Recently in Behavior Category

http://www.ted.com/talks/michael_specter_the_danger_of_science_denial.html

I figured I would make my last post from ted.com, since I have really come to enjoy this site over the course of this semester. This video is of Michael Specter discussing the recent denial of scientific advances. Michael briefly discusses the progression of lifespans in his family from generation to generation. He mentioned that each generation has lived a decade longer than the last, and he plans to live till 90. Through the course of this video he discusses the ways in which we are able to engineer foods to make them more nutritious. We, as a community, have decided that foods that are not 100% natural should be shunned from our diet. However, we are willing to take pill after pill in hopes that it will help us feel better. We have virtually wiped out the threat of small pox in our country, so we no longer get the vaccine. What if small pox is reintroduced? We will all be susceptible once again. The discussion of what problems vaccines can cause has been brought down to the ground by science every time that it is brought up. Yet, people still believe that they are doing their children a favor by neglecting to give them their vaccinations. However, if an unvaccinated individual travels the world and contracts a disease outside of the protective bubble of the United States, not only would they run into a problem for themselves, but they could bring a problem for the rest of us.

What is it that motivates people to take such risky behaviors, but claim them to be safer? Is it the need for power? Reeve describes this as the need to be in control of situations. Could it be that people feel as though they have more control over situations if they eat food that is not genetically engineered or if they avoid vaccinations?

How did this video make you feel? Personally, it really got me thinking about what I felt to be health conscious. I always believed that vaccinations were necessary, and that it was rather ignorant to over look the research that has been done to prove it. This video just reiterated that point for me.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/36649379#36649379

Whenver we think about college students and their addictive behaviors, what comes to mind is alcohol and drugs.  Reeve (2009) states that addictive drugs, such as psychostimulants, are especially potent reinforcers because their repeated usage produces hypersensitivity to dopamine stimulation.  This is what is being compared to the feeling people get after tanning.  The behavioral approach system is related to the reward responsiveness feeling, which these tanners feel when they are just getting out of the booth. 

Now, studies have shown an addictive behavior to tanning, especially around the season of prom, graduation, and spring break.  Doctors have said that some people just have addictive behaviors and people who are addicted to tanning, are usually addicted to other things such as alcohol and drugs. In one study done on Northeast college students one third of them are shown to have a tanning addiction.  People feel better after they just got done tanning and that they have some sort of anxiety which they think tanning eliviates.

Although people know that it causes skin cancer, college students feel that they can't get skin cancer that young.  Experts think that tanning booths need to start screening tanners for an addictive behavior.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/25/us/25mobs.html?src=me

 

This article talks about what used to be something that used to be a non-violent act, but now in Philadelphia these flash mobs are turning violent.  The police have said that they had enough and they are starting to enforce curfew and hold parents responsible for having their children out late in the city.  There has been five flash mobs this year in the city, more than in any other part of the United States. 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100325/ap_on_re_us/us_philly_teen_mobs_1

 

This article also quoted Temple University professor Frank Farley is an expert in risk-taking and thrill-seeking personalities. He says the flash mobs attract teens because they offer thrills and attract publicity.  Chapter 13 discusses risk taking personality about arousal.  It is more likely that the teens who are a part of these flash mobs  are high sensation seekers rather than low sensation seekers.  There have been findingd that sensation seekers have low levels of monoamine oxidase (Schooler, Zahn, Murphy, & Buchsbaum, 1978). 

 

When reading chapter 9, I was really interested in reactance theory, so I decided to research it some more. I found this great article online that was written by Jack Brehm, the person who came up with the reactance theory.  In the article he explains what reactance theory is:  reactance theory is "that people become motivationally aroused by a threat to or elimination of a behavioral freedom".  In the article he talks about how he was surprised that some people acted negatively even when influence attempts might be in the best interest of that person.  Jack Brehm goes on to tell us that there are two things that come about with reactance.  First, we may try to restore the freedom that has been put in jeapordy.  Second, there may be a perceived attractiveness to the lost or threatened freedom.

Jack Brehm also goes one step further and talks about the implication principle and how it interacts with reactance theory.   He talks about how there are two implications that come about to other freedoms when one freedom has been threatened.  The first implication applies the threat to the same freedom but for future actions.  Second, other freedoms that are similar to the original threat may also be threatened.  He illustrates that if a person believes that one freedom is in danger, what is to stop other freedoms from becoming threatened?  He also talks about how when many freedoms are threatened the person is likely to have a very strong response to stop those threats from taking place.

