assignment 3: March 2012 Archives

I have a younger cousin, only a year old, whom really does entertain me quite a lot. It was very appealing to me while watching the video during lecture where the little boy with the screen in front of him and the car went by. I always play the game with him, which we now know as object permanence, by just simply ducking down below a table, and popping right back up, and he is just beside himself with laughter. No matter how many times or how long I would wait to pop back up from hiding behind the table, he still would just not be able to understand that I would keep popping back up. We also talked about children learning very quickly in lectures, such as the baby kicking its foot to move the toys above her head. Then the next time that she returns, she knows exactly what she has to do to get the toys to start moving, she doesn't have to start from ground zero. So what interests me referring to my little cousin and object permanence and cognitive development, it just surprises me that they can't learn about things like this when to us it really seems so simple, but at such a young age, well, before they hit age 7, they just don't understand it!

Homework can be a tricky thing. We've all had problems that we get stuck on and cannot figure out. Some people handle this situation in different ways. A common thing that people do when stuck on homework is just give up. This can be for a variety of reasons. They give up because they are just too frustrated to keep trying the same problem, they are lazy, or they do not feel like they are smart enough to figure it out. This last one I want to focus on. In the textbook it went into detail about this feeling of inferiority. When people have the preconceived notion that they will fail, they often will. This is because it is kind of like a self-fulfilling prophecy. People who believe they will fail do not try as hard to find the answer because they think that it is futile anyways. I know for me that there have been times when I have wanted to give up on a problem but I keep looking for the answer and I seek advice and/or help and I always find the answer. The thing to remember is put best by Steve Jobs in this interview.

The point that he makes starting at about the 45 second mark is important to remember. Yes there are a lot of people who know more than you do, but that doesn't mean you are inferior to them; you just have to learn what they know.

And if all else fails....call 911.

We have all stayed up late flipping through channels and the only thing that is on are commercials to sell you this and that to lose weight. But do these pills, plans, or gadgets really work? While I have been a victim and fallen to the promise of "Do this for 30 days and it will change your life," I have had some success with products or plans. However, with lots of research, that tiny footnote at the bottom of the screen stating "Results Not Typical" is in fact true! It is much easier to get someone to spend $100 dollars on the hope of losing weight than it is to have them change their life in a way that leads to weight loss. The fact is, people will set their minds to something for a few days and then return to old habits which got them to being overweight in the first place. In order for these services to work, it is up to the person using them to determine the outcome. Just because you spend $49.99 on workout videos, doesn't mean you will magically fit into your jeans by Friday. Americans spend $40 billion dollars a year on weight loss products and services. Society factors play a role in why this industry is so huge. People have certain ideas about how they should look and the industry provides them with an infomercial that gives them hope that they themselves can look like a model. I know people that have had luck with such programs, but at what risk? I believe that the industry will continue to grow, but also support the increase in teens or young adults struggling with weight loss disorders and low self-esteem.

There are many ways in which a child can be raised in an atypical household. In this context, 'atypical' would be anything that isn't the nuclear family which is the familiar unit consisting of two parents and their children. This includes anything from being raised by a single mother, a single father and even parents of the same sex. It wasn't surprising to me that being raised in a household with parents of the same sex did not impact a child's development. Especially since each person in most same-sex couples still contributes to different aspects of parenting just as they would if they were both of the opposite sex. I was surprised to read that the children of widows showed no higher rates of developmental problems than children from two-parent households, even though children of mothers who have been divorced, or separated, do. Whether this is causal or correlational cannot be determined. One reason that I believe this may be the case, though, is because some couples that divorce or separate have familiar troubles long before the separation. This, in turn, may affect the child's behavior by viewing the parents'. My biggest question in this matter is whether or not the influence of having a "nontraditional" family plays a correlational role or causative role in the child's development. Are parents that have had or do have emotional or behavioral problems more like to divorce, therefore passing those genes on to their kids? Or does the divorce, itself, cause the child to display those problems?

