psychology-health

As you saw from the analogy in the previous post, brain studies can be made more understandable with the use of simple analogies. Axonal conduction and neurotransmitter activation is also a simple process when it is explained in a logical manner.Consider the following: 

Axonal Conduction:

When a garden tap connected to a hose is left turned on for any length of time without disruption (continual stimulation) the water will run out the end of the hose and into a bucket at the same volume as it went into the hose from the tap (nondecremental nature of action potential conduction). When the hose is turned to the ‘off’ position, the water cannot continue to flow into the bucket, but it also wont go be able to go back up the hose and into the tap (absolute refractory period).If the tap is turned on and off intermittently, the water will only be able to come out of the end of the hose at intervals each time the hose is turned back to the ‘on’ position (intermediate rates of neural firing).When the bucket overflows, the water soaks into the lawn (adjacent voltage-activated sodium channels, which have opened).

Activation of neurotransmitters:

A gentleman places a teabag into a cup with 1/2 an inch of water. The teabag slowly begins to release its flavor into the water (activation of neurotransmitter).A little more water is added, but the teabag does not release any more flavor because the water is cold (inhibitory postsynaptic potential) (membrane is relatively impermeable to sodium ions = cold water)The man decides to add boiling water to the cup instead, and the teabag begins to release its flavor (excitatory postsynaptic potential).After a short while, the teabag stops releasing flavor altogether (action potential has reached its peak), so the man adds a new teabag to the cup of boiling water, and once again the bag begins to release flavor (neuronal firing).

  Brain studies are a large part of biopsychology, but it is a complex field of study and confusing to most people. Today we will look at an analogy to explain the function of neurons: 

The male and female of a species will display certain physical attributes, such as the fanning of feathers, to attract a mate. For the courtship to be successful, both the male and female must respond repeatedly to the signals sent to them before mating will take place. When the female of the species is disinterested, she will not respond at all, and no union is likely to occur. The dominant male of a group of animals is the one who mates with the most females, while other males who are not as strong, mate far less often. At times, some males will not mate at all, perhaps because they do not send out correct signals to the female, or because the low ranking in the order of all males in the group means he has very little influence.

Many animals have been affected by global warming, and do not migrate, or migrate later than usual as the seasons change. This could have an affect on the behaviors they would usually display when attempting to attract a mate. Some species may die out altogether if the majority of them do not head to warmer climates through the mating season, or they may stay behind and develop new behaviors and cross breed with other breeds of animals within the same species.

Many animals have been known to cross breed in a natural setting; some people turn pets loose into the wild when they realize they can no longer care for them. Pythons have been known to mate with other varieties of snakes in the wild after being turned loose by their owners because the snakes had become too large to care for-even venomous snakes!  The dumping of cats has also been a huge problem for the environment, and it has been found that some are mating with larger wild cats. Dingoes have been known to cross breed with dogs that have strayed from tourist’s campsites in Australia’s outback. Over time, new courtship rituals for these cross breeds could develop, ensuring future breeding with other strong members of their group.

Predators could also move into areas like the ones which have been destroyed by fires, because their ability to live in arid surroundings could mean they stay long term and kill off the previous ‘residents’. It is such a shame how we have collectively destroyed the habitats of many of earth’s creatures. I wonder what tougher species will evolve from those lucky enough to make it through our lifetimes?

 Biopsychology is the neuroscientific study of the brain and its psychological processes. Throughout evolution as genes are passed on, we each develop certain behaviors which are the product of the interaction of neural activity and our perception of different situations. These neural patterns are determined by the gene pool we inherit, and as a consequence, behaviors vary greatly from one person to the next. The experiences we have help to shape our behaviors, while those behaviors also influence our experiences and our perceptions. Over time, the unique behaviors we have developed are passed on through our genes to form future generations. From a professional perspective, understanding biopsychology will be useful in developing programs which can assist with the modification of existing behavior in individuals whose actions appear to be out of the norm. If it can be determined that the behaviors have a genetic influence, it may be possible to predict future behaviors. This would be useful in the area of, Industrial/Organizational Psychology in particular, because of the rising incidence of disgruntled employees who develop violent tendencies. Any knowledge of how to possibly predict future behaviors could save lives.

