Running head: MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS
Evaluating Media’s Portrayal of an Eccentric-Genius: Dr. Sheldon Cooper Christine N. Winston Women’s Christian College at Chennai, India
Author Note Christine N. Winston, Department of Psychology, Women’s Christian College, Chennai, India. Correspondence regarding this article should be addressed to Christine N. Winston, Department of Psychology, Women’s Christian College, Chennai – 600 006. Email:
[email protected] Citation: Winston, C. N. (2014). Evaluating Media’s Portrayal of an EccentricGenius: Dr. Sheldon Cooper. Psychology of Popular Media Culture. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1037/ppm0000060 Note. This article may not exactly replicate the final version published in the APA journal. It is not the copy of record.
1
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS Abstract The association between creativity and pathology has been heavily romanticized in popular media culture. The portrayal of the offbeat theoretical physicist, Dr. Sheldon Cooper, on the television show The Big Bang Theory is one such recent characterization that resonates with the mad-genius stereotype. In this article, I evaluate the validity of Sheldon’s psychological profile against existing literature and isolate the cognitive processes that differentiate his “autistic-creativity” from “schizotypic-creativity.” Further, I hypothesize that such characterizations of creative individuals can either reinforce the stereotype of the eccentricgenius or challenge normative definitions of normality. I reinterpret the creativity-pathology link from a humanistic perspective to mean that psychological health is not the absence of despair but the pursuit of creative generativity despite personal distress. Accordingly, I speculate that people will always be fascinated by eccentric-geniuses, even fictive ones such as Dr. Sheldon Cooper, because they compel us towards authentic creativity and away from arbitrary conformity. Keywords: Sheldon Cooper, The Big Bang Theory, eccentricity, genius, creativity,
2
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS Evaluating Media’s Portrayal of an Eccentric-Genius: Dr. Sheldon Cooper There is a fine line between wrong and visionary. Unfortunately, you have to be a visionary to see it. – Dr. Sheldon Cooper (Holland & Cendrowski, 2009) The characterization of creative individuals as offbeat and eccentric is a recurrent phenomenon in popular media culture, particularly television shows. Examples include the lawyer Denny Crane in Boston Legal, the diagnostician Dr. Gregory House in House M. D., and the theoretical physicist, Dr. Sheldon Cooper in The Big Bang Theory. The portrayal of such protagonists as creative-eccentrics in mainstream television has implications for people’s attitudes towards creativity, its manifestations, and its correlates. It is important therefore to evaluate the accuracy with which creative individuals are portrayed in popular media and to examine its potential impact on people’s attitudes and beliefs about creative individuals. The Big Bang Theory, a highly-ranked and widely-viewed (approximately 20 million viewers in the United States; Goldberg, 2013; Rickman, 2011) American situational-comedy, is one such television show that draws on the personalities, lifestyles, and idiosyncrasies of a group of prolific scientists (Rickman, 2011). The purpose of the present article therefore, is to evaluate the validity of the psychological profile of the show’s protagonist, Sheldon Cooper, in the light of existing literature on creativity and eccentricity. Sheldon is a senior theoretical physicist specializing in String Theory at the California Institute of Technology. He shares his apartment with his best friend, Leonard Hofstadter, who works as an experimental physicist at the same institute. His other friends include Rajesh Koothrappali, a particle astrophysicist, Howard Wolowitz, a mechanical engineer, and his neighbor, Penny (Rickman, 2011).
3
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS What makes Dr. Sheldon Cooper an eccentric-genius? The Creativity of Dr. Sheldon Cooper Creativity is an aggregate term that includes a wide spectrum of original works ranging from Einstein’s cosmological constant to a child’s pretend-play in her imaginary castle. Kaufman and Beghetto (2009) have therefore classified the different types of creativity into four broad categories: mini-c (experiential creativity), little-c (everyday creativity), pro-c (expert creativity), and big-c (eminent creativity). Although the creativity exhibited by Sheldon is more readily typical of pro-c and big-c creativity, the range of creative activities that he engages in spans across all the four categories. Mini-c. Mini-c refers to the creativity that is inherent to one’s idiosyncratic experiencing of the world (Kaufman & Beghetto, 2009). Sheldon experiences the joys of such creative activity when he plays with his toy trains (Lorre, Kaplan, Reynolds, Prady, Molaro, Goetsch et al., 2011), takes imaginative tours to the fantasy world “flatland” (Aronsohn, Molaro, Lorre, et al., 2010), dresses up as a superhero for Comic-Con (Lorre, Prady, Aronsohn, & Cendrowski, 2008), or uses coconut shavings as hair for his Frodoshaped pancakes (Lorre, Molaro, Reynolds, et al., 2010). It is noteworthy that he experiences much of his mini-c creativity through fantasy and imagination. Indeed, he has expressed a similar sentiment to his colleagues; “I wish you could all be inside my head. The conversation is sparkling” (Prady, Holland, et al., 2012). He also exhibits a childlike capacity to turn otherwise mundane activities into enjoyable ones, such as climbing down the stairwell in step with the rhythm of a rhyme (Prady, Aronsohn, Goetsch, Lorre, et al., 2010). Little-c. Little-c refers to everyday experiences of and experiments with creativity (Kaufman & Beghetto, 2009). Such creativity is abundant in Sheldon’s repertoire as he tends to “excel at so many things” (Prady, Goetsch, Gorodetsky, et al., 2011) such as Tuvan throat singing, making sour-dough bread (Prady, Goetsch, Gorodetsky, et al., 2011), playing the
4
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS theremin (Lorre, Aronsohn, Ferrari, Prady, Molaro, Kaplan, et al., 2011), creating his own board game “Fun with Physics” (Lorre, Aronsohn, Prady, Rosenstock et al., 2009), and learning how to weave (Lorre, Prady, Litt, Aronsohn, & Cendrowski, 2007). He also engages in highly specialized (though not professional) creative activities such as building a Legoblock death star (Lorre, Kaplan, Hernandez, et al., 2011), building a hypothetical model of DNA for a silicon-based life form (Lorre, Prady, Litt, et al., 2007), and hosting a podcast called “Sheldon Cooper presents: Fun with Flags” (Lorre, Molaro, Kaplan, et al., 2012). He also exhibits little-c in everyday conversations by discussing topics that require the ability to reason hypothetically (e.g., alternative history). Accordingly, he once proposed the following question as a conversation starter, “How would the civil war have gone differently if Lincoln was a robot sent from the future?” (Goetsch, Molaro, Engel, Rosenstock, & Cendrowski, 2008). Pro-c. Pro-c refers to the creativity that is exhibited by individuals who have invested time and effort in order to acquire the expertise and skills necessary to make a useful contribution to one’s field of interest (Kaufman & Beghetto, 2009). Sheldon exhibits such creativity in his widely-acclaimed work with String Theory. He has also received the necessary qualifications which include a graduate degree with summa cum laude, a Masters degree, and two Doctoral degrees (Rickman, 2011). His other professional accolades include regular scholarly publications in peer-reviewed journals (e.g., New England Journal of High Energy Physics), awards for academic and professional achievement (e.g., Chancellor’s Award for Science, Stevenson’s Award), and numerous research funds and grants (Rickman, 2011). Big-C. Big-c refers to the creativity exhibited by eminent individuals who make revolutionary and time-transcendent contributions to a particular field (Kaufman & Beghetto, 2009). Accordingly, Sheldon’s work with String Theory has been considered to have the
