Psychology Articles

Have you ever wondered how police investigators seem to have a ’sixth sense’ in matters of honesty? They know when the suspect is being dishonest, and the truth seldom waits for breakfast. (=Cold porridge and sugarless gnat’s tea – or so they tell me.) Our Boys in Blue use a series of progressive interrogation techniques that exploit human behaviour when the going gets tough. Some crooks (usually the ones who’ve been interrogated before) are capable of suppressing or controlling their body language, but when pressure is applied over prolonged periods this becomes increasingly difficult. As they bend and buckle under the strain of interrogation, signs of deceit surface.

This doesn’t mean the fuzz have the crooks cold – far from it. The investigators see the crooks are withholding information, so they squeeze harder, eventually he or she cracks. When depends on the crook’s resilience to the applied mental pressure – it’s just a matter of time.

This month our Bodyspy is Detective Sergeant McBiggles, who’s been assigned as chief of staff for the bungled bank robbery on Regent Street, Soho…

“Did you get him constable?”

“Yeah Guv, we got him alright.”

“Any sign of the get-a-way car?”

“Nah, it disappeared down Beak Street with Fast Eddie in tow. We only got him ’cause Betty Jobbins saw him coming and tied a stocking round the lamp post outside her parlour door. She pulled it tight as Eddie ran past. You should have seen him gulpin’ at her in undies – with plenty showing – as he flew through the air and landed flat on his face.”

“What about the dough?”

“Oh yeah, they got the dough alright, or 1.6 million of it. It would have been a clean get-a-way if Eddy hadn’t dropped his sack and stopped to scoop it up as he sped towards the get-a-way car. They got edgy and drove off as Billy Busker beat him about the head with his fiddle stick. He grabbed the sack and ran, only to be apprehended by Betty’s ingenuity.”

“OK constable, I think I’ve got the gist. When are you bringing him in?”

“Oh, we’re just mopping up now. We’ll be back at HQ in twenty minutes.”

“I want the hussy and the fiddler for questioning too.”

“OK Guv, we’ve got the fiddler here, but Betty’s gone back to work.”

“Well, get her off the job and down here fast!”

“Yes Guv.” The radio crackled and went dead.

Latter, back at the nick, “You do not have to say anything.” Voiced McBiggles huskily to Fast Eddie, “But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court.” Eddie sloped back in his chair, lifted up his right leg and rested a Dr Marten on the interview room table where he now sat opposite McBiggles and WPC Tire. To complete his carefree gesture he placed his hands behind his head. McBiggles noted his nonverbal challenge and continued, “Anything you do say may be given in evidence.”

Having finished reading his caution to this cocky pizza-faced git opposite him, McBiggles lent forward and pushed his boot off the interview table. Eddie jerked forward as his leg fell to the floor and then slouched back in his chair once more taking up the hands behind the head position. McBiggles choose to let his gesture ride. Questioning began, but Eddie was feeling none too informative.

The questioning continued as McBiggles found himself tiring from Eddie’s defensive backchat and constant display of the nonverbal challenge. McBiggles sloped back in his chair, placed his hands behind the head to mirror Eddie’s stance. This obviously agitated Eddie (it was intended to) as he once more placed a Dr Marten on the table. McBiggles immediately broke his gesture, lent forward and pushed Eddie’s boot off the edge. Again Eddie Jerked forward and then slouched back in his chair, this time crossing his arms (defensive). Ahh, mused McBiggles, Mr Fuzz one, ‘Fast’ food face nil! Questioning continued.

With each question Eddie came back with a flawless defensive answer, sometimes leaning his head forward as he did so to reinforce his words. WPC Tire sat at the table like a dummy, not being able to get a word in edgeways, her plump belly resting on the table. Eddie felt like singing the lyrics of that popular Ian Dury and The Blockheads song ‘Hit Me With Your Rhythm Stick’ (for those of you who are too young to remember: “hit me with your rhythm stick, two fat persons click click click, hit me, hit meeee…” sorry I got carried away there), but didn’t dare do so. The interesting thing was that Eddie’s head was tilted slightly to the left side throughout most of the interview. Being a Bodyspy McBiggles knew why. Eddie’s head position was one of ‘interest’, it showed he was listening carefully to every word in order to maintain consistent answers with no hint of contradiction. He was a tough nut to crack.

