With some anticipation and appetite, what accounting can we apply to the resulting extra flavor of an apple pie? What about the extra refreshment of a cold beer after a hard work-out?

Copyright © 1998 Wesley W. Stillwagon Sr. All rights reserved.
Some sections Copyright © 1991 Wesley W. Stillwagon, Sr.

Presented at a Conference of the Edison Electric Institute, San Francisco, 1988

Forward

With some anticipation and appetite, what accounting can we apply to the resulting extra flavor of an apple pie? What about the extra refreshment of a cold beer after a hard work-out? What is the difference in appearance of another person resulting only from our attraction or loathing? Some of the difference is attributable to "illusion." The source of the illusion is unconscious, and within the mechanics of our own psyche. How great the impact of illusion upon our conscious impression is partially dependent upon how conscious (aware) we are during the observation.

There is considerable evidence that would support an opinion that one hundred percent consciousness (or even one-hundred percent objectivity) is not mortally attainable; that we can never achieve complete awareness of internal or external stimuli. Accepting that truth, even with the best effort, a portion of the image acquired must be attributable to illusion. The impact of illusion on a conscious image depends upon a number of influencing factors. Understanding some of the basics of the psyche system will help to develop an understanding of its operation and subsequently the nature of the unconscious influences.

The Mechanics of Perception

A tropism or sight, sound, touch, smell, or taste influence on our human biological system produces a complex signal; that signal from the senses does not go directly from the sensory organ into consciousness. The signal goes first into our unconscious. There, it is subject to modification, and adulteration, that converts some of the conscious image into an illusion. How much influence is determined by (among other factors) how aware or conscious we remain. The range may be from no conscious image at all, because its strength has failed to bridge the threshold of consciousness¹, to a level high enough to completely change our direction or will.

Contrary to popular opinion, remaining conscious, that is, being aware of external and internal influence, is a difficult (perhaps impossible) and unnatural state. As any experienced teacher or trainer will tell you, it is possible for a student to display all of the indicators of conscious attention, including appropriate nodding of head, and apparent acknowledgement of information, while in fact, being totally oblivious to a presentation.

Just because the signal from our senses doesn't have enough strength to surpass the threshold of consciousness, this doesn't mean it is lost or discarded in the unconscious. Evidence resulting from hypnosis of witnesses, indicates that all items that influence the sensory organs are stored in the memory.

Understanding the above, we can therefore diagram the relationship between conscious image and factual reality:

Illusion in the Interpersonal

If we could accept the flow of unconscious sense to conscious image signal diagrammed above, how could this influence how we perceive the image of other human beings in our life. Recalling the flow above, a perception is formed via the following process: an object influences a sense, such as sight, taste, etc., and produces a signal carried by the nerve system; the signal goes from the sense to the unconscious and is stored in memory. The signal also subjected to passive value judgements that may be influenced by the individual's needs, knowledge, desires or attitude. This unconscious process also modifies the signal more or less depending upon those needs, hates, and fears prior to raising it to a level of consciousness. Knowing this, it is easy to understand how the object of our senses can be made more pleasing or take on more fearful characteristics, depending upon previous experiences. This also enables us to understand how police reports from several witnesses can yield a variety of descriptions of the same event or suspect. The image that comes to consciousness is really modified in our unconscious, more or less, depending upon conscious or unconscious attitudes, needs, fears, prejudices, etc. The image formed in the conscious is partly accurate and partly an illusion.

Such knowledge is very important for training simulation designers/leaders, for it can help eliminate unwanted performance variables like those in the interpersonal. Most of us trainers are not above brow beating, or other forms of punishment or reinforcement such as creating other participant 'illusions' (e.g. acting like we are not pleased, disappointed, angry, deliriously happy, really excited, etc.) to accomplish our goals. The persona we create to influence a less than committed participant, most often doesn't reflect our true feelings or attitude. It is a mask used to overcome their lack of attention, or their less than positive attitude to the experience. We are equally capable of applying praise to achieve goals, complete with a broad smile and pat on the back to a participant whom we are convinced is a hopeless idiot. This is another consciously applied persona that hopefully creates the needed illusion in their minds.

As much as we trainers are capable of creating or modifying events through the application of some of the basic tools of the interpersonal, we can also be victims of this fact of life. If we are orderly, structured individuals, convinced of the benefits of this way of life, and a less orderly, more slovenly trainee drags him/herself into our classroom, we may be angered at the appearance presented. This anger may set our attitude toward the trainee, which may set the stage for their failure. If the company has paid us to develop this person and some time has been invested in their hiring and development, then the trainer/facilitator also owns part of that success or failure. I am not proposing that everyone who fails to achieve the learning objectives of a program deserves to pass. But if a person failed because they had to learn in a hostile environment, one that is established and maintained by the session leader, that session leader isn't earning his or her pay. I am also not saying the workplace must be saccharin, all sweetness and gooey, either, but it should be a serious, supportive environment both for the material exchange and to accommodate a variety of humans with their weaknesses and differences.

The trainer/facilitator should be the guide to objectives that are clearly understood by the trainees. The path to the objectives should be a shared, participative experience, recognizing there are a variety of styles that a trainee may bring to the experience. My twenty-nine years in training has often shown me that the plan I had for bringing the class to the learning goals was sometimes inferior to one envisioned quite clearly by a trainee. (Sometimes the trainees are closer to the real work problems or have experiences from other companies or assignments to share.) The supportive, participative atmosphere I established for the trainees did enable or encourage that expression of creativity to the benefit of the other trainees and myself.

Such a positive learning atmosphere cannot be established or maintained if my attitude toward an individual clouds my vision of this person; if the image of that trainee in my eyes is negative or causes me anger and impatience. More seriously, this negativism is felt or noticed by the other trainees to the detriment of the training or simulation environment and process.

Shifting the Perspective of the Perception

A couple of psychologists from Connecticut developed a very useful model of perception in the interpersonal. Their names were Joe and Harry and they named this model the Johari window. Through this model we are made aware of a variety of projections we consciously and unconsciously create as well as some perceptions of others.

Joe and Harry, with their "Window," enable us to see four ways we see others and are likewise seen. There is a side of us that is visible to others and of which we are aware; this is called "the Public Window." There is a side to us that we don't show others; that is the "Private Window." There is a side that others see quite easily, but of which we are unaware; this is called the "Blind Window." Finally, there is a side of us that is unavailable to us or to others; this is called the "Unknown." The "Blind" and the "Unknown" windows are the realms of our unconscious. I believe a good example of the blind side coming through is found in the training classroom, when an instructor really doesn't have an answer to a question from an trainee and has elected to bluff his/her way out of embarrassment. The trainees, for the most part, know the trainer is trying to bamboozle them; usually the only one that doesn't know is that trainer.

The exchange from person to person or trainer to trainee is from personality to personality, or persona to persona. The persona is an illusion consciously or unconsciously created by one individual for another depending upon the situation. It is an illusion, not necessarily representative of the individual behind the "mask." Remember, we are also partially responsible for the image created in our consciousness of another person. The illusion is further created by our unconscious. If we harbor hate or prejudice, the image of a person within the category hated, is modified to support our negative opinion. We are our own unconscious propaganda creators.

We also support the interpersonal illusion unconsciously through something called the Pygmalian Effect. If we expect the least from another person, we unconsciously set up events that will eventually prove us correct.

Another illusion is something called the "shadow." If another person's life experiences has enabled them to individual qualities which we are lacking, it is likely, especially if they are the same sex, that we will find we have a disproportionate dislike for them. We will also be very uncomfortable in their presence. (They unconsciously remind us of our undeveloped side.) This negative reaction will enable us to form numerous, reasons ("Reason is a whore!" Martin Luther) for disliking them, and this may lead to an occurrence of the Pygmalian Effect. When that affect is in place, we unconsciously set up events to prove that they were the despicable persons we suspected all along. Ideally, in spite of the uncomfortable feelings we experience in their presence, we should overcome our urge to flee and try to get to know them, for they may hold the key to getting to know ourselves better. We likewise are capable of returning the consciousness raising favor. If we are personally repulsed by someone entrusted to us for training and qualification, and the "Pass/Fail" decision is ours, it would be easy to see how we could lose our objectivity.

