Johari Window

This experience was quite interesting. I was surprised my friends and family thought similar things about me as I did. The characteristics I picked were adaptable
dependable, independent, reflective, and logical. I found it hard to select five to six characteristics.

I do agree with statements made in class that personality tests are mainly reductive. I felt I could relate to a lot of the other qualities but they did not define me. For example I am organized but that is not more important than dependable. I felt this test was subjective to whatever the person rating the other person felt was important. For example I have a friend who is very religious and rated me as religious. I do go to church but I would not say that is one of my top five Johari Windows. Obviously if they are filing out your Johari window they have ties to you in some way and appreciate some aspect of you. 

It was very interesting to see what everyone thought compared to what I thought. There were a lot of synonyms that described what I selected. 72% of people thought I was independent and intelligent.  No one agreed with me that I am logical. Some characteristics that surprised me were spontaneous and complex.

I feel this exercise could have gained validity if the people rating the characteristics identity was protected. I feel since the person knew their results would be apparent to all they only selected positive things and could have looked at previous ratings.

http://kevan.org/johari?view=Emily%20Killian


Spotlight 2: DARE

The DARE program was a government run program from sixth grade through high school aged children to prevent drug use. DARE stood for Drug Abuse Resistance Education Program (Cima). DARE was popular in the 1980s and 1990s (Cima).  Children who went through the DARE education program were no less likely to partake in drugs (Cima).  The DARE curriculum consisted of seventeen lessons starting at personal safety and leading to gang pressures. Science from DAREs start supported that DARE would not be successful. DARE was taught by police officers as they are more familiar with crimes.  Officers received 80 hours of training to teach techniques in classrooms (Cima). DARE focuses on building a child’s self-esteem and resisting peer pressure (Cima) First Lady Nancy Reagan helped boost the program with coining the term “just say no” (Cima).  The program was wildly popular among adults even with the multi million dollar price tag. In 1995 DARE had a cost at 200 million to 2 billion.  DARE was funded by government, state and local tax money. DARE supporters accused critics of being in cahoots with drug cartels (Cima). Politicians didn’t care about the adverse research because parents believed DARE was working and Parents vote.  DARE executives used evidence that the programs popularity equated to credibility.

DARE was also reviewed by the Government Accountability Office.  The office found that there was “no significant difference between the DARE group and the control group” (Cima) Ennett and colleagues ran a quasi-experimental research project in 1993 meaning there was no random assignment. The logistic regression with odd ratios adjusted had no significant effect on alcohol use, cigarette use, or heavy drinking (Rosenbaum). Rural students were half as likely to increase their cigarette use from pretest (Rosenbaum). Yet they were more likely to increase alcohol use upon post test (Rosenbaum).  There was no effect on urban or suburban students who received DARE training. This effect for rural students wore off after a year.  There were no long-term effects (Rosenbaum).

I feel the program was very costly. I feel like if any program costs 200 million to 2 billion dollars there should’ve been some more focus on results. I believe the program went as far as it did because of the popularity with parents and politicians. Of course, the idea of preventing drug use and building children’s self-esteem sounds like a fabulous idea. I also think the idea of police officers working in schools foster appositive impression of police in children’s mind. I feel DARE was idealistic and that is why it went so far. There was a decrease of drug use statistically in the 1990s but his wasn’t specifically focused in schools and I believe was misattributed.

As far as similar abstinence based programs I do not think they are effective I think as they are similar programs similar results were occurring. I think programs focusing on healthy decision making should be used.  I think these programs must expose children to what will happen if they partake in these activities and inform them of the risks. Then focus on the point that they can make the smart informed decision.

Bibliography

Cima, R. (n.d.). DARE: The Anti-Drug Program That Never Actually Worked. Retrieved November 04, 2017, from https://priceonomics.com/dare-the-anti-drug-program-that-never-actually/

Rosenbaum, D. (n.d.). Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE). Retrieved November 04, 2017, from https://www.crimesolutions.gov/ProgramDetails.aspx?ID=99


Week 10 first impression post

Growing up, I felt the experience in  elementary school was very positive. I mean how negative can kindergarten to fifth grade be. I did believe that the foundations in a child’s education built their character. In elementary school I remember my teachers being positive overall. I do not remember being talked down to ever. I remember being positively reinforced a lot when I got good grades. The only interaction I remember being negative is this 100 problem times table multiplication test I could never finish them all in time.  Eventually I did and it was fine. Everyone else did and then they got a giant chocolate bar.