I really would recommend that everybody read this.  Jack Brehm uses great examples to help illustrate all of his points.  You can find this article at: http://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/display.asp?id=6883In

If you're like me, you probably get on your laptop, check you're email, then head straight to Facebook. Then throughout the day you may check it once or twice more just to see what people are saying in their status' or if you have any new messages or comments. Like me, you are not alone because according to this article 65% of Facebook users do the very same thing. Well, researchers are now saying that this could be lowering your grades more than you think. It has been found that those who utilize Facebook are underachieving by a whole letter grade compared to those who do not have a Facebook! GPA's of Facebook users were also significantly lower than those who do not use the social networking site. One researcher's explanation is that people are getting of Facebook as opposed to studying. The article cites one student's experience of trying to write a 2,000 word paper with the distraction of Facebook. Her decision as a result of that distraction was to deactivate her Facebook account. This sounded extreme to me, but I remembered a friend of mine who did the exact same thing at the beginning of the school year! Most of Facebook users (79%), however, don't believe the time spent on Facebook has any impact on school work and grades.

I would have to say I'm partially a part of that 79% because when I read this article I was shocked! I know that Facebook is a distraction and I find myself constantly logging onto the site (even when I have to blog or do other homework online) but I would have never contributed my getting a B instead of an A to a social networking site.

Reeve (2009) discusses Relatedness being a psychological need to have social interaction that is warm, close and affectionate (p. 161). With technology advancing sites like Facebook seem to make our friendships less affectionate, but I think our rejection of homework for Facebook is to fulfill our need of Relatedness to a degree.

What kind of impact do you see Facebook having on the quality of your relationships as well as your studies?


I understand that we are an evolving society that revolves on technology tremendously, but what is our motivation for logging onto Facebook several times throughout the day when we are facing deadlines as college students? Have any of you deactivated your Facebook due to the distraction or know someone who has? Does anyone is this class NOT have a Facebook account?
Article: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/education/article6078321.ece

http://babynamesworld.parentsconnect.com/search.php?p=qsearch&s_gender=1&s_copt=2&i_search=shane&filter_select=1&s_filter=14&=a

Check out the first link, and see what your name means. My name (Jordan) means descendant.

I found an article on personality characteristics or people's names. Let me know what you think.

http://www.articlealley.com/article_590182_27.html

The article talks about how parents actually decide on their child's name by the day of the week they are born.

There is a rhyme about choosing names for personality traits:

Monday's child is full of grace

Tuesday's child is fair of face

Wednesday's child is full of woe

 

Some cultures have a ceremony for the naming of a new baby, whereas other parents look at names or ones they have heard of and liked.

In Chapter 10 Reeve talks about personality characteristics. Do you think a person's name can make them have a certain personality, such as neuroticism, or how about parents who name their children Joy or June, will they have those type of characteristics just because it is their name? What's your opinion...

"Don't let the difficult climb persuade you to quit or from setting higher goals," the article states.  I completely agree with this statement because I often feel like a lot of us give up easily on things if we don't achieve them right away.  We feel discouraged when we fail at something even though we should take it as a learning experience and do better the next time.  The article also states, " Success comes to those who look for it," which I also agree with.  Those who persist in achieving their dreams and goals are usually the ones who will end up achieving them.  They show drive, positive attitudes, and passion when they chose not to give up.  Things to think about:
1. What are you passionate about?
2. Be specific when setting goals (as everyone should know by now)
3. Think big, yet realistic, don't set something you already know you won't achieve.
4. Make a plan.  Write down ideas and your plan of action towards achieving short-term goals.
5. Set values on your goals.  Goals must be valuable to you in order for you to fulfill them.
6. Reward your progress.  Celebrate your achievements, even the smaller ones!

This post is dedicated to Ali and UNI for upsetting Kansas.  Ali has become nationally known for his two clutch shots at the end of the games of UNLV and especially Kansas.  Blogs and analysts are all amazed at this guy's incredible guts and confidence in himself to take a shot like he did at the end of the Kansas game with so much on the line. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTMmBCHwqOM&feature=related

 In my chapter nine analysis, I looked at UNI's team self-efficacy:

"First, self-efficacy is the generative capacity in which an individual organizes his or her skills to cope with the demands and circumstances that arise. Thus, it's an important aspect of competent functioning as situations arise, especially within sporting events, which are stressful, ambiguous, and unpredictable. As the environment changes, one's self-efficacy is put to the test.

For UNI in their 2nd round game vs. Kansas, their team self-efficacy (belief whether or not they would advance in the tournament) was a judgment formed through multiple sources, specifically the following: personal history trying to execute that particular behavior, vicarious experience, verbal persuasion, and physiological state.

First, their personal history affected their belief they could win. While this season they had won many games, UNI had never defeated the #1 team in the nation in the past and had never even advanced to the sweet sixteen. Next, vicarious experience; UNI has watched other teams defeat Kansas, yet they have also seen Kansas be victorious a great number of times. Also, past history of the NCAA tourney shows that 2nd round upsets of the #1 seed are possible, yet few and far in between. Also, the team could have looked at UNI's 1990 team which also pulled off a shocker against Mizzou in a 3 vs. 14 matchup. Verbal persuasion; Ben Jacobsen and the team knew they had a shot at knocking them off, yet much of the media had been telling them they had no shot at even competing with the best team in the nation. I think the coach's and individual's verbal persuasion on the team definitely outweighed the media's, providing them an efficacy boost, generating motivation. This led to a solid physiological state in which there appeared to be an absence of tension, fear, and anxiety about playing Kansas.

