küchen modern klein
- we live in a universe where statisticallydisorder is king. as time moves forward,things fall apart. stars burn out.energy spreads out. entropy conquers all. but humans, life, fightsthat trend. we build things. we organize things. we add information.
so why is that we lovedestroying things? [shouts] exploding fireworks. fights and crashes. even popping bubble wrap. ugh! tiny cute things can make us want to just squeeze 'emto death. why?
[electronic music] ♪ ♪ the power to destroyis a delicious one. even just holding this here, knowing i can drop it, i am in control. i can exert my will in adramatic and irreversible way. ready? ready.
ugh.[laughs] beautiful. why does that feel so goodto do, or even just watch? for me, throwing it to its deathwas almost relaxing, like i feel calmer nowafter being destructive, like i've ventedsome pent-up energy. or anger? why do we like breakings thingswhen we're angry?
there's a growing trend of businesses anger rooms that are popping up in places like texas and toronto. people pay to visit these anger rooms and let off steam by smashing mock-ups of workplaces, kitchens, and more. catharsis theory proposesthat such acts of destruction reduce our anger. but do they?
sometimes, but sometimesthey don't. this is what makes studyingthe mind so difficult. researchers are still lookinginto the specifics and the variables involved,and i want to see firsthand and in person what it's likewhen people get angry and then break things. will then be more or lessviolent afterwards? to demonstrate catharsis theory, we set up our own anger room
to see whether or not breaking things will help calm down some angry people. our subjects think they're participating in a study about opposing political views, so we've asked them to write an essay on different polarizing topics. - come in.- kashona? hi. how are you?i'm michael. - hi, michael.
- it's nice to meet you. i was just with yourco-participant clint. he's in another room. i'm gonna give your essayto clint, and he's gonna critique it, and you're goingto critique his. - okay, thank you.- see you soon. - he wrote a lot.i didn't write that much. okay.
- each of our subjects has been paired with a man named clint, and they will be critiquing each other's essays. - "police officers havea very difficult job. they have to protect us mainlyfrom people of color." [laughs] - the thing is... okay, here we go. i'm actually clint.
"overblown, un-american.get over it." my job-- or rather, clint's job-- is to make our subjects mad so they can test our anger room. "you should be ashamed." - "you deserve what's comingto you." what a asshole. ha.changed it to black. that's better.
oops. - okay, kashona.i'm back. and you were with clint.okay. - mm-hmm.- let's go through what he wrote just quickly. - he wrote--- did i put that that way? - no, you didn't.- did you turn it around? - i did turn it around. he seems like a bigotor somebody.
i didn't want to keep lookingat his face. - he's responded toyour essay there. - we can't tell people whereto go to eat for lunch, what car to drive; like, that just reallyirritates me. - this is a person that ismaking arguments that are not based inany fact. - he's clearly someonewho thinks that the people who are onsocial programs
are lazy. - i was like,"what the [bleep]?" - getting fired up, mother--ooh, i'm getting fired up. - it's disgusting. - i got an f-plus? oh, i hope i don't see himin the hallway. he's a dick, and that is why he is partof the reason why our country [bleep] sucksright now.
because he's stupid. - well, i think that was pretty effective. we've got a lot of angry people on our hands, so will demolishing things calm them down or will acts of destruction throw fuel on the fire? [dramatic music] let's explore catharsis theory with an expert. - the modern view of catharsis
is that by acting out we release sort of likea pressure valve and that releases that energy in order for us to sort of build up again and handle everyday distress. - people who are angryand aggressive who then act that out, whatwould they feel afterwards? - what many studies have found is that it's a short-livedrelease,
and it feels good--it feels really good to release-- but what happens in the brain is, the brain enjoys that. there's really a reward to build up that pressure again and then release it again. it's a temporary fix,as far as we know. - i didn't realizeit was so complicated and still being researched. i thought it wasblack and white.
it was--you do this,and you release the emotion and it's gone. - yeah, not as much. we don't have thisperfect definition of catharsis,where everybody agrees, here's how it works,here's how it ends up. - well, let's see if catharsis works for us. now that clint has sufficientlyangered all of our subjects... - he's more like a [bleep]pussy, as far as i'm concerned.
- it's time to put catharsis theory to the test. some subjects will be allowed to actively take out their anger on all of these beautiful art objects. you have completely free reign to break anything in this room. - what?- okay? other subjects are instructed to sit in the room passively.
i want you to reflect on the essay, the arguments, the critiques, and also on the objectsin this room. - am i going to meet clintor not? - no, you are not.- okay. - that's not part of this study. - okay, got you. - wil these subjects feel less angry
after their violent acts of destruction? only one way to find out. [rock music] [elevator music] when we are angry, the body's adrenal glands release cortisol and adrenaline, readying the body and mind for fight mode. - but catharsis theory hypothesizes that letting it out relieves feelings of aggression.
