Topic: u02d1 Process
Pretty good days work ... I think this one finishes up the paper we were working on. :)
Date: July 30, 2006 6:22 PM
Subject: In response to assignment from Ann Author: Garvey, Ann
Last edited on: July 30, 2006 6:29 PM
In summary, the process of perceiving persons considers observation, attribution, integration, and confirmation (Brehm, Kassin, & Fein, 2005). In observation, we utilize the elements of internal scripts and first impressions of others gained through behavioral evidence collected (2005). In Attribution, we assign the others to certain dispositions according to whether or not they match up to our expectations with consistency (2005). Does the other do as he says? We use this to predict if the other is going to be safe (2005). It is our mental understanding of the other in relationship to us. Integration is the impression the other makes on us (2005). We tend to be more impressed if the other weighs in according to the traits we value. Confirmation is us making up our minds as to personal investment in others and the internal verification of our beliefs (2005).
Attribution is in general how we handle being in the social world. We look to other people for stability through their characteristics, personality, attitudes, and abilities (Brehm, Kassin, & Fein, 2005). When we met our ex-husband we thought he was stable and from a stable family, showed intellectual characteristics, appeared to have an open lively personality, carried a healthy attitude toward life, and ranked well in the abilities that were of interest to us. We attributed him as being all-pervasive. Placed next to him, we felt more steady, confident, alive, and curious about life. However, we did not attribute these qualities as coming from inside of us, we attributed them to him and was grateful he was making us important because we had been important to him.
An attribution bias that we had, though not fully conscious of it, was that we saw life through the eyes of someone who had been abused and that would have a decisive impact on how we perceived our ex, our world, and ourselves and that perception changed as time, circumstances, and the principles involved changed. When we were introduced to our ex, the person doing the introductions told him, “You are going to love Ann, she asks so many questions.” Then she turned to us and said, “You are going to love him, he has all the answers.” That was our first impression of him. He was going to be someone who would take care of us. From the first take, we were feeding into a common script of being helpless in the caretakers presence. We did as he wanted, because we had attributed his mind to be better than our own and we didn’t want to make him angry.
Gradually truths straighten themselves out, but sometimes only through years and years of hard lessons. The turning point for us was when he became so angry with us for standing up to him, he told the doctors and hospital staff about his strong wishes to have us dead. They did not wear the same blinders and acted in such a way that we would not be released from the hospital until safer independent housing was prepared. The more we took over our own thinking processes, the angrier he became. Not only had he wanted us dead, but he had strongly impressed we should take our own life, because the insurance policy would be of higher value to him and the boys. Even, at that, we did not lose overnight our bias that he was a superior person with superior thoughts. Therapy and a hard three year process of separation and divorce would assist in altering some of our impressions. From the perspective of an abuse survivor his anger was confirming our impression of us being at fault rather than him. Over and over again, he would state that I would be without home and children. The result of our self-diminished thinking acted as a self-fulfilling prophecy. We had left our family of origin terrified of our abuser’s anger and negativity, we were also afraid of our husband, in-laws and children having angry negative thoughts toward us, and we responded in turn by eventually and fearfully leaving. We found ourselves alone at a homeless shelter as a better and safer alternative.
One study that supports perception and harsh parenting of children states that children raised this way often repeat the parents’ perceptions of themselves so that the children learn to hold the same negative angry attitudes about their life, unrealistic developmental expectations, and sometimes negative attitudes about their own children (Daggett, O’Brien, Zanolli, & Peyton, 2000). In another study Leahy, Pretty & Tenenbaum (2003), found that adults traumatized by childhood sexual abuse attributed the abuse differently according to whether or not they had resolved the traumatic attachment to their perpetrator. I know that my life now 16 years later is much, much better and safer than it ever was in our past. But, it’s been 20 years of therapy and I still cringe when the boss gets cranky. I have never stopped, nor will I ever stop working on issues having been abused so early in life.
We are still battling ghosts as to attributing success to ourselves, or others. As toward our future and how these concepts might affect us professionally, we have chosen to work in the field of psychology, but not toward clinical. We know that we have a certain amount of instability. It would be irresponsible for us to be in a therapeutic relationship with others while having so many outstanding issues. Still as any other, we need to choose going forward, which means learning about people relationships and hopefully advocating programs revolving around positive self-concepts. We are all much better off without bias separating our ideals from reality. Most often now, although the path far from straight, we can now attribute us with the strength to go forward. We are interested in how people learn and our past experience has taught us to pay attention to the value of self and other. Altermatt & Pomerantz (2003) completed a study on the development of competence-related and motivational beliefs; they wrote that friends were influential toward positive “self-perceptions of competence, academic standards, importance of meeting standards, and preference for challenge.” We are absolutely positive we will never marry again, but we hold great stock in our friends and in school.
References
Altermatt, E. R. & Pomerantz, E. M. (2003). The development of competence-related and motivational beliefs: An investigation of similarity and influence among friends. Abstract retrieved July 30, 2006, from PsycARTICLES database.
Brehm, S. S., Kassin, S., Fein, S. (2005). Social psychology (6th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Daggett, J., O’Brien, M., Zanolli, K. & Peyton, V. (2000). Parents’ attitudes about children: Associations with parental life histories and child-rearing quality. Abstract retrieved July 30, 2006, from PsycARTICLES database.
Leahy, T., Pretty, G., & Tenebaum, G. (2003). Childhood sexual abuse narratives in clinically and nonclinically distressed adult survivors. Abstract retrieved July 30, 2006, from PsycARTICLES database
I don't think we were getting anywhere too fast here. :(
We were busy on Saturday
There's another coming after this ... probably so many more you'll feel they are raining down on you like kitties and dogs.
Umm, I think there is one more after this one ... they are all relatively long.
Still trying ... this video probably wraps up the day and is about 1 hour 52 min ...
This morning ... have to progress MORE!
Dear Dr. K,
I wanted you to know that I am still here. I'm having trouble with the writing. I've been stuck on the assignment from 2.1. We had outlined the chapter and noted the resources that we wanted to use. Then we wrote about ten paragraphs ... and it seemed that the more time invested the more lost I became. Somehow it was turning into a paper on abuse although that was not the intention to start. It's just that the examples I was thinking to tie into attributes and such were all related to the past around the time of a separation/divorse 16 years ago. I don't usually write like that. Then in trying to understand how and what had happened to the paper we started adapting the paper to a new program called, "The Brain" suggested by the Encyclopedia Britanica.
On one side I know I'm getting in big trouble with my time, but there's this other side where the material from the unit is helping me to figure out something that was very important in my life. I took yesterday off from work and its all I did, but we're not getting "things done" as in paper.
I'll send you an attachment ... feels like being in a tail spin. Please advise. I know I can't afford to lose weekend.
Ann
Ok, this video is like 2 hours and 10 minutes, but now for just a few minutes start it up and listen to the sections 13 min - 26 min. This is the part we want to show you what we're doing with the brain. This is where we are at now.
Paper...
The process of perceiving people is through observation, attribution, integration, and confirmation (Brehm, Kassin, & Fein, 2005). The observation label is a collection of the different elements that go into first impressions, scripts, and behavioral evidence (2005). Attribution is our explanations on why things happen as they do. Attribution bias is our general personal rules, whether right or wrong as to how we perceive others (2005). Biases are affected by our cultures, cognitive heuristics and motivation. Integration is in taking the dispositional evidence we just collected to form our impressions so that we can make inferences of self and others (2005). Confirmation is the process in which our impressions form into reality even when we are wrong, and in general, our perceptions are either quick and automatic, or mindful, but not always truthful; we settle for what is comfortable or good enough (2005). The process of perception has applications in the workforce particularly in work where you need to listen to people at client, staff, and administrative levels, but perhaps more immediately for us in looking at issues of abuse.
The observations that we make come from our first impressions of the physical or emotional appearance of others (Brehm, Kassin, & Fein, 2005). Because we have all interacted with many people and situations before any one encounter, we develop scripts as to how we think people should act in various situations. For example, thinking of my childhood family script, I find myself cringing at the mere thought of intimacy with my birth family. This family script affects my perceptions when I’m at work and I see other families interacting. Often we see that people are much more loving and knowledgeable of each other than I am comfortable with. We “collect evidence to support or deny our script noticing not only the beneficial glances and touch of parents and children, but also the behaviors and body language that might give better clue to suspect motivations. I carry a certain measure of distrust that people are sincere. Each instance then of watching other families interact, I need to consciously remind our self-system that we will be ok, even though we weren’t similarly loved. It would be easy to understand then, but not excuse our need for self-deception, in order to cope with fears of not “fitting in.”
