Finals episode, part 1
Why is social media, specifically tumblr, so good at preventing productivity?
I think it's because it uses the same resources and gives the same feelings as actually completing work. Scrolling through a facebook news feed or a tumblr dashboard keeps you updated with what's going on in the world, and getting back to the point where you last checked it gives a sense of completeness. Especially when so much schoolwork is done on the computer, processing words and information from the web feels productive, even when it isn't.

Negative results of self-regulation:

• procrastination: result of being able to self-regulate conscience into silence
• nutritional deficiency: result of being able to self-regulate food intake excessively
• unbalanced time management: result of self-regulating too much time to a single activity
• decreased positive reputation: result of self-regulating to the expense of social activity

Religion has an interesting two-way relationship with self control.
In one respect, religion causes self control, because it usually promises dire results for lack of control, damnation and hellfire or some other kind of punishment. To avoid this, then, people will avoid doing whatever it is that they are forbidden, such as violations of the ten commandments.
In another respect, self-control seems to occur more frequently in those who are religious. It would be easier to follow stipulations and requirements of most faith systems if a person already had strong self-regulatory abilities.
In reality, it is likely a combination of the two that causes religious people to be more religious.

Why do women regulate eating more than men? There is a definite focus on body image for women. Value, for women, is defined in terms of appearance, ability to attract men, wealth, intelligence, hygiene and mannerisms, and character. Value, for men, is defined in terms of wealth, physical fitness, ability to attract women, intelligence, athletic ability, and character. I don't have evidence, and would love to see a study, but I think that women regulate eating more and men regulate physical activity, because their priorities are on appearance and physical ability, respectively.

• Why do we think we need to have motivation in order to do tasks? We can clearly complete tasks at the last minute with adrenaline or a deadline. "Motivation" sometimes seems like a fluffy myth invented to keep people happy about the work they do.
• Is the will really superior to the body? If so, then motivation is unnecessary if the will is strong enough. 
• Is the idea of free will consistent with or synonymous with the idea of self-control? I think that will encompasses more, and is a combination of self-control and consciousness. Perhaps self-control is a product of free will, and free will is one aspect of the conscious mind.
• Where does conscience fit in?

Self regulation of eating
This chapter was difficult to read, because food and the control of eating is such a huge issue, and is already talked about so much relating to teenage girls. I have never had an eating disorder, but several of those close to me have, and I find it hard to think about the issue from a balanced point of view.
Is it more difficult to self-regulate highly considered issues like weight and appearance? Or is it easier, since we think about those things more anyway?
This chapter also made me hungry. Not recommended to read except before mealtimes.

The past two days have been so hot that they could be mistaken for summer vacation, and it seems most people lounging outside on the quads are doing just that. Most people seem to be doing less homework and more relaxing, while others are more able to buckle down and study.
Does the weather really have a substantial effect on our self-regulation, or does it just improve our mood? Is mood really an factor of self-regulation, or a result of it?

Why do lists make self-control easier? Lists, especially checklists, tend to make tasks seem more manageable. I think it's the visual association with finishing something that is normally just mental. Is there another way to connect visual accomplishment with tasks? Perhaps that's why the progress bar is so satisfying on computers, or the little wheel of death that accompanies any loading streaming internet video. This also makes sense with the weight-loss tip to eat foods that leave a visual remainder- wings that leave bones on your plate, shrimp that leave tails- so that you can see how much you've eaten, and get a sort of satisfaction from it that you might not feel in your stomach.

Do we purposely derail our own self-regulation? 

Alcohol is consumed, to excess, even though we know that it will lead to risky behaviors, bad choices, and regretted nights.

Homework is put off, though work will decrease, because it can be completed faster under pressure. 

Relationships fall apart because of lack of fidelity, though there is no way to cheat except for conscious action.

The theories of self-regulation as strength, as a coping mechanism, in any sort of scientific sense, are in my opinion ultimately subject to the idea of personal will.

Classical conditioning: training subjects to respond to certain cues subconsciously, such as Pavlov's cue to his dog's salivary glands at the use of a bell.
Operant, or instrumental, conditioning: use of certain positive or negative results to effect certain conscious behavior changes, through positive reinforcement or avoidance of negative consequences.
Successful operant conditioning is usually so subtle as not to be noticed. If conditioning is noticed by an adult, understandable feelings of resentment will result, after feelings of being used.

