Tackling a new business venture as a budding entrepreneur requires persistence and perseverance. Most entrepreneurs and start-ups fail, so it makes sense to think encouragement from friends, family, and peers would help morale. However, research suggests that what may be even more helpful is a baseless critic telling them they’ll fail.

A team at North Carolina State University gathered research from three studies involving a combined 1,400 participants. They found evidence that the majority of those who defined themselves as entrepreneurs were more driven when told they would fail. In fact, the less credible the critic, the more persistence the entrepreneur displayed to prove them wrong.

The researchers explained this “underdog effect” as part of Psychological Reactance Theory. The theory suggests that when a person’s freedom is challenged, they tend to push back harder and stronger than before. In this case, when someone tells an entrepreneur they’ll fail, the response tends to be, “Watch me!”

Entrepreneurs offer their thoughts

Entrepreneurs and business leaders spoke to GOOD to weigh in on this discovery. Many related to the entrepreneurs who felt more motivated after being disregarded by critics. However, they also urged caution against basing decisions and motivation solely on proving others wrong.

“This resonates with me to a degree. I think someone should be able to intuit when their persistence has become too much,” said Nathan Silvernail, co-founder and CEO of Plantd. “Often, folks are unwilling to pivot when a pivot is required. They’re afraid of change or hesitant to course-correct even when all of their signals are telling them to. Stubbornness paired with ignorance is a dangerous combination in any regard. A truly successful person will understand what this means.”

“Being told you might fail can absolutely strengthen someone’s resolve. But entrepreneurship isn’t just about endurance,” said Samyr Laine, co-founder and managing partner at Freedom Trail Capital. “If you ignore every piece of criticism because you’re trying to prove people wrong, you damage relationships and miss useful signals. Business is relational. Investors, customers, employees, they’re all giving you feedback in some form…You need resilience, but you also need self-awareness.”

“Proving others wrong might push you to short-term wins, but it’s consistency over time that drives championship-level results,” said Christina Reckard, president of the Pat Summitt Leadership Group. “The entrepreneurs that make it the distance can’t wait for a critic to give them the fire inside they need to motivate them, they need to have a great product or service, with the customer at the center, and the self-discipline to pursue excellence regardless of the obstacles.”

“For those of us who don’t have unlimited personal resources, entrepreneurship takes against-the-odds tenacity…If you’re deterred by a dismissive word, you’re not an entrepreneur for very long,” said Matt Graber, co-owner of Cool Hand Movers. “When acute adversity hits, or is even implied, the urge to swim upstream naturally kicks into high gear. Is this a healthy dynamic? Probably not. The results aren’t surprising but I wouldn’t go searching for negative reinforcement in place of traditional coaching and productivity tools.”

Psychology experts weigh in

Psychiatrists and therapists who spoke to GOOD explained why entrepreneurs can get a boost from such negativity. However, they also warned that persistence can turn into stubbornness, causing entrepreneurs to miss opportunities to learn and improve.

“When a person feels as though their competence is being challenged, they may become more motivated to prove themselves,” said Krista Walker, a therapist and clinical director at The Ohana. “This may be especially true for entrepreneurs, in particular. That is because their identity may be tied to their business or performance. It can feel like a personal challenge.”

“When we cling too tightly to an idea, an approach, or a specific outcome, we lose flexibility,” said psychiatrist Dr. MaryEllen Eller. “It can become easy to confuse commitment with rigidity and stubbornness for strength.”

Balance is key

“Being told ‘you’ll fail’ or ‘you can’t’ can actually make us want it more. It fuels a drive to self discover autonomy and prove your abilities,” said psychiatrist Dr. Sam Zand. “However when this fuel is from resentment, it can become unhealthy if it takes over who you truly are. Some of the biggest entrepreneurs use stories and experiences of doubt as fuel, but stay open to constructive criticism and learning.”

Based on the thoughts of these professionals, it seems best to pay attention to any data that conflicts with your vision in case changes need to be made.

  • Why does your brain mix up memories? A new study examines how memories are misplaced in your brain’s filing cabinets
    Photo credit: LWA/Stone via Getty Images – Older people may confuse memories rather than forgetting them altogether.
    ,

    Why does your brain mix up memories? A new study examines how memories are misplaced in your brain’s filing cabinets

    A new study explores how aging changes the way our brains store and retrieve experiences.

    Associate Professor of Psychology, Binghamton University, State University of New York

    Old age and forgetfulness seem to go hand in hand. But my colleagues and I found that memories actually becomes less precise, not entirely forgotten. Our study, published in the journal Cerebral Cortex, shows how the brain blends related experiences as you age rather than replaying the exact one you need.

    Memory is a complicated process. Even when everything’s working as it should, the way people remember specific events has many parts.

    Say you have a conversation with a friend. The first stage of memory is when you’re experiencing, feeling and perceiving details of an event as it happens. The second stage involves storing these details in your brain’s file cabinet. The third stage covers when you need to search that file cabinet for just the right file when, a week later, you want to remember that conversation with your friend. This last retrieval stage is what many people think of as memory.