Overall, it seemed UNI had positive self-efficacy beliefs through their speech and their actions on the court as they shocked the nation defeating Kansas!"

 

In the video below, the sport psychologist describes self-confidence as the strength of your belief in your ability to execute.  He talks about a global self-confidence, which is the perceptive belief in your ability to win and your team can win.  Also, there is task specific confidence, the belief in which you can shoot the ball into the basket.  This confidence is fluid depending on the task and course of the game. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIIqxYJX_I4

Confidence is controllable, yet it can be destroyed from allowing outside sources like the media or within the course of the game, the opposing team.  In the UNI/Kansas game, Ali had a stable, longlasting confidence which many athletes desire.  While he started the game off hot, he was 0-6 in the second half before the 3-pointer in the final minute.  Kansas was making their big run, UNI was turning the ball over, and Ali was cold shooting the ball.  Yet, Ali knew his teammates had confidence in him and he maintained confidence in himself, giving him the guts to shoot the shot many players would not have taken.  This confidence, individually and as a team, gave UNI a strong outcome expectation, which is a judgment that a given action (playing the game), once performed, will cause a particular outcome (winning the game).  For Ali, his efficacy expecations (his judgment of his capacity to make the 3-pointer) were strong enough to allow him initiate his behavior of shooting the basketball during such a crucial point of the ballgame. Now on the sweet sixteen!!

 

 

 

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/mar/15/health/la-he-marathon-20100315

This article is about different factors that motivate people to participate in marathons. Some of the information seems fairly obvious, especially to people in this class, but it is still interesting to consider these findings. I found it especially interesting that the reason a person runs can make a difference in if they finish the race. In short, it was the people with high intrinsic motivation who tended to finish the training and marathon itself. It said that "The 75 who did not finish were those most likely to have been motivated by the wish to lose weight or gain recognition from others."

This finding makes sense to me, and I think it fits rather well with our individualistic culture. Many of us feel that it should be up to each person how they want to live, we should not spend our lives trying to please others. It would be interesting to see if this finding holds up in collectivistic cultures. If it would, we could be more confident than intrinsic factors of motivation may be inherently more powerful in influencing whether or not a person ultimately finishes a marathon.

This article mentioned that more and more people are creating bucket lists on which they include marathons. The article said this was a form of extrinsic motivation because it is being done for recognition, but I would argue that it really depends on the person. There are undoubtedly some people who will do extreme activities just to brag about them, but there are others (using the bucket list) who simply enjoy the challenge.

I find it rather interesting that some people do it for loved ones, and I have heard that others still do it for Christ. From what we first read (that  the people with high intrinsic motivation tend to finish the marathons), it would seem that these motivations are extrinsic (being done for the approval of others). I think this certainly does seem true, but there are probably exceptions. If a Christian is doing the marathon as a type of self-imposed penance because they feel guilty about past wrongdoings or because they simply want to make a sacrifice for the Lord, that would probably be intrinsic motivation. On the other hand, if a Christian does the marathon as penance to avoid the fires of Hell, it seems that would probably be a form of extrinsic motivation. In retrospect, this past paragraph sounds somewhat like a bad joke, but I believe it is never the less very true.

Another point which merits attention is about endorphins. Over the past couple years I have read very contradictory "findings" on endorphins. You commonly hear that exercising and physical activities releases endorphins, and others have claimed that the level of physical exertion one must undertake to actually release significant levels of endorphins is dangerously high (with such physical activities doing actually more harm than good overall). I honestly do not know which view is objectively correct, so if anyone else might be able to shed light on this area, I would very much appreciate it.

One final point I would like to write about is that there obviously can be both primary and secondary motivations. The article also mentioned that specific reasons for making the commitment to a marathon may change over time. For example: physical health benefits may become dominant. Although raising money for charities seems to be partly be an extrinsic form of motivation, I really do not believe you can place it exclusively in a single category - there may be elements of both intrinsic and extrinsic forms of motivation present (recognition from others and feeling happy that you have helped others).   

It may be a cliche activity post, but what a perfect time to find a goal for yourself than right now when you are learning about them in class!  I am sure if you are like most people you would have come up with some New Year's resolution, well how is it going?  Mine is not....at all!! Which is discouraging, but I know why.

It wasn't specific, I didn't have something I was reaching for.  I just said, I want to shed a few pounds and eat healthier foods.  What I didn't do is write it out and figure out HOW I was going to get there.  In our book on page 216 it shows the summary of the goal process.  I started out fine: goal - to eat healthy and shed a few pounds.  It was a difficult goal (for me) but was NOT specific.  From there it has dwindled down to excuse after excuse.  Has this ever happened to you??

If it has, or even if it hasn't lets use some knowledge we are learning and set a goal. 
Post this back as a comment, or you are more comfortable just jot it down in a notebook for yourself. 