Self-regulation of sleep
When it is listed as one of the new factors that college students can determine for themselves, sleep is considered a good thing. Because of numerous personal and physical benefits, among which is the theory that sleep itself increases self-regulation, more sleep is equated with better self regulation and time management. If you have time to sleep adequately, you are clearly getting your homework done on time, and fulfilling all other obligations.
On the other hand, there is a kind of quiet esteem for those students who have the reputation of "never sleeping" because they do so many extra curricular activities and they perform well academically. This goes in accordance with the idea proposed as advice to many beginning fiction writers, which is to give up sleep in exchange for quiet, peaceful writing time.
Sleep is interesting as a self-regulation resource, then, because it is one of the few things which can be up-regulated and down-regulated, with positive results for each.

Are there limits within which self-control models will work?
For Robison, the limit to his problem-focused coping came when he was continually rejected by all the other children, time and time again, for being unable to work with them. This suggests an upper stress limit for applications of explanatory style.
The theory of rumination also has limits. The friends of mine who ruminate excessively often only do so for certain things- social situations, certain schoolwork projects, and family issues. There are other things, which come more naturally, which they do not think of at all, such as hobbies, habits, and routines. This suggests an area limit for rumination coping.

Gender differences in self regulation:

• Women tend to diet more, and focus more on what they eat. Are they successful at this self-regulation?
• Men tend to regulate themselves socially around women, more than around other men. Women sometimes tend to be unabashedly, relentlessly social, around either gender. Are men better at regulating social interaction with the opposite gender?
• Women supposedly get better grades in college. Are they better at self-regulating academically?
• Men tend to be involved in fewer extra curricular activities. Are they better at self-regulating obligations, so as not to be overwhelmed?

I think that the idea of being introverted matches very well with the concept of social interaction as requiring self-regulation. In my experiences adjusting to the college environment, one of the hardest things to accept was the idea that I would have to see and interact with people every day, no matter how I felt. As a homeschooled student, I could easily limit my social interaction in high school, if I didn't feel up to people. I didn't often; I had friends and eventually took classes at the public school where I had to come every day. But social interactions still take work for me, and I still have days where I would just rather not talk to anyone.

from sarahseeandersen.tumblr.com

The fundamental attribution error is assuming that the actions of others are caused by internal factors- things you have done to/for them, for instance- instead of external factors to you- their relationships, challenges, and lives in general.
This is a piece of advice my Mom always gave me when I was younger. She told me that just because someone treats you badly, it isn't your fault. It's important to consider the other factors.
There is a similar concept advanced by young adult author John Green, especially in his book Paper Towns. He terms it "imagining people complexly," looking at other people in the context of their own lives, and respecting that they are also immeasurably complex, and cannot be summed up by quick titles, labels, or stereotypes.

One of the most iconic counter-culture apparel trends is the Converse All-Star shoe. The company started out as a rebellion against the monopoly of rubber companies in order to directly produce rubber sneakers, and went on to represent teenage rebellion throughout the sixties. But in 2003, the Converse company was bought by Nike, one of the large shoe companies. It still markets its shoes as "celebrating the spirit of rebellion and originality," but this has a hollow ring, when they are produced by a mainstream company.
I think this trend, for the new and original to become mainstream and identifiable, is seen in many movements. The ideas that we see now as rock and roll, punk, and more recently, grunge and "alternate" (or hipster) culture have become so widespread that they are no longer as unique as they were intended to be.
People, even those who seek to stand out, still want to fit in. This model, seen in the growth and acquisition of Converse and the explosion of teenage trends, is intrinsically ironic and very interesting.

Does rest really improve concentration, and ability to self-regulate class work?
Yes, and I would argue that it does not even have to be complete rest. In my experience, being lazy to the extent of professional indolence tends to put me out of practice at doing homework. Spring break was a busy week, full of spending time with friends, visiting places, and going on adventures. Yet, since I returned to school, I have had more success motivating myself to do homework than I had for weeks before the break. I hope this trend continues.
It's also possible that my increased self-regulatory ability has simply come from the fact that I've spent a week not thinking at all about my self-regulatory ability, in which case, it's about to come to an abrupt halt.

Tasks which will require self-regulation:

• Concentration in class
• Starting on break homework
• Drinking less caffeine
• Eating less sugar and more vegetables

Mental tasks, 3-6-2013

• Getting out of bed
• Going to classes, paying attention
• Starting, concentrating on, and finishing assignments 
• Leaving indoors to walk in the cold
• Going to newspaper meeting
• Going to sleep at a reasonable time

Traits of alcoholism, as related to Glass Castle
Alcohol addicts in the study displayed higher "harm avoidance" levels, which fits very much with the character of Rex Walls, who didn't really solve any of his problems, he just tried to get out of or around them. They also have lower levels of self-transcendence, or ability to see beyond their present circumstances. For a family always moving around, there would be little hope if you were unable to see beyond the problems facing your immediate family, because that is all you have.
Interestingly, as a child, Walls' younger sister also seems to fulfill characteristics that match up with alcoholism. This seems almost to foreshadow her downfall in New York. She goes to her friends' house instead of living at home, just like Rex Walls leaves for days at a time, unable to transcend self. Her ultimate move- traveling to California instead of trying to live in New York with her family- also shows harm avoidance.
It seems clear that the tendency of alcohol addiction to run in families is due not only to genetics and family situations, but also to character, because none of the other Walls children has this much trouble functioning as an adult.