The nature-nurture debate has long been a topic of interest among psychologists. However, it can safely be said that choosing one side or the other in such a debate is an incorrect way to arrive at any logical conclusion; “Individual development is always the result of the interaction of nature and nurture” (Pinel, 2007, p.31).

We are all different in complex ways; and it is not possible to quantify either the genetic or experiential components which produce a behavior. When studying the development of two individuals, it is feasible to assume that genetics play a more substantial role in their development than experience, if the subjects are selected for their genetic similarities. However, when the subjects are unrelated, the contributions of genetics cannot be considered.

As an example of individual differences; a large group of 45 year old men are racing bicycles along a twenty mile route. They stay closely together for most of the journey, but toward the end of the race, several have fallen way behind. They all finish the race, but there is a 45 minute gap between the first and last competitors. Although they have all been riding the same brand of bicycle, the differences in performance can be attributed to their levels of fitness, and not the quality of the bicycle.

 Nature and nurture cannot be used to measure individual differences, however, the interaction of both does account for individual development.

Reference

Pinel, J. P. J. (2007). Basics of biopsychology. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

   
A personal construct is an organizational system that individuals use to weigh how things are similar to each other, and how they are different. People use their personal constructs to assess how a situation is, might be, or has been, so that they can try to predict how a situation will affect them. Kelly’s belief was that an individual uses their personal construct as their motivator for whether they will or will not do something, based on the anticipated end result.

A person’s behavior is affected by their constructs based on how they organize and interpret information regarding a particular social situation. Personal constructs differ from one person to the next, so the categories of the personal construct for one person may be entirely different to another. According to George Kelly (1955), “What moves people to act is their desire to know what the world has in store for them”(para.2).

     In a social situation where business is being discussed, one person may be comfortable and act in a confident and inquisitive way, while another individual might feel alienated or shy due to a lack of knowledge on the topic, and wish they were not present. If the situation were known to them beforehand, the second person may not have attended the function, but would be equally as confident as the first person, if they happened to be with another group of people who enjoyed discussing crafts and parenting. This different behavior is because each person has different personal constructs. We use our personal constructs to decide if we think we will feel good as a result of a situation, or to know how we can shape the situation to fulfill our best interest.

Reference

McAdams, D. (2006). The person: A new introduction to personality psychology. (4th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

The way we learn and behave throughout our lives is determined by many life experiences, the environment we live in, and an abundance of internal variables such as self-efficacy. Therefore, to raise a healthy new generation, it is beneficial for us to fully understand the concepts of behaviorism and the different ways we are able to learn new things.

John B. Watson founded the concept of behaviorism in the early years of the 20th century. The principles of behaviorism have been an influential force on many theories of psychology which were later developed. Behaviorism attempts to explain the influence the environment has in the development of a person’s behavior. Many believe that the environment is largely responsible for shaping us into the people we become. An example of this train of thought belonged to B.F. Skinner, when wrote a novel about a civilization of harmonious human beings, who lived and worked peacefully together and had few problems to contend with.

Skinner’s novel, Walden Two, presented a theory which Watson strongly believed, that any person could be manipulated to behave in a certain way, if the environment they resided in was conducive to such behavior. Another philosopher before Watson, John Locke (1690) had previously developed the doctrine, known as the tabula rasa.

What is Tabula Rasa?

 The tabula rasa refers to the idea that a person is a blank slate, and therefore, is able to be molded into a being with positive purpose and appropriate behaviors, based on their life experiences. In a perfect world, this may be the case, and theorists today do indeed, believe that our environments play a major role in the way we develop; particularly from a social perspective. Utilitarians Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) and John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) put it clearly, agreeing that “the good society should make for the greatest happiness or pleasure for the greatest number of people”(para.1).