What is your goal?
Now think, is it difficult AND specific?
Is this a long term goal or a short term goal?
How will you get to that goal?

My goal: stop twirling my hair
Difficult: check...very much so
Specific: check...see the how portion
This is a long term goal. 

How: I have tried to do this in the past and for a while it worked mostly because I was reinforcing myself. It is 4:43 right now, I want to make it through this blog without twirling my hair.  From there I can watch the clock like crazy and test myself in 30 min. increments..."have a twirled my hair?"  If I haven't it is gratifying and reward enough to keep going.  I set mini goals like: I want to make it through the rest of this class period without twirling my hair.  Or I want to read this page in my book without twirling my hair.  I write it down and will post it in a spot I see every day, multiple times a day. I will keep increasing the increments until I make it to days...and then weeks...and then a month..and two months...until six months...until a year...then I'll kick the habit!
So within my "how" there are mini goals.  And if each are positively reinforced I might just stop twirling. 

Sounds obtainable (so far I haven't even touched my hair).  I have heard that with bad habits there is a three day hump for quitting.  That could be the case but from previous attempts I found that when I lost social support and stress levels increased I gave in to the urge.  Also my reward system wasn't as effective.  Its a real bummer, but I am ready to try again. From reading this it might not sound specific enough (but some details are just left out because I could probably write a whole book on how I could just stop this habit). 

Reeve (2009) states "Planning how to carry out a goal allows the performer to overcome the inevitable volitional problems associated with goal-directed behavior." Goals are an important part of life.  Maybe not enough to qualify as a need, but I think goals can really direct you through life.  And it will create challenges and obstacles while trying to attain whatever your goal may be.

5:00 PM = 17 minutes twirl free!

This article talks about Two Ways To Be a Happier Parent. It's a sociologists perspective on being a parent and dealing with the stressful times. According to her it comes down to two questions:

1. When are you happiest with your kids?

2. What part of the normal day with your family routinely causes suffering?

She goes on to give a specific example she dealt with personally, and she explains how she changed their routine as a family to decrease the stress levels in their household.

I think parenting is one of the hardest things to do in life, so it is helpful to have any tips. While reading how the sociologist adjusted her family's mornings it seemed a little too military like. If it works than maybe that's all that matters. I just don't know if I liked her approach.

http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2010/03/11/hundreds-of-students-rally-lawmakers-save-our-schools/

http://www.news-medical.net/news/20100309/Activity-in-lateral-prefrontal-cortex-may-improve-emotion-regulation-in-day-to-day-life.aspx

 

I found this to be a rather interesting article. I think it directly relates to the material we studied in Chapter 3 (dealing with the emotional brain). One of the main reasons I found it interesting is because it seems to go against common sense, or at least against conventional wisdom. Many of us have undoubtedly heard others tell us not to go to bed angry, but this study suggests that "brain activity (specifically in the lateral prefrontal cortex) is a far better indicator of how someone will feel in the days following a fight with his or her partner." Generally those who had high activity in this area had a better mood than those who had low activity in this area. I believe what helps set this recent study apart is that it did not take place entirely in a laboratory, but also involved real situations/relationships. In other words, one can probably be more confident of its external validity.

 

In our textbook (starting on p. 61 in Chapter 3), Reeve writes about the relationship between the prefrontal cortex and affect. Here it mentions that, "the limbic system receives incoming sensory stimulation (that) activate rather automatic emotional reactions... stimulation of the cortex can generate emotional states." Reeve also makes the point that one must make a distinction between the left and right side of the prefrontal cortex because each is qualitatively different from the other. Reeve also makes reference to the Behavioral Inhibition System, which includes the two dimensions of personality, one of which is "how sensitive versus stable a person is to threats, punishments, and the experience of negative emotion (Reeve 2009, p.61)."

 

 I was actually rather impressed with the physiological measures used - researchers used an fMRI, recorded facial expressions, and tested cognitive skills. As I mentioned before, the researcher (Hooker) found that  the level of activity in their lateral prefrontal cortex may be a significant factor in predicting a person's experiences, ability to bounce back, etc.

 

The main reason why I chose this article and wanted to share it with others is because I am rather fascinated by the unconscious activity that takes place in the brain. As others probably have heard, there have been studies that suggest people actually have a tendency to make better decisions having slept on it - I think I heard about this in Social Psychology. I believe I also heard data that supports this in my BioPsychology course. While sleeping, our brain continues to process information. It's very interesting to think of the possibility that being angry while we go to sleep may actually help us better deal with our problems, confront them face on with our subconscious attention. This may be drifting a little bit from Motivation and Emotion, but I find it very interesting how I have often woken up with solutions to some of my problems that I had never thought of before - I believe my mental activity throughout the night has sometimes helped me come up with effective solutions.

 

In any case, this study  does provide insight and understanding into physiological activities, such as the activation of certain brain structures and subsequent impact on emotional states. For the reasons I have mentioned, I actually believe this type of research is very important and may lead to more effective interventions for people facing certain problems, such as depression.

