# Avoiding "cognitive tunneling"



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 23, 2016)

Are any of you aware of any practices for reducing cognitive tunneling (defined below) in a self-defense context?

_Cognitive tunneling is an effect that occurs when our brains move from an auto-pilot mode (like when we're walking down the street, just enjoying the day or thinking about work, etc. - Condition White) to a crisis situation (Condition Orange or Red) where decisions are suddenly neceessary. The brain tends to lock in on the single stimulus most dominant (often, right in front of the field of vision at that moment) and ignore all others in decision making. This could lead to a whole range of problems, not the least being focusing on an obvious threat and ignoring two others next to him._


----------



## ST1Doppelganger (Aug 23, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> Are any of you aware of any practices for reducing cognitive tunneling (defined below) in a self-defense context?
> 
> _Cognitive tunneling is an effect that occurs when our brains move from an auto-pilot mode (like when we're walking down the street, just enjoying the day or thinking about work, etc. - Condition White) to a crisis situation (Condition Orange or Red) where decisions are suddenly neceessary. The brain tends to lock in on the single stimulus most dominant (often, right in front of the field of vision at that moment) and ignore all others in decision making. This could lead to a whole range of problems, not the least being focusing on an obvious threat and ignoring two others next to him._


Allot of aikido haters might laugh about this but I'm firm believer in aikido randori helping me not fall in to the tunnel vision on a single opponent. 

When I first started aikido I would often end up with my back turned to one opponent when I was dealing the first opponent and my Sensei would tell me Everytime I did this.  Now when I do randori this rarely happens and I'm usually using the first attacker as a shield for one of the other attackers.  

I will say that it's a type of sparring I value now since my other styles didn't focus on multiple opponents in sparring. The one thing you can also do is give the opponent's training knifes and then one will randomly pull the knife out with out you knowing which one is the knife attacker. 

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk


----------



## JowGaWolf (Aug 23, 2016)

I have a specific exercise drill that I do in class.  I'll have to record it the next time I have class.

When I'm sparring one of my goals is to absorbing the background which helps to reduce the tendency to focus directly (staring) at the person in front.  Outside of sparring I will train my vision on a clear night I by looking at the stars in the sky.  The goal is to not focus on one set of stars but to try to pick up movement of light in the sky by looking at the entire sky.  I use this same method when sparring.  I don't need to see detail from my opponent, I only need to see and factor movement in order to fight.  Everything else can be done by touching and sensing.  This helps me to keep the bigger picture in play.   I will also disengage or increase distance from my opponent for the purpose of getting a bigger picture, especially when I find that my vision is tunneling.   When I'm in the heat of punches then I don't know if I get tunnel vision or if my view is just blocked because I'm close to the person I'm fighting.  Stepping back and disengaging can help to regain the bigger picture and gives me the opportunity to see the environment, threats, opportunities, and escapes.

I look at vision like everything else, a person can train vision so that it can perform certain tasks in more of a natural manner (auto pilot). 

Sports like basketball, hockey, football, lacrosse, tag (the children's game), and old fashion dodge ball also helps.  No look passes in basketball are an excellent example.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 23, 2016)

ST1Doppelganger said:


> Allot of aikido haters might laugh about this but I'm firm believer in aikido randori helping me not fall in to the tunnel vision on a single opponent.
> 
> When I first started aikido I would often end up with my back turned to one opponent when I was dealing the first opponent and my Sensei would tell me Everytime I did this.  Now when I do randori this rarely happens and I'm usually using the first attacker as a shield for one of the other attackers.
> 
> ...


The issue is that cognitive tunneling seems to defy simple training (by which I mean training the mind to pay attention to a wider focus, as with multiple-man randori). It can happen to extremely experienced airline pilots, when they have (literally) been on auto-pilot and something happens that requires they take control of the plane. They can focus on a single gauge or control to the exclusion of the other things they'd normally pay attention to.

That's not to say that multiple-man scenarios (including randori) aren't good. They absolutely are, and I suspect they are part of an answer. It looks like cognitive models (a picture to compare a situation to, and a pre-determined sequence to revert to) are an important part of avoiding cognitive tunneling.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 23, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> I have a specific exercise drill that I do in class.  I'll have to record it the next time I have class.
> 
> When I'm sparring one of my goals is to absorbing the background which helps to reduce the tendency to focus directly (staring) at the person in front.  Outside of sparring I will train my vision on a clear night I by looking at the stars in the sky.  The goal is to not focus on one set of stars but to try to pick up movement of light in the sky by looking at the entire sky.  I use this same method when sparring.  I don't need to see detail from my opponent, I only need to see and factor movement in order to fight.  Everything else can be done by touching and sensing.  This helps me to keep the bigger picture in play.   I will also disengage or increase distance from my opponent for the purpose of getting a bigger picture, especially when I find that my vision is tunneling.   When I'm in the heat of punches then I don't know if I get tunnel vision or if my view is just blocked because I'm close to the person I'm fighting.  Stepping back and disengaging can help to regain the bigger picture and gives me the opportunity to see the environment, threats, opportunities, and escapes.
> 
> ...


Cognitive tunneling is not about vision. It's about your brain's focus (not the focus of the eyes). Your brain (kind of like your eyes) can take a wide, floodlight-like focus or a narrow, spotlight-like focus. When we are suddenly forced to switch from auto-pilot to critical decisions, our brain has a natural tendency to focus hard. That's probably a throwback to being attacked by predators, and was valuable if you were being attacked by a single predator.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Aug 23, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> Are any of you aware of any practices for reducing cognitive tunneling (defined below) in a self-defense context?
> 
> _Cognitive tunneling is an effect that occurs when our brains move from an auto-pilot mode (like when we're walking down the street, just enjoying the day or thinking about work, etc. - Condition White) to a crisis situation (Condition Orange or Red) where decisions are suddenly neceessary. The brain tends to lock in on the single stimulus most dominant (often, right in front of the field of vision at that moment) and ignore all others in decision making. This could lead to a whole range of problems, not the least being focusing on an obvious threat and ignoring two others next to him._


A couple months ago, I was topping off tanks, at the factory, when I noticed another tank had sprung a leak. I instantly focused on that, and ended up over filling the tank I was at. I looked around, and I couldn't find anyone to blame. Damn it!


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 23, 2016)

Touch Of Death said:


> A couple months ago, I was topping off tanks, at the factory, when I noticed another tank had sprung a leak. I instantly focused on that, and ended up over filling the tank I was at. I looked around, and I couldn't find anyone to blame. Damn it!


That's a good example. If you fill tanks a lot, you were probably mostly on automatic while doing that function. When the leak showed up, you switched to decision-making, and your brain focused only on that one thing - the leak.


----------



## Tez3 (Aug 23, 2016)

I take it you don't want the men can't multi task argument?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 23, 2016)

Tez3 said:


> I take it you don't want the men can't multi task argument?


LOL - nobody can multitask, Tez. The human brain - in the conscious portion - is a single-thread processor.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Aug 23, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> LOL - nobody can multitask, Tez. The human brain - in the conscious portion - is a single-thread processor.


The trick is to make a good habit of switching to neutral... "Kill the headlights, and put it in neutral..."


----------



## Jenna (Aug 23, 2016)

Touch Of Death said:


> The trick is to make a good habit of switching to neutral... "Kill the headlights, and put it in neutral..."


Beck?


----------



## Steve (Aug 23, 2016)

What I think can be addressed is coping with extreme stress or anxiety in general and, where possible, exposure to the activity. 

Competitions are one way to get people outside of their comfort zone and force them to function in a stressful situation.  Teaching people things that they can actually apply in context is helpful, which is another reason I'm a fan of competition. 

Scenario based training, if done well, could also help, I think.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Aug 23, 2016)

Jenna said:


> Beck?


Hey, those lyrics must mean something... this seemed to fit.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 23, 2016)

Steve said:


> What I think can be addressed is coping with extreme stress or anxiety in general and, where possible, exposure to the activity.
> 
> Competitions are one way to get people outside of their comfort zone and force them to function in a stressful situation.  Teaching people things that they can actually apply in context is helpful, which is another reason I'm a fan of competition.
> 
> Scenario based training, if done well, could also help, I think.


Competition helps with the stress training, but it never has that moment of switching. Since we know it is coming, we aren't standing around in auto-mode until the opponent starts to act. Remember that commercial pilots are put through some very stressful scenarios along the way in simulators (and sometimes while actually flying), and are good at the necessary decision-making. The issue is with that unexpected switch between modes - that's where our minds over-focus.

I also wonder if cognitive tunneling might be responsible for some of the "I never saw the knife" scenarios. In fact, I have little doubt that it does, but how many - what percentage?


----------



## Steve (Aug 23, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> Competition helps with the stress training, but it never has that moment of switching. Since we know it is coming, we aren't standing around in auto-mode until the opponent starts to act. Remember that commercial pilots are put through some very stressful scenarios along the way in simulators (and sometimes while actually flying), and are good at the necessary decision-making. The issue is with that unexpected switch between modes - that's where our minds over-focus.
> 
> I also wonder if cognitive tunneling might be responsible for some of the "I never saw the knife" scenarios. In fact, I have little doubt that it does, but how many - what percentage?