5
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS potential to “forever change man’s understanding of the universe” (Lorre, Molaro, Reynolds, et al., 2010). Indeed, his contributions to physics are comparable to those of eminent theoretical physicists such as Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking. Sheldon is one of the few fortunate individuals who have been recognized for their brilliance during their lifetime; most “geniuses are rarely lauded as geniuses in their own time” (Kaufman & Beghetto, 2009, p. 4). While the different creative activities that Sheldon engages in have been discretely classified into categories, the different types of creativity do interact with and enhance each other. For instance, he draws from his knowledge of superheroes (little-c) in order to better articulate his scientific theories (pro-c), such as when he illustrated the concept of mirrorsymmetry by likening it to the Flash playing tennis with himself (Engel, Haggar, Doyle, Rosenstock, & Cendrowski, 2008). On another occasion, his observations of children on a merry-go-round (mini-c) inspired him to theorize about the properties of super-solids (pro-c; Prady, Engel, et al., 2008). Indeed, he has noted that a creative experiencing of mundane everyday events (e.g., apple falling on Newton’s head) has the potential to spark a wildfire of creativity (e.g., discovery of gravity; Prady, Engel, et al., 2008). Conversely, a disentanglement from engagement with mini-c activities (e.g., visiting the comic book store, play paintball) had implications for his creative output at the pro-c (and potentially, big-c) level (Engel et al., 2008). It appears therefore that specialized creativity and everyday creativity interact with each other in order to construct an idiosyncratic understanding and experiencing of the world around him. The Eccentricity of Dr. Sheldon Cooper Eccentricity is a term that has not been defined in psychological literature. However, the terms “odd” and “eccentric” have been consistently used to characterize cluster-A personality disorders that are marked by pervasive psycho-social dysfunction (DSM-5;
6
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS American Psychiatric Association, APA, 2013). It must be noted however that eccentricity is not synonymous with mental illness. According to Barlow and Durand (2012), three features characterize mental illness: psychological dysfunction, personal distress, and socially-atypical behaviours. Existing literature on self-identified eccentric individuals suggests that they do not experience psychological dysfunction; indeed, they tend to be healthier and happier than “normal” individuals (Holt, Simmonds-Moore, & Moore, 2008; Weeks & James, 1995). The only feature that underlies both eccentricity and mental illness is the exhibition of sociallyatypical behaviours. Eccentricity therefore refers to a deviance from or defiance of sociocultural norms in the (relative) absence of dysfunction and distress. This definition is supported by existing literature which suggests an inverted-U shaped relationship between creativity and mental illness (Kinney et al., 2000) such that subclinical pathology, rather than “[mental] illness or mental health per se,” is a correlate of creativity (Kinney & Richards, 2014, p. 302). Kinney and Richards (2014) argue that creativity confers a “compensatory advantage” (p. 297) against severe pathology; and conversely, mild pathology is “conducive to creativity” (p. 308). Accordingly, Sheldon’s behaviours are indicative of eccentricity (presence of socially atypical behaviours) and not psychopathology (absence of dysfunction and distress). Indeed, on several occasions, he has refuted others’ speculations regarding his mental health by noting, “I’m not insane. My mother had me tested. ” (Prady, Lorre, Engel, Doyle, & Cendrowski, 2008). Presented below are clusters of behaviours that summarize his idiosyncratic style. Regressive Behaviours. Sheldon may be best described as a child in an adult’s body. Despite possessing intelligence and knowledge well beyond his years, he tends to display numerous regressive behaviours such that his best friend, Leonard, described him as having been emotionally “stuck” all his life (Aronsohn, Goetsch, et al., 2010). His childish qualities include the need to be cared for by a parent or a parental figure when ill or afraid (Lorre,
7
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS Aronsohn, Prady, Engel, & Cendrwoski, 2008), stubbornness (Lorre, Prady, Litt, et al., 2007), considering certain individuals his “mortal enemies” (Prady, Molaro, Reynolds, et al., 2011), and tendencies to throw temper tantrums when he does not get his way (Lorre, Prady, Litt, et al., 2007). Indeed, his friend, Bernadette, has drawn from her experiences in working with stubborn children in order to effectively manage his idiosyncratic behaviours (Aronsohn, Goetsch, et al., 2010). Egocentrism. Sheldon is portrayed as a highly egocentric individual who has difficulties in taking the perspective of another person. This is obvious in his highly idiosyncratic speech embedded with technical terminologies that are not comprehensible to the listener who is unfamiliar with physics (Prady, Molaro, Aronsohn, Goetsch, & Cendrowski, 2008). He also tends to show contempt for any perspective that differs from his own. For instance, he once expressed disdain and mockery towards his colleague, Leslie Winkle, because her theoretical orientation (Loop Quantum Gravity) differed from his own (String Theory; Lorre, Prady, Aronsohn, & Cendrowski, 2008). Interestingly and ironically, egocentrism also influences his attempts at altruism. For instance, as demonstrated in the following conversation (Lorre, Aronsohn, Goetsch, et al., 2011), Sheldon forces his distressed friend, Penny, to consume a hot beverage because social protocol dictates that he offer a hot beverage to an upset guest. Sheldon: Right. I’ll make tea. Penny: Sweetie, it’s okay. I don’t want tea. Sheldon: I’m sorry. It’s not optional. Sheldon also displays pervasive disregard for others’ needs and preferences, and extorts favours from others in an egocentric manner. Examples include waking his sleeping roommate in order to discuss mundane issues (Goetsch, Molaro, et al., 2008); forcing an unwilling friend to drive him to a store (Prady, Molaro, Aronsohn, et al., 2008) or to offer
8
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS him accommodation (Prady, Goetsch, Molaro, & Cendrowski, 2008); and making his neighbor sing to him when he is ill (Lorre, Aronsohn, Prady, Engel, et al., 2008). Such an attitude is exemplified in the following interaction (Prady, Molaro, Aronsohn, et al., 2008), in which Leonard (who regularly drives Sheldon to work) communicates that he will not be able to drive him to work due to changes in his work schedule. Leonard: Sheldon, I was up all night using the new free-electron laser for my X-ray diffraction experiment. Sheldon: Did the laser accidentally burn out your retinas? Leonard: No. Sheldon: Then you can drive. Let’s go. Leonard: Didn’t I tell you I’d be working nights, and that you’d have to make other arrangements? Sheldon: You did. Leonard: And? Sheldon: I didn’t. Let’s go. Narcissism. Egocentric tendencies tend to go hand-in-hand with narcissistic features (Whitbourne, 2012). Accordingly, Sheldon has expressed ideations of infallibility (e.g., I often forget other people have limitations; Prady, Lorre, et al., 2008) and grandeur (e.g., My brain is better than everybody’s; Goetsch, Kaplan, et al., 2013). Further, he has expressed contempt towards those who are less educated or less intelligent than he is. He tends to hold a negative evaluation of people in general and is exemplified in the following exchange between him and his friend, Howard (Prady, Molaro, Holland, et al., 2012). Sheldon: Try to put yourself in my place. Imagine you’re the sole human being living on a planet populated with nothing but dogs. And then it turns out there’s another human being.