Attributions are how we make sense of how the world fits together. People with a background of abuse tend to over observe, analyze, and rationalize. They sometimes follow patterns of hypersensitivity, hyperarousal, and catastrophising. We try to second guess whether others we meet or people we know are safe to be interacting with. The attribute of anger in others becomes a trigger, which is threatening to our sense of security. It is much more likely that when we do encounter people we consider angry, we attribute their emotion to internal characteristics of them being dangerous or that we are somehow at fault and responsible for the emotion rather than perhaps the person was just in an argument or stubbed his toe, which would be situational circumstances. Inference and Covariation theories both assume that we can observe something in others’ behavior that directly represents another’s personality. With our therapist we often find ourselves questioning out loud whether or not he is mad at us. We can intellectualize that although sometimes we can be frustrating, he doesn’t really get mad at us. Still, we watch his behavior looking for conditions that will establish our internal certainty that people cannot be trustworthy and that eventually we will uncover his “true” personality, or worse yet, he will uncover ours. I can know this is wrong thinking, but still we need to battle our internal scripts.
Attribution bias relates to our rules we create to justify quick and easy interpretations of our environments. We each make up our own mythology as I will do in just a moment. In order to function socially we “estimate the odds that something is going to happen,” which is called an availability heuristic (Brahm, Kassin, & Fein, 2005) and to support this bias, we often believe that others share our opinions, attributes, and behaviors (2005). In a study completed by Daggett, O’Brien, Zanolli, & Peyton (2000), they found in examining parents’ childhood perceptions that often the attitudes and expectations were mirrored from their families of youth to their children. They stated that Mothers who reported harsh parenting as children, negative attitudes about life, and unrealistic developmental expectations had negative attitudes about their own child,” which related to a “lower quality home environment” (2000). At the beginning of this chapter and at the end, two points are highlighted - sometimes perception is quick and fairly automatic and at other times we are able to test our perceptions more carefully (2005). This fits the case of children who are or were abused. The difference it would seem between adult abused children and adults not abused would be that the adult abused in childhood would have many more negative scripts to challenge and the scripts of being “unlovable” probably affect their personality and esteem more deeply.
Because the odds seem greater that negative things are going to happen, people who have been abused often find themselves in adult relationships that continue aspects of an abusive relationship. That is the role we expect, although in adulthood we have the opportunity to establish new rules, often we are feel unequal to the task. For example, I had understood physical abuse enough to know that if I were hit once by my spouse, most likely I would be hit again. So that became a marker point to us; if it happened we would have to leave the relationship. Because I carried that heuristic, in fact, we set ourselves up inevitably to be hit. We tend to be more accepting of the negativity in relationships, because that furthered our childhood scripts. Base-rate fallacy establishes our becoming more enamored in drama, so even now 16 years after the divorce; we’re still recalling the situation of being hit although the occurrence had only been once.
We didn’t understand as concretely the rules of emotional abuse. Our spouse had told us and the doctors that he had wanted to kill us, or more preferably, we could kill ourselves, which he said would allow him to collect our life insurance. The odds of our husband killing us were quite slim we rationalized, because we were still thinking he loved us better than we could love ourselves. When he shared some of these wishes with hospital staff there was a general sense of crises. The hospital helped change our perception in that he was really a dangerous person to us. Today, we are more likely to see the situational stress of him being a young man pressured by a wife with mental illness, finances, family and new relationship with another woman. We knew we needed help with our perceptions at the time though, because that is what hospital staff was telling us and we were feeling of danger to ourselves along the lines of our family script to self-destruct. It is more common in Western societies as a whole to make attributes that place the individual in the forefront and the situation in the background as in not seeing at the time the other factors that were contributing to the relationship that had little to do with us. In general, this whole scenario is part of our “abuse bias,” or victim mentality, which included being at fault and overly responsible for the relationship. There is a new heuristic centered on self-care and an allowance of our primary needs to have healthy life structures and self-support.
Part of our thinking that we were going to maintain our marriage at the time was in our perception of not being able to take care of self(ves); we waited thinking our spouse would “come to his senses” and we could continue our marriage/dependency. At the time of the marital crisis it seems we converted our “helpless” script from our husband to the doctor and hospital; they were better caregivers and would gradually help us to take better care of ourselves. We were held for two months until safer housing could be arranged. I believe opposite to individuals who are not abused, we take more credit for our failures than our successes; we hadn’t seen the hospital’s viewpoint that a move away from our spouse was to be one of our first successes; we were only seeing the failure of our marriage and that we were to blame. Instead we attributed our successes to the new doctor who appeared safer and more able to reason clearly. He conveyed throughout he would only help us learn how to take care of ourselves. We had to form new heuristics of how the world was going to work. In the former relationship most consideration and energy was spent toward our spouse, his family, and our children, so being now the center of attention was a major paradigm shift.
In looking at integration we realize that we’d formed in others a set of dispositions that allowed us to make sense of the circumstances. Over the years we’ve looked at the situation differently so that each time it mirrors more closely our new sense of self. It allows us an impression that we were always “the good guy” and we also are allowed through time the ability to let go, so what had hurt us at the time is not hurting us the same way now. “People act as their own masters, defining their terms differently, when dealing with the words they use to describe themselves and the concepts they use to judge others” (Dunning & Cohen, (1992). In stepping away from the negative relationships, we started to see things more positively and we looked for the positive in others that were more like ourselves. We found people that were smart, which was a disposition that weighed heavily in our mind, but we also looked for people who were more compassionate and that allowed us to feel better about ourselves. Although we struggled for many years, we found people who would be supportive and emotional stable. Without realizing it, we were looking for safely not dependency.
Following along the processes of perception the next state includes confirmation biases. We turn our impressions to reality. Many years after the separation and eventually the divorce, we again found ourselves at the hospital crossing a bridge that needed to be crossed. We had available to us a very good psychiatric nurse who outlined with us briefly the difference between our past and future. Certain doors had closed, but others had opened. We hadn’t seen for ourselves how clearly the picture really was. Basically, the end conclusion was that all the roads were leading toward going back to finishing the degree. To do this, we needed to take the focus from the past (including the ex) and refocus it on our educational dreams. “Resolving traumatic attachment to the perpetrator may be the core therapeutic task complicating the process of reclaiming trust, expressing grief and anger, and developing empowered meaning attributions” (Leahy, Pretty, & Tenebaum, 2003). We were able to do this most concretely through a successful relationship with our doctor who had negotiated a therapeutic environment that was safe. School, was an extension of our need for safety. We needed to learn about people and relationships and appreciate that most teachers were safer than family had been. We leaned more heavily on this set of familiar heuristics. It also played an affect because it had been something started, but left unfinished. We needed not only the degree, but some sense of closure. Toward change-of-meaning-hypothesis, we started to look at our husband more as someone who had blocked educational doors and this in return assisted us in enrolling and taking active steps forward, because he could no longer affect us if we so chose.
We find it surprising that we’ve gone through this amount of depth from our past in trying to understand better the area of perception. Most often we hold our present life course without articulating or expressing thoughts from the past. We preserver toward more basic beliefs, like toward school, than through marriage because it allows us to feel less vulnerable. We test our hypothesis by allowing more flexibility in the work that we are doing in that we now have tools to integrate more completely our avenues or paths. We still maintain a confirmation bias in that we still want to be liked with either more or less information given. We would like to know that it is acceptable to be us and to process as we might. In summary of the written material
Pause paper ... not complete...
Outline for chapter in Social Psych
The process of perceiving people is observation, attribution, integration, and confirmation.
