Marcia Ruben, Ph.D. and Debra Pearce-McCall, Ph.D.
Abstract
Can recruiting our senses, mind, brain, and body accelerate the odds of reaching a critical leadership development goal? How might this information assist executive coaches in working with clients? As part of a two-year research professorship, Dr. Marcia Ruben, with assistance from Dr. Debra Pearce-McCall, designed and implemented an applied exploratory research study to answer this question. The research study employed a multi-modal, multi-sensory approach with the hypothesis that an integrated methodology, based on evidence from numerous approaches, could accelerate goal achievement. Most studies rely on one method of goal achievement. We wondered if choosing more than one would increase the odds of success. The term NeuroStrollTM reflects two organizing principles. “Neuro” refers to understanding the brain’s relevant areas as a learning and memory aid while experiencing multiple activities. It also reflects our purposeful choice of experiences that would activate different circuits of the nervous system. The acronym “STROLL” represents the framework for the components of a three-hour experiential process (S = Sensing, T = Thinking, R = Regulating, O = Orienting, L = Lasting, and L = Leading Yourself). We piloted the process with three different groups and administered pre- and post-surveys. A one-way repeated measures ANOVA was conducted to determine whether there were statistically significant differences in survey responses before and after the exercise. The NeuroStroll™ exercise elicited statistically significant changes in perceptions about achieving a specific, meaningful goal after participants completed the NeuroStrollTM.
Implications
This article presents preliminary results from an exploratory, novel multi-modal, experiential immersion in goal achievement strategies supported by evidence in the existing literature. Our main finding is that engaging our senses, cognitions, regulatory strategies, somatic cues, and social connections facilitates creating a customized habit change plan, thereby enhancing goal achievement. This has implications for executive coaches working with clients to achieve leadership development and other goals.
Introduction
What if recruiting your senses, mind, brain, nervous system, and body can accelerate the odds of reaching a critical leadership development goal? How might learning about your brain boost your effectiveness? Could awareness of both the conscious and non-conscious parts of our nervous systems help us be more successful when we work to achieve a goal? As part of a two-year research professorship awarded to Dr. Marcia Ruben, she and her team and interpersonal neurobiologist Dr. Debra Pearce-McCall designed and implemented an exploratory applied research study aimed at answering these questions. The research study employed a multi-modal, multi-sensory approach to investigate the hypothesis that an integrated methodology, based on research findings about the brain, body, cognition, and motivation, could enhance our ability to accomplish leadership development goals. The research was rooted/located in scholarly literature at the intersection of neuroscience, learning, change, and goal achievement.
Learning, change, and goal achievement are closely intertwined. We may set a new leadership development goal that will require a significant change to achieve it, or the process of achieving a goal may result in new learning that catalyzes behavior change. Whatever the starting point, change is difficult. It requires the motivation to change, coupled with the skills and knowledge needed to sustain a change effort and unlearn old ways of thinking and acting. We are using use our mind when we change some of the well-worn wiring patterns or neural circuits that support what we do and even who we are. Research on the brain has shed new light on how this process occurs, with some surprising ways that mind-body connections can aid or interfere with our best intentions.
Behavioral scientists and psychologists have long searched for answers to help individuals learn, achieve goals, and change behavior (Berkman, 2018). The prevailing wisdom has been that goal achievement, behavior change, and learning require focus, discipline, and attention – all conscious processes in the domain of the prefrontal cortex. But recent advances in neuroscience have allowed researchers to understand better both the conscious and non-conscious brain mechanisms involved in these processes, thus providing more precise guidance on how to access them.
Our brains are energy-intensive. They use up 20% of our body’s energy, although they comprise only 2% of our body’s weight (Medina, 2014). Learning something new requires focus and attention, which in turn drains our mental energy. As new neural pathways become established, the older paths that they replace shrink from a corresponding decline in use. As a result, the brain systems that control behavior shift from the energy-intensive prefrontal cortex to the ventral and dorsolateral striatum (Yin et al., 2009). The ventral and dorsolateral striatum need minimal energy resources to function. Our brains have evolved to allow the efficient use of mental resources to learn and routinize new habits (Berkman, 2018). One challenge is to understand and utilize new knowledge about how we learn, change and accomplish to facilitate this process and transfer the “brainwork” involved in new choices, thoughts, and behaviors from energy-intensive to more automatic newly established pathways.
This study drew on a wide range of literature to develop a multi-disciplinary, integrated approach that allowed participants to experience and choose which goal-setting modality/modalities would most accelerate the achievement of their goal. Other expert reviews of goal attainment conclude that the process involves specific cognitive strategies, such as implementation intentions (discussed below), and numerous other factors, such as emotional regulation and social support (Nowack, 2017).
The NeuroStroll™ was designed as a 2½-3 hour guided experience with seven activities. Research suggests that acronyms help with limited brain capacity (Bower, 1972; Cowan, 2000; Miller, 1956), so we used the acronym “stroll” as a guide and a memory aid. The first activity, an orientation, included the definition and importance of neuroplasticity. We introduced each exercise in the “Stroll” with a brief overview of relevant neuroscience findings. Participants were encouraged to identify what parts or circuits of the brain they needed to activate to increase their likelihood of achieving their goal. The last activity provided time for reflection, integration, and planning.
Literature Informing this Study
This study integrates research findings from multiple disciplines. The literature review is organized using the STROLL acronym, starting with research about using an acronym and proceeding through the letters and their corresponding concepts.
Snapshot of Literature Informing this Study
#1: Acronym [Neuroscience/Goal Achievement/Change Concepts]
Framework for organizing NeuroStrollTM experience
Main Points/Findings
* Acronyms help with limited brain capacity
* Early cognitive scientists suggested 7 items
* Later studies reinforce the efficacy of chunking and that we can retain 4 items in our memory
* Creating acronyms facilitates memory retention through stickiness
Sources
Bower (1972)
Cowan (2000)
Davis et al (2014)
Miller (1956)
Hanssens et al. (2002)
Robinson & Cook (2008)
#2 Neuroplasticity [Neuroscience/Goal Achievement/Change Concepts]
Brain changes
Main Points/Findings
* The brain continues to rewire itself
* Change happens by paying attention first and then repeating over and over until new neural patterns are formed
Sources
Fuchs and Flügg (2014)
Hebb (1949)
Kempermann et al. (2002)
Shaffer (2016)
Vemuri et al. (2014).