    Imagine that when your brain was retrieving information from that conversation with your friend, it accidentally combined details from that conversation with one you had with your spouse that morning. When you then try to remember the conversation with your friend, you actually pull the file for the conversation with your spouse instead. This kind of mix-up might be an example of what happens with the aging brain.

    Why it matters

    Remembering people and events is important for many social activities. Confusing people’s names can be embarrassing. The fear of confusing memories can even lead to social isolation.

    Scientists already know that confusing memories happens more often than forgetting them altogether. What’s less clear is how the brain gets confused.

    My team’s study tried to understand when in the memory process these mix-ups happen and how the brain’s memory center, called the hippocampus, plays a role.

    The hippocampus is involved in all stages of memory. The patterns of neural firing that occur during the first stage of memory – the initial experience of talking with your friend – often recur while your brain is filing that memory away and later when retrieving it.

    Watch on  YouTube
    The hippocampus is critical to memory.

    For our study, we scanned the brains of young, middle-aged and older adults while they went through those same three stages of memory. While in the scanner, they briefly saw images of a face at the top of the screen and an image of either a scene or an object, such as a forest or an apple, on the bottom of the screen.

    We told participants to imagine the person at the top interacting in the scene or with the object. Each image pair served as a separate “event.”

    They then relaxed for 20 minutes while we continued to record their brain activity. Finally, they took a memory test in which a face they had previously seen reappeared on top with four images below. Participants had to remember which of those images had previously been paired with the face. We repeated this test several times to gauge how well people remembered links between faces and scenes and objects across events.

    We found that older people had more memory mix-ups than young adults. For instance, they were more likely to falsely remember a face that was initially paired with an apple as having been paired with a forest. Older people were also less likely to repeat the same brain activity patterns seen when they first experienced, stored and retrieved a specific memory. Surprisingly, even when older adults did repeat the original brain patterns, they were even more likely to confuse their memories.

    Our study provides new evidence that the hippocampus is inappropriately changing memories between different memory phases as one gets older.

    What still isn’t known

    Research in young adults, including those in our study, suggests that the hippocampus is supposed to engage in the same neural firing patterns when remembering an event as when first experiencing it.

    But the older adults who made more memory mix-ups than younger participants showed these same neural patterns. So what is the brain signature when older adults get a memory right? Are other brain regions outside the hippocampus helping? We did not get a good answer for these questions from our study.

    What’s next

    Researchers are still learning how different brain regions talk to one another. One of the next frontiers in neuroscience is understanding how electrically stimulating the hippocampus prevents memory loss or restores lost memories.

    Future interventions might try to strengthen the hippocampus to prevent it from changing a memory after it’s stored. Researchers already have some ideas for this: intensive exercise, mindfulness training, brain stimulation and even recording memory cues on smartphones.

    But researchers still need to investigate whether changing the hippocampus can lead to stable, consistent memories over time.

    The Research Brief is a short take about interesting academic work.

    This article originally appeared on The Conversation. You can read it here.
  • Getting outside despite your 9‑to‑5 job can improve your mental health – here’s how to spend time in nature during and around working hours
    Photo credit: Todd Lookingbill – Urban parks are great places to soak in the outdoors without planning an elaborate trip.

    The modern workday unfolds largely indoors. Long hours spent commuting, sitting in meetings and staring at screens can make time outdoors feel like a luxury. Finding time for nature in an already packed workday can feel impossible, especially if you think nature only “counts” when it involves hiking boots and camping gear.

    But a growing body of research suggests that nature’s benefits don’t require an exotic vacation getaway or weekend adventure. Even brief, routine interactions with green space can reduce stress, improve mood and promote overall well-being.

    I spent the spring of 2026 teaching and studying urban landscapes in Denmark, a country consistently ranked among the happiest in the world. I expected to find thoughtfully designed parks, courtyards and bicycle paths. I did see those things. But what surprised me was how seamlessly people moved through those spaces as part of their ordinary lives.

    These green spaces weren’t aspirational destinations, reserved for special occasions. They were places to eat lunch, meet friends, walk through on the way home from work, or just pause for a few quiet moments. Getting outside seemed a part of the natural rhythm of the day.

    Denmark‘s outdoor culture stemmed not only from the creation of a meticulously planned network of parks, but also from the way green spaces were fundamentally woven into the routines of everyday life.

    A wooden bench in an outdoor park
    A wooden bench in one of Copenhagen’s forest therapy parks invites people to sit and soak in their surroundings. Todd Lookingbill

    Everyday parks, everyday benefits

    Evidence linking time spent in nature with health benefits has increasingly shaped public policy. In the U.S., for example, the National Park Service’s Healthy Parks Healthy People and ParkRx initiatives reflect a growing recognition that access to parks contributes to well-being.

    For many Americans, however, the word “park” brings to mind iconic national parks such as Yellowstone, Yosemite or the Grand Canyon. Yet visiting parks of all kinds can improve your overall health. The greatest public health value may come not from the parks people visit once in a lifetime but from those close enough to visit again and again.