McBiggles had wanted to nick Eddie ever sine the burglary on Toff’s Jewellers on Cavendish Street; there just wasn’t enough evidence to do so. That’s when he’d earned the name ‘Fast’ for outrunning PC Longlegs. Indeed, you may ask whose legs are longest. The answer is Longlegs, but Eddie was still faster. As the pace of questioning quickened and the pressure on Eddie grew, McBiggles noted what he thought to be the beginnings of a hand to face gesture, but Eddie quickly nipped it in the bud. Ahh, weakening at last thought McBiggles while feeling his tummy rumbling for Mrs Sweet’s sticky buns. After seeing this his first thought was to push on, but hell, he needed a hot mug of coffee and a bun. Besides, he had an idea he wanted to put into action.

So McBiggles and WPC Tire strolled off to the Police canteen while Eddie had to be content to sip another cup of gnat’s pee from the stiff boards of his cell bed. WPC Tire – strangely enough – became disconcerted as she was called to the Police radio to relieve the duty sergeant who’d slipped out for a call of nature. She arrived back at the canteen just in time to witness McBiggles stuffing the remainder of his last bun into his mouth (one was never enough) as he jumped to his feet; flecks of saliva danced on his lips. WPC Tire saw the plate of sticky buns on the canteen counter and ran her tongue around her chops. “Right, let’s see if we can slacken off Eddie’s jaw bones shell we constable?” said McBiggles rubbing his hands to lose the remaining sugar. Inconsiderate Bun-hog mused WPC Tire.

They entered the interview room. McBiggles turned up the heating on the wall thermostat. “No matter how hot you feel constable, just keep quiet and reframe from making any oh it’s hot gestures. Now go and get him.”

The interview commenced once more; this time Fast Eddie had slumped back into his chair and taken a defensive arms-folded position. Indeed he had something to hide, but it was to be expected; after all he was as guilty as Flufikins the pussy in a flowerpot calamity. The tension grew and grew over the next hour and things began to look grim for Eddie. McBiggles had taken to a new tactic. He paced around the interview room while asking questions (WPC Tire remained seated) by the time he finished each question, he was standing right next door to Eddie, remaining in the confines of his intimate sphere so as to invade his personal space until he answered. From time to time Eddie would make a ‘collar pull’ gesture, a classic sign of deceit. That’s what he had seen earlier when Eddie had nipped it in the bud. Turing up the heating had made it much harder for Eddie to resist the temptation to relieve the clammy feeling around his neck that results from telling so many lies. (I told you those boys in blue were clever didn’t I!)

Eddie was clearly buckling under the pressure as McBiggles reclaimed his seat. The questions kept coming; McBiggles clung to the end of every answer never giving Eddie the time to relax. Then it came: a sweet, sweet contradiction to one of Eddie’s earlier answers. Ooops, the PC plod’s got me now mused Eddie.

The result of Eddies’ slip of the tongue was cooperation, after a little protest that is. His body language was quite different once he started to cooperate. He was leaning forward in his seat with arms folded on the edge of the table (defensive) as he answered each question. Thanks to McBiggles’ interrogation skills, the gang was apprehended, the money was recovered, and the garage responsible for the get-a-way car (a suped-up Skoda) was closed down.

So McBiggles finally fingered Eddie after all. If you’re wondering what happened to Fast Eddie, I will tell you. He now spends his days in his prison cell reading a copy of my Bodyspy training manual to suss-out exactly how McBiggles caught him out. He does not intend to quit crime, but rather to learn from his mistakes. You can obtain your copy of Bodyspy (complete with over 170 illustrations) from http://www.bodyspyteachings.com, just complete the online process; it will take only a few moments of your time and costs just $19.70USD (Approx £12.50GBP). Guarantee: in the unlikely event that you do not find Bodyspy outstanding value for money, you may contact us at the address given on the site and receive a full refund within 60 days of purchase.

The field of psychology encompasses many aspects that must be dealt with on a daily basis. Psychologists and others working in the field are often faced with moral dilemmas that may cause them to question the place of morals and spirituality in psychology. Those who practice some form of religion may use their specific values and morals when it comes to finding resolutions in these situations. There still lies the question of whether religion has a place in the day-to-day practice of psychology and if so, where to draw the line.

