Deconstructing consumer confidence
Why are Americans so gloomy? It may be all about the yoked dog and ‘learned helplessness.’
We have a market paradox on our hands. Consumer confidence is close to a 40-year low, suggesting that the economy is in worse shape now than in times that seemed far darker, such as the early 1980s, when both inflation and unemployment crept into double digits. Yet many of the current economic indicators, including inflation and unemployment, are rather positive — or at least not as negative as consumer sentiment implies.
So why are consumers, myself included, so gloomy?
I suspect that one answer lies in a psychological condition caused by prolonged exposure to unpredictable negative events called “learned helplessness.”
The basic experiments on learned helplessness use two dogs, each in a separate room. In the control dog’s room, after a bell rings the dog gets a mild electrical shock — just enough to annoy and surprise him. This dog has a switch to turn off the shocks and quickly learns to use it.
The second dog is yoked to the first but has no bell and no switch. Every time the control dog gets a shock, it too gets a shock until the control dog flips its switch. So, objectively, both dogs get the exact same treatment, but the yoked dog has no ability to predict or control the shocks.
Next comes the test. Both dogs are put in a “shuttlebox” — a large box divided into two compartments by a low fence. From time to time a warning light comes on, and a few seconds later the floor of the shuttlebox emits a mild electrical shock. If the dog jumps from one compartment to the other, the shock is immediately terminated. Even better, if the dog jumps over the fence upon seeing the warning light, there’s no shock at all. As you might expect, the control dog quickly learns to jump over the fence on cue; though understandably a bit anxious, he’s relatively happy.
And the second, yoked dog? You might expect it would be just as motivated to escape the shocks in the shuttlebox. But this is where the results get very interesting, and somewhat depressing: The yoked dog just lies in the corner of its cage, whimpering.
The yoked dog learned in the experiment’s first stage that shocks happen unpredictably and inescapably — and it carried that mind-set into the shuttlebox. This dog learned to be helpless in its general approach to life, exhibiting symptoms similar to suffering chronic clinical depression.
Americans are currently a bit like the yoked dog, exposed to an alarming sequence of market disasters. First, it was the Internet stock bubble. Then housing prices. And now oil prices and the banking crisis. All these came at us in quick succession and in direct contradiction to the prevalent advice given by financial advisors and the media. To give a personal example, about the time I got my first job, we were all told that technology stocks were the wave of the future and the best way to invest our money. When that bubble burst, we were told that housing was the best possible investment — but as my wife and I recently learned, this also was not the best advice.
So is the low level of consumer confidence and general depression justified? Perhaps not in terms of the hard numbers of the economy, but, from a psychological perspective, it’s an expected reaction. The question then is what to do to fix our sorry state.
One idea comes from psychologist James Pennebaker at the University of Texas at Austin. Pennebaker’s research has repeatedly shown the active process of trying to make sense out of traumatic events — often done through writing — can help individuals recover from them.
From this perspective, it might be useful to think about how we consume news. We have access to news 24 hours a day on TV, radio and online — but much of it is sensation-seeking rather than sense-making. Even stories about the economy take the shape of gossip about people who are struggling, who have lost their jobs and can’t pay for gasoline. A conscious effort to analyze and explain these economic crises is not only an important journalistic duty, it is also an essential element of our national mental health.
But we still need to think about how to prevent such economic shocks. In fact, in our current vulnerable state, I am worried that another immediate shock — most likely to occur in the healthcare market — could be too much for us to bear.
I suspect that the only way to regain a sense of order, predictability and control is to have government take very clear and substantial steps to regulate the markets — steps far beyond the patch-up jobs the Federal Reserve Bank is doing now. In fact, I suspect that the Fed’s attempts to impose order seem so random, idiosyncratic and capricious to most consumers that they do little to relieve our sense of chaos.
We need forward-looking policies that stave off potential problems in markets that have not (yet) failed. Or at least policies that sort out in advance how we will deal with crises as they emerge. Under what circumstances the Fed bails out banks, for instance, and what would be the consequences for the shareholders, the bank and the bankers. I suspect that only such large-scale and forward-looking policies will help us regain our general sense of order, predictability, control and trust — and stop feeling like the yoked dog.
This comment also appeared in the LA times

My latest book, The Upside of Irrationality, explores some positive and some negative ways that irrationality plays out in our lives.

