Right, manuscript du mois is now at the point where it's Not Currently My Problem, which means that I stand half a chance of stringing together coherent words in actual conversation, as opposed to just talking out loud in my own space, which is Less Human Interfacial Energy, etc.
My initial thought was that that didn't sound like quite the same kind of thing, because I was talking about people feeling genuinely more impressed by the less objectively impressive achievements, whereas you seem to be talking more about people making tactical judgments about where positive reinforcement can be most effectively applied.
No, I think I was unclear (see also Endless Paper): I think this is absolutely a thoroughly-observed phenomenon along gendered lines in division of housework and childcare. What constitutes "astonishingly impressive" (single) parenting is very different depending on the (perceived) gender of the parent, even if all other variables are held constant. There is also, overlain in this, some amount of tactical judgement -- but I don't think that's the main point I was trying to get at.
So some of it is less "tactical judgements" and more "genuine response to perceived effort expenditure": someone putting in More Effort will tend to get More Praise even if the effort is ineffective/inefficient/misdirected/etc.
But perhaps your unspoken point is that that might be what's really going on in some of my own illustrative examples? The security-hole one, in particular, would make a lot of sense that way now that you mention it.
That too!
Though there's also the thing where: if we work on the premise that nobody is perfect and everybody's going to screw up (eventually), "a company that has never introduced a security hole" is "a company that hasn't introduced a security hole yet". Given the assumption that screw-ups will happen, the sooner you get data on how they'll be handled -- whether they'll be handled well -- the sooner you get reassurance that it's "safe"(r) to invest (time/energy/finance/emotion).
This also shows up in sociology: see e.g. the increasingly frequent advice (at least in the places I hang out, like Captain Awkward) to, early on in any kind of relationship, try saying "no" to something minor, and see what reaction you get. Certainly I've spent a lot of time in therapy arriving at the idea that particularly in contexts where people see to want to form a very intimate relationship very rapidly, where I'm giving a lot of support, it is a really good idea to ask for some reciprocal support early on, rather than just assuming that Obviously It's On Offer When I Need It, because very frequently it's turned out not to be in ways I've found really upsetting or isolating or difficult.
The point I was aiming for was mainly "I think I recognise this phenomenon or at the very least closely associated phenomena, I know a whole bunch of sociological analysis of it Exists, I do not have the brain to dig it out right now but here's a signpost to aspects of discussion I think you might find interesting."
(If you are cheerful about the prospect of ongoing dilatory correspondence on this topic I am v happy to keep flailing intermittently at you -- I think you are Entirely Right about the pattern existing, to be clear!)
no subject
My initial thought was that that didn't sound like quite the same kind of thing, because I was talking about people feeling genuinely more impressed by the less objectively impressive achievements, whereas you seem to be talking more about people making tactical judgments about where positive reinforcement can be most effectively applied.
No, I think I was unclear (see also Endless Paper): I think this is absolutely a thoroughly-observed phenomenon along gendered lines in division of housework and childcare. What constitutes "astonishingly impressive" (single) parenting is very different depending on the (perceived) gender of the parent, even if all other variables are held constant. There is also, overlain in this, some amount of tactical judgement -- but I don't think that's the main point I was trying to get at.
So some of it is less "tactical judgements" and more "genuine response to perceived effort expenditure": someone putting in More Effort will tend to get More Praise even if the effort is ineffective/inefficient/misdirected/etc.
But perhaps your unspoken point is that that might be what's really going on in some of my own illustrative examples? The security-hole one, in particular, would make a lot of sense that way now that you mention it.
That too!
Though there's also the thing where: if we work on the premise that nobody is perfect and everybody's going to screw up (eventually), "a company that has never introduced a security hole" is "a company that hasn't introduced a security hole yet". Given the assumption that screw-ups will happen, the sooner you get data on how they'll be handled -- whether they'll be handled well -- the sooner you get reassurance that it's "safe"(r) to invest (time/energy/finance/emotion).
This also shows up in sociology: see e.g. the increasingly frequent advice (at least in the places I hang out, like Captain Awkward) to, early on in any kind of relationship, try saying "no" to something minor, and see what reaction you get. Certainly I've spent a lot of time in therapy arriving at the idea that particularly in contexts where people see to want to form a very intimate relationship very rapidly, where I'm giving a lot of support, it is a really good idea to ask for some reciprocal support early on, rather than just assuming that Obviously It's On Offer When I Need It, because very frequently it's turned out not to be in ways I've found really upsetting or isolating or difficult.
The point I was aiming for was mainly "I think I recognise this phenomenon or at the very least closely associated phenomena, I know a whole bunch of sociological analysis of it Exists, I do not have the brain to dig it out right now but here's a signpost to aspects of discussion I think you might find interesting."
(If you are cheerful about the prospect of ongoing dilatory correspondence on this topic I am v happy to keep flailing intermittently at you -- I think you are Entirely Right about the pattern existing, to be clear!)