down.

I would rather have a hard working person and "force" them to have more fun, then trying to get a person who is only about fun and try to get them to work.

I would rather try to get a shy girl to sleep around a bit more than try to get a slut to close her legs - LOL.

I know there is no perfect person - and that we are all on a journey of personal growth. But I think movements in certain directions are more controllable and, have the chance of success, than the other way around.

[Sombro]

I think this works the other way around, at least initially.

I was never confident, but I was quietly curious, sharp and persistent about certain things.
It wasn't until I achieved success in certain things (=merit) that I had confidence, and not just in those 'certain things,' but a wider perspective of how to look at any challenge.
Now that found confidence drives success.

It's a chicken & egg thing.

ymmv

[nek]

You need both. Confidence and ability to actually make it. Confidence pushes you to try. Ability, well, is ability. The Dunning-Kruger effect is interesting too...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%...ger_effect

[Feisbook Control]

(02-26-2014 10:52 AM)scorpion Wrote:  

Overconfidence is a doubled-edged sword. It works out really well for some, but really poorly for others. It's as likely to send you to jail or an early grave as it is the executive boardroom. Basically, consider overconfidence the most extreme manifestation of the masculine quality of risk taking. It's like doubling down on every hand you get in life, which can work out well if you hit a hot streak, but not so well if you go cold.

I've known a few wildly overconfident guys in my life, and the common characteristic they all shared was a lack of introspection and reflection. They aren't the type to spend a lot of time thinking or planning, they typically just act and see what happens. I think the best results come when you combine an overconfident personality with a reasonably high IQ, because then you're at least smart enough to avoid the major fuckups that less intelligent guys will blunder into due to overconfidence.

I'm with you on the first paragraph, and then the first two sentences of the second, but I think you're wrong about the remainder of the second paragraph. The smart guys generally make fewer fuck ups than the stupid guys, but when smart guys get it wrong, they REALLY get it wrong, and overconfidence is no less a part of it.

For example: Long-Term Capital Management and Blowing Up: Taleb vs Niederhoffer

[Sombro]

Quote:

I'm with you on the first paragraph, and then the first two sentences of the second, but I think you're wrong about the remainder of the second paragraph. The smart guys generally make fewer fuck ups than the stupid guys, but when smart guys get it wrong, they REALLY get it wrong, and overconfidence is no less a part of it.

Truly smart guys learn from other people's fuckups.

[scorpion]

(02-27-2014 01:04 AM)Feisbook Control Wrote:  

(02-26-2014 10:52 AM)scorpion Wrote:  

Overconfidence is a doubled-edged sword. It works out really well for some, but really poorly for others. It's as likely to send you to jail or an early grave as it is the executive boardroom. Basically, consider overconfidence the most extreme manifestation of the masculine quality of risk taking. It's like doubling down on every hand you get in life, which can work out well if you hit a hot streak, but not so well if you go cold.

I've known a few wildly overconfident guys in my life, and the common characteristic they all shared was a lack of introspection and reflection. They aren't the type to spend a lot of time thinking or planning, they typically just act and see what happens. I think the best results come when you combine an overconfident personality with a reasonably high IQ, because then you're at least smart enough to avoid the major fuckups that less intelligent guys will blunder into due to overconfidence.

I'm with you on the first paragraph, and then the first two sentences of the second, but I think you're wrong about the remainder of the second paragraph. The smart guys generally make fewer fuck ups than the stupid guys, but when smart guys get it wrong, they REALLY get it wrong, and overconfidence is no less a part of it.

For example: Long-Term Capital Management and Blowing Up: Taleb vs Niederhoffer

I agree with you, but by major fuckups I was talking more along the lines of getting yourself thrown in prison or killed, which happens to a lot of overconfident guys with low IQs.

Losing a lot of money in a bad trade is a major fuckup, sure, but getting your head smashed in a back alley because you were overly confident at the wrong time is worse.

[Valhalla]

There's a fine line between over confident and try hard(these are the most annoying types of guys)

How do you know where to stop?

[Feisbook Control]

(02-27-2014 02:05 AM)scorpion Wrote:  

(02-27-2014 01:04 AM)Feisbook Control Wrote:  

(02-26-2014 10:52 AM)scorpion Wrote:  

Overconfidence is a doubled-edged sword. It works out really well for some, but really poorly for others. It's as likely to send you to jail or an early grave as it is the executive boardroom. Basically, consider overconfidence the most extreme manifestation of the masculine quality of risk taking. It's like doubling down on every hand you get in life, which can work out well if you hit a hot streak, but not so well if you go cold.

I've known a few wildly overconfident guys in my life, and the common characteristic they all shared was a lack of introspection and reflection. They aren't the type to spend a lot of time thinking or planning, they typically just act and see what happens. I think the best results come when you combine an overconfident personality with a reasonably high IQ, because then you're at least smart enough to avoid the major fuckups that less intelligent guys will blunder into due to overconfidence.

I'm with you on the first paragraph, and then the first two sentences of the second, but I think you're wrong about the remainder of the second paragraph. The smart guys generally make fewer fuck ups than the stupid guys, but when smart guys get it wrong, they REALLY get it wrong, and overconfidence is no less a part of it.

For example: Long-Term Capital Management and Blowing Up: Taleb vs Niederhoffer

I agree with you, but by major fuckups I was talking more along the lines of getting yourself thrown in prison or killed, which happens to a lot of overconfident guys with low IQs.

