Recently in Culture 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.

Building Community in Organizations

I found this article through one of my other classes, but I think that it relates to Motivation and Emotion more than anything else in psychology. The article discusses six steps to having a healthy, cooperative community.  Many times it referrers to areas in the business context, but I also think it would be applicable to everyday life.  Although the article does come across as somewhat candy-coated, I still think the general ideas have great meaning behind them, even if they aren't 100% generalizable to every type of community. 

The text discusses the aspect of engagement (Reeve, 165) in a way that encourages motivation.  This is the same basic concept that the article is getting at, only more specified.  The article wants to motivate members of a given community to take part and care about that community, where as Reeve discusses the model of engagement in a broader basis.  Engagement can involve anything that someone cares about, including psychological needs. Engagement also taps into emotions as well, causing for even more intensified involvement in the given activity.  Building a strong community anywhere (whether it's at work, school, or home) can be much easier if these guidelines of engagement are implemented. Table 6.4 (Reeve, 164) in the text shows how the aspects of an environment can trigger engagement and fulfill different psychological needs. While many of these terms are different that those provided in the article, they stem off of the same ideas and constructs. 

 

The six principles of an engaged community are:

1. Communicate a compelling message.

2. Build a guiding coalition.

3. Create principle-based versus compliance-based guidelines for decisions and behaviors.

4. Identify early engagement indicators.

5. Generate continuous opportunities for dialogue at all levels.

6. Plan assimilation strategies for new members and new leaders.

 

While some of the terminology may seem complex, the article explains how simple each principle really is. Many of the terms stem from concepts that we have learned in the past about Motivation and Emotion.  The first aspect, communicating a compelling message, gets into the concept of involvement and relatedness, and almost acts like an advertisement.  Reeve discusses the importance of relatedness (Reeve, 161-162) and how high levels of relatedness can increase levels of social interaction, higher functioning, resilience to stress, and lower chances of psychological dysfunctions.  In order to get people engaged in a given situation, they must first feel as if they have a social relation to that community or event and have a sense of involvement within that situation.

The second principle, building a coalition, corresponds with the idea of leadership. Reeve (196) discusses how leadership skills can effect and influence the people around that leader.  Reeve also discusses how power can also change the attitudes of peers. With a high-quality leader, subordinates will be more likely to participate fully within the community, and be happier with their community overall.   

The third principle, principle-based vs. compliance-based guidelines, revolves around the idea of autonomy and control over situations.  Reeve discusses the importance of fulfilling the need for autonomy (Reeve, 145-146).  This area is crucial in discussing something such as a community or job setting, and can have a huge impact on the level of happiness and satisfaction each individual experiences.  Using guidelines that promote autonomy, rather than strict rules, can enhance individual's level of involvement and engagement within that group.  This can also improve performance and satisfaction in that particular situation.

The next principle deals with early signs of motivational concepts. Once people seem to show an interest in engagement, it reinforces the leaders and those involved by showing them that the engagement is possible and helpful. Reinforcing the behaviors of both leaders and subordinates is a good way to keep motivations high and keep everyone involved (Reeve, 115). In turn, this can help to keep the levels of engagement constant in the community setting.            Principle number five revisits aspects of relatedness and competence.  Encouraging communication is a way to gain relationships with each individual, strengthening their levels of engagement.  This also has an impact on their levels of competence (Reeve, 154).  Increasing communication increases levels of interaction with the environment, establishing a perception of competence.  Competence is the need to have an effect on the environment, as well as master optimal challenges (Reeve, 155).  Increasing the levels of communication and increasing opportunities for challenges is a great way to get individuals engaged in which ever community they may be in.

Assimilation strategies for new members and leaders is applying the concepts of all of these situations into one, making new members feel as though they are involved, making the steps of engagement easier to adapt to. In short, it takes aspects of all of the other principles and applies them to the single new member in order to make them feel as though they are engaged in that community, and so that they can begin to take part in each of the six principles.

 

Can you think of any other psychological concepts that we have discussed in class that relate to this article? Are there any that DON'T apply to these principles?

