4 Ways to Take Better Breaks at Work


Your aching back or burning eyes may tell you that taking a break from your work is a good idea, but there’s very little research to suggest when, how often, or how long you should break for maximum benefit. To fill this gap in knowledge, two associate professors of management at Baylor University’s Hankamer School of Business set out to investigate what exactly constituted a “good” work break.  Emily Hunter and Cindy Wu surveyed 95 employees (ages 22 to 67) over a five-day week, and analyzed 959 break surveys. Their results were published in the Journal of Applied Psychology. “Everyone knows breaks are helpful, but there’s surprisingly little research on what makes the best break,” Hunter says.

Hunter and Wu defined breaks as “any period of time, formal or informal, during the workday in which work-relevant tasks are not required or expected, including but not limited to a break for lunch, coffee, personal email or socializing with co-workers, not including bathroom breaks.”


Hunter and Wu were surprised by the counterintuitive finding that afternoon is not the ideal time for a break. “We found that workers should take a break mid-morning, before lunch," Hunter tells mental_floss. "Morning breaks were the most effective at restoring resources of all breaks across the day.”

The research says that mental resources like energy, concentration, and motivation are highest in the first half of the day. Rather than waiting until lunch, when you’ve already burned through most of your brain fuel, take a short break mid-morning. Hunter and Wu found that this break brought employees back to their desks refreshed and energized, and with greater ability to endure the rest of the day.

“Your mental resources decline throughout the day,” Hunter says. “So when taking a mid-morning break you’re replenishing a small amount of lost resources better as opposed to afternoon, when it’s harder to get back to your pre-break state.”


Hunter and Wu’s results also turned up an important finding for managers. Structured breaks, or prescribed breaks—in which employees must follow someone else’s rules or expectations—are not as effective as breaks initiated by the employees themselves.

“We tested a number of assumptions, including going outside or doing something of low effort, not using a lot of physical effort, or doing something not work-related,” Hunter says. “None of those things mattered. The only two characteristics of break to replenish energy and reduce symptoms were taking break earlier in the day and doing something you prefer.” They found that the content of the break didn’t matter—whether it was exercise, eating, or simply walking away from one’s desk; what mattered was that it was “something you enjoy and choose to do.” They concluded that managers might see greater productivity and morale if they allowed their employees to take their own breaks. 


The one finding that did not surprise either researcher was the confirmation that breaks are helpful. “They did replenish energy, concentration, and motivation. They decreased symptoms of headaches, eye strain, lower back pain and so on,” Hunter says. They determined that people who took these smaller breaks had higher job satisfaction, more citizenship behavior (helping others, going above and beyond in the workplace), and lower burnout—all important criteria for employers. Hunter feels this is crucial information for managers: “There hasn’t been a lot of research about the effects of breaks besides ergonomics that confirms the notion that they are effective.”


While a lunch break is always a good idea, and there is no magic rule for the perfect number of minutes, Hunter says they did find that “what matters is how many you’re taking.” The study pointed to more frequent short breaks as being most effective at reducing negative effects and boosting mental resources. They also found that those people who take an earlier mid-morning break are more likely to take more breaks in general.

Ultimately, the study suggests that managers institute more flexibility in scheduling breaks, and allow more autonomy to employees to listen to their own cues and break when they need to. For the employee, it might just mean that at the first sign of weariness in the morning, instead of reaching for that second cup of coffee, you just need to step away from your work. 

This Just In
Yes, Parents Do Play Favorites—And Often Love Their Youngest Kid Best

If you have brothers or sisters, there was probably a point in your youth when you spent significant time bickering over—or at least privately obsessing over—whom Mom and Dad loved best. Was it the oldest sibling? The baby of the family? The seemingly forgotten middle kid?

As much as we'd like to believe that parents love all of their children equally, some parents do, apparently, love their youngest best, according to The Independent. A recent survey from the parenting website Mumsnet and its sister site, the grandparent-focused Gransnet, found that favoritism affects both parents and grandparents.