Problem-focused coping involves solving problems, while emotion-focused coping involves minimizing them. At first, the logic of problem-focused coping, and its mathematical sense, seems to recommend it as the unquestionable best tactic. But is emotional coping really wrong? One of the attributes is "perceiving value in putting up with negative events." Isn't this patience, commonly considered a virtue? It also involves "regulat[ing] emotional response," which is an attribute of successful adulthood. It's a good thing that all people use both forms of response, because I think that they are both useful, and emotion-focused coping shouldn't be so discounted.

Self regulation is tied to both outer and inner distractions. This makes sense, because mental disabilities would then reduce abilities to normally self-regulate. But this isn't reversible- not all people with an inability to correctly self-regulate have mental disabilities. Is the ADD "epidemic" really just an inability to differentiate self-regulation abilities from genuine mental problems?

Self regulation and attention are closely tied.
Self regulation requires attention. Suppression requires attention to the thought being suppressed, and any kind of conscious regulation requires attention to the thing to be regulated.
Attention also requires self regulation. Thoughts must be corralled, kept relevant to the task at hand. Physical motions must also be kept together. In a classroom, this means staying in the seat, focusing on material, not falling asleep. In a car, this means controlling pedal use, steering, signalling, and keeping eyes and thoughts on the road. On a sidewalk, this requires only avoiding other people and maintaining the process of walking forward.

What is the difference between changing education to effectively reach children, especially shortening the length of time for tasks and lessons, and using education to change children, to teach them to concentrate and apply themselves for lengths of time?

Should education serve the child, or is education a tool for making the child serviceable to other people, his society, and his family?

Glass Castle by Jeanette Walls
As a child, Walls and her family seem to deal with everything by reappraisal, finding the positive in everything. Is their optimism positive, or excessive? It is easy to judge her parents as incompetent, but are they just exercising tough love? I suppose I'll have to keep reading to find out.

"Attentional Control and Self-Regulation" by Rueda, Posner, and Rothbart

"These findings suggest that a variety of pathologies may be related to deficits in the cognitve network underlying executive control." pg. 295

This makes so much sense. Attention is key to literally every single task we perform, with the possible exception of habit-controlled activities. If we lack attention, in the form of any kind of executive control, it's very logical that pathological illnesses would result.
"If the appropriate methods for training attention in young children can be identified, it is possible that systematic training of attention might be an important addition to preschool education." pg. 296
I find it a little disappointing that this was the final stirring conclusion of this chapter. I hope that these revelations about the relevancy of attention to every aspect of life can apply to more than the manipulation of small children's attention. If it really is as important to executive control as the article was saying earlier, wouldn't it be a necessary component and byproduct of any attempt to educate preschoolers?

Reappraisal seems to be a successful emotional response to stress. But it can also be an avoidance mechanism. In this article, the author, Dr. Riggio, suggests "positive thinking," a fluffier and more obnoxious name for reappraisal of negative emotions, as a response to stress. The danger of positive thinking is the tendency to forget or minimize the honest negative consequences of whatever you're "thinking positively" enough to live with. We think negatively because we have problems we need to fix- can't positive thinking be an easy way to avoid these problems?
Article mentioned earlier: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/cutting-edge-leadership/201210/don-t-let-life-s-hassles-become-stressors

How exactly would one go about changing self-regulatory ability by improving reappraisal techniques?
Could interpreting events more optimistically decrease the perceived challenge, and allow work to start more easily? Or would it help by making work itself seem better?
Besides that, I don't see how reappraisal would work to increase self-regulatory ability, other than a general improvement of emotional state.
If I seem to fall on the pessimistic side of each aspect of the explanatory theory, is it worthwhile to attempt to improve reappraisal?

"Thinking Makes It So" by Ochsner and Gross
"Neuroscientific data are not special in the sense that they provide a 'magic window' on the mind that tells us what 'really' is going on."
This quote, from one of the sections which defines this as a chapter in a book and not a peer-reviewed article, demonstrates a humility not commonly seen in neuroscientists.
"In this study, we asked 15 female participants...." This seems like extremely few people for a scientific study, and it's curious that they were all female. It was a little odd that this wasn't ever explained.
The second study was more comprehensive than the first, but I am still curious what the results would be if researchers looked into the location of brain activity during the reappraisal of positive thoughts.