 

 

 

http://www.healthyplace.com/anxiety-panic/main/can-kids-blame-their-parents-for-social-phobias/menu-id-1059/

The study I've chosen to post here is related to something we discussed in class.(The idea that spending one's life blaming parents provides no relief for your troubles, it just makes life worse, and your time would be better spent focusing on bettering your situation).
The article starts out by stating that "Social phobia, a paralyzing fear of social situations, may be brought on by a combination of genetics and child-rearing methods." Of course, there's nothing we can currently do to change our genetics, but some researchers found that parents who are overprotective of or show rejection towards their children may be putting them at greater risk of developing social phobias.

Another interesting point was that the research team " found no link at all between family functioning and teenage social phobia." Contrary to what the title of my article (also a lyric in West Side Story) may indicate, growing up in a dysfunctional family does not appear to make one destined to failure, socially or otherwise.

I think these findings  (at least the latter one) would be very welcome to individuals who have grown up in very poor situations - these results can provide hope, encouragement, and perhaps even  a form of verbal persuasion (to help them believe they can succeed, personally and professionally).Bad things happen, but life goes on. I also think it is incredibly important for there to be motivational speakers who have overcome their tremendous obstacles and achieved success, such speakers may be thought to provide a type of vicarious modeling as well as indirect verbal persuasion.

As some of you may have heard, there's a woman coming to campus on the 20th who actually survived a saline abortion. Although I think her talk will partly focus on how young, pregnant women aren't given enough support, from a motivation/emotion standpoint I think her story is incredible. I cannot imagine the feelings one would experience knowing that you have been given the ultimate form of rejection - having people try to kill you. I think another motivation/emotion question that may merit attention in that situation is the impact that an abortion has on the mother. Here I am not just talking about the loss of the baby's life, but (as we have discussed in class) an expectant mother's body undergoes hormonal changes to prepare for the baby. When the changes have been made and there is no longer a baby, this can an even greater sense of loss. To tie this back into material in Reeve's Chapter 12, it could be said that women in this situation are facing both cognitive and biological bases for their conditions and need help that will address both of these bases.

 
Getting back to the main topic, I think one of the major take away points from the main article is that each person has their own unique set of problems. As discussed in class, it is not desirable to be happy and positive all the time, it is natural to have negative emotions and moods. Negative events provide contrast to positive ones, they have the potential to make people appreciate the "good things" more. Facing serious challenges in one's development might actually make a person stronger and better adjusted to the world, at least for some individuals (and if the challenges are not too overwhelming). This last point most directly relates to goal setting theory in Reeve's Chapter 8.  

How many times have you asked yourself about the goals you want to accomplish before you die? If not, why haven't you? Have you ever heard the quote "Carpe Diem" which means to seize the day. Or even enjoy being a kid while you can, because it goes by too fast. Well the Buried Life guys have, and according to them life moves fast, so we should slow down and enjoy it.

 

You might have met the Buried Life guys if you're a fan of any shows on MTV. It is likely that you have seen a trailer/shows for the TV show called The Buried Life. Meet Ben, Dave, Jonnie, Duncan, four guys who share the same ideas about life and the world around them.

These four guys were originally from the same town, and knew of each other; however it wasn't until 2006 when they discovered that they had the same goals and aspirations about their life, focusing on the question "What do you want to do before you die?" This question led to these four guys making a list of things they wanted to do before they died, starting out at 50 items. After making this first list, they set out on a journey to complete these tasks, and making a documentary of it. Along the way, they wanted to help others cross of things on their lists as well. On their first trip they were able to cross off 26 items on their list, and help 24 people. This led to the development of the list with 100 items on it, and the guys decided they did not want to put a quantity for the number of people they wanted to help, they just want to help as many people as they can. The Buried life eventually are going to making a film of their documentary of all of the 100 items they accomplish.

 

When talking about these guys, we have to go back to the basics of motivation which of course is goals. Their 100 item list is of course their goals. These goals come in a variety of skill level, some more difficult to achieve than others. Along with that, Ben, Dave, Jonnie, and Duncan all have high levels of the need for achievement. You can see this just by looking at how far they have come in achieving all of their goals. These guys first started out just talking about this journey in 2006, and its now 2010, and they have crossed off yet another item on their list "Making a badass TV show" with their show The Buried Life on MTV. Their ultimate goal consists of every item being checked off, and a documentary film to show it all. Along with their goals, they try to help others achieve a goal of theirs. With this, the Buried Life guys are gaining feedback from the people that they help. This feedback is obviously positive, and provides feelings of happiness, joy, and even feeling accomplished.

