Showing posts with label Introduction to Psychology I. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Introduction to Psychology I. Show all posts

Sunday, December 11, 2011

Modern Views of Depression


Modern Views of Depression

            Sarah’s depression could be caused by several different reasons. There are five modern views of psychology. The neuroscience view says that there is a biological reason for Sarah’s depression. Her depression may be related to an abnormality in her brain structure. Another biological reason for depression may be heredity. The cognitive view says that Sarah is responding to something around her. She has viewed and understood something around her and as a reaction, took on the behaviors listed. The behavioral view states that something in Sarah’s observable behavior will explain why she is feeling this way. The humanistic view says that Sarah controls her feelings and she has chosen to feel this way (free-will). The psychodynamic view states that Sarah’s unconscious determines her depression. Sarah has no control over her feelings.

Plagiarism:
Using someone else's work without giving proper credit, is plagiarism. If you use my work, please reference it.

Friday, October 14, 2011

The Inaccuracy of Eyewitness Testimony


       Eyewitness testimony is used every day in court cases across the country. But, how reliable is eyewitness testimony when it comes to the aspects of a person’s memory? Quoting Elizabeth Loftus, “Memories are not fixed.” This means that memories can be changed, lost and created. Eyewitnesses tend to remember major details, but memory of minor details is low. Eyewitnesses who perceive themselves as objective have more confidence in their testimony. However, confidence is not the same as accuracy.

Many factors can account for a person’s eyewitness testimony to be inaccurate. One such example is when a weapon is used in the crime being committed. Some studies show that a witness’ attention may be more on the weapon rather than the details of the crime and the perpetrator. A witness may be less likely to recall the events accurately. Another factor concerns how a police line – up is conducted. Some research suggests first having the witness describe the perpetrator and then look through photos matching that description rather than looking through photos first. Some also believe that errors are less likely if members of a line – up are viewed one after another rather than all together. However, although the “show – up” method (seeing one suspect at a time) results in fewer misidentifications, it is less likely to make a positive identification. A third factor that can affect eyewitness testimony is how a witness is questioned. Specific wording by police officers or attorneys can affect how a witness recalls information. Some researchers suggest that neutral questions be asked. Suggestive techniques can result to mistaken memories. These mistaken memories can even be detailed if the techniques are suggestive enough. Another study reports that race could even play a role in inaccurate eyewitness testimony. This study reported that it is 15% more likely that a witness identify the wrong person if the perpetrator’s race was different than their own.
           
       Witnesses can have false memories. There are several reasons this can happen. One reason was talked about previously - suggestive techniques. Another reason is the misinformation effect. This occurs when misleading information is supplied after the event and results in false recollections of the actual event. Also, each time a witness recounts testimony, they become more likely to change their testimony in response to misinformation. Some “recovered memories”, which are most likely to be false memories, are usually uncovered by hypnosis or guided imagery. Hypnosis does not improve accuracy of memory. Having a witness, or victim, imagine an experience as if it happened, can lead them to believe it did happen.  An eyewitness can also pick up information from other sources, such as the media or idle gossip. They can use what they hear to create false memories of an event. Children as witnesses can also contribute to the false memory scenario. Children’s memories can be highly affected by others especially when the event is highly stressful or emotional. Witnesses talking to one another before police can jumble up memories as well.

            The inaccuracy of eyewitness testimony can have some implications on our society. Wrong testimony can lead to the wrong person being convicted of a crime. This means an innocent person could spend years in prison for a crime they didn’t commit. The other part of this implication is that while an innocent person is jailed, the true guilty person is still free. He could then commit crimes again. This is also an implication, as our tax dollars are paying for an innocent person to be jailed. There could also be lawsuits to be paid if it is revealed that the person was innocent and jailed. Also, inaccurate testimony could let a guilty person go free. More state money could be spent trying to convict the person in some other way. These are all severe implications for our society.

 After conducting my research, my conclusion is that eyewitness testimony is not always accurate and can in many times be wrong. I personally feel that a court case should not rest solely on eyewitness testimony but should also be based on forensic evidence.


