Trauma-informed practices in psychology, therapy, education, and many other fields are becoming increasingly popular. Researchers have thoroughly documented the impacts of trauma, hence the importance of trauma-informed practices. But in positive psychology, these practices take on an even more hopeful spin. 

In this episode from the Psychology Podcast with Scott Barry Kaufman, psychologist Dan Tomasulo discusses his work in creating hope, something he calls learned hopefulness. Through practicing psychodrama with his patients, Dan has found ways of redirecting thoughts to produce hope rather than fear or anger. Psychodrama is the practice of acting out traumatic or difficult events from one’s past in a therapeutic setting. 

In their conversation, Kaufman and Tomasulo discuss various practices and exercises you can take to learn to foster hope in yourself. As Dan said, “hope is the only positive emotion that requires negativity or uncertainty to be activated.” So, to practice hope, you have to reframe negativity from the past and in the future. What’s more, practicing hope looks an awful lot like choosing a compelling goal, a core tenet of entrepreneurial mindset development. To get started on your own or with those you work with, here is one such exercise called Best Possible Self. Also, check out Dan’s piece from Psychology Today to read more about the exercise.

Glass is fragile, and plastic is resilient, but some systems and functions require stress testing to get stronger. From our muscles and bones to our immune systems, many human systems fit into the “what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger” paradigm. Nassim Taleb coined the term "antifragility" to define this tendency in humans. It goes beyond persistence or even resiliency and, in many ways, interconnects with the concept of learned hopefulness. 

In this video from Big Think, we hear from six big thinkers about their views on hope, resiliency, and antifragility. What each touches on is not only the importance of being able to get back up after hardship but strategies to move forward. This video is not a conversation telling us to embrace unrealistic optimism or chase happiness. It is instead about accepting our situation and working through what we can control. 

The final vignette focuses on how influential leaders learn to take small steps towards leaning into fear, learning from it, and becoming more antifragile in the process. So, what is something you can do today to become more antifragile?

Long-time followers of ELI’s work will know the importance of developing a growth mindset on the path to learning to think like an entrepreneur. However, as the idea has gained more traction in mainstream education, new research has been done to test the efficacy of the model.

In one meta-analysis, a “ team…led by Jeni Burnette, a psychologist at North Carolina State University, found that the results [of mindset interventions] were wildly different for students across 53 studies published between 2002 and 2020…In their final analysis, [they] concluded that growth mindset interventions are helpful for some but not all students. Low-achieving and disadvantaged students were most likely to benefit. High achievers typically did not get a boost.”

Other meta-analyses have reached quite different conclusions, furthering the debate. What is clear is that differing methodologies between studies need to be better defined. However, most concur that there is some value in mindset interventions for many students. That being said, developing a growth mindset “isn’t going to close the achievement gap; it’s no silver bullet. We still need to improve how schools teach. But small psychological boosts like this might help some students on the margin.”

Read this article from the Hechinger Report to learn more about the latest research around growth mindsets.

Our final resource to share in 2022 focuses on the influence of human-centered design on science and policy and how this can sometimes be at odds with a genuinely scientific approach. So why is the ELI team thinking about scientific inquiry, you might ask? Simply put, the entrepreneurial discovery process, in many ways, overlaps with the scientific method. And with this overlap comes a similar tendency in entrepreneurs to fall into a version of Slodderwetenschap (sloppy science). 

Taking shortcuts, working from the end solution rather than the problem (the thing being observed in scientific terms), and not focusing on the process by which you get your results are all hallmarks of sloppy science. The same can be said for entrepreneurship. So, while we advise entrepreneur-ials to get out there and test their ideas quickly, that does not mean cutting corners or using flawed logic are advisable. 

In the paper, the authors outline three aspects of the problem of “assert[ing] the simple over the complex, the shortcut over engagement. And then, we act. And we often act wrongly.” These aspects are relevant to the rest of our lives, too. From there, they outline seven mechanisms of sloppy science, including disregarding potentially important variables and prematurely applying findings. Both examples and the other five mechanisms are crucial to consider when setting out on any endeavor, including entrepreneurial discovery. 

“Sloppy science can be overcome by a focus on asking questions, examining affordances, and challenging assumptions.” When setting out on your next act of discovery, be mindful of the process you take. Check your assumptions, and be ready for things to change as you gather more data.