9
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS Howard: Hang on. Are you saying the rest of us are dogs? Sheldon: Yeah, okay, I can see you’re going to take this the wrong way. Let me try again. Imagine you’re the sole human being living on a planet populated with nothing but chimps. Sheldon considers himself to be a member of a superior species, “homo novus,” one that is farther along in evolutionary development than human beings (Prady, Molaro, Aronsohn, et al., 2008). He also believes that his work is revolutionary and that it has the potential to change man’s perception of the universe and ultimately win him a Nobel prize (Engel et al., 2008). Accordingly, he has tentatively titled his auto-biography, “You’re Welcome, Mankind!” (Lorre, Kaplan, Reynolds, Prady, Molaro, Holland, et al., 2012). It is noteworthy that despite narcissistic features (and consistent with Narcissistic Personality Disorder; APA, 2013), he reacts adversely to threats to his sense of personal worth. For instance, when confronted with a child prodigy in physics, Joyce Kim, who critiqued and corrected his work with ease, he suffered from a loss of self-worth and temporarily abandoned his work with String Theory (Glickman, Engel, Goetsch, Molaro, & Cendrowski, 2010). Psycho-Social Dysfunction. Sheldon leads a rather solitary life with minimal and structured interactions with friends and colleagues. He prefers isolation primarily because of his narcissistic distaste for relationships as well as deficits in social skills. Social Skills Deficit. Sheldon is portrayed as a socially-awkward and perhaps misanthropic person. He avoids social interactions as much as possible by disclosing that he does not have time for “chit-chat” (Prady, Aronsohn, Goetsch, Molaro, Cendrowski, 2008). He considers social relationships to be a means to an end and appreciates relationships for their instrumental rather than emotional value. For instance, despite disclosing to his roommate, Leonard, that he is his best friend, Sheldon said to him, “If I could afford the rent,
10
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS I’d ask you to leave” (Lorre, Prady, Aronsohn, Glickman, & Cendrowski, 2007). He prefers to treat friendships as social contracts that ought to be guided by “written agreements” and “implied covenants” (Prady, Molaro, Aronsohn, et al., 2008). Sheldon avoids most forms of physical contact, because of his discomfort with touch, as well as his fear of contamination from others (Lorre, Molaro, Reynolds, et al., 2010). Further, his interactions with others are highly structured and task-oriented and relatively devoid of emotional self-disclosure. He also has significant difficulties in identifying and understanding others’ emotions and affective undertones unless explicitly verbalized. As a result, he fails to interpret cues which suggest discomfort or anger on the part of the listener and consequently finds himself in trouble (Ambrosetti, Lorre, Roth, Molaro, & Cendrowski, 2009). Further, he tends to interpret speech literally and has difficulties in comprehending sarcasm, irony, and humour (Lorre, Prady, Cohen, Goetsch, & Cendrowski, 2007). Alexithymia. Alexithymia, a term coined by Sifneos (1973) literally translates to “lack of words for feelings.” It is a sub-clinical personality trait in which an individual has difficulties in identifying and describing emotional experiences (Taylor, Bagby, & Parker, 1997). Sheldon is portrayed as a severely alexithymic individual who experiences significant discomfort with emotions. He responds to queries regarding his affective state with the response, “I’m sorry, I don’t understand the question.” (Prady, Engel, et al., 2008). He also has difficulties in expressing his feelings and he tends to somatise emotional disturbances, which is another characteristic feature of alexithymia (Taylor et al., 1997). For instance, during a stressful event involving conflict with his best-friend, Leonard, he speculated that he had been experiencing gastro-intestinal abnormalities as a result of emotional distress (Prady, Engel, et al., 2008). Obsessive-Compulsive Tendencies. The most prominent features of Sheldon’s eccentricities include obsessive-compulsive behaviours such a sitting only on his designated
11
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS spot on the couch, knocking on doors in a rhythmic pattern, regularly disinfecting his hands, etc. (Lorre, Prady, Hernandez, et al., 2013). He also adheres to a strict schedule regarding his dietary intake, bodily functions, and entertainment choices (Lorre, Craig, et al., 2012). Further, he obsessively seeks to “sort, label, and organize the entire universe” (Lorre, Prady, Cohen, et al., 2007) in an attempt to bring order into an otherwise chaotic world. Further, when under stress (often precipitated by lying and secret-keeping), he exhibits facial tics and engages in ritualistic behaviours (Prady, Goetsch, Molaro, et al., 2008). On one such occasion, he relentlessly repeated the phrase, “You forgot your flash drive” when he realized that he had forgotten to carry his flash drive to a conference (Prady, Goetsch, Doyle, Engel, & Cendrowski, 2009). It is noteworthy however, that despite such overtly obvious rigidities, Sheldon considers himself to be “a free spirit” (Lorre, Aronsohn, Ferrari, et al., 2010). Mild Impairments in Reality-Testing. Sheldon holds certain beliefs (e.g., I’m Batman; Prady, Goetsch, Molaro, et al., 2008) that question his ability to test reality. On one such occasion, he believed that a strangely-shaped cloud followed him home (Prady, Molaro, Ferrari, 2011). It is noteworthy however, that some of his irrational and unrealistic beliefs are precipitated by stress. For instance, during one particularly stressful event which involved a delay in getting his hair cut, Sheldon reacted adversely by displaying erratic behaviours and expressing beliefs that are inconsistent with reality (e.g., that he can hear his hair growing; Lorre, Craig, et al., 2012). There are however, difficulties in assessing Sheldon’s ability to test reality. This is primarily the case because he has difficulties in drawing boundaries between reality and fantasy, particularly the kind that is portrayed in science-fiction movies and television shows (e.g., beliefs regarding time-travel and superpowers). In one particular instance involving a conflict with his best friend, Leonard, he attempted to explode his brain using mental powers as portrayed in the science-fiction movie, Scanners (Prady, Engel, et al., 2008).
12
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS It is noteworthy that although some of Sheldon’s perceptions and beliefs are considered to be bizarre by his friends, he is nevertheless often right. For instance, Leonard once called him “crazy” because he expressed concern that the milk carton felt lighter for no obvious reason. However, at a later time, he learned that he was right and that his carton weighed lighter because some of the milk was stolen by his neighbour, Penny (Ambrosetti, et al., 2009). It appears therefore, that while Sheldon’s perceptions of the world around him are unusual, they are not necessarily inaccurate. Indeed, he has made a similar observation in a rather narcissistic fashion; “Extraordinary intelligence might well appear extra-terrestrial to you (Lorre, Molaro, Reynolds, et al., 2010).” Other Pathological Behaviours. Sheldon displays behaviours characteristic of multiple phobias (extreme fear of germs, Lorre, Aronsohn, Prady, Engel, et al., 2008; birds, Lorre, Goetsch, Broccolo, Prady, et al., 2011; and the stage; Lorre, Prady, Holland, et al., 2010) and hypochondriasis (e.g., interpreting the sound of a high-frequency whistle as a symptom of brain tumor; Lorre, Molaro, Prady, Rosenstock, Cendrowski, 2008). Does literature support the psychological profile of Dr. Sheldon Cooper? The psychological study of genius (big-c) is extremely difficult because truly eminent creators are rare (approximately 7000 individuals in the entire world; Kaplan, 2014) and in most cases, deceased, as big-c contributions often receive a posthumous evaluation (Kafuman & Beghetto, 2009). The big-c creativity exhibited by Sheldon is estimated to occur at the rate of 1 per million individuals (Kaplan, 2014). Indeed, he has made a similar observation himself, “I am a published theoretical physicist with two doctorates and an I. Q. which can’t be accurately measured by normal tests, how much scarcer could I be?” (Lorre, Prady, Aronsohn, & Cendrowski, 2008). The psychological study of such a character, fictive though he be, can offer valuable insights into the mind of a creative genius, or at least lay notions of it. It is noteworthy that Sheldon’s personality structure is loosely based on the co-creator,
13