As easily as we can lose our objectivity due to irrational repulsion to our shadow, we are equally vulnerable on the other side of the interpersonal dynamic wheel. We are susceptible to being influenced by attraction.

There is a Greek myth that tells the story of the first human beings being born having both sexes, that were round, and completely happy. They were so happy, that they made the gods jealous. The gods were so jealous that they separated the two halves and scattered them throughout the world. Since that time, humans have been looking for their other half. Above that, you say? We trainers are far too smart to be swayed by such nonsense. I say those characteristics that contribute to making a person smart (aiming for perfection rather than completeness), by western standards, makes them all the more likely to be influenced by an attraction.

Smart, in the west (to the occidental mind), means a level of perfection has been reached. A person has "specialized" or "focalized" in some area so well that they are unquestionably expert. Nature charges a substantial price for being one sided; in nature, there is always a loss imposed for every gain. The price for perfection is the loss in the development as a 'complete' individual. The greater the work toward perfection, the greater the loss in the other areas that contribute to making a complete individual; subsequently, the more likely there is an area in which another human may be attractive or represent a shadow.

These attractions or repulsions are unconscious and potent influences on our will and are therefore difficult to mask. It is essential, however, that we trainers/facilitators know these possibilities and with the realization, take the necessary precautions to protect ourselves as well as the trainee/qualifier. We should also, for our own state of mind, realize the difficulty presented by these situations, and never forget how human and vulnerable we and our trainees are to illusions in the interpersonal.

Just as repulsive the image of a person representing a shadow in our mind, the person to whom we are attracted is far more appealing. In either case we are forced to deal with an illusion. Now you at least have the knowledge that this does exist and can properly prepare yourself for a difficult period of attaining objectivity.

I have heard many a respected psychologist state how impossible it was to completely eliminate the "shadow" effect. They all state you can corner it, but to a man/woman, they say, it is impossible to eliminate altogether. Perhaps this is a way for nature to provide the necessary experiences contributing to our individual growth.

Swiss Psychiatrist, Philosopher, Professor Carl G. Jung, M.D. said the following of the difficulty with the shadow:

The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. This act is the essential condition for any kind of self-knowledge, and it therefore, as a rule, meets with considerable resistance. Indeed, self-knowledge as a psychotherapeutic measure frequently requires much painstaking work extending over a long period.²

The one sure method I know to reduce the chance of unwanted impact of the influences of 'shadow' or attraction is through self development, and at that root is self-knowledge.

Another tool in the dynamics of the interpersonal is through understanding of "Indirect Communication." San Diego Psychologist John A. Sanford describes 'Indirect Communication:'

One way in which indirect communication may take place is through the body, which sends its own signals even through we may not be aware of them. Examples of body communication include all the psychogenically induced physical symptoms with which a doctor is familiar - the high blood pressure that turns out to be a result of stress or anxiety, the simulated heart attack that turns out to have no organic basis, and a host of other symptoms, from dizziness to headaches, that may have no organic basis.

Body communication also includes so-called body language. As we unconsciously wring or twist our hands we are telegraphing to others a message about our unexpressed anger, frustration, or tension. Our stooped posture, somber way of walking is like a neon light that tells the world about our great psychological burden we are carrying, our despair, or our feeling of spiritual fatigue. The unconscious changes of inflection in our voice often say more than our words about how we are feeling, and people who are sensitive to others respond to voice modulation as well as to words.

