Comments on: Self Confidence Built into Genes? I don’t agree http://confident1.com/self-confidence-built-into-genes-i-dont-agree Build self confidence, be more confident, confidence building help Sat, 12 May 2012 09:56:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: William http://confident1.com/self-confidence-built-into-genes-i-dont-agree/comment-page-1#comment-8455 William Mon, 20 Jun 2011 21:06:28 +0000 http://confident1.com/?p=958#comment-8455 I think it has more to do with how society treats you. I think it has more to do with how society treats you.

]]> By: Michael http://confident1.com/self-confidence-built-into-genes-i-dont-agree/comment-page-1#comment-8141 Michael Sun, 26 Dec 2010 13:10:21 +0000 http://confident1.com/?p=958#comment-8141 It's all in the head. I've played sports professionally when I was young and it's not about genes, it's all in the head and how you focus yourself and view yourself among others and how you see your development. Psychology is a great part and should never be under-estimated. It’s all in the head. I’ve played sports professionally when I was young and it’s not about genes, it’s all in the head and how you focus yourself and view yourself among others and how you see your development. Psychology is a great part and should never be under-estimated.

]]> By: Cliff Sutton http://confident1.com/self-confidence-built-into-genes-i-dont-agree/comment-page-1#comment-6992 Cliff Sutton Mon, 10 Aug 2009 13:46:54 +0000 http://confident1.com/?p=958#comment-6992 Let's throw another factor into the mix! Self Confidence is a combination of lots of things, genetics included, which influence the level we possess. How about time of the year you are born. This insteresting study showed that kids born Jan. to June are more likely to make it to the NHL than those born July to December. http://www.socialproblemindex.ualberta.ca/RelAgeMinorHockeyCJBS.pdf Interesting to consider this in light of self confidence. Self confidence partly based on relationship to peers in terms of maturity, size, comptence. Once again many factors, many of which we can influence and therefore change outcomes. Let’s throw another factor into the mix!
Self Confidence is a combination of lots of things, genetics included, which influence the level we possess. How about time of the year you are born. This insteresting study showed that kids born Jan. to June are more likely to make it to the NHL than those born July to December.
http://www.socialproblemindex.ualberta.ca/RelAgeMinorHockeyCJBS.pdf
Interesting to consider this in light of self confidence. Self confidence partly based on relationship to peers in terms of maturity, size, comptence. Once again many factors, many of which we can influence and therefore change outcomes.

]]> By: Eva-Lena http://confident1.com/self-confidence-built-into-genes-i-dont-agree/comment-page-1#comment-6959 Eva-Lena Fri, 24 Jul 2009 16:33:32 +0000 http://confident1.com/?p=958#comment-6959 I think that we are born with a certain (various from person to person) degree of fear, for example for trying new things. Some persons are not afraid of anything, so for them nothing feels challenging. It's much about chemical reactions. If you are afraid of many things already as a child, you must work harder during your phases in life to get what some others can get much easier; some almost automatically. And you must maybe work active for changing attitudes you received/developed from early childhood experiences. So, I think we learn ourselves to get much of our self confidence, but that we start from different areas and also get it by different experiences. I also think that the parents communication with the children affect a lot. But I am just thinking - am no expert at all. ;) I think that we are born with a certain (various from person to person) degree of fear, for example for trying new things. Some persons are not afraid of anything, so for them nothing feels challenging. It’s much about chemical reactions.

If you are afraid of many things already as a child, you must work harder during your phases in life to get what some others can get much easier; some almost automatically.

And you must maybe work active for changing attitudes you received/developed from early childhood experiences.

So, I think we learn ourselves to get much of our self confidence, but that we start from different areas and also get it by different experiences. I also think that the parents communication with the children affect a lot.