I'm sure you're right.  I'm just throwing out some thoughts, and I'm open to other ideas.  

Frankly, what comes to mind is the Inspector Clouseau situation, where Kato just jumps out of the bushes or attacks him in his sleep.   In other words, it seems like you'd need to in some way replicate that shock, and further, that you'd need to do it in the context of the situation you're trying to normalize.  Which kind of seems like a bad idea.  Doesn't it?


----------



## Steve (Aug 23, 2016)

I think about other situations in which people experience this, and the one that I think about is driving.  I understand that this is a little different, but when I taught my kids to drive a few years ago, that was exciting.  Kids are so overwhelmed by all of the stimuli from within the car, that they literally only process what is a few feet in front of their car.  Through exposure and experience, they are better able to organize the information and so are able to expand their field of view.

There was a video a few years back on this about basketballs and such.  Anyone here see that?  I don't want to say more, in case you haven't seen it.  Very interesting.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Aug 23, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> Cognitive tunneling is not about vision. It's about your brain's focus (not the focus of the eyes). Your brain (kind of like your eyes) can take a wide, floodlight-like focus or a narrow, spotlight-like focus. When we are suddenly forced to switch from auto-pilot to critical decisions, our brain has a natural tendency to focus hard. That's probably a throwback to being attacked by predators, and was valuable if you were being attacked by a single predator.


  You mentioned vision in your statement. So that's what I was addressing. See below.



gpseymour said:


> The brain tends to lock in on the single stimulus most dominant (often, right in front of the field of vision at that moment) and ignore all others in decision making. This could lead to a whole range of problems, not the least being focusing on an obvious threat and ignoring two others next to him.



To me it's the same.  Vision, smell, touch, hearing, and taste function send information to the brain which in turns helps the brain to process the environment. You can not process your environment without at least one of these things working.  At any point of time during the day and at night even when sleeping, the brain will pay more attention to one sensory organ more than another for various lengths of time.

Our brains don't operate independently from our other senses.  What is in my brain is what I get from the input of touch, sight, smell, hearing, and even taste.  What I choose to do with that information is where training will come into place.



gpseymour said:


> hat's a good example. If you fill tanks a lot, you were probably mostly on automatic while doing that function. When the leak showed up, you switched to decision-making, and your brain focused only on that one thing - the leak.


 Would that decision or focus even had existed if he did not have the ability to see?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 23, 2016)

Steve said:


> I'm sure you're right.  I'm just throwing out some thoughts, and I'm open to other ideas.
> 
> Frankly, what comes to mind is the Inspector Clouseau situation, where Kato just jumps out of the bushes or attacks him in his sleep.   In other words, it seems like you'd need to in some way replicate that shock, and further, that you'd need to do it in the context of the situation you're trying to normalize.  Which kind of seems like a bad idea.  Doesn't it?


It does, and it's also the only good (bad) answer I've come up with, thus far. That's why I asked here. I think scenario training and/or competitions give some help in this. I think multiple-attacker scenarios and drills help some in this area. I just don't think either gives us that answer to having to change states. I'm imagining adding some sort of Kato-like suprise attacks in the dojo. I'd have to contemplate how to make that safe for students (and me, as Kato). I don't think it necessarily has to be in the specific situation (though that would be best), so long as you're training the mind to a specific reaction to that state change.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 23, 2016)

Steve said:


> I think about other situations in which people experience this, and the one that I think about is driving.  I understand that this is a little different, but when I taught my kids to drive a few years ago, that was exciting.  Kids are so overwhelmed by all of the stimuli from within the car, that they literally only process what is a few feet in front of their car.  Through exposure and experience, they are better able to organize the information and so are able to expand their field of view.
> 
> There was a video a few years back on this about basketballs and such.  Anyone here see that?  I don't want to say more, in case you haven't seen it.  Very interesting.


Yes, I recall this. It's a similar cognitive effect, though obviously generated through a different process.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 23, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> You mentioned vision in your statement. So that's what I was addressing. See below.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You have a point, and since we tend to draw our information mostly from our eyes, there's definitely a link. With the cognitive phenomenon, however, the subject can actually receive and respond to spoken information which their brain simply fails to process, staying focused on the one point it chose.

Here's the example I recently picked up (from the book _Smarter Faster Better_), which refers to an Air France flight that went down over the Atlantic. There was a minor issue (something small that pilots deal with all the time: frozen pitot tubes) that caused the pilot to suddenly take manual control after 4 hours on auto-pilot. He fixated on the information from a display in front of him (roll indicator) to the exclusion of all else. Even when the co-pilot told him the nose was pitched up and he needed to bring it down, he responded "yes" and continued to focus on the roll, unconsciously keeping the nose up. The co-pilot was also tunneled, focused on a display of messages from the system, not seeing that the pilot had the nose pitched up.

The co-pilot was probably visually tunneled, as well as cognitively. There's indication that the pilot was not - his brain actually got so overwhelmed just before the crash that he literally stopped seeing the display he was looking at.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Aug 23, 2016)

You're right in that humans cannot multi-task, but we can task-switch rapidly. And that is, I think, the only way to avoid the tunneling you're describing. 
The only way I know of to practice this is (as others have mentioned) to incorporate random outside events into your drills. Like having a spectator randomly smack you in the head.
The problem with this is that your mind then learns to task-switch when you're drilling, but not necessarily other times.
I guess we could all go the Inspector Clouseau route, and hire someone to randomly attack us, but that seems impractical.


----------



## Steve (Aug 23, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> It does, and it's also the only good (bad) answer I've come up with, thus far. That's why I asked here. I think scenario training and/or competitions give some help in this. I think multiple-attacker scenarios and drills help some in this area. I just don't think either gives us that answer to having to change states. I'm imagining adding some sort of Kato-like suprise attacks in the dojo. I'd have to contemplate how to make that safe for students (and me, as Kato). I don't think it necessarily has to be in the specific situation (though that would be best), so long as you're training the mind to a specific reaction to that state change.


With regards to the Kato attack scenarios, I think you'd need to be very careful which students you spring this on.  It could go really bad. 

I also wonder how helpful it would really be.  I mean, it seems like it would need to become a regular and routine part of your training in order for it to change the way a person responds.  At worst, occasional exposure risks undermining the confidence of your student by getting in their head that they will freeze when the **** hits the fan.  Which is exactly the opposite effect you're looking for.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Aug 23, 2016)

Dirty Dog said:


> You're right in that humans cannot multi-task, but we can task-switch rapidly. And that is, I think, the only way to avoid the tunneling you're describing.
> The only way I know of to practice this is (as others have mentioned) to incorporate random outside events into your drills. Like having a spectator randomly smack you in the head.
> The problem with this is that your mind then learns to task-switch when you're drilling, but not necessarily other times.
> I guess we could all go the Inspector Clouseau route, and hire someone to randomly attack us, but that seems impractical.


  Yep.  We do a good Job at task-switching except when "zoning out" nothing seems to work when someone is just not in the room mentally.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Aug 23, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> Yep.  We do a good Job at task-switching except when "zoning out" nothing seems to work when someone is just not in the room mentally.



Or, similarly, when the "fight or flight" reflex kicks in. We pretty much stop task switching then, too. This is instinctive and pretty much hardwired into us. Countering such instincts has limited success.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 23, 2016)

Steve said:


> With regards to the Kato attack scenarios, I think you'd need to be very careful which students you spring this on.  It could go really bad.
> 
> I also wonder how helpful it would really be.  I mean, it seems like it would need to become a regular and routine part of your training in order for it to change the way a person responds.  At worst, occasional exposure risks undermining the confidence of your student by getting in their head that they will freeze when the **** hits the fan.  Which is exactly the opposite effect you're looking for.


As I said, I'd have to figure out rules that keep it safe - not sure if that's possible. I wouldn't want to go all-out Kato style, just something to disrupt the routine drills, so there shouldn't be any problem with freezing.

The point would be to give students a chance to test a cognitive model designed to avoid tunneling. If they're doing well with it, no tunneling should occur. 

Clearly something I'm just bouncing around in my head. Not sure if it will ever turn into a workable idea.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 23, 2016)

Dirty Dog said:


> Or, similarly, when the "fight or flight" reflex kicks in. We pretty much stop task switching then, too. This is instinctive and pretty much hardwired into us. Countering such instincts has limited success.


This is the issue - if we know the stress is coming (like with a competition), there's no sudden change of state. Pilots didn't used to have the issues seen in that Air France flight, because they were always flying the plane. Once automation took over the routine portion of the flight (pilots only having to manually control about 10 minutes of the flight), there was potential for the problem.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Aug 23, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> As I said, I'd have to figure out rules that keep it safe - not sure if that's possible. I wouldn't want to go all-out Kato style, just something to disrupt the routine drills, so there shouldn't be any problem with freezing.
> 
> The point would be to give students a chance to test a cognitive model designed to avoid tunneling. If they're doing well with it, no tunneling should occur.
> 
> Clearly something I'm just bouncing around in my head. Not sure if it will ever turn into a workable idea.