#3 S = Sensing [Neuroscience/Goal Achievement/Change Concepts]
Sensory Link
Main Points/Findings
* Our brains respond to and are influenced by light, sound, and movement
Sources
Doidge (2015)
Martinek & Berezin (1979)
Porges (2007, 2017)
Menon & Levitin (2005)
#4 T = Thinking [Neuroscience/Goal Achievement/Change Concepts]
Cognitive Approach
Main Points/Findings
* Negative thoughts activate negative emotions
* Negative thoughts trigger the amygdala
* Focusing on values helps focus us in a positive direction
Sources
Berkman (2018)
Bryan et al. (2011)
Cresswell et al. (2005)
Disner et al. (2015)
Leary and Tate (2007)
Woo and Dutcher (2018)
#5 R = Regulating [Neuroscience/Goal Achievement/Change Concepts]
Nervous System,
Regulation
Main Points/Findings
* Our brains are a complex system
* Calming or energizing our nervous system helps us focus and take action
* We can consciously self-regulate and co-regulate
* Mindful breath awareness meditation helps us pay attention
* Mirror neurons help us connect with others
* Loving-kindness meditation leads to more self-compassion
Sources
Butler & Randall (2012)
Cozzolino (2014)
Ferrari & Rizzolati (2014)
Frederickson et al. (2008)
Hanson & Mendius (2009)
Hasson et al. (2012)
Hutcherson, Seppala, &
Marshak (2019)
Nowack (2017)
Neff (2012)
Porges (2007, 2017)
Regine & Lewin (2000)
Schön et al. (2018)
Sayers, Cresswell, & Taren (2015)
#6 O = Orienting [Neuroscience/Goal Achievement/Change Concepts]
Mindset
Main Points/Findings
* Our mindset influences our thoughts and actions
* A growth mindset enhances goal achievement; a fixed mindset hinders it
Sources
Doidge (2015)
Dweck (2008)
Marshak (2019)
Ochsner (2017)
#7 L = Lasting [Neuroscience/Goal Achievement/Change Concepts]
Mental Contrasting/
Implementation Intentions
Main Points/Findings
* Contrasting our current undesired state with the desired state is most effective in achieving goals to which we are committed
* Implementation intentions circumvent the power of ingrained habits
* Reappraisal lowers threat response
Sources
Achtziger et al. (2009)
Gollwitzer (1993, 2000, 2006)
Gollwitzer & Sheeran (2006)
Gross (1998)
Ludwig, Srivastava & Berkman (2018)
Miller & Cohen (2001)
Oettingen (2012, 2014)
Oettingen & Gollwitzer (2010)
Prehn (2012)
#8 L = Leading Yourself [Neuroscience/Goal Achievement/Change Concepts]
Integration and Goal Setting
Main Points/Findings
* Moving while imagining yourself in a different mindset or situation may alter beliefs and behavior
* Self-compassion is essential in overcoming inevitable obstacles
* The integration of sensory input, thinking, and movement facilitates learning
Sources
Breit et al (2018)
McCraty (2015)
Reilly et al (2016)
Rogers (2012)
Siegel, D. (2020)
Siegel & Pearce-McCall (2009)
Thayer & Lane, 2009)
Van Der Kolk (1994)
Zhu et al. (2017)
Zull (2002)
Use of Acronym and Other Memory Boosters
We used the acronym STROLL to create stickiness. Stickiness is a marketing term that measures customer retention (Hanssens et al., 2014; Khalifa et al., 2002). The learning field also uses the term “stickiness” in reference to memory retention (Robinson & Cook, 2018). Acronyms help with limited brain capacity. Early cognitive scientists suggested that we could retain seven items (Miller, 1956). Later studies (Cowan, 2000) reinforce the efficacy of chunking and indicate that we can retain three to five items in our memory. It has long been known that creating acronyms facilitates memory retention (Bower, 1972; Thalmann et al., 2019) because it reduces the load on the prefrontal cortex.
Davis et al. (Davis et al., 2014) introduced the AGES (Attention, Generation, Emotion, and Spacing) model as an acronym that describes the necessary ingredients for learning based on neuroscience findings. One of their conclusions is that learning sticks with repetition and what they call spacing. Our main themes were introduced in the opening, referred to in each activity, and presented in a workbook. Thus, we provided repetition and broke up the experience into short chunks, using the STROLL acronym, allowing for maximum attention. We walked people through an integrated review as the final activity, and participants left with customized workbooks. Throughout the process, we asked participants to generate their own learning by taking notes in the workbook provided. We tapped into positive emotion by asking participants to choose an important goal to which they were committed. We also asked them to compare their future undesired state in one specific activity, which generated a negative emotion, with a future positive state, which generated a positive emotion.
Neuroplasticity and Goal Achievement
A foundational premise guiding this study was the notion of neuroplasticity, and specifically that adults can change well-worn patterns of behavior. Important research that has contributed significantly to our understanding of learning and change includes findings that some form of brain change, or neuroplasticity, continues throughout our lives (Hebb, 1949). Donald Hebb and others observed that neurons that fire together repeatedly become wired together and often survive together. We are born with much of our brain’s connectivity still in development, and though the rate slows over our life span, some form of brain changes or neural plasticity continues throughout our lives. Change happens in various ways; many involve focusing our attention and then repeating a pattern of behavior over and over until new neural patterns are formed.
Fuchs and Flügg (2014), summarizing 40 years of research, suggested that neurons in our prefrontal cortex are the most plastic – meaning the most subject to change. They cited numerous studies that indicated that stress and especially chronic stress inhibits this plasticity, so managing stress well should support neuroplasticity. Putting ourselves in environments rich in novelty or challenges that require focused attention encourages plasticity (Kempermann et al., 2002; Vemuri et al., 2014). A regular physical fitness regimen and adequate sleep (Shaffer, 2016) also help support new neural connections in the brain. Ironically, some of the habits that support goal achievement are often those that people pick as part of their development goals.
Our Senses and Goal Achievement (Sensing)
The growing understanding of our brains and bodies’ interconnectedness also impacts our explorations of ways sensory elements can influence thinking, learning, and change. Norman Doidge (2015), a medical doctor who has been a pioneer in the field of neuroplasticity, suggested that light, sounds, and movement impact the brain, moving us either toward or away from our desired result.
We need natural light to flourish, and all light impacts our eyes and skin, and internal organs. Humans are also quite sensitive to color. Russian researchers Martinek and Berezin (1979) found that different colors have different effects. They found that “…some colors stimulate bodily enzymes to work more effectively and can turn processes in our cells on and off and affect which chemicals they produce” (Doidge, 2015, pp. , 121). Doidge, whose work is in the realm of physical healing, wondered if light therapy could help in rewiring brain cells. He discovered promising therapies using laser light therapy for a variety of medical conditions.
