Chap. 4 – Impression

--Original published at Kealey's PSY105 Blog

It is interesting examining how the psychological landscape of the human mind changes in a lifetime. Many factors assist in uniquely developing the mind of an individual, and each individual transitions through the psychological states at times dependent on their biological make-up and life experiences. The following is my interpretation of the eight psychological stages of life:

Stage 1: Infancy (Birth – 2 years)

The psychological state of an infant is limited to basic survival instincts and the dependency to be cared for. This is a rapid stage of experiencing and processing completely new stimuli, including sensory information such as sights and sounds.

Stage 2: Early Childhood (2 years – 4 years)

This is when children are still heavily dependent upon their caretakers for survival. They do not understand societal rules. They can identify the sensory information they experience and associate this information with past experiences to infer meaning. Early language development is present.

Stage 3: Mid Childhood (4 years – 9 years)

Children can make the association between words and meaning. They have developed many self-sufficient tendencies and understand some social trends. They begin to develop many relationships with peers, rather than just caretakers. They are curious, and their minds are flexible enough to be taught in a learning environment.

Stage 4: Late Childhood (10 years – 13 years)

Children begin displaying signs of independence and uniqueness in personality. They question often and are easily taught new information. They have close relationships with peers and find a sense of individuality.

Stage 5: Puberty (13 years – 16 years)

At this stage, children experience angst. They want independence but are not usually able to be completely self-sufficient without direction. They begin to experience sexual desires. They are often faced with the difficulty of discovering where they fit in to society.

Stage 6: Early Adulthood (17 years – 25 years)

Adults are completely self-sufficient and strive for self-actualization. They can assess their lives and solve their problems. Often, they have adventurous and risk-taking tendencies, but also begin to desire stability.

Stage 7: Adulthood (25 years – 65 years)

This is the peak psychological state. Adults are self-sufficient, experienced, and strive for happiness. They are still capable of learning new things and retaining new information. They can care for others. They have many relationships in their lives. Stability is key to their mental health.

Stage 8: Seniority (65 years – Death)

In many ways, the psychological state of these adults begins to recede. Mental processes may slow or become inefficient. Things learned in early experiences of life, such as language and some life-sustaining habits, are still present. However, their psychological state can deteriorate so much that they will again need care and support from others to survive.

Chapter 4 First Impression Post

--Original published at CatherinesCollegeBlog

I will be discussing which parenting style I believe is best for this chapter’s first impression post. The three main parenting styles are tiger moms, jellyfish dads, and helicopter parents. Tiger moms are much more strict when parenting and have extremely high expectations for the success of their children. Tiger parents use an authoritarian method to emphasize high achievement standards and are very demanding of their children. Jellyfish dads are more removed from their children’s lives, especially regarding the discipline aspect of parenting. There are very few rules for their children to follow and low expectations for them to meet. Helicopter parents are known for being too involved in their children’s lives. At the slightest hint of their children struggling or misbehaving, helicopter parents are there to take control of the situation, which hinders the ability of the children to develop independence.

Of these three parenting styles, I believe that tiger moms exhibit the best way to parent. Although they are strict and demanding, many children respect where their parents are coming from with the tiger mom tough love. Tiger moms care immensely about the development and success of their children, which means they must care about the person behind these successes. This parenting style creates children who learn to achieve success for themselves. Helicopter parents would most likely achieve the success for their children since this parenting style does not allow children to make their own decisions, good or bad. Jellyfish dads are too laid back and do not create enough structure for their children. I believe it is good for children to have freedom, but tiger moms find the balance between freedom and rules, whereas jellyfish dads forget about these standards. They fail to prepare their children for the rules that the rest of society will hold their children to after they are no longer children. Tiger moms demand high achievement standards from their children which require them to make their own decisions and create their own success. For these reasons, I believe the tiger parenting style is the most successful in producing children who become productive members of society.

Chapter 4: 1st impression

--Original published at Kirsten's Kreations

Each parent as their own way of raising their child. Personally, I have close friends who have a wide variety of parenting styles from extremely strict to parents practically not existing. In all honesty, the parenting style my parents used seems to be one of the best I’ve seen.

From my experience of children having strict parents ends in a rebellious child. Because they have so many rules, the child will do whatever it takes to break some of them because it will make them feel more free. On the other hand, a child who has no rules can also end up being even more rebellious because they are craving the attention from their parents. No rules can make a child feel like their parent doesn’t care because it seems their parent isn’t doing anything to make sure the child is safe.

