Curses are a common trope in folklore, but could psychology explain these mythological maledictions? Let's take a look at...
- What is a Curse?
- Placebo and Nocebo Effects
- Attribution Theory, Fundamental Attribution Error and the Just-World Hypothesis
- Misattribution of Arousal
- A Hypothetical Scenario
 |
| Are curses all in the mind? (freestocks) |
What is a Curse?
A curse is a prayer, invocation or magical spell intended to inflict harm or misfortune - or it can mean the persistent misfortune experienced as a result of being cursed. If you're wondering why we sometimes say people are cursing when they swearing, that's because swearing evolved from cursing - you only need to look at expressions like "damn it" (an expressed wish that something should be damned) to see the link.
So what happens when someone's cursed? Well, it varies on the story. One of the most famous is the "Curse of the Pharaohs" or "Tutankhamun's Curse" - supposedly those who excavated (or even visited) the tomb ran the risk of an untimely death... though there's not much evidence to back that up. Another fairly well known curse is that of the evil eye - the idea that people could inflict persistent misfortune or ill health with a baleful glance.
Either way, many people throughout history have believed in curses - but certain psychological phenomena might offer another explanation.
Placebo and Nocebo Effects
You've probably heard of the placebo effect - but if you haven't, it's a real case of mind-over-body. Despite a substance having no real benefit whatsoever (it might be a sugar pill, a saline injection or any other number of pointless procedures) the patient may find themselves experiencing reductions in pain and fatigue... or possibly even a boosted immune system. Want an example? Just think about the last time you took a painkiller - the odds are you started to feel better pretty quickly, much faster than it would take for your body to absorb the medication into your bloodstream!
Researchers believe that the placebo effect works thanks to the patient's expectations and conditioning (i.e. their previous experiences with medication) though it still seems to have an effect even when you know "medication" is a placebo. So what happens when you expect something to be bad rather than good? You get the nocebo effect instead.
The nocebo effect is the placebo effect's evil twin. It works in the same way (i.e. you get what you expect) but rather than helping, it harms. For example, injections might hurt more if you're told "this'll sting" and if you've ever read the "potential side effects may include" section of medication you're taking, you've probably experienced far more than you would have otherwise!
It's probably obvious how this relates to curses - if you're told that you're the victim of a hex (and are even remotely worried that curses might be real) there's a chance your mind and body will start providing symptoms all of their own!
 |
| The placebo effect is powerful, the nocebo effect can be harmful... (Harrison Cohen) |
Attribution Theory, Fundamental Attribution Error and the Just-World Hypothesis
In 1958 Fritz Heider put out an early version of attribution theory - or how humans attempt to infer the cause of behavior in both ourselves and other people.
The core of the theory is that we judge people's behavior based on both external (things like being stuck in traffic or being kept away all night) and internal (things like having a naturally angry disposition) factors.
People unconsciously do this to gain useful information about other people. To give an example, let's say you see "Johnny" swearing profusely - with nothing else to explain it, you might reasonably judge that Johnny is both easily angered and rude. Now imagine you'd just seen a shelf collapse and dump its contents on his head - you'd probably write off his behavior as a response to misfortune rather than a nasty disposition!
It turns out that when we make attribution theory judgments, we tend to be biased - something known as the fundamental attribution error. We tend to look for internal factors to explain what other people do, such as believing someone failed a test because they were lazy and didn't study... though we might blame an external factor (e.g. the room was too hot, making it hard to concentrate) if we were in the same situation. In contrast, we tend to give ourselves the benefit of the doubt (something called the self-serving bias) and blame our failings on external factors, but claim our successes as internal factors!
There's a particularly unpleasant theory attached to the fundamental attribution error known as the just-world hypothesis. In essence, we try to rationalize why events (both good and bad) happen to other people based on whether they "deserve it" rather than admitting that sometimes things just happen beyond our control. An example might be someone who tends to be a bit careless getting their house robbed - you might be tempted to think they probably left their windows or doors open and thus brought it on themselves.
Now you might be wondering how that all ties in to curses - well, many stories have curses inflicted on people after they've done something foolish or immoral. Take the old story of King Midas, in which the monarch wished for all that he touched to be turned to gold... only to find that his greedy request included food, drink and (in some versions) his daughter!
 |
| King Midas was blessed and cursed with a golden touch... (Zlaťáky.cz) |
Misattribution of Arousal
It turns out that humans are also not very good at interpreting how our own bodies are reacting to things... which can even lead to us mistaking fear for attraction.
It's been suggested that many emotions are an interplay between physiological arousal (i.e. your adrenaline, heart rate and so on) and your circumstances. Think about it - you get the same kind of physical feeling when riding an adrenaline-pumping rollercoaster as you do as when you fall off of something, but in the first case you're excited and happy, while in the second you're panicked and scared.
The idea that your body supplies that arousal but your brain interprets it is known as the two-factor theory of emotion, and it can have some strange effects. In 1974, psychologists Dutton and Aron carried out a study using two bridges, one low and stable, the other high and wobbly. Their experiment was simple - have a reasonably attractive female researcher stop males crossing each bridge and ask them to fill in a questionnaire on creativity. The researcher would also give each male her phone-number, in case they had any questions about the study - Dutton and Aron wanted to see how many of the males would seek further contact with the researcher.
It turned out that 39% of males called in the high bridge condition, while a mere 9% called in the low bridge condition. Dutton and Aron interpreted this difference as the "high bridge" males misattributing their arousal (fear) about crossing the bridge with attraction for the researcher.
While the Dutton and Aron study isn't incredibly strong by modern standards, it is generally accepted that there conclusions were correct - and that humans can indeed misattribute their arousal based on their circumstances.
When it comes to curses then, is it not possible that a "victim" could misinterpret any kind of arousal (fear, attraction, excitement, anger) as being the result of a curse... especially if they had been told they under the effects of one?
 |
| A curse? (Valentin Vlasov) |
So could all these add to up the classical idea of a curse? I'd like to run through a scenario, and let you be the judge.
Let's say that one day, you manage to offend a "witch" (well, everyone claims they're a witch) and they glare at you, long enough to make you feel a bit worried. You're trying to do some DIY the next day, but it's not going well... which is funny, because you're good at DIY - something else must be going on to explain the problems you're having today (attribution theory.)
You start to get frustrated and angry, sweat beads on your hands and brow, stinging your eyes... and they you remember offending the witch. Maybe you're awful because of something she's done (misattribution of arousal) in revenge?
Now that the idea's in your head, you can't shake it. You keep wondering if it'll get worse... and so it does (nocebo effect.) Soon you're feeling pretty rotten - you actually complain about the whole sequence of events to your friends, only for one of them to nod sagely and claim that the "witch" is known to curse those who've offended her (just-world hypothesis.)
I don't know about you, but to me that sounds like a reasonable explanation for a curse!
Thanks for reading - for more, try...