Doidge (2015) also concluded that sound therapy could rewire the brain, often permanently. This conclusion rests on the work of Dr. Stephen Porges. Porges found that specific sound frequencies link to whether we feel safe or in danger. This finding explains why we experience a fight or flight reaction when we hear a noise that startles us. When we feel safe, our parasympathetic nervous system turns off the fight or flight reaction, allowing us to connect more fully with others (Porges, 2007; 2017). While we set goals using our prefrontal cortex, we process sounds in the brain’s subcortical area, underneath the top layer of the cortex. Menon and Levitin’s (2005) laboratory research found that music increases the connection between areas involved in reward processing, resulting in a dopamine release in the insula. The insula is the part of the brain involved in helping us pay attention to body cues. Doidge reported that “brain scan studies show that when the brain is stimulated by music, its neurons begin to fire in perfect synchrony with it, entraining with the music it hears (p. 345).” He concluded that music is one way to change the brain’s rhythms, which can change behavior.
Moshe Feldenkrais, whose work is referenced by Doidge (2015), was first in the Western World to suggest a solid mind-body connection. Feldenkrais believed that motor movement, thought, sensation, and feeling were all strongly linked to the functioning of our brains. Even the tiniest, almost imperceptible movements can influence changes in our neural wiring. Doidge recounted lab experiments by Dr. Michael Merzenich, a neuroplasticity researcher, who validated Feldenkrais’s assertions and added that we learn best when we pay attention to new and novel experiences.
Cognition and Goal Setting (Thinking)
Cognitive scientists have also contributed knowledge about the impact of our thoughts on learning, goal achievement, and change. Like real or imagined physical threats, negative thoughts can trigger a threat response and activate the amygdala (Disner et al., 2011). Leary and Tate (2007) identified five dimensions of mindfulness. One dimension is self-talk, which they characterized as a running inner commentary that includes self-evaluation and critical judgment, which becomes less self-critical with mindfulness. Leary and Tate’s work suggests that negative thoughts can get in the way of the neural rewiring that has to happen to change behavior.
In addition, researchers (Cresswell et al., 2005) found that reinforcing one’s personal values reduced stress and allowed participants to focus. Korb (2015) suggested that once we have decided on a goal and why it is important to us, our natural stress responses decrease. Woo and Dutcher’s (2018) research further validated that affirming personal values enhance our ability to perform. Berkman (2018) reported that the ventromedial prefrontal cortex receives value signals as part of the neural link between what’s important to us and the behaviors we choose. Being aware of this link between values and desired behaviors can help in goal achievement. Recent studies (Bryan et al., 2011) suggested that a simple linguistic change in describing one’s identity can stimulate positive action. For example, just the mere fact of switching from the word “voting” to “being a voter” increased voter turnout in a state election. Berkman (2018) that linking desired behavior to “one’s core values and sense of self” (p.39) will increase the likelihood of goal achievement.
Nervous System, Self- and Co-Regulation, and Self-Compassion (Regulating)
Our ability to regulate our nervous system and impact others’ nervous systems is vital in reaching an important goal. Nowack (2017) asserts that social support and emotional regulation are as crucial as our cognitive processes in developing new habits. Our brain and entire distributed nervous system is an example of a complex system. A complex system is nonlinear – something small can create significant ripple effects (Regine & Lewin, 2000). All the parts of a complex system interact, and out of that emerges something greater than those parts. This is because the whole includes (at least) those parts AND how they relate to each other. So, in our complex brains, considerable relating or regulating is happening, most of it beyond our awareness, and some that we can impact through awareness. Through the conscious use of breath, language, attention, and other tools, we can influence our bodies’ regulation circuits. We can learn to calm ourselves when overstimulated or agitated. We can also learn how to activate ourselves when we are too low in energy. Thus, we can call up emotions and motivational pathways that serve and support us and our goals (Porges, 2007; Porges, 2017). By consciously self-regulating, we can shift ourselves into a physiological state that supports our new choices and behaviors. Our brains also have considerable wiring and processes geared for relating, so we often co-regulate each other without realizing it (Butler & Randall, 2012). This co-regulating happens in pairs and also in groups. When we connect with compassion and optimistic hopes for each other, we are making great use of our social brains and coregulation.
Self-regulation and Goal Achievement
One of the critical brain areas for self-regulation is the prefrontal cortex, where different sub-regions communicate with, inhibit, and integrate other areas of the brain. For example, when we breathe rhythmically or focus on our hearts, we help these higher brain regions coordinate and calm (inhibit) lower areas (Hanson & Mendius, 2009; Porges, 2001). The regulation of limbic regions, such as the amygdala – an almond-shaped center found in both hemispheres that alerts us to emotionally significant stimuli – can help us identify and experience our emotions in healthier ways. We can move anxiety toward excited readiness (shifting arousal down), or we might need to shift from bored and distracted to playfully engaged (shifting arousal up). Learning how to “turn on” the circuits that can calm or energize us to shift our level of alertness to fit our task at hand is another top-down skill we can practice. Research by (Schöne et al., 2018) suggested that mindful breath awareness meditation can enhance our ability to pay attention. In a review of the neurobiology of mindfulness and emotion processing and self-regulation, Sayers, Creswell, and Taren (2015) strongly suggested that mindfulness practices do indeed change the neurobiological systems through which we process emotions.
Coregulation: The Social Brain and Goal Achievement
We are communicating and “syncing” (or not) all the time, though we are often not aware of it. This is evident when individuals notice that they are sitting similarly to someone they are speaking to or when they experience “emotional contagion” and start feeling what others feel. Researchers have measured this resonance or synchrony in physiological measures, like heart-rate variability or galvanic skin response, and even neural co-action, in what neuroscientist Uri Hasson et al. (2012) termed “brain-to-brain coupling.” Hasson’s exciting and revolutionary research showed these brain responses varied with participants’ sense of successfully communicating with the other.
The Power of We and Goal Achievement
We meet each other at what Cozolino (2014) calls “the social synapse,” which affects what happens with the physical synapses and connections within our very social brains. Numerous brain areas are involved in socially oriented networks, including the prefrontal cortex, anterior cingulate, amygdala, and insula. Scientists have also identified special brain cells, such as mirror neurons (Ferrari & Rizzolatti, 2014), in several brain areas. They appear to play a role in translating our observations of others into understanding and learning. These unique brain cells allow us to connect through emotional attunement and coordinate complex group activities. All kinds of behavior change and lifestyle/health research show the incredible power and importance of having support from others on our behavioral change/goal achievement journeys.