Skillful doctors and counselors learn to observe the body movements of their patients. A good physician has her patient under scrutiny from the moment she steps into her office... All of this tells him a great deal about his client's inner state. These messages can be an open book that can be easily read by those who know the language.³

We can be more successful in the interpersonal through more actively developing our communication to trainees. We may be engulfed in a tremendous pressure (perhaps resulting from a shadow issue) to phrase our statements to an trainee in a challenging, antagonistic manner, when we could achieve more by simply rephrasing our statements so that they are more supportive, and motivational.

Another helpful suggestion for the developing trainer/facilitator would be through developing our skills in active listening; that is, listening to understand, not to judge or evaluate. Logical or Value (Thinking or Feeling) should happen after you've clearly understood what the trainee was trying to communicate. Listening to understand the trainee's feelings is as important as understanding their thoughts, even in a technical environment.

The Psychological Functions and Supporting the Illusion Necessary for Simulation.

While touring simulator training facilities internationally while I prepared my report on their use in training, I witnessed a scene which greatly influenced me in this subject. We walked into a simulator area in a generating station training center in the British Isles while an exercise was in progress. The participants included one trainer/ facilitator and one trainee. The trainee (I hope not because of our entrance) did something to trip the turbine (this means he responded to a problem incorrectly which caused the virtual generating station's electronic supervisory system to begin the sequence needed to bring the turbine down to zero speed). The trainer elbowed the trainee away from the control panels with such force as to cause him to slide across the tile floor. The trainer made no attempt to hide his anger at the trainee, calling him a SOB and soundly dressing him down for the error.

Frankly, I was stunned. It was clear to me and the other observers that the trainer was so completely engrossed in the illusion of the simulation (the dynamic presentation of system operation of these simulators is very convincing) that he failed to remember that he was involved in a training exercise. He reacted as if the trainee had actually tripped the turbine in the real generating station, including taking over the controls and bringing the system back "on-line." The trainer was a former control room operator with supervisory experience. I am certain this scene is repeated around the world wherever the very realistically operating simulators are used for training and qualification. It was a very disturbing scene, but enlightening to my study of the use of simulators and simulation.

Most trainers in generating station simulator training facilities are subject matter experts (or unfortunately people who were difficult to manage in the real generating station). This usually means they are technically trained in the complex system operation of the generating station. It also means they usually have no training in how people learn, or the other important humanities elements necessary to economic and effective training dynamics. Sometimes they are interpersonally ineffective like the errant trainer described above.

To properly support the human side of the simulation issue, trainers/facilitators must have a sound psychology/humanities education and experience in addition to a working knowledge of the field for which the simulation relates. The psychology/philosophical education must include studies of behaviorism and also studies which would enable a sound working definition of the individual. The trainer must be able to recognize and be able to constructively define individual strengths and weaknesses.

To aid in individual style identification for hiring and promotion, I understand the CIA uses (I suppose along with other devices) the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)⁴. This test is based on principals developed by Carl Jung, M.D. In establishing simulation programs, it is necessary (for objectivity) to establish clear goals for actively and faithfully participating in the exercise. It is also necessary to establish corresponding standards by which success can be measured.

Classifying Tasks to be Simulated

Tasks to be simulated should be definable within the following model to appreciate their value as elements of the job being simulated:

Level one: This is the most elementary of tasks; we all have these tasks as part of our accountabilities. They merely consist of an initiating cue, a referenced or recalled procedure and the action.

Level 1 Task

Level two: In this level task, the cue is established as a result of some analysis against a standard, such as the instructions to sum the level of three meters and cue the action if the total exceeds a specified limit.

Level 2 Task

Level three: This still involves some analysis or synthesis on the part of the employee, but no standard is established for the initiating cue. This is left up to the initiative of the employee. Once the cue is established, a procedure is available describing the process necessary for the completion of the task.

Level 3 Task

Level four: The initiating cue for this level task also depends upon the initiative of the employee to determine the need for action. This highest level task also has no procedure in place defining the process necessary to complete the task. Success is dependent upon the skill or technique of the employee.

Level 4 Task

One could call a level one task a production task and level four task an art. If you must accomplish the task through interface with other people, logically, and correctly you must consider increasing the difficulty of the task.

