Overcoming failure
In a groundbreaking 2019 research endeavor, a cohort exceeding 400 participants embarked on a journey to unravel the intricacies of a cryptic, fabricated language. Entrants were tasked with deciphering three sets of enigmatic symbols, each pair posing a distinct query such as discerning the representation of animate entities versus inanimate objects. Subsequently, following a brief intermission, participants encountered the same rune pairs, albeit with questions reversed—challenged to distinguish between living and non-living entities. However, unbeknownst to the players, a clandestine mechanism governed the proceedings: the responses furnished during the initial phase dictated the attributions of the symbols in the ensuing round. In the initial phase, participants were either bestowed with unerring validation irrespective of their responses or compelled to confront unrelenting failure. Consequently, at the juncture of the interlude, every contender found themselves on an equal footing, with identical reservoirs of knowledge to draw upon in the subsequent round. Yet, despite this ostensibly level playing field, the victors of the preliminary phase ascended to the summit of proficiency, while those consigned to failure found themselves mired in a perpetual cycle of inadequacy.