Studies of loving-kindness meditation – a practice in which individuals speak compassionate words to self and others – suggested that even brief periods of practicing this meditation increased social connection and positivity (Hutcherson et al., 2008) and positive emotions. This, in turn, led to increased personal resources, including a stronger sense of purpose (Frederickson et al., 2008).
Self-Compassion
Self-compassion, the ability to acknowledge that individuals are bound to make mistakes and sometimes be overly hard on themselves as they move toward an important goal, factored into this research study’s design. Neff’s research (2012) suggested that those who practice loving-kindness meditation are more likely to feel compassion for themselves and others. In research studies, increased empathy was associated with activity in the insula, one brain area linked to perspective-taking. Self-compassion is essential to helping individuals change, so celebrating both successes and missteps provides an opportunity to learn. Those who practice self-compassion use mistakes to help themselves and add to their knowledge of increasing positive pathways to achieving goals.
The Growth Mindset and Goal Setting (Orienting)
Robert Marshak (2019) defined mindsets as “the constellation of conscious and unconscious assumptions, beliefs, premises, and frameworks that shape how something is interpreted and the resulting reactions and responses” (p. 26). Dr. Carol Dweck (2008) is known for coining the term “growth mindset” as an outgrowth of her pioneering research with junior high school students. Dweck found that students who believe that intelligence is a fixed trait stop trying when confronted with a challenge because they’ve convinced themselves that they’re not good at a school subject. Her research suggested that a better strategy is to foster a “growth mindset” – the belief that the brain is like a muscle that can grow stronger through hard work. Those with a fixed mindset focus on problems, get bogged down in details, and use avoidance strategies. In contrast, those with a growth mindset focus on solutions and can persist toward their goals.
Dr. Kevin Ochsner (2017) suggested three strategies to shift to a growth mindset. These include experimentation, focusing on progress, and learning from others. Experimentation entails trying out a new, likely uncomfortable behavior and requires conscious focus. This deliberate focus taxes the brain’s resources, especially the prefrontal cortex and hippocampus. New or novel experiences, like experimentation, wake up the attention process and help create new neural connections (Doidge, 2015). Focusing on progress also requires accessing the prefrontal cortex and hippocampus to record and remember what works and what doesn’t. Focusing on improvement helps strengthen new neural patterns and lessen the chances of slipping back into unconscious habits. Learning from others requires consciously choosing to perceive constructive feedback as a growth opportunity. Because unasked for feedback can trigger an amygdala threat and shut down learning, it is essential to solicit constructive feedback.
Goal Setting, Implementation Intentions, Mental Contrasting (Lasting)
In addition to the neuroscientific research, many studies have been conducted to identify and substantiate critical practices and attitudes associated with goal achievement (Achtziger et al., 2009; Gollwitzer, 1993; Gollwitzer et al., 2000; Gollwitzer & Sheeran, 2006; Oettingen, 2012, 2014; Oettingen & Gollwitzer, 2010). Findings from these studies substantiate the importance of 1) focusing on both goal setting and goal implementation, 2) framing goals toward achieving a positive outcome, as opposed to framing them to avoid a negative, 3) setting goals to which one is firmly committed, and 4) setting goals that are close in time and have specific criteria for measuring achievement. Ludwig, Srivastava, and Berkman (2018) suggest that even brief training in “specific patterns of thought” familiar to those who naturally achieve goals can make a significant difference for those who are not naturally inclined to be planful.
There is ample research (Gross, 1998a, 1998b) demonstrating that reappraisal, or reframing an emotionally laden stimulus in a more thoughtful manner, lowers the threat response. Reframing, put simply, means considering other perspectives and finding a more positive way to view a situation or event. When we reframe, we activate both our prefrontal cortex and dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (Miller & Cohen, 2001; Prehn, 2012). This, in turn, decreases the activity in the amygdala and insula, the areas that process our negative emotions (Prehn, 2012). It takes a conscious effort, or top-down control, to pause and identify an interpretation that lowers the threat response. It also takes conscious effort to achieve a goal, especially if it requires us to change habitual behavior. Based on a review of 94 studies (Gollwitzer & Sheeran, 2006), forming an implementation intention helps when one is committed to a goal. Implementation intentions are formed by identifying the specific obstacles to achieving a purpose, and specifically the situational cue, and then deciding what one will do when encountering that situational cue in the future.
An implementation intention takes the form of “if situation x arises, then I will perform response y” or “when x happens, then I will do y” (Gollwitzer, 1993). Pre-planning the anticipated environmental cue is a way to prime the mind and brain. Switching from conscious effort to an automatic response is less taxing for the prefrontal cortex. Consider this example. Say you want to exercise five mornings a week. One obstacle is that you don’t want to get out of bed when the alarm rings, so you hit the snooze button. An if-then implementation intention would be, “When the alarm rings and I want to hit the snooze button, I will begin my stretching and warmups, get out of bed and put on my workout gear.”
Research studies (Achtziger et al., 2009) have demonstrated that imagining yourself achieving the desired goal in as much detail as possible, identifying and mentally contrasting both the benefits and the current obstacles, increases the likelihood of goal achievement. In other words, merely imagining the desired outcome is not sufficient and may even decrease motivation. The best strategy is to contrast the desired positive future with the present negative reality.
Mental contrasting is “cognitively demanding” and increases neural connections in the brain that associate current obstacles with future reinforcements. Mental contrasting draws on working memory (prefrontal cortex organizing other areas), episodic memory (temporal lobes), and the occipital area, which receives visual input from the retina. In contrast, visualizing a positive outcome alone, while enjoyable, is seen by these researchers as “mindless daydreaming” and is not as taxing to the brain. A key finding here is the importance of visualizing both the current and future states while at the same time proactively planning how to overcome the current negative obstacles.
Integration of Mind/Body/Movement (Leading Yourself)
Because we were experimenting with a multi-modal, multi-sensory approach to goal-setting, we wanted to include a final experience that integrated the various modes we had introduced. Our brains and body are interconnected. Research supports the link between our gut and our brain (Breit et al., 2018) and between our hearts and brains (Thayer & Lane, 2009). More neural pathways are going from our hearts to our brains than from our brains to our hearts (McCraty, 2015).
We learn patterns of how to relate to others from our earliest caregivers. This formative learning results in implicit memories (Siegel, 2020), specifically how to respond emotionally. Researchers (Reilly et al., 2016) discovered that memories are stored in our bodies and may be resistant to change. Studies in post-traumatic stress (Van Der Kolk, 1994) have demonstrated that emotional memories are stored in the limbic system and need to be accessed through somatic methods. Physically moving while imagining different mindsets and behaviors can access these deeply held mind-body circuits and provide insights that help people work toward a goal (Rogers, 2012). (Zull, 2002) suggested that in order to learn, individuals need an integration of sensory input, thinking, and movement.