In part, psychology is considered a science. Though it is not exact in all situations, it does carry with it various similarities to science where theories and decision making are concerned. Ethics play a big role in psychology for both the roles of the psychologist or psychological professional conducting evaluations and providing treatment and the client or patient receiving the services or treatment. The code of ethics was put into place to protect both parties involved. Ethics is based on right and wrong and, can therefore be closely related to morality in many instances. Because of this, it can be argued that religion plays a role in the ethical decisions that are made everyday. Though the code of ethics does not specifically site religion as a part of what is contained there in, various aspects of morality and common values are found.

Spirituality as a whole has become even more prevalent in the field of psychology over the past several years as evidenced by the number of Christian counseling centers that have opened around the country. The professionals working in these settings offer what some say is the perfect combination of treatment, psychology based on Christian values and beliefs. Here the psychological principles and ethics are used with various aspects of religious values and beliefs interwoven into the treatment plans. Patients are often counseled on how spirituality can help them through their difficult situations. In these settings, professionals strive to find a balance between psychology and religion, a challenging task at times. Psychology is based on various principles, theories and ethics while religion is based mostly on faith. Psychological issues are proven in a scientific way while a good part of religion is based on belief in the unseen. While many people don’t question their faith, it can be difficult to intermingle what can be physically seen with what cannot. This causes many people to question the place of spirituality in psychology.

Because faith is often questioned, it has become necessary to receive proof. This proof often comes in the form of answers that are a direct result of the testing of ideas (Myers). When ideas are tested and found to be correct, faith is easier to maintain; however, then they do not survive the test, faith can become a very shaky prospect. When this principle is applied to psychology, the outcome can change on a regular basis. Different situations call for different ideas which may or may not prove to work. Also, what works in one situation may prove impossible in another. The key to understanding where spirituality fits in is knowing how to apply it to each individual situation and idea and make determinations and assessments based on the information that is gathered and the particular values that are relevant to the end result.

To better understand where religion fits into the psychological realm, let’s take a closer look at the human attributes that make up each. Where religion is concerned there is the theological wisdom. This deals with the acceptance of divine love in order to enable individuals to accept themselves. Psychological wisdom, however, deals with self-esteem, optimism and personal control (Myers). The ability to use the two together to make important decisions will provide the freedom to use what we know, admit what we don’t and search for the answers. Because we are both the creatures and creators of our own social world, people and situations matter (Myers). While ultimate control lies beyond us, we carry responsibility for making important decisions that have a lasting effect on us as well as others.

Psychologists face these dilemmas everyday. They must make important decisions that will directly effect their patients. Each decision is made on an individual basis and is dependent on each specific situation and its own set of circumstances. Each decision will carry with it a separate set of ethical issues and dilemmas and the solution will remain unique to each. Religion is said to heal people while medicine was designed to do the same. The two often work in different contexts, but it can be argued that medicine was discovered because of ideas and values based on religious beliefs. Because of this, it is believed in many situations the two are used together to come up with treatment plans that will be both effective and long lasting.

In many ways, people who have great faith have found the insights and critical analyses of psychology to be supportive of the understanding they possess of human nature. Their assumption that religion is conducive to happiness and good health is also attributed in great part to psychology. The science of psychology offers principles that can be applied to the construction of messages that will prove both memorable and persuasive. Here the tasks of peacemaking and reconciliation are promoted in a way that offers solutions that will provide the means by which others can achieve happiness by establishing healthy relationships (Myers). While the science may challenge our way of thinking, the same can be said of religion. Faith is often questioned in an effort to find answers. This has proven to be helpful in many situations where the answer wasn’t clearly defined. Here, the science of psychology is used along with the religious beliefs to find solutions to problems that seemingly have no immediate or clear resolution. Still, faith is not always a negative aspect of psychology.

A strong value and belief system can help a psychologist working as a professional in the field deal with situations where the traditional psychological theories aren’t showing a definite answer. Here the process is reversed because religion is used to clarify a particular set of circumstances based on the lack of information that can be gathered at a given time. There are also times where one can support the other. Religious beliefs are often used to support the reasoning behind many ethical situations whereas psychology is often used to prove various religion based ideas. This is where the two can be used in tandem to come up with a truly unique solution that will work.