1. Observation - elements
a. First impressions
i. Physical appearance
ii. Name
iii. Face
b. Scripts
i. "That enable us to anticipate the goals, behaviors, and outcomes likely to occur in a particular setting (Abelson, 1981; Read, 1987).
ii. Knowledge of social settings
1. What we expect to happen
2. How we explain the causes of human behavior
c. Behavior Evidence
i. Recognize what a person is doing (at any given minute)
ii. Derive meaning from it
1. Non-verbal behavior
a. Feelings and emotions
2. Body language
3. Eye contact
4. Touch
iii. Deception (covering our emotions)
2. Attribution - elements to dispositions - The explanations we develop (observe, analyze, and explain) to manage social world
how people feel and if they can be trusted (predict future behavior by identifying dispositions (stable characteristics, which are personality traits, attitudes, and abilities) inferred indirectly from what people say and do.
a. Theories
i. Describing the process we come up with (why questions)
1. Personal
a. Internal characteristics (ability, personality, mood, and effort)
2. Situational
a. Factors external to people (task, other people, and luck)
ii. Jones Correspondent Inference Theory
1. Inferring from action or behavior whether it represents a person's personality or not
a. Degree of choice
b. The expectedness of behavior (agree with norm)
c. The intended affect of someone's behavior
iii. Kelley's Covariation Theory
1. Principle - something has to be present and directly cause the behavior
a. Consensus - does the behavior repeat in others
b. Distinctiveness - is it different from others
c. Consistency - does it remain the same
b. Biases - See study Parents' Attitudes About Children : Associations With Parental Life Histories and Child-Rearing Quality
i. Cognitive Heuristics
1. Our general social rules that are quick and easy
2. Availability heuristic - estimate the odds something will happen
3. False-consensus effect - overestimation of others sharing opinions, attributes, and behaviors
4. Base-rate fallacy - more than normal absorption in graphic dramatical events
5. Counterfactual thinking - imagine alternative outcomes that didn't happen
ii. The fundamental attribution error
1. When people overestimate personal factors and forget situational factors.
c. Cultural constructions
i. People from Western societies place more attributions on personal self; foreground
ii. People from Eastern societies place more attribution on social world; background
d. Motivational biases - See study Egocentric Definitions of Traits and Abilities in Social Judgment
i. Our social perception being colored by personal needs, wishes and preferences.
ii. We take more credit for success than failure
iii. We overestimate the extent to which others think, feel, and behave to rationalize our own social behaviors
iv. Ideological motives
1. Conservatives believe problems caused by underclass
2. Liberals believe problems caused by institutional favoritism
v. Defensive motives lead us to blame others for their misfortunes
1. Belief in a just world - you just need to work harder
2. If one can't help the other, then we blame him (more attribution on the person than the situation)
3. Integration - disposition to impression - See study Childhood Sexual Abuse Narratives in Clinically and Nonclinically Distressed Adult Survivors
a. By making personal attributions we are lead to an inference that a person has a certain disposition.
b. The arithmetic
i. Impression formation
1. Summation model of impression (if we are more impressed) is the more positive traits there are the better
2. Averaging model of impression (if we are less impressed) is the higher the average value of all the various traits the better
3. Scale value - ratings obtained for each trait (sincere/liar) - moderate ratings diluted upper and lower ratings
4. Information integration theory
a. Personal dispositions of the perceiver
b. A weighted average, not a simple average, of the target person's characteristics
c. Deviations from the arithmetic - See study The Development of Competence-Related and Motivational Beliefs : An Investigation of Similarity and Influence Among Friends
i. Perceiver characteristics
1. We each look for certain traits in others such as beauty, intelligence, warmth, etc.
2. We see in others that which we like of ourselves
3. Perceivers are influenced by their present mood
ii. Priming effects
1. Characteristics we see in other people are somewhat depended on our current situation
2. Recently practiced concepts come to mind influencing perceptions more readily
3. We are more likely to perceive others as positive when we are primed first with positive thoughts or sense of accomplishment or good deed
iii. Target characteristics
1. Extroversion
2. Emotional stability
3. Openness to experience
4. Agreeableness
5. Conscientiousness
6. Valence of trait
a. Consideration of socially desirable or undesirable to our final impressions
7. Trait negative bias - negative information affects us more profoundly than positive.
iv. Implicit Personality Theories
1. A network of assumptions that we hold about relationships among various types of people, traits, and behaviors
2. The presence of one trait often implies the presence of others
3. The presence of certain traits have more influence on final impressions.
v. The Primacy Effect
1. The order in which a trait is discovered can influence impact, especially when first makes a lasting impression
2. When perceivers come to an accurate impression, they tend to pay less attention to subsequent information
3. Need for closure - is the desire to reduce ambiguity
a. Those high in closure tend to be impatient and impulsive and form quick and lasting judgments
b. Those low in closure tend to be open-minded, deliberate and perhaps even reluctant to draw firm conclusions about others
4. Change-of-meaning hypothesis once people have formed an impression they start to interpret inconsistent information in light of that impression (remarkable how creative we are in our efforts
to transform a bundle of contradictions into a coherent, integrated impression (reconciliation))
4. Confirmation Biases - from impressions to reality - See study Realism of Confidence in Obsessive–Compulsive Checkers
a. One people make up their minds they are highly unlikely to change even when confronted with new evidence.
i. Due to personal investment
ii. Confirmation biases - tendencies to interpret, seek, and create information in ways that verify existing beliefs
b. Perseverance of beliefs
i. People form early impressions that interfere with their subsequent ability to "see straight" once presented with improved evidence
ii. We see what we want or expect to see
iii. Belief perseverance - sticking to initial beliefs (easier to build then tear down)
iv. Once people form an opinion that opinion becomes strengthened when they merely think about the topic, even if they do not articulate the reasons for it
v. By asking people to consider an alternative theory that might be true, we can reduce or eliminate the belief perseverance effects to which they (and us) are vulnerable
c. Confirmatory hypothesis testing
i. Expecting a certain kind of person, participants unwittingly sought evidence that confirmed their expectations
ii. One-sided search when people are not certain of their beliefs and are concerned about the accuracy of their impressions, when they are allowed to ask their own questions, or when available nonconfirmatory responses are better then people tend to pursue a more balanced search for information
d. Self-fulfilling prophesy
i. A perceiver's expectations can actually lead to its own fulfillment
1. A perceiver forms an impression of a target person (based n interactions or other information
2. The perceiver behaves in a manner that is consistent with that first impression
3. The target person unwittingly adjusts his or her behavior to the perceiver's actions
4. Result: behavioral confirmation of the first impression
ii. When perceivers are highly motivated to seek the truth the become more objective, do not confirm prior expectations and are not so causal with their impression making.
iii. Prophecies of power high-power perceivers triggered the self-fulfilling prophecy, the low-power perceivers did not and the low power perceivers spent more time just trying to be liked
iv. Target's often don't know how they are being perceived
1. When discovered would overcome the effect by acting in ways that forced the perceiver to change his mind
2. This was especially true if the perceiver's perception clashed with the target's self-concept
3. What changed as a result of the interaction were the perceiver's' beliefs, not the target's behavior because the perceived have their own prophecies to fulfill
e. Summary - Social Perception - bottom line - See study Informant Discrepancies in the Assessment of Childhood Psychopathology : A Critical Review, Theoretical Framework, and Recommendations for Further Study
i. Two correct assumptions
1. Perception is quick and relatively automatic
2. Perception is relatively mindful
ii. Both assumptions cause us to steer our interactions along a path narrowed by first impressions (self-fulfilling prophecy)
iii. We overestimate our accuracy of predictions
1. More so in the case of people who scored
a. Low on spelling tests
b. Low in logic
c. Low in grammar
d. and low in humor appreciation
2. Satisfying (satisfying and sufficing)
a. Our judgments are good enough
b. Bounded rationality
i. We are rational within bounds depending on our abilities, motives, available time, and other factors
ii. People seldom compute intricate probablities to make decisions
iii. Compute fast and frugal heuristics (good enough)
iv. Sometimes get fooled
c. Biases lead to harmful consequences - stereotypes, prejudice and discrimination, BUT
i. We become more accurate with experience
ii. We become pretty good at predicting how people will act directly around us
iii. People will perceive better if taught the rules of probability and logic
iv. More accurate impressions of others can come about when motivated by a concern for accuracy and open-mindedness rather than by need for immediacy, confirmation, and closure.
Sorry just thought this was cool new cars 8'x5' 40 mpg in city, 60 mpg on highway!
We lost time in space ...
This one was just sitting on the shelves ... about 50 minutes.
Last smoke??
We're a trying ... this one was from yesterday or day before?
Monday morning ... we can do it...
Good morning ... late posting of this, but here nonetheless about 1 hr. 6 min.
This will wrap up Sunday
I was really workin, but tired quickly ... was talkin to V. before nap. About 49 min.
This video is the 2nd out of 3 made on Sunday. 2 hrs. and 8 min.
This video wraps up Sunday 2 hrs. 29 min.
This will be it for the day ... but, not enough
The first video was only 1/2 school half getting there ... still in total two hrs.
This is the second video followed not to long after the first. We lost it for awhile after this one. 2 hrs.
Yeeks sorry about that first screen capture ... Last video of the night 1 hr. 40 min.