Free sparring against multiple opponents does help some, but the reality is that you still cannot focus on three different people at once, so if I attack while you're in mid-technique vs another person, I have a very good chance of landing the shot.


----------



## drop bear (Aug 23, 2016)

You reduce the level of stress that you impose on yourself when you fight. So either learn to fight. Or accept you might loose or do a combination of both.

Otherwise you develop a set of rational steps to mechanically counter the issue. Like a fire drill. Which will work but is slow in fighting terms.


----------



## drop bear (Aug 23, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> This is the issue - if we know the stress is coming (like with a competition), there's no sudden change of state. Pilots didn't used to have the issues seen in that Air France flight, because they were always flying the plane. Once automation took over the routine portion of the flight (pilots only having to manually control about 10 minutes of the flight), there was potential for the problem.



Yes there is. in training leading up. People freak out to all sorts of berserk levels. And train through it.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Aug 23, 2016)

cognitive tunneling .....
i like that phrase. i never heard it before.  i have been using congnitive dissonance in a lot of my training and dividing it up into different segments.  i will have to start using this ,, thanks.


gpseymour said:


> probably a throwback to being attacked by predators, and was valuable if you were being attacked by a single predator.





gpseymour said:


> I also wonder if cognitive tunneling might be responsible for some of the "I never saw the knife" scenarios.



i believe these are two separate things.  similar but separate.  
studies on human behavior during a fire has  found that people would continually try to open a locked door over and over and would not stop and look for alternative exits. even when a window was next to the door.  i agree this is a primal instinct to a predator. if you have an animal locked onto you, you will pound it with a rock over and over until it lets go.  we see this in modern fights as well, when one person is repeatedly punching over and over with the same hand. the mind seems to "lock on" to this one response waiting for the circumstance to improve.

you may be right but not seeing a knife i usually attribute to the adrenal arousal state. tunnel vision happens along with quite a few other side effects caused by the increase in heart rate and chemical dump.  but you dont always get tunnel vision, depends on the chemically increased heart rate that the individual experiences.

switching gears from everyday life and auto pilot to a state of response where you can make decisions,,,,  hummm ill have to think about this one.


----------



## drop bear (Aug 23, 2016)

Steve said:


> With regards to the Kato attack scenarios, I think you'd need to be very careful which students you spring this on.  It could go really bad.
> 
> I also wonder how helpful it would really be.  I mean, it seems like it would need to become a regular and routine part of your training in order for it to change the way a person responds.  At worst, occasional exposure risks undermining the confidence of your student by getting in their head that they will freeze when the **** hits the fan.  Which is exactly the opposite effect you're looking for.



We played it at work.  With markers. Water bombs and occasional fist fights.

The gane was to mark a guy without being punched in the face.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Aug 23, 2016)

Speed Freaks: Tunnel Vision and Physiological Perception | Psych 256: Introduction to Cognitive Psychology

"Studies have suggested that humans are capable of normally processing approximately 13-15 frames per second of vision (Deering, 1998). It is estimated that the average human is comfortable processing information in a close-proximity moving environment, such as driving, at no more than 72 MPH."

"what is referred to in aviation as g-LOC, or g-induced loss of consciousness. That would be where a human is physiologically overloaded by stimuli,"

Tunnel Vision or General Interference? Cognitive Load and Attentional Bias Are Both Important on JSTOR

"when the is to much information the useful field contracts to prevent overloading of the visual system."


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 23, 2016)

hoshin1600 said:


> cognitive tunneling .....
> i like that phrase. i never heard it before.  i have been using congnitive dissonance in a lot of my training and dividing it up into different segments.  i will have to start using this ,, thanks.
> 
> 
> ...


Cognitive dissonance is a different phenomenon. That's where new evidence doesn't match a cognitive paradigm. So, for instance, if you and I had been taught - and truly believed - that a knife can't cut you if you are moving, then we see someone get cut while moving, that presents a cognitive dissonance. The brain has only two choices for that new information: use it to change the paradigm, or ignore the information.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 23, 2016)

hoshin1600 said:


> i believe these are two separate things.  similar but separate.
> studies on human behavior during a fire has  found that people would continually try to open a locked door over and over and would not stop and look for alternative exits. even when a window was next to the door.  i agree this is a primal instinct to a predator. if you have an animal locked onto you, you will pound it with a rock over and over until it lets go.  we see this in modern fights as well, when one person is repeatedly punching over and over with the same hand. the mind seems to "lock on" to this one response waiting for the circumstance to improve.


That defnitely sounds like cognitive tunneling - good example. Very much like the pilot who kept trying to keep the wings level even though that had nothing to do with the problem at hand (an aerodynamic stall).



> you may be right but not seeing a knife i usually attribute to the adrenal arousal state. tunnel vision happens along with quite a few other side effects caused by the increase in heart rate and chemical dump.  but you dont always get tunnel vision, depends on the chemically increased heart rate that the individual experiences


Adrenal arousal is certainly a major contributor, since it literally narrows vision. I suspect that cognitive tunneling contributes in some instances, for instance, if the defender is overly focused on a part of the attacker's body that isn't near the hand. In that case, especially combined with tunnel vision, they'd have little chance of seeing even a large knife.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 23, 2016)

hoshin1600 said:


> Speed Freaks: Tunnel Vision and Physiological Perception | Psych 256: Introduction to Cognitive Psychology
> 
> "Studies have suggested that humans are capable of normally processing approximately 13-15 frames per second of vision (Deering, 1998). It is estimated that the average human is comfortable processing information in a close-proximity moving environment, such as driving, at no more than 72 MPH."
> 
> ...


This sounds like it may at least partly explain the process taking place when they were below 4,000 feet, and the pilot could no longer see his display. I'll need to read those in depth.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 23, 2016)

Dirty Dog said:


> Free sparring against multiple opponents does help some, but the reality is that you still cannot focus on three different people at once, so if I attack while you're in mid-technique vs another person, I have a very good chance of landing the shot.


True. The point I'm making is that this is exacerbated if cognitive tunneling is taking place, because I'm unlikely to be aware you even exist in the fight, so I'll make no effort to avoid having my back to you, for instance.


----------



## Juany118 (Aug 23, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> The issue is that cognitive tunneling seems to defy simple training (by which I mean training the mind to pay attention to a wider focus, as with multiple-man randori). It can happen to extremely experienced airline pilots, when they have (literally) been on auto-pilot and something happens that requires they take control of the plane. They can focus on a single gauge or control to the exclusion of the other things they'd normally pay attention to.
> 
> That's not to say that multiple-man scenarios (including randori) aren't good. They absolutely are, and I suspect they are part of an answer. It looks like cognitive models (a picture to compare a situation to, and a pre-determined sequence to revert to) are an important part of avoiding cognitive tunneling.



I think this article does a good explanation.  You can train to deal with it, the thing is you need to extensively practice muscle memory. This Is Your Brain On War The part I found most interesting regarding this conversation are the following...



> That’s because, at its most extreme, vasoconstriction affects the brain, too. “As the blood drains from the face, blood drains from the forebrain, and there’s no rational thought,” Grossman explains. “I call that ‘condition black.’ And at condition black, the midbrain is in charge, and you’ll do what you’ve been trained to do — no more, no less. You will do what you’ve been programmed to do — no more, no less.”
> 
> Thus, if a soldier reaches condition black and lacks adequate training, there’s a good chance he or she will freeze up. A well-trained soldier, on the other hand, will likely take action to neutralize the threat. “Given a clear and present danger, with today’s training almost everyone will shoot,



and 



> A soldier’s vision can also be affected by combat, and Grossman uses two different so-called predator models — the “charging lion” and the “wolf-pack dynamic” — to explain this.  Most soldiers experience tunnel vision. “The charging lion is like a heat-seeking missile. He locks onto one target and never lets go,” he says. “That’s tunnel vision.”
> 
> Sometimes, however, instead of zeroing in on his target, a soldier becomes intensely aware of all the moving parts on the battlefield, like a wolf hunting with its pack. “That’s what we want,” Grossman says. “When I work with high level civilian operators, like LAPD SWAT, it’s amazing to see how they’ve evolved. Almost all of them move between these two models: zooming in to eliminate a target and then back out to see everything going on.”



It takes a lot of training to do these things.  Its why the Army changed the protocols for the National Guard to be deployed and added a lot more training before deployment (initially National Guard personnel hit "condition black" a lot.)  However with adequate training your reactions can be automatic.  I think the issue with the pilot is that the reason one needs to take control of the aircraft can be so variable.  Do they need to increase power to climb?  Take other evasive action? etc.  While a sudden combat encounter has variables there are typically, in my experience, fewer "openers" that you can use to give your brain to "catch up" so to speak.


----------



## drop bear (Aug 24, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> True. The point I'm making is that this is exacerbated if cognitive tunneling is taking place, because I'm unlikely to be aware you even exist in the fight, so I'll make no effort to avoid having my back to you, for instance.