Still "Tools of Discovery and Older Brain Structures" because it bothers me.
What if all of neuroscience is just the result of an absent mind acting on the brain in certain places? Is this a practical, necessary to be considered consequence of the "correlation, not causation" theory?
How is it ethical to experiment on domestic cats by stimulating or reducing the stimulus for the amygdala?
If a rat's pleasure pathways are remotely stimulated, is it still an autonomous creature?

"Tools of Discovery and Older Brain Structures"
Is it true that "the mind is what the brain does"?
If the mind is the product of the brain, the presence of the mind will be directly proportional to the amount of brain.
If the presence of the mind is proportional to the physical brain, people who survive brain damage or undergo lobotomies are less "mindful" than others. Does this make them less worthy as people?
Do people exist above or beyond their physical mind? Is there really a human "essence" as there is in the classical view, that makes someone human, gives them mind, beyond what they physically have? Or is consciousness the limit of humanity?

If stress causes the body to respond with adrenaline, and temporarily reduces the ability of other systems to function, and this includes the immune system, then it is possible to literally make yourself sick with stress.
If stress management is a personal choice, then the amount of stress a person has is in their own control.
Therefore, if I am sick, from stress, it is my personal choices that have led me to this point. That's depressing.

Is there anything self regulation doesn't change? 

Areas self regulation is important in:

• academics- learning to keep track of assignments, work when unwilling, turn things in on time, and keep up concentration through a class, semester, and college education
• health- eating, exercising, sleeping the right amounts
• relationships/manners- censoring thoughts from being spoken, regulating the proper amount of communication and socialization, developing closeness at a normal pace
• spirituality/faith- regulating amount of energy spent on figuring out "big questions"
• leisure time- controlling amount of time spent, refraining from harmful hobbies

Self-Regulatory Strength, Schmeichel and Baumeister

"In particular, self-control appears to get progressively worse the longer a person goes without sleep..."

This is true, from personal experience.

If self-control is really a limited resource, can it be manipulated? Can one control their own suppression, procrastination, and amounts of self-regulatory strength so as to perform at the maximum of their abilities?

I don't think that self-regulation is a limited resource, for three reasons:
1. It can be developed and grown, so it must not be firmly limited.
2. Some instances of extreme self-regulation occur out of the blue- when a large assignment is completed overnight, when a gossip must keep a secret.
3. It is possible- not easy or common, but possible- to live a life well-governed by the self, with good habits and a schedule and proper priorities.

"I have so much homework!"
"Don't even talk about it!"
Thought suppression is much harder because of our communities and lifestyles. We model ourselves and rely on those around us. Are our habits really shaped by anything other than our friends and peers? Or are we helpless, in a place where everyone else procrastinates too?

After reading the two articles on thought suppression, is thought suppression really self-regulation?
It seems to be more regulation of thought than of action. If thought is behavior, then suppression is self regulation; if thought and behavior are separate, suppression is not self regulation.
This ties into the regulation vs. control aspect. If self regulation is more automatic and self control more conscious, suppression would be self control, because it involves a conscious effort not to think of the certain action.

Self regulation is closely tied to the nervous system, and occasionally functions like a thermostat.
There are five basic "f" reactions to stressers:

• flight
• fight
• fright
• Fahrenheit
• sex

Self regulation is important in nearly every aspect of life. Many problems are a result of too little or too much self-regulation:

• Failure to self-regulate negative emotions may be one of the reasons for suicide.
• Failure to self-regulate physical desires results in infidelity.
• Failure to self-regulate motivation causes procrastination.

Self-regulation is also very important in childhood, and can be influenced by many things. If children develop a positive trust of the adults around them, they are often more patient, as in the marshmallow experiment. Their exposure to positive self-regulation, shown by their parents and teachers, can help them to form similar good habits. When children are not exposed to as many other children, or do not have this good influence, they can be more distrustful, and be less able to regulate themselves, with less impulse control.

On the other hand, children raised in stressful or lacking situations, like children in refugee camps, may grow up with an over-active sense of self-regulation, as a result of conserving resources for survival.

What is self-regulation?

• ability to stop yourself or motivate yourself for any particular task or trait
• ability to monitor actions
• decision making

Self-regulation often involves conscious decision making, but it can also be unconscious. Unconscious self-regulation can occur at any age, but is particularly evident in small children, before they become old enough to regulate their actions and processes consciously. Examples of these processes include eating and physical activity.

Whether or not self-regulation is unconscious, it can be influenced by many things. Surroundings, including social norms, family, and media, can all set or change the regulations to which we hold ourselves. 

Self-control can also be dangerous, when taken to an extreme. Eating disorders are examples of too much self-regulation, and indulgence of addictions is an example of too little self-regulation.