It has been observed that Eastern cultures demonstrate a more holistic cognitive style, whereas Western cultures exhibit a more analytic cognitive style. What stroke me the most was the further examination of brain's development based on analytic-holistic thinking. Results clearly indicated the more developed left-brain associated with Eastern culture holistic thinking, while the left brain's analytical way of thinking indicated among those subjects with Western cultures analytical thinking. Therefore, as the world is flattening with more and more cross-culture communication and business, the best approach to thrive in the global community is to think with a whole brain.
As a prospective dental student, I recently noticed emerging evidence of today's scholarly articles indicating the strong links between oral health and the systemic complications. It seems that the holistic thinking and interdisciplinary studies will be more prominent in dental profession, which is very likely to further explain the classic idea "act locally, think globally" in today's dental practice. This area of study is also my interested area.
I believe further explorations regarding practical, comprehensive educating methods are needed to prepare today's students for the future global community. More than that, I would like to further take a look at how a more comprehensive thinking pattern can make a difference to improve people's ideas of diversity in their lives and professions.

With finals around the corner, working out problems for classes is becoming something that students are dealing with on a daily basis to stay ahead. While this may be the case getting stuck on that "one" problem is a common occurrence that I am sure we have all experienced. I recently had one of these moments where I was working on a physics problem and no matter what I tried or read in the book I just could not figure out the problem. So instead of giving up and quitting, I took a "step back", relaxed, had a drink of water and attacked the problem once again. This time I focused my energy not on the problem but the bigger picture and by taking that "step back" I was able to focus on what really was important in the problem and complete the problem with ease. Looking back at this experience it seems to me that when I take a "step back", relax for a minute, or drink some water I am able to (almost all the time) solve the problem. By doing one of these activities I am able interrupt my focus on the unnecessary information that my brain is processing and re-focus on the other parts of the problem that I had been missing. While this approach may not work for everyone, I suggest taking that "step back" and making the final push on the problems that you don't understand. In the end it may just help you to solve that problem and save your grade.

Playing professional sports is what many youngsters aspire to be when they grow up. Zack Greinke was fortunate enough to be one of the kids that made his dreams a reality. Currently pitching for the Milwaukee Brewers, Greinke brought a powerful arm to a team desperately in need of pitchers, and helped Milwaukee by going 16-6 and hurling 201 strikeouts. By looking at multiple intelligences, it's safe to conclude Greinke has impressive bodily-kinesthetic intelligence. On the other hand Greinke is very awkward with personal interaction, and has a hard time speaking with others. Greinke excels in bodily-kinesthetic intelligence, however lacks interpersonal and linguistic intelligence. After reading 9 chapters of our textbook, I found it interesting that instead of intelligence meaning one intellectual ability, the authors have split it up into multiple categories (8 categories for Howard Gardner, 3 for Robert Sternberg). Everyone has their strengths and weaknesses, and thinking logically, I would argue that the idea of multiple intelligences is extremely valid and relevant in comparison to intelligence being one category.

Recently I was working on a set of homework problems and couldn't figure out the last problem. I just didn't understand how to put the data into the equation I had. So after working on the problem for quite a long time I called a friend and asked her how she did the problem. She pointed out that I was using the wrong equation. Looking back over the problem it seemed so obvious. As we've talking about before I had hindsight bias when I was thinking that however, it should have been easier than I made it. I was so stuck in my mental set of using a specific equation that I never even considered using a different equation. Oddly enough I can't think of how I could have avoided this. It almost seems like my professor wanted us to get stuck and be challenged! Is there something I could have done differently? Simply doing the problems backwards doesn't seem like it would always solve the problem of forming mental sets. My best guess would be to work with a group of people. It is far less likely that you would fall prey to the obstacles of problem solving if you work with other people. However, in group settings sometimes if one person makes a mistake it's easy to be blinded by it because of a group mentality. I feel like there are pros and cons to the solution of working in a group to avoid making errors in problem solving.

In chapter 10, human development, human attachment is the emotional connection we share with those to whom we feel closest. These people protect us and give us food. This brings about a lot of questions in my mind. I'm wondering if attachment is possible, in children, to any adult-looking figure to whom they have never met? I understand this is from a movie, but in Big Daddy, the child that the "father" receives has only been told that this is father, knowing nothing else about him or never being around him. Throughout the whole movie, the child grows on him and would rather have "Sonny" as a father than the father Sonny fraudulently impersonated. I know that the bond between parents and their children lasts forever, but can there possibly be too much attachment? Does this develop children being "spoiled"? Where the child can't really do much on their own without their parents constant support and willingness to keep them close. I also wonder that when we students become adults and start our own families, we no longer rely on parents as much or at all, does attachment no longer exist?

