| Abstract | If we take Darwin's principle that is not the strongest species that survives, but the most responsive to change, we can investigate how change occurs in groups, to extend those mechanisms to social and cultural change. For that reason, Hot Brain and Fluid Personality Hypothesis proposes at least two ways through which people change: an interaction called fluid (that is, empathic, sincere and positive) and the emotional temperature of a brain-personality system, often functioning at the same time.
Objectives
We synthesize 6 years of personal research on fluid interactions in encounter groups and in the impact of emotion on brain-personality systems. To measure change, we measured the behaviour of variables describing brain-personality system's functioning and group interaction.
Methods
We imparted questionnaires for cognitive (self-cognition, attention, motivation, memory, creativity) and emotional (anxiety, depression, empathy, love) variables and a feedback questionnaire measuring the fluidity of the subject, the fluidity of the coordinator and the fluidity of the group, and also taken cortisol samples before and after the encounter group interaction to see if the behaviour of the brain-personality system follows three categories of brain-personality functioning, according to the emotional temperature: supercold (low empathy), hot (normal empathy and anxiety) and superhot (high anxiety and depression).
Results
Apart for the brain-personality equation (the constant proportion of, first, the product of a function of cortisol values and a function of cognitive values, and second, a function of the emotional temperature, discussed before), and the fact that a fluid interaction decreases cortisol levels, the self-cognition coefficient is proving a cognitive bias occurs if we take the supercold and the superhot brain-personality categories. Also, comparing in love and not in love subjects, we find that supercold subjects in love and superhot subjects in love worsen their condition, a sort of biased change, a change for the worse, and for the hot brain-personality (normal) subjects, an increase in cognitive functioning and a decrease of anxiety.
Conclusion
If change is essential for evolution and development, for learning, then change is mediated not by social context alone (in this case by democratic and tolerant fluid group interactions), but by internal factors also, by the type of brain-personality the subjects have.
|
|---|