It has also been argued that faith plays an important role in a psychologist’s ability to use the information found in the code of ethics and psychological practices that are present everyday. This is based on the belief that people who possess strong faith are better able to understand the science of psychology because they can use the two together to come up with answers that are suited to each new set of circumstances. Here psychologists are not heavily relying on either faith or science, but instead are using them both to gain a better understanding of the situation as a whole. Those who believe in the contents of the code of ethics understand its importance and why it must play a role in psychology on a daily basis (Kafka). Those who possess strong religious beliefs usually strive to use them everyday when making ethical decisions and are often working toward an outcome built on both science and faith. Still there is a very important line between when to use the science of psychology and when to rely on the beliefs and values that often assist many in making daily life decisions.

When it comes to the co-mingling of psychology and spirituality, each has its own place. The scientific aspects of psychology are necessary in order to solve a wide range of problems and provide successful treatment to those in need. Still, spirituality can play a very important role in the rehabilitation of patients by making it easier to understand the psychological ramifications and why they exist. Spirituality and science can be used both during and after treatment. During treatment, religious beliefs may guide both the psychologist and patient toward making the right decisions and understanding difficult situations along the way. After treatment, religion can continue to help the patient as he or she moves onward through life while the scientific aspect may still remain present in the form of ongoing counseling or use of medication.

Psychologists can use both in their profession to make difficult decisions and deal with hard to solve problems. Aspects of each can be relied upon to provide the means by which to draw important conclusions that may help throughout the entire treatment process. Evidence has also shown that psychologists who know their profession but also possess strong religious beliefs are able to help their patients throughout treatment by passing on various virtues that promote positive thinking (Myers).

The end results of melding together both science and spirituality have been studied for a number of years. Some argue psychology should remain only a science while others feel the intertwining of science with religion can only serve to improve the overall outcome of treatment situations. The argument is also made that science as a whole has strong ties to religion and the two often give cause for the questioning of each other. Science can often prove what religion cannot and religion was the basis for the need to know, thus people began studying the how and why of scientific matters (Myers).

Some have explained the boundaries between psychology and religion by bringing up a few points that express how one relates to the other. One point is the correlation of scientific ideas presented in everyday human nature to religion and being able to site the information to show how it is all related. Another important point is the link between religion, prejudice, altruism and overall well-being (Myers).

When dealing with various psychological situations, it is just as important to realize the importance of the science as it is the religion. This is often difficult to do because of the differing beliefs and values possessed by each professional working in the field. Because of this, it is necessary for each to make decisions based on the psychological code of ethics along with the specific circumstances of each given situation. For those who are religious, spirituality will most likely play a role in the decision making process in a professional setting because it very likely does in any other. Those who utilize spirituality in day-to-day situations often rely on it to guide them in their professions. Though the psychological code of ethics may not have been created based specifically around the religious beliefs and values directly associated with spirituality, there are many similarities between ethical dilemmas and resolutions and those of a moral nature.

Correlations have also been reported between faith and subjective well-being. One example of this can be found in a National Opinion Research Center survey of 42,00 Americans that was conducted after 1972. Here 26 percent who never attended religious services reported being very happy while 47 percent of those participating in spiritual services on a regular basis, sometimes more than weekly reported also being very happy (Myers). Though this does not sho3w a direct link between religion and well-being, it does indicate that many people seek spirituality in various aspects of their lives. Whether the science of psychology and spirituality should be co-mingled in a professional setting can be a bit subjective as it is dependent upon the differing situations and those directly involved in the treatment processes. While there are correlations between the ethical code used by psychological professionals everywhere and the morality associated with religion, the two remain separate and can be called upon in any given situation where they may be deemed necessary or important. The code of ethics is used every day in the psychological setting, but whether or not spirituality is involved may be up to each professional working in the field.

REFERENCES

For more information, please contact Dr. Joseph Coleman at jcoleman05@bellsouth.net or via phone at (504) 621-0966 (504) 621-0966

The materialistic world despises the meaning of dreams, while psychologists and psychiatrists disagree one with the other.

I was a neurotic artist who had a great literary talent, but who had abandoned literature, when I understood that I was neurotic, and I started seriously caring about the meaning of my dreams, in search of psychotherapy.

I always had the fear of becoming schizophrenic like my father. I wanted to prevent this tragic end, and I was right, because there was too much absurdity in my anti-conscience (the wild side of the human conscience).

The first time I cared about the meaning of dreams was in 1979, when I read Freud’s book about dream interpretation loaning it from Pacific Beach’s Library. I had seen a very strange dream before travelling to California. I was born in Sao Paulo, Brazil, and had lived there until I was 17 years old, then I went to the USA.