 

The article ends with the following...

  

While Hooker acknowledges that more work must be done to develop clinical applications for the research, it may be that lateral prefrontal cortex function provides information about a person's vulnerability to develop mood problems after a stressful event. This raises the question as to whether increasing lateral prefrontal cortex function will improve emotion regulation capacity.

 

http://www.mentalhelp.net/poc/view_doc.php?type=doc&id=9697

The article I found talks about identity and how everyone becomes their own identity. Identity is not just what you know; it is also how you know. We are not born into our identities; rather we develop who we want to be in this world. Some factors that can come into play with choosing our identity can be our family, friends and society. A young child may see her mother as a creature that exists solely to take care of her, but an older child will often start to appreciate that her mother has needs of her own, and start acting less selfishly towards her mother so as to take that knowledge into account. Personal beliefs have no bias on one's identity, for example if a group hates a certain religious group, doesn't need to affect another person. Young children have simple identities and see things in an overly simple, generally self-serving manner. As people grow older and wiser, they identify themselves with other people, places and things in increasingly sophisticated ways and start to grow out of this initial selfishness. Sometimes life events can interrupt one's identity and their identity stops growing. For example a death of a parent, may cause a child to grow up and take on the parent role for younger siblings, and not get to live their childhood identities. According to Reeve, once a person takes one role, the identity directs the person to pursue some behaviors (identity-confirming behaviors) and to avoid other behaviors (identity-disconfirming behaviors), (2009 p. 279). Other things that can affect a person's identity are low self-esteem and low self-efficacy.

What do you think about this article?

Do you know what your self-identity is like...has your identity changed a lot throughout your life?

 

Have you wondered why sometimes when you are in a room you mood changes? Is it the climate or the lack of plants, what about the color?

I found this site when looking for colors to paint my house back home. I found that greens and dark purples seem to motivate me the most. I haven't used orange yet, which helps you get going with exercising. If you pay attention to the setting you are in and the mood you are in, could it be the color on the walls?

 http://freshome.com/2007/04/17/room-color-and-how-it-affects-your-mood/

After checking this out, which colors do you think would help in class rooms? I would prefer the walls in my dorms to be more than this off white or cream color and maybe I would do more than sulk in there.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/04/day-of-action-update-rowd_n_486276.html

Advertising is a pretty manipulative business.  All kinds of industries use language, images, commercials, etc. to influence our emotions and motivate us to NEED their product or service.  While the United States is somewhat strict about inflammatory advertising, especially concerning hot topics (i.e. Tim Tebow's abortion commercial during the Superbowl caused quite a stir), France is much more liberal.  First, go to the following site and see what side of the fence you land on: 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/24/french-oral-sex-anti-smok_n_474909.html

The issue at the heart of this controversey is teenage smoking. In France, 33% of the teens smoke.  The anti-smoking agency's motivation behind this is they are trying to extinguish or at least reduce this behavior. General advertising efforts solely commenting on health and dying hasn't elicited the type of reaction anti-smoking agencies would have liked. So this was there behavioral response to that antecedent.  From that, there has stemmed many emotionally-driven responses.  Obviously, the sexual connotations are driving this debate of whether or not this ad should be pulled. Pretty funny though because all this controversy by the opposition has made this ad tremendously popular and famous within France and obviously around the world as it has made it into a college classroom in the Midwest.

Personally, I think the ad is provocative and thus powerfully effective. This will undoubtedly grab the attention of youth emitting this addictive behavior. Consequently, the message will get across to these individuals, positively reinforcing the ad company's behavior of producing ads such as this one. It's ingenious really as controversial ads always seem to get more attention than they would have if the opposition kept its mouth shut. It's a pretty crazy behavior modification tool within the marketing business really as their extrinsic motivation to gain attention by producing this controversial ad proved to be a stimulus for discussion and smoking awareness (response).

While I do not smoke, I do wonder within the context of our class whether smoking is a physiological need or a quasi-need?  Is it possible for a quasi-need (a situationally induced want) to turn into a physiological need over time as one continues to smoke? (physiological need:  biological need within an organism orchestrating brain structures, hormones, etc. to regulate imbalances and necessary well-being)