 

Although it appears that the Buried Life guys are just trying to complete a list just to be able to say they did those things, I think it is something a little more than that. Reeve (2009) talks about the six dimensions of psychological well-being, including self-acceptance, positive relations with others, autonomy, environmental mastery, purpose in life, and personal growth. By pursuing these six dimensions, individuals are ultimately defining your concept of self. The Buried Life Guys are continuously working on many of these dimensions. While helping others along their journey to complete their lists of things to do before they die, the Buried Life Guys are establishing positive relations with other people. Not only that, they are networking, and establishing connections which benefit not only themselves, but also the people that they would like to help. It is evident that these four guys also have high levels of autonomy because they have chosen to take on these goals, and to go to great lengths to achieve them despite if others don't believe that they can. Overall, through everything the Buried Life guys are accomplishing, or going to accomplish, they are building and figuring their purpose in life, and have high levels of personal growth.  I'm not sure if the Buried Life Guys would agree, but I would say it seems like their purpose in life is to help others. It seems like they received a lot of joy and happiness out of it, and it helps them grow as a person as well.

Ben, Dave, Jonnie, and Duncan have motivated other people to make their own lists of goals to do before they die. The Buried Life has even influenced a networking site called The Buried Life Network. If you're interested in watching their show on MTV or just learning more about the Buried Life visit these two websites. http://www.theburiedlife.com or http://www.mtv.com/shows/buried_life/episodes.jhtml.

 

As Ben, Dave, Jonnie and Duncan state, if they ever come to your town, you better be ready to answer the question "What do you want to do before you die?"

So as I was reading chapter twelve, one section that caught my interest was affective computing.  What exactly is affective computing?  Affective computing is the result of persuasive evidence that exists for distinctive autonomic nervous system activity associated with fear, anger, disgust, and sadness. For example, with anger, there is increased heart rate and increased skin temperature which facilitate strong, assertive (adaptive) behavior.  With fear, heart rate increased while skin temperature decreased.  With disgust, both heart rate and skin temperature decreased.  With sadness, heart rate increased while skin temperature was stable. These four emotions, however, are among the few emotions with distinct autonomic nervous system reactions.  As Reeve states, "If no specific pattern of behavior has survival value for an emotion (like jealousy), there is little reason for the development of a specific pattern of autonomic nervous system activity." In other words, for jealousy and other emotions which don't fit distinct patterns, there is no universally appropriate bodily response because it depends on the situation more than it does on the emotion itself.  Thus, it is very unlikely that in the future humans will ever develop and evolve a single pattern of ANS activity for those emotions. 

STILL, for those emotions that show an ANS specific pattern (found through various studies) which I mentioned above (anger, fear, sadness, disgust, and additionally joy), there are future technological implications.  Essentially, it is possible that in the future we are going to be able to build machines that read our emotions.  As Reeve states, "Imagine electronic sensors built into steering wheels, mobile telephones, handles of bicycles, pilot simulators, computer joysticks, and golf clubs which constantly monitor its user's ANS (autonomic nervous system) arousal.  This would be the field of affective computing!  While these sensors would be limited in measuring only those basic emotions, additional technology like a digital camera or video camera could capture and analyze facial expressions and monitor movements of the user's face like the following features:  the user's frontalis, corrugators, orbiculris oculi, zygomaticus, nasalis, depressors, etc.  There is a great picture demonstrating faces of interest in our text after Tiger Woods hits a tee shot on page 341.  Computers already using technology analyzing user's facial muscles are actually already in existence, and are able to score facial movements just as accurate and actually faster than people. 

Here is a link which discusses affective computing and past, present, and future research projects regarding the technology:

http://affect.media.mit.edu/

Here is quick excerpt from the link:

Affective Computing is computing that relates to, arises from, or deliberately influences emotion or other affective phenomena.

