The smell of fear, and its impact on risk taking
It's often said that you can smell fear, and indeed when people are nervous they release a chemical signal that's detectable on a subconscious level by those close to them. So far so standard. Indeed the 'smell of fear' is a part of the popular lexicon.
Here is where it gets interesting though. Researchers recently took this fear drenched sweat and analysed how it impacts upon our propensity for risk taking. The researchers first asked participants to undertake a high wire obstacle course to get them nicely spooked up, although it must be said they can't have been as scared as the guys repairing this radio tower (had to get this video into a blog somehow - watch it and come back!). Guessing those guys must have a whole lot of sweat! Anyway, back to the blog.
So they put the participants through the obstacle course to induce sweating, then asked them to play a game of poker. To spice up the game, one group had bags of the scary sweat hung underneath the table, whereas another group had bags of non-scary sweat generated from people on exercise bikes.
The scary sweat table made higher risk bets than the non-scary sweat table. In other words, the detection of another person's anxiety made them more willing to take risks. Quite why this should be remains unclear.
When both groups were asked to rate the smell of each of the scary and non-scary sweat, they found both to smell pretty bad, but could not distinguish between them, so the different reaction is it seems purely subconscious.
Whilst it isn't entirely clear why this happens, past research has shown that scary sweat and non-scary sweat activate different parts of the brain, and the researchers in this instance suggest a fight or flight type reaction is perhaps the best hypothesis.
Anyway, there you have it, if you want your team to be a bit more adventurous, try sprinkling some scary sweat into the room.
ps, what did you think of the repair man video?
Comments
Ok first things first, that video is insane. Those guys seriously have balls of steel!!
The fight and flight thing would certainly make sense. If you're under threat then you're more likely to take risks to get out of that situation I would think.
OMG that video. I think I'd be doing a bit more than sweating if I was up there! lol.
My first questions is:
Were there really only two poker groups? Or did they do the same thing multiple times (multiple game of poker, with different players or player combinations each time)?
That would seem pretty pertinent, as if it was just based on two games of poker with two different sets of people the results don't really indicate anything at all - other than if you have two groups play two separate games of poker the bets made in one game probably won't be exactly the same as the bets made in the other, which I'm pretty sure anybody with half a brain already knows.
Hi Thomas, my mistake, they didn't actually play poker, but rather a risk game created by the researcher. The full report can be obtained here.