Earlier in the semester we talked about the brain and how certain hormones influence or are activated due to emotions. Neurotransmitters such as dopamine, serotonin, norepinephrine, and endorphins are just a few that have been shown to influence mood and emotion. What we did not go in detail about was the parts of the brain that make contribute to moods, emotions, and behaviors. I found an article that discuss' this very topic.
Arousal is a process that involves cortical, behavioral, and autonomic mechanisms (Reeve, 2009, p. 374) This article talks about the cortical (activity of the brain) part of being aroused and the emotional reactions that can evolve from being aroused. Reeve (2009) lists four principles to explain arousal's contribution to motivation. There are two that relate to the study explained below:
1) A person's arousal level is mostly a function of how stimulating the environment is.
2) People engage in behavior to increase or decrease their level of arousal.
A new study was done to test if the lateral prefrontal cortex (LPFC) was a region of the brain that could help people control emotional reactions such as negative moods, rumination (not being able to get something off your mind), and substance abuse. After having several people in stable, healthy relationships journal daily and have brain scans done while viewing positive, negative, and neutral facial expressions of their partner, it was found that LPFC activity did predict how one would react to an interpersonal conflict. When there was a day of no interpersonal conflict, the LPFC activity was not related to the next day's mood or behavior. On the contrast, when there was a day when interpersonal conflict did occur LPFC did predict mood and behavior the next day. Low levels of LPFC activity was related for high levels of negative moods, rumination, and substance abuse.
This study is helpful when talking about coping with stress. To avoid bad coping strategies like over-eating or substance abuse, people can become aware and learn to introduce positive strategies such as counting to 10. If you are a person who has low LPFC function, it is possible you may become more susceptible to such behaviors.
Link:
http://news.oneindia.in/2010/03/03/howto-control-emotional-outbursts-in-front-of-yourpartner.html

This week for class I read an article about how early child-rearing techniques influenced later, adult personalities. This study used surveys from a 1951 study about mothering techniques and later contacted their children who were now about 31 years old. The results showed a correlation between mothers with strict toilet training and scheduling of feeding and children with high needs of achievement. Mothers who were permissive about sex and aggression had children who were high in needs of power.

 

This article made me think about how much early childhood experiences really have on our behaviors and if it does affect our different needs in adulthood. Is it even possible to study this connection or are there too many intervening variables between childhood and adulthood? In another class I am taking this semester (Psychological Anthropology) we discussed the differences in child-rearing techniques between American mothers and Gusii mothers. American mothers spent more time looking at and talking to their children while Gusii mothers spent more time holding their child. These parenting styles represented what was important in the different societies; Americans value independence and individualism while Gusii value collectivism and society. So, were the adult behaviors created by the parenting techniques in their childhood? And why does this correlation even matter?

 

Personally, I have some trouble making this connection. I think it may be because I need more concrete proof of the correlation between the two variables rather than just observations. And even if there was a cause and effect relationship, I don't think it matters that much. So what if a certain parenting technique creates an adult with a high need of achievement, is it really that important that people will either want to avoid that behavior or encourage it? What does everybody else think about this correlation?

 

Articles:

 

McClelland, D. C., & Pilon, D. A. (1983). Sources of adult motives in patterns of parent behavior in early childhood.

 

Levine, Robert A. (1999) Infant environments in psychoanalysis: A cross-cultural view.

Your personality has a lot to do with what types of stimuli in the world you seek out and avoid.

Take this brief quiz http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes2.asp

and then after you hit score it, click on the first link available (type description by Keirsey) and read the description.

How accurate do you think this assessment is?

Notice how the quiz itself is focused on various behaviors. What factors contribute to your motivation to approach/avoid these various situations?

Chapter 6 talks about relatedness and how relationships that are caring, accepting, and valuing satisfy the need for relatedness. Loneliness is used as an example of a characteristic of someone who has not fulfilled the need of relatedness. Having close, personal, and intimate relationships will help satisfy this need. Any social bond such as a sibling, spouse, or friend has the potential of being an intimate relationship. But even people who have siblings, spouses, and friends are not gaurunteed to have their need for relatedness satisfied. There are many marriages, as the text suggests, that may not satisfy one or both of the partners emotionally. The texts stresses the importance of fulfilling the need of relatedness because it has been shown that neglecting such needs can lead to loneliness and depression. Here is a website that explains how to start the process of trying to beat depression related to loneliness. It focuses on the importance of getting out of isolation and meeting new people. This should be done in hopes of finding someone that you could eventually develop a social bond, and thus, fulfilling the need of relatedness. I think this site has a good message behind it, but makes it sound a little easier than it probably is for depressed people. The textbook supports the need for meeting new people as a way of lessening depression and loneliness though.

http://www.ehow.com/how_5517599_beat-depression-related-loneliness.html

http://newsroom.ucr.edu/news_item.html?action=page&id=1958

In my Healthy Psych class I am currently taking, we read an article on conscientiousness increasing longevity in elderly people.  I thought it was interesting and decided to find another article supporting the one I read in class. 

The article I found was called "Conscientious People Live Longer" done by Howard S. Friedman, professor of psychology, and Margaret L. Kern, a graduate student at the University of California, Riverside.  In the article, Friedman states, "...conscientious individuals have better health habits and less risk-taking, but they also travel life pathways toward healthier psychosocial environments..."  Friedman and Kern found three specific facets of conscientiousness: responsibility/self-control (responsible, not implusive); order (organized, disciplined); and achievement (achievement-oriented, persistent).  From their meta-analysis they also found achievement and order were the strongest components for linking conscientiousness and longevity.