Classical Conditioning

The utilitarians believed that people were able to learn through the process of association. In Pavlov’s well known example, the dog learned to salivate when he heard a tone, because he associated that with a piece of meat which it was given shortly after hearing the sound. The tone, a neutral stimulus, the meat was the unconditioned stimulus, and the salivation was the unconditioned response. After a period of repetitions, the tone became a conditioned stimulus, which prompted the conditioned response, salivation, whether the meat (unconditioned stimulus) was offered to the dog or not (para.4).

Classical and Operant Conditioning.

 It is said that classical conditioning can also provide a negative outcome under certain circumstances, such as the development of phobias. An example of this would be when a situation is associated with something unpleasant, and thereafter a person may react negatively because they remember the previous incident as being stressful.

Operant conditioning is another learning concept. It has its basis is association, but focuses on consequences as the means to fostering new and more positive behavior.

Reinforcement.

In Skinner’s book, the primary method of  maintaining a contented society with well mannered citizens was by positive reinforcement; “by rewarding socially desirable behavior, the educational system at Walden Two gently and gradually instilled behaviors compatible with a good life for all its citizens”(para.1).

Research has shown that partial reinforcement can produce a more consistent outcome, than continuous reinforcement. as confusing as this may sound, it makes sense that if a lapse occurs and reinforcement is not given as regularly as it once had, the positive behavior ay cease. Conversely, by offering partial reinforcement periodically, the learner is more likely to continue with good behaviors and not deviate from the norm.Behaviorism has left an undeniable influence on modern psychology.

Behavior modification therapies which are practiced by psychologists today, can trace their roots to the early theory of behaviorism developed by John B. Watson. Reinforcement is an effective way to promote continued respectable behavior, and has a success rate higher than punishments, which merely point out unwanted traits.

Albert Bandura.

Observational LearningPsychologist Albert Bandura makes a clear point, when he says that “The traditional principles of learning that are derived from behaviorism—such as the laws of reinforcement and punishment—have more to do with performance than with learning per se. Rewards and punishments directly shape what people will do, Bandura argues, but they may not always be implicated in what people learn”(para.1). Bandura’s concept seems simple in one sense, by insisting that people learn by observing the behaviors of those around them.

The basis of Bandura’s Social Learning Theory is that people will not only learn by observation, by will assess their own abilities before attempting to mimic a given behavior. There are variables though, and self-efficacy can also be a motivator for the learner to mimic the behavior.

Bandura’s Four Steps of Observational Learning.

In Bandura’s (1971-1977) For Steps of Observational Learning, the subject first observes a particular event or behavior. The learner then encodes the demonstration and organizes it into a manner he can comprehend. In the third step, the learner decides if he is physically capable of reproducing the behavior, and this is ultimately determined by his own expectancy of the outcome. In simple terms, a learner’s self-efficacy can be a great predictor of his performance. If he has doubts about the intended outcome, it may become a self-fulfilling prophecy. This is an important lesson why parents should always encourage their children, and praise them for their achievements!

Reference

McAdams, D. (2006). The person: A new introduction to personality psychology. (4th ed.).Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. 

1930-1950

Learning from animal responses.

The first issue of the journal Character and Personality was published in 1932.

In 1937, Gordon Allport published the first major textbook onpersonality: Personality: A Psychological Interpretation. Allport’s was the first to articulate a grand vision for the field of personality and to place it within the context of historical and contemporary scholarship in the arts and sciences.

Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung and Alfred Adler  had all developed comprehensive theories of personality derived from clinical observations and rooted in the European psychoanalytic tradition.

Personality textbooks organized the field according to these grand systems, variously dividing the systems into psychoanalytic and psychosocial theories.

Psychoanalytic theories became incorporated within personality psychology proper and began to have a significant influence on how personality psychologists thought about and empirically studied human individuality.

1950 - 1970

Specialized psychology departments.

After WWII, more attention was given to psychology, and personality psychology in particular.

Specializations were developed, such as clinical, counseling, and industrial/organizational psychology.

Increased federal funding supported personality research in laboratories and field settings.

Personality psychologists focused their research efforts on the examination and elaboration of particular personality constructs, such as extraversion, anxiety, and the need for achievement.