Couldn’t the low level of consumer confidence actually be due to anchoring? Although there have been a few short blips, for the most part the economy since the 80′s has been excellent. Few people in the current generation remember a seriously bad economy, so they’ve come to expect everything to be rosy. When something does go wrong, it seems all the more worse in comparison.
I’ve found that a sure way to increase one’s happiness and sense of mastery in life is to ignore the news as much as possible. I take a weekly news magazine and that’s it. All that yammering was intruding on my life in unhelpful ways.
As an aside, you’ve mentioned government a few times in a context that implies that people in government are much more rational than other people. My experience implies the opposite: that people in government are just as irrational as the public, and that the net effect of government is the institutionalization of irrationality.
I believe happiness has nothing to do with the economy or any other thing outside our mind. Happiness is a choice. At any given moment I can choose to focus on the positive or negative.
There will always be plenty of outside factors attempting to throw my world off balance but it is always my choice as to how I choose to think about it.
This explains the phenomena where two people experience the same exact situation but one has a positive experience and the other a negative. i.e. a baby that wakes up every two hours is torture to one family but music to the ears of another who weren’t able to have kids for 10 years.
I concur with a comment above: “I believe happiness has nothing to do with the economy or any other thing outside our mind.”
…Like the control dog, we humans also have a “bell and switch” to determine our experience in the world. But unfortunately, most are unaware of this and so are like the yoked dog — much of life appearing to happen unpredictably and inescapably.
Our direct personal experience is our “bell” and our thoughts are our “switch” — as has been known by a few throughout history:
“With your thoughts you make the world.” – Buddha
“What we achieve inwardly will change outer reality.” – Plutarch
“And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive.” – Matthew
“I do not know how to distinguish between waking life and a dream. Are we not always living the life that we imagine we are?” – Henry David Thoreau
…In order to consciously determine our outer reality, we must be aware of our own thoughts. This requires the development of self-awareness. A simple, but not easy way to develop self-awareness is to practice paying attention to the shapes and colors in our peripheral vision. Thus we will “regain our general sense of order, predictability, control and trust” — not from “large-scale and forward-looking policies”, but from control of our own thoughts.
Insightful article.
Unfortunately, we can’t get “forward-looking policies that stave off potential problems in markets that have not (yet) failed” if the government continues to have such a poor fiscal policy and the Fed continues to print money out of thin air.
I also agree with Barry’s point about the lack of knowledge about past crises like the S&L crash in the 80′s (I was born in 1981 but I study financial history).
Lastly, Robert is so right about the people in govt., they’re still people just like us. I too watch the news but I don’t let it affect my life.
While I have opinions, I don’t let poor journalism and fear-mongering ruin my day, week, month or year.
Dan – Thankyou for a very interesting perspective. I have struggled with the problem of recuring shocks to society and our inability to learn enough to mitigate them in the future. I attributed this to a paradox of human nature but I find your explanation very persuasive…the “Yoked dog” phenomenon.
Part of the persuasiveness comes from your total immersion in the subject. An immersion that is evident by the fact that your article reveals that you to are a “yoked dog.” This is a great metaphor for our current socio-political system. The political leaders are the “control dog” and the rest of us are obviously the “yoked dog” whimpering in the corner of our cage…”please give us more regulation.” The only difference is that in our system the “control dog” also creates some of the shocks.
The human mind is wonderful and mysterious. After centuries of experience with the force and coercion of political systems and their disastrous results, we ask for more. Now if only your study can show us the way to throw off the yoke
As to the difference in consumer confidence in the early 80′s vs. the present relative to the actual economic conditions, isn’t it possible that certain issues we face now (global warming, terrorism, for example) are experienced in a meaningfully different way than those of the early 80′s (inflation and unemployment — which have a patently transitory quality (perhaps even the “Cold War” is different from these latest concerns?))?
As for the various failures, complete agreement that meaningful regulation is the key.
As for “the yoked dog,” exposing my political leanings, I like to think it will be roused energetically into a new state of excitement and optimism (i.e., hope!) by dramatic and historic new leadership (and not an Alaskan soccer mom).