Out of 1185 parents and 1111 grandparents, 23 percent of parents and 42 percent of grandparents admitted to have a favorite out of their children or grandchildren. For parents, that tended to be the youngest—56 percent of those parents with a favorite said they preferred the baby of the family. Almost 40 percent of the grandparents with a favorite, meanwhile, preferred the oldest. Despite these numbers, half of the respondents thought having a favorite among their children and grandchildren is "awful," and the majority think it's damaging for that child's siblings.

Now, this isn't to say that youngest children experience blatant favoritism across all families. This wasn't a scientific study, and with only a few thousand users, the number of people with favorites is actually not as high as it might seem—23 percent is only around 272 parents, for instance. But other studies with a bit more scientific rigor have indicated that parents do usually have favorites among their children. In one study, 70 percent of fathers and 74 percent of mothers admitted to showing favoritism in their parenting. "Parents need to know that favoritism is normal," psychologist Ellen Weber Libby, who specializes in family dynamics, told The Wall Street Journal in 2017.

But youngest kids don't always feel the most loved. A 2005 study found that oldest children tended to feel like the preferred ones, and youngest children felt like their parents were biased toward their older siblings. Another study released in 2017 found that when youngest kids did feel like there was preferential treatment in their family, their relationships with their parents were more greatly affected than their older siblings, either for better (if they sensed they were the favorite) or for worse (if they sensed their siblings were). Feeling like the favorite or the lesser sibling didn't tend to affect older siblings' relationships with their parents.

However, the author of that study, Brigham Young University professor Alex Jensen, noted in a press release at the time that whether or not favoritism affects children tends to depend on how that favoritism is shown. "When parents are more loving and they're more supportive and consistent with all of the kids, the favoritism tends to not matter as much," he said, advising that “you need to treat them fairly, but not equally.” Sadly for those who don't feel like the golden child, a different study in 2016 suggests that there's not much you can do about it—mothers, at least, rarely change which child they favor most, even over the course of a lifetime.

[h/t The Independent]

8 Ways to Tell If Someone Is Lying to You

Sociopaths and narcissists may believe they have lying down to a science, but it turns out there are a lot of little clues that reveal even the most sophisticated level of mendacity. If you want to catch a liar in their tracks, look for the following "tells," courtesy of father and daughter Dan and Lisa Ribacoff, credibility assessment experts and advanced certified polygraph examiners based in New York. They use their skills in criminal investigations, business matters, family and relationship issues, and other areas; you might have seen them on TV. Dan is also a private investigator.

The Ribacoffs use a mix of psychology, body-language analysis, expert interview skills, and polygraph tests to determine whether someone is lying. A polygraph is a combination of medical devices that monitor any physiological changes, particularly heart rate, blood pressure, respiratory rate, and perspiration rate, that an interview subject undergoes during an interview. To begin this process, the examiner conducts a pretest interview, asking questions that should be easy for the subject to answer, such as name and age. This establishes a "baseline" of normal autonomic responses to benign questions. They may also do a "stimulation test" in which the subject is asked to lie consciously. Changes from the baseline may indicate deception—though that interpretation is up to the examiner.

The accuracy of polygraph tests has been questioned by numerous critics, including the American Psychological Association. Guilty people have passed them, and innocent people have failed them. But they're just one factor in the Ribacoffs' assessments, which are based mostly on reading people, not polygraphs.

Credibility assessment is not built upon a single tell but a combination, Dan tells Mental Floss: "There's not one verbal or non-verbal cue that is going to be the absolute indicator [of a lie]. It's a process of collecting pieces to the puzzle and putting that puzzle together."

Read on for tips to identify when someone might be lying to you.


A common habit for a person obfuscating the truth is to put physical distance between themselves and the person they're lying to, particularly if they're being questioned. "Sitting back and stretching your legs out is trying to gain distance between you and the interviewer," Dan says. Crossing one's arms, a defensive posture, is also a potential sign of duplicity.