Personality psychology turned away from the grand theories of the 1930s and 1940s and came to focus instead on problems and controversies concerning personality measurement. Most influential, however, was Mischel’s (1968, 1973) critique, in which he argued against explanations of human behavior based on internal personality traits and in favor of explanations that focused on the situational and cognitive/social-learning determinants of behavior.

1970 - Present

The Big Five model: The phase began with critique and pervasive doubt concerning the legitimacy and worth of personality studies, but it evolved by the mid-1980s into a broad sense of renewal and revitalization.

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, psychologists delivered a series of devastating critiques of personality psychology that threw the field into a crisis. For example; Carlson (1971) chastised personality psychologists for ignoring the grand theories of the early years and straying away from their implicit mandate to study real lives and whole persons in depth. Personality psychologists have refined new research methodologies for the scientific study of persons.

Contemporary research in personality has become more sensitive to the complex interactions of internal personality variables and external situational factors in the prediction of behavior (Kenrick & Funder, 1988).

Renewed interest in integrative personality theory and a renewed commitment to studying whole persons in their full biographical complexity.

Reference

McAdams, D. (2006). The person: A new introduction to personality psychology. (4th ed.).Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

There are differing views about what drives humans to think and behave the way they do. While the theories differ, the basis for each of them is similar, and therefore, all could be seen as derivatives of Freud’s theory of human motivation.

Sigmund Freud (1856–1939) insisted that sexuality and aggression were the driving forces behind all human motivation. He theorized three areas of the mind, namely the conscious, preconscious, and unconscious. Freud argued that the material in the unconscious mind would bring feelings of fear, emotional pain or guilt. “We cannot bear to know certain things about ourselves. Therefore, we do not (consciously) know them. Yet what resides in the unconscious profoundly affects our behavior and experience, even though we do not know we are being affected”(para.5). Freud believed that our behaviors stemmed from deep-seated sexual and aggressive motivation in our identity, and were outwardly projected in a manner which was controlled by the ego and superego. These are the regulatory systems which manipulate the motivators so that we behave in a manner which is in line with our beliefs, and in ways which are acceptable to society.

Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow had similar theories about human motivation. Rogers believed that strivings were consistent with the need to obtain, thrive and advance. Rogers believed that humans have a natural internal need to advance, and that all of the needs and influences, both internal and external, dictate the course of actions and thought processes we go through toward achieving our goals. This entirety is what Rogers refers to as “the phenomenal field”(para.2).

In his theory, similar to Carl Rogers, Abraham Maslow concurred that strivings for self-enhancement were indeed, the combinations of ingredients humans drew upon in their quest for self-improvement. Maslow developed a system which demonstrates the needs in order of importance. The five tiered hierarchy puts physiological needs as the primary need, followed by safety, and above them, belongingness and love, self-esteem, and self-actualization. Maslow insisted that in order to achieve the highest level of needs, the lower level needs must first be met. Maslow’s theory is a common sense approach, and was adequately summed up by saying that “a starving man will not act in accord with his needs for belongingness until he has secured food (physiological needs) and a safe position in life (security needs)”(para.3).

Henry Murray’s diversity theory was that we behave in ways which reflect a combination of past experiences and future goals. Murray’s theory of needs and wants were described as themas. Physiological and psychological needs interact with press, the opportunity or need for expression, to produce the thema (para.3). Similar to Maslow’s hierarchy, Murray’s list of needs rang from viscerogenic, or physiological needs such as food and warmth, to psychogenic needs like affiliation and autonomy.

Because the common denominator of all theories is that we do what we do in order to achieve and thrive,  all theories of human motivation are feasible. The theories are relevant to each other in many ways, and I favor Carl Roger’s theory above others because it clearly suggests that in order to advance, we must first be content within ourselves.  Reference

McAdams, D. (2006). The person: A new introduction to personality psychology. (4th ed.).Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. 