But I am just thinking – am no expert at all. ;)

]]> By: David http://confident1.com/self-confidence-built-into-genes-i-dont-agree/comment-page-1#comment-6957 David Fri, 24 Jul 2009 07:13:27 +0000 http://confident1.com/?p=958#comment-6957 Thanks for your comments Konstantin - I'm certainly no fan of the Daily Mail, but if you do a google search there are many articles with the same interpretation of the research. And from the Telegraph, Plomin is quoted ""Our research shows that it is certainly genetically influenced and that self confidence predicts achievement at school.". Looking back at the Mail article, it was definitely Plomin who introduced tennis into the argument and suggested/implied that Henman was flawed. And, whilst its not a direct quote from her, his colleague Ms Greven suggested "further research could now be done to establish which are the 'confidence genes'." The other problem, of course, is that terms like "self confidence" "self esteem" etc. have different meanings to different people, and we could debate all day as to whether "self perceived abilities" is the same as "self confidence" Thanks for your robust contribution to the debate, and bringing the source article to the table Thanks for your comments
Konstantin – I’m certainly no fan of the Daily Mail, but if you do a google search there are many articles with the same interpretation of the research. And from the Telegraph, Plomin is quoted “”Our research shows that it is certainly genetically influenced and that self confidence predicts achievement at school.”. Looking back at the Mail article, it was definitely Plomin who introduced tennis into the argument and suggested/implied that Henman was flawed. And, whilst its not a direct quote from her, his colleague Ms Greven suggested “further research could now be done to establish which are the ‘confidence genes’.”
The other problem, of course, is that terms like “self confidence” “self esteem” etc. have different meanings to different people, and we could debate all day as to whether “self perceived abilities” is the same as “self confidence”
Thanks for your robust contribution to the debate, and bringing the source article to the table

]]> By: Vanessa http://confident1.com/self-confidence-built-into-genes-i-dont-agree/comment-page-1#comment-6956 Vanessa Fri, 24 Jul 2009 04:38:24 +0000 http://confident1.com/?p=958#comment-6956 Yeah, I don't buy that for a second. I am much more of a nurture vs. nature type of person. .-= Vanessa´s last blog ..<a href="http://notyourmotherscrazy.com/?p=97" rel="nofollow">It’s okay to… blame the bad in your life on random shit.</a> =-. Yeah, I don’t buy that for a second. I am much more of a nurture vs. nature type of person.
.-= Vanessa´s last blog ..It’s okay to… blame the bad in your life on random shit. =-.

]]> By: Konstantin D. A. Scheller http://confident1.com/self-confidence-built-into-genes-i-dont-agree/comment-page-1#comment-6955 Konstantin D. A. Scheller Thu, 23 Jul 2009 23:04:54 +0000 http://confident1.com/?p=958#comment-6955 Well, a bit weird commentry of you and the above comments - that you disagree with something does not mean that it is false, has flaws or is bad research, and even less does it mean that it should not be funded... and, well, to bash it without reading it... not exactly scientific either :D I got the article which you seem to comment on ( http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/122386058/abstract that's the only article by plumin in the magazin for a few years), and following are some quotes... from the abstract: "Although it has been as- sumed that the origins of SPAs are environmental, this ?rst genetic analysis of SPAs yielded a heritability of 51% in a sample of 3,785 pairs of twins, whereas shared environ- ment accounted for only 2% of the variance in SPAs." and at the end ("discussion"): "We conclude that, contrary to extant theories, SPAs are sub- stantially in?uenced by genetic factors, and they are in?uenced by genetic factors at least as much as IQ is." "Finding genetic in?uence on SPAs does not imply that SPAs are impervious to environmental change. Moreover, although about half the variance in SPAs is due to genetic factors, the rest is due to environmental factors." at no point does he mention that there would be a "no confidence gene". More exactly, the article is focused on finding the correlation of "self-perceived abilities" within pairs of twins. So he mentions a "SPA gene") And there it is, the 51%. Which means, that the twins are likely to exhibit a similar level of SPA! This does not imply that they exhibit the same as their parents, this was not measured - but obviously, genetic means, there is something... then, even if there was a self-confidence-in-a-certain-ability gene, that you don't have and your wife does, or the other way around, means that there is a 50% chance the twins got it, so if they have a different level from you... maybe they have the gene of your wife? Or maybe even a combination of the two, something in between. And then, the correlation is just 51%. That is a lot, but still shows that there is a lot of influence of environmental factors. So, to sum it up... you or the daily mail (which is not exactly known as a newspaper that's worth the paper it's printed on) got a few things wrong, which is, that a) the article was not merely about "self-confidence", but about believe in one's own ability (in the measured case it was school achievement in math, language, etc.)) b) it was not about a certain moment but about general performance (as measured by years-end grades) c) the number is just 51% which leaves a lot of environmental variability. Oh, and the article at no point mentions tennis, that's solely that Daily Mail cr** that says it and I guess they asked him about the player or something... Greetings, K .-= Konstantin D. A. Scheller´s last blog ..<a href="http://travel.kdas.de/asides/2008_09_13/76/thought-of-the-moment-0000006-if-life-is-an-illusion" rel="nofollow">Thought of the Moment - #0000006 - If life is an illusion</a> =-. Well, a bit weird commentry of you and the above comments – that you disagree with something does not mean that it is false, has flaws or is bad research, and even less does it mean that it should not be funded… and, well, to bash it without reading it… not exactly scientific either :D

