The book is overall well referenced(For the quality of the references I cant vouch, but the references are there) and in reading/listening it made me reevaluate my conception of confidence,
shining light on the inbetween of how imagined happenings get to be concrete reality.
As Robertson is a neuroscientist, and studies the brain, he mentions different aspects of brainphysiology, in the process and phenomenon of confidence.
For example with a perceptive eye toward over-confidence, aspects of confidences relationships to dopamine get explored(not definitively). Too much dopamine in certain pathways = To much confidence? Come find out in the book what Robertsons take is. I will admitt I cant remember.
Overall the author does intend this book as an important case for the idea that confidence is inevitably what can hold societies together. Hence the importance of the topic.
Confidence has many functions and appearances that are often overlooked or when mentioned dismissed.
For example he is reporting in one chapter on the impact of socialisation on confidence. How gender role or ethnic based stereotypes impact current societies through confidence of ability.
And how that in turn feeds back to impact ability.
The often propagated notion that females are innately less visual spacial and thus less reliable in engineering than males comes to mind.
As I have heard from many different sides, mathematicians, parents, to fellow students, math education is most often problematic enough in engaging any subject. Few are willing to give it their all, for even fewer a passionate spark gets to be lit. Which is not a really confidence boosting state of affairs.
And that also in the male sex, that has been supposed to be innately more gifted.
It is thus not difficult to understand that getting told you are innately worse off in doing math than others, who seem to be mostly bad off at it also, is seldom an encouragement.
Another tidbit I found interesting enough to remember:
How failure is dealt with in different cultures reveals that an approach less focused on ensuring confidence can lead for people to engage more in the humbling experiences of focusing to improve where you are not yet sufficient. So it is self reinforcing.
That in contrast to focusing on your strengths and pursuing them so the idea of always having been a prodigy does not vanish. Something that I find in my behavior ever so often.
At times the book felt a little too over generalized,
"it is this way, source statistical study x"
and it took some consideration for me to find the rating that felt right to me. It is a good book with not the utmost compelling style of presentation, and perhaps not an end all discussion book on the subject matter(But what is?).
Yet all in all it is a solid presentation of the importance of confidence. And some scientific tidbits to remember or forget, as you and your brain see fit.
That being said most of the studies were statistical and statistics naturally have a place in explaining something. But massively using statistical studies fail for me to satisfy the "why itch" on their own.
Acknowledged it is a broad topic, so certain limitations had to be made somewhere, and the product is: What has been to chosen to be written about is written about in an informing manner.
So thats solid. Let's leave the pedanctics there.
You won't transform over night into a person without issues of self esteem, neither will you understand everything about confidence, or you might, I don't feel confident I do,
but at least the phrase "confidence is key" will have some more associations.