[crack] will these subjects feel less angry after their violent acts of destruction? - okay, i'm done. - before we move on to the final step of our anger room demonstration, maybe we can gain insight from someone who makes a living by hitting. not objects but other people.
mark smith, aka "rhino," is a champion bodybuilder, boxer, and uk gladiator who knows a thing or two about how to destroy an opponent. so when you're going intoa fight, you know that you're goingto get hurt. - yes.- you know that you're going hurt someone else. how do you psych yourself up
to be good at that? - when you get into a fight, you want to stick toyour game plan, stay focused, and be relaxed. - relaxed. because i would have thought you'd want to go in angry. - no, because if you go intoo angry, all you're doing is...
and you're not thinkingstraight, it turns into, like,a school brawl. it's a very tactical game.- right. - the eye of the tiger,like rocky. - but this is fascinating to me, because you would think that tophysically outfight someone, in nature, we would have evolvedto run off of angry and fear. - that's like two lions;i agree with you there. two lions attack and gofull out, don't they?
there's no pace in that fightwhatsoever, like animals, but you have toknow when to be an animal and at what point in the fight. bang!- oh! - but, like--so it's point in-- - i'm a very jumpy,flinchy person. - it's knowing when to pullthe trigger. - if you ever find yourselfangry in your real life, do you find it helpful to puncha punching bag...
- definitely.- yeah? i will get angry, like,i'm on the phone with my bank, and i might thinkslamming a door or just hanging up and throwingmy phone on the bed-- - no, don't throw your phone,and don't slam doors. - why?- just come and exercise and hit the bag;you'll feel so much better. - what's the difference, though? they're both, like,active things.
- well, you're not doingsomething spontaneous and acting on impulse. [growls]it's premeditated. you know you're gonna go, "okay,i'm gonna pack my bag, "i'm gonna go to the gym, i'll be releasing endorphins." you'll feel more relaxedand you'll be able to assess the bank manager who's beenirritating you for the last hour.
- can i--can i try hittingsome things? - definitely.you can try hitting me. - can i really?- yes. are you gonna hit back?- i will-- i will let you know i'm there. - okay. awesome.do i look scary? - [laughs]- oh, yeah. is rhino correct that violent acts of rage
won't calm you down? but the controlled aggression used in boxing will actually relax you? i guess i'm about to find out. [bell dings] - yes, like that. no, no. - [groaning] - no.come on.
- well done! good work. - i came out of the fight having learned two things. one, i'm a wimp. and two, rhino was right; when physical violence is channeled in an organized sport like boxing, it can actually reduce feelings of aggression. i had this weird combinationof feelings.
as tired as i am...- yep. - i'm very amped up. - so now you feel it.- yeah. i don't feel aggressive. - you feel relaxed? - i wouldn't sayi'm relaxed here; i would just sayi'm clearer here, and i feel more in control. - eye of the tiger, rock.
- yeah, well, maybe it's the eyeof the kitten, who is in a bad mood, but, man, that was great. it's time for the final part of our anger room demonstration. all of our subjects will be taking part in what they think is a reflex test against their opponent clint. in reality, of course, there is no client, and what we're really looking at
is the catharsis theory. have our subjects' levels of anger been affected according to whether they committed violent acts of destruction. or not. stage three is going to betesting how your reflexes are workingat this very moment. okay? so this right here is
a static electricity generator that is going to providea little bit of a shock. we're putting one on clintas well, and he's in another room, but you both havethe same setup. once our subjects are fitted with the shock bracelet, they're introduced to the test's control panel. - [chuckles]look at this. - yeah, it's very simplified,
but that really helps keepthe variables low. so both you and clint will becompeting in a bit of a game. the yellow light is going tocome on at some point, and as soon as you see itcome on, hit that orange button. and if you hit this buttonbefore clint does, you'll see the green lightcome on. and that will mean that you won. and clint needs to receivea small shock, okay?
and you can set this to a levelof your choosing. - so--okay. light goes on,if i hit this, the green one comes and theni'm allowed to work this contraption. - correct.- which controls how high the voltage and for howlong the voltage. - correct.- okay. - if however, clint pushesthe button before you do,
the red light will come on,indicating-- - my red light and i'm aboutto get it. - that you'll get a shock, yeah.correct. we'll get a sense of our subjects' level of anger by how they respond to the chance to administer pain to clint. remember, this subject just sat in the anger room passively. - did i get him? oh, all right.
- the green light means our subject wins. how hard will he shock clint? - i'm gonna give you a littlelow one, buddy. [buzzing]there you go. just a kiss. ah, got me. - the red light means clint won. how will our subject respond to getting shocked?
[static buzz]- ah! [laughs]you son of a bitch. [chuckles] - not only does this subject not seem angry, he's actually enjoying the game. - all right. [buzzing]how about that? i'm not gonna harm you, man. gave ya a little low one.
- he actually seems relatively calm. will our other passive subject follow suit? [static buzz] clint gave her a painful shock. let's see how strongly she retaliates. [buzzing] even after getting a shock from clint, this subject is still hesitant to give him a shock in return.