I also feel like in school sometimes everyone is so much in competition for grades they’re not focused on actually learning. For example they just cram information into short term memory but do not actually understand what is going on. I feel like sometimes other students make it  a negative experience and make other students feel dumb. For example a lot of students are afraid to ask questions to sound dumb or they are so confused they do not even know what to ask. There is a very competitive atmosphere and its difficult to not just come to a professor during office hours instead of when its actually happening. I do think if you ask a question and a teacher replies kinda snappy or judgmental then a child will not want to ask a question again.

I also think if a child is not succeeding in a class and they continue to see poor grades they are not encouraged to keep trying for better grades. I do not think we can eliminate grades but perhaps grade off of effort and comprehension combined. Of course this is hard to measure.


Week 10 First impression

I believe that children are more violent when exposed to violence in media. I feel as if there is some knowledge that is innate and some is learned. I feel as if innate abilities are sleeping, emotions, eating. Social activities are not so innate. When I go to a new place for example central Pennsylvania 300 miles away from where I live I most definitely observed to see if there were blatant differences. Social interactions are learned. Nuances are specific to places but overall social interactions are learned. Bandura developed the social learning theory supported the claims that children learned through observation. The theory explains that children find models such as their parents, media, friends, or classmates. The social learning theory only works if the child is attentive, retains the information, can reproduce the behavior, and is motivated.

To  the best of my memory Bandura developed this theory from his experiment on the bobo doll. A bobo doll is a inflatable doll comparable to a punching bag.  First the child watched a model either express aggression by punching the bobo doll or by playing with other toys in the room. Another group had no model I do not recall their outcome.  After watching the model of their selected group (Aggression or playing with other toys) The child was left in the room. Children were aggressive towards the bobo after watching a model abuse a bobo doll. Therefore forming the social learning theory. I believe that child do learn from observation therefore increased influence of violence in any form will increase aggressive behavior. I think for the early early of my children’s childhood I would minimize video games with very graphic violence. I understand that children at a certain age understand it is a video game. I think the extent of violence could be minimized  to achieve the same climax  of the game.


Week 9 First impression post

I chose option two which is a reflection on Kelly McGonigal. McGonigal started off with a study on 30,000 Americans asking how much stress they experienced? They were also  asked if they believed stress was harmful. Then the researcher checked the death rates. People who believed stress is harmful for their health had a 43% higher chance of dying. People who did not believe stress was harmful were least likely to die. 20,000 people died from stress  according to McGonigal.  That would mean that changing what you think about stress would make you healthier. Then McGonigal explains the research that if you rethink your biological reaction to stress as this is my body preparing me for a situation. The heart pumping fast is to get more oxygen to your brain. Then she moves on to Oxycontin  explaining it is just as a stress response as your heart pumping. Oxycontin makes sure you tell people you and get that support in stressful situations. Oxycontin helps repair your heart in social situations. A person then releases more Oxycontin when people interact with people. Caring for others can counteract the stress.

I think the speaker is credible because scientifically that is sound. She is a Professor at Stanford so that also heightens her credibility.  I agree with her also because physiologically there are a lot of examples where a persons mindset changes the outcome of an event. For example if you believe you cannot do something you automatically shut down or or subconsciously do not try as hard. In my life I feel this way about Chemistry I must change my mindset about it. I do not hate chemistry it is not too hard and then i can focus. I could implement this into my life by simply believing that the Adrenalin response  at exam time is to help me preform at my prime. I can also manipulate Oxycontin to repair my heart as Mcgonigal suggested.