Emotion is fundamental to human experience, influencing cognition, perception, and everyday tasks such as learning, communication, and even rational decision-making. However, technologists have largely ignored emotion and created an often frustrating experience for people, in part because affect has been misunderstood and hard to measure. Our research develops new technologies and theories that advance basic understanding of affect and its role in human experience. We aim to restore a proper balance between emotion and cognition in the design of technologies for addressing human needs.

Our research has contributed to: (1) Designing new ways for people to communicate affective-cognitive states, especially through creation of novel wearable sensors and new machine learning algorithms that jointly analyze multimodal channels of information; (2) Creating new techniques to assess frustration, stress, and mood indirectly, through natural interaction and conversation; (3) Showing how computers can be more emotionally intelligent, especially responding to a person's frustration in a way that reduces negative feelings; (4) Inventing personal technologies for improving self-awareness of affective state and its selective communication to others; (5) Increasing understanding of how affect influences personal health; and (6) Pioneering studies examining ethical issues in affective computing.

 

Will these technologies actually come into play in the near future?  Who knows, but if they do, they will revolutionize seemingly every field of business, sport, and life.  Would this necessarily be a progressive adaptation within our culture? Definitely an interesting topic to consider...  

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...

I read a very interesting article for my Psychological Anthropology class today that pertains to our class.  I could not find the link to the article anywhere on the internet, however the main point of the article was that our idea of the "self" comes from cultural norms and beliefs.  A person's schemas about the world can be influenced by communication with peers and in turn influences our culture.  Reeve talks about internalization and integrating self.  He discusses this idea of society on page 283.  Reeve talks about how the needs and interests of the self grow and develop throughout life.  However, our need for relatedness keeps our "self" from straying too far from the beaten path.  Behaviors, emotions, and ways of thinking originate in the self and also within the social context of society. 

http://digg.com/d31LEDK

 

This article tells how Carlos Slim Helu, a Mexican billionaire, has just surpassed Bill Gates as the world's richest man.  I don't want to talk about the reasons behind acquiring that much money - I think that "Wall Street" covered that.  However, I want to talk about my reaction to the article and see how it compared to yours.

 

As I read the article, I immediately wanted Bill Gates, an American, to be the richest person in the world again.  He has been the world' richest person for fourteen of the past fifteen years.  Also, Gates is only five hundred million dollars behind.

 

I thought it was odd that I became so vested in the competition . . . and it doesn't even affect me . . . at all! I immediately identified with the other American and started to become emotionally upset.

 

I personally feel that this could be from our social needs.  Those would be our needs for achievement, affiliation - intimacy, and power.  Even though we aren't the ones with the money, we can identify with Bill Gates since we are Americans, too.

 

What do you think?  Is this from our social needs? Do you have another explanation?

I recently read an article about Gabourey Sidibe, the plus sized actress that was nomited for an Oscar after her emotional performance in Precious. I wondered, like i'm sure many other people do too, will there be a place for her in Hollywood after this film? The facts are that she is an obese woman, and while she is obvisouly very talented, will there be parts for her and will directors want to cast her in a movie? It's sad that a persons talent can be overlooked or disregarded because of your physical features, but in a way it makes sense. The article I read made a good point in saying that her roles will be severely limited because "no one in the executive world looks like her." Sidibe moved audiences by portraying an abused girl and people were able to feel her pain and suffering through her acting, but is this one role enough to motivate directors and casting agents to cast her in more movies? What would be there motivation for casting her instead of someone more physically attractive? Our culture is so caught up on weight and hollywood that I for one think it will be very difficult for her to continue her career without losing weight. One important factor will be if having her star in a movie will motivate people to go to the theaters and watch a movie she is in. Ticket sales of her upcoming films will really motivate other directors to either keep using her, or to move on to the next actress. Hopefully people can look past her physical size and see her talent, so that she might still have a career next year!

Here is the article I read about her.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/Movies/03/10/gabourey.sidibe.career/index.html

This website is a common theme for my posts, but I really enjoy it's variety of topics about relationships and what not to do.

 

At www.askmen.com, I found an article about mistakes people make during their first conversations.  Everyone needs a source of intimacy and relatedness, and I feel that these are two very strong motivators for being in a relationship.  Also, sex can be a strong motivator.  How many people can look at a movie start like Megan Fox (or for the ladies, Channing Tatum) and not think, "Damn. Yes please!!!!"

