I met the founder of V1bes, Gustaf Krank, at a wearables gathering in Helsinki last year. He gave a dynamic presentation to the conference and afterward walked me through the technology with a personal demo. The approach is like no other in that is aims to pull together multiple electromagnetic signals from brain, heart and the environment through a ring.
V1bes has launched an idiegogo campaign. I am going to to get one to see how its measurements correlate with Heart Rate Variability (HRV). The idea of electromagnetic “smog” as an influencer of HRV is something worth looking at. Unlike HRV Gustaf’s invention does not have the large number of medical studies with which to compare but that is part of the fun.
Since April of 2014 I have been posting my findings here as part of a systematic way to understand and mitigate Upsets. I logged Upsets as they occurred, measured my heart rate variability during periods of stress and connected types of Upsets to different types of thought.
The first real insight that came from self reporting Upsets was that the majority of them were Self Induced and of those the majority were anticipating future negative events. The fundamental tool we have which is the ability to imagine a future scenario is the source of most of the stress – thoughts that anticipate a negative future outcome.
Another insight is the volume of thought. Thinking I was capturing a high number of Upsets in my reporting was completely blown apart by watching how often my physiology altered based on thought. Was looked at the beginning to be a 5 to 8 time a day volume was actually up to 450 thoughts a day that could potentially cause Upset. And that volume is constant. So any plan that includes eliminating thought is irrelevant. The plan must be based in how I respond to Upsets.
Looking at the lessons learned the core skill to develop is managing imagination. Imagination is our engine of progress, it shows us what is possible. It is also the source of what we believe are our misfires, misalignments and Upsets. Believing too much in imagination immerses us in our miserable misfires. Completely eradicating imagination robs us of our ability to be motivated, plan and progress. Somehow we have to find a middle ground of practical imagination, a place where we see what is inspiring and possible while knowing when to discount those scenarios that are impossibly negative and exaggerated.
I have continued the experiment I reported earlier on playing Dual-n-back game while monitoring my progression Heart Rate Variability (HRV). I have manually set the game to Dual-3-back, meaning I have to remember a location and letter that is three iterations in the past. For a full explanation of how much cognitive load that adds to the situation you can read Gwern’s FAQ on Dual-n-back here. I can tell you from experience that 3 back is a lot harder than 2 back. The data shows the difference in scores:
You can see I was reliably getting percent scores in the 70’s and 80’s playing 2 back. When I increased the difficulty to 3 back my scores dropped to the 30’s. An you can see a progression where the most recent plays are moving toward 50%. How has this effected my HRV? Here is my rMSSD for the last 8 sessions of 2 back and first 19 sessions of 3 back.
As I have reported before an rMSSD above 48 for a 30 second reading occurs when I am relaxed and feeling stress free. Each of these games are 4.5 minutes long, so that is 9 consecutive 30 second readings. You can see the 2 back games toward the end were averaging above 50 so I was feeling stress free during those sessions which makes sense because I my average score for those sessions was 77%. I had the feeling of having mastered that level.
When I started with 3 back the rMSSD dropped to an average of 43.3 for the first ten sessions. 3 back was definitely harder and I was seeing very slow progression in the scores. I recall feeling a bit negative about the process and unsure if I could get better at the task. I did not really try any strategies, I just tried to improve through repetition.
The last four 3 back sessions are interesting. At session fifteen I was thinking about how to move the score I decided to try focussing on only the location and “wing it” for remembering the audio cue. To my surprise BOTH measures went up. I saw better results and got interested about pushing this strategy. For the following sessions you can see both my scores and my rMSSD going up. My rMSSD average for those sessions is 54.25. I was enjoying the process because I saw there was a path to improvement.
What is intriguing is that my rMSSD (and stress) changed not as a result of the scores, but at the specific point I felt I had discovered a way to improve the process. My perception alone drove the change in HRV. My story about improvement and efficacy moved my stress level, not the performance of the game at all. So growth and learning is gradual, but our story about how the progression of the learning can be more dramatic.
I had a good opportunity to unpack an Upset in real time. I was with another person and they did something that caught me off guard in a negative way. I was wearing my Polar H7 heart rate belt and was measuring my heart rate variability using Heart Rate Variability Logger app by Marco Altini. Here is a graph showing 30 second snapshots of my rMSSD, a measure of the variability of my heart rate.
I know from previous readings that a reading above 48 of my rMSSD is a reading that indicates low stress, an rMSSD below 48 indicates stress. The event that caught me off guard happened at the “13” time mark on the chart. As it unfolded I chose not to react to the situation and take stock. When it happened my rMSSD was at 51, a comfortable stress free reading. As I sat quietly and processed the event you can see my rMSSD drop to 47, not too bad, then pop back up to 58 which is quite relaxed. When I decided on some level to show I was displeased, shown in the chart at time hack “22,” my rMSSD dropped to 27. This is a reading comparable to being in the dentist chair or firing a shotgun at a range.
So my decision to react and show my displeasure was the stress inducing action, not the original event itself. My decision to be visibly confrontational created the deep negative rMSSD reaction. I think this event has measured my fight/flight response. The response occurred a full four minutes after the original event. So I chose to enter that state.
Once I walked away I maintained my state of Upset. On being clear of the situation you can see the opening reading is still in a somewhat stressful state, but 30 seconds after that I was back in a state of no stress.
After I was clear I was still mentally considering my reaction and the event, but I was not physiologically in a confrontational state as measured by my heart rate variability.
So a few insights come from this event. First, the actual event was not the physiological trigger. My interpretation, arrived at a full four minutes after the fact was the trigger. Once into it, the time I was in fight/flight was quite short. Though I felt I was still in an Upset state I had emerged from it a full minute or two earlier.
Interpretation is a choice, Upset results from interpretation. Conflict creates fight/flight, removing oneself from conflict seems to reduce fight/flight reaction. Regardless of the mental rehearsals before and after, an Upset unfolding in real time is quite a bit smaller than it appears when you look to the data.