References
Renner, T., Morrissey, J., Mae, L., Feldman, R.S. & Majors, M. (2011) Psychsmart. New            
    York, NY: The McGraw – Hill Companies, Inc. (pp. 150 – 153)

Wood, S. E., Wood, E. G., & Boyd, D. (2011) The World of Psychology (7th ed.).       Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc. (pp. 200 – 202)

University of Washington Faculty. (2003) Our changeable Memories: legal and practical
    Implications. Loftus, E. retrieved from 
    http://faculty.washington.edu/eloftus/Articles/2003Nature.pdf

Plagiarism:
Using someone else's work without giving proper credit, is plagiarism. If you use my work, please reference it.

Operant Conditioning As Observed At Chuck E. Cheese


For two hours, I observed parents and children in a “natural” setting – a child themed restaurant including pizza, games, toys and play area. I set out to observe families to see how they offered reinforcement and/or punishment to their children and what brought caused the parents to offer the reinforcement or punishment. I chose Chuck E. Cheese because I thought it would be a great place to observe children and their parents. The one chose was a large building with lots of space, games and play areas.

Place of Observation:
Chuck E. Cheese
6637 Ritchie Highway
Glen Burnie, Maryland 21060

Date and Time:
Saturday, October 8, 2011
4:00 – 6:00 pm

Number of Families Studied:
4
(8 adults, 7 children)




Family #1
Family #1 consisted of two parents and two children. This family was African – American. The parents appeared to be in their mid 30’s. The two children were both girls and appeared to be between 8 and 10 years of age. This family appeared to be close. The parents were observed actively playing with the children. I learned that this trip to Chuck E. Cheese was a reward for the girls behaving at the dentist office the day before. This is an example of positive reinforcement. The desired behavior {girls behaving at dentist} was met with a reward {trip to Chuck E. Cheese}.

Family #2
Family #2 consisted of two parents and one child. The family was Asian – American. The parents appeared to be in their early 30’s. The one child, a boy, appeared to be around 6 years old. The parents seemed more involved in their own conversation than in their son’s behavior. The boy ran around for several minutes hitting other children in the establishment before the parents took action. The father grabbed the boy by the arm, yelled at him sternly to behave and then sat the boy in the booth for 6 minutes before allowing him to play again. The little boy appeared to have learned his lesson for the moment as he behaved the rest of the time they were there. This is an example of negative punishment. There was a removal of something pleasant {playing} as a result of undesired behavior {hitting children}.

Family #3
Family #3 consisted of two parents and three children. The family was Caucasian. The parents appeared to be in their early – mid 30’s. There were two boys, appearing to be around 4 and 10. The third child was a girl, around age 6. This family also appeared close. They were talking during dinner and laughing and smiling. After eating, the kids were given their tokens to go play games. The youngest boy snatched some tokens out of his sister’s cup. The father immediately popped the boy’s hand, firmly but not hard. He explained to the boy that taking the tokens from someone was wrong. He instructed the boy to give the tokens back to his sister as well as a couple from his own cup as punishment.
I think this situation resembled both positive punishment and negative punishment. I think it is positive punishment as an unpleasant stimulus {having hand popped} was added due to an undesired behavior {taking tokens}. I think it is negative punishment because there was a removal of something pleasant {the boy’s tokens} due to an undesired behavior {taking tokens}.

Family #4
Family #4 consisted of two parents and one child. The family was bi – racial. The parents appeared to be in their mid 20’s. The little girl appeared to be around 3 - 4 years old. The little girl was well – behaved until the Chuck E. Cheese character made an appearance. The little girl got scared of it and hit it out of fear. The father became angry and popped the little girl’s butt. The family then left the establishment.
I also think these actions resembled positive punishment and negative punishment. The undesired behavior {hitting the mouse mascot} was met with an unpleasant stimulus {spanked}. Also, the undesired behavior {hitting the mouse} was met with the removal of something pleasant {leaving the establishment}.