It's perfectly safe to say that in today's egotistic culture, a heavy amount of the population takes great pride in their physical appearance. A combination of healthy exercise and a nutritional diet provides a stable basis for weight-loss and attaining the appealing look desired among many. However, there are individuals who resort to detrimental measures to lose excess body weight by putting themselves in grave danger. Eating disorders, with the main focus of this entry being on Bulimia Nervosa, are an extremely unsafe and unhealthy way to lose weight.

Bulimia Nervosa, known more commonly as simply Bulimia, is used by people who try to lose a lot of weight over a short period of time. It is an eating disorder associated with a pattern of bingeing - eating large amounts of food high in calories in brief periods, followed by purging - self- induced vomiting or frantic exercise to drastically reduce weight. A person bingeing can sometimes eat as much as 10,000 calories in a two-hour period!

So what effect does bulimia have emotionally on an individual? Those with bulimia report high levels of dissatisfaction with their body image, even when they're of normal weight. They tend to have low levels of self-esteem and vie for peer approval. Although bulimia has been experimentally shown to be influenced by genetic factors, it is undoubtedly influenced greatly by today's cultural expectations on the "ideal body" image. And who can blame anybody for wanting that perfect body when it's all anyone ever sees? Movies, television, advertisements; "beautiful" people are shown only with the ideal body. What many do not understand, however, is that an alteration of eating habits will not result in a healthy new image of your body. The damage can be devastating. So please, keep to a healthy diet and exercise regime, and keep that food down!

There are so many different ideas about how to raise children. Should you be stirict? Or how about lenient? Should you discuss everything with your kids and be an open book or should you keep things a secret and never let them know why you are making the decisions you are making? To me the style of parenting you use is like picking out a dog. I know, you are thinking this metaphor could never work but bear with me. There are many types of parenting styles in the world just like there are countless types of dogs. But which one is right? Not every dog is right for every person. Some people like big dogs and some like small. Some people want a low energy dog and some want a very active and playful one. So you have to do your research and find the dog that suits your personality just like you need to find a parenting style that fits your child. Some children tend to mature very quickly and would not thrive well in a tight leash and very closed off parenting style. They would quickly feel boxed in and lacking a great deal of independence and most likely respond poorly to his/her parents' wishes. On the contrary, there are those children that without a strict set of guidelines, they will fall into a lot of trouble. They need a tough parent to keep their head on straight; a parent that will not only keep them in line, but also will communicate to them as to why things are done the way they are. So when you start having kids, don't simply look at success/failure stories with your friends or in magazines. Get to know your kid first and tailor you parenting style to your own child. They will thank you for it later in life.

As we all know as students here at the U, there are often many barriers to solving problems. From a difficult problem on a physics test to whether or not you should break up with your girlfriend/boyfriend you are constantly making decisions and solving problems. In these cases there are a handful of barriers that present themselves including salience of surface similarities, mental sets, and functional fixedness (p. 310). There are also a few other obstacles that may occur in problem solving including individual insecurity, past history, and jumping to conclusions. Attached is an image in which the objective is to connect all nine dots by only drawing four lines and without picking up the pencil. This is a classic example of how these barriers can come into play. Once you have solved the problem it may be easier to identify what the barriers are. For me, jumping to conclusions was a big obstacle in solving the problem. I figured that the lines I drew and to connect dot-to-dot as opposed to extending past the dots. This assumption made solving the problem much harder at first. Another barrier could be one's insecurity in solving problems involving logic and geometric arrangements. This could discourage them to even attempt the problem or cause them to give up quickly. There are many other obstacles that can occur with a problem such as this and everyone may experience different ones. It would be interesting to see how people's multiple intelligences (found in chapter 9) correlate with what barriers they have for solving problems.

