Pavlov’s Dogs and Sudden Conversion

The Russian physiologist Ivan Pavlov (1849–1936) is probably best known for his research on what is known as “classical conditioning,” or in his honor also: “Pavlovian conditioning.” This is where, for example, a dog gets food and at the same time a bell rings. After a few repetitions, the dog reacts already if only the bell rings and starts to salivate.

But there is also other research that Pavlov pursued and that is very interesting. I read up on this years ago and write this from memory, so grant a little imprecision and also that this is perhaps my interpretation to some extent.

The line of research I mean got going by pure chance. Pavlov’s lab was flooded where he kept his dogs in cages. The water rose, and the dogs panicked and fought for their lives. After they were rescued, Pavlov noticed something strange: Dogs that had been wild before were suddenly tame, dogs that had been tame, were now wild. They seemed to have converted to a different persona. After some time, the dogs flipped back to their previous self, though.

Pavlov looked deeper into this and conducted experiments. If you like dogs, do better not read up on the details because part of the experiments was to bring the dogs into similarly horrible situations. The result was about this:

There seemed to be two types of dogs: Some flipped already under moderate pressure, whereas others did so only under extreme circumstances. They appeared to have different character traits in this regard. But that was not all: The dogs that were hard to flip, then persisted for a longer time before they flipped back. Those that were easy to flip, went back faster.

The interpretation here was that there were two dimensions to the character of a dog: (1) Some dogs were tame, others wild. (2) Some dogs were easy to flip, and other hard to flip.

Basically, you could have any combination of the two dimensions: tame and hard to flip, wild and hard to flip, tame and easy to flip, wild and easy to flip. So far, this is only a description. But it could also predict behavior, namely how fast the dogs flipped back. It also seemed as if the content, wild or tame, did not matter all that much for this, only for whether the sequence was tame-wild-tame or wild-tame-wild.

If you think about it, the result is not obvious: You could also imagine a gradual change: tame dogs could become increasingly wild, or wild dogs increasingly tame. But that was not the case: It seemed more like black and white. The dogs flipped abruptly under pressure between two different modes.

— — —

Ivan Pavlov was not a fan of the Soviet system and even astonishingly outspoken about it. But since he had won a Nobel prize in 1904, the regime tolerated it and let him do his research. It is unclear whether others built on Pavlov’s results, but that was what people in the West started to suspect later on.

During the Korean War, where the UN fought on the Western side, allied soldiers were captured by the North Koreans and the Chinese. What astonished many was that some of them flipped and were then presented to the media as propagandists for the Communists. There was no reason to think they had been closet Communists before. It was called “brainwashing” or by its Chinese name “thought reform.”

After the POWs had been released and had returned home, a similar phenomenon was observed as with the dogs. They flipped back, but some took longer while for others it went fast. At the time, all this scared many in the West because the idea was that the Communists had some secret weapon. There was even a covert CIA program that came to light later on, Project MKUltra, which was supposed to develop techniques of mind control in response. It was a complete failure. One of its unintended consequences was, though, that there were also experiments with LSD, which probably helped the drug to become known at the time.

— — —

While it is deeply disturbing that you could flip a person into someone with completely different views, “brainwashing” by the North Koreans and Chinese was not that impressive. As already noted, people flipped back under normal conditions although some persisted more than others. And then the description was that while “brainwashed,” the POWs sounded more like broken records.

There were also interesting differences: Americans seemed to be easier to flip, while the success with British POWs was limited. What I have read, but have not been able to track down in detail: Turkish POWs were almost impossible to flip. Maybe this had also for other reasons: Flipping an American was more valuable, so perhaps more effort went into working on them.

“Brainwashing” worked basically like this (from memory, and my interpretation):

The first step was not to convince the POWs to adopt a Communist outlook. There were discussions with them where they could argue against Communism. It was not important that they accepted it. The point here was different: They had to learn the Communist worldview. They also had to write pieces from a Communist perspective.

Actually, if the POWs tried to challenge the Communist view and got emotionally involved, learning worked better. The principle here is that if you get emotionally involved, your mind switches to an intuitive way of thinking where you have little rational control. And emotions also reinforce what you learn and make it stick better. POWs thought they rejected the Communist worldview and were hence immune, but missed that they learned it along the way.

Possibly that also explains the difference between the different nationalities: Americans engaged the arguments and tried to convince the other side. They also got emotionally involved. The British POWs were apparently cooler and more distanced. And the Turkish POWs treated the other side with ridicule and did not let themselves be drawn in. They also stuck together as a group and in this way undermined the effort by keeping the Communist worldview out.

After the POWs had learned the Communist outlook, I don’t know how exactly the North Koreans and Chinese proceded. But I gather the main point was to put extreme pressure on them. As with the dogs, they could then flip, and it depended on their character whether that was easy or hard to do. That also determined whether the new worldview persisted only for a short time afterwards or longer.

If I understand it correctly, the US military analyzed what had happened, and American soldiers who are now captured are told to engage as little as possible with the other side. The rule is that they will only give their name and some basic data, and that is it. The mistake had been that the American POWs tried to get into an honest discussion with the Communist side, and that they also got emotionally involved. But if you simply shut down, that cannot happen. Don’t learn the worldview of the other side, and you cannot be flipped to it.