    My own research on Civil War battlefield parks illustrates this point. These are parks that were established to commemorate historic conflicts that were frequently fought on the fringes of major metropolitan areas. Consequently, many of these landscapes preserve forests, grasslands and trails within easy reach of millions of Americans.

    Because they’re accessible without extensive travel or planning, they can become places people return to repeatedly – such as during a lunch break or after work. Reframing the notion of “park” opens up millions of acres of land for everyday uses.

    Designing for everyday nature

    At the University of Richmond, where I work, a stream restoration projects became an opportunity to rethink how nature fits into campus life. Landscape architects designed an Eco-Corridor, as the project became known. It has walking paths, gathering spaces and seating areas for quiet reflection alongside flowing streams and native vegetation.

    The result was a landscape that supports biodiversity and improves water quality while also creating places for students, faculty and staff to walk between meetings, eat lunch alfresco or spend a few quiet moments outside during the workday. Its ongoing care depends on an army of volunteers who spread mulch, remove invasive plants and tend the community garden. For these volunteers, stewardship between classes and meetings meant another opportunity to interact with nature.

    A group of young people walking along a concrete path lined with trees and shrubbery.
    Students walk through the ‘Eco-Corridor’ at the University of Richmond. Haley Herrmann

    What we learned was that nature doesn’t have to compete with work, studying or everyday responsibilities. Thoughtful landscape design can make spending time outdoors, even if only for a few short minutes, feel like a normal part of the day.

    This article originally appeared on The Conversation. You can read it here.

  • New Russian research suggests that the human lifespan could be up to 156 years
    Photo credit: Canva – Researchers found what's preventing us from living longer.
    ,

    New Russian research suggests that the human lifespan could be up to 156 years

    Humans can live much longer if certain barriers are addressed.

    According to the Guinness Book of World Records, the oldest person lived to the ripe age of 122 years old. Such a lifespan is an incredible feat, but what if the average person could beat that record by 34 years? Recent research done in Russia has led scientists to believe that the average human lifespan could be up to 156 years.

    The researchers at Skoltech Biomed Technologies Center developed a mathematical model that allowed them to “switch on” a variety of aging mechanisms. This allowed them to calculate a human’s lifespan where mortality risk never increased with age. After experimenting with different scenarios and conditions, they found the biggest barriers to longevity were caused by non-renewable tissues and somatic mutations.

    What are these barriers against longer life?

    Somatic mutations are DNA changes within a cell. They accumulate over time during a human’s life and cannot be reversed with any existing therapy. These DNA errors that pile up in our cells contribute to the aging process.

    Many human organs like the liver and skin continually replace cells and regrow damaged portions of themselves. However, there are two organs that can’t do this: the brain and the heart. Brain tissue (neurons) and heart tissue (cardiomyocytes) cannot regenerate. This proves to be the most prominent biological limit that shortens our lifespans. This explains why issues like dementia and heart disease are prominent causes of death and morbidity later in life. Since those organs’ tissues don’t replace damaged cells, they’re prone to irrevocably decline over time.

    “The key finding of the study is the discovery of substantial differences between tissue types. Neurons and cardiomyocytes, which lack the ability to divide, turned out to be the main limiting factors: when all other causes of aging are eliminated, somatic mutations alone reduce the theoretical median lifespan from 1,759 years (for a hypothetical non-aging human organism) to 156 years,” said Evgeny Efimov, a research intern at the Skoltech Biomed Technologies Center, researcher at AIRI, and one of the key authors of the study.

    This suggests that somatic mutations and DNA damage is what ultimately prevents humans from living indefinitely, even if our brains and hearts regenerated cells like other organs.

    So what’s next?

    Now knowing these biological limitations, the researchers hope to study other areas of aging impacting the human lifespan that could plausibly be reversed. This includes mitochondrial dysfunction, telomere shortening, epigenetic drift, and loss of proteostasis. 

    The hope is to have a clearer priority list of issues for future therapies to tackle. This is not just to possibly extend life, but to improve lives in general. By developing a fully comprehensive theory of aging, Skoltech hopes to pinpoint which aspects of aging are within our scope to address. After all, thoroughly studying each puzzle piece that makes up human life gives us a better understanding of the whole.

    Of course, other impactful factors in a person’s lifespan can be addressed today. As most know, things like diet, sleep, and exercise are among them. A person’s living environment can also negatively impact their lifespan if it doesn’t have clean air, access to clean water, and so on.

    For now, the best method for living long is to follow instructions from your physician. Whether you make it to 156 years or not, living well is best for whatever time you’re given.

Explore More Health Stories

Health

Getting outside despite your 9‑to‑5 job can improve your mental health – here’s how to spend time in nature during and around working hours

Research

New Russian research suggests that the human lifespan could be up to 156 years

Health

Screen time guidelines for kids and adolescents have shifted as research paints a more nuanced picture

Care

ER doctor and mom sets the record straight for parents of kids with e-bikes and e-scooters