Not sure what to say about this day total ... the point that we lost it was after we had found the article on obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). We had forgotten for a long period that we had this, and after having read the first article, we went in search of others. It didn't take us long to find quite a few articles. But, then after reading them, we felt bad about ourselves again. A couple of hours before we were expected to be out to our older son's, we called and canceled our meeting with him. It was too difficult a jump to get us from one point to the other. We didn't think we'd be able to leave the house. We did end up talking to him and felt better about that, and then later about 8:30 our sweetie had come over. Sweetie was not happy about us having missed an opportunity like this to be out with our son and his family as had been planned. Today we are going to need to get out of the house once again in meeting our youngest son. I miss terribly not having been able to be with our oldest son, I know I have to work harder to leave the house. Please V., do not add your scolding of us on this one as well. I feel pretty low about it.
This is one of our best rambling about nothing video's yet!
We did this one this morning ... about 1 hr 10 min. I'll let you know if there is ever one that you need to listen to. :)
As Ayn's World Turns
Ok ... this just goes to show you we can go on an on ...
This is our Happy Birthday Entry
Ok ... pretty much now we should go to bed? Chief Says ...
Still struggling to make my educational challenges
Dear Student #3
Thank you for reading my post. The sample size was quite remarkable. I believe the importance of the study was to look at self-concept in comparison of the students to their peers. So it would appear that because the students from the private Universities were looking at their peers as a form of "higher ability and status" that they were more likely to not rank themselves as able. That same student in a public setting would most likely credit himself higher on self-concept because the competition might not seem as challenging. I can understand your reservation in associating the results to higher education and in particular comparison of an Ivy League University to Capella, or other Universities of its stature. I'm not sure if the results could be generalized to this degree, because at 15 years of age, there is bound to be much more significance weighted toward identity formation and social comparison.
However, I would tend to think the same results might apply. I have some comfort, for example, that the level of acceptance to Capella was around 2.83 GPA. I could make that mark, however, I could not have gained entrance to the University of Illinois and that is a State University. The standard there was to have maintained a 3.4 GPA. It is easy to imagine that the standards at the Ivy League Universities are that much more exacting. I find myself more comfortable with my own ability at the lower level. I think the level is very satisfactory to my abilities, but I would have questioned myself if accepted at the higher level university in being able to "keep up" to the higher standards of its students. It would seem difficult even if I were smarter to be able to keep up with other students who were the nation's brightest or most able students.
This again, does not disqualify Capella as an excellent university "of its kind," but to meet Harvard's standards, students need to have distinguished undergraduate records and of the applicant pool they receive, only 11% of the students are accepted for a class size of 700 (Harvard, 2006) You also need to take a GRE test, some programs require language, "quantitative expertise," and all require letters of recommendation, resume or curriculum vitae, and if available papers or manuscripts (2006). At Capella I need to take care of my GPA at a 3.0 level, but I do not need to "beat out" other students to gain or maintain my place. Everyone at Capella can stay as long as they maintain their GPA, which is less than the more advanced schools.
Reference
Harvard University, (2006). Harvard University admissions and financial aid. Retrieved July 19, 2006, from http://www.harvard.edu/admissions/#grad
Oh man ... It's so cool to be in school
Topic: u01d2 Scientific Discipline Date: July 16, 2006 9:02 AM
Subject: In long response to learner #1 and learner #2 from Ann Author: Garvey, Ann
Last edited on: July 16, 2006 9:09 AM
Learner #1 & #2,
I apologize for being late into this discussion. I've done my required comments, but would like to add this one more. In looking at some of the ideas you both have presented. I'm interested Learner #1 in how you approach the ideal of studying social psychology so that history not repeat. In this I refer to your statement on some throughout history as sowing the seeds of self destruction and destruction of others. You indicate that if we could predict an event on the basis of systematic theory and hypothesis, we could more meaningfully make sense of the contradictions and here I might think the contradictions are in looking at supposed versus actual reality, or perhaps the differences between "my reality" and "your reality." Please let me know if I'm too far off-base. You also comment on information overload in that because of the speed of events happening so quickly we need to become better at structuring, filtering, and making sense of the information in a coping manner so that it didn't overload us with its complexity. Learner #2 furthered this discussion by stating that having a "head start" and adding information on local conditions that we could better explain the course of human history. Learner #2 indicated through his work that "some cultures do not adapt to sudden overwhelming change." Through my paper, we'd discussed that a positive self-concept would allow "things to happen, such as positive thoughts and feelings leading to the students’ ability to make choices, self-motivate, plan and other subsequent accomplishments (2003) and that students with higher self-concepts could adapt to change better." Learner #2 introduced the concept of "tacit knowledge" as a skill in codifying knowledge as a transformation process in better understanding "patterns of information," which could be accomplished from learning. I would think an assumption could then be made that those people and countries who continue to learn from their mistakes and successes will better survive the rampant change that is evident in our society today and part of the acceptance or tolerance is in realizing the "pond is very big," which refers to the vast multi-cultural aspects of learning. Learner #2 last leaves the question of developing better strategies for processing change.
Whew … I hope I didn't mess that up too much … so, what are my conclusions? I agree that it would seem logical that if we could learn from our mistakes that we could better society. I am though wary of the thought that "history repeats" and history has included good and bad alongside each other. I agree that without being able to adjust to change, we become overwhelmed. It doesn't seem to necessarily follow that because we can understand the variables that things will always change for the better. In saying this, I mean that history does repeat and that not all people, countries, or cultures hold the same goals and objectives. We would also need to better understand "forces of good and evil" without complicating the picture with judgments and stereotypes. It would seem due to various fundamental believes, particularly religious and political, that even though we might gain better understanding, we might not conclude by all following the same course or path. The question would then become are we tolerant enough to accept others' differences? Does my reality have to match yours? And, is there such a thing as global truths? I think here now about the psychological concept of dissonance. Here in America we subscribe to liberty, justice, and freedom, and accordingly free choice. This would presume then that we can cope with ourselves as being different although dissonance would seem to indicate we struggle to not be confused or uncertain by conflicting concepts, and we do this by "changing one (the one that is easier to modify) to make it consonant with the other" (Corsini, 2002). Would this mean that because different is more difficult that we close down our borders and consider only being bigger fish in a small pond like in the case of the US being more protective in this century of its self-interests. It would seem as indicated in our paper this unit that US is tending toward a path, that is seemingly and more easily within our grasp as us taking care of us. This would of course mean that US could continue to be a Big fish by its maintenance of its world from the viewpoint of a small pond. It would stand to reason that our self-concept within the small pond would feel more reassuring than the self-concept we get as being a small imposing fish in the world's pond where our impact is much lesser. Perhaps a better strategy would include learning that different (change) is good. I believe to understand social psychology we need to include the entire world, which at the time being is overwhelming us. Not all the bigger world is at this point of time inviting us to lead.
Ann
Corsini, R. J. (2002). The psycholgoy dictionary. NY: Brunner Routledge.
Dear Student #2
Your welcome. Cool, we have a bridge to sell as well!
You couldn't have chosen a more favored subject then self-system. We're planning on banking our career on it. We've carried that term with us over this last year and have had little chance to test-drive her. I don't know enough about it yet to know if a healthy self-system is created by an internal self or modeled from an impressive parent. I love the concept of scaffolding. I figure we're still working on her. Our "system" has gone through some pretty heavy abuse when very young, and my understanding is that self-systems establish themselves beginning at about two. I value recreating positive adult self-schemas; as far as I see it there are a lot of negative "other-imposed" messages to let go. As someone with multiplicity … we're still working on self-concepts … I think we're winning with good "team" effort.
I haven't read Coleman's book, but we have our own take on intelligence. We read about 16 years ago, when diagnosed that multiples tend to be intelligent and creative. I've held onto that hope tightly. I think as a child it had worked against us, in that the more we tried to sparkle, the heavier-handed the consequences. It would be a matter of perception in this case whether "our minds" showed advance development, or severe damage. We tend to vote toward the former. We hold an understanding that our will to survive gave us what was necessary to get through the averse treatment of family. Emotionally, we spent years recovering from the anger, but in general emotions took a long time of psychiatric care to uncover and release. I don't believe all abuse survivors fare as well as us. We've had excellent adult supports. I don't know if we have stronger assets intellectually or emotionally, but I take great stock in personal development and hold the value of some others we've met on our way as lights along the path. Being able to control our behavior is much more critical toward self-regulation and goal-setting, whereas emotional work is a matter of self-acceptance, it is ok and safe to feel. Yes these tools can be channeled into life and career, but most importantly toward a burgeoning sense of self worth.
I hope its ok to talk openly. I know that not all psychology believes in dissociative identy disorder. Figure at this point that what we think counts too. Great questions … love to hear your feedback, maybe we can continue it over into the next unit. BTW left a combined note for you and Student #1 further down this unit's thread. Hope it makes sense!