Whether it was an unconscious reaction to sexual tension, or a manifestation of repressed aggression, President Clinton’s indiscretions almost cost him his job, his reputation and his wife and child. Freud’s psychoanalytic theory identifies sexuality and aggression as underlying motivators for human behavior, and due to the continual stress which goes with the office of the President of the United States; it is possible the President was not completely in charge of his own faculties at this time. Freud also spoke of three structures of the mind; the id, the ego, and the superego. Looking more closely at the driving forces behind each of these, one could speculate that the pleasure driven id was working alone in Clinton’s case, with no regulatory oversight from either the ego or the superego. The President’s actions clearly follow Freud’s description of the id which is that “Pleasure derives from the reduction of tension in the immediate gratification of impulses. The id, furthermore, is the driving force behind primary process thinking—the loose, fluid, and irrational kind of thinking that we associate with dreaming. Primary process thought is motivated by the sexual and aggressive instincts”(¶.2).

If one examines President Clinton’s actions using Carl Roger’s humanistic theory, it can be put most simply by saying that Clinton was “striving to actualize and perfect the self” (¶.1), albeit in a maladaptive way. To become a fully functional, self-actualizing person, inner strivings for advancement and the respect of others is a large part of what any human needs to feel good. Clinton looked to fulfill his need for positive regard in a place where it was guaranteed to be found. Monica Lewinsky was an impressionable young woman who also made bad choices, and this was possibly due to her being intimidated or at least flattered by the President’s attention. As a result of their affair, both Lewinsky and President Clinton lost the respect of millions of people worldwide. Rather than rely on their own self-worth and capabilities, Clinton and Lewinsky’s decisions offered only the experiences which Rogers said were “contrary to actualization—those experiences that do not promote growth and fulfillment”(¶.4).

Like Rogers, Abraham Maslow’s humanistic views can be used to sum up the Clinton and Lewinsky fiasco. Based on Maslow’s hierarchal system of needs, where one level of needs must be attained before moving to the next, the President’s strivings for “Achievement, competence, approval, recognition, prestige, status”(Figure 7.4) had already been achieved, right after the fulfillment of belongingness and love; given this fact, the final step of self-actualization in the hierarchal system was where Clinton reached for the wrong goals. Maslow’s research was the result of studying healthy minded individuals, and Clinton fell one step short of attaining the list of needs from the perspective of a healthy minded person.

Henry Murray’s diversity theory can also be used to describe former President Clinton’s behavior and attitude during those years. Murray’s idea was that “human beings are motivated by many different things”(¶.1), such as physiological needs, and opportunities and constraints which he called press. The interaction of both groups of motivators created the thema, the sum total of both physical and psychological needs, and influences resulting from situations or created by a particular environment. Murray argued that “In general, the way in which a person achieves a goal may be partly determined by traits, such as extraversion–introversion. But the nature of the goal itself is more likely determined by needs”(¶.8). It is here one could ask the obvious question of former President Clinton: “what needs did you have which were not being met?” He had a great job, he had a loving wife and family, he had the respect of millions of people world-wide; is it possible to forget one’s own identity in the process? It is difficult to know with any accuracy what motivates a human being to behave the way they do. In spite of all the greatness a person can achieve in one short lifetime, the unimaginable experience of being the most powerful person in the world apparently has its disadvantages. Fortunately, the whirlwind of media attention has subsided with regard to the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal, much to the relief of many, and one can only hope that Ms. Lewinsky has found her path to contentment. The fact that she is no longer the focus of any public attention would suggest this is the case. As for President Clinton; he eventually settled into an active life of public service, and continues to work for the good of human kind, with his dignity remarkably intact.

Perhaps it takes a more powerful motivator than we could possibly imagine, being able to continue  life’s journey in a positive direction after such a horrendous experience, than it does to be the President of the United States. Carl Rogers offers the perfect explanation for what Clinton may have been searching for when he spent time with Ms. Lewinsky; “The person builds a self-image commensurate with what other important people, who provide the person with positive regard, urge him or her to adopt”(¶.6).  It is human nature to take the path of least resistance; perhaps this time with Lewinsky was Clinton’s easiest way back to discovering his own identity after living a surreal existence.

Reference

 McAdams, D. (2006). The person: A new introduction to personality psychology. (4th ed.).