Yeah but you may be using prearranged tactics that limit your risk a bit. So to a certain degree you don't need to know they are there.

That is partly how slipping works. You go in and out at the angles they are less likely to capitalise on.


----------



## Buka (Aug 24, 2016)

I don't think there's any one drill. Not sure if any group of drills just added to a curriculum would work, either. But we did some that I think helped with what _we did_ on a regular basis.

The first tempo setter for all my students, a veritable carved in stone first rule, was "Protect yourself at all times." I always believed it helped students develop awareness over a long period of time, and stayed with them years afterwards. At least that's what former students have always told me, even decades later.

When we sparred, I would always spar with everybody at some point. Sometimes, in the middle of sparring, I'd fake twisting a leg/ankle, and my opponent pause....and get blitzed slapped for doing it. Now, before you make any judgements, we had hard and fast rules about disengaging during sparring or any contact fighting drills. Pausing/stopping was NOT one of them. And everyone knew it. The chorus of people waiting to sparr would always chime "protect yourself at all times!"

I never cared for Floyd Mayweather, as a person. Loved watching him work though. But one time, I wanted to shake his hand.






Cheap shot? Sure. Almost as cheap as the lunging head-butt Ortiz threw beforehand. But Ortiz did not do what EVERY boxing ref tells every fighter. "Protect yourself at all times." To me, it's part of a mindset. (one little tiny thing, of many, to avoid a mindset that allows cognitive tunnelling to creep in and manifest.)

We used to do a drill, best with at least twenty people. (the more the merrier). Every one's name went into a hat and you picked. That was your "target". Then....we put the names back and you picked again. That was your second target.

We designated a space, usually a couple of taped off sparring areas (around twenty by twenty) that were next to each other, sometimes we used the area outside the dressing rooms. And you would mill about as if in a crowd in the subway, only circling, going against the grain, reversing direction, zigging - all at a slow, relaxed pace, sometimes talking, singing, talking smack, whatever. The whole time you would keep your eyes on your target, without letting them know you were doing so. The area was always small enough so your were always rubbing elbows, brushing against everyone and having to reverse direction or turn so you would stay within the designated area. 

Your goal was twofold. First - you wanted to slap your target in the head. (had to get your primary target before you could go for your second) Not hard enough to hurt, just to annoy. You didn't do it the first chance you got, or even the second or third, sometimes you waited and waited. (The target's job was to avoid the slap) Your second goal was to notice who was stalking YOU and take positional steps to thwart them. (another little tiny thing in a process of awareness)

Another drill we sometimes did was with a golf ball in a sock. You would stand almost against a wall.(cup, mouthpiece, painters goggles
A couple guys were twenty feet away, swinging the sock/ball and let them fly. Again, not trying to kill anyone, just smack them hard.
Then you would add a third sock thrower. Guy against the wall had to move (or block), without moving too far away. Once you got used to it, we rubbed vaseline onto the goggles, blurring everything. It was a good instinctual drill. Got a few lumps on occasion, but nothing to write home about. It made you work off gross motion instead of detailed motion. You couldn't tunnel if you wanted to

Another drill, which might also fit into what you're asking, was a vision drill we used for multiples. (Originated from prison yards a long time ago) It wasn't so much the "vision" itself, but rather, how to take advantage of it. By itself, maybe nothing, but added to the actual multiple fight training that followed, it helped, I believe, the whole tunnel thing.

If you stand and look straight ahead, without moving your eyes, your field of vision is cone shaped. Your peripheral vision/ field of vision, can see a certain length/width to the sides and up and down, and everywhere in between, in more or less a conical shape, without moving your eyes.

You stand in the middle of the floor. Your partner stands facing you, about five feet away. You stare into each other's eyes. Your partners job is to make sure you don't move your eyes (only using your peripheral vision)

Two more people stand to your right and left, about twenty feet back. They are about three or four feet off to each side. They slowly, and very quietly, take baby steps moving forward. Their goal is not to approach your back, they do not veer in, their goal is to see how close they can come to be standing beside you. (again, a few feet to the side). You will eventually pick up on them when they are anywhere from a foot back, to an inch back, or right beside you. When you do see them, you point with the corresponding arm and say "there"

Now you repeat the drill, except rather than staring at the eyes of your partner in front of you, you look a foot ahead of his feet. This lowers the cone of vision, taking out a lot of upwards vision, and replacing it with added vision on the low line, some of it behind you.

Repeat the drill of the two people taking quiet, baby steps coming up behind you. You'll spot them a couple of yards earlier. I mentioned this came from prison yards. People in prison yards don't play nice. If you were a target, you either had to stay out of the yard altogether, or keep your vision low in order to be less likely to be bushwhacked from behind because you could see approaching enemies quicker and easier. (it was originally taught to Law Enforcement years ago, by ex cons, prison film confirmed it)

You've all probably played Bull in the Ring at some point. We did too, but sometimes put some twists in it. An instructor would walk around and whisper into the ears of everyone in the ring. Say nothing to some, but naming a target for others. So you would rush the man in the middle and sometimes keep going and attack someone in the outside ring. Brief attack. Or sometimes if you were given a target you would wait until he attacked the man in the middle and either come up behind him or intercept him. _All part of protecting yourself at all times.
_
When surprise, and the preparation of always being vigilant, is worked enough, it sometimes takes hold. I believe it decreases the likely hood of a narrow vision in combat._
_
Speaking of combat, one of the first things I was taught about shooting, was to check the background of my target. Drilled into me over and over, like a broken record, it's all we heard. There were times that I thought it might slow me down. And maybe it did, but it gave me a better awareness of total picture. And I believe it kept my focus from narrowing under stress. I might still crap my pants in fear, but it keeps me reading information better from all sides. I hope it's still drilled as much as it was with us.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 24, 2016)

Juany118 said:


> I think this article does a good explanation.  You can train to deal with it, the thing is you need to extensively practice muscle memory. This Is Your Brain On War The part I found most interesting regarding this conversation are the following...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That certainly speaks to ongoing training being an important component, so we develop automated reactions. I'm not convinced that's a solution for CT, though, since attention to a single stimulus still leaves us using an automated reaction to only that stimulus. I think I have time for research tomorrow to dig deeper into the processes involved. Perhaps there's been enough research to provide some suggestions.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 24, 2016)

Buka said:


> I don't think there's any one drill. Not sure if any group of drills just added to a curriculum would work, either. But we did some that I think helped with what _we did_ on a regular basis.
> 
> The first tempo setter for all my students, a veritable carved in stone first rule, was "Protect yourself at all times." I always believed it helped students develop awareness over a long period of time, and stayed with them years afterwards. At least that's what former students have always told me, even decades later.
> 
> ...


I think we are getting somewhere with this. Firstly, perhaps the totality of such drills helps students switch faster, earlier out of auto-pilot mode. If they do this before decision-making becomes critical (if I remember the concept properly), there's a far lesser chance of CT occurring.

I'm also thinking that introducing abrupt switching of drills might help. So, imagine students had one or two drills that required high awareness, which they could step into at a single command. In the middle of some mundane drill (working on forms, for instance) where they are able to operate more on auto-pilot, the instructor gives the command to go to one of the awareness drills, and students abruptly switch drills wherever they are, with whatever partners they have. Of course, for safety, anyone partnered with a relatively new student would need to immediately get them to the edge of the mat (another quick awareness test).


----------



## Touch Of Death (Aug 24, 2016)

So let's break this down. We can use this against our opponent. It is, of course, all a timing issue, where you create cognitive tunneling, as it were, by upsetting the persons ability to do what they are doing. Punching someone in the nose will, instantly get them thinking about what just happened, then fear of what you might do next begins to creep in, which is the future and all its possibilities. This gives me plenty of time to formulate my next move.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 24, 2016)

Touch Of Death said:


> So let's break this down. We can use this against our opponent. It is, of course, all a timing issue, where you create cognitive tunneling, as it were, by upsetting the persons ability to do what they are doing. Punching someone in the nose will, instantly get them thinking about what just happened, then fear of what you might do next begins to creep in, which is the future and all its possibilities. This gives me plenty of time to formulate my next move.


Since CT apparenly only occurs during a state change from auto-pilot to critical decision-making, the process can't be initiated inside a fight. If it's a competition, they'll be in "ready state" well before the first round starts. If it's an attack, they're in "ready state" before they attack.

We might run into an attacker with CT in force if they are not paying attention and we bump into them, and they simply lose it. That abrupt change could get them tunneled, and if we notice what their single focus is, we can easily work that to our advantage.