Losing a lot of money in a bad trade is a major fuckup, sure, but getting your head smashed in a back alley because you were overly confident at the wrong time is worse.

Definitely. If you're going to do something risky, make it white collar. The worst that can happen is that you'll get sent to a low security prison with a rec room containing table tennis tables. If you're lucky and/or what you did was really bad (i.e. could crash the world economy), you might even get a golden parachute and a slap on the wrist.

[Days of Broken Arrows]

(02-26-2014 09:44 PM)nek Wrote:  

You need both. Confidence and ability to actually make it. Confidence pushes you to try. Ability, well, is ability. The Dunning-Kruger effect is interesting too...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%...ger_effect

"The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which unskilled individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly rating their ability much higher than is accurate."

I'm coining a new term. The "Days of Broken Arrows Effect." It's when you have the knowledge and creativity but feel like you're under a cloud all the time and just don't have the gumption to act. Think Charlie Brown and his eternal rainout life. Maybe some of you have the symptoms. They include:

1). Repeatedly picking stock winners but never buying.

2). Thinking you failed with women, then going back and reading old letters and realizing you completely misunderstood situations.

3). Reading acceptance as rejection because you focused on one irrelevant thing instead of 99 important things.

4). Having ideas for articles and books you're sure will be ignored (or hated), then watching people become famous with those very ideas.

We should form a club where we can sit and have drinks. But the rule would be we can't be at the bar or at a table. We'd have to sit along the sidelines watching the action from a safe distance.

[Scesci]

this sounds more like lack of state control or a utter fear of failure veering to self sabotage

the links below may help you

http://boldanddetermined.com/2014/02/10/...ike-tyson/

The 50th Law book by Robert Greene http://www.amazon.com/The-50th-Law-50-Ce...1000020-20

http://dangerandplay.com/2014/01/14/succ...ll-street/

Quote:

3 states you need to master

1. Certainty – to be certain about that you’re doing.

2. Clarity – to be clear and not overwhelmed.

3. Courage – to have a conviction and not let fear stop you.

we are overwhelmed when we over intellectualize our endeavors

Roosh wrote some stuff about this

http://www.rooshv.com/less-knowledge-is-more

http://www.rooshv.com/less-knowledge-is-more

[DVY]

The people who do the best are those are tremendously under-confident but through sheer power of will become confident. They have both the introspection and the self-imposed gumption to push themselves but realize limitations.

This will often not build empires, but it will make you tremendously successful.

[samsamsam]

Related to success - the tiger mom is back with a new book. She quotes 3 factors for success.

Quote:

The first element in the Triple Package is a superiority complex: a belief in the specialness or exceptionality of one’s group. These ideas are based on having descended from ancient cultures, such as Chinese or Persian empires, being a higher Indian caste member, or believing one is among God’s Chosen People — whether Mormon or Jewish. The implication is that the American value of egalitarianism — all people are created equal — provides an advantage to these “cultural outsiders.”

At the same time these group members think themselves superior, they often feel inferior and insecure — the second element. This can result from embarrassing “status collapse” after immigrating to the U.S., anxiety about being able to provide a home country lifestyle, or parents and families who motivate by never being satisfied with children’s’ level of achievement.

The writer Alfred Kazin recalls, “If there were B’s on tests, the whole house went into mourning.” Feelings of inferiority and insecurity also create a resentment that produces a highly motivating “I’ll show them” mentality.

The final element is impulse control: a single-minded focus on goals without being distracted. More importantly, this trait includes working harder, learning and rebounding from setbacks, and never giving up.

A few weeks ago on ESPN, one of the guy's was talking about his dad and he said his dad told, "The greatest sign of maturity is to delay gratification."

Also relevant is the famous Marshmallow Test - kids were given a marshmallow if they could wait 15 minutes (and not eat the first one) they would get another. They followed up on the kids 40 years later.

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/4655-usi...jail-time/

Quote:

The initial purpose of the experiment was to determine how a child’s mental processes would allow some to delay instant gratification and to study why some children could wait for a second marshmallow.

But the goal of the study was expanded several years later. Mischel decided to track down many of the 653 children who had participated in the earlier study. The purpose was to find out if there was any correlation between those who quickly ate the marshmallow and those who delayed doing so.

Mischel’s questionnaire included every human trait he could think of, such as the ability to plan ahead, how they got along with their peers, or whether they had a criminal record. He also requested their SAT scores.

So what did he find? He discovered that those who quickly ate the marshmallow were more likely to suffer from behavioral problems both in the home and at school. They had trouble paying attention, struggled in stressful situations, and found it difficult to maintain friendships. And they had an increased chance of having a weight problem, trouble with drugs, and being convicted of a crime.

Those children who could wait for 15 minutes had an SAT score that was, on average, 210 points higher than children who could wait only 30 seconds. They were also more likely to come from high-income families, save for their retirement, and study rather than watch TV.

I imagine impulse control allows someone to make a controlled logical decision. Yes, I get the gut often gives the right answer. But in some situations being able to reason through a situation pays off, but you need a little time to sort it out.

[Draugr]

So basically: if you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with your bullshit?

[soup]

I realized that one of my big problems is that unless I feel like I'm the best at something, then I tend to not feel as confident in my ability in that thing. This affects my overall confidence.

This is a problem for me because it means that I have trouble maintaining confidence at different stages of a learning process.

And, we all know that in game, confidence is one of the most important things (charisma is probably the most).

Then the other issue is that once I feel like I'm the best at something, then I can get lazy.

Anyone else have an issue like that?