Image source: http://www.deviantart.com
A couple weeks ago, San Francisco 49ers linebacker, Chris Borland, announced his retirement from the NFL after one season (and at the age of 24). Borland was ranked as one of the top rookies of the year, and his retirement represents a huge blow to the 49ers. But the reason why Borland decided to quit is the really interesting part of the story. In an interview with ESPN, Borland said he was quitting because of concerns over the long-term effects of head injuries. Borland continued, "[f]rom what I've researched and what I've experienced, I don't think it's worth the risk." Why is this so interesting? Well, we know from research on hyperbolic discounting and intertemporal choice that most people are incredibly present-biased: they prefer the present to the future and they focus on short-term outcomes or gains at the cost of long-term outcomes or gains. Also, with regards to head injuries, many times the worst health outcomes can be caused by the many small hits that linebackers take over their career. This can lead to another cognitive bias driven by mental accounting known as the adding up effect: we have a hard time seeing how many small things add up to larger problems over time. Finally, research on risk and temporal construal has demonstrated that removing a risk in time results in it being less aversive - in other words, people are usually willing to take on more risk if it happens in the distant future than if it happens in the near future. This means that Borland made quite an extraordinary decision: he chose the future over the present, he saw how many small outcomes added up to one large negative outcome, and he weighted future risk the way he would weight current risk. Those are three very large biases to overcome. It's also a decision that many players in his same position would never make (or potentially even consider). As one player said in response to Borland's decision: "No offense to anyone but I'm playing until I can't anymore. I love this game to [sic] much. " I would guess that many players feel the same way (not to mention the incentives that come along with continuing to play).
What I want to know is how Borland was convinced to give up millions of dollars and fame (now - and potentially later), for his long-term health and increased longevity (in the future)? In describing the decision the article says, "[a]fter the season, Borland said, he consulted with prominent concussion researchers and former players to affirm his decision. He also scheduled baseline tests to monitor his neurological well-being going forward 'and contribute to the greater research.' After thinking through the potential repercussions, Borland said the decision was ultimately 'simple.'" Whatever techniques his family, friends, and researchers used to convince Borland to make the right choice for the future, they are techniques that could be ultimately valuable to anyone facing intertemporal tradeoffs between the want and the should (things that give us short-run pleasure at the cost of long-term gains or that come with high long-term costs).
Just to get an understanding of the hits players take and how they affect visual memory and cognitive impairment, I found the infographic below. It's shocking how many hits NFL players experience in a season (over 1,000 for linemen and linebacker). Especially since the most impairment was seen in those players taking a lot of middling hits (because of the representativeness heuristic players may expect only big hits to have big consequences, but in reality it's all the smaller hits that they probably don't even pay as much attention to that can lead to the deterioration of brain tissue and cognitive impairment).
What I want to know is how Borland was convinced to give up millions of dollars and fame (now - and potentially later), for his long-term health and increased longevity (in the future)? In describing the decision the article says, "[a]fter the season, Borland said, he consulted with prominent concussion researchers and former players to affirm his decision. He also scheduled baseline tests to monitor his neurological well-being going forward 'and contribute to the greater research.' After thinking through the potential repercussions, Borland said the decision was ultimately 'simple.'" Whatever techniques his family, friends, and researchers used to convince Borland to make the right choice for the future, they are techniques that could be ultimately valuable to anyone facing intertemporal tradeoffs between the want and the should (things that give us short-run pleasure at the cost of long-term gains or that come with high long-term costs).
Just to get an understanding of the hits players take and how they affect visual memory and cognitive impairment, I found the infographic below. It's shocking how many hits NFL players experience in a season (over 1,000 for linemen and linebacker). Especially since the most impairment was seen in those players taking a lot of middling hits (because of the representativeness heuristic players may expect only big hits to have big consequences, but in reality it's all the smaller hits that they probably don't even pay as much attention to that can lead to the deterioration of brain tissue and cognitive impairment).
Image source: The Globe and Mail (accessed via visual.ly here.
RSS Feed
