Review: Plays Well With Others

 Plays Well With Others claims to dispell myths about human relations with science.  It turned out to be a fun book to read and well-written. Fundamentally it, it covers certain aphorisms you might have heard of, such as "A friend in need is a friend indeed", "No man is an island", and "Love conquers all." The author, Eric Barker, then does a deep dive into the meaning of the aphorism, and the scientific evidence for and against.

Richard Wiseman of the University of Hertfordshire says you tell about two whoppers a day. Whom do you lie to most frequently? Mom. (kindle loc 605)

I enjoyed the discussion on how bad humans are at lie detection. And why is that? It turns out that trusting people is much less stressful.  

One study asked people how much they trust others on a scale of one to ten. Income was highest among those who responded with the number eight. And low-trust people fared far worse than overtrusters. Their losses were the equivalent of not going to college. They missed many opportunities by not trusting. In The Confidence Game Maria Konnikova points to an Oxford study showing that “people with higher levels of trust were 7 percent more likely to be in better health,” and 6 percent more likely to be “very” happy rather than “pretty” happy or “not happy at all.”  (kindle loc 738)

 The section on love is also surprisingly upbeat. It does provide the context that in the past most marriages were not based on love, and the modern divorce rates are incredibly high. But it also notes that when modern marriages work they work far better than historical marriages did with huge benefits to both parties.

Other interesting titbits from the book include the fact that Prozac is largely a placebo:

 A 2014 paper concluded: “Analyses of the published data and the unpublished data that were hidden by drug companies reveals that most (if not all) of the benefits are due to the placebo effect.” And another study, titled “Listening to Prozac but Hearing Placebo,” looked at over 2,300 subjects and found “approximately one quarter of the drug response is due to the administration of an active medication, one half is a placebo effect, and the remaining quarter is due to other nonspecific factors.” Did these papers result in a torrent of pushback from the scientific community at large? Nope. (kindle loc 2791)

In fact, the placebo effect is so strong because we're so wired to be social that the fact that someone is paying attention is enough to make most problems go away, since the fact that you're socially supported in itself is enough for your brain to think that you're fine. In fact, the most optimistic scenario tends to happen in a crisis, when despite popular conception, people ignore class and party lines and just give help to everyone in an egalitarian fashion:

When we are one, we don’t need placebos. We give care and are provided with care. During war, psychiatric admissions decline. This phenomenon has been documented time and time again. When Belfast experienced riots in the 1960s, depression plummeted in the districts with the most violence and went up where there was none. Psychologist H. A. Lyons wrote, “It would be irresponsible to suggest violence as a means of improving mental health, but the Belfast findings suggest that people will feel better psychologically if they have more involvement with their community.” (kindle loc 2851)

I found the book rich with insights and very easy to read. Recommended.