Siegel and Pearce-McCall (2009) described the development of a new field of interpersonal neurobiology (IPNB). IPNB, based on the inter-disciplinary findings from over a dozen scientific disciplines, allows us to see the interconnection between the mind, brain, and relationships. With this integrated view of human experience, the need for a multi-modal approach to goal attainment becomes clear. In other words, to reach a goal, we need to do more than just think about it. We need to consider the complex interconnected system of our mind, body, and relationships both with ourselves and others.
The Study: Brief overview of the demographics of participants in the group and most important findings
Demographics
We conducted an initial pilot at Golden Gate University in San Francisco. The pilot was offered as one of the options in the launch of a new “Week 16 Innovations in Practice Seminar,” advertised as a requirement for all graduate students in the business school. We administered a pre- and post-survey to the 49 participants but did not receive enough post-survey responses for a meaningful analysis, most likely because the pilot was conducted with graduate students at the end of a semester. Responses received strongly suggested that the experience had a significant positive impact, and we used the qualitative feedback collected to streamline the design.
Three more pilots were held, one co-led by Dr. Marcia Ruben and Dr. Debra Pearce-McCall and the additional two by Dr. Marcia Ruben. These participants included:
- 22 staff and faculty at Golden Gate University
- 12 middle managers from an Austrian company visiting Golden Gate University for a week-long executive education program
- Seven doctoral students in a doctoral seminar at Golden Gate University
Approximately half of the participants identified themselves as male and half as female, with 44% between 24-39 years of age and 56% over 40 years of age. Pre and post surveys were completed by all groups. After preliminary analysis indicating that statistical assumptions were met for combining the samples, final results were obtained by analysis of grouped data from the three pilot samples. This also provided a broader sampling of participants regarding educational level, employment status, income, and residence place.
The NeuroStroll™
The experimental intervention for these studies was the NeuroStroll™, which was designed after a thorough literature review of studies directly related to behavior change and goal attainment. Here, in brief, is the multi-model set of experiences corresponding to the acronym STROLL:
S = Sensing
The Sensing experience spotlighted the role senses play in moving individuals either toward or away from one’s goals and identified some sensory cues that can support the “moving toward” states. The Sensing segment focused on participants identifying specific colors/light, sounds, and body movement cues.
T = Thinking
The Thinking experience focused on the thinking patterns and values necessary to reach a goal. Participants identified negative thoughts that would derail them, values that empowered them, and worked through a technique to reframe their negative thoughts as they occurred.
R = Regulating
The Regulating experience highlighted the role of self-regulation and coregulation in achieving a goal. Participants practiced three exercises, including a self-regulating exercise, a co-regulating exercise, and a social field regulating exercise.
O = Orienting
The Orienting experience addressed the importance of the attitude or mindset needed to reach a goal. The Orienting exercises included work with a growth mindset, experimentation, and expanding one’s support system.
L = Lasting
The Lasting experience included mental contrasting, identifying obstacles to goals, and working through if-then implementation goals, using words and images.
L = Leading Yourself
This final experience provided time to review and integrate all the prior exercises and point toward the next steps. After a review using mind and body to promote memory and bring this new information into a full picture, a few essential change tools were shared, including neuroplasticity boosters, making written commitments to oneself, and generating self-compassion when inevitably going off track.
Methodology
All participants received a 13 question pre-and post-survey. The pre-survey was created in SurveyGizmo and sent electronically to participants a week before the NeuroStroll™ sessions. We asked subjects to identify a leadership development goal that was important to them and indicate the goal in their pre-survey. Participants then went through the NeuroStroll™ intervention. We sent a post-survey immediately after the session. Out of 41 participants, we received complete pre- and post-data for a total of 36 participants. Our analysis goal was to explore whether the NeuroStroll™ had any immediate impact on goal attainment perceptions, as measured by changes in pre-test and post-test scores.
The survey data was imported from SurveyGizmo, cleaned, and analyzed. We used IBM SPSS Statistics to conduct the data analysis, paired t-tests, ANOVA analysis, descriptive statistics, anomaly detection, and normalization. The data was imported into Tableau, a data visualization tool, to create graphs and tables.
Basic Requirements for Combined Analysis
To increase our sample size, we considered whether we could combine all pilot data. Specific assumptions about the groups and the data distribution are required to run a paired-samples t-test or a one-way repeated measures ANOVA analysis. In our study, the effect of the ANOVA analysis was also equivalent to a paired-samples t-test. We considered all required statistical assumptions before combining data. One outlier was detected, and after we removed the anomaly from the dataset, for a final sample size of 35, the assumptions of normality were not violated, as assessed by Shapiro-Wilk’s test (see Table 2).
Table 2 Results of Shapiro-Wilk’s Test
| Tests of Normality (Grouped Pilots) | ||||||
| Shapiro-Wilk | ||||||
| Statistic | df | Sig. | ||||
| Pre | .976 | 35 | .637 | |||
| Post | .959 | 35 | .206 | |||
OVERALL FINDINGS
The summary finding was that there were statistically significant differences in perceptions about achieving a specific goal after participants completed the NeuroStroll™. As a summary measure, we combined the before and after responses to each of the 13 questions. We then calculated a total score for each participant. The NeuroStroll™ elicited statistically significant changes in the Score of Before and After Perceptions of Goal Achievement, F(1, 34) = 35.685, p < .0005, partial ω2 = .512, with this score increasing from 3.60 ± .51 /before the NeuroStrollTM to 4.12 ± .45 /after the NeuroStroll™ (see Table 3).
In other words, the overall result suggests that this multi-modal set of experiences significantly shifted people’s knowledge and beliefs about reaching their goals.
Table 3: Score of Individual Performance-Grouped Pilots
Descriptive Statistics
| Mean | Std. Deviation | N | |
| Pre | 3.59780219786 | .513678446247 | 35 |
| Post | 4.12307692300 | .454394177911 | 35 |
We then examined which individual questions showed the most significant shifts after the NeuroStroll™. The 13 questions are listed in Table 4, and the results for each in Table 5.
An exciting finding is that the diversity of tools and experiences included in the NeuroStroll™ were new, relevant, and immediately applicable, as indicated by participant responses. For example, after the experience, they reported significant increases in understanding how to apply the following in order to reach their leadership goal:
- Use their senses
- Reframe negative thoughts
- Shift their arousal level
- Use mental contrasting and if-then implementations
- Track their progress
Of particular note was a significant shift in understanding the brain’s role in the process of change, and participants reported that they found the neuroscience information helpful.
