麻豆传媒

THE Cookie Monster in Sesame Street isn鈥檛 known for his self-restraint, but in 2013 the swivel-eyed biscuit fiend experienced a remarkable transformation. Over a series of episodes, he learned to curb his cravings and avoid eating every cookie he saw in an attempt to gain entry to the Cookie Connoisseurs Club. 鈥淢e want it (but me wait)鈥� is how Cookie Monster described his dilemma in a catchy musical number.

Parents of young viewers may have sensed this storyline had a purpose. It was an attempt to tap into the latest research on self-control, which has been linked to many aspects of success in life. Some argue that it is as important as IQ. Besides inspiring various educational initiatives 鈥� including the 44th season of Sesame Street 鈥� these finding have spawned numerous media articles and self-help books. 鈥淲e are surrounded by messages that more self-control is better and that there basically could not be enough self-control,鈥� says Liad Uziel at Bar-Ilan University in Israel.

But is it time to question some of these assumptions? . He and others have discovered that self-control is a double-edged sword. There is no doubt it has benefits, but too much of it can leave you open to exploitation and undermine both your physical and mental well-being. This presents something of a dilemma for the latest educational reforms 鈥� and indeed for anyone on the road to self-improvement. Fortunately, the findings also hold lessons for us all about when to wield our rod of iron and when it might be better to cut ourselves some slack.

Much of our current understanding of self-control stems from the work of psychologist Walter Mischel (who was also the scientific consultant behind Cookie Monster鈥檚 transformation). Beginning in the 1960s, Mischel鈥檚 studies presented children with a tray of tasty treats, including marshmallows. The kids were given two options: they could either eat one treat immediately, or wait for a few minutes while the researcher left the room to run an errand and then have two. scored better on their SAT college entrance exams, were less likely to smoke, take drugs or become obese and were less physically aggressive.

Beyond marshmallows

Such delayed gratification is one form of self-control, but there are more. In psychology, the term describes a variety of behaviours that help us modify our immediate actions in the pursuit of long-term goals. That might mean inhibiting unwanted emotions (so you don鈥檛 shout at your boss during a disagreement), resisting distractions (like Facebook) or persevering with difficult problems. We can measure these aspects in various ways, from behavioural tasks to personality tests, but .

Admittedly, a few results haven鈥檛 been replicated, with a recent experiment finding that the . Nevertheless, the consensus is still that self-control holds sway over everything from professional and relationship success to the risk of landing in jail.

Given the obvious benefits, the finding that self-control can grow with practice and generalises across many domains was welcome news. Simply correcting posture or deliberately avoiding slang speech, for instance, can strengthen self-control and increase students鈥� persistence during difficult academic work. In another study, smokers who gave up sweets 鈥� a test of willpower 鈥� were also more likely to quit cigarettes. . What鈥檚 more, while previous studies suggested that self-control is temporarily depleted by overexertion, more recent research indicates that it is essentially unlimited.

It is little wonder that these findings caught the eye of educational reformers. In the US, the Knowledge is Power Program was one of the first to apply them in schools. It aims to of children through small acts, so that they find it easier to exert greater self-control in all areas of their lives. For example, they are encouraged to maintain eye contact with whoever is speaking in the classroom, and to count backwards from 100 during playground arguments instead of getting into a fight. The UK government has also been looking into .

What鈥檚 not to like? The problem, says Uziel, is that we haven鈥檛 explored whether you can have too much of a good thing. In 2014, his own research was among the first to indicate this might be the case. Self-control is generally thought to promote positive social behaviour, but Uziel found the opposite to be so, in people who aren鈥檛 that concerned about the approval of others. In a series of economic games, such individuals 鈥� particularly if they felt their actions were private, without consequences for their reputation. In the real world, it is easy to imagine how this might be reflected in cases of fraud, for instance, which don鈥檛 tend to be the result of immediate impulses but instead require steady dedication and organisation. 鈥淪elf-control is a tool, a mental instrument,鈥� says Uziel. 鈥淎nd like any other tool, it can serve problematic causes.鈥�

鈥淪elf-control interacts with other personal traits, with very different results鈥�

Recent work shows another potential dark-side to self-control 鈥� it can amplify your moral sensibilities, for better or worse. Thomas Denson at the University of New South Wales, Australia, first asked students to complete two weeks of self-control training. They had to concentrate on using their 鈥渘on-dominant hand鈥� for everyday tasks such as opening doors 鈥� a simple intervention that had previously been shown to increase self-control. He also measured their feelings of 鈥渕oral responsibility鈥� using a questionnaire. Then Denson called the students into his lab and gave them glass vials containing 20 cricket nymphs, along with a modified coffee grinder, which he called the 鈥渆xtermination machine鈥�. Their task was simple: to feed the bugs into the grinder. (In reality, the bugs could escape through an emergency exit.)