Comments
I’m assuming (based on observation) that this technique is used frequently with Family #1. The girls seem well – behaved and respect their parents. I think that Family #2 should have been paying more attention to their son and punished him sooner. To me, Family #3’s techniques did not seem too drastic. I was most surprised by Family #4’s actions. The little girl was terrified of the mouse and I feel she hit it out of fear and instinct. I hope that the parents explain to her how to handle fear more appropriately.

Plagiarism:
Using someone else's work without giving proper credit, is plagiarism. If you use my work, please reference it.

Schedules of Reinforcement


Continuous Reinforcement Schedule
Example: Giving my daughter money for each correct math problem on her test
Advantages: My daughter will strive to do well in math.
Disadvantages: She may come to expect money for each correct answer in everything.

Fixed Interval Schedule
Example: Receiving salary pay at a job rather than hourly pay
Advantages: I will know how much I will receive on each pay day and I can budget around it.
Disadvantages: There is no incentive for me to work harder because I will be receiving the same pay no matter how many hours I work.

Fixed Ratio Schedule
Example: I receive a $25 bonus for every 10th sale I make as a salesperson.
Advantages: I have an incentive to sell more and push sales.
Disadvantages: Disappointment if I do not achieve enough sales.

Variable Ratio Schedule
Example: Winning money from a slot machine.
Advantages: I will be winning money.
Disadvantages: I will spend more money playing the slots because I will not know which time I will win.

Plagiarism:
Using someone else's work without giving proper credit, is plagiarism. If you use my work, please reference it.

Friday, October 7, 2011

Nature Vs Nurture


       The debate of nature and nurture on behavior has been debated since classical Greek times. Anne Anastasi (1958) believed that the proper question for this debate should not have been which of the two causes behavior or how much of each affects behavior. Instead, she believed that the question asked should have been “How do nature and nurture interact to produce development.” (Miller, 2002)

            Developmental psychologists have been split on this debate for decades. Some psychologists believe that genetic factors provide the potential for some behaviors. Other psychologists believe it is environmental factors that play a large role in enable people’s behavior. The newest stance of psychologists is an “interactionist position”, meaning it is a combination of heredity and environmental factors that contribute to a person’s behavior. It is believed that the two factors, heredity and environment, are “inextricably intertwined” and they are both fully involved in development (Miller, 2002)

            There are several developmental theories. Some say basic psychological principles of learning and stress on those are the biggest factor to our development. Others believe it is the role of the environment that most influences our development. Then, there is a third group that believes our physiological makeup is the biggest influence.

            A study was conducted in 1991 by Bailey and Pillard to determine the link between homosexuality, genetics, and environment. In this study, they studied homosexual males with monozygotic co-twins, dizygotic co-twins or adoptive brothers (Bailey & Pillard, 1991, Dec; 48(12)) Their results revealed that 52% of the monozygotic twins, 22% of dizygotic twins and 11% of adoptive brothers were homosexuals. Another 1991 study, this one conducted by LeVay, studied the volume of 4 cell groups in the anterior hypothalamus of the brain in three categories of people in the postmortem – women, presumed heterosexual males and homosexual males. The results from this study suggested that sexual orientation had a biological influence.  (Levay, 1991 Aug 30;253(5023)

            No one person grows up free of environmental influences. No one develops without being affected by their genetic composition. Perhaps Canadian psychologist Donald O. Webb said it best – behavior is determined 100% by heredity AND 100% by environment.

Works Cited

Bailey, J., & Pillard, R. (1991, Dec; 48(12)). A Genetic Study of Male Sexual Orientation. Journal of General Psychiatry , 10890- 96.

Levay, S. (1991 Aug 30;253(5023). A Difference in Hypothalamic Structure Between Heterosexual and Homosexual Men. Science , 1034-7.

Miller, P. (2002). Theories of Developmental Psychology (4th ed). New York, NY: Worth Publishers.

Renner, T., Morrissey, J., Mae, L., Feldman, R., & Majors, M. (2011). Psychsmart. New York, NY: The McGraw - Hill Companies, Inc.



Plagiarism:
Using someone else's work without giving proper credit, is plagiarism. If you use my work, please reference it. 