Because lying activates the limbic system, whose goal is to keep you calm under stress, liars may have a hard time sitting still. "It's like the popcorn maker pops its lid [in your mind]," Dan says. "You do things to burn off nervous energy, like pick off imaginary lint, rub your arm—self-soothing behaviors such as moving or fidgeting." Lisa tells Mental Floss that "rubbing your neck or playing with hair" are also signs of potential deception, particularly if someone does it right after they lie to you.


man in suit avoids eye contact

Eye contact is intimate, vulnerable—and lots of liars can't hold a gaze when they're working up a mistruth. Lisa says she's found that examinees will often maintain eye contact "right up until they give the answer they're lying about." The polygraph usually reveals physiological changes that suggest the person is lying. There are other reasons that a person might not make eye contact, such as being on the autism spectrum or having certain psychological disorders, but Dan says the baseline of normal behavior is established for each individual subject. What examiners look for is a change or departure from the person's unique baseline.


A liar will not directly say they haven't done something wrong; they'll answer with a dodge, a question back at you, or a nonsequitor. Not answering directly is an immediate alarm bell to Dan. An innocent person will usually just say "no" when asked if they've done something wrong. "A guilty person has a hard time saying no," Dan says. When they don't answer the question, you might sniff out a lie.


Hand pointing

Another surefire trick of the treacherous is to over-explain. "They hard sell it to you, they go off on tangents, they ramble," Dan says. "They give you unimportant information." Or, they'll shift the blame onto someone else.

Dan, who lends his expertise to The Steve Wilkos Show, recently assessed a situation where an employee of a hotel was accused of stealing money from a hotel room. He polygraphed the entire hotel security staff, because it involved taking money from a safe that only they would have access to. When Dan questioned the accused employee, the man proclaimed his innocence and shifted the blame to his manager, Kara, and another employee named John. "When I said, 'Did you take the money?' he said, ‘I didn't take the money, it's that goddamn Kara, she's constantly favoring this one guy John because she grew up with him, and he's her boy,'" Dan recalls.

But John passed the polygraph, while the employee—who was guilty—failed it.


Liars also tend to change the story every time they tell it. In a recent case, Dan interviewed a man who was charged with stealing from his workplace and selling the items. He claimed to Dan that a security guard at the company had actually committed the crime. He even mentioned that he'd run into the security guard recently at a party. But conveniently, the man didn't know the guard's name or have his phone number. Lisa put him through a second interview, asking him the same questions, and "suddenly he knows the security guard's name and has his number," she says. This spelled a lie to Dan, and the polygraph results backed up his assessment.


"If the story doesn't make sense, it's usually not true," Dan says. In a recent case, a wife had agreed to take a polygraph at the request of her jealous husband, who had found numerous texts between her and a coworker on her phone. At first she told Dan that she and her colleague were merely friends who texted a lot, but that nothing physical happened between them. But as the polygraph went on, she added their communications went on for three years … and then confessed that they included nude photos of her.

She failed the polygraph—but then agreed to a second one, during which she denied having sexual contact with the friend. After she failed that test too, she admitted she had kissed the friend. (Even without these confessions, her body language throughout both tests was telling, Dan says; she was distraught and trembling. "I felt really bad for her," he admits. "I knew it wouldn't end well.")

"There's a saying: If it doesn't add up," Dan says, "it's usually because the truth wasn't in the equation."


Close-up of perspiring, tense, frowning young blonde woman

You breathe shallower when you lie, your face flushes, and you may begin to sweat. In addition, Dan says, "You lick your lips because digestion stops when fight or flight kicks in." Of course, these symptoms can also happen if you are genuinely afraid or have issues with authority, but according to Dan, this is where that valuable baseline of behavior helps an examiner determine if you were already nervous when you walked in.

Dan has one more tip that's useful no matter how astute your observational powers are: Get the person talking. He suggests approaching your line of questioning as an interview rather than an interrogation. "When I interview you, I let you talk," he notes. "In an interrogation, I'm doing the talking to get you to confess."


More from mental floss studios