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS Bill Prady’s observations of and experiences with gifted computer programmers (Rickman, 2011). While empirical literature regarding the link between everyday creativity and pathology is ambivalent, the “price of greatness” (big-c; Ludwig, 1995) appears to be distress and turmoil (Kaufman & Beghetto, 2009). It is noteworthy that the association between creativity and mental illness is dependent on the level and type of creativity. In other words, while artists such as visual artists and writers have been found to report elevated levels of schizotypy (Burch, Pavelis, Hemsley, & Corr, 2006), scientists such as mathematicians and theoretical physicists have been found to manifest behaviours that are characteristic of Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD; Baron-Cohen, Wheelright, Skinner, Martin, Clubley, 2001). Accordingly, the numerous behaviours patterns displayed by Sheldon, such as an insistence on sameness, inability to read nonverbal cues, lack of interest in social interactions, and restricted range of interests have been considered to fit the diagnostic criteria for highfunctioning autism (APA, 2013) or its variant, Asperger syndrome. Indeed, the association between autistic features and an aptitude for physics has been well established by BaronCohen, a leading researcher in the field of autism (Baron-Cohen et al., 1998). Evaluating the “Lone Nut” stereotype Sheldon’s limited capacity for empathy (responsiveness to another’s thoughts and feelings) and advanced capacity for systemizing (construction and deconstruction of systems) is consistent with Baron-Cohen’s (2009) theory that ASD is characterized by deficient folk psychology (ability to understand people) and superior folk physics (ability to understand objects; Baron-Cohen et al., 1998). Further, consistent with Sheldon’s recollections of his childhood as characterized by an engagement with science and disengagement with relationships (Lorre, Reynolds, Holland, et al., 2013), children with ASD display difficulties
14
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS in empathizing and advanced capabilities for systemizing from a very early age (BaronCohen, Wheelright, Spog, Scahill, & Lawson, 2001). The evidence that children with autism are impaired in the development of folk psychology is plentiful. This impaired folk psychology appears to be universal in autism, even amongst adults with autism. . . . Evidence that in such children [and adults] folk physics is intact or superior comes from the following sources: they have a good understanding of object properties and physical causality; they understand mechanisms . . . and their obsessional interests often centre on machines, other physical systems . . . or systems with mathematical/spatial regularities. (Baron-Cohen et al., 1998, p. 4) The term “mindblindness” has been coined to refer to autistic persons’ “blindness” to others mental states (Baron-Cohen, 1995). However, their deficits in cognitive and affective empathy are compensated for by a superior capacity “to identify the rules that govern the system, in order to predict how that system will behave (Baron-Cohen, 2009, p. 71).” It has been suggested therefore that “presenting mental states as if they are lawful and systemizable, even if they are not” (Baron-Cohen, 2009, p. 72) can prove to be effective intervention strategies that facilitate improvement in emotion recognition and empathy. Accordingly, Sheldon has often used similar “systemizing” strategies in order to improve his socioemotional functioning. The most profound illustration of this mechanism can be drawn from his attempt to befriend his colleague, Barry Kripke, by conducting a survey on why his current friends like him, reviewing existing literature in the field of friend-making, thematically analysing children’s books on friendship, and ultimately drafting “the friendship algorithm” (Prady, Rosenstock, Lorre, Molaro, & Cendrowski, 2009). It is because of such an extreme need to systemize that he relies on formal contracts such as “The Roommate Agreement” (Aronsohn, Molaro, Holland, et al., 2010) and “The Relationship Agreement”
15
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS (Lorre, Molaro, Goetsch, et al., 2011) to dictate his social relationships. Frith and de Vignemont (2005) have documented a similar instance in which an individual with Asperger’s compiled the “rules” of social behaviour into “A survival guide for people with Asperger syndrome (p. 732).” The empathizing-systemizing theory also explains the extreme egocentrism displayed by Sheldon. According to Baron-Cohen (2009), individuals with autistic tendencies have a poorly developed Theory of Mind (folk psychology) and as a result, have a diminished capacity to take the perspective of others. Frith and de Vignemont (2005) note that a “normal” individual integrates an egocentric perspective (the world and the self as I see it) with an allocentric perspective (the world and the self as it exists) in order to perceive the world in a coherent and meaningful manner. They have noted: There seems therefore to be a mutual dependency between egocentric and allocentric stances. The allocentric social knowledge is partly based on memories of past egocentric actions and inferences drawn upon them. The egocentric stance is influenced by a wider allocentric knowledge of people. A rich social life is thus based on egocentric mentalizing, balanced by all allocentric mentalizing, which provides an accuracy check on mental states of other people. (Frith & de Vignemont, 2005, p. 726) They have theorized that the absence of an allocentric stance or a faulty allocentric stance explains autistic persons’ reliance on their egocentric perceptions of the world. The absence of a point of reference other than one’s own results in lack of interest in testing one’s perceptions of the world around them (Frith & de Vignemont, 2005). This results in the construction of an assumptive reality rather than a collective reality (Winston, Tarkas, & Maher, in press). Further, the lack of an allocentric stance results in a narcissistic defiance of any perspective other than one’s own and consequently, psychosocial dysfunction. Frith and de Vignemont (2005) have observed such an attitude in individuals with autistic tendencies
16
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS whom they have described as “contented tyrants” because “they are happy if others do exactly what they want, and extremely frustrated if they do not. . . . [They] often think that they are the centre of other people’s life and the only motivation for their actions and their discourse. Consequently, they cannot understand why other people do not want to be friends with them (p. 730).” The profoundness of such egocentrism and the frailty of such narcissism have been well documented in the Sheldon’s behavioural repertoire. Differentiating “Autistic” creativity from “Schizotypic” creativity A consistent explanation for the “mad-genius” hypothesis has been that “openness to experience” underlies both creativity and sub-clinical pathologies such as schizotypy (Carson, 2011; Miller & Tal, 2007). However, such findings are inconsistent with Sheldon’s (and autistic persons’) insistence of sameness, preference for routine, resistance to change, and other obsessive-compulsive features. The discrepancy arises because of a failure to differentiate between the different types of creativity (expression-oriented vs. precisionoriented), the underlying cognitive processes (expansive vs. constrictive), and associated pathology (Asperger’s vs. schizotypy). Creativity is traditionally defined as the novel and useful association of otherwise unrelated elements (Sternberg, 1999); hence the Remote Associates Test (Mednick & Mednick, 1967). However, the capacity to delineate elements that have been traditionally grouped together is also reflective of creativity. The capacity to link elements together has been associated with schizotypic tendencies (Carson, 2011; Winston et al, in press), whereas the ability to isolate and differentiate elements has been associated with autistic features (Baron-Cohen, 2009). It is noteworthy however that once the individual (with autistic tendencies) has been able to isolate and study the detailed properties of the individual elements, he or she will be able to develop a coherent understanding of a larger whole (synthesis follows analysis; Baron-Cohen, 2009). One of the primary reasons why creative-
17
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS schizotypes are able to generate novel re-combinations of mental elements is because they possess lower levels of cognitive inhibition (Carson, 2011). Such an “over-inclusive” cognitive style noticeable in creative schizotypes can be contrasted with the creativity of autistic individuals that is oriented towards “under-inclusion” or localized processing (BaronCohen, 2009). Sheldon has demonstrated a detail-oriented localized cognitive style; such as when he attempted to solve the “grapheme problem” by “isolating the terms of his formula and examining them individually” (Aronsohn, Goetsch, et al., 2010). Differences in perceptual interpretation can be also observed between schizotypiccreativity and autistic-creativity. While schizotypic-creativity requires one to reason beyond the confines of reality (as manifested in animism, anthropomorphism, fiction; Winston et al., in press), autistic-creativity is characterized by an orientation to “reveal scientific truths about the nature of reality” (Baron-Cohen, 2009, p. 77) and resistance to “play with and even suspend the truth” (Baron-Cohen, p. 78). This is often manifested in autistic individuals’ tendency to defy super-natural, mystical, and inexplicable experiences. One such instance in which Sheldon undermined an “amazing coincidence” by operationalizing the probability of its occurrence is presented below (Aronsohn, Rosenstock, Prady, Ferrari, & Cendrowski, 2009). Penny: Okay, so Kim the night manager went on maternity leave, and her husband’s name is Sandy, right? So get this, her replacement is a woman named Sandy whose husband’s name is Kim. Leonard: Wow! Penny: I know. What are the odds? Sheldon: Easily calculable, we begin by identifying the set of married couples with unisex names. We then eliminate those unqualified for restaurant work, the aged, the imprisoned and the limbless, for example. Next we look at . . .