Tuesday, April 26, 2011

Discussing Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development


            Jean Piaget was a Swiss psychologist born in 1896 and died in 1980. He did research for a branch of psychology that he called “Genetic Epistemology”. Genetic, in the sense that Piaget used it, meant “development or emergence”. (Miller, 2002) Epistemology means the study of knowledge. Piaget developed one of the most widely known theories of cognitive development in developmental psychology.

            Piaget was working on the standardization of intelligence tests when he noticed a couple of things. He noted that the children’s incorrect answers were more informative than the correct answers. He concluded that the same mistakes were made by children of approximately the same age. He also noted that the kind of mistakes made by children of one age were qualitively different from the kinds made by other ages. (Hergenhahn & Olson, 2001) Piaget believed that humans learn through stages. He then began research in order to study these stages. His primary method was to first observe children in their natural settings, then form hypotheses about their behavior and finally to devise problems to test his hypotheses. (Wood, Wood, & Boyd, 2011) He and his assistants then asked these problems, as questions, to children to gauge their answers and if they were right or wrong. The result of his research was that human logical thinking did develop in a fixed sequence.  He also concluded that children’s knowledge of the world changed as their cognitive system developed. (Miller, 2002)

           Piaget believed that the way a human’s knowledge developed was through organization. Organization is a mental process that uses specific experiences to make inferences that can be generalized to new experiences. (Wood, Wood, & Boyd, 2011) Piaget also believed that people construct their knowledge by taking an active role in the process. According to Piaget, we develop schemes, or an organized pattern of behavior, as a result of cognitive learning. The main task in cognitive development is the refinement of our schemes. Piaget’s theory also states that we use such processes as assimilation (where new objects, information, experiences are incorporated into what we already know), equilibration (motivates humans to keep a scheme in balance with reality), and accommodation (modifying existing schemes and crating new ones to incorporate new information, events, etc) Piaget’s theory also says that accommodation is not the end of the learning process. Children repeat the processes with each new object until they create a new set of working rules for it.

            Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development consists of four stages: Sensorimotor, Preoperational, Concrete Operational and Formal Operational. A child develops better schemes with each stage. Each stage differs in quantity of information acquired as well as in quality of knowledge and understanding. (Renner, Morrissey, Mae, Feldman, & Majors, 2011) Movement from one stage to the next occurred when an appropriate level of maturation was achieved and when exposed to relevant types of experiences. There were five characteristics of Piaget’s stage theory (Miller, 2002): 1) A stage is a structured whole in a state of equilibrium, 2) Each stage derives from the previous stage, incorporates and transforms that stage and prepares for the next, 3) The stages follow an invariant sequence, 4) Stages are universal, and 5) Each stage includes a coming – into – being and a being.

            The first stage in Piaget’s theory is the sensorimotor stage. This stage is usually from birth until 2 years of age. In this stage, the infant understands the world through their senses and motor activities. During this stage, there is an absence of language. It has been noted that “fantastic development” takes place during this stage. (Malerstein & Ahern, 1979) This stage is broken down into six sub-stages to accommodate this development. (Miller, 2002) The first of these sub-stages is the Modification of Reflexes. During this stage, babies strengthen, generalize and differentiate behaviors that began as reflexes. The second sub – stage is the Primary Circular Reaction stage. This sub – stage has the most widespread and rapid development of schemes. This is because primary circular reactions, or a behavior that focuses on the body rather than an object that is repeated over and over again) now occur. Sub – stage number three is the Secondary Circular Reaction stage. These reactions are centered on the external world rather than the self. The fourth sub – stage is the Coordination of Secondary Schemes stage. This stage includes babies learning the means – end behavior. They begin learning what to do to get what they want. The fifth sub – stage is the Tertiary Circular Reactions stage. In this stage, babies work through trial and error to expand on the means – end behavior. The final stage in the Sensorimotor Stage is the Invention of New Means through Mental Combinations stage. This is the stage where babies begin to use mental symbols to represent objects and events. Some behaviors a baby uses during the sensorimotor stage are sucking, touching, chewing, shaking and manipulating objects. The end of this stage is marked by the infant learning object permanence, the realization that objects and people continue to exist even when they are out of sight.