I got the article which you seem to comment on ( http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/122386058/abstract that’s the only article by plumin in the magazin for a few years), and following are some quotes…

from the abstract:
“Although it has been as-
sumed that the origins of SPAs are environmental, this ?rst
genetic analysis of SPAs yielded a heritability of 51% in a
sample of 3,785 pairs of twins, whereas shared environ-
ment accounted for only 2% of the variance in SPAs.”
and at the end (“discussion”):
“We conclude that, contrary to extant theories, SPAs are sub-
stantially in?uenced by genetic factors, and they are in?uenced
by genetic factors at least as much as IQ is.”
“Finding genetic in?uence on SPAs does not imply that SPAs are
impervious to environmental change. Moreover, although about
half the variance in SPAs is due to genetic factors, the rest is due
to environmental factors.”

at no point does he mention that there would be a “no confidence gene”. More exactly, the article is focused on finding the correlation of “self-perceived abilities” within pairs of twins. So he mentions a “SPA gene”) And there it is, the 51%. Which means, that the twins are likely to exhibit a similar level of SPA! This does not imply that they exhibit the same as their parents, this was not measured – but obviously, genetic means, there is something…

then, even if there was a self-confidence-in-a-certain-ability gene, that you don’t have and your wife does, or the other way around, means that there is a 50% chance the twins got it, so if they have a different level from you… maybe they have the gene of your wife? Or maybe even a combination of the two, something in between.

And then, the correlation is just 51%. That is a lot, but still shows that there is a lot of influence of environmental factors.

So, to sum it up… you or the daily mail (which is not exactly known as a newspaper that’s worth the paper it’s printed on) got a few things wrong, which is, that a) the article was not merely about “self-confidence”, but about believe in one’s own ability (in the measured case it was school achievement in math, language, etc.)) b) it was not about a certain moment but about general performance (as measured by years-end grades) c) the number is just 51% which leaves a lot of environmental variability.

Oh, and the article at no point mentions tennis, that’s solely that Daily Mail cr** that says it and I guess they asked him about the player or something…

Greetings,
K
.-= Konstantin D. A. Scheller´s last blog ..Thought of the Moment – #0000006 – If life is an illusion =-.