[over pa] okay, clint and drea, this is just a reminder that you are-- you are allowed to changethat dial to what you think would beappropriate. - yeah, i just don't want to,like, hurt him or anything. i'm just gonna keep it at low. - so the angry subjects who sat passively seemed to have calmed down. now it's time to check on the subjects who acted violently
in the anger room. did letting out all of that aggression relieve their anger? [over pa] the experiment will begin now. - take it, take it, take it. - kashona. that's--that's fine. what level is your dial at? - um...
low. - he cranked that all the way up and he's laying on that button. this subject was one of the most aggressive people in the anger room, but that doesn't seem to have calmed him down. - among our subjects, it seems that those who physically vented their anger are still pretty angry
compared to that subjects who sat quietly. - so at least in this case, catharsis therapy was not effective. in fact, in some cases, the subject seems even angrier. - ow! [bleep] you know what?that's too hard. you [bleep] dick! why don't you come in here and[bleep] talk to me in person?
- oh, my god.oh, my god. - we're all familiar with the concept of rubbernecking. it's hard to look away from a car crash. - oh, my god. - but why? there are surely a myriadof reasons, but one may be that ata primitive level, witnessing danger allows usto learn and prepare for it. activities where dangerand destruction are likely
are exciting. starting in our childhood, physical aggression is encouraged, even in games. take a piã±ata for example. as a special birthday treat, we are told to beat up an effigy with a baseball bat. and when we hit it hard enough, we are rewarded with candy.
what parts of a child's urgeto destroy are innate versus learned? well, there is a groundbreakingexperiment that shed light on this. in 1961, albert banduraconducted a famous and controversial studycalled the bobo doll experiment. he had adults act violently to an inflatable clown doll in the presence of children. then left the children alone with the same doll
to see if they would mimic the destructive behavior they'd observed. disturbingly, the children did indeed copy the adults, and lashed out at the doll, often getting very creative with their aggression and destruction. aggression comes in manyunexpected forms. why is it so hard to resistpopping bubbles in bubble wrap, for instance?
do we like the sound? the destruction?or both? it's like we're naturally drawnto destroying these harmless plastic bubblesof air. destructive tendencies seemto be so engrained in us that we even respondto positive stimulation with urges to destroy. one of the strangest thingsabout destruction is how people want to hug thingsto death,
especially things that areextremely cute, like a puppy. we don't know exactly whythis is, but there is a studythat demonstrates the effect by using bubble wrapand our desire to pop these bubbles. [popping]oh, yeah. can sweet adorable stimuli really insight aggressive behavior?
we're about to find out. - thank you for participatingin our focus test. - no problem. - please make yourselfcomfortable. - we've recruited subjects who think they're taking part in a motor skills test. - are you familiar withthis product? - yes.- have you popped the bubbles in bubble wrap before?
- yes. - but really what we're testing is their aggressive response to cute stimuli. - so you will be viewinga montage of images. please pop bubblesin the bubble wrap. you may pop as many or as fewas you like. just be sure to startwhen the images begin and stop when the images end. - popping bubbles is like squeezing a stress ball.
it's a great way to express aggression. the question is, will the subjects pop more bubbles when watching neutral images or cute ones? first we showed our subjects these basic landscapes, which are not designed to elicit an emotional response. [pop] and we tallied the total number of bubbles popped. - okay, great.i'll take those. all right, we're gonna dopart two,
where you'll be viewinganother set of images. - we also showed them images of... puppies. [playful piano music] oh, look at that one! don't you just want to hug it and squeeze it to-- well, okay, you get the point. to keep things even, half of the subjects viewed the landscapes first
and half viewed the puppies first. but either way, they seemed to pop a lot more bubbles while watching the puppies. except for this guy. so-called cute aggression is a universal psychological phenomenon. researchers believe the brain's response to both cuteness and aggression results in the release of dopamine
implicated in the reward and pleasure, but if we are unable to physically touch cute stimuli, the desire to do so can be regulated by substituting aggressive physical behavior. will our results reflect this theory? - how did you feelabout the images that you saw? - they were cool. - how did you feel aboutthe puppies? - i love them.- they were very tiny
and adorable. and i wanted to hug them. - and how did you feel aboutpopping the bubble wrap? - i felt like i wanted to play with the dogs or-- i wanted to play with the bubblewrap with the dogs. - in our simple test, our subjects popped an average of 33% more bubbles while watching cute puppies, as opposed to boring landscapes.
- so was the bubble wrapa stand-in for the puppies? - i guess so. - in fact, the majority of our subjects popped more bubbles while watching puppies. but not this guy. remember him? - so how did you feel aboutseeing the dog pictures? - um, i've always been moreof a cat person. - it seems sometimes cuteness is a matter of perspective.
our relationship withdestruction is not a simple one. it can release endorphins and relax our minds. it can amp us up and make us even more aggressive. it can even help us regulate our emotional reactions to cute things. destruction can be useful, it can be dangerous, and it can be a lot of fun. and as always,thanks for watching.