One of my all-time favorite psychology research studies was done in an elevator. A table was set up in the corner of the elevator with a sign that offered coupons for free hamburgers at McDonald's. A video camera had been placed in one of the upper corners of the elevator. The researchers were interested in how many people would take a coupon when they were alone in the elevator as opposed to when they were in the elevator with someone they did not know.
How important was this factor --- being alone in the elevator where no one could observe (and possibly judge) their behavior versus having someone else there who could see their actions and possibly think poorly of them? Your might be surprised --- I know I was. 81% took (at least) one coupon when they were alone in the elevator, whereas only 14% took a coupon when there was someone else there in the elevator with them. The percentages went from 81% to 14% simply because someone might think poorly of them!
As Americans, are we concerned about what people think of us? Yes.
Some of this is no doubt evolutionary / genetic / biological --- it is reasonable to argue that there are significant survival benefits in not disappointing others, especially those who care for us as we are growing up. But it is also reasonable to argue that we learn how to be sensitive to what others might be thinking of us / how to not disappoint / how to please. As a result, some of us are more concerned about pleasing people than are others --- some individuals have become the consummate peace-at-all-costs / don't-rock-the-boat / people-pleasers.
Do you feel that you should always be nice? Are you careful not to hurt someone else's feelings? Does it bother you when you feel that you have disappointed someone? Do you think that you should do what other people expect of you? Does it nag at you when you think you have let someone down? If this sounds like you, then you probably have the disease to please.
But isn't this a good thing? Isn't it good to be a nice person? And aren't such people better dating partners / spouses --- after all, aren't they more sensitive to their partner's needs? Better able to pick up on what will make their partner happy?
I would have to admit that being a people-pleaser is certainly better than being someone who could care less what other people think. In general, people of this latter ilk should be avoided as romantic partners. But fortunately, these two options (people-pleaser versus I-don't-give-a-rip-what-you-think) are not the only alternatives.
Imagine that you are observing someone who is a nice person --- they are concerned and sensitive to the needs of others, they tend to be dependable and responsible, and generally they are going to be there when others need them. Can you tell by watching them whether they are genuinely a nice person or whether they are this way out of guilt? In other words, is it possible for someone to be responding in this way in their interactions with others because they don't want to disappoint anyone? Because if they don't, they will feel guilty? For someone with the disease to please, it is so much easier / so much less painful to simply make people happy than to deal with the guilt of having someone disappointed in them.
I would be willing to bet that if you have the disease to please, then you have a long history of ending up in relationships that have significantly restricted your freedom. Being overly sensitive to how your partner might be responding to what you say or do (and wanting to avoid their disappointment in you) will naturally give them lots of control over you.
Please let me be clear: the goal here is NOT to become one of those individuals who is rude, insensitive, unreliable, and only watching out for themselves. Instead, the goal is to become a genuinely nice person --- not someone who is a puppet, with the strings being pulled here and there by the whims, expectations, and potential disappointments of others, but rather, someone who has cut the strings and is able to be a nice person because this is how they want to live their lives, not because they are unable to be other than this.