]]> By: David http://confident1.com/self-confidence-built-into-genes-i-dont-agree/comment-page-1#comment-6947 David Sat, 18 Jul 2009 09:09:52 +0000 http://confident1.com/?p=958#comment-6947 Ben Thanks for the comment. My main gripe with any argument for a genetic cause (to anything) is that it is taken that there is nothing we can do to change it. And like with this research, it gets presented in a very black and white way. As you say, even if there is a genetic influence it is relatively minor compared with the impact of environment, etc.. Ben
Thanks for the comment. My main gripe with any argument for a genetic cause (to anything) is that it is taken that there is nothing we can do to change it. And like with this research, it gets presented in a very black and white way. As you say, even if there is a genetic influence it is relatively minor compared with the impact of environment, etc..

]]> By: Find yourself with a smile... http://confident1.com/self-confidence-built-into-genes-i-dont-agree/comment-page-1#comment-6940 Find yourself with a smile... Tue, 14 Jul 2009 22:42:22 +0000 http://confident1.com/?p=958#comment-6940 A great post, David. This one gets under my skin a bit as well... since I haven't read the research I'll do my best to keep the rant to a minimum...;^) While I suspect that there is some basis to genetic 'influence' to self esteem and confidence... I think it is minor when compared to the influence our training and attitude plays. No one competes at the top in any sport or other activity without tremendous training, and the development of tremendous confidence. At that level of training, any 'genetic' gift becomes more and more insignificant. And no matter how good our 'genetic gifts' or trained in confidence may be, we can all work ourselves into a bad state. All the greats have had bad days. What about people that are incredibly confident in one arena... but a bit uncertain in others? I'm good at teaching Karate, and I feel quite certain of myself when I do it... but I don't know the first thing about playing a flute (or any musical instrument, for that matter), and I would be a bit short on self confidence if I were put in a situation where I had to. Furthermore, in spite of any scientific basis for a 'low self confidence' gene... all it will be used for in practical life is an excuse. We already have plenty of excuses... where are they going with this research, anyway?...;^) keep smiling, Ben .-= Find yourself with a smile...´s last blog ..<a href="http://peacefulprosperity.com/site-review-anmolmehtacom/" rel="nofollow">Site Review: AnmolMehta.com</a> =-. A great post, David.

This one gets under my skin a bit as well… since I haven’t read the research I’ll do my best to keep the rant to a minimum…;^)

While I suspect that there is some basis to genetic ‘influence’ to self esteem and confidence… I think it is minor when compared to the influence our training and attitude plays.

No one competes at the top in any sport or other activity without tremendous training, and the development of tremendous confidence. At that level of training, any ‘genetic’ gift becomes more and more insignificant.

And no matter how good our ‘genetic gifts’ or trained in confidence may be, we can all work ourselves into a bad state. All the greats have had bad days.

What about people that are incredibly confident in one arena… but a bit uncertain in others? I’m good at teaching Karate, and I feel quite certain of myself when I do it… but I don’t know the first thing about playing a flute (or any musical instrument, for that matter), and I would be a bit short on self confidence if I were put in a situation where I had to.

Furthermore, in spite of any scientific basis for a ‘low self confidence’ gene… all it will be used for in practical life is an excuse. We already have plenty of excuses… where are they going with this research, anyway?…;^)

keep smiling,

Ben
.-= Find yourself with a smile…´s last blog ..Site Review: AnmolMehta.com =-.

]]> By: David http://confident1.com/self-confidence-built-into-genes-i-dont-agree/comment-page-1#comment-6922 David Sun, 05 Jul 2009 13:51:45 +0000 http://confident1.com/?p=958#comment-6922 Thanks Evan for your comment and I will look up the book you suggested. It does remind me that I also have an excellent book on the topic of the importance of nurture, as opposed to nature, "They F*** You Up" by Oliver James. Despite the racy title it very much draws on research and has good discussions on the use of twins studies. Thanks Evan for your comment and I will look up the book you suggested. It does remind me that I also have an excellent book on the topic of the importance of nurture, as opposed to nature, “They F*** You Up” by Oliver James. Despite the racy title it very much draws on research and has good discussions on the use of twins studies.

]]>