            The second stage of Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development is the Preoperational Stage. This stage lasts from around age two until age six. During this stage, a child has the ability to mentally represent objects making it possible to construct a scheme for the idea that one thing can stand for another (symbolic or semiotic function). This is a stage that is primarily focused on language. However, during this stage, the ability to use logic is still restricted. They cannot perform mental operations that follow logical rules. Children have difficulty with this because of centration (focusing on one dimension). Children exhibit egocentrism (believing that everyone around them feels, sees, knows what they know). Children also have animistic thinking where they believe that inanimate objects are alive. The Preoperational Stage has two subdivisions. (Hergenhahn & Olson, 2001) They are the Preconceptual Thinking stage and the Period of Intuitive Thought stage. In the Preconceptual Thinking stage is where the basic concept thinking begins forming. In the Period of intuitive Thought stage, a child can solve problems based on intuition rather than by a logic rule. The end of this stage is marked by a shift in play preferences that includes pretending. A child also realizes at the end of this stage that putting on a mask or a costume does not change their identity.

            The third stage of Piaget’s theory is the Concrete Operational Stage. This stage usually lasts from age six to age eleven or twelve. Children gradually develop schemes that allow them to focus on two dimensions at the same time. Children also develop reversibility, the fact that only the appearance of an object has been changed and it can be returned to its original state. They also develop conservation (the knowledge that quantity is unrelated to the arrangement and physical appearance of objects). Children have developed more logic skills in this stage. They can now apply logic to real world problems, but still cannot think logically about hypothetical or abstract problems. According to Piaget, a child moves out of this stage and into the final one when they can respond correctly to hypothetical problems.

            The final stage of Piaget’s theory is the Formal Operational Stage. This stage usually begins around age eleven or twelve and goes beyond. During this stage, humans can construct a scheme that allows them to coordinate present realities with other possible realities. (Wood, Wood, & Boyd, 2011) The logical thinking skills have now expanded to include abstract problems and hypothetical situations. Although this stage occurs during the teen years, some adults rarely use it. (Renner, Morrissey, Mae, Feldman, & Majors, 2011) Some studies say that some individuals never even reach this stage. Most studies reveal that only 40 to 60% of college students and adults fully reach it. Others studies estimate as low as 25%. Some behaviors in this stage include naïve idealism (making elaborate plans), adolescent egocentrism (belief that all the focus is on them), imaginary audience (the audience that is always focused on them), and personal fable (believing that they are so unique that no one has ever felt as they have).

            Some believe that there has been no other theory of cognitive development as influential as Piaget’s. His problems have been used by thousands of developmental psychologists around the world. (Wood, Wood, & Boyd, 2011) Although his stages have been challenged, they are an accurate account of age related changes in relation to cognitive development. Piaget himself claims he is one of the primary revisionists of his theory. He made changes over the years in relation to developmental change and equilibration. Although some contemporary theorists claim that stage theories are not accurate in predicting a child’s cognitive behavior, Piaget’s theory is regarded as one of the most comprehensive cognitive development theories.

References


Courage, M., & Howe, M. (2002). From Infant to Child: The Dynamics of Cognitive Change in the Second Year of Life. Psychological Bulletin , 250 - 277.

Hergenhahn, B., & Olson, M. (2001). Introduction to Theories of Learning (6th ed). Saddle River, NJ: Prentice - Hall, Inc.

Malerstein, A., & Ahern, M. (1979). Piaget's Stages of Cognitive Development and Adult Character Structure. American Journal of Psychotherapy , 107-118.

Miller, P. (2002). Theories of Developmental Psychology (4th ed). New York, NY: Worth Publishers.
Renner, T., Morrissey, J., Mae, L., Feldman, R., & Majors, M. (2011). Psychsmart. New York, NY: The McGraw - Hill Companies, Inc.

Wood, S., Wood, E., & Boyd, D. (2011). The World of Psychology (7th ed). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.


.Plagiarism:
Using someone else's work without giving proper credit, is plagiarism. If you use my work, please reference it.