If I go on a spending spree and run up a huge credit card bill, I will appear to be very prosperous. But, if I am rational, I will probably be depressed, because I know the chickens will come home to roost and I’ll be confronted with a bill that I can’t pay. I think the American people know that their leaders have been irresponsible with the Federal credit card and they are waiting for the shoe to drop. I don’t think it is irrational to be worried at the present moment
A consumer’s confidence is based on:
> his or her perceived likelihood of a positive or negative future
> how positive or negative it is likely to be
> the degree of certainty one feels about that expectation.
If one expects even a very positive future, yet one’s certainty of that expectation being fulfilled is very low, then overall, one may be much less confident.
I think that many “consumers” feel jolted by what they have experienced as a “blind-side” hit. They did not see the mortgage market collapsing so rapidly or the cost of transportation and food rising so rapidly. Not only have many experienced significant reversal of fortune, but they have also been shaken by a realization that they were SO wrong in their positive expectation.
So not only has the plunge been sudden and severe but I believe that the fact that it was so unexpected has contributed to the greater loss of confidence than we have experienced in past downturns.
heir faith in their ability to judge their own future well-being greatly decreased. This is based on so many having turned out to have been “wrong” about their expectations in the recent past. A recent failure to predict the future accurately will discourage one from confidently stating a belief in a positive future today.
First, consumers are correct in their current pessimism. It demonstrable that the U.S. economy continues to be in recession since starting one year ago — see the link below. The vast majority of Wall Street economists, investment managers, financial planners and investors are predisposed to only belatedly recognize bearish conditions.
Second, since no one wants to be out on three strikes, theory and history (again see the link below) show consumers are inclined to quit after two negative shocks, which is now happening to their home equity following their stock equity losses during the dot.com bust.
I agree with Dan’s “learned helplessness” as a prevalent consumer condition since they make investment decisions on what Shiller calls “information cascades.” They can only safe-haven themselves by quitting when their trend following goes awry since they don’t know any better way to make complex financial decisions. This is not so irrational since it’s our pro-survival herd conditioning, as well as an operant macro-pricing signal.
Bob Bronson
Bronson Capital Markets Research
http://www.financialsense.com/editorials/bronson/main.html
I liked the learned helplessness analysis but not the suggestions. The Fed should do the least possible to ‘fix’ the economy. Like any other living organism, the economy goes through natural periods of growth and decay. The decay that is ocurring now is and will be ultimately constructive as long as the system survives – excesses will be wrung out, bad investments will be punished with negative yields, ‘stupi’ money will be lost forever, and a ‘new’ paradigm will emerge ( that looks remarkably like the old paradigm from beginning of the last cycle.)
The yoked dog experiment seems way too simplified for the explanation of “Why are Americans so gloomy?”. You mentioned in your book that everything is relative. Therefore, if you could control the mind and the way you look at yourself from within(which dog might not be able to), you might have some control of the external impact on your happiness. Have you thought about religions and the spiritual impact on this?
There are some pretty substantive things for consumers to be unhappy about.
http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2008/08/income-and-pove.html provides some data.
Real median income taken since the last peak has not grown at all, it’s net shrunk. That’s the first time this has happened in my lifetime, and I’m 52.
In practical terms it means that people are doing what they are supposed to be doing to get ahead, and it isn’t working. They aren’t getting raises, or better jobs, they are treading water, or worse.
Yes, this condition will definitely lead to learned helplessness. But I don’t think its about trauma so much as the everyday story.
And if you are considering that GNP growth doesn’t follow the same curve, you’re missing the point. The rewards of growth have gone to the few, the very few. Which doesn’t help everybody else.
I suffer from chronic clinical depression so I can relate to “learned helplessness.”
It’s all relative…some days I can hear about market disasters and my mood and behavior is hardly affected, other days I run for the (bed) covers. I have lost my job many times as other people, but when I see the news of other mass layoffs like this week I often unconsciously absorb the loss the workers feel.
I can attest that writing has helped me recover from traumatic events, but sometimes I’m unable to write because I’m so caught up with the overwhelming emotions.
Why do you say the next immediate shock may occur in the healthcare market? How do you see this playing out?
Hmm, Katrina comes to mind when I read your suggestion that forward looking policies are needed to deal with crises. I think there’s a great deal of denial that happens before and during a crisis which contributes to the poor reaction. For example, the Internet stock bubble, anyone working in the industry at the time if they had a bit of insight at all could see the successes weren’t “real”.