Ann
Just for V ... Our first paper he didn't need to remind us to do. :)
Topic: u01d2 Scientific Discipline Date: July 15, 2006 5:54 PM
Subject: In response to assignment from Ann Author: Garvey, Ann
The article I chose to focus on was “Big-Fish-Little-Pond Effect on Academic Self-Concept: A Cross-Cultural (26-Country) Test of the Negative Effects of Academically Selective Schools” by Marsh and Hau (2003). In answering the questions, “Is social psychology a scientific discipline?” And, “What makes it a scientific discipline?” I would answer affirmatively to the former especially due to social psychology’s primary interest in the scientific method and experimentation combined with attention to social consciousness and the social self (Morawski, 2000). In response to the latter, I would suggest that the system of testing hypothesis empirically allows us to build an objective and methodological knowledge-base that is very scientific. The development of social psychology following a pattern of hypothesis testing has been challenged by psychologists from other countries and by a few American psychologists, such as Wallach and Wallach . Those positions will be sketched shortly, but distinguished attention will be in response to the work of Marsh and Hau, which will illustrate the generalizability of empirical studies based on large multi-cultural samples. Last, we will summarize the effect on this particular study on the area of learning we are interested in toward adults with developmental disabilities.
The study of “Big-Fish-Little-Pond Effect” (BFLPE) by Marsh and Hau was performed utilizing 103,558 15-year-olds from 26 countries to test the hypothesis of selective schools (private) in comparison to non-selective schools (public) as they relate to building “academic self-concepts” in adolescents. The study found that students in the selective schools did not fare as well in academic self-concepts as the students in public schools. This was measured by a self-concept instrument and achievement tests (Marsh and Hau, 2003). Marsh and Hau considered self-concept as “making things happen” such as positive thoughts and feelings leading to the students’ ability to make choices, self-motivate, plan and other subsequent accomplishments (2003) and that students with higher self-concepts could adapt to change better. The social comparison aspect contributes to theory development in that it assists individuals in forming a frame of reference as to where they stand in comparison to others in similar situations. In a sense, students compare themselves to other students and this assists them in developing a self-concept. In consideration of selective schools, these students were considered more likely to be small fish in a big pond thus making it to the “top of the class” more difficult, thus lowering self-concept. Therefore in public schools, students are bigger fish in a smaller pond comparing themselves upward toward higher feelings of self-concept because often the competition for intellectualism isn’t as great.
Research such as that of Marsh and Hau is unique in that it is a very comprehensive study undertaken in many different countries. It follows the American model of Empirical research, but it does not over-generalize the American role as center of the research effort or results. In the world view America could be compared to private education, we are a “selective” country. We are in general highly educated and America is the place that is supposed to value most happiness, success, rights, and freedom. But, if Americans take the stand as only maintaining a narrow self-concept, we then risk our self-concept as being unrealistic; there is a larger pond. If we only protect are own, we can only assume a self-view as an illusion that we are big fish. Social psychology in America mimics this view of being big fish in a small pond. “Our history” is identified with American “scientific management in the 1920s, the emergence of social psychology in the 1930s, World War II, group dynamics in the 1950s, social action of the 1960s, team building in the 1970s, economic turmoil in the 1980s, and the ascendance of team-based organizations in the 1990s" (Skipton & Freedman, 2000). Global relationships have seriously hit psychology in only the past decade or two. It is easy to draw a parallel that a larger pond would incorporate the entire world, and in this pond the United States is relatively a small though important fish. This practitioner’s understanding of the world population is that American’s are only 4% of the whole. America seems to have a self-concept that suggests that it is better or “more right” than most other countries, because of its narrow focuses and influences primarily due its positions of power, wealth, and education.
In retrospect, we might look into the value of self-concepts drawn by Marsh and Hau. In the formation of an American identity in the 21rst century, we could generalize that a better self-concept would lead to better chances of “making things happen in the world.” Marsh and Hau contend that having a positive frame of reference leads to better social comparison and a higher self-concept. The self-concept that America holds for itself is most likely higher within itself (big fish small pond) and more positive than concepts held of it within the world’s view. Taken from the world’s view, America is making things happen such as war, which is not in concordance with collaborative efforts in world peace. The United States stood apart from the world community in its war against Iraq when it quit its negotiations with the United Nations. Many American people supported the present administration, because they hold the frame of reference that we are the world’s leader and in particular - watchdogs in preventing international abuses of power against people, such as the case in Iraq. America is trying to impose its ideals of democracy on a resistant international community.
As tides change, it now seems that America is holding the self-concept that it is in danger. This has been apparent since the bombing of the World Trade Center. Through its concept of danger, America has taken a strong stance for its self protection, especially because it is easily recognized that more people are “against” the US than before. It started through terrorism, and over the last three years we have the building of Homeland Security, sufferance priori (high gas prices or shortages), and the enactment of stricter policies and procedures with foreigners, illegal aliens, border crossings, and less tolerance for foreign languages. America seems to be shutting the fortress doors, at the sake of losing touch with the international intelligence community that in the past has served a check and balance purpose against another world war. This practitioner percept is that we as a country are only representing a façade in its role of world leadership. We will accomplish less, because most often people do not favor war for their sons and daughters, and taking a stance of war will not allow us to make better choices, motivate others, or plan toward peace. Like the 15 year-old students, we may find that being in a selective school/country the competition to maintain higher status within the world is more difficult, because in reality there are too many factors not within our control.
Social psychologists play a great part in foreseeing events happening due to its understanding of society and the way it works. The importance of the scientific method is underscored by Brehm, Kassin & Fein (2005) who state:
[Indent] Social psychologists develop specific, quantifiable hypotheses that can be tested empirically. If these hypotheses are wrong, they can be proven wrong. In addition, social scientists report the details of how they conduct their tests so that others can try to replicate their findings. They integrate evidence from across time and place. And slowly but steadily, they build a consistent and more precise understanding of human nature [end indent].
As outlined in the first assignment, we can know that an American interest in social psychology was sparked approximately 125 years ago and that it was thought to be the formal beginning of social psychology because at that time social interest was combined with a scientific method. Morawski (2000) writes "America's dual interest in social welfare and practical science fueled the emergence of social psychology in the late 19th century. French researchers at the beginning of the 21rst century complain of the world being overly enamored in the scientific discipline of psychology. Rodriguez and Alcover de la Hera (2002) state “It is necessary to point out its [United States] excessive dependency in both theory and methodology on models and tools” and its focus on limited populations. This resulted in their conclusion that there be a European curriculum where European psychologists could complete its own research and Rodriguez and Alcover de la Hera (2002) further state advancements had been made over the last 15 years in structuring social psychology into the European university setting (2002).
Part of the fall-out from the perspective of Rodriguez and Alcover de la Hera might have come from Americans’ 20th century insistence on studying primarily middle-class White males from the United States. It has only been a recent development through globalization that psychology as a whole incorporated multi-cultural standards. These standards seem dampened by an America military role in the Middle East. America, could do itself further harm if it assumed its concepts without affirmation of global truths, which will become more difficult if the country is allowed to shut it’s front door.
It would seem fair to present the field of social psychology as a developing structure and to note each year and century that it has made improvements upon itself that are in accordance to time and space in serving people. Morawski (2000) indicates a need for the psychology profession to produce knowledge that could be readily used to address current social problems and regulate social institutions.” There is a question as to America becoming inclusive within its self. An important aspect of social psychology has always been in its immediate application. The solutions it develops need to be put into practice and developed to work for all people. While most people have never afforded the luxury of personal and private counseling, social psychology could benefit many in its generalization of knowledge and truth within society. It should be noted also the specific work being done in social psychology on groups could be conceivably very supportive and practical.
As mentioned at the beginning of this writing effort, not all American social psychologists hold the belief that the scientific method is working. Wallach and Wallach (as cited in Schaller, Crandall, Stangor & Neuberg, 1994) discussed hypotheses and empirical design on experiments offering “some provocative opinions about what makes a hypothesis interesting, important, or worthwhile to test. They argued that in social psychology, “hypotheses derivable from propositions very much like tautologies may not be infrequent” and that “their confirmation as such is of little interest” (Abstract; see also p. 241)" (Schaller, Crandall, Stangor & Neuberg, 1994). Corsini (2002) states that tautology is the “repetition of the same word or phrase, or of a literal equivalent in the same sentence.” So, basically the argument of Wallach and Wallach was that too frequently social psychology wastes research effort by studying words so close in nature they lose value in describing something unique or of interest. Schaller, Crandall, Stangor & Neuberg state that social psychology and general science will benefit best from “an unrestrictive, eclectic, even anarchic approach to the generation of ideas and hypotheses.”