Interestingly, the intervention did not significantly shift overall confidence in reaching one’s goal. Still, it significantly increased confidence in one’s ability to get back on track and keep working toward the goal, even when faced with challenges. Participants also felt more confident that they could sustain their goals once reached.
Figure 1: List of 13 Questions and All Group Comparisons
Table 4: Descriptive Statistics and Results of t-tests for before and after NeuroStroll™ Session for Significant Questions (Average Pre – Averaged Post)
Session |
95% CI for Mean Difference |
|||||||||
Pre-Session |
Post-Session |
|||||||||
M |
SD |
n |
M |
SD |
N |
t |
df |
|||
Question One |
3.81 |
0.920 |
36 |
3.83 |
0.971 |
36 |
-0.385, 0.329 |
-0.16 |
35 |
|
Question Two |
3.58 |
0.770 |
36 |
3.86 |
0.798 |
36 |
-0.553, -0.002 |
-2.05* |
35 |
|
Question Three |
3.42 |
1.079 |
36 |
3.86 |
0.798 |
36 |
-0.852, -0.036 |
-2.21* |
35 |
|
Question Four |
3.33 |
1.014 |
36 |
4.22 |
0.637 |
36 |
-1.275, -0.503 |
-4.67** |
35 |
|
Question Five |
4.33 |
0.756 |
36 |
4.56 |
0.735 |
36 |
-0.515, 0.071 |
-1.54 |
35 |
|
Question Six |
3.67 |
0.926 |
36 |
3.81 |
0.951 |
36 |
-0.384, 0.106 |
-1.15 |
35 |
|
Session |
95% CI for Mean Difference |
|||||||||||||||
Pre-Session |
Post-Session |
|||||||||||||||
M |
SD |
N |
M |
SD |
N |
t |
Df |
|||||||||
Question Seven |
3.36 |
0.833 |
36 |
3.78 |
0.929 |
36 |
-0.782, -0.052 |
-2.32* |
35 |
|||||||
Question Eight |
3.89 |
1.036 |
36 |
4.28 |
0.566 |
36 |
-0.804, 0.026 |
-1.90 |
35 |
|||||||
Question Nine |
3.86 |
0.990 |
36 |
4.33 |
0.793 |
36 |
-0.881, -0.064 |
-2.35* |
35 |
|||||||
Question Ten |
3.47 |
1.000 |
36 |
4.25 |
0.874 |
36 |
-1.140, -0.415 |
-4.35** |
35 |
|||||||
Question Eleven |
3.36 |
1.041 |
36 |
4.11 |
0.854 |
36 |
-1.165, -0.335 |
-3.67** |
35 |
|||||||
Question Twelve |
4.03 |
0.654 |
36 |
4.39 |
0.494 |
36 |
-0.606, -0.116 |
-2.30** |
35 |
|||||||
Question Thirteen |
2.69 |
1.261 |
36 |
3.64 |
1.150 |
36 |
-1.544, -0.245 |
-3.20** |
35 |
|||||||
* p < .05.
** p < .01
Qualitative Data
We created the NeuroStroll™ as an integration of many methods of strengthening goal attainment. Our underlying belief was that individuals need to discover their own personalized methods for navigating and sustaining change. It follows that offering various useful options was likely to increase the rate of success and the amount of engagement. One of our qualitative survey questions asked participants to identify their “greatest take-away,” and the range of answers supports our hypothesis. Consider this word cloud, generated from responses to the most significant take-away question, and we can see the variety of top influences, even in this small sample.
Figure 2: Qualitative Data Word Cloud
Discussion
The results of the NeuroStrollTM strongly suggest that participating in such an exercise strengthens one’s belief in relevant aspects of goal achievement. By learning to tune in to color, sound, and light, reframe negative thoughts, change arousal levels, and track progress, participants left with confidence and a toolkit. Participants also benefited by learning how their brain functions and how to visualize accessing those parts of the brain critical in goal achievement. This is useful information for coaches, who can vary their techniques in order to find the best fit for clients.
Our research goal was to create a flexible multi-modal exercise based on significant findings from the goal achievement literature. While we achieved favorable results, there were several limitations to this study.
The first limitation is that we used convenience sampling. Since one of us works within the graduate business school of a university, we chose to recruit participants from a pool of available graduate students, faculty and staff, and a group of visiting business people participating in a week-long executive training program on campus.
Although we sent out follow-up surveys after the original post-survey, we received limited responses. Therefore, we did not obtain enough data to determine if our research design results were long-lasting.
Still, another limitation is that new research, reported by Charles Duhigg (2014), suggests that people are more likely to change when new habits are chunked into small behaviors and repeated. Duhigg explains that this automatic chunking practice occurs within a three-step process that includes a cue or trigger, then a routine, and a reward. The three-step process is similar to Gollwitzer’s (1993) work on implementation intentions that we relied upon. Our research experiment ran 2½-3 hours. Suppose people make more changes when an experience is delivered in small doses. In that case, it is possible that the NeuroStroll™ contains too much variety, novelty, and stimulation for one session and would be more impactful in multiple sessions, with time in-between for experimentation with each new goal attainment strategy. More research is necessary to pinpoint the best way to present this multi-modal approach for maximum benefit, and especially for executive coaches who want to employ multi-modal approaches in their coaching engagements.
Implications
This preliminary study supports providing people with a menu of options for working toward goal achievement rather than searching for a singular “best way” to change. The multi-modal experiential approach also offered novelty and a sense of play. These two elements facilitate creativity and memory formation. The NeuroStrollTM allows people to sample different cognitive, somatic, or relational goal achievement strategies through various exercises. Some people may need to use multiple techniques to affect change, while others could depend on one or two that prove most useful.
We conducted the beta versions of the NeuroStrollTM in person, with participants working in table groups and obtaining peer support through conversations. Current circumstances point toward considering whether to offer this educational intervention in a virtual format or solo participants rather than groups. The post-study comments about sharing the experiences fit with common knowledge that most of us find it helpful to make public commitments and have some type of accountability partner. Thus, incorporating that relational aspect of goal achievement will need to remain part of the NeuroStrollTM when designed to be offered in different formats.
Another implication of our findings is that learning about one’s brain and how to access its functions is valuable. We introduced a sizeable physical brain mat in one of the sessions, and participants stood on it, in addition to looking at visuals and identifying relevant brain areas and their approximate place in one’s head. This physical exercise increased the engagement and fun of learning about the brain’s role in goal achievement.