 

I think that the intensity that these motivators create can be blamed for most mistakes with the awkward first conversation.  The drive to succeed with an opening conversation can lead to becoming nervous.  Your heart will rate, you'll begin to sweat, and then worry if you smell or not.  These nerves can lead to several of these "faux pas".

 

1)    Talking about exes.  They're in the past.  Let's leave them there. As the article says, the first conversation should be fun.  It should leave her interested in you.  Make a few corny jokes.  It will show her that you're light-hearted.

2)    Talking about money.  At this place in our lives, most of us are POOR! We're in college.  If you're both poor, great.  But if you're rich and they're poor, you'll create jealousy.  Not a good way to start something. Also, you'll seem arrogant, and she will be wondering why you're not on "Jersey Shore"

3)    Flirting too much.  Coming on too strong, by being too flirty, is just as bad as being standoffish.  By being sincere, you'll stand out by being original.  (Here's a tip: this is how you get the "okay" from her friends, too.) Just be real with her, and she's bound to be slightly interested in you.

4)    LISTEN!!! Ask her about herself - people generally enjoy talking about themselves - then just relate it back to yourself. Making a conversation with someone involves effort. If you're not going to put any into the first conversation, why would she expect you to put any into a relationship?  And how are you any different from the other hundred guys who have showed interest in her that same night?  Again, this will make you stand out.

5)    Leave her wanting more.  This will sound a little odd, but stop the conversation early.  Stop at a high of the conversation - not when you're looking for a new topic.  She will definitely be interested in talking to you again after this.

 

Obviously this article is geared as advice towards men.  But women, what do you think about this?  What do you agree with / disagree with.  Do you really think that any or all of this will lead to a fulfilling relationship or is this just a load of crap?

 

http://www.askmen.com/dating/heidi_300/378_5-first-conversation-mistakes.html

I ran across this article on the Psychology Today website and it seemed like an interesting topic
Why We Fear The Unknown

http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~culture/sussman.htm 

This article is taken out of an online textbook and concerns culture and psychological implications of living, working, or studying in another culture.  The article goes through the steps of the "sojourner cycle" that goes from first immersion into another culture through returning home to the native culture.  It was a really fascinating read, and brought up a lot of thought-provoking ideas.

The article raises the important issue of how people are deeply rooted in culture without even being aware of it.  This process is called "enculturation" and is the formation of our thoughst and behavior to be similar to those in our culture.  The article explained how many people don't realize the extent of their enculturation until they experience being in a different culture.  When in another culture, one can examine his or her own thoughts and behaviors based on differences or similarities that arise from experiencing the non-native culture.  I found this point particularly interesting because so many people never get or take the opportunity to experience anything different than the culture they were raised in. 

There are so many benefits to being able to more objectively see how your culture has affected who you are.  Enculturation has a natural way of making people believe that their way of thinking or behaving is "right" because that is what they have always known.  Experiencing something different is definitely strange and may feel "wrong" but I think having one's eyes opened to alternative ways of living is important.

Although there are many benefits to experiencing another culture, some of the potential problems are worth noting.  When someone goes to another culture, their sense of identity must be redefined and will probably change at least a little.  This is important to recognize especially when the traveler returns to his or her home culture, as he or she may have trouble re-adjusting to native culture.  Traveling to a different culture can also be a negative experience if the culture is very different from the native culture.  If the native culture has strict ways of doing things or strict beliefs, seeing another culture live in a way that is contradictory to that can be uncomfortable and ego-shattering.  The article goes into more detail on this...you should read it.

This article brought up several motivation questions in my mind:

What motivates some people to constantly seek out new experiences and new cultures, while others are highly motivated to remain in a "bubble" of like-mindedness and similar behavior?

I think thrill-seeking/adventure-seeking is a particular motivation that would cause some people to seek out new cultural experiences.  Motivators for willing choosing to avoid new cultural experiences could be preservation of the ego/self identity, or simply the potential discomfort and fear that could come along with experiencing a new culture.

 

A few summers ago, I had the opportunity to intern in Denver, Colorado at an organization called TASC.  TASC is a diversionary program for juvenile delinquents.  Here, I came into contact with numerous individuals - the majority of whom were involved in gangs.  This is also when I became more interested in gang involvement, especially among adolescents.