Finally, this practitioner would like to state that further research of social comparison and self-concept would be of interest in pursuit of new knowledge and toward application of the information to current or future professional settings. As stated previously, Marsh and Hau (2003) considered self-concept as important in “making things happen. We have an obvious interest in world politics only in respect to wanting the world to be around in our life and the life of our family. It seems socially that our country is making wrong turns, but that there is good work being done by researchers who can consider the significance of world-wide theories. One interesting note that Marsh and Hau made in relationship to people with developmental disabilities was that just as selective schools didn’t work for the higher educated students, teaching students with developmental disabilities at higher levels (regular classrooms) also did not work toward providing positive self-concepts. Although, advocacy strongly suggests normalization and inclusion, the reports suggest that placing people with developmental disabilities in the classroom was taking them as big fish in a small pond, and making them into small fish in a big pond. This is something to consider in our work and we incorporate social psychology into our thoughts. As an up and coming educational psychologist, we feel the study of positive self-concepts that allow for motivation, choice-making, planning, etc. will support the work we’ve already started in self-regulation. It is my contention that when people, or countries, are in control of self, the outcome will be brighter for all.
References
Brehm, S. S. Kassin, S. & Fein, S. (2005). Social psychology. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Corsini, R. J. (2002). The dictionary of psychology. NY: Brunner-Routledge.
Marsh, H. W. Hau, K. (2003). Big-fish-little-pond effect on academic self-concept: A cross-cultural (26-country) test of the negative effects of academically selective schools. American Psychologist, 58, 364-376. Abstract retrieved July 13, 2006 from EBSCOhost database.
Morawski, J. G. (2000). Social psychology a century ago. American Psychological Association, 55, 427-430. Abstract retrieved July 13, 2006 from EBSCOhost database.
Rodriguez, F. G. & Alcover de la Hera, C. M. (2002, December). Small group research in Europe: contributions to the field from Spanish social psychology 1955-2000. European Psychologist, 7, 265-274. Abstract retrieved July 13, 2006 from EBSCOhost database.
Schaller, M., Cradall, C. S., Stangor, C., & Neuberg, S. L. (1995). "What kinds of social psychology experiments are of value to perform?": Comment on Walach and Wallach (1994). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 611-618. Abstract retrieved July 13, 2006 from EBSCOhost database.
Skipton. L. H. (2000). From scientific management through fun and games to high-performing teams: A historical perspective on consulting to team-based organizations. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 52, 3-19. Abstract retrieved July 13, 2006 from EBSCOhost database.
I think this recording is only about 30 minutes, but of course, you can take a pass ... just recording *silly grin*
Don't look we're in the middle of this post
Good morning … just me. AND, it’s a Saturday morning … That be the good part, right? Hehehe sorry, just a little down this morning … let’s just say I haven’t woked up yet, K?
I think V. signed off just before I could get to the computer. It’s already 6 am. And, there is soooooooo much to do today. The primary things are blogging, school, clean house, and have guests over. What? I know didn’t I just say that? Guests??!! Wow! That’s different.
We had got to talking with some friends from work and things went along and now they say their coming over? Hmm, that’s leads to the housework part. *Sigh* Oh yah … have to go to the bank and laundry today too. I went to the bank last night, but when I got there I found that my coffee had spilled and saturated my check … that wasn’t so good. I left it to dry and we’re hoping that we can still deposit it today. I never done that before. Not so sure Sr. is going to appreciate getting a returned check back in that condition. But, we’re pretty sure we need the money in the bank.
We had a so-so day yesterday … Did ok with most stuff, but we had a bad part. On Wednesday, we had met the new State person at both Annual meetings. She turned out to be like some of the other bad ones. Usually, this meant that she interfered, made assumptions and tore into our goals. So, we were like … ok, I see, I know what to expect. Her main thing was that the goals had to be simplified. So, I rewrote the goals … no problem I told her her input was good, because we were both working toward the same objectives. So then, yesterday. I got a copy of a fax in my mail box … it was from this lady and she wrote that she had found the goals to be unacceptable and that I had to rewrite them, and if that wasn’t bad enough, she sent me a copy of what she expected. I had considered both things a vie for power, because she placed herself in a commanding position both times instead of lets talk about it. Even though … we talked between meetings and I made sure she knew we weren’t upset and that changing the goals would be no problem. After we got the fax with her idea of a goal … we were infuriated. Whereas my goals are very good as to the clients real issues and psychological condition, her goal solution was “Have the client take the underarm deodorant and apply. Praise him for good work.” Except her goal wasn’t even written that well.
Oh man … that’s about the suckiest goal writing I’ve ever seen. I was pretty frustrated though … but I determined in my mind that I would continue writing my goals as we do and I’d put out a façade for her. BUT, then I had talked to Sister about some plans for next week while she’s gone, and she said, “By the way, I had to spend a good amount of time on the phone with this State worker as she complained about the goals and insisted that it be different.” Oh man … that put me over another ledge. We very seldom show our anger directly with Sr. but, that about tilted my little world. I couldn’t believe that she had overstepped her boundaries not only once, twice, but now again. She had gone over my head although I had given her no indication that I was going to be giving her trouble. I had spent the extra time working with her to assure the relationship was sound. Shoot, that was like way too much. I must have gone off in front of Sr. for a good 6-7 minutes about what an imbecile this person was and simple-minded blah blah blah … well, you get the idea. I was pretty direct. We were pretty angry. Fortunately, for me Sr. took the attitude that I had in that we’d continue making good goals and I would cover my tracks with her simple-sucky sh**********. But, it took another long while to calm down and about five other staff had heard my frustration before I could calm down. That was pretty silly. I told Sr. what the state person was asking was literally not only an insult to my intelligence, but darn near anyone in sights! Shoot, Chief is here now and he said it’s an insult to HIS intelligence too. See. That just goes to show you. It’s a given that some people at the State assume power positions, but this lady surely didn’t waste any time in establishing herself as untrustworthy. Oh man … Chief says though … she’s an imbecile … lets think of petting the kitty instead! Good thinking Chief.
Ahh Dr. V. is on! Ok, ok … we’re on a little brb break … V had to do something. I think I’m over for now the upset … not all the way, but its back burner. Just to catch you up in other happenings. I did get a chance to talk to sweetie pie last night and I got a chance to talk with my Grandma and I went to a meeting for multiples and a chat for survivors all before going to bed at 10 pm.
The talk with my Grandmother is always nice. We talked about her grocery’s and trip to the doctor and such … I always learn stuff when we’re talking to her. She said the temps up to the 100’s this weekend didn’t like that part. My Grandma always makes me feel like we can hardly wait for the next opportunity to call. She’s real good people. She makes me feel good. We had to let her go a little early though because her voice was getting dry … yup yup so that meant we talked about drinking enough water. She’s got a pretty good take on that, but I think the best solution was to just give her voice a break. Didn’t want to wear her out.
Afterward was the metting for Multiples already started. We’re trying to let people get used to us. I’m missing out on a lot of what they have going between them. It seems kind of like a check-in time. We’re not to the point where people ask about us … we’re still just trying to not be afraid to say stuff. A lot of times we’ll say something trivial and no one will respond back, so then we go another long period of time before we get the courage to say something again. Trust takes a long time.
Over at the Surveyors group … it had started off causal enough, but then someone that needed to talk came by. Within a couple of statements the leader of the group was already being heavy-handed with her. And, then a little later one of her good friends called her on personal stuff. I tried to stay out of it and did except at the very end … I had told her what I had thought the purpose of the room and I related what I thought of her reaction toward the first woman. I also added that I didn’t want to upset and would like to come by more often. Two times in one night, I was told “whatever!” Which, I take to mean my opinion isn’t work a bag of sh***, so I said ok guess I’ll leave then. I’ll try again, but if the main lady is at odds with us … just after a couple of sessions … it won’t be worth our time. From the sounds of what her friend was saying she’s been acting out of sorts with a lot of people and that isn’t the way it used to be. So there’s a chance she’ll get over whatever muck she’s in, or just like the lady last night and me … people will just keep coming in expecting support, get confronted with anger and judgments and leave feeling a little less trusting. After I’d come in I had noted that she wasn’t talking about the casual stuff and she ignored a couple of attempts for me to talk with her, but then she jumped right at the person “needing help.” That gave me a lot of information. Eh … letting that all go too. We’ll see.
