Part 1: How We Think Differently
We didn’t dream up this innovative approach called Resonance on our own. We based our completely-reinvented survey on the new neuroscience of how emotions and logic interact and help us make decisions. We built Resonance as neuroscience leapt ahead during the 1990s’ “Decade of the Brain.” The work of leading neuroscientists Tony Damasio, Paul Ekman, Robert Plutchik and Joe Ledoux illuminated Resonance.
The Resonance instrument is designed to mimic what’s now understood about how our brains actually process our experiences and make decisions. Over-simplified, we’re wired to start with almost-instantaneous limbic responses – basic feelings that can trigger actions “without thinking” like fight, flight or rescue. Ancient limbic brain structures like the amygdala and hippocampus then transmit those feelings up to “the new brain” or neocortex. Within the prefrontal cortex those impulsive feelings are integrated with rational thoughts, comparisons and judgments. Hit yourself on the forehead (like in “I could’ve hadda V8!”) and you’re striking the prefrontal cortex.
So what? So, asking a rational question (“How satisfied are you, on a scale of 1-to-10?”) addresses only the rational mind. Asking a rational question skips the critical front end of our thought process. The rational mind hears the rational question and obediently provides a rational answer (a single rating on 1-to-10 scale), which omits all the affective thought. That’s a crucial omission, especially if you’re trying to understand complicated behaviors, like buying or voting or learning. If you don’t have a way to elicit and measure those critical cognitions, you can’t fully understand behaviors or decision-making. And you can’t make useful, accurate predictions. In which case, why bother spending time and money researching?