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

I was at www.askmen.com and saw this title for an article, so I couldn't resist.

As it's part of askmen.com, the article is geared towards providing advice for men - in this instance, particularly straight men.  The article is examining the traits of gay men and why straight women love the gays so much for them.  They talk about clothing style, physical fitness, sensitivity, faithfulness, and fun.

Most heterosexual men's fashion is based on three things: sneakers, wrangler jeans, and a t-shirt.  And while this is fine for us men, women are typically more sophisticated.  They want to be able to talk about their outfits, hair, skin care, etc.  Who is going to provide more to a conversation on hair, a straight guy who puts on a hat until it lies flat, or a gay guy who can compare and contrasts features of different products?

It's harder for women to maintain a set weight for various reasons - partly because their bodies are continuously preparing itself to hold a child each month.  As the article says, " [in] many instances, gay men simply take better care of themselves than we do . . ."  Their gay best friend is, however, someone who will tell them the new ways to lose weight or who will go to the gym with them.

 

The website tells how an article by the National Academy of Sciences in 2008 describes how heterosexual women's brains and homosexual men's brains are similar - making it more likely that their brains function the same way.  This would explain one reason why gay men tend to be more willing to talk about their emotions than we, heterosexual men, are.

 

Faithfulness is yet another quality that women love in their gay men.  They don't have to worry about the man leaving them for another woman.  It removes a deep-seated insecurity.

 

And lastly, gay men are just more fun.  They can comparatively talk about sex with women and give them tips from a guy's perspective on what feels good without being embarrassed.

 

This can all be explained with a simple answer: the psychological need for relatedness.  Gay men can just relate to straight women on levels that straight men cannot.  However, this is NOT an excuse to not try.

 

As my mom always says, "try walking in the other person's shoes for a while."  If we straight men try this, I'm sure we can all relate to females much better and avoid unnecessary arguments - because sleeping on the couch sucks!

 

http://www.askmen.com/dating/curtsmith_300/332b_why-women-love-gay-men.html

Cultural Influences on Preschoolers:

I found this really interesting article on how the culture of children and their parents affects the abilities of children to adapt and learn in a new environment.  There were a lot of really cool things discussed in the article, such as how sometimes the enculturation (resisting adaptation to new cultures) may serve as a protective factor for children.  As you can assume, this is a very controversial statement.  I suppose in some cultures if their beliefs are strong it could cause the children to grow to be strong, independent people.  At the same time, It's hard to see how an encultured family could thrive in a different culture (this study was done in NYC).  If someone really cares about their children, wouldn't you want do to everything in your power (even if that means adapting and implementing acculturation, which is adapting culture into your children's lives) to improve their chances of success in learning?  The study actually found that the type of people who were likely to sign up for the study would be disproportionally accultured, considering they had to speak English, send their children to English speaking schools, and volunteer for a study run by an American Institution.  It would be interesting to see the real effects on these factors using participants who are more encultured, although I feel it would be nearly impossible to reach people who are highly encultured.  At the same time (this may sound mean) if someone is so resistant to change in culture, why would you move to America in the first place? I realize that sometimes people don't have a choice, but I feel that NYC, of all places, is probably the biggest melting pot in the world.  You would think that people who reside there understand that NYC is a good place to experience new cultures, as well as implementing your own culture to new people.

I think culture in general is a very hard topic to study, especially with all of the new cultures emerging.  Motivational factors behind some of the rituals and beliefs that cultures have are interesting, yet very challenging, to study.  I think that is why it is so important to look at these differences when we can; without over generalizing all research to a certain race or ethnicity, because many times these lines can be crossed in incorrect ways. 

Here's the link, be sure to click "PDF":

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6W52-4VY6FNJ-1&_user=724663&_coverDate=08%2F31%2F2009&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_acct=C000040479&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=724663&md5=d288b327c501c516a10331dfc6998732

 

 

For this post I wanted to find a really neat video to share. But instead I found a few and decided instead of sharing a video I wanted to share this whole site.  Maybe more people than I'm aware of know about TED but I just think it is a neat site to go to and learn and hear other opinions on various topics. So I want to encourage you all to go to this site and check out the different themes of videos and find one that is for YOU!