My parents were always the middle man. Yes we had plenty of rules growing up but my parents also let us do almost anything we wanted. Want to go to the mall with friends? Sure but there is a curfew and we had to tell them if there were any other stops besides the mall. If we wanted to spend the night at a friends beach house for prom weekend we had to have at least one parent there. When we wanted to stay home rather than go to a baby cousins birthday party, we were allowed as long as we told them if we leave the house, who we were with, and had the house locked up. The best rule of all in our house was meant to keep us occupied all year round so we had a chance to get out and have fun with friends while keeping out of trouble. That rule is for us to do one activity or sport every season. Thankfully it wasn’t such an issue since we were interested in sports, marching band, and girl scouts. But if it wasn’t for that one rule I wouldn’t have made the friends I did, who helped get me to where I am today.

When it comes down to it, rules are needed yes. Too many, though, can make a person feel suffocated. Not enough can make a person feel abandoned or unwanted. A mix of both freedom and rules are needed to make a child be the best they can be without getting into trouble.

Chapter 4 First Impression Post

--Original published at Jenna'sPSY105blog

For this first impression post, I chose to discuss parenting styles that I feel are the best. The prompt includes “tiger moms,” who give tough love, micromanage, and really push their children- sometimes too far. There is also “jellyfish dads,” who are very passive parents who tend to have little rules and try to avoid confrontation or punishment. “Helicopter parents” are considered to be obsessed with their child’s life and too involved, as well as overprotective. All of these parenting styles take away from the child’s ability to think for themselves, their problem solving skills, and their individuality. Children must make mistakes in order to learn and grow, but not allowing it or practicing it in the right way is detrimental to the child’s development.

I think it is important to find a middle ground that combines all of these parenting methods while still allowing for opportunity and freedom for the child. The best way I feel to do this is considered “dolphin parenting.” These parents begin by being more authoritative when their child is young, in a sense “hovering” and maybe a little overprotective to ensure they are being raised to be good people, stay out of harm’s way, and make good decisions so they can learn right from wrong. But as the kid grows older, provide instruction and guidance when needed, but let the child figure out more for themselves by trial and error and making mistakes. They can eventually transition to be more of a support system and grow more of a friendship with their child and be less seen as intimidating authoritative figures.

I believe that if more parents practice “dolphin parenting,” their children will be able to develop more individuality, character, values, interests, balance, and drive when given more space to learn things on their own. In turn, they will grow up to be happy, healthy, and productive members of society.

Lecture #1 Response

--Original published at CatherinesCollegeBlog

According to a psychodynamic perspective, Miguel may be having problems because of early childhood experiences with failure. These previous experiences may have created a sense of doubt in his own abilities that has carried through his life so far. According to a behavioral perspective, Miguel could be depressed based on his recent observable behaviors. He is constantly tired, cannot fall asleep as easily at night, is noticeably irritable, and often gets in fights with others. These are common signs of depression in others and are all observable without having to understand or focus on internal thoughts. According to a humanistic perspective, Miguel does not feel like the best version of himself at the moment. Although he is inherently good, Miguel currently sees himself as unworthy of enjoying life and experiencing happiness. He may need to strengthen his relationships with others who could provide more of a support system for him. According to a cognitive perspective, Miguel may have something internally wrong with his brain. The mental processes that should be aiding his emotions and reactions to certain situations are failing him as he overreacts to little mistakes or fights with friends. According to the biological, or neuro perspective, his parents may have also experienced times of depression that were passed on to his generation. The genetic aspect of this perspective suggests that the behaviors Miguel displays may be a direct result of his own bloodline. According to the cultural perspective, Miguel may be feeling depressed, frustrated, and tired lately because it is common for other people in his group to feel overwhelmed and beaten down in stressful situations. Perhaps the people in his surrounding culture are not accustomed to handling difficult circumstances, so when they are presented with challenges, they cannot handle it the best way.

First Video Lecture Psych

--Original published at Loretta Gabrielle

Today we learned about the unconscious mind and how to explain why the behavior is happening which the person may not be aware of. This part of psychodynamic can lead to what Miguel has been struggling with. At looking at Freud’s beginning of psychodynamic it can be questioned at to whether Miguel had a traumatizing childhood which was put out of his memory as a child to help protect himself. Was there a trigger he is unaware of? After psychodynamic we looked at behavioralism which focuses on his observable behavior, lashing out and irritable. When looking at both psychodynamic and behavioral we can also view the Humanistic viewpoint which focuses on personal growth and freedom.

From this lesson and the example above I can draw the conclusion that Miguel’s Locus of control in regards to internal focus and external focus doesn’t work to praise him for doing work and having a good outcome but rather blaming himself for not succeeding. He continuously get’s mad at himself and thinks very little of his accomplishments.

Breaking down the problems:

Felt very tired in recent weeks and has found it difficult to focus on his studies- Psychodynamic comes into play with the unconscious mind and the best solution for this in my opinion is Talk Therapy.

Has trouble falling asleep at night- I am going to turn to anxiety for this one, with all of the additional stresses in his life it can cause anxiety to fall asleep despite him being tired. This will relate to psychodynamic and the unconscious mind from a childhood event or relationship.

Irritable during the day and picks fights with his roommates- this is most likely caused from the sleep and from the Humanistic psychology where the words being said and the experience of the words being said are two different things based off of interpretation. There could be a disconnect of communication.

He is a bit of a perfectionist and gets mad at himself when he makes even tiny mistakes. It’s gotten to the point where he doubts his ability to do anything right: This part focuses on the Locus of control which is found that more people with depression look to blame themselves more.

Chapter 1: First Impression Post

--Original published at KatieMillerPSY105

For the first impression post I chose to watch the Myth Busters video. The prompt I chose to watch was “does weaving through traffic actually get you to destination faster?” I thought this was an interesting question because I have always been told by my parents to stay in one lane while stuck in a traffic jam because changing lanes will not matter in the end.

In this experiment, they had two different cars go through the same traffic route. This experiment had a constant of going on the same California freeway to go to the same destination. Another constant was that they both left at the same time of 7:30 in the morning. The difference between the cars was that one stayed in a single lane and the other was weaving in and out of the lanes. The results showed that the car that had been changing lanes actually was behind the car that stayed in one lane. They had changed lanes 17 times in 15 minutes and the car that had been in the same lane the whole time ended up passing them. This experiment answered the Myth Busters question only for one day.

There are both strengths and weaknesses to this experiment. Some strengths are that the team kept some constants between the two cars. They kept the same start time and the same route constant throughout the experiment. There are some weaknesses as well in this particular experiment. One weakness is that they only did one test. The more tests you have, the more accurate your results will be. Anything can happen in the short run, but to determine an answer to a question, you have to look at the long run. Another weakness is that different vehicles could have different results. If you have a larger vehicle, changing lanes may be harder to do than in a smaller SUV. You would need a greater distance between cars in order to change lanes multiple times. A third weakness I noticed was that there are different traffic flows on different times of the day and different traffic patterns. There could be a difference in traveling in the morning rush hour or the afternoon rush hour. Overall, I felt that this was a good question to create an experiment around, but the answer is not as simple as the question itself.

First Impression Post

--Original published at Loretta Gabrielle

For the first impression post I selected option 2 with the Mythbusters to analyze the myth question of “Do waitresses get bigger tips when they have bigger breasts?”

During the video it had one woman wear three different sized bras to see if she would receive more tips as the size of her breasts increased. The experiment had the same woman wear the same outfit and arrive at the coffee shop at the same time of day for three days in a row with the same quality of service in each day. Based off of this experiment they kept several constants and the only change was the bra size in order to answer the question, do larger breasts equal larger tips?

The video accurately answered the question based off of the responses from the increased amount of tips received as the breast size increased. It had several different controlled variables which is necessary in order to find the outcome of a question. The constants included the customer service, outfit, person, and time in the same coffee shop.

The weaknesses surrounding the video assumed men would be the main contributor to the tips as the breast size increased. Not only would they be the ones focusing on in the study as demonstrated in the video, but one can infer that the Mythbusters assumed that men make more money in comparison to women as they were the larger ones focused on being able to tip. The issues surrounding this experiment implies that every man that walks into the coffee shop at the time this woman is working is a straight male. In January of 2017 there was an estimated of 10 million people who identified in the LGBTQ+ population and to assume every single man is going to tip solely based off of the breast size of a white female with larger breasts is impossible to know their motive. This is an inaccurate conclusion from this study and impossible to conclude that the reason they are tipping is because of the size of breasts and not because of other possible reasons. It not only assumes all men are straight but that all women who walked into the coffee shop at the time she worked are only lesbian or bisexual and attracted to her breasts, causing them to tip more.