Each action must be dissected and sequenced into its primary components (observable and not observable):

• Perception, combining on-board knowledge and awareness;
• judgment including thinking and feeling;
• decision making including courage, wisdom, and confidence; and,
• action taking, which requires courage, wisdom and perhaps some willingness to take risks.

There are people who naturally will do better at handling details and prefer technical work over jobs requiring face to face problem solving with other human beings. Likewise there are those that relish the human contact over the technical details. Even within the technical arena, there are people that found out after beginning their career that they prefer using their technical knowledge to sell the product rather than contributing to its development or production. Not everyone is ideally suited to be a fighter pilot regardless of their dreams of doing so; not everyone is best suited to be chief operator of a large power plant with its considerable responsibilities.

Through psyche or style typing, you may find there are ways of saving your company money through pre-qualification type testing of applicants. There are a few good testing devices that would aid in that goal. An understanding of the concepts presented in this book is a necessary first step.

Perhaps, had the work of Carl Jung had more influence in American education in the past fifty years, we would not be faced with such devastating career moves when people realize at mid-life they chose the wrong path for themselves. Who could tell how far humanity would have progressed if people had the tools at the beginning of the technical revolution to clearly see their part in bringing it about. These tools which are the legacy of Professor Jung could have contributed to correcting this serious failing.

Fortunately, there are serious attempts to develop testing material based upon his concepts and the additional work of his followers. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)⁵ is a very popular instrument for defining functional numinence and psyche attitude (Introversion or Extraversion). It is, in my opinion, very weak in interpreting the meaning of the results as they apply to a production environment.

The "I Speak" series from Drake Beam Morin⁶ does a good job sticking to the basics and thereby being more easily understood. It doesn't require additional training in interpretation and is closely aligned to Jung's model.

Introversion and extraversion are attitudes of the psyche that we can all relate to at different times. When one or the other is habitual, we call that being an introvert or an extravert. This is one way of typing a person. If the experience of achieving an increase in profits for a time period is more fun or personally motivating than the actual goal, you may be an introvert. If you are more object oriented and the profit figures goal really determines your focus, rather than the thrill of the work, then you may normally be an extravert.

The popular definitions of the terms are somewhat lacking for practical use. A person may be an extravert and not boisterous, also a person may be quiet and not be an introvert. The attitude of the psyche regarding subject and object determine the attitude type of the individual. The person normally introverted may turn very extraverted when circumstances warrant and visa-versa. I am sure if you see yourself as normally introverted, taking the world in prior to decisions, reflective rather then direct, there are events that "turn you on," so to speak. You become very object oriented, your focus upon the objective becomes direct, the libido (energy) has made its mark upon your behavior, you are now an extravert.

Also the staunchest extravert, normally direct, clear minded, and focused has times when they'd prefer to reflect upon a problem rather than approaching it directly. At those times, they are introverted.

There are other considerations in psychological typology, those are the peculiar psychologies that result from a numinence⁸ of one of the psychological functions. If a person normally approaches life through the thinking function, they are said to be a thinker. If they normally deal with problems from a value point of view first, in other words from the feeling function, they are termed feelers. Likewise, if they tend to rely most heavily upon the senses, they are 'Sensors.' The same applies to intuitors.

Carl Jung said the following of how we favor one function over another:

...Experience shows that it is practically impossible, owing to adverse circumstances in general, for anyone to develop all his psychological functions simultaneously. The demands of society compel a man to apply himself first and foremost to the differentiation of the function with which he is best equipped by nature, or which will secure him the greatest social success. Very frequently, indeed as a general rule, a man identifies more or less completely with the most favoured and hence the most developed function. It is this that gives rise to the various psychological types. As a consequence of this one-sided development, one or more functions are necessarily retarded. Those functions may be properly called inferior in a psychological but not in a psychopathological sense, since they are in no way morbid but merely backward as compared to the favored function.⁹