18
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS Leonard: Sheldon! It’s an amazing coincidence, can we leave it at that? Sheldon: I’m sorry. Ooh, Penny, it’s as if the Cheesecake Factory is run by witches. Perceptual interpretations are therefore primarily oriented towards expression (e.g., art, music, writing) in schizotypic-creativity and towards precision (e.g., physics, mathematics, computer science) in autistic-creativity. The egocentrism inherent to schizotypic-creativity and autistic-creativity is also hypothesized to be different. For instance, an autistic-creative individual is egocentric because one lacks an (optimal) allocentric stance (Frithe & de Vignemont, 2005). On the other hand, the schizotypic-creative individual is egocentric, not because one does not have an allocentric stance but because one rejects it. This is demonstrated in Rogers’ (1961) observation that creative individuals are able to trust their subjective experience despite allocentric differences (Winston et al., in press); “Great artists do not paint like this (allocentrism), but I paint like this (egocentrism; p. 175).” The aforementioned differences between the cognitive processes underlying schizotypic-creativity and autistic-creativity are summarized in table 1. How might media’s portrayals of eccentric-geniuses influence social attitudes towards creativity? The mind of an eccentric-genius is a subject of fascination for professionals and laypersons alike. It is primarily because of such widespread interest that television shows with creative-eccentric protagonists find widespread appeal. Such portrayals have the potential to influence people’s attitudes and beliefs towards creative individuals and to consequently make or break stereotypes. Nisbet et al. (2002) for instance, have identified recurrent stereotypical representations of scientists in popular media (e. g., evil scientist, the eccentric scientist, the elite scientist) and have observed that scientists are consistently portrayed as “unusual, whether in positive or negative ways (p. 588).” Further, they have found that the manner in which scientists are portrayed in media has implications for whether
19
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS scientists are perceived as “strange and scary” (p. 603) or as a powerful force that can advance society and improve life. It is important therefore, to examine the potential ways in which media’s characterization of creative-geniuses, such as Sheldon, might impact people’s attitudes and beliefs regarding creativity, its manifestations, and its correlates. Reinforcement of the “Lone Nut” Stereotype The paradox of the positive correlation between the two seemingly conflicting mechanisms involved in creativity and pathology is indeed a puzzle for researchers and a sensation for laypersons. Much of the controversy exists primarily because there is no convincing answer to the question, “Why would the growth-oriented need for creativity cooccur with a downward-spiral into pathology?” Some theorists have addressed this apparent contradiction by dismissing the correlation as a spurious one. Schlesinger (2009) for instance has identified numerous conceptual and methodological flaws in past research studies and has underscored the ambivalence of research findings. She has also contended that pairing a positive characteristic such as creativity with pathology is both unwarranted and counterproductive. Indeed, the mad-genius stereotype may become a self-fulfilling prophecy. In other words, a creative individual might consider mental illness to be a necessary condition for creativity and may therefore refuse treatment or fear recovery (Kaufman, Bromley, & Cole, 2006). “The ongoing media parade of the talented and the doomed” (Schlesinger, 2014, p. 63) has the potential to reinforce the stereotypical association between creativity and mental illness; such that the viewer considers pathology to be a necessary, if not sufficient condition for creativity. Accordingly, Schlesinger (2002) has condemned the popularization of the mad-genius stereotype in popular media culture, “it’s primarily the public fascination that keeps [the mad-genius stereotype] alive, as we flock to all those films about talent that distort the facts to serve the stereotype, like ‘Shine’ and ‘A Beautiful Mind’ (p. 141).” In addition, she has endorsed positive psychology’s contention that creativity is an indication of
20
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS mental health rather than mental illness; and has credited positive psychology for promoting the more “life-affirming” qualities associated with creativity, such as “optimism, resilience, and creative ‘flow’ (Schlesinger, 2009, p. 70).” Reconceptualization of “Normality” The existential-humanistic approach offers a different interpretation of the association between creativity and eccentricity; and consequently, has implications for how portrayals of creative-eccentric individuals in media might influence social attitudes. In humanistic psychology, health is not the absence of distress; but the will to be(come) oneself, even in the face of personal distress and social disapproval. Rogers (1961) illustrates this principle by drawing from the examples of creative individuals such as Albert Einstein, El Greco, and Ernest Hemingway who were true to their idiosyncratic styles rather than to arbitrary external standards. El Greco . . . must have realized as he looked at some of his early work, that “good artists do not paint like that.” But somehow he trusted his own experiencing of life, the process of himself, sufficiently that he could go on expressing his own unique perceptions. . . . Ernest Hemingway was surely aware that “good writers do not write like this.” But fortunately he moved toward being Hemingway, being himself, rather than toward someone else’s conception of a good writer. . . . Einstein . . . rather than drawing back . . . simply moved toward being Einstein, toward thinking his own thoughts, towards being as truly and deeply himself as he could. (Rogers, 1961, p. 175) The pursuit for such authenticity is often a lonely and painful journey. It is primarily because of such a dissonance between one’s personal idiosyncrasies and societal norms that creative individuals experience a sense of estrangement in this world and report feeling like “aliens in a foreign land” (Maslow, 1987, p. 175) or “a round peg in a square hole” (Carson, 2012, para. 26). In addition to feeling alienated and being misunderstood, the creative
21
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS contributions of individuals (at the big-c level) are rarely recognized and acknowledged by the gatekeepers of a given field during one’s lifetime (Kaufman & Beghetto, 2009). Nevertheless, the humanists contend that Kierkegaardian defiance, “the will to be oneself,” even in the face of social rejection and associated personal distress is indeed the epitome of health (Maslow, 1987; Rogers, 1961). Conversely, the “individual loss of personhood” and mainstream conformity is considered to the greatest tragedy of modern society (Rogers, 1961, p. 214). Creative individuals’ pursuit for authenticity, even at the cost of happiness, can be better explained by making an analogical reference to the “parenthood paradox.” It refers to the phenomenon by which most individuals express a desire to be a parent as well as a desire to be happy; parenthood, however, has been consistently found to be associated with lower levels of happiness (Baumeister, 1991). Baumesister (1991) explains that individuals will continue to bear and rear children, even though it comes at the cost of personal happiness, because parenting has existential value (it fosters a sense of purpose and generativity). Accordingly, “Musicians must make music, artists must paint, poets must write if they are to be ultimately at peace with themselves. What humans can be, they must be” (Maslow, 1987, p. 64). Therefore, in the same way that the association between parenthood and distress does not pathologize parenthood but underscores the pursuit of “something” beyond personal happiness, the association between creativity and eccentricity reflects man’s (painful) search for meaning, generativity, immortality, and transcendence through the actualization of one’s idiosyncratic potentials. Abraham Maslow (1987), the pioneering humanist, rejected the notion that the statistical average is an indication of normality; non-normality is not synonymous with abnormality. Indeed, he considered resistance to conformity and enculturation to be indicators of psychological health and optimal functioning. Accordingly, he drew his profile
22
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS of the self-actualizing individual based on eminent and some arguably eccentric historical figures such as Albert Einstein and Abraham Lincoln; and the healthiest 1% of the college population. In other words, Maslow considered those who deviated, both conceptually and statistically, from the “average” human being to be the healthiest individuals. This concurs with the definition of “eccentric,” which in geometry and astronomy, literally means “out of the centre” (Aymes-Stokes & Mellet, 2012, p. 5). The overlap also explains the many similarities that exist between the characteristic features of eccentric (Weeks & James, 1995) and self-actualizing individuals (Maslow, 1987); including, but not limited to curiosity, autonomy, resistance to enculturation, idealism, problem-centering, and a profound love for solitude. Indeed Maslow (1993), has made a similar observation himself, “My feeling is that the concept of creativeness and the concept of the healthy, self-actualizing, fully human person seem to be coming closer and closer together, and may perhaps turn out to be the same thing” (p. 55). Accordingly, it can be inferred from table 2, that there is much overlap between the characteristic features of self-actualizing individuals and eccentric individuals. Further, the idiosyncratic behaviours displayed by Sheldon, his “Sheldonisms,” are more consistent with the features of psychological health rather than with dysfunction. Therefore, in humanistic theory, the link between creativity and eccentricity does not pathologize creativity but questions the validity of normative definitions of normality. Schlesinger (2009) has contended that the eccentric-genius stereotype has survived history and will continue to do so because it implicitly defends a person from the awareness of one’s unlikelihood of greatness. She has written, “The mad genius idea also neutralizes any envy of their abilities, for if we cannot share their talent, at least we don’t have their problems” (p. 62). In contradistinction to this perspective, I believe that people are fascinated by and drawn towards eccentric-geniuses because they inspire us to free ourselves from the shackles of conformity and to pursue authenticity and the actualization of our idiosyncratic
