For this week’s first impression I decided to do the second option that discusses how we are able to recover certain memories. The question asks,” Why do you think some memories are so much stronger than others?”
In my personal opinion, I feel that memories that come to us stronger than others are ones that impacted us the most in different ways. for example, most people can remember exactly what they were doing when 9/11 was happening because its impact was so strong and emotional it gave them a reason to remember. Where some memories are maybe not as significant or carry heavy emotion. Maybe a way to study this is to randomly select a certain amount of people and all survey them on how 9/11 impacted them or another significant memory personal to their own life and see what their responses are, and maybe have the rate how strong they feel that memory is. This study could then determine how powerful that certain event was to them.
For this weeks first impression post, I decided to chose option #2, which discusses the ongoing debate about increase gun violence in first-person video games. I actually have a decent amount of personal experience with video games, I have played a decent amount of call of duty in my free time, along with my friends guy-friends also playing lots of “violent” video games before. But I mainly just stuck to games like Sims or Mario Kart. However, as there is a recent increase in mass shootings and gun violence it has made me reconsider my very strong consensus of this debate.
I feel as if video games are not the complete connection to one’s reason to commit such a crime. I believe that there are very many other contributing factors that push an individual or group to do this, such as a mental health issue, how they were raised, or peer pressure perhaps.
I believe that it is a very bombastic reason to completely ban violent video games. there is no real, significant or valid evidence that supports this case. I think that more research and studies need to be conducted in order to make this type of drastic change. I also feel that it is unrealistic to think that video game companies would just completely stop creating games without weapons, gore, and so on. They should definitely be aware of how far they are taking their graphics but should not totally shut their ideas down.
For this week’s first impression post, I decided to watch the TED talk called “Exploring the mind of a killer”, by Jim Fallon.
The reason I watched this TED talk was because I am very intrigued by this specific topic and I personally love watching Netflix shows/documentaries about this type of stuff. I have always pondered if the minds of those who kill have always been off. is it a psychological issue? or maybe, a biological issue? does it have to the with the brain structure or a personality/social issue. All questions that I have put deep thought into.
The TED talk began with Fallon talking about a past experimentation that he performed with psychopathic killers. He used their brain to record specific data, along with their thoughts. He discussed with his results that there is precise brain damage to those who kill. He went on to discuss about a certain gene that he believes is passed down through heredity for violence, which then led to him to discussing what his own family history is like and if there were any possibilities there.He even brought up that there was 7 men on death row on his own fathers side.
What I found to be the most interesting was how he brought up the gender of most murders are usually male, and not female. I found that to be an interesting statistic and the biological view behind it to be even more fascinating.
I felt that Jim Fallon is a very trust worthy source. All his claims had evidence that seemed very factual. He also stated that he is a professor and as a degree in neuroscience, which means that he definitely has a lot of knowledge about this topic. He talked about his own personal research on brain structure and CAT scans (in general and on his own family).
A research idea that I would do based off of this TED talk would be looking at the their past, how they grew up and how they were raised. if they were bullied, socially awkward, or maybe had a lot of friends. I feel that a person’s past definitely effects how they act in the future. I would maybe give them all a survey to fill out that talks about their past and then maybe do multiple sessions where I go in and talk to them about to see their body language, the way they talk about it etc. I think another great research topic would be if serial & psychopathic killers could be integrated back into society after receiving their punishments. I think I would do a longitudinal study of maybe 3-5 specific killers.
I strongly believe that the “best way” to raise a child all depends on you, and your significant others personal preference. I feel that everyone has their own thoughts, beliefs and ideals on how they should raise their own children. In my opinion, I feel that the most efficient way is to be laid back but also have reprimands when necessary. From observations, I have noticed that most kids who have the overprotective; “helicopter parents” have been known to act out more, especially once they can not be supervised by the parents 24/7. A great example is when those types of kids go onto college, and the parents can not control what they do, 99% of those kids are known to go wild and completely reckless. So, I feel that as long as their is some rules and regulations, but not over the top, the child will be honest, and well behaved and then end up as a happy, healthy and productive member of society.
I feel as if I took in observations of how my own parents raised me and found myself commonly saying to my friends things like ,”My parents would never let me do that” or ” My parents would kill me if I ever said or did this”. So, I feel that most people take what they have experienced into consideration when they are raising their own children.
For my first impression post, I decided to choose the second option which involved choosing a video that was done by the popular group “The Myth busters”. The video that I decided on was ‘Is Talking on the Phone While Driving as Dangerous as Driving Drunk?’. What they did to test if this question was plausible, they had two people would drive a certain course that had multiple different obstacles placed on the track, and the first time they went through it, they completed it without any distractions. Then, they drove that same course and completed it with the distraction of talking on the phone but, that person was giving them with different tasks to complete while also trying to drive. For the third and final course, the testers consumed a distinct amount of alcohol and attempted to complete the course. Each time they completed the course there was a driving instructor that accompanied them in the car that made the judgment if they passed or failed the test.
Before watching the video, I was under the strong assumption that obviously driving under the influence would be a lot worse than just talking on the phone. Though, the experiment exemplified that both of the test subjects impacted the drivers ability to complete the course in a positive manner (both of them failed the test when on the phone and under the consummation of alcohol). The results showed that both failed the test by a greater amount while on the phone, and not just intoxicated, which was totally shocking to me. Yet, I did expect both to be significantly bad, I did not expect them to be so far off. I feel that the results of the experiment could have been skewed due to the setup of the experiment, but that can be easily fixed if the experiment were to be repeated.
Two main issues that I noticed with this experiment all around was the fact that there were only two test subjects, everyone knows that in order for the experiment to get more accurate results, you need to have multiple test subjects and multiple tests in general. The more amount of tests with more amount of test subjects will allow the experiment to have a better chance at accuracy. Another issue with this experiment is that I feel there is a drastic difference between test subjects. whether it be gender, weight, and even just one’s mind and body. Everyone is very unique in their own way, certain things like completing a task and drinking an amount of alcohol can impair people in different ways, so I feel that depending on what the test subjects are could have skewed the results. Which is another great example of why you need multiple trials in an experiment.
Hi everyone! My name is Maddie Lazzelle, and I am from Hanover, Pennsylvania. I am a first year Biology with an Allied Health concentration major and a Cognitive Science and Philosophy minor!
I decided to take this class because not only is it required for my major, but I also took AP Psychology in high school and did extremely well, which encouraged me to further my studies in this general direction. Overall, I would say I have average experience with psychology.
When I hear the word “psychology” I immediately think about the brain and how it works as one large unit, though it is brought together by many smaller parts that are very complex and unique. After graduation, I plan on attending PA school with the hopes in becoming a Physicians Assistant with a specialization in neurology. So, the brain is what fascinates me the most about psychology. I also associate psychology with how an individual may analyze ones behavior, reactions, emotions, etc.
Three topics on the syllabus that sparked my interest are Classifying Mental Illness, Emotion, and Stress/Coping with Stress. All these topics seem very unique and seem very interesting. Especially the Coping with Stress because personally, I am always a very stressed individual. So, it will be interesting to see what connections I can make while learning the information.
Three topics that do not interest me as much are the Scientific Method, Chemicals & Motivation. All are things that I have learned so many times so, at this point these topics are getting very redundant.
By the end of the semester, I want to be able to answer the question: “How will advancements in the Psychology field effect the future?”