That said, when I get to research some more, I want to see if there's evidence of the CT process occurring outside that state change. Every art I've run into uses some form of getting the opponent to focus on one area so we can attack another. Perhaps we're using a similar process there, which would also give some insight into building an exit from CT into our mental "coming on-line" sequence when we have to change states.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Aug 24, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> Since CT apparenly only occurs during a state change from auto-pilot to critical decision-making, the process can't be initiated inside a fight. If it's a competition, they'll be in "ready state" well before the first round starts. If it's an attack, they're in "ready state" before they attack.
> 
> We might run into an attacker with CT in force if they are not paying attention and we bump into them, and they simply lose it. That abrupt change could get them tunneled, and if we notice what their single focus is, we can easily work that to our advantage.
> 
> That said, when I get to research some more, I want to see if there's evidence of the CT process occurring outside that state change. Every art I've run into uses some form of getting the opponent to focus on one area so we can attack another. Perhaps we're using a similar process there, which would also give some insight into building an exit from CT into our mental "coming on-line" sequence when we have to change states.


Couldn't a person's basic rhythm be an auto-pilot of sorts, even in competition?


----------



## Buka (Aug 24, 2016)

Steve said:


> I think about other situations in which people experience this, and the one that I think about is driving.  I understand that this is a little different, but when I taught my kids to drive a few years ago, that was exciting.  Kids are so overwhelmed by all of the stimuli from within the car, that they literally only process what is a few feet in front of their car.  Through exposure and experience, they are better able to organize the information and so are able to expand their field of view.



Steve made some great points on the first page, the Kato thing, competition, but I think the one above is most important.
When you drive, there's usually never another time in your life you'll be processing as much stimuli. (thank God)

I think stimuli is important in what we're talking about.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 24, 2016)

Touch Of Death said:


> Couldn't a person's basic rhythm be an auto-pilot of sorts, even in competition?


Hmm...I think the key point is the need to make decisions and how they focus. Someone could, in fact, have a very well developed routine before competition that would keep them in auto-pilot up to the moment of the bell to start the first round. In that case, I'd think CT would be a real possibility if their opponent attacked immediately. If the opponent doesn't, then they have more time to transition their focus. This might argue for at least delivering a feint very quickly in competition, in the hopes that it causes some over-focus on their part.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 24, 2016)

Buka said:


> Steve made some great points on the first page, the Kato thing, competition, but I think the one above is most important.
> When you drive, there's usually never another time in your life you'll be processing as much stimuli. (thank God)
> 
> I think stimuli is important in what we're talking about.


Yes, a combination of stimuli and having to focus to make decisions. CT can occur while we're driving, since we can be in auto-pilot mode even then (ever get home and not been able to recall the drive?), and is exacerbated by things like cruise control for obvious reasons. If something goes wrong while we're driving like that, we are reportedly much more likely to stomp as hard as we can on the brake pedal and keep pushing harder even if the car is skidding (fixation on that one control) than if we are keenly analyzing the stimuli around us as we drive.


----------



## Buka (Aug 24, 2016)

Not to derail..

We're in a metal and plastic box, sometimes moving at 88 feet per second. (60MPH) We're controlling this box with our hands, feet, common sense and information gathered from our eyes. Sometimes we're talking while we do it, sometimes music is playing and we're singing, sometimes we make phone calls, sometimes we only using one hand, usually just one foot. All the while we are processing information, reading signs, lights and conditions, watching that guy up ahead, that guy behind, that guy flying past, that guy entering  right, that one left.

There's hundreds, sometimes thousands of other people, some as sharp as us, some not, doing exactly the same thing in other boxes right near us. We see just about all of them. 
But we are all protected. Protected by lines painted on the ground, by lights that change colors and by rules written down somewhere, usually, not in our metal and plastic boxes. And protected by our fellow man's common sense.

In the United States, 27,000 of our boxes bang into each other every single day. Globally, 3,287 people, flesh and blood people, just like you and me, are _killed_ each day, when their boxes bang into each other. Tens of thousands others are only injured or maimed.

Makes fighting seem kind of easy.


----------



## Steve (Aug 24, 2016)

Defensive driving skills can't guarantee safety on a micro level but they are proven effective on a macro level.  Simple behaviors that keep you safer. 

Driving at safe speeds.  Increase your following distance.  Check your mirrors.  Don't drive in someone's blind spot.  Whenever possible, keep a lane open on at least one side.  Stay calm.  

These are behaviors that first help avoid crisis and second will give more tome to react in crisis.  

So perhaps the answer isn't to avoid an involuntary phenomenon, but instead to mitigate it.   self defense training focused on actual behaviors that will mitigate risk


----------



## Buka (Aug 24, 2016)

Steve said:


> Defensive driving skills can't guarantee safety on a micro level but they are proven effective on a macro level.  Simple behaviors that keep you safer.
> 
> Driving at safe speeds.  Increase your following distance.  Check your mirrors.  Don't drive in someone's blind spot.  Whenever possible, keep a lane open on at least one side.  Stay calm.
> 
> ...



I fully agree. And I think a similar attitude and planning works in everyday social situations to avoid trouble.


----------



## Steve (Aug 24, 2016)

Buka said:


> I fully agree. And I think a similar attitude and planning works in everyday social situations to avoid trouble.


Unless you're aiming to misbehave.


----------



## drop bear (Aug 24, 2016)

Buka said:


> Steve made some great points on the first page, the Kato thing, competition, but I think the one above is most important.
> When you drive, there's usually never another time in your life you'll be processing as much stimuli. (thank God)
> 
> I think stimuli is important in what we're talking about.



Gee. I just wish someone could make some sort of device that would restrict your vision and create a greater sense of anxiety so you could spar under those sort of conditions.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 24, 2016)

Steve said:


> Defensive driving skills can't guarantee safety on a micro level but they are proven effective on a macro level.  Simple behaviors that keep you safer.
> 
> Driving at safe speeds.  Increase your following distance.  Check your mirrors.  Don't drive in someone's blind spot.  Whenever possible, keep a lane open on at least one side.  Stay calm.
> 
> ...


In MA, our focus is on the physical skill for defending against an imminent attack. 

In that context, mitigation of CT is not, from what I've found so far, effective unless done in advance. Meaning, you must have the proper cognitive model in mind before the moment where CT would otherwise occur.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Aug 24, 2016)

Steve said:


> Competitions are one way to get people outside of their comfort zone and force them to function in a stressful situation. Teaching people things that they can actually apply in context is helpful, which is another reason I'm a fan of competition.



I've suspected for a while that learning to listen to your coach and follow instructions while in a match can have some useful carryover to a street situation. It's pretty common for fighters to develop such tunnel vision in the heat of a match that they either don't hear anything their coach is yelling at them or else don't really register what is being said as something they should react to.

My theory is that if you develop the habit of keeping your ears open so you can hear your coach say "watch out, he's setting up for a double leg", you're more likely in a street fight to hear someone yell "watch out, he's got a knife!" I don't have any empirical evidence for this, but it seems likely.



gpseymour said:


> I'm imagining adding some sort of Kato-like suprise attacks in the dojo. I'd have to contemplate how to make that safe for students (and me, as Kato). I don't think it necessarily has to be in the specific situation (though that would be best), so long as you're training the mind to a specific reaction to that state change.



I'm thinking of adding some little occasional game changers when my students are sparring - tossing a training knife out on the mat (or having one student start out with the knife concealed in their gi), having "reinforcements" arrive to help out one sparring partner, etc so that the students have to maintain the mental flexibility to switch gears on a moments notice.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 24, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> I've suspected for a while that learning to listen to your coach and follow instructions while in a match can have some useful carryover to a street situation. It's pretty common for fighters to develop such tunnel vision in the heat of a match that they either don't hear anything their coach is yelling at them or else don't really register what is being said as something they should react to.
> 
> My theory is that if you develop the habit of keeping your ears open so you can hear your coach say "watch out, he's setting up for a double leg", you're more likely in a street fight to hear someone yell "watch out, he's got a knife!" I don't have any empirical evidence for this, but it seems likely.


This seems like it would have a postive effect on maintaining a broader attention area - the opposite of CT. Perhaps things like this can build a habit (part of the "cognitive model") of not over-focusing.



> I'm thinking of adding some little occasional game changers when my students are sparring - tossing a training knife out on the mat (or having one student start out with the knife concealed in their gi), having "reinforcements" arrive to help out one sparring partner, etc so that the students have to maintain the mental flexibility to switch gears on a moments notice.


This seems like a sensible way to build the habit of keeping a wider focus. I'm about to introduce some new drills and exercises to mine - this should fit into some of them.


----------



## pgsmith (Aug 24, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> I'm thinking of adding some little occasional game changers when my students are sparring - tossing a training knife out on the mat (or having one student start out with the knife concealed in their gi), having "reinforcements" arrive to help out one sparring partner, etc so that the students have to maintain the mental flexibility to switch gears on a moments notice.



  Back when I used to practice jujutsu, our instructor used to sometimes carry a small practice knife inside his gi during randori. He would produce it at unexpected moments and we were expected to attempt to counter the attack. We never knew when he had it or when it might come out, so it greatly increased our focus because we were never sure what to expect.   I like the "reinforcements" idea also.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 24, 2016)

pgsmith said:


> Back when I used to practice jujutsu, our instructor used to sometimes carry a small practice knife inside his gi during randori. He would produce it at unexpected moments and we were expected to attempt to counter the attack. We never knew when he had it or when it might come out, so it greatly increased our focus because we were never sure what to expect.   I like the "reinforcements" idea also.