Each individual's psychology, when understood and appreciated, can bring its strengths to an organization or a production goal. The recognition and proper application of this by the organization or society can pay back manifold. It also enables the definition of the weaker side of us all, and thereby the key to self development. Unless we are able to understand our weaknesses, how can we go about correcting them? The strength and its corresponding weakness may be defined thus:

If you are a Sensor your weak side is Intuition; if you are a Thinker, it is Feeling. To really be able to sort this out, you first have to understand the peculiar psychologies that result when one psychological function is the normal choice in approaching life problems. We will do this with a thorough description of these psychologies. With practice, you should be able to pick out your psychological type and that of others. (Remember the definition of the term, 'persona.')

Ideally, people learning this model start the study by simply contrasting the extremes of the thinker, feeler, intuitor and sensor. Nature makes our study a bit more complicated by adding combinations, and with practice the observer can recognize people who are intuitive feelers, sensing thinkers, intuitive thinkers and sensing feelers. (Perhaps I should point out that if you use the wheel depicted in Figure 4 you may find it easier to remember the primary or cardinal types and the combinations. For instance, there is no thinking-feeling type or intuitive-sensation type.) This adds a mere four more types to consider created out of four basic functions. If you are able to orchestrate the incredible system complexity of a complex organization or other technological wonders, this algebra of human psychology we present here should be a piece of cake.

The two information gathering functions never operate on their own, they must rely upon the rational (thinking or feeling) functions to relate to the ego. When one combination is habitual, this defines the type combination.

Naturally, I would expect the same negative reaction from the reader that I experienced at the start of my study; I feared I would approach each individual with less open mindedness with this perspective, and would be guilty of pigeon holing.

The purpose of typing is not to 'pigeon hole' anyone but to establish an algebra, a geometry with which to begin defining individuality and apply what is defined to individual situations. The development of these skills would also apply to:

• better understand others;
• better individual and organizational management;
• or to get a better working handle on a political situation.

Conclusion

I believe for complex, (so-called, knowledge-based work, and simulations, we should be considering the analytical advantage of working with functional types. If we did consider the functional types from the perspective of basic task types, and by virtue of the usual (mostly unconscious and unobservable) flow from perception to action:

that we'd produce more efficient and effective simulations and case studies.

In considering the individual trainee, we should also consider their adult development with respect to the two dimensional type/attitude model. If a simulation learning and critiquing experience were designed to test individual or team performance in the face of the unexpected, (that is, they are to take timely and appropriate action that is a result of a decision made through sound value and logical judgement, that was itself initiated through keen perception), then the descriptions within the above model will be helpful to you. Attacking performance problems only using behavioral, or statistically supported models, while otherwise useful in developing training and performance improvement programs, won't help when the performance is an individual challenge, or an individual within a team challenge.

Notes

¹The level required to bridge consciousness, to make us aware of its existence. Such as a drop of perfume in an eight room house, one candle-power at four hundred feet, etc.

² C. G. Jung, "Aion" Collected Works, Volume 9,II, P8, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey

³ John A. Sanford, "Between People, Communicating One-to-One" Published by the Paulist Press, 545 Island Road, Ramsey, New Jersey, 07446

⁴ Reference recent testimony by a female witness at the Gates Senate Confirmation Hearings.

⁵ This is available to qualified/certified users from the Consulting Psychology Press, Inc. 577 College Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94306. The Association for Psychological Type in Gainesville, Florida offer training and certification in this instrument.

⁶ The "I-SPEAK your language" Series of materials by Dr. Paul P. Mok, includes video tapes, tests and very well prepared text that present a very down to earth, easy to understand description of the functional types. The series ignores the attitudinal types and for many uses, this is adequate. The material is available from: DBM or Drake Beam Morin, Inc., 277 Park Avenue, New York, New York 10172

⁸ Has some favor as a selected function. Unconsciously preferred or selected function.

⁹ C. G. Jung, "Psychological Types" Collected Works, Volume 6, Page 450, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey

{/viewonly}