For people with a strong sense of moral responsibility, the lessons in self-control helped them resist the experimenters鈥� orders. But the exact , who tipped about 50 per cent more nymphs into the grinder than people in a control group. Perhaps their greater self-control made them more obedient, or perhaps it allowed them to inhibit feelings of disgust as they fed the bugs into the machine. Whatever the reason, the findings indicate that self-control interacts with other personal traits to promote very different kinds of behaviours. 鈥淚t can be used by heroes and villains alike,鈥� says Denson.

Taken for granted

What鈥檚 more, the greater obedience associated with high self-control may be damaging for oneself as well as others. People with high self-control report feeling less satisfied with their partners and colleagues, believing that others take advantage of their dependability. It seems that we are so used to seeing them quietly persevere, we forget the personal sacrifices they are making 鈥� a perception borne out in at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology.

In 2015, while she was at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina, Koval asked volunteers to read anecdotes about potential colleagues and then estimate their work performance in various tasks. She found that small cues indicating high self-control (whether someone flosses their teeth, for instance) prompted volunteers to allocate them more work, while also underestimating the effort they would need to put in to complete the work. The assumption, it seemed, was that someone with high self-control could simply 鈥済et on with it鈥�. Koval says she has witnessed many friends and colleagues who have been taken advantage of in this way. 鈥淭hey become a repository for other people鈥檚 goal pursuits,鈥� she says.

People with high self-control may take less pleasure in their own achievements, too. Research suggests that they have slightly muted responses to both positive and negative emotion, perhaps because they automatically inhibit any strong feelings. Mark Muraven at the State University of New York at Albany, who , emphasises that the effect is quite small, but it is still enough to take the edge off a good time. 鈥淭hey鈥檙e missing out on some part of the human experience and not having quite such high 鈥榟ighs鈥�,鈥� he says.

And it gets worse. In the long run, . One study asked alumni from Columbia University to reflect on their winter break 40 years previously, and compared their responses with the reflections of current students who had just finished their holiday. The youngsters were more likely to feel guilty about missing their studies, while the alumni resented having studied too much instead of partying and travelling. Rather than feeling pride in their achievements, most wished that they had exercised less self-control, not more.

鈥淚n the long run, high self-control can be a source of regret rather than pride鈥�

Perhaps the , however, comes from a survey of nearly 700 African American families from poor neighbourhoods. In line with much of the previous research, teachers鈥� assessments of children鈥檚 self-control predicted many later outcomes: those scoring highly were more likely to enter college, for instance. Yet they also had high blood pressure and showed elevated levels of hormones commonly associated with stress.

Further analyses revealed that . If you come from a richer family, high self-control improves your health by encouraging more salubrious behaviours. But if you lack resources, the stresses of overcoming life鈥檚 existing obstacles appear to outweigh the benefits of these healthier behaviours. So, for these children, higher self-control is linked with lower rates of depression and substance abuse, but the accelerated cellular ageing associated with exerting self-control affects their health.

In light of all this, Uziel thinks that we should be more cautious before applying some of the well-publicised findings 鈥� particularly in education. 鈥淲e need to consider their long-term implications 鈥� not only in terms of achievement but also in terms of their effect on the children鈥檚 overall well-being and health,鈥� he says. At the very least, programmes designed to boost self-control should offer greater support to help children cope with those additional stresses. But Uziel is also keen on using so-called nudge techniques to improve behaviour without the need for self-control. He notes that people with low self-control are more susceptible to conformity 鈥� so, for example, simply telling them that a healthy diet is in fashion means they are more likely to eat better.

For anyone else hoping to exercise self-discipline, the conclusions are a bit more nuanced. No one would suggest that we should lose all inhibition, but we might want to question when and how we apply self-restraint. Given the regrets of those Columbia alumni, for instance, you might decide to reassess your long-term goals and whether the efforts you are putting in today will pay the dividends you hope. As Uziel points out, people with high self-control may doggedly pursue a goal even once it has stopped being personally meaningful. You might also make more effort to deliberately leave empty windows in your diary that allow greater spontaneity and indulgence (see 鈥�A lazy path to self-control鈥�).

At work, meanwhile, this research might encourage you to manage the expectations of others. 鈥淚t could be beneficial for high self-control individuals to talk about their challenges and not just bottle up all the feelings of burden and dissatisfaction,鈥� says Koval. Maybe deliberately let your standards drop, once in a while 鈥� just to let others know that you are human.

These are small steps, but Uziel believes they are a necessary corrective to some of the more puritanical interpretations of research into self-control. Ultimately, he says, we should remember that self-control is merely a tool to help us get what we want from life 鈥� and we should learn to recognise when it would be wiser not to wield it. Sometimes you need to curb your impulses. Other times, why not just let your inner Cookie Monster prevail?

This article appeared in print under the headline 鈥淐ontrol yourself鈥