We have an exercise called an "attack line" - a simple exercise where each student gets a turn defending one attack from each other student, in turn. I think I'll be adding hidden knives (perhaps only after a certain rank, so they get a chance to get complacent  and maybe step in, myself (I'd normally be off to their side), if they aren't paying attention to anything but the obvious attacker.


----------



## Juany118 (Aug 24, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> That certainly speaks to ongoing training being an important component, so we develop automated reactions. I'm not convinced that's a solution for CT, though, since attention to a single stimulus still leaves us using an automated reaction to only that stimulus. I think I have time for research tomorrow to dig deeper into the processes involved. Perhaps there's been enough research to provide some suggestions.



While the article didn't necessarily directly address it I was thinking to my military training when I read your post.  We trained in what was called an immediate action drill.  The point of the IAD was when you are traveling along a road or walking down a trail and are ambushed you immediately react.  Whether to attack the ambush or to lay down suppressive fire so you can withdraw etc. You trained it so much that you oriented to the ambush as you dropped to the ground or sought cover without thinking.  That is a simple reaction though, from a mechanical stand point.  That's why I was wondering if the issue is that cognitive tunneling is on a curve of sorts. Simple choices/reactions not a big deal with enough training but the more possible actions and the more complex the action the tunneling effect becomes more pronounced?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 24, 2016)

Juany118 said:


> While the article didn't necessarily directly address it I was thinking to my military training when I read your post.  We trained in what was called an immediate action drill.  The point of the IAD was when you are traveling along a road or walking down a trail and are ambushed you immediately react.  Whether to attack the ambush or to lay down suppressive fire so you can withdraw etc. You trained it so much that you oriented to the ambush as you dropped to the ground or sought cover without thinking.  That is a simple reaction though, from a mechanical stand point.  That's why I was wondering if the issue is that cognitive tunneling is on a curve of sorts. Simple choices/reactions not a big deal with enough training but the more possible actions and the more complex the action the tunneling effect becomes more pronounced?


That seems plausible. You'd think that the simpler the environment and/or choices, the less important a wide focus would be. I think (as someone implied in an early post) that the sheer amount of information (stimuli) available likely has an impact on the likelihood of CT occurring. I'll have to look at the psychological research and see if anything shows up.


----------



## drop bear (Aug 24, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> I've suspected for a while that learning to listen to your coach and follow instructions while in a match can have some useful carryover to a street situation. It's pretty common for fighters to develop such tunnel vision in the heat of a match that they either don't hear anything their coach is yelling at them or else don't really register what is being said as something they should react to.
> 
> My theory is that if you develop the habit of keeping your ears open so you can hear your coach say "watch out, he's setting up for a double leg", you're more likely in a street fight to hear someone yell "watch out, he's got a knife!" I don't have any empirical evidence for this, but it seems likely.
> 
> ...



You have to know where you are when you fight and how much time you have left. Which is also pretty abstract.

Especially if you are sparring in a room full of people 

I know guys who will listen to the enemy coach. And counter their opponent that way.

Otherwise we call out a number and see if they can remember it.


----------



## Rich Parsons (Aug 24, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> Are any of you aware of any practices for reducing cognitive tunneling (defined below) in a self-defense context?
> 
> _Cognitive tunneling is an effect that occurs when our brains move from an auto-pilot mode (like when we're walking down the street, just enjoying the day or thinking about work, etc. - Condition White) to a crisis situation (Condition Orange or Red) where decisions are suddenly neceessary. The brain tends to lock in on the single stimulus most dominant (often, right in front of the field of vision at that moment) and ignore all others in decision making. This could lead to a whole range of problems, not the least being focusing on an obvious threat and ignoring two others next to him._



This will seem funny, yet give it a try. 
Get online, and read forums, while listening to music and and watching TV. 

Type while people are talking and type on a different subject. 

Also do things while under stress and or with adrenaline such as on a roller coaster. While in this situation think about things around your and what was around you and ...

Train your body and mind to work on multiple things at once and to pay attention to your surroundings. 

Walk into a room and remember what is outside the room and then go back into the other room and and see home much you remembered. 

Mileage may vary


----------



## Juany118 (Aug 24, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> I've suspected for a while that learning to listen to your coach and follow instructions while in a match can have some useful carryover to a street situation. It's pretty common for fighters to develop such tunnel vision in the heat of a match that they either don't hear anything their coach is yelling at them or else don't really register what is being said as something they should react to.
> 
> My theory is that if you develop the habit of keeping your ears open so you can hear your coach say "watch out, he's setting up for a double leg", you're more likely in a street fight to hear someone yell "watch out, he's got a knife!" I don't have any empirical evidence for this, but it seems likely.
> 
> ...




The article I linked earlier mentions this...



> This phenomenon is called “auditory exclusion,” and it’s a result of the nerve that connects the inner ear and the brain shutting down in the heat of battle. According to Grossman, 90% of combat soldiers report having experienced auditory exclusion. “You get caught by surprise in an ambush. Boom. Boom. Boom. The shots are loud and overwhelming. You return fire, boom. The shots get quiet, but you’re still getting hearing damage.”



I believe this is related to the adrenaline dump.  The article goes into a lot of detail on the effects of fight or flight.  From reading other articles that go more into the causes than the effects the various symptoms (tunnel vision, auditory exclusion, "condition black" etc) can be mitigated by tactical breathing (aka Dantian breathing) and building good muscle memory, even for fine motor skills.  Many of the effects scale up as our heart rate increases.  They start to kick in at around 115 bpm and at 145 bpm they can go right out the window.  Having the muscle memory will allow you to still function in what @lklawson has called "Robo-droid" but unless you influence the heart rate cognitive function  and tunnel vision still kick in big time.


----------



## Juany118 (Aug 24, 2016)

Rich Parsons said:


> This will seem funny, yet give it a try.
> Get online, and read forums, while listening to music and and watching TV.
> 
> Type while people are talking and type on a different subject.
> ...



I do similar things.  Now I don't get the cognitive degradation because it lacks the hormone dump but the following is better than nothing.

If I am going to do something that requires fine motor skills, say Sinawali in Kali, I will first sprint for 25 yards, drop and perform 20 push-ups as fast as possible then perform the task. If inside slam out 40 jumping jacks in place of running.  I do the same when shooting at the range but add a friend being with me.  After doing the exercises I then wait for my friend to yell "threat!!!" Before drawing and firing 2-3 rounds.  I have to fire those rounds in a number of seconds = to the rounds being fired.


----------



## jks9199 (Aug 25, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> This is the issue - if we know the stress is coming (like with a competition), there's no sudden change of state. Pilots didn't used to have the issues seen in that Air France flight, because they were always flying the plane. Once automation took over the routine portion of the flight (pilots only having to manually control about 10 minutes of the flight), there was potential for the problem.


And you've nailed the problem right there...  Inappropriate levels of attention and awareness.  You can't train yourself out of an instinctive level response like that without some significant actions -- and consequences.  Instead -- learn to maintain the appropriate level of awareness for what's going on, switching focus and level as needed.


----------



## Juany118 (Aug 25, 2016)

jks9199 said:


> And you've nailed the problem right there...  Inappropriate levels of attention and awareness.  You can't train yourself out of an instinctive level response like that without some significant actions -- and consequences.  Instead -- learn to maintain the appropriate level of awareness for what's going on, switching focus and level as needed.



Please correct me if I misunderstood what you were saying above.

That holds its own dangers as well though (relying more so on awareness than training), depending on your career.  In a career like mine, and my former one as a soldier, not balancing "training out" instinctive reactions with practiced awareness can lead to hypervigilance.  I went through a period early in my LEO career where I couldn't drop out of Condition Yellow, to Condition White.  That lead to me appearing more than a little antisocial, trashed sleeping patterns and my wife getting progressively more pissed off that I was "always in work mode."

It's a weird balancing act.  We can condition ourselves to bypass certain issues in cognitive thinking so the drawing of a weapon and target acquisition are as normal as walking to the car.  As you said that has costs.  The most efficient way I have found, and read about, however is to train in such a way that we actually take advantage of "fight or flight" when the crap hits the fan and trust in that training.  In essence you train in ways that direct the natural "fight or flight" reaction in the manner you want it to move.   If you don't and rely too much on awareness (note I said too much) you run the risk of hypervigilance.


----------



## Steve (Aug 25, 2016)

I am having a hard time envisioning a person who is not professionally at risk maintaining the kind of continuous, heightened awareness you guys seem to be describing.   
When you are all outlining strategies, are you picturing these for all students or are you thinking more in terms of people who are at higher risk for violence?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 25, 2016)

jks9199 said:


> And you've nailed the problem right there...  Inappropriate levels of attention and awareness.  You can't train yourself out of an instinctive level response like that without some significant actions -- and consequences.  Instead -- learn to maintain the appropriate level of awareness for what's going on, switching focus and level as needed.