So that puts us up to this morning. We’ve taken our medicine … gone over some time … and now need to focus on school AND cleaning. I think we’ll have to use our timer. At least we remembered to have put batteries in our bag, so we’d better start there. Ok … that’s all set up … it’s now 7:42. You all know the routine … though its been awhile since we tried it. Let’s say every 20 minutes we have to do something for at least 7-8 minutes or as long as our back holds up. We’ve set the timer for 17 minutes so we can do our first chore right at 8 am, which will have given the medicine a chance to relax the arthritis problems. THEN we’ll start at the desk, then the living room, then the kitchen, then the bathroom, then the back bedroom, then the front bedroom, and last the hallway with new kitty litter … and hopefully by then we’ll grab a shower and if there is time we’ll go to the bank and laundry, but until then it’s just a plan. We might take our afternoon friend out and run those few errands if we are running late. We’ll have to see how it goes by then. With this much activity … we’re likely to be pretty sore. BUT, it’s always nice to have the place picked up. I think our friend is planning to come over about 1 pm.
So there is only five hours … we’ll have to concentrate, because I want to have finished the second paper and comments by then too. Ok … better start thinking toward school then. I think we last left off with just the one paragraph. So, we’re going to pull that over here now. And then, we’ll have to work from there.
First paragraphs…The article I chose to focus on was “Big-Fish-Little-Pond Effect on Academic Self-Concept: A Cross-Cultural (26-Country) Test of the Negative Effects of Academically Selective Schools” by Marsh and Hau (2003). In answering the questions, “Is social psychology a scientific discipline?” And, “What makes it a scientific discipline?” I would answer affirmatively to the former especially due to social psychology’s primary interest in the scientific method and experimentation combined with attention to social consciousness and the social self (Morawski, 2000). In response to the latter, I would suggest that the system of testing hypothesis empirically allows us to build an objective and methodological knowledge-base that is very scientific. The development of social psychology following a pattern of hypothesis testing has been challenged by a few psychologists, such as Wallach and Wallach as noted by Schaller, Crandall, Stangor & Neuberg (1994). That position will be sketched shortly, but distinguished attention will be in response to the work of Marsh and Hau, which will illustrate the generalizability of empirical studies based on large multi-cultural samples. Last, we will summarize the effect on this particular study on the area of learning we are interested in toward adults with developmental disabilities.
The study of “Big-Fish-Little-Pond Effect” (BFLPE) by Marsh and Hau was performed utilizing 103,558 15-year-olds from 26 countries to test the hypothesis of selective schools (private) in comparison to non-selective schools (public) as they relate to building “academic self-concepts” in adolescents. The study found that students in the selective schools did not fare as well in academic self-concepts as the students in public schools. This was measured by a self-concept instrument and achievement tests (Marsh and Hau, 2003). Marsh and Hau considered self-concept as “making things happen” such as positive thoughts and feelings leading to the students’ ability to make choices, self-motivate, plan and other subsequent accomplishments (2003) and that students with higher self-concepts could adapt to change better. The social comparison aspect contributes to theory development in that it assists individuals in forming a frame of reference as to where they stand in comparison to others in similar situations. In a sense, students compare themselves to other students and this assists them in developing a self-concept. In consideration of selective schools, these students were considered more likely to be small fish in a big pond in comparison of intellectually reaching “top of the class.” Therefore in public schools, students are bigger fish in a smaller pond comparing themselves upward toward higher feelings of self-concept because often the competition for intellectualism isn’t as great.
Research such as that of Marsh and Hau is unique in that it is a very comprehensive study undertaken from many different countries. It follows the American model of Empirical research, but it does not over-generalize that America is the center of all important research being completed in the field of social psychology. In a sense, America standing on its own becomes the big fish in a little pond, while in consideration of the larger world pond, it is still relatively a small fish. America has a world identity that seems to suggest that it is better or “more right” than most other countries, especially due to its influences through power, wealth, and education. In retrospect then we might look into the value of Marsh and Hau’s work in its work toward self-concepts. In the formation of an American identity in the 21rst century, we could generalize that a better self-concept would lead to better chances of “making things happen in the world.” Marsh and Hau contend that having a positive frame of reference leads to better social comparison and a higher self-concept. The self-concept that America holds for itself is most likely higher within itself (big fish small pond) than is held within the world’s view. Taken from the world view, America is making things happen in the world, but many things such as war are negative and not in concordance with a peaceful world collaborative effort. The United States stood apart from the world community in its war against Iraq when it quit its negotiations with the United Nations. Many people supported the present administration, because they hold the frame of reference that we are the world’s leader and in particular watchdogs in preventing internal abuse of its people by a corrupt government in Iraq. As tides change, it now seems that America is becoming more self protective. Indications of it becoming more inclusive is seen from its building priori in our sufferance (high gas prices), Homeland Security, and the enactment of stricter policies and procedures with foreigners, illegal aliens, border crossings, and less tolerance for foreign languages. It seems to be shutting the fortress doors, at the stake of losing the international scope of intelligence that would serve as a better safety toward world peace.
The importance of the scientific method is underscored by Brehm, Kassin & Fein (2005) who state:
[Indent] Social psychologists develop specific, quantifiable hypotheses that can be tested empirically. If these hypotheses are wrong, they can be proven wrong. In addition, social scientists report the details of how they conduct their tests so that others can try to replicate their findings. They integrate evidence from across time and place. And slowly but steadily, they build a consistent and more precise understanding of human nature [end indent].
As outlined in the previous history paper we can know that an American interest in social psychology was sparked approximately 125 years ago and that it was thought to be the formal beginning of social psychology because at that time social interest was combined with a scientific method. Morawski (2000) writes "America's dual interest in social welfare and practical science fueled the emergence of social psychology in the late 19th century. A French researchers at the beginning of the 21rst century complain of the world being overly enamored in the scientific discipline of psychology. Rodriguez and , Alcover de la Hera (2002) state “It is necessary to point out its [United States] excessive dependency in both theory and methodology on models and tools elaborated [or spread] throughout North America and Europe.” Their idea resulting from the concept of “excessive dependency” on the United States was to focus on a European curriculum where European psychologists could complete research work on its own and he further stated advancements had been made in Europe over the last 15 years in structuring social psychology into the university setting (2002). Part of the fall-out from the perspective of Rodriguez and alcover de la Hera might have come from Americans’ 20th century insistence on studying primarily white middle-class males from the United States. It has only been a recent development through globalization that psychology as a whole incorporated multi-cultural standards. And, it seems that America is still struggling with its identity according to world standards and further provoked by its military role in the Middle East. America, would do further harm if it assumed its concepts untested by a world census could affirm psychological truths to the entire scientific community and more specifically to the general world public or stage.
It would seem fair to present the field of social psychology as a developing structure and to note each year and century that it has improvements upon itself that are in accordance to time and space and could better serve people in general. Morawski (2000) is in accordance when he indicates a need for the psychology profession to produce knowledge that could be readily used to address current social problems and regulate social institutions.” Theres seems to be a question as to inclusion and exclusion. An important aspect of social psychology has always been in its immediate application. The solutions it develops need to work for all people. Not many people could afford the luxury of personal and private counseling, though through social psychology many could benefit generalized knowledge on how to get along better with others. It should be noted also the specific work being done in group psychology, which supports social psychology being a very useful practical science. Skipton & Freedman (2000) write,
[Indent] In development of a team theory, "The influence of important schools of social and organizational psychology as well as the political and social milieu of the times on the research and theory of teams is identified: scientific management in the 1920s, the emergence of social psychology in the 1930s, World War II, group dynamics in the 1950s, social action of the 1960s, team building in the 1970s, economic turmoil in the 1980s, and the ascendance of team-based organizations in the 1990s [End indent].
Pardon our Construction ... we're in mid-phase about here ...Umm this is just us warming up our silly stuff
*Double Sigh*
Our friend is fishing this weekend.
That’s ok … But, can you tell,
Which one of these pictures did he say he’s Coming over on Thursday Next Week …
Er … b-day on Tuesday.
:(
I know ... their just like that.
Hmm ... Just a Tease ... Need to bring home the bacon!
Ok, ok … yes we look jut this excited. Good morning. I apologize for the lack of posts. We’d written one over the course of a couple of days, but we lost it when the machine turned off … for some reason the computer didn’t think to save it booooo…
We’re a little bit groany this morning. Our fingers are hurting and we didn’t leave enough time to study and we’re feeling just tired and cranky. We didn’t have a very good Dr. M. session last night … Some parts out crying, but its been worse. Little tummy problem too … shoot we’re a downright mess!
This is where we are right now with school …
u01d2 Scientific Discipline :
For this activity, you will locate an article on the Internet and discuss it and the text readings from this unit.
Instructions
1. Conduct a library search to identify one psychological journal research article
published since 1990 related to an area of interest in social psychology.