23
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS potentials. In other words, a person subscribes to the concept of the eccentric-genius not because one is envious of them, but because one is inspired by them. Accordingly, the findings of a recent study (Van Tilburg & Igou, 2014) offer support to the hypothesis that individuals are drawn towards creative individuals’ authenticity (being “me”) rather than sheer eccentricity (being different). More specifically, participants were found to be more appreciative of Lady Gaga’s music when her eccentricities were portrayed as being rooted in authenticity (“autheccentric”); but not when her eccentricities were interpreted as stemming from inauthenticity (marketing gimmick or publicity stunt). The portrayal of creative individuals as eccentric in popular television shows can be edifying because they challenge and weaken prevailing conceptualizations of normality. Consequently, it facilitates the normalization of “non-normal” behaviours that are otherwise considered pathological. Accordingly, when asked if the character of Sheldon was patterned after Asperger syndrome, the creators of the show responded in the negative, adding that they considered his behaviours to simply be “Sheldony” (Waldman, 2009, para. 5). Idiosyncratic behaviours are therefore indicative of individual differences rather than personal deficiencies. In the following conversation, Sheldon (Prady, Rosenstock, Molaro, Haggar, & Cendrowski, 2009) makes a similar observation regarding the volatility and relativity of the concept of “normality,” in response to Penny’s characterization of her scientist-friends as “peculiar.” Penny [to Howard]: I mean, I get it, you’re a little peculiar. You know, like Sheldon. Sheldon: Yeah, excuse me, Penny, but in this room [consisting of four scientists building a killer-robot], you’re the one who’s peculiar. Penny: Yeah, you might be right. Agree to Disagree? Concluding Remarks There has never been as heated a debate in the field of creativity as that surrounding the issue of the eccentric-genius stereotype. There are psychologists who dismiss any and every
24
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS association between creativity and pathology, those who endorse the association with a “conditions apply” clause (e.g., it depends on the domain and level of creativity or diagnosis and severity of psychopathology), and those who “just prefer their creative geniuses to be stark-raving, ear-cutting, crackling-out-loud mad” (Kaufman, 2009, p. 111). A similar divide exists among creative laypersons themselves because they “feel passionately about the question of mental illness and creativity” (Kaufman et al., 2006, p. 157). It is obvious, therefore, that those who oppose the association will condemn media’s exploitation of the “mad-genius” hypothesis. Accordingly, a self-identified “nerd” has observed in his following critical review of The Big Bang Theory that its portrayal of the eccentric-genius is offensive to the sentiments of the nerd community. I have always looked at this show as “Nerd blackface”. They take random stereotypes about nerds and display it on TV for people to laugh at. . . . I and friends of mine often get people asking us stuff like "Oh you must like Big Bang Theory, they're nerds like you" or "You're such a nerd, you're like Sheldon" . . . I have mostly nerdy friends . . . not many of them are anything like the geek caricatures on the show. Sure some people will say it’s taking it too serious, but they aren't the offended ones so you can't judge how it makes someone feel. (Fields, 2013, Comments, para. 1-5) On the other hand, those who prefer the more “out of the box, out of this world, and out of one’s mind” manifestations of creativity are likely to be fascinated by and inspired by fictive eccentric-geniuses such as Dr. Sheldon Cooper. Indeed, there exists a wikiHow page entitled, “How to act like Sheldon Cooper” (How to act like Sheldon Cooper, n. d.). Diametrically opposed to the “nerd blackface” critique is the following comment, which resonates with the sentiment that media’s portrayals of eccentricity has the potential to challenge prevailing standards of normality and to inspire viewers to “to be the next Van Gogh, Plath, Cobain, or Hemingway (Kaufman et al., 2006, p. 157).”
25
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS That Sheldon has graced our televisions highlights the successes of neurodiversity and of the widening acceptance of the human experience. . . . Sheldon is a cocktail of characteristics so easily recognizable as traits of Asperger’s complicated by his feats of neurotypical genius. Therein lies his-and the show’s-greatness: Portraying an underrepresented, but highly important and influential part of our population in a manner that is accessible and admirable. (Holverstott, 2011, para. 3, 6) In short, media’s portrayal of creative individuals, such as Dr. Sheldon Cooper, as “non-normal” can either reinforce the pervasive stereotype of the eccentric genius; or challenge prevailing notions of normality. Alternatively, by portraying successful creative individuals as eccentric, the media weakens scripted definitions of normality and encourages a culture of “autheccentricity.”
26
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS References Ambrosetti, J., Lorre, N., Roth, A., Molaro, S. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2009). The Vegas Renormalization [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing. Aronsohn, L., Goetsch, D., Holland, S., Lorre, C., Molaro, S., Kaplan, E. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2010). The Einstein Approximation [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Aronsohn, L., Molaro, S., Holland, S., Lorre, C., Goetsch, D., Ferrari, M. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2010). The Staircase Implementation [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Aronsohn, L., Molaro, S., Lorre, C., Kaplan, E., Reynolds, J. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2010). The Psychic Vortex [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Aronsohn, L., Rosenstock, R., Prady, B., Ferrari, M. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2009). The Gothowitz Deviation [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Aymes-Stokes, S., & Mellet, L. (2012). Introduction. In S. Aymes-Stokes & L. Mellet. (Eds.). In and Out: Eccentricity in Britain (pp. 1-32). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
27
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS Barlow, D. H., & Durand, V. M. (2012). Abnormal Psychology: An Integrative Approach (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. Baron-Cohen, S. (1995). Mindblindness: An Essay on Autism and Theory of Mind. Boston: MIT Press/Bradford Books Baron-Cohen, S. (2009). Autism: The Empathizing-Systemizing (E-S) Theory. The Year in Cognitive Neuroscience, 1156, 68-80. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04467.x Baron-Cohen, S., Bolton, P., Wheelwright, S., Scahill, V., Short, L., Mead, G., & Smith, A. (1998). Autism occurs more often in families of physicists, engineers, and mathematicians. Autism, 2, 296-301. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/ Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., Skinner, R., Martin, J., & Clubley, E. (2001). The autismspectrum quotient (AQ): evidence from Asperger syndrome/high-functioning autism, males and females, scientists and mathematicians. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 31(1), 5 -17. doi: 10.1023/A: 1005653411471 Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., Spong, A., Scahill, V. & Lawson, J. (2001). Are intuitive physics and intuitive psychology dependent? A test with children with Asperger Syndrome. Journal of Developmental and Learning Disabilities, 5, 47-78. Retrieved from http://docs.autismresearchcentre.com/ Baumeister, R. F. (1991). Meanings of life. New York: Guilford Press. Burch, G. S., Pavelis, C., Hemsley, D. R., & Corr, P. J. (2006). Schizotypy and creativity in visual artists. British Journal of Psychology, 97, 177-190. doi: 10.1348/000712605X 60030 Carson, S. H. (2011). Creativity and psychopathology: a shared vulnerability model. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 56(3), 144-153. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm. nih.gov
28
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS Carson, S. H. (2012). The Unleashed Mind: Why Creative People Are Eccentric. Retrieved from http://creativealliancemke.org/2012/01/the-unleashed-mind-why-creative-peopleare-eccentric/ Engel, S., Haggar, D., Doyle, T., Rosenstock, R. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2008). The Cooper-Nowitzki Theorem [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Fields, C. B. S. (2013, October 5). 11 Reasons Geeks Hate The Big Bang Theory [Online forum comment]. Retrieved from http://www.ugo.com/tv/11-reasons-geeks-hate-thebig-bang-theory Frith, U., & de Vignemont, F. (2005). Egocentrism, allocentrism, and Asperger syndrome. Consciousness and Cognition, 14, 719-738. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2005.04.006 Glickman, J., Engel, S., Goetsch, D., Molaro, S. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2010). The Jerusalem Duality [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Goetsch, D., Kaplan, E., Holland, S., Molaro, S., Reynolds, J., Ferrari, M. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2013). The Scavenger Vortex [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Goetsch, D., Molaro, S., Engel., S., Rosenstock, R. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2008). The White Asparagus Triangulation [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios.