Apparently, it is possible to greatly reduce the incidence of CT through the use of cognitive models. A comparative case is used in the book _Smarter Faster Better_, wherein the Captain of a flight starts out every flight by having the cockpit crew identify what a "good flight" looks like (a model for recognizing when something isn't right), and what their first area of focus should be (something hopefully not directly in their view, something that makes them look up or away).

What I'm working on is a way to replicate this in a moment when we can't afford to look away. I can't reasonablly train my students to look over their left shoulder when someone steps up in front of them and looks like they are going to punch.

Remember that overcoming "instinct" is much of what we do in martial arts. We train new habits that overcome old ones, even reflexes.


----------



## Steve (Aug 25, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> Apparently, it is possible to greatly reduce the incidence of CT through the use of cognitive models. A comparative case is used in the book _Smarter Faster Better_, wherein the Captain of a flight starts out every flight by having the cockpit crew identify what a "good flight" looks like (a model for recognizing when something isn't right), and what their first area of focus should be (something hopefully not directly in their view, something that makes them look up or away).
> 
> What I'm working on is a way to replicate this in a moment when we can't afford to look away. I can't reasonablly train my students to look over their left shoulder when someone steps up in front of them and looks like they are going to punch.
> 
> Remember that overcoming "instinct" is much of what we do in martial arts. We train new habits that overcome old ones, even reflexes.


One exercise I do with new managers is to talk about factors that go into decision making.  Through the course of the discussion, we identify different elements that will affect making a decision in a crisis.  Typically, things that come up are policies, laws, safety, risk, urgency, privacy, results... there are many.

Then we work through various scenarios.  Some are big crisis and others are more benign.  For example, what would you do if you came into the office, the HVAC isn't working and it's below 60F or above 80F?  What if it's 6am and you're the first one there, or if it's 2pm and the lobby is full of customers?  What if it's 50F or above 85F? 

We go through workload scenarios, health and safety, emergency situations and discuss the relationship between these decision factors, and in particular when one factor trumps another.   A common one is safety.  Even if you're a "rules follower," when does safety trump policy?  Do results ever trump the rules?  How does risk factor into decision making? 

The end result is that, ideally, these people have a much better sense of their own priorities, and will make better decisions, big and small.

So, just thinking out loud, in a self defense context, I wonder how this could really work.  It seems like the catalyst for this CT is crisis, but the two working elements of a cognitive model are the model itself and application of the model in context.  You can provide a self defense model, but most people are not in a position to actually apply the model in context.  Are they? 

What I mean is, for the average joe, this seems like it could easily create a false sense of imminent danger and a kind of generalized, low level paranoia.


----------



## Rich Parsons (Aug 25, 2016)

Steve said:


> I am having a hard time envisioning a person who is not professionally at risk maintaining the kind of continuous, heightened awareness you guys seem to be describing.
> When you are all outlining strategies, are you picturing these for all students or are you thinking more in terms of people who are at higher risk for violence?



1) Not all students will do it and will still remain oblivious too their surroundings
2) Yes, I recommend it for all with the understanding that mileage will vary
a) Some will walk around as stated in work mode or on edge and it will set others off. It will affect sleep as one sleep real light and the cat walking through a room on carpet might be noticed. 
b) Learning to identify when you are with friends who also are aware, gives you a moment to relax. 
c) Learning that at home and low risk areas one can relax more, yet, walk through slowly their exit strategy and or reading the room. 
d) Once you do "c" enough it happens naturally and instinctively as you do it. And you stay relaxed while doing it and also the background tasks are running. 
e) My original post was about engaging your background tasks and capabilities. training them to work in multiple situations. I have a radio on in the other room and I have a speaker phone on for a work meeting and I am typing this up. 
f) Music becomes a real easy background task. I do not recommend  having it play as you sleep and while you sleep. This trains the mind to relax to the music and makes it easier for one to fall asleep while driving . Not safe. 
3) Transition from relaxed to ON or Aware is where most people loose it. So if you do it all the time with your background tasks then when it happens in your car, quickly remember what was going on around you. Try to remember the license plate in one read. 
4) It is like a joint lock in a stick fight or a disarm in sparring, if you never practice a technique in slow controlled situations one will never stand a chance to try it at speed and time. 


Good Luck


----------



## jks9199 (Aug 25, 2016)

Juany118 said:


> Please correct me if I misunderstood what you were saying above.


We're on similar pages.

First -- the cognitive tunneling effect the OP is concerned with is really a pretty near instinctive level action.  When we move to dealing with a threat or crisis -- we focus on the most immediately perceived issue.  Hence the "invisible knives" or focus on keeping wings level rather than dealing with a stall; it's what was immediately perceived as the problem, and under severe adrenal stress, it's hard as hell to refocus.  It's wired deep and hard, because it was probably not very beneficial to worry about stubbing our toe on a tree root when Mr. Sabretooth Tiger was about to eat us...  

You can overcome that sort of wiring -- but there's a price to be paid.  Typically, you end up simply trading the old instinctive response for a new one... and that new response might create problems in another setting.  (And the training process isn't really enjoyable...  visit classical operant conditioning.)

Second -- if you don't maintain an *appropriate* level of awareness, it quickly becomes dysfunctional.  In Condition Yellow, you're alert, accepting that there are potential threats around, but you haven't focused on one.  In Condition Orange, you've recognized a potential threat, and are paying attention to see what it's doing.  In Condition Red, you've focused 100% on that threat, and are ready to take action to end it.  (Those who add Condition Black describe it as panic mode; that's the whole situation we're trying to avoid!)   Condition White is all guards down, no expectation of any threat.  So... at home, behind locked doors, White is probably OK -- but Red would be seriously inappropriate!  For a cop on patrol, Yellow to Orange should be going on routinely, with "dips" into Red.  For an average office worker, spending their day in the office, Yellow makes sense, but they probably won't hit Orange very often.  And so on...

Taking on an inappropriate level of awareness for the activities and environment leads to problems.  The cop who "can't turn it off" and looks at everyone like a suspect isn't exactly fun to be around, right?  Neither is that naif who can't see a bad thing happening in the world and needs someone around them to keep them from walking into traffic...  Both wear out the folks around them, in different ways.

So the trick is to set yourself at an appropriate level for where you are and what you are doing.  I'm currently in my house, with my son and 2 of his friends.  Yeah, I'm not on White -- I'm a kind of low Yellow.  Like anyone else, I've had days when I don't remember my drive home -- inappropriately on White.  At work, I get dispatched to a call, and I'm shifting from Yellow to Orange, focusing on the specific concerns of the call.  I might find myself going to Red as I notice a suspicous person whose hands are concealed, and isn't responding appropriately to my words -- then back to Yellow as I see the earphones or realize that he's deaf.  Maintaining an appropriate level of awareness means that when you need to shift, it's a conscious change aimed at what's happening, not a sudden "oh crap!" event that leads to jumping from Yellow (or White) to Red (or Black).


----------



## jks9199 (Aug 25, 2016)

Steve said:


> I am having a hard time envisioning a person who is not professionally at risk maintaining the kind of continuous, heightened awareness you guys seem to be describing.
> When you are all outlining strategies, are you picturing these for all students or are you thinking more in terms of people who are at higher risk for violence?


For an "ordinary person", you still need to shift awareness.  An office worker shouldn't get so absorbed in their work at the desk that they jump when the phone rings or someone walks in -- or doesn't hear when someone talks to them.  They get up, go to lunch, and walk out the door -- they should be watching what's around them, paying attention -- and if they see a guy leaning up against a wall, about to block their path -- maybe they go up to Orange until they figure out what's up.  The guy actually steps out and blocks their path -- they need to go to Red and be ready to put a plan of action into play.  He turns and walks away -- and they can drop back down.  He brandishes a gun, and demands money -- maybe they give him the money, maybe they sprint across the street, maybe they go for their own gun (assuming they have one).  That's up to them.

Or driving... As you drive, you should be in Yellow, looking ahead, around, and behind for what other drivers are doing, road hazards, etc.  A car in front of you starts to drift towards your lane, or hits their turn signal (wonder of wonders!), you go to Yellow while you wait to see if they're going to change lanes safely or cut you off.  You get a flat, and you find yourself in Red, dealing with getting safely off the road.  

Cooper's Color Codes are simple model for describing attention and awareness; nothing more.  I could have written everything above without referring to them at all -- but they give an easy shorthand.  Moving levels of awareness is something we all do, or should do.  How well we do it... well, that's the rub, huh?


----------



## mograph (Aug 25, 2016)

Steve said:


> There was a video a few years back on this about basketballs and such.  Anyone here see that?  I don't want to say more, in case you haven't seen it.  Very interesting.


Absolutely -- saw it in cognitive psych class: it, and cognitive capture/tunnelling is about inattentional blindness.


----------



## Buka (Aug 25, 2016)

I think everyone is different. As a cop, I walk around in Condition teddy bear. I'm as relaxed as any time in my life other than the dojo. Just feels right. For me, personally, I pick up on cues easier and quicker when I'm in that mode. I observe things better, I profile better, I diffuse things better. Martial Arts has taught me a lot, least of which is throwing the the fast twitch switch from nothing to everything. And I can throw it even quicker when in chill mode.