Week 8 First Impression- Emotion

Dan Gilbert suggests that the pre-frontal cortex is the justification for the advancements of the human mind. This is because humans can simulate situations. The impact bias suggests that different impacts are less severe or have less impact then they do. The fact that astonished me was that i it happened more that 3 months ago than it has no impact. Humans synthesize happiness. Synthesized happiness is what we get when we do not get what we wanted Natural happiness what we get when we get what we wanted. People do not know they synthesize happiness and this “can be a supreme disadvantage”. The irreversible term is not conducive to the synthesis of happiness. This is because happiness does not work when the student is killing themselves over the choice instead of just being content with what they have.  If someone is always worrying about their own mistakes then they are not content. They cannot learn. Gilbert claims we can manufacture happiness if we simply allow ourselves to be.

I believe this is very true. This perspective is very true. I always stress so much. I stress over things for example in chemistry if I do not have exactly the grade I want I am not happy. Where Gilbert is correct if I am trying my best this is not the end of the world. IN the long term being grateful for all the things you do have is much more important than focusing on the one thing you do not.

 


Week 7 First Impression- Sleep

I chose option one because I though it would be more interesting. Russell Foster’s three prominent arguments are restoration, energy conservation, brain possessing an memory conservation.

Restoration means that when we are asleep everything we use during the day we need to recover. This theory goes in and out of “style” and is in style right now.  The energy conservation Idea is not very good because the difference between calories is 10  between being awake and asleep. This is not a very valid theory. Memory processing is that when you are asleep the mind needs to sort the memories and process the days memories. The mind is three fold more effective after sleeping. Again there is not one proven reason just evidence that sleep deprivation reduces creativity and concentration. I was also particularly surprised by the fact that Ghrelin is produced if you have 5 hours of sleep of less a night. Ghrelin increases appetite.

I think the restoration and the memory conservation theories make sense. The restoration theory is logical because the brain uses a lot of energy. Recovery and rest are necessary for any muscle.

The memory processing approach argues that during the day your mind takes in so much that it needs time to sort whats important. It seems logical to me that during the night your brain would have all its energy to commit to sort through the vast amount of information. Some memories go to long term memory. The encoding process allows for later retrieval. In conclusion there is no one theory.


Divorce’s impact on Children

Divorce in the US is very prevalent currently with the rates at 46.37% (National Marriage and Divorce Rate Trends) with data gathered by census. With this high of divorce rates  in America there have been rumors of wrecked children but what actually is the long-term effect of Divorce. One of the major factors during a divorce is the impact on the children. Parents fret over long term damage to their children such as fearing long term relationships and marriage.

In the first argument stating divorce is not harmful for children was found in an article titled “Is Divorce Bad for Children the Scientific American.” This article argued that divorce is not negative for children long term (Lilienfeld, Arkowitz).   In 2002 psychologist Hetherington at the University of Virginia concluded that most children experience temporarily negative effects from divorce (Lilienfeld, Arkowitz). These feelings usually stop after a year. Only a minority of kids suffer longer. Overall most children are not affected in the long term and thrive (Lilienfeld, Arkowitz). In 2001 Amato from Pennsylvania State University, studied the possible effects on children several years after a divorce (Lilienfeld, Arkowitz). He studied this by comparing a control of children with married parents and children from divorced parents (Lilienfeld, Arkowitz). This study compared their academic achievement, emotional and behavior problems, delinquency, and relationships (Lilienfeld, Arkowitz). There was little to no significant difference in results supporting the claim Divorce does not negatively impact children in the long term.

In Berlins’s Article supporting divorce doesn’t negatively impact children. The study found that there were many different factors such as impact, violence, employment and support (Berlin). The Study suggested that in average middle class white family divorce doesn’t impact the children negatively in the long term. This is because they have enough support and economic wellbeing.

The argument that divorce negatively impacts children focuses on the short-term effect mainly (Gross). This article specifically was published by the Huffington post focuses on the impacts by age. Younger children are confused and older children are still egocentric and cannot imagine the idea of their parents living apart (Gross).  The article doesn’t focus on after the separation. Anyone no matter the age feels uprooted moving. The change in routine is difficult for children.