I saw many strange dreams in San Diego too, but I concluded that Freud’s method of dream interpretation could not be applied to all kinds of dreams, even though it seemed to work well for certain ones.

It was only later that I discovered that only Carl Jung had discovered the right method of dream interpretation, after reading the books of many psychologists and their different theories about the meaning of dreams. Only Jung’s method could be applied to all dreams. It was too complicated though… I had to study it very much.

I was already 24 years old at that time, and I had decided to live in Athens, Greece, where I have many relatives.

My research took a very long time, but when I finally found the solution, being able to easily decipher the meaning of all dreams, I also had to help many people through dream therapy for 19 years, before daring to present my work to the public.

I had to transform a very complicated method of dream interpretation into a fast method of dream translation that everyone could easily learn and start putting immediately into practice. And the most important thing of all was not to exactly and immediately translate all dream messages, but to help everyone find their mental health, peace and happiness with the unconscious’ guidance, giving them advice, and helping them in all fields.

You are very lucky because today you can learn the results of my very long research and practice translating thousands of dreams. This knowledge will educate you and help you develop your intelligence, besides curing you from all mental illnesses.

But the religious meaning you’ll find in dreams is even more important than the miraculous cure of physical diseases, besides the cure of all mental illnesses. The extraordinary wisdom of the dream messages proves to us that our dreams are produced by a genius, and that this genius has saintly characteristics.

This means that there is a superior mind guiding our blind and ignorant conscience, and it could only belong to God. All scientists are atheists, and deny mixing science to religion… However, the entire truth about the meaning of dreams has many dimensions, and all elements are together, without distinction.

Christina Sponias continued Carl Jung’s research into the human psyche, discovering the cure for all mental illnesses, and simplifying the scientific method of dream interpretation that teaches you how to exactly translate the meaning of your dreams, so that you can find health, wisdom and happiness. Learn more at: http://www.scientificdreaminterpretation.com. Click Here to download a Free Sample of the eBook Dream Interpretation as a Science (86 pages!).

When people talk about a person’s ‘intelligence’ it is not generally clear what underlying ability or abilities this term refers to. This article is intended to clarify in layman’s terms what psychologists and brain scientists can mean by intelligence. Basically, there are two good theories–and scientists are divided on which is the best theory–and one bad one which all scientists I know of reject. A good theory is one that is supported by the evidence; a bad theory is one that is not.

Official IQ tests such as the WAIS-IV claim to measure individual differences in an underlying ‘ level of cognitive ability given by a single number–your IQ or intelligence quotient. But is it true that there is a single underlying mental ability that we differ in and that explains what makes us different in our cognitive abilities? If someone is good at maths, are they also likely to be good at language comprehension, reasoning, thinking analogically, learning languages and general knowledge, due to their underlying ‘intelligence level’, as this theory implies?

Or are there ‘multiple intelligences’ underlying out abilities–perhaps dozens or even hundreds of them–each independent from each other, and measured by different types of test. If you have an ability in mathematics, is this ability completely unrelated to your ability in learning languages or play general knowledge games like trivial pursuit? If this is the case, is the idea of having a single IQ score quite meaningless? Or alternatively, are there a small number of underlying cognitive abilities (perhaps two or three) that we differ in, which are relatively independent from each other–and which together explain most the differences in our cognitive abilities?

1. The theory of general intelligence (g)–a good theory

A long standing an influential theory for our cognitive abilities states that underlying all our cognitive abilities (math, language comprehension, general knowledge) is a single factor–called general intelligence (also known as unitary intelligence, general cognitive ability, or simply ‘g’ ) that individuals differ on and which explains those differences.

Spearman (1923) proposed that underlying all cognitive abilities a ‘general ability’ factor (g) that all the abilities draw on. Individuals differ in g according to a bell curve distribution on this theory. g can be thought of in terms of information processing power. Some people –those with higher g–can process more information, more efficiently than others. Using a computer analogy, they have more RAM. The more RAM a computer has, the more complex and information-intensive the programs that can be run on it. If you have an IQ of 160 like Quentin Tarantino has, you have lots of RAM, large ‘bandwidth’ for processing information. If you have an IQ of 78 like Muhammad Ali as a young man (whose IQ was measured by the army), then you have less RAM. Muhammad Ali had many talents, but according to the unitary intelligence theory, intelligence wasn’t one of them.