This article intrigued me because I am interested in learning how conscientiousness, achievement, and order help increase the longevity of peoples' lives.  I feel like conscientious people are more intrinsically motivated to live healthier lives and focus on making healthy, not reckless, decisions.  After reading about Atkinson's model on achievement goals in the book, I think conscientious people are motivated by mastering their goals.  They will continually work to improve themselves and overcome challenges in order to make progess in their lives to reach their "standard of excellence" (Reeve, pg. 183, 2009).  Friedman and Kern also found that highly conscientious people, on the average, live two to four years longer than low conscientious people.  Highly conscientious people also seem to live more stable lives and less stressful lives.

NBA superstar and Dallas Maverick's player Caron Butler has an addiction. Actually he has two of them.  For his most recent addiction, the NBA has now gone on to ban this behavior during games due to safety concerns.  What is it you ask?  Has to be something performance enhancing or drug related right? Actually, the NBA has banned Butler for chewing straws during the game, of which he goes through at least 12 a game--60 per day!  Talk about quite an oral fixation.  This got me thinking, why does he do this?  There's obviously a reason for this behavior.  Well Butler stated in his blog that this habit calmed him down, especially helpful during NBA games I imagine.  His motivation for this behavior was to satisfy his physiological response of stress and anxiousness.  Arguably, this was a performance enhancer of sorts for him.  It'll be interesting to see how much the extinction of this behavior will affect him.  Looking back, this behavior could possibly be correlated/as a consequence of his first habit:

In summer 2009, Butler blogged on NBA.com that he had lost 11 pounds just by giving up his daily "addiction" of drinking at least six 12-ounce bottles of Mountain Dew.

"I was going through withdrawals," Butler said on NBA.com. "... Honestly, those first two weeks without The Dew [were] the roughest two weeks of my life. I'm talking headaches, sweats and everything."

Like the straws became a psychological need and fixation, Butler had conditioned his body to the physiological extremes with his habitual caffeine intake.  It had really become an addiction. 

It will be interesting to see how Butler's behavior will be affected by the NBA's banning of chewing straws during games.  Will he take up another habit to help calm him down?  We'll see.  Here's a link to a video clip and article discussing the situation.  It's funny to watch the video and see all the fans and radio broadcasters who came to the game chewing straws in support of Butler's behavior.  It's also interesting to note in the sportsnation poll that 54% of people in America enjoyed chewing on straws...:

http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/nba/news/story?id=4945104

http://www.ted.com/talks/kiran_bir_sethi_teaches_kids_to_take_charge.html

After watching The Hours, and learning about autonomy and how everyone needs to have that kind of support in their lives, people have the need to be in control of their lives.  Where in the movie, all the women thought that suicide was the one thing that they could control in their lives, that was the thing that their husbands and responsibilities couldn't control.  When learning about this extreme sense to gain control, I thought of girls and boys who have eating disorders.  Where psychologically, they can feel so out of control with their lives, that they try and control what they put, or don't put, into their bodies.  Although, there are other ideas that go into Eating Disorders, I thought that autonomy was greatly related. 

I found an article that hypothesized that disturbances in the development of autonomy are a central psychological feature in anorexia nervosa. Specifically, that both restrictive and bulimic anorexics would evidence greater problems with autonomy than would controls and, further, that the three groups would show differential patterns of response on these measures.  The study proved to show that this was a true hypothesis.  The study states that autonomy isn't the single factor for certain eating disorders, but can be useful in the treatment of some eating disorders. 

http://psycnet.apa.org.proxy.lib.uni.edu/journals/abn/96/3/254.pdf

I believe that having control over one's own life is a huge motivating factor for how we choose to live our lives, and we want to be able to control certain things.  For eating disorders, their reinforce is the way that they feel about themselves when they lose the weight, but the idea that they will never be their 'perfect' size shows that persistence and need to be what their idea of perfect is.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20100222/sc_livescience/5thingsthatwillmakeyouhappier

 

 

I'm not sure if anyone else has seen this article, but it is about 5 things that will supposedly make a person happier. In short, they are...

 

1. Be grateful

2. Be optimistic

3. Count your blessings  

4. Use your strengths  

5. Commit acts of kindness

 

     Although this first one is rather obvious, there is some merit to mentioning it. I believe that trying to get into the habit of putting a positive spin can make life more enjoyable, but as we have read, each person has homeostasis level that will be resistant to change. (The researcher here seem to admit that people generally have certain dispositions and stable personalities throughout their life, but they argue that a significant amount of happiness can also be attributed to pro-active approaches to increasing one's happiness.) In any case, I suppose making an active effort to appreciate what you have may cause at least a minor increase in feelings of happiness.

 

Being Grateful  - One rather interesting note is that this finding of the study is largely based on an activity where people wrote letters expressing gratitude. In case you are thinking there might be a confound, such as relatedness or affiliation playing a role, I thought of that as well, but it was found that there was an increase in happiness even if people did not actually send the letters out.