— — —

The phenomenon is actually quite common. In a religious context, this is a conversion experience where someone suddenly adopts a new worldview. However, what happens before is that they learn it although they may think of it as something they reject. When under pressure, they can then flip. This may happen also in many other contexts: situations of domestic abuse, cults, terrorist groups, fundamentalist organizations, political movements, and so forth.

One example I can recall from what I read was the description of how someone became a Communist. I think it was Arthur Koestler, but I am not sure. You might assume that someone gradually moves from their old views to Communism and slowly raises their confidence in the ideology until they are convinced. Or even that there was some slam-dunk argument that sweeped them off their feet. But that was not how it worked in this case.

This person had attented Communist meetings before and for some time. He lived in an environments with Communists and absorbed their views. However, he did not accept Communism, found it interesting, but not convincing. The conversion happened when one day he woke up with a huge hangover and a woman by his side he hadn’t wanted to end up in bed with. Like a lighting had struck him, in a moment he knew: I am a Communist!

— — —

Another example I can recall were religious conversions by the original Methodists if I remember this correctly. Basically, potential converts were invited to their meetings. They were already well-versed in the Christian worldview, however, there were some specifics they learned now on top.

Finally, the preacher would go into a very drastic description of what awaited those who had not converted, with a vivid imagery of their tortures in hell. In the emotional upheaval many converted on the spot. Interestingly that also happened with those who had gone to the meetings with a critical or even hostile approach. But the trick about emotional engagement is not what the emotion is, only that it is strong, which helps to engrain views on an intuitive level.

My interpretation of this is: While you have a worldview that is yours and that you cling to under normal circumstances, you can also have a worldview in reserve that you know is not yours and that you reject. However, when you come under extreme pressure, your mind decides that perhaps your previous worldview is not the right one. It has failed. And so your mind reaches for anything that is there. This is an abrupt change, and suddenly the other worldview is yours.

— — —

I would think that this insight about conversions also explains other phenomena. Take revolutions as an example. They usually have a long history leading up to them where nothing happens. But then it goes so fast that everybody is overwhelmed. Many people are suddenly swept along who were on a fence before or even hostile.

If you read authors from the phase before the Revolutions of 1848, which is known in German as “Vormärz” (pre-March because the revolution occurred there in March of 1848), you can feel that they know something was going to happen. But they have no idea what it is or how it would work. There were events that might have triggered a revolution, but at the same time, the system was stable and seemed unassailable.

However, then it went extremely fast. The first stirrings begin in Southern Italy in January of 1848. In February 1848, a Revolution in France follows. And then it spreads like wildfire all over Europe within weeks. At the time, this was called the “Spring of Nations.” While a revolution seemed impossible before, it felt suddenly within reach. Many people who had not considered drastic change, were suddenly swept along. Another example is also how the Communist regimes that had seemed in control for decades, imploded within a short time in 1989.

There was no gradual change, but whole societies, or large parts of them, suddenly flipped almost over night. The old is over, and now something new has started.

This view also helps to think about how propaganda can work. It may be wrong to think that it is meant to convince you on the spot. The purpose could be instead to make you learn a certain worldview. That might have little effect for a long time. However, in a situation where previous worldviews come under pressure, many people can suddenly flip to what they have learned.

— — —

“Brainwashing” is scary, but it should not be overestimated. I think there is an explanation for why the POWs who had been turned sounded like broken records:

You have a worldview that is very expansive and has many interconnections between parts. It has grown over a long time. Your mind always works to keep it consistent and tries to remove “cognitive dissonances.” That’s why people are extremely resistent to arguments. If it is your own worldview that feels natural. But it becomes obvious when you try to convince someone with a very different worldview. Then it can be frustrating how even patently obvious arguments cannot get through. And even if they do, they are shrugged off shortly afterwards.

Now, when the North Koreans and Chinese tried to build up a Communist worldview in the POWs, they had to ram ideas into their minds that are foreign bodies and alert your mental immune system that tries to purge them. Even if it is successful, the alternative worldview will hence end up rather rudimentary compared to your own worldview.

That’s why what happens after someone has been made to flip sounds like a broken record: thin and unconvincing. And it also why people revert to their worldview when they are in a normal environment again. Your mind has retained a lot from your old worldview that is in tension with your new worldview. Also new ideas come in that strengther it, and your mind starts to remove the “cognitive dissonances.” Over time that eats into your new worldview. And at some point, it becomes untenable, so you flip back.

That is also why it is harder to flip older people: They have a worldview that has evolved over a long time and has many parts that are strontly interconnected. On the downside that means that older people can be very stubborn about changing their views, but it also has an upside that they do not fall as easily for something new. It is different with younger people who are in many ways more of a blank slate where you can implant a worldview for the first time. That’s why totalitarian regimes are so fond of getting their hands especially on children.

— — —

How to defend yourself if you are faced with such a situation?

Basically, you should not play along with the plan: Keep your engagement low, stay aloof and cool-headed, and do not become emotional. Humor can be a very strong defense here. Don’t think because you are angry and reject the other worldview, the manipulation doesn’t work. Quite the opposite, this may make you learn it better than otherwise.

Force yourself also to use the rational and not the intuitive side of your mind. Take your time and lean back. Avoid situations where pressure is applied to you, and don’t give in to it.

Do not get sucked into the other worldview with too much exposure. Counterbalance it with other views. One of the typical techniques of propagandists, cults, totalitarian regimes, etc., is to isolate you, so they have total access to your mind. That’s why they are also so hostile to open societies where you might be exposed to what they have no control over and which can help you keep your thinking straight.