The evidence for this theory is the same evidence that allows us to reject the theory of multiple intelligences. All standardized tests of cognitive ability (and there are dozens of them, measuring a wide range of different abilities) are positively correlated–not perfectly, but to a large degree. This means that if someone scores higher than average on one of those tests, they are likely to score higher than average on all the other tests–even ones that appear totally unrelated. Scoring higher in an arithmetic test means you will probably also score higher in a vocabulary test. This remains true, even when you take other factors like educational background, or family socioeconomic status into account. This is compelling evidence that there is a single underlying level of cognitive ability that is applied to each of the tests and that performance on one test is not independent from performance on another as the multiple intelligence theory claims.

Spearman (1904)–the psychologist who first proposed the g theory–argued that the variance (the person to person variation) of performance between individuals on ANY cognitive task can be attributed to just two underlying factors: g (general intelligence) and s –the skill unique to that particular task. A person could invest relatively more time into developing a specific skill such as arithmetic, and this will raise their score on an arithmetic test relative to another test such as vocabulary that they didn’t train or practice on, but their general intelligence g will still account for most of their performance on the arithmetic test. G is still the most important factor in explaining levels of performance, whatever the test.

2. The theory of multiple intelligences-a bad theory Spearman’s ‘g’ theory is the opposite of the theory of multiple intelligences. The theory of multiple intelligence is an appealing one because it gives some room for everyone to have their own unique strengths in ‘intelligence’. But as we have seen it turns out that our cognitive strengths and weaknesses are best explained by how much time and effort is we have invested into particular skills or types of knowledge. If I take up a technical trade and become good at it, and find that I am struggling with reading fiction, this doesn’t necessarily mean that I have a special ‘intelligence’ for technical thinking and have no ability for reading or language. The fact I struggle with fiction is better explained by the fact that I have invested my intelligence into building up this particular type of expertise and thus see more of a return on that investment in technical modes of cognition. If I had spent as much time reading fiction as I have applying myself to technical problems, chances are I’d be good at that.

3. The theory of fluid intelligence (gF) and crystallized intelligence (gC)–another good theory

This theory builds on the general intelligence theory, and was originally proposed by the psychologist Raymond Cattell back in 1943. It holds that g is meaningful–that we each have a different general intelligence level– but contributing to g are two different types of intelligence: fluid intelligence (gF) and crystallized intelligence (gC ). Fluid g is the ability to reason and problem solve with novel tasks or in unfamiliar contexts (measured reasoning tasks), while crystallized g is defined as acquired knowledge and is measured using tests of general knowledge, mathematics, and vocabulary. This dual way of understanding intelligence allows for knowledge that you have built up in particular areas to compensate for limitations in overall reasoning and problem solving ability– our ‘raw intelligence’. You may succeed due to knowledge about a task or domain (crystallized g), or due to sheer mental ‘horsepower’ (fluid g).

Where the idea of ‘multiple intelligences’ makes sense: as crystallized intelligence that we invest in

Our crystallized intelligence allows for ‘multiple intelligences’. You could have a high level of crystallized intelligence in graphic design, for example, while having only an average level of fluid intelligence. But you will only be able to use your crystallized intelligence for graphic design in situations in which you are familiar and have built up expertise. Unless you have a high level of fluid intelligence when you are confronted with an unfamiliar problem in graphic design–something ‘out of context’, requiring some difficult figuring out-then you are likely to have difficulties. On the flip side, if you have a high level of fluid intelligence, it will take you less time to pick up graphic design (or whatever) skills as you learn your basic skill set. Your learning will be more efficient, and you will find it easier. In general, the more fluid intelligence you have the more you will be able to ‘invest’ it into crystallized intelligence skills and knowledge–the more ‘multiple intelligences’ you will be able to develop if you so wish. In the context of work, the more gF you have the more quickly and efficiently you can be trained. One study showed that it took people in the 110 to 130 IQ range about 1 to 2 years to catch up with the super-charged performance of those with IQs of 130+ who had only 3 months’ experience on the job.

Summary

Looking at all the evidence, both the general intelligence (g) theory, and the fluid intelligence (gF) and crystallized intelligence (gC) are well supported and useful in explaining how we differ in our cognitive abilities. In my view, the fluid and crystallized theory is the more insightful and useful. It helps me understand intelligence-and how we can improve it-better. For instance, research shows that you can do a specific type of ‘working memory’ brain training to increase your fluid intelligence level substantially–but this training does not directly affect your crystallized intelligence.