If I were to walk around in condition yellow or red, my head would have exploded a long time ago. Would have ruined a perfectly good shirt.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 25, 2016)

Steve said:


> One exercise I do with new managers is to talk about factors that go into decision making.  Through the course of the discussion, we identify different elements that will affect making a decision in a crisis.  Typically, things that come up are policies, laws, safety, risk, urgency, privacy, results... there are many.
> 
> Then we work through various scenarios.  Some are big crisis and others are more benign.  For example, what would you do if you came into the office, the HVAC isn't working and it's below 60F or above 80F?  What if it's 6am and you're the first one there, or if it's 2pm and the lobby is full of customers?  What if it's 50F or above 85F?
> 
> ...


The first purpose of the cognitive model is to give a way to recognize when things are "off". In a self-defense context, a cognitive model would describe what a "safe" situation looks like. We'd need more than one, though we could probably afford to get by with two: one for calm situations where nothing creepy is going on, and one for conflicts that are not likely to be dangerous.

Using those models should allow an individual to NOT be paranoid, because they wouldn't have to constantly consciously evaluate the situation for danger.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 25, 2016)

jks9199 said:


> For an "ordinary person", you still need to shift awareness.  An office worker shouldn't get so absorbed in their work at the desk that they jump when the phone rings or someone walks in -- or doesn't hear when someone talks to them.  They get up, go to lunch, and walk out the door -- they should be watching what's around them, paying attention -- and if they see a guy leaning up against a wall, about to block their path -- maybe they go up to Orange until they figure out what's up.  The guy actually steps out and blocks their path -- they need to go to Red and be ready to put a plan of action into play.  He turns and walks away -- and they can drop back down.  He brandishes a gun, and demands money -- maybe they give him the money, maybe they sprint across the street, maybe they go for their own gun (assuming they have one).  That's up to them.
> 
> Or driving... As you drive, you should be in Yellow, looking ahead, around, and behind for what other drivers are doing, road hazards, etc.  A car in front of you starts to drift towards your lane, or hits their turn signal (wonder of wonders!), you go to Yellow while you wait to see if they're going to change lanes safely or cut you off.  You get a flat, and you find yourself in Red, dealing with getting safely off the road.
> 
> Cooper's Color Codes are simple model for describing attention and awareness; nothing more.  I could have written everything above without referring to them at all -- but they give an easy shorthand.  Moving levels of awareness is something we all do, or should do.  How well we do it... well, that's the rub, huh?


The car drifting into your lane is a good example of how we use cognitive models. You don't have to do a lot of analysis to figure out there's an issue. You carry a model in your head of what a "safe road" looks like. As that car starts to drift, it violates that model, so your attention is drawn to it.

The more I think about it, the more I think that some small adjustments in our training would make cognitive models more central, which would solve a major part of the problem, since it would draw our attention to what violates the model.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 25, 2016)

jks9199 said:


> We're on similar pages.
> 
> First -- the cognitive tunneling effect the OP is concerned with is really a pretty near instinctive level action.  When we move to dealing with a threat or crisis -- we focus on the most immediately perceived issue.  Hence the "invisible knives" or focus on keeping wings level rather than dealing with a stall; it's what was immediately perceived as the problem, and under severe adrenal stress, it's hard as hell to refocus.  It's wired deep and hard, because it was probably not very beneficial to worry about stubbing our toe on a tree root when Mr. Sabretooth Tiger was about to eat us...
> 
> ...


Condition Black is, as you suggest, what we're trying to avoid. One version of that would be pure CT. Other versions would include freezing, scanning wildly without any focus, and other attentional dysfunction.


----------



## Steve (Aug 25, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> The first purpose of the cognitive model is to give a way to recognize when things are "off". In a self-defense context, a cognitive model would describe what a "safe" situation looks like. We'd need more than one, though we could probably afford to get by with two: one for calm situations where nothing creepy is going on, and one for conflicts that are not likely to be dangerous.
> 
> Using those models should allow an individual to NOT be paranoid, because they wouldn't have to constantly consciously evaluate the situation for danger.


Okay, I probably don't understand, but isn't failing to consciously evaluate a situation exactly the catalyst for a CT when a crisis does occur?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 25, 2016)

Steve said:


> Okay, I probably don't understand, but isn't failing to consciously evaluate a situation exactly the catalyst for a CT when a crisis does occur?


Yes, that's a reasonable description of the problem. If I'm on auto-pilot (so not evaluating the situation consciously), then I am set up for the CT process if a crisis arises, wherein I suddenly have to go to conscious decision-making.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 25, 2016)

Steve said:


> Okay, I probably don't understand, but isn't failing to consciously evaluate a situation exactly the catalyst for a CT when a crisis does occur?


Ah, I think I just got your point. Yes, that is what leads us there. Recall, though, that the issue with CT is that we get focused on something that is often irrelevant to the issue at hand (in the case of the Air France flight, the roll indicator). A good cognitive model lets us focus on where the situation doesn't meet the model, which, at the least, will put our focus on something relevant. I'm still looking into why this doesn't lead to CT focused on that one thing. Perhaps it's simply that we don't get to focus on that single aspect most central to our vision (normally the focus in CT), and that the model draws our attention to the several points we used in constructing the model.

Knowing the nature of psychology, we probably don't yet know the exact process here.


----------



## Juany118 (Aug 25, 2016)

jks9199 said:


> We're on similar pages.
> 
> First -- the cognitive tunneling effect the OP is concerned with is really a pretty near instinctive level action.  When we move to dealing with a threat or crisis -- we focus on the most immediately perceived issue.  Hence the "invisible knives" or focus on keeping wings level rather than dealing with a stall; it's what was immediately perceived as the problem, and under severe adrenal stress, it's hard as hell to refocus.  It's wired deep and hard, because it was probably not very beneficial to worry about stubbing our toe on a tree root when Mr. Sabretooth Tiger was about to eat us...
> 
> ...



First let me clarify, I thing that part of the issue is I was using the old color code which had only white/green, yellow and red, like a traffic light.  I will use Cooper's Colors in this below response.

I think the difference is the training out aspect.  If you train correctly the only issue is time/repetition.  As an example. The training should always address the OODA loop.  A stimulus makes you Observe a potential threat, you then Orient to the potential threat, you then Decide is it a actually a threat, then you Act appropriately.

So I can be walking down the street and hear "bang!!!" I orient to the sound.  If I then see that it's a guy who just threw a fire cracker I move on, if I see a weapon I react in another way. 

What is all of the above about?  Your training should only address the D and A of OODA, Observe and Orient are things you can cultivate naturally.  In doing it this way you actually arent creating any possible negative behaviors.  I think the problem is most civilian training doesn't directly address the O, O and D of OODA, it often only addresses A.  If you personally cultivate the O's and train in the D and A, you shouldn't react inappropriately.



Buka said:


> I think everyone is different. As a cop, I walk around in Condition teddy bear. I'm as relaxed as any time in my life other than the dojo. Just feels right. For me, personally, I pick up on cues easier and quicker when I'm in that mode. I observe things better, I profile better, I diffuse things better. Martial Arts has taught me a lot, least of which is throwing the the fast twitch switch from nothing to everything. And I can throw it even quicker when in chill mode.
> 
> If I were to walk around in condition yellow or red, my head would have exploded a long time ago. Would have ruined a perfectly good shirt.



I think our issue was we are both using the old white/green, yellow, red protocol.  Now there is orange.  Yellow is simply...That you are paying attention to the sights and sounds that surround you whether you are at home or moving in society, you simply have moved your alertness to a level of attention that will prevent you from being totally surprised by the actions of another person.

We were equating Yellow, I think with what is now Orange in some training...In condition orange, you have identified something of interest that may or may not prove to be a threat. Until you determine the true nature of whatever has piqued your interest, your “radar” is narrowed to concentrate on the possible threat and will remain so focused until you are satisfied no threat exists.

Does this mean we are the "old heads"?  Lol


----------



## drop bear (Aug 26, 2016)

Steve said:


> I am having a hard time envisioning a person who is not professionally at risk maintaining the kind of continuous, heightened awareness you guys seem to be describing.
> When you are all outlining strategies, are you picturing these for all students or are you thinking more in terms of people who are at higher risk for violence?



It depends to what level you use and employ amazing awareness tactics.

So you come home and find your door kicked in. You could go in and check out if your stuff is gone. Mabye running into the robber.

Or use amazing awareness. And just ring the police and let them check.

Now we could just suggest this is common sense. But it is worthwhile learning the cues a bit before hand.

Another example is a mate of mine almost got bashed during some sort of meeting he had that occurred in a quiet back car park.

Now. Meetings in quiet car parks are a general red flag. You don't have to to be sensitive as such to pick these things.

Ambushes and scams have general themes.

15 Common Travel Scams (And How To Avoid Them) • Expert Vagabond


----------



## drop bear (Aug 26, 2016)

Otherwise you could spar in roda fashion. Which has people yelling from the sidelines that you have to watch for and other guys jumping in all the time.


----------