What are the ingredients of having well-behaved, intelligent, socially expectable children? Most researchers along with most people would agree that having 2 parents that are still together, and who uses authoritative parenting styles would be the best way for a child to end up "normal." I agree that this probably helps the situation, however I don't think it's that clean-cut. Having a successful child has to do with a lot of other factors that can be incorporated into these ideas. What if the parents are still together but constantly fight? What if one parent is authoritative and the other is permissive? There are so many different environments that a child could possibly be raised in that I think it is nearly impossible to define how to raise a successful child.
My parents got divorced when I was young and I was raised by My Dad, so as an outsider one might see this as a more unique case and if they read our psychology book they might infer that I had behavior problems, and was more aggressive growing up, but this couldn't be farther from the truth. I have never been in a fight and rarely have gotten in trouble at school or with other adults. This is why I think it is kind of silly to say that a child will be "better" or "worse" by solely looking at the number of parents in their life. I think it has to do with how the parent or parents treat their child and the examples they set for their children.

While reviewing the basis of Lawrence Kohlberg's idea of reasoning processes, I found it pretty interesting how he scored his subjects. There was no "right" or "wrong" answer to his questions, instead he looked at how a person came to his or her final decision. This stuck out to me because there could have been any number of responses to a single question, pieced together from someone's ethical background, previous lived experiences, knowledge of societal acceptances, and personality. While thinking about these influences, I thought of a few questions that the book doesn't really answer. What types of cultures were involved in his experiment? We, as PSY 1001 students, know all about decision making and problem solving strategies by now, and could easily make the argument that how one person comes to his answer varies by what type of culture he or she hails from, through no fault of his own simply by how his culture raised him. Does that place him on a morally lower level than another person with the same answer, just a different method of how he achieved it? The other question was inferred from on page 396 about sex biased. Gilligan claims that women were destined to score lower because of their "caring" orientation rather than the male "justice" orientation. It just got me thinking about all of the possible answers people could come up with if they had an extreme personality, or if the question Kohlberg presented hit especially close to home with one individual, making them either more or less moral according to Kohlberg.

It is common knowledge that the bond between a mother (or primary caregiver) and child is important- but just how important is it?

Well, I was surprised when I stumbled upon an article describing attachment theory as the "first interactive love," and how this first love plays a major role in maintaining relationships in adulthood, maintaining emotional balance, and even the ability to simply enjoy being ourselves! Even the ability to 'bounce back' from any disappointment or misfortune is strongly influenced through attachment theory.

One might think, "okay, easy enough to make a baby feel loved, I mean... I'm all they've got, right?" Wrong! This article lists an abundance of ways for insecure attachment to take place. Some of the more obvious reasons include physical/sexual abuse, physical/emotional neglect, and separation from the primary caregiver. Other causes which may not be quite as obvious include traumatic experiences such as serious illness or accidents, maternal depression, and the clincher... young or inexperienced mothers (Teen Mom? 16 and Pregnant?)!

These findings give some extra credit to 'nurture' in the whole nature vs. nurture debate. Children of teen moms have a greater chance of becoming teen parents themselves in the future. Could it be because their childhood attachment was insecure? Possibly... but of course their are plenty of other factors.

A successful bond between mother and child is crucial in the future success of intimate adult relationships, and (although I'm sure this information is redundant and hopefully, obvious) don't think love and money are enough to raise a family... full mental development is a necessity!

As a student of business, I found it particularly interesting to write about the study of cross-cultural decision making tactics. It is said that in Western cultures, decisions are made much more rapidly and on impulse than in Eastern cultures. While Eastern cultures are generally more reserved to begin with, their every day culture is reflected in their corporate culture as well. What strikes me most about these findings is that people are people, but their ways of going about problems are drastically different and do tend to vary by regions. A manager in the US would be willing to seal a deal and fix a problem immediately and deal with the kinks and issues as they come. A manager in China however, would be much more hesitant to make any final decisions until all of the kinks were sorted out ensuring a smooth transition and solution to the initial problem.

Various approches to problem solving include algorithms - step by step procedures, or breaking up larger problems into smaller sub problems. The speeds at which these are implemented and executed at, however, can cause issues and glitches in cross-cultural operations as everyone is most comfortable moving at their own pace rather than at someone else's. Regardless, I know that to solve problems in whatever career I end up in, I will be able to use such tactics to solve the problem and move on. Algorithms especially seem to be right up my alley, but one burning question still eats at me at the end of the day. What happens if a business deal falls through because of miscommunicated solutions or discomfort among problem solving techniques because one group moved too fast or the other too slow. What happens then and how can cross-cultural business deals continue?