When will and imagination conflict, imagination wins, and trying harder makes the imagined failure more likely.
Coue's illustration is the plank on the floor that anyone can walk and the same plank between two roofs that almost nobody can. The effort of willing oneself across supplies the vivid image of falling. The observation is acute and the framing as a law is not earned; Wegner's ironic process theory is where the evidence for something like it lives.
In practice
- An insomniac trying to sleep is performing the activity most reliably incompatible with sleeping.
- A speaker concentrating on not saying the wrong name says it.
- Possible explanations
- The explanation offered is that will and imagination conflict and imagination wins. The researched cousin is ironic process theory, in which monitoring for the unwanted outcome keeps it active in mind.
- In its favour
- The ironic process effect has experimental support, and the everyday cases the maxim names, insomnia, stage fright and the plank between two roofs, are recognisable.
- Against it
- It is a formulated maxim rather than a tested finding, the mechanism it proposes differs from the one with evidence behind it, and effortful control clearly does work in many settings the law would predict it fails.
- Standing
- A formulated maxim rather than a tested finding. The related ironic process effect has experimental support and a different mechanism; this is the folk ancestor.
- Subject
- Psychology & Behavior
- Essay
- Moralists, aphorists and the self-help tradition