In summary, the NeuroStrollTM offers people a new approach to goal formation and accomplishment that they could apply to current and future leadership development goals. It also provides executive coaches a broader menu of interventions to employ when assisting clients in reaching important leadership development goals.
Future Research
There are several opportunities for future research. At least in the short-term, given the COVID-19 pandemic and the necessity for virtual experiences, there is an opportunity to create an online experiment, chunked by time limits, with more frequent, built-in, and required check-ins on progress. Once the pandemic has passed, there is an opportunity to test more flexible delivery options to ensure spacing and retention. For instance, running one or at most two of the exercises at a time might result in more robust results.
Because we intentionally included working with a “buddy” to enhance commitment and connection with another, we could also test whether running the exercise solely virtually, without face-to-face interaction and connection, makes a difference.
Some of the participants felt that some of the exercises went too quickly. Whether offered in person or virtually, lengthening the time of the whole experience, should also be tested.
A small number of survey participants were uncomfortable with face-to-face and group loving-kindness meditations. We don’t know if that discomfort detracted from the overall results. Still, others expressed a desire for more detailed explanations of each exercise and the science behind each of them.
In summary, to fully test the design, we will want to identify a larger sample, have more explicit follow-up procedures, and explore various options for timing and chunking of the delivery. Another consideration is whether the experience is best done in person and/or maintains its impact when adapted for virtual delivery.
The design purposefully and intentionally had several variables, which made measuring the impact more complex. Given the results, we are not clear which of the exercises was the most powerful. However, we have qualitative data that suggests that the sensing exercises were most impactful for some. On the other hand, participants cited several of the other activities as useful. Our individual biology may be so unique that it is possible no one path to change is universal for all.
Finally, there are now several apps on the market that aid in the accomplishment of goals. Still, another research opportunity is to link our exercise to a particular app and measure the impact.
About the Authors
Marcia Ruben
Dr. Ruben is the founder of Ruben Consulting Group and has worked as an Executive Coach, OD Consultant, and facilitator for more than 25 years. She has experience with leaders in various sectors, including high tech, cleantech, biotech, healthcare, financial services, retail, private equity, nonprofits, government, and professional services firms. She is a published thought leader in the areas of coaching, neuroscience, and complexity.
Debra Pearce-McCall
Special thanks
The authors would like to express appreciation to Dr. Siamak Zadeh and MS Business Analytics students Tom Lin and Sana Keshtkaran for assistance with quantitative research.
References
Achtziger, A., Fehr, T., Oettingen, G., Gollwitzer, P. M., & Rockstroh, B. (2009). Strategies of intention formation are reflected in continuous MEG activity. Social Neuroscience, 4(1), 11-27. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470910801925350
Berkman, E. T. (2018). The neuroscience of goals and behavior change. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice & Research, 70(1), 28-44.
Bower, G. H. (1972). Perceptual groups as coding units in immediate memory [journal article]. Psychonomic Science, 27(4), 217-219. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03328942
Breit, S., Kupferberg, A., Rogler, G., & Hasler, G. (2018). Vagus Nerve as Modulator of the Brain–Gut Axis in Psychiatric and Inflammatory Disorders [Review]. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 9(44). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00044
Bryan, C. J., Walton, G. M., Rogers, T., & Dweck, C. S. (2011). Motivating voter turnout by invoking the self. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(31), 12653-12656. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1103343108
Butler, E. A., & Randall, A. K. (2012). Emotional Coregulation in Close Relationships. Emotion Review, 5(2), 202-210. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073912451630
Cowan, N. (2000). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(1), 87-114. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X01003922
Cozolino, L. (2014). The neuroscience of human relationships (2nd ed.). WW Norton.
Cresswell, D. J., Welch, W. T., Taylor, S. E., Sherman, D. K., Gruenewald, T. L., & Mann, T. M. (2005). Affirmation of personal values buffers neuroendocrine and psychological stress responses. Psychological Science, 16(11), 846-851.
Davis, J., Balda, M., Rock, D., McGinnis, P., & Davachi, L. (2014). The science of making learning stick: An update to the AGES model. NeuroLeadership Journal, 5(August 2014), 1-16.
Disner, S. G., Beevers, C. G., Haigh, E. A. P., & Beck, A. T. (2011). Neural mechanisms of the cognitive model of depression [Review Article]. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 12, 467. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3027
Doidge, N. (2015). The brain’s way of healing. Penguin Books.
Duhigg, C. (2014). The power of habit: Why we do what we do in life and business (Trade Paperback ed.). Random House LLC.
Dweck, C. (2008). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Ballantime Books.
Ferrari, P. F., & Rizzolatti, G. (2014). Mirror neuron research: the past and the future. Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 369(1644), 20130169. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2013.0169
Frederickson, B., Cohn, B. L., Coffey, K. A., Pek, J., & Finkel, S. M. (2008). Open hearts build lives: Positive emotions, induced through loving-kindness meditation, build consequential personal resources. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(5), 1045–1062.
Fuchs, E., & Flügge, G. (2014). Adult neuroplasticity: More Than 40 years of research. Neural Plasticity, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/541870
Gollwitzer, P. M. (1993). Goal achievment: The role of intentions. European Review of Social Psychology, 4, 141-185.
Gollwitzer, P. M., Delius, J. D., & Oettingen, G. (2000). Motivation. In K. Pawlik & M. R. Rosenzweig (Eds.), The international handbook of psychology (pp. 191-206). Sage.
Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2006). Implementation intentions and goal achievement: A meta‐analysis of effects and processes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 69-119. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(06)38002-1
Gross, J. (1998a). Antecedent-and response-focused emotion regulation: divergent consequences for experience, expression, and physiology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(1), 224.
Gross, J. (1998b). The emerging field of emotion regulation: an integrative review. Review of General Psychology, 2(3), 271-299. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.271
Hanson, R., & Mendius, R. (2009). Buddha’s brain: The practical neuroscience of happiness, love, and wisdom. New Harbinger Publications, Inc. .
Hanssens, D. M., Pauwels, K. H., Srinivasan, S., Vanhuele, M., & Yidirim, G. (2014). Consumer attitude metrics for guiding marketing mix decisions. Marketing Science. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2013.0841
Hasson, U., Ghazanfar, A. A., Galantucci, B., Garrod, S., & Keysers, C. (2012). Brain-to-brain coupling: a mechanism for creating and sharing a social world. Trends Cogn Scie, 16, 114-121.
Hebb, D. O. (1949). The organization of behavior. John Wiley & Sons.
