One Crazy Fact That Science Says Could Decide Game 7 of the NBA Finals

And maybe help save the planet, too!

The Cleveland Cavaliers' LeBron James and the Golden State Warriors' Stephen Curry during Game 4 of the NBA FinalsTony Dejak/AP


When the Golden State Warriors and the Cleveland Cavaliers tip off Sunday night for Game 7 of the NBA Finals, don’t be dismayed if your team is slightly behind at half time. In fact, it might be a good thing.

That’s the surprising finding of a study that Jonah Berger—a marketing professor at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania—published several years ago. Along with his colleague Devin Pope, Berger found that NBA teams that were losing by just one point at the end of the second quarter were more likely to win than teams leading by a point. Why? On this week’s episode of the Inquiring Minds podcast, Berger tells host Indre Viskontas that it all comes down to motivation. “They say, ‘I’m almost there, I’m close to winning, but I’m not there yet,” says Berger. “It encourages them to work harder.”

It’s a phenomenon that goes beyond basketball and that, according to Berger, has serious real-world implication. As he and Pope wrote in the New York Times in 2009:

Understanding what motivates employees, researchers and, yes, sports teams, has important implications. Encouraging people to see themselves as slightly behind others should increase motivation. Companies competing to win contracts or research prizes would be wise to focus employees on ways their competitors are a little ahead.

Berger is known for his 2013 bestseller Contagious: Why Things Catch On, where he unpacks the social science behind why word-of-mouth publicity is better than any ad and why anti-drug commercials could actually lead to an increase in drug use. His latest book is Invisible Influence: The Hidden Forces That Shape Behavior. In it, Berger writes about the power of influence and why we conform in some situations and rebel in others. According to Berger, your attraction to a certain sports car, designer handbag, catchy pop song, or good-looking person has less to do with your actual preferences than you might think. “It also depends on social dynamics and the fact that we tend to follow others,” Berger says.

“They say, ‘I’m almost there, I’m close to winning, but I’m not there yet. It encourages them to work harder.”

What becomes popular is seldom the just result of objective measures of quality. Berger points out that before Elvis Presley was “The King,” he was told he couldn’t sing. People told Walt Disney he wasn’t creative. And publishers repeatedly turned down J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter before Bloomsbury picked it up in 1997. (The series made history when the seventh book sold 8.3 million copies in the first 24 hours after it was released.)

Social influence helps us form likes and dislikes, and it also fires up our competitive edge. For example, while studies show that simply educating residents on how to save energy isn’t particularly effective, hinting that they’re not “keeping up with the Joneses” can have a much bigger impact. When software company Opower informed residents on their bill that some of their neighbors were being more energy efficient than they were, it led to decreases in consumption.

So as you crowd around the television, clenching your fists during Game 7 this weekend, it’s worth remembering that the same competitive spirt driving Steph Curry and LeBron James can help you save a few bucks on your electric bill.

Inquiring Minds is a podcast hosted by neuroscientist and musician Indre Viskontas and Kishore Hari, the director of the Bay Area Science Festival. To catch future shows right when they are released, subscribe to Inquiring Minds via iTunes or RSS. You can follow the show on Twitter at @inquiringshow and like us on Facebook.

More Mother Jones reporting on Climate Desk

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate