altm0069: April 2012 Archives

Not-So Prosocial Behavior

user-pic
Vote 0 Votes

After looking at the chapters surrounding social psychology, i found the most interesting topic to be prosocial behavior. Prosocial behavior is behavior that involves helping and cooperating with other people. Researchers often look at why people help others, as well as why they sometimes refuse to help or cooperate. The bystander effect really stood out to me as an interesting "social phenomenon" involved with the subject. The bystander effect is the phenomenon that refers to situations where individuals do not offer any sort of help in an emergency situation to a victim when other people are present. One would imagine that the more people that are present in a given emergency situation, the more likely that someone would help.

After reading more about this effect, i found that the presence of other bystanders greatly decreases any sort of intervention. This happens because as the number of bystanders increases, any given bystander is less likely to interpret the incident as a problem, and less likely to assume responsibility for taking action. The following youtube link is a study conducted by a news station showing the true colors of the bystander effect. They have an actor lay on the ground in a very public place acting like he is really sick. Hundreds of people pass this man with only a sympathetic look while he lies in pain asking for help. Eventually after 20 minutes have passed, someones came up to him and offered help. I find it really disheartening that humans aren't concerned enough with the well being of our own kind to reach out and offer help because it would be an inconvenience.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSsPfbup0ac


Stupid Intelligence tests

user-pic
Vote 0 Votes

Intelligence, and how we measure it, is very controversial. There are those who think that intelligence can be measured by a simple score on a math, science, reading or english test. This type of testing really hits home. It is a key contributor to the reason that we are currently attending this University. ACT and SAT testing is a major part of college admissions these days. But do these tests really tell us how "intelligent" a person is?

After reading chapter 9 and getting a little more information on the topic, i found that there are some better methods for analyzing someone's intelligence. The method that i found to better access someone's intelligence was the Triarchic Model. This model measures knowledge past the cramming and regurgitation that standard IQ, ACT, and SAT tests require. On top of factual knowledge, it gives proper representation to practical (street smarts) and creative knowledge. Practical knowledge is also called "tactic intelligence", which means it is knowledge about how to do something rather than knowledge about something. This is extremely important in applying factual knowledge to everyday situations. The 3rd wheel to this model is creativity. This is important to the intelligence model in that it accounts for the intelligence we need in order to find new and effective solutions to problems. All 3 are important factors in determining a persons intelligence, and without one of them, i don't think that all "knowledge" is accounted for. Do you think that colleges should change their admissions process in a way that tests for all 3 types of knowledge?

Stupid Intelligence

user-pic
Vote 0 Votes

Intelligence, and how we measure it, is very controversial. There are those who think that intelligence can be measured by a simple score on a math, science, reading or english test. This type of testing really hits home. It is a key contributor to the reason that we are currently attending this University. ACT and SAT testing is a major part of college admissions these days. But do these tests really tell us how "intelligent" a person is?

After reading chapter 9 and getting a little more information on the topic, i found that there are some better methods for analyzing someone's intelligence. The method that i found to better access someone's intelligence was the Triarchic Model. This model measures knowledge past the cramming and regurgitation that standard IQ, ACT, and SAT tests require. On top of factual knowledge, it gives proper representation to practical (street smarts) and creative knowledge. Practical knowledge is also called "tactic intelligence", which means it is knowledge about how to do something rather than knowledge about something. This is extremely important in applying factual knowledge to everyday situations. The 3rd wheel to this model is creativity. This is important to the intelligence model in that it accounts for the intelligence we need in order to find new and effective solutions to problems. All 3 are important factors in determining a persons intelligence, and without one of them, i don't think that all "knowledge" is accounted for. Do you think that colleges should change their admissions process in a way that tests for all 3 types of knowledge?

Having gone through high school and my first year of college, i've realized that group work is an important aspect of learning. We have all experienced that group member who doesn't pull their own weight. It adds stress and frustrates group members who are actually doing work. I always thought this was due to a lack of effort or laziness on their behalf. When reading about the cognitive section, i found that this "laziness" is scientifically supported by psychology research. It's called "Social Loafing". Social Loafing is the phenomenon when people put in less effort to achieve a goal when they work in a group rather than when they work alone. This is seen as one of the main reasons that groups are sometimes less productive than the combined performance of their members working as individuals.
I found a research study conducted on the performance of tug-of-war participants. They found that individual's performance (the force exerted) was higher when compared to the individual's performance when paired up with other team members. This goes to show that we shed responsibility - force in this case - to our other team members thinking that they will pick of the slack. Do you think that this is always the case? or do you think that some group environments encourage participation?

About this Archive

This page is an archive of recent entries written by altm0069 in April 2012.

altm0069: March 2012 is the previous archive.

altm0069: May 2012 is the next archive.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.