29
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS Goldberg, L. (2013, October 1). How ‘The Big Bang Theory’ Scored Record Ratings After 6 Years. The Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved from http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/how-big-bang-theory-scored-410550 Holland, S. (Writer), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2009). The Pirate Solution [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Holt, N. J., Simmonds-Moore, C. A., & Moore, S. L. (2008). Benign schizotypy: investigating differences between clusters of schizotype on paranormal belief, creativity, intelligence and mental health. In Sherwood, S., (Ed.). Proceedings of Presented Papers of the Parapsychological Association 51st Annual Convention (pp. 82-96). Winchester: Parapsychological Association. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu How to Act Like Sheldon Cooper (n.d.) In wikiHow. Retrieved July, 3, 2014, from http://www.wikihow.com/Act-Like-Sheldon-Cooper Kaplan, A. (2014). Creativity and Mental Illness [PDF document]. Retrieved from www.psychiatrictimes.com/printpdf/198915 Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond Big and Little: The Four C Model of Creativity. Review of General Psychology, 13(1), 1-12. doi: 10.1037/a0013688 Kaufman, J. C., Bromley, M. L., & Cole, J. C. (2006). Insane, poetic, lovable: Creativity and endorsement of the “Mad Genius” stereotype. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 26(1-2), 149-161. doi:10.2190/J207-3U30-R401-446J Kinney, D. K., Richards, R., Lowing, P. A., LeBlanc, D., Zimbalist, M. E., & Harlan, P. (2000). Creativity in offspring of schizophrenic and control parents: an adoption study. Creativity Research Journal, 13(1), 17–25. doi: 10.1207/ S15326934CRJ1301_3
30
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS Kinney, D. K., & Richards, R. (2014). Creativity as “compensatory advantage”: bipolar and schizophrenic liability, the inverted-U hypothesis, and practical implications. In J. C. Kaufman, Creativity and Mental Illness (pp. 295-317). United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. Lorre, C., Aronsohn, L., Ferrari, M., Prady, B., Molaro, S., Holland, S. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2010). The Justice League Recombination [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Lorre, C., Aronsohn, L., Ferrari, M., Prady, B., Molaro, S., Kaplan, E. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2011). The Bus Pants Utilization [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Lorre, C., Aronsohn, L., Goetsch, D., Prady, B., Molaro, S., Reynolds, J. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2011). The Cohabitation Formulation [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Lorre, C., Aronsohn, L., Prady, B., Engel, S. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2008). The Pancake Batter Anomaly [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Lorre, C., Aronsohn, L., Prady, B., Rosenstock, R., Reynolds, J. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2009). The Guitarist Amplification [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Lorre, C., Craig, T., Torvinen, G., Prady, B., Molaro, S., Reynolds, J., Ferrari, M. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2012). The Werewolf Transformation [Television series
31
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Lorre, C., Goetsch, D., Broccolo, A, D., Molaro, S., Reynolds, J., Holland, S. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2012). The 43 Peculiarity [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Lorre, C., Goetsch, D., Broccolo, A. D., Prady, B., Molaro, S., Kaplan, E. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2011). The Ornithophobia Diffusion [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Lorre, C., Kaplan, E., Hernandez, T., Prady, B., Molaro, S., Holland, S. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2011). The Isolation Permutation [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Lorre, C., Kaplan, E., Holland, S., Molaro, S., Reynolds, J., Ferrari, M. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2013). The Contractual Obligation Implementation [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Lorre, C., Kaplan, E., Reynolds, J., Prady, B., Molaro, S., Goetsch, D. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2011). The Pulled Groin Extrapolation [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Lorre, C., Kaplan, E., Reynolds, J., Prady, B., Molaro, S., Holland, S. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2012). The Friendship Contraction [Television series
32
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Lorre, C., Molaro, S., Goetsch, D., Prady, B., Reynolds, J., Holland, S. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2011). The Flaming Spittoon Acquisition [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Lorre, C., Molaro, S., Kaplan, E., Prady, B., Goetsch, D., Ferrari, M. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2012). The Beta Test Initiation [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Lorre, C., Molaro, S., Prady., B., Rosenstock, R. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2008). The Vartabedian Conundrum [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Lorre, C., Molaro, S., Reynolds, J., Aronsohn, L., Rosenstock, R., Ferrari, M. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2010). The Large Hadron Collision [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Lorre, C., Prady, B., Aronsohn, L. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2008). The Codpiece Topology [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Lorre, C., Prady, B., Aronsohn, L., Glickman., J. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2007). The Dumpling Paradox [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios.
33
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS Lorre, C., Prady, B., Cohen, R., Goetsch., D. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2007). The Big Bran Hypothesis [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Lorre, C., Prady, B., Ferrari, M., Molaro, S., Reynolds, J., Holland, S. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2012). The Transporter Malfunction [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Lorre, C., Prady, B., Hernandez, T., Molaro, S., Reynolds, J., Holland, S. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2013). The Closure Alternative [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Lorre, C., Prady, B., Holland, S., Kaplan, E., Rosenstock, R., Reynods, J. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2010). The Pants Alternative [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Lorre, C., Prady, B., Litt, D., Aronsohn., L. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2007). The Luminous Fish Effect [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Lorre, C., Prady, B., Reynolds, J., Aronsohn, L., Molaro, S., Ferrari, M. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2010). The Zazzy Substitution [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Lorre, C., Reynolds, J., Holland, S., Molaro, S., Kaplan, E., Ferrari, M. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2013). The Proton Resurgence [Television series episode].
34
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Ludwig, A. M. (1995). The price of greatness: Resolving the creativity and madness controversy. New York: Guilford Press. Maslow, A. H. (1987). Motivation and Personality (3rd ed.). New York: Harper & Row. Maslow, A. H. (1993). The farther reaches of human nature. New York: Penguin-Arkana. Mednick, S. A., & Mednick, M. T. (1967). Remote Associates Test examiner’s manual. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Miller, G. F., & Tal, I. R. (2007). Schizotypy versus openness and intelligence as predictors of creativity. Schizophrenia Research, 93, 317-324. doi: 10.1016/j.schres.2007.02.007 Nisbet, M. C., Scheufele, D. A., Shanahan, J., Moy, P., Brossard, D., & Lewenstein, B. V. (2002). Knowledge, Reservations, or Promise? A Media Effects Model for Public Perceptions of Science Technology. Communication Research, 29(5), 584-608. doi: 10.1177/009365002236196 Prady, B., Aronsohn, L., Goetsch, D., Lorre, C., Molaro, S., Holland, S. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2010). The Desperation Emanation [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Prady, B., Aronsohn, L., Goetsch, D., Molaro, S. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2008). The Peanut Reaction [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Prady, B., Aronsohn, L., Reynolds, J., Lorre, C., Molaro, S., Holland, S. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2010). The Bozeman Reaction [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios.
35
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS Prady, B., Engel, S., Lorre., C., Aronsohn, L., Goetsch, D. (Writers), & Murray, J. (Director). (2008). The Cooper-Hofstadter Polarization [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Prady, B., Goetsch, D., Doyle, T., Engel, S. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2009). The Terminator Decoupling [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Prady, B., Goetsch, D., Gorodetsky, E., Lorre, C., Molaro, S., Kaplan, E. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2011). The Agreement Dissection [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Prady, B., Goetsch, D., Molaro, S. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2008). The Bad Fish Paradigm [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Prady, B., Holland, S., Kaplan, E., Lorre, C., Molaro, S., Reynolds, J. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2012). The Stag Convergence [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Prady, B., Kaplan, E., Holland, S., Lorre, C., Molaro, S., Reynolds, J. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2012). The Countdown Reflection [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Prady, B., Lorre, C., Engel, S., Doyle, T. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2008). The Griffin Equivalency [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios.