Based off of the study it showed that women tipped 40% more with larger breast size whereas men tipped 30% more. This could lead to the question as to whether women tip more in general in comparison to men? Do women and men still tip regardless of the cashier? In order to conclude to whether or not breast size increased the tips, it would be necessary to answer the question of “Do women tip more than men?” along with “Do women and men still tip regardless of the cashier?” which could then have this draw the conclusion as to whether the breast size increased equated to more tips. Lastly, I find this study to be weak as they had three different days which accumulate different customers based off of the time of the week (different people will most likely come on Saturday than on a Monday). Not only this but if large breasts were the sole contributor of whether tips increase than the service of the cashier should be bad in order to focus on the why they are tipping more. In my opinion, if they tested every Monday at 12pm for one hour with low-effort service and still increased tips as the breast size increased, it would have a more accurate results from a more controlled experiment.

Chap. 1 – Impression

--Original published at Kealey's PSY105 Blog

“Are women better than men at reading emotions?”

For this week’s prompt I chose to critique the research methods used by the Mythbusters’ team in the clip, “Are women better than men at reading emotions. For the experiment, the hosts took pictures of their faces, each picture displaying a different emotion. Then, male and female test subjects tried to guess the emotion displayed by only the eyes of the original pictures and were judged by how many emotions they could discern correctly. Ultimately, the Mythbusters discovered that the women had significantly quicker responses and were more accurate than the men at correctly guessing the emotions depicted by the eyes on the screen.

The strengths of this experiment were the organized procedure the hosts planned and the way that they tested the subjects in the same manner. Some weaknesses the experiment displayed included the test content and the degree of conclusiveness that the judges asserted the results with. For the test content, each host displayed faces they thought would convey whatever emotion they were told to emote. However, I believe that we do not have control over how our faces react to emotions. Consequently, the faces that the hosts think they would make and the faces the would actually make showing certain emotions could be different and affect the accuracy of the results. Therefore, the subjects were only interpreting simulated expressions of emotions, not actual displays of true emotion. The test content could have been improved by attempting to capture faces in true states of emotion. For example, the expression of fear could have been captured by taking a picture of someone watching a scary scene in a horror film.

Also, the margin in the accuracy average of correct emotions guessed by the genders may not have been big enough to proclaim with absolute certainty that women are generally better than men at reading emotions. The test subjects may not have been randomized enough and there may not have been a large enough sample size to conclude that the statistics of the experiment were significant enough to explain the entire population of men and women. The hosts could have concluded their results with more certainty by enlisting subjects of different ages, cultural backgrounds, etc. and increasing their number of test trials by expanding their sample size.

Chapter 1 First Impression Post

--Original published at CatherinesCollegeBlog

I chose the second option for this chapter’s first impression post. For this prompt, I selected the video that tested whether beer goggles really exist. The popular myth argues that the more alcohol a person consumes, the more attractive other people will appear to that person. In this video, two men and one woman rated several photos of women and men respectively, then proceeded to drink alcohol and re rate the photos. They had five seconds to score each photo, so the ratings were based on gut reactions.

This experiment included a number of strengths, one of which was including both genders in the study to make it more extensive. The subjects of the experiment all received the same amount of alcohol as well, which kept it consistent. The scores the photos received were all averaged, which helped show a trend of the results more clearly. Since the initial rating of photos had to be completed in five seconds, the ratings were based on gut reactions which are often more honest answers. There was a decent amount of photos included in the study, but additional photos could have been included to strengthen the argument.

This experiment also had several weaknesses. The three people performing the study rated a set of photos three separate times, once while sober, another while buzzed, and a final time while drunk. It would make more sense to rate the same set of photos all three times; however, they instead received a new set of photos each time said to be exactly as attractive as the first set of photos. Attractiveness is subjective, so photos of different people cannot be treated as the same photos for an experiment that should be testing the attractiveness of the same people. In the video, it appears that all three test subjects consume the same amount of alcohol, including a beer and a scotch. The amount and combination of alcohol affects people very differently depending on gender, age, previous consumption, tolerance, lifestyle, and many other factors. The challenge is that one person in this experiment may have felt much more drunk than another, which could have influenced the decisions they made when rating photos. They should have used blood alcohol content as the measure to consider each test subject drunk as soon as they reached a certain level. Although each test subject reacted a bit differently in terms of rating photos more generously, the experiment would have been more improved if it included a larger sample. Additionally, there should have been a control group present that either consumed no alcohol or consumed something appearing to be alcohol. If the experiment included another group of people who thought they were consuming alcohol, this could also test whether or not the myth plays more of a role in increasing attractiveness than the actual alcohol does. It is possible that simply being aware of the beer goggles theory would lead someone to find another more attractive if they think they have already had a few beers.