The next article is about the impact of family structure on health of children by the National Center of Biotechnology. This article argues by three decades of research that children “married, biological parents consistently have better physical, emotional, and academic well-being” (Anderson).   The only exception to this rule was when violence was involved. The study showed that the average age of women getting married increased and the rate of marriages decreased (Anderson). The implications of the study suggest that the emotional instability.  The long-term argument argued that the emotional implications are worse because of relationship with parents (Anderson).

In my experience, I believe divorce is in the long term is not negative. In the short term I do believe it is very stressful even as an adult.  Currently my family is moving and my fifteen-year-old sister is moving schools. I agree with Berlins perspective that each family is different and has different factors such as economics and emotional support. I also agree with Gross’s stance that the age of children changes their interpretation. In conclusion there are many factors and in short term it is negative because of change of routine. In the long term the majority of children adjust.

Bibliography

Anderson, Jane. “The impact of family structure on the health of children: Effects of divorce.” The Linacre Quarterly, Maney Publishing, Nov. 2014, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4240051/.

Berlin, Gordon Anonymous. “The Effects of Marriage and Divorce on Families and Children.” Mdrc, 24 Apr. 2017, http://www.mdrc.org/publication/effects-marriage-and-divorce-families-and-children.

Gross, Dr. Gail. “The Impact of Divorce on Children of Different Ages.” The Huffington Post, TheHuffingtonPost.com, 12 Mar. 2015, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-gail-gross/the-impact-of-divorce-on-children-of-different-ages_b_6820636.html.

Lilienfeld, Hal Arkowitz Scott O. “Is Divorce Bad for Children?” Scientific American, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-divorce-bad-for-children/.

“National Marriage and Divorce Rate Trends.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 23 Nov. 2015, http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/marriage_divorce_tables.htm.

 


Week 6 First Impression

I chose option two on addiction counseling styles. Addiction counseling is an interesting topic. Before this post I had not thought much on the topic. I was aware of programs such as alcoholics anonymous but unaware of alternatives. I also was aware of the abstinence program. For example in hard drugs this is almost impossible to simply stop or else this wouldn’t be addiction. In the New Hope article address the differences in counseling styles. New hope does explain the steps to have the patient cognitively understand the addiction. It is a disease. Yet I feel the the process is black and white and very cut and dry. If a person is addicted telling them to stop and never be around it or think about it ever is a lifestyle and  neuro-chemical change. They  know where and who to get these substances from. They may be friends or family with people who partake in these activities. The AA model does allow for  relapses.  The harm reduction model gradually encourages addicts to go towards healthier decisions as this process isn’t all at once. When addicts go to prison and then are forced to quit what psychologically changes prisoners to not want to do drugs besides the chemical reason. There is no program  but gradually weening along with counseling would enable them to do that. When the removing addict gets out of prison there needs to be knowledge in place. In contrast if a loved one was addicted I think the AA approach would be more appealing as the emotional response would scare me to knowingly allow them to continue substance abuse even if it was in a weening fashion.

New Hope Recovery Center . “Addiction Counseling: Abstinence Versus Harm Reduction.” New Hope Recovery Center, 24 July 2014,  Accessed 2 Oct. 2017.


Week 5 First Impression – Memory

Not all memories are created equal because of memory decay.  To the best of my understanding memories are on circuits. Memories are created by reoccurring patterns. These patterns are electrical impulses powered by imbalanced in ions? Not quite sure. When we are learning or creating a long term memory we strengthen these connections. I am not sure exactly how my suspicion is rerunning the memory through to strengthen recall. Then perhaps more myelin is applied I think this would just speed up the recall. Memories can be short term or long term. These circuits are rewired so to speak. Memories are forgotten biologically it can be hypothesized. This could be evolutionary. If every little detail was remembered then there would never be a new experience. Memories also are not completely unbiased memories are stronger than others because cause of timing. I believe many people have stronger memories than others are a common life changing event  for example 9/11 was a communal life changing event. Everyone’s life is very unique but this was common group for Americans. People from a certain age all remember 9/11 because this was uncommon event. If you were in college classes were dismissed. My family for example lived on a military base and and went to the beach that day then we could not return to our house. Everyone can immediately recall where they were because it changed daily activities and was unfathomable. The event itself is unforgettable and changed united states policy. Huge events share memories. This is called light bulb memories.