The author, Dr Mark A. Smith, is a cognitive neuroscientist, author and entrepreneur. Between 2000 and 2003 he was a Lecturer in the Department of Experimental Psychology at the University of Cambridge. His most recent position has been as Assistant Professor at Bilkent University, Turkey. His current research is in fluid intelligence and its evolution in human cognition. He has recently set up a cognitive interventions laboratory for experimental research into brain training tools and brain nutrition.

To find out more of what is known about intelligence and how to increase IQ, visit his website: http://www.iqlift.com/.

America is the great melting point, a haven for difference. Millions of people from around the world immigrate for a chance to experience the opportunities promised them in this country. Within this great American ideal is the reality of different social and psychological experiences for cultural or ethnic minority group members based on social, racial, and/ or ethnic status. Different lived experiences alert individuals to their group identity , creating a lens through which to see and judge their experiences (L. Arredondo, personal communication /class lecture, 11/16/2006); So that, while a person is American they are also European-American, also African-American, also Asian-American, Hispanic-American, etc. Through these different socio-cultural contexts, individuals and groups develop different models that influence their thoughts and actions within their own and other contexts (Y.C. Dutton, personal communication/class lecture, 11/16/2006). Models of diversity can be defined as shared understandings and practices of how groups come together (or should come together), relate to one another, and include and accommodate each other given the differences associated with group identity (Markus, et. al., 2002)

Members of various cultural and ethnic groups must assimilate to the styles and standards of the mainstream European-American culture (Phinney, 1989). However, the mainstream is not obligated to value any of the corresponding features of these sub-groups. In fact, marginal and superficial interest is often expected to be rewarded, despite the frequent misinterpretations or negative representations of the particular cultural or ethnic group. The central problem is how to recognize group difference without affirming and creating boundaries. Many Americans seek to alleviate this tension, of trying to be inclusive and acknowledging difference. However, group discussions in search of solutions often leave both parties upset, and feeling that little or nothing can be done to solve the problems of the inherent paradoxical nature of the prominent cultural model in the United States. The problem in these group discussions is that they frequently become a medium for both minority and majority members to release their frustrations with the system of discrimination in America on each other. In addition, many members participate in these discussions with the intention of making another understand them, but not the intention that, they too, will understand another. The problem with this is, those in power, and those who are not, usually have very different understandings of the way things work. In many cases, the listeners, those trying not to offend, are members of the dominant group and holders of the mainstream perspective.

Thus, in the example of America, the listener can be equated to a Caucasian male or female. Listeners belong to a social category of people whose sense of belonging in society is often taken for granted. Because their individual experience may not often alert them to group differences in the experience of society’s settings, and because they are presumably committed to the American ideal of treating everyone the same, they may not readily see, or acknowledge, the speakers different experience within the same environment. The idea that difference should be celebrated juxtaposed with the idea that this difference does not really matter is paradoxical. This perspective on difference can be viewed as an effort to resolve America’s tension around diversity with its strong position in favor of equality. The assumption here is that race, ethnicity, and culture are superficial qualities applied onto a person, and that it is possible to ignore them in seeking the ‘real person’.

An example of this is depicted in the film ‘Last Chance for Eden’ when the white male demands of the Latino male that he is “going to be real for [him]“. This tactic, however well meaning of the listener, undermines the dignity of the speaker – the person ‘being heard’. In order to ‘be real’[have his opinion heard and acknowledged] he must ‘relive his pain’ to allow someone else to recognize that discrimination continues to be a real force and to empathize with the speaker’s perspective. This cultural model of ’sameness’ (Plaut, 2002) has dominated relationships between groups in the United States. Using the sameness model, it can be easy for listeners to attribute a speaker’s mistrust to an inherent oversensitivity. In supporting this model, the listener inadvertently works against the inclusion they seek to provide the listener. Examples of this were repeatedly depicted in the film ‘Last Chance for Eden’, as many of the white participants were repeatedly misunderstood by the participants of color when they proclaimed that they did not see color or thought of everyone as the same regardless of their backgrounds. It was clear that a number of the minorities in the video viewed these statements as offensive or lacking a certain understanding of how diversity should be interpreted. In a student opinion survey conducted by Adelman (1997) a noticeable difference was found in the way majority and minority college students thought about diversity.