Hutcherson, C. A., Seppala, E. M., & Gross, J. J. (2008). Loving-kindness meditation increases social connectedness. Emotion, 8(5), 720-724. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013237
Kempermann, G., Gast, D., & Gage, F. H. (2002). Neuroplasticity in old age: Sustained fivefold induction of hippocampal neurogenesis by long‐term environmental enrichment. Annals of Neurology. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.10262
Khalifa, M., Limayem, M., & Liu, V. (2002). Online customer stickiness: A longitudinal study. The Journal of Global Information Management, 10(3), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.4018/jgim.2002070101
Korb, A. (2015). The upward spiral: Using neuroscience to reverse the course of depression one small change at a time. New Harbinger Publications.
Leary, M. R., & Tate, E. B. (2007). The Multi-Faceted Nature of Mindfulness. Psychological Inquiry, 18(4), 251-255. https://doi.org/10.1080/10478400701598355
Ludwig, R. M., Srivastava, S., & Berkman, E. T. (2018). Planfulness: A Process-Focused Construct of Individual Differences in Goal Achievement.
Marshak, R. J. (2019). Dialogic meaning-making in action. Organization Development Review, 51(4), 26-31.
Martinek, K., & Berezin, I. A. (1979). Artificial light-sensitive enzymatic systems as chemical amplifiers of weak light signals. Photochemistry and Photobiology, 29(3), 637-649. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-1097.1979.tb07104.x
McCraty, R. (2015). Science of the heart: Exploring the role of the heart in human performance (Vol. 2). HearMath Institute. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/293944391_Science_of_the_Heart_Volume_2_Exploring_the_Role_of_the_Heart_in_Human_Performance_An_Overview_of_Research_Conducted_by_the_HeartMath_Institute
Medina, J. (2014). Brain rules: 12 Principles for surviving and thriving at work, home, and school (Second ed.). Pear Press.
Menon, V., & Levitin, D. J. (2005). The rewards of music listening: Response and physiological connectivity of the mesolimbic system. Neuroimage, 28, 175-184.
Miller, E. K., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 24, 167-202.
Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(81-97).
Neff, K. D. (2012). The science of self-compassion. In C. Germer & R. Siegel (Eds.), Compassion and Wisdom in Psychotherapy (pp. 79-92). Guilford Press.
Nowack, K. (2017). Facilitating successful behavior change: Beyond goal setting to goal flourishing. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 69(3), 153-171. https://doi.org/10.1037/cpb0000088
Ochsner, K. (2017, Octobr 12, 2017). Neuroscience of growth mindset. Neuroleadership Summit, New York.
Oettingen, G. (2012). Future thought and behaviour change AU European Review of Social Psychology, 23(1), 1-63. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2011.643698
Oettingen, G. (2014). Rethinking positive thinking: inside the new science of motivation Read more: http://mobile.wikilove.com/WOOP_(scientific_strategy)#ixzz5e8cKPPSk. Penguin Random House.
Oettingen, G., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2010). Strategies of setting and implementing goals: Mental contrasting and implementation intentions. In J. E. Maddux & J. P. Tangney (Eds.), Social psychological foundations of clinical psychology. The Guilford Press.
Porges, S. W. (2001). The polyvagal theory: phylogenetic substrates of a social nervous system. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 42(2), 123-146. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8760(01)00162-3
Porges, S. W. (2007). The polyvagal perspective. Biological Psychology, 74(2), 116-143.
Porges, S. W. (Ed.). (2017). Vagal pathways: Portals to compassion. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/ 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190464684.013.15.
Prehn, A. (2012). Create reframing mindsets through Framestorm. NeuroLeadership Journal, 4, 1-11.
Regine, B., & Lewin, R. (2000). Leading at the edge: How leaders influence complex systems. Emergence: A Journal of Complexity Issues in Organizations and Management (2(2)), 5-23. www.emergence.org
Reilly, J., Peelle, J. E., Garcia, A., & Crutch, S. J. (2016). Linking somatic and symbolic representation in semantic memory: the dynamic multilevel reactivation framework. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23(4), 1002-1014. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0824-5
Robinson, A., & Cook, D. (2018). Stickiness”: Gauging students’ attention to online learning activities. Information and Learning Science, 119(7/8), 460-468. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-03-2018-0014.
Rogers, J. (2012). Coaching skills: A Handbook. McGraw Hill Open University Press.
Sayers, M., Cresswell, D. J., & Taren, A. (2015). The emerging neurobiology of mindfulness and emotion processing. In B. Ostafin (Ed.), Handbook of mindfulness and self-regulation. Springer
Schöne, B., Gruber, T., Graetz, S., Bernhof, M., & Malinowski, P. (2018). Mindful breath awareness meditation facilitates efficiency gains in brain networks: A steady-state visually evoked potentials study. Sci Rep, 8(1), 13687. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-32046-5
Shaffer, J. (2016). Neuroplasticity and Clinical Practice: Building Brain Power for Health [Review]. Frontiers in Psychology, 7(1118). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01118
Siegel, D. J. (2020). The developing mind: How relationships and the brain interact to shape who we are. The Guilford Press.
Siegel, D. J., & Pearce-McCall, D. (2009). Mindsight at work: An interpersonal neurobiology lens on leadership. NeuroLeadership Journal(2), 23-34.
Thalmann, M., Souza, A. S., & Oberauer, K. (2019). How does chunking help working memory? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 45(1), 37-55. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000578
Thayer, J. F., & Lane, R. D. (2009). Claude Bernard and the heart–brain connection: Further elaboration of a model of neurovisceral integration. Neuroscience & Behavioral Reviews, 33(2), 81-88.
Van Der Kolk, B. (1994). The body keeps the score: Memory and the evolving psychobiology of post traumatic stress. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 1(5), 253-265.
Vemuri, P., Lesnick, T. G., Przybelski, S. A., Machulda, M., Knopman, D. S., & Mielke, M. M. (2014). Association of lifetime intellectual enrichment with cognitive decline in the older population. JAMA Neurology, 71, 1017-1024. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2014.963
Woo, H., & Dutcher, J. (2018). Functional connectivity between reward regions and executive function regions during self-affirmation.
Yin, H. H., Mulcare, S. P., Hilario, M. R. F., Clouse, E., Holloway, T., Davis, M., & Costa, R. m. (2009). Dynamic reorganization of striatal circuits during the acquisition and consolidation of a skill. Nature Neuroscience(333-341). https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nn.2261
Zull, J. (2002). The art of changing the brain: Enriching the practice of teaching by exploring the biology of learning. Stylus Publishing.