36
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS Prady, B., Molaro, S., Aronsohn, L., Goetsch, D. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2008). The Euclid Alternative [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Prady, B., Molaro, S., Ferrari, M., Lorre, C., Reynolds, J., Holland, S. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2011). The Infestation Hypothesis [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Prady, B., Molaro, S., Holland, S., Lorre, C., Kaplan, E., Ferrari, M. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2012). The Hawking Excitation [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Prady, B., Molaro, S., Reynolds, J., Lorre, C., Kaplan, E., Ferrari, M. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2011). The Russian Rocket Reaction [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Prady, B., Rosenstock, R., Lorre, C., Molaro, S. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2009). The Friendship Algorithm [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Prady, B., Rosenstock, R., Molaro, S., Haggar, D. (Writers), & Cendrowski, M. (Director). (2009). The Killer Robot Instability [Television series episode]. In C. Lorre & B. Prady (Executive producers), The Big Bang Theory, Burbank, CA: Warner Bros. Studios. Rickman, A. (2011). An independent, amazing, unofficial A-Z of the Big Bang Theory. London: John Blake Publishing. Rogers, C. R. (1961). On Becoming a Person: A Therapist’s View of Psychotherapy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
37
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS Schlesinger, J. (2002). Issues in creativity and madness, Part Two: Eternal Flames. Ethical Human Sciences and Services, 5, 139-142. Retrieved from www.ingentaconnect.com Schlesinger, J. (2009). Creative Mythconceptions: A Closer Look at the Evidence for the “Mad Genius” Hypothesis. Psychology of Creativity, Aesthetics, and the Arts, 3(2), 6272. doi: 10.1037/a0013975 Schlesinger, J. (2014). Building connections on sand: the cautionary chapter. In J. C. Kaufman (Ed.), Creativity and Mental Illness (pp. 60-75). United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. Holverstott, J. (2011). Why Sheldon Cooper Matters, Aspergers or Nerd [Web blog]. Retrieved from http://jholverstott.wordpress.com/2011/01/05/why-shelden-coopermatters-aspergers-or-nerd/ Sifneos, P. E. (1973). The prevalence of ‘alexithymic’ characteristics in psychosomatic patients. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 22(2), 255-262. doi: 10.1159/000286529 Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.). (1999). Handbook of creativity. New York: Cambridge University Press. Taylor, G. J., Bagby, R. M., & Parker, J. D. A. (1997). Disorder of affect regulation: Alexithymia in medical and psychiatric illness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Van Tilburg, W. A., & Igou, E. R. (2014). From Van Gogh to Lady Gaga: Artist eccentricity increases perceiver skill and art appreciation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 44(2), 93-103. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.1999 Waldman, A. (2009). Come up with a new theory: Sheldon does NOT have Asperger’s. Retrieved from http://www.aoltv.com/2009/08/14/come-up-with-a-new-theorysheldon-does-not-have-aspergers/
38
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS Weeks, D. J. & James, J. (1995). Eccentrics: A study of sanity and strangeness. London: Phoenix. Whitbourne, S. K. (2012). It’s a Fine Line Between Narcissism and Egocentrism. Retrieved from http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/fulfillment-any-age/ 201204/it-s-fine-linebetween-narcissism-and-egocentrism Winston, C. N., Tarkas, N. K., & Maher, H. (in press). Eccentric or Egocentric? Preoperational Features in Schizotypic and Creative Adults. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. Online First Publication. doi: 10.1037/a0037442
39
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS Table 1 Cognitive Processes Underlying Autistic-Creativity and Schizotypic-Creativity Cognitive Process Egocentric Perspective Allocentric Perspective Perceptual Selection Perceptual Organization Perceptual Interpretation
Autistic-Creativity Present Absent Local Processing Elemental Differentiation Operational
Schizotypic-Creativity Present Present Global Processing Hyper-connectivity Meta-physical
40
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS
41
Table 2 A Comparison of the Characteristic Features of Self-Actualizers, Eccentrics, and Sheldon Self-Actualizers Personality Structure A. Estrangement B. Love of solitude
C. Awareness and acceptance of shortcomings
D. Lack of interest in others’ approval
E. Unusual sense of humor
“Sheldonisms”
Eccentrics
“I have no peers (Lorre, Prady, Cohen, et al., 2007).” “I realize you [Penny] are also on your own tonight, so if at some point you find yourself with nothing to do, please do not disturb me (Ambrosetti et al., 2009).” “You may not realize it, but I have difficulty navigating certain aspects of daily life . . . understanding sarcasm, feigning interest in others, not talking about trains as much as I want to. It’s exhausting. Which is why, for twenty minutes a day, I like to go down to that room, turn my mind off and do what I need to do to recharge (Lorre, Goetsch, Broccolo, Molaro, et al., 2012).” “I have no interest in standing . . . in front of a group of judgemental strangers, who wouldn’t recognise true genius if it were standing in front of them giving a speech (Prady, Engel, et al., 2008).” “When I try to deceive, I myself have more nervous tics than a lyme disease research facility. It’s a joke. It relies on the homonymic relationship between tick the blood-sucking arachnid, and tic the involuntary muscular contraction. I made it up myself (Prady, Goetsch, Molaro, et al., 2008).”
Awareness that one is different Need for solitude
Non-conforming from a very early age
Unusual, mischievous sense of humor
Nature of Relationships A. Inability to feign social niceties
“What would we talk about? We’ve no overlapping areas of interest I’m aware of, and you know I don’t care for chit-chat (Prady, Aronsohn, Goetsch, Molaro, et al., 2008).” B. Lack of interest in “The need to find another human being intimate relationships has to share one's life with has always puzzled me. Maybe because I am so interesting all by myself (Prady, Kaplan, et al., 2012).” C. Emotional “Just keep in mind, if you ever need a detachment in slightly apathetic tertiary friend, I stand at relationships the ready (Lorre, Aronsohn, Goetsch, et al., 2011).”
Mostly unmarried or single
Uninterested in the company of others
MEDIA’S PORTRAYAL OF AN ECCENTRIC GENIUS D. Enmeshment with selected few
E. Ruthless termination of dysfunctional relationships Perception of Reality A. Accurate and idiosyncratic perception of reality B. Fresh and creative appreciation of everyday life
Experience of Life A. The call to duty
B. Happy preoccupation with one’s work
C. Intrinsic enjoyment of both processes and outcomes Attitude towards Humanity A. Condescension towards people’s mediocrity
42
“The four of you are three of my closest friends [Leonard, Rajesh, Penny] and one treasured acquaintance [Howard] (Prady, Aronsohn, Reynolds, et al., 2010).” “I move our relationship terminate immediately . . . there being no objections . . . the motion carries. Goodbye! (Lorre, Prady, Reynolds, et al., 2010)” “You’re the milk thief! Leonard said I was crazy but I knew that carton felt lighter (Ambrosetti et al., 2009).” “I was walking through the park, and I saw these children on a merry-go-round, which started me thinking about the moment of inertia in gasses like helium at temperatures approaching absolute zero (Prady, Engel, et al., 2008).”
Creative and unusual interpretations of reality
“Science demands nothing less than the fervent and unconditional dedication of our entire lives (Engel et al., 2008).” “Quantum physics makes me so happy. It’s like looking at the universe naked (Lorre, Prady, Ferrari, et al., 2012).”
Seek to make the world a better place Happy preoccupation with one’s hobbies and interests
“Leonard and I often use our commute time to exercise our minds with brainteasers . . . and games (Prady, Molaro, Aronsohn, et al., 2008).” “When I correct people, I am raising them up [not putting them down] (Prady, Molaro, Holland, et al., 2012).”
Seek to educate and convert others to one’s point of view
“I believe in a gender blind society like in Star Trek; where women and men of all races and creeds worked side-by-side as equals (Lorre, Kaplan, Holland, et al., 2013).” Note. Characteristics of self-actualizers are based on Maslow’s (1987) theory of selfactualization; descriptions of eccentrics are based on Weeks and James’ (1995) study of selfidentified eccentric persons. B. Blindness to superficial differences