TED has the catch phrase "Ideas worth spreading".  They hold a few conferences each year where speakers will come and spread their idea.  They have some interesting topics that anyone could enjoy.  You should check it out!

I got carried away watching a few videos and decided to post one up anyway.  Do you remember the golden rule from when you were a kid?  "Treat others the way you want to be treated".  This stopped me in my tracks and made me really rethink how I was going about life now.  What would happen in this world if everyone started to live by that golden rule?  We should be sensitive to other's emotions by thinking of our own emotions.  I heard this analogy from someone else so I can't take all of the credit, (but just think about it).  Say you're driving and you realize you need to be over a lane, like NOW.  So you pull in front of someone and cut them off.  The way you react is most likely like, "I'm sorry, I didn't mean to" and you just feel bad and apologetic.  But then on the other side of that coin, when someone pulls in front of you or cuts you off you might blow up, curse at them, call them names...make assumptions.  We should just be empathetic of others (just think what the world would be like if we did.)
   
http://www.ted.com/talks/karen_armstrong_let_s_revive_the_golden_rule.html

Here is the link to the website:
www.ted.com
From there you can explore, and please, post a comment with a video you watched or liked.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/08/090824115811.htm

 

 

According to this website, women judge men's faces for attractiveness on two parts: sexually and non-sexually.  

 

The first part determines if you have the characteristics of being a good mate.  They're looking for qualities that will help them determine if you have high levels of androgen (testosterone).  According to evolutionary psychology, this is a highly desirable trait to look for in a partner since testosterone is linked to aggression, which will lead to better protection and more food.  These traits will include strong cheekbones, a square jaw, full lips, and over all proportions of the overall face.

 

The second part is overall attractiveness of the face.  If these proportions of the face are symmetrical or not is one key point in determining the attractiveness.   

 

More on this topic can be seen during a short video on the next link.

 

http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/science-of-sex-appeal-attractive-facial-features.html

 

First of all, I love the discovery channel.

 

The video quickly explains that although as children, we all have very similar faces.  However, because of puberty, our faces will change and become more prominent for the men and finer for the women (generally).  According to the video, a strong does of these hormones will indicate good health and fertility.  Also, by saying that someone is attractive, you're saying that they have good genes and would make a good partner for reproduction.

http://www.themedguru.com/20100114/newsfeature/people-happiest-during-weekends-study-86131803.html

I found this article to be rather interesting, the study suggests that weekends have a significant effect on the body. Researchers suggest that, "simply being in charge of your own day, spending quality time with family, provides better mood, greater vitality and (fewer) physical ailments from Friday evening to Sunday afternoon."

 

While the results of this study are probably to be expected - most people are visibly happier on the weekends -  it is interesting to hear about what they believe specifically causes physiological changes, such as hormone release, and a more positive attitude overall.

 

They attribute some of these changes to higher feelings of autonomy. At first, I wondered if this effect was mainly seen in those with relatively low paying jobs (those with consistently low autonomy throughout the week), but the effect was found regardless of occupation, age, gender, or relationship status.

 

I actually found it very interesting that even those with high status jobs experience this effect on weekends. I have generally thought that workers with high status already tend to have significantly higher levels of autonomy and leisure, so the presence of the weekend would not make as much of a difference to them. According to this study, I may be wrong.

 

 I wonder if another reason for this affect is that people are often able to rest more on weekends. In BioPsychology I remember the author (John Pinel) mentioning that over time people can gradually reduce the amount of time they sleep to as little as two hours per night with only minor effects, but I have not yet looked at the studies on which he based those statements. I wonder how much of a role (perhaps 2 additional hours) additional sleep can play in improving one's mental and physical condition. I find studies involving sleep to be among the most interesting, and from what I have read it seems like much more research needs to be conducted in this area.   

 

Another question I have is, "Why don't the effects seem to carry past Sunday afternoon?" I suppose the answer may lie in their original report, but if it does it would be rather odd for them not to have included it in the article. I have often heard people say that they will be revitalized and refreshed for work after the weekend, but in my experience I'm not sure people tend to be any better or any worse at their jobs whether it is a Monday, Tuesday, or Wednesday. In any case, I think some of the questions that arise from this article merit further research.