2. Read the article you located and incorporate the information into your discussion response. Remember to cite the research article. Do not provide just a descriptive report. List the full reference for this article using the APA 5th edition style guidelines reference lists and citations.
3. Remember to cite information from the text readings as appropriate.
4. Consider the following:
o Is social psychology a scientific discipline?
o If so, what makes it a scientific discipline?
o What areas of research in social psychology interest you the most in terms of pursuing research or applying the information to your own current or future professional setting?
"Research concerning groups has experienced a rapid development over the last 15 years of the 20th century--the result of the late but then clear institutionalization of psychology into university structure" (Rodriguez, 2002).
"It is necessary to point out its excessive dependency in both theory and methodology on models and tools elaborated throughout North America and Europe."
Rodriguez (2002), proposes "creating a European formative curriculum for group psychologists I order to unify and promote research within this active and important field of [social] psychology."
"America's dual interest in social welfare and practical science fueled the emergence of social psychology in the late 19th century" (Morawski, 2000).
"Contesting models of social psychology … were challenged by the discipline's growing dedication to the scientific method and experimentation, as well as the profession's need to produce knowledge that could be readily used to address current social problems and regulate social institutions" (Morawski, 2000).
"The modernity of social consciousness or of the social self thus was set with both the comparably modern glue of aggregate experimental techniques and an accordant positivism that measured visible features of the social world, which were to be the means to make social psychology (and psychology generally) a genuinely useful science" (Morawski, 2000).
In development of a team theory, Skipton & Freedman (2000) write "The influence of important schools of social and organizational psychology as well as the political and social milieu of the times on the research and theory of teams is identified: scientific management in the 1920s, the emergence of social psychology in the 1930s, World War II, group dynamics in the 1950s, social action of the 1960s, team building in the 1970s, economic turmoil in the 1980s, and the ascendance of team-based organizations in the 1990s."
Wallach and Wallach discussed the nature of social psychological hypotheses and the manner in which psychologists respond to the empirical results of experiments designed to test those hypotheses. In doing so, they offered some provocative opinions about what makes a hypothesis interesting, important, or worthwhile to test. They argued that, in social psychology, “hypotheses derivable from propositions very much like tautologies may not be infrequent” and that “their confirmation as such is of little interest” (Abstract; see also p. 241)" (Schaller, Crandall, Stangor & Neuberg, 1994).
"Thus, we submit that there can be no single authoritative answer to the question “What kinds of social psychology experiments are of value to perform?” In the long run, social psychology (not to mention the sciences in general and society at large) is likely to benefit from an unrestrictive, eclectic, even anarchic approach to the generation of ideas and hypotheses" (Schaller, Crandall, Stangor & Neuberg, 1994).
"The focus on “near-tautologies” is not the whole of Wallach and Wallach's article. They also critically discussed Gergen's (1982 , 1988) thesis that social psychology is essentially nonempirical" (Schaller, Crandall, Stangor & Neuberg, 1994).
"Tautology - Repetition of the same word or phrase, or of a literal equivalent in the same sentence" (Corsini, 2002).
Brehm, S. S. Kassin, S. & Fein, S. (2005). Social psychology. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Corsini, R. J. (2002). The dictionary of psychology. NY: Brunner-Routledge.
Marsh, H. W. Hau, K. (2003). Big-fish-little-pond effect on academic self-concept: A cross-cultural (26-country) test of the negative effects of academically selective schools. American Psychologist, 58, 364-376. Abstract retrieved July 13, 2006 from EBSCOhost database.
Morawski, J. G. (2000). Social psychology a century ago. American Psychological Association, 55, 427-430. Abstract retrieved July 13, 2006 from EBSCOhost database.
Rodriguez, F. G. & Alcover de la Hera, C. M. (2002, December). Small group research in Europe: contributions to the field from Spanish social psychology 1955-2000. European Psychologist, 7, 265-274. Abstract retrieved July 13, 2006 from EBSCOhost database.
Scaller, M., Cradall, C. S., Stangor, C., & Neuberg, S. L. (1995). "What kinds of social psychology experiments are of value to perform?": Comment on Walach and Wallach (1994). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 611-618. Abstract retrieved July 13, 2006 from EBSCOhost database.
Skipton. L. H. (2000). From scientific management through fun and games to high-performing teams: A historical perspective on consulting to team-based organizations. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 52, 3-19. Abstract retrieved July 13, 2006 from EBSCOhost database.
End That Stuff…
Ok ok … moving along … we jumped in the shower early so we could concentrate for a bit. We have a half hour now before work. I took our medicine too so feeling better all around … we were having problems with achy fingers. We take pain medicine prescribed and over-the-counter for arthritis, and the shower time gave it a chance to seep in.
Now we’re about to here …
I’d like to pull together a real quick outline before I go. Let’s see how that would work.
Paper...
The article I chose to center on was “Big-Fish-Little-Pond Effect on Academic Self-Concept: A Cross-Cultural (26-Country) Test of the Negative Effects of Academically Selective Schools” by Marsh and Hau (2003). In answering the questions, “Is social psychology a scientific discipline?” And, “What makes it a scientific discipline?” I would answer affirmatively to the former especially due to social’s psychologies primary interest in the scientific method and experimentation combined with attention to social consciousness and the social self (Morawski, 2000). In response to the latter, I would suggest that the system of testing hypothesis empirically allows us to build an objective and methodological knowledge-base that is very scientific. The development of social psychology has followed a pattern of hypotheses testing, though this has been challenged by psychologists such as Wallach and Wallach as noted by Schaller, Crandall, Stangor & Neuberg (1994). The work of Marsh and Hau will illustrate the generalizability of large empirical studies based on large multi-cultural samples. Last we will summarize the effect on this particular study on the area of study we are working on in serving adults with developmental disabilities.
Pause Paper ... Go to work silly!
Let's Make it a Good Day, K?
Good morning … just me! It’s about 5 am and we’re still just sippin our first cup of coffee. V’s off doing V-stuff and we’re thinking we should do something … need to move our minds.
Yesterday wasn’t a very good work day to get things done. We were met at the door by Sister who was having a staff shortage crisis. She had four of the DSPs gone and that makes things tough for the three DSPs that are left, so we needed to take a group for the day. She was suggesting that we could teach our intern to do it, but we’d booked the intern to be finishing work for the Wednesday staffings, because she works with the other Q on Tuesdays. It made things worse in that the DSP in charge of the group hadn’t taken care of her lesson plan for the week. So, that took a few minutes. I did the normal paperwork and I worked on today’s lesson plan so whether it is me or someone else … there will be something planned. I also noted that the DSP had not taken care of the client summaries last week, so I did a good summary for each of the 11 clients. That took quite some time … they ran from half to full page.
The group went pretty good … there were some regular problems like a few clients being mad at each other and people spending too much time in the bathroom, but other than that … everyone was pretty happy. HOPEFULLY … we’ll get back on task today. I’m cutting it a little short, because we’re thinking we want to get back to school. I think we’re going to check that out. We didn’t get home until 7 pm last night and it took us a while before we were able to focus … we found ourselves just sitting aimlessly flipping through news screens, before our head cleared and we figured we should check out the classroom. There were 4 comments left for us and other papers to read through. The papers by others looked about the same as we are used to.
Hmm, now I’m about 4-5 minutes from leaving for work. I stopped over at school and left a comment for one of my peers. He had the best entry out of about 10 people posting and there are 25 people in the course. It brought to mind a story that I’d read yesterday about hospitals and ambulances doing experimental work without consent in giving a substitute blood in emergencies. I didn’t like the sound of that at all, primarily because I wouldn’t want to have it inserted into me. I think my standards are pretty high in thinking I want most often “REAL” everything!
But … I gotta go. Chow!
Whoops ... you got us again ... had to forward the post to work so that I could get it in. We have a few quiet moments before we start up the day official. The intern has just gotten in and she is pretty excited as are we because her mother is finally back from Guatamla. Sr. wisked her away pretty quickly. Lot's of time to make up for, because she's been gone for about 5 weeks.
I'm hoping to get things back in order today. I'm going to need really rebooting, because I don't remember what we were doing. I'll probably start by making sure everything is arranged for the staffings tomorrow. It looks like the intern got a lot of work done on them. She was very efficient. I teased her it was because she didn't have me around to interrupt ... just I know that is probably just the case. And, Sr. is VERY sure that I should be getting some CARF done everyday. So, I should plan when that is going to happen. Think we're going to try scheduling us in, but need to figure out when everything is going to happen. Maybe I should consider the first part of the day for other things, and then after lunch for work on CARF ... why don't we try that today and see what happens. Ok, better be off. Headed over to check out those annuals!
Us