 

Be optimistic - In the study, researchers actually had participants visualize "an ideal future" which included imagining having a loving, supportive partner and a great job. I am not sure if this strategy would necessarily lead to long term happiness though - the researchers did not mention whether or not this was exclusively short term happiness in their summarized report. The reason I say this is because I think over time significant cognitive dissonance would arise (people could become delusional) if there is a strong focus on a "perfect" life. If interpreted this way, this finding would actually seem to be in contrast to the first. If you are being appreciative of what you have, you will not be constantly focusing on the perfect, ideal life. I have heard that some studies have found striving for excellence can be much better than striving for perfection. I know the "being optimistic" strategy could probably be taken on a more moderate and healthy level, but I think the activity the researchers used does not necessarily seem healthy over the long term.

 

Count your blessings - I do not believe this one merits any further discussion because this "additional" finding seems to be very similar to "being grateful." In fact, there is no separate research mentioned for this in the article.

Use your strengths - The participants in the study (that contributed to this finding) focused on strengths such as using humor to increase others' happiness. I think this is perhaps related to competence, achievement, and relatedness - all concepts that we have recently mentioned in class. Being able to successfully use's one's abilities to accomplish a goal would lead to feelings of competence and achievement. Having someone identify with your achievement (in this case humor)

Commit acts of kindness - although we have not yet talked about pro-social very much in this class, this finding makes sense, and I think it also has something to do with relatedness.

http://www.cosmopolitan.com/sex-love/relationship-advice/secrets-women-keep-0308?click=pp

This article was about what girls should keep from their significant others.  I thought it was interesting because I work in a shoe department and a lot of women always tell me they are going to be in trouble when they get home.  Some will even tell me to throw away the boxes because it will make it easier to sneak in the new shoes.  I know that men get uptight about it but I don't quite understand it, especially if you aren't married and sharing an income.  Why do you care what shoes or things I buy?  Do you think about the future and that we will waste money on "unnecessary things" in your mind?  Although a lot of us women don't think a 60 inch TV is necessary.  Another question I have is, if you want us to like your gift, why must you get something we didn't ask for?  We don't always want jewelry!   
The top five things to keep from your sweetie were:
1. Past Hookups
2. How you spend your money
3. The way you feel about his family
4. Innocent Flirtations
5. What you really think of his gift

So in my B-Mod class, there has been some blogging about superstitions.  It's a pretty sweet topic I think, especially concerning why we are motivated to have these irrational beliefs  even though today, even in the age of reason, we "know" they are pointless.  Personally, I am very superstitious.  I wear a rubber band around my left wrist for good luck, have lucky numbers (surprisingly I'm intrigued by the #13), and in football, I always wore the same shirt under my jersey.  In the video below,

http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/deadliest-catch-sig-on-superstitions.html

Capt. Sig Hansen from Discovery Channel's "Deadliest Catch," discusses the superstitions of fisherman at sea. It's pretty incredible how superstitious they really are. He talks about all kinds of weird things he has become accustomed to that have come a part of his life. He realizes that these are just associations that elicit a rewarding feeling of safety and probably bring him no real good fortune (even though there are some that say you create your own luck), but as he states in the video, he will even go as far as turning the boat around to satisfy this target behavior of his. These superstitous items allow Sig to emit behaviors such as comfort and joy as bad luck or misfortune while fishing at sea would prove aversive to him and his crew. As he states, they have been raised or conditioned to behave this way--whether it's not allowing bananas or horseshoes on the boat or stepping onto a boat with the correct foot. At some point during their adventures or experiences, Sig must have been positively reinforced (perhaps by catching more fish)and associated this behavior with some material object (like his erasors, post-its, or a fishing lure necklace). As he states, they have been conditioned as time passes to check for these superstitions and if everything is not in place,  psychological hell breaks loose on the boat. Here is a good example from the clip to explain why the shipmen were motivated to continuously behave the superstitious way they do:

The antecedent would be the previously demonstrated superstitious behavior of fishing at sea without allowing any suitcases on board

Thus, their behavior-->which was to force the Discovery Channel crew to unpack their cameras and leave their suitcases on land

As a consequence of their positive experience at sea (no misfortune) Capt. Sig and crew are reinforced for their superstitious behaviors of not allowing suitcases aboard. Thus superstition remains unbroken, actually reinforced, and conditions same behavior to be repeated.

In a sense, these superstitious behaviors give them a sense of control over their otherwise uncontrollable environment.  Mentally, Capt. Sig and crew need these objects to satisfy their emotional needs as well as physiological needs (such as cortisol/stress), as the superstitions/charms act as a coping mechanism/calming effect. 

The article below is an interesting article which argues that superstitions might actually have a natural evolutionary bias towards superstitions which help our survival:

"Hood claimed that superstition is a product of evolution, having evolved as a way of generating theories about the way things work when they cannot easily be seen or proved. It helps us adapt and stay safe, as well as providing a welcome sense of control. In the modern era, we know that some beliefs are really just nonsense, but the foundations of science itself were built on mankind's ability to reason intuitively."

http://psychcentral.com/lib/2008/do-we-have-a-natural-bias-toward-superstitions/


What do you guys think of superstitions? What are some that you have?