Majority students tended to focus on similarity and sameness, whereas minorities recognized differences between cultural and ethnic groups. In addition, while the European majority seemed to support a one-way assimilation or colorblind model of diversity (minorities should make adjustments to fit the majority culture), the minorities supported a mutual-accommodation model of diversity (the majority culture should change to accommodate minority perspectives). In this model of diversity, difference is recognized but not as a hindrance to performance or progress within a group or society. It recognizes that individuals come from different socio-cultural backgrounds and have legitimately different perspectives and beliefs. This difference is also found and transmitted in cultural products such as magazine advertisements (Plaut, 2002) Clearly, recognition of these alternate perspectives would be the best approach in forums addressing diversity (as well as among the general public). In addition, minority participants must allow room for the uncertainty and worry associated with the European majority’s transition to a new and unfamiliar model. The goal should be to help people understand the validity of alternate models. Attempting to force understanding only succeeds in arousing defensive feelings and rejection of the model. In the film ‘Last Chance for Eden’, this ‘understanding of uncertainty’ was only provided by the mediators, however, an emphasis should be made for all participants to do the same. Successful implementation of alternate models of diversity such as the inclusion/ accommodation model requires effort from all individuals, both majority and minority, to ensure that differences are viewed as contributive.

Works Cited

Maria Beaudry is a freelance writer offering services in a variety of forms, including: academic writing, article writing, blogs, copywriting, e-books, editing, essays, ghostwriting, proofreading, and web content.

The word psychology is derived from the Greek word psyche which means ’soul’ or ‘mind’ and logia meaning “Study of”. Psychology is applied in studying the human mind and behavior. Research in psychology is used to understand and explain thought, emotion, and behavior.

Psychology is a vast field which covers all aspects of the human knowledge – from the functions of the brain to the surroundings in which humans and animals develop; from child growth to aging. Psychology is a science based on a large body of social science and behavioral science research and, which is expanding its boundaries to overlap with neuroscience and health science.

Being an applied and a theoretical subject, psychology can be utilized in a number of ways. As it is very difficult for an average person to take advantage from research studies, I will try to put forward the topic in simple words so that an average person could be able to understand in the light of the results of experiments and studies.

Following are the ways in which psychology can improve your life:

I. Improving your Memory:

As it is mentioned above that psychology is the study of human mind, so it’s obvious that it deals with human Memory.

Following figure elaborates relation of psychology with memory;

Memory can be improved by several methods such as:

a) Pay attention to the material you are listening or reading.

b) Establish a regular study session, don’t break your schedule.

c) Visualize the concepts, for example, if you want to remember someone’s name, try to visualize the person in your mind.

II. Creativity:

According to cognitive psychologist Robert J. Sternberg, creativity can be defined as “the process of producing something that is both original and worthwhile” (2003). Creativity means finding new ways for solving your problems and dealing with the difficult situations. You can apply psychology to boost your creativity.

The following figure shows the psychological aspects of Creativity;

a) Build your confidence and take risks. Don’t be scared of failure.

b) Sometimes a solution can be used to solve multiple problems, you should always realize that.

c) Put yourself in challenging situations.

III. Improving Communication Skills:

Non verbal communication plays an important role in communication. Research tells us that nonverbal signals make up a great portion of our communications. Non verbal communication includes notable behaviors such as touching, eyes, facial expressions, and tones of voice, as well as fewer obvious messages such as dress, posture and spatial distance between two or more people. For more information about non-verbal communication refer to the book “Non Verbal Communication” by Albert Mehrabian.

IV. Controlling Anger:

Anger according to Charles Spielberger (Ph.D., a psychologist who specializes in the study of anger) is an emotional state that varies in intensity from mild irritation to intense fury and rage. Anger can be

destructive when it gets out of control

Anger can be controlled by the following ways;

a) Stop thinking about anger, focus on something else.

b) Try to relax yourself. Breathing techniques are helpful in relaxation.

c) Have a glass of water if available.

V. Self Confidence:

Many people often fail to do something just because lack of confidence, nothing is impossible in this world the only thing you need is self confidence. It provides you the motivation for hard working, which is the key to success.

Tips to gain self confidence;

a) Pay attention to your achievements; don’t pay attention to the fear of failure.

b) Get motivation from others; think how great people achieved impossible in their lives.

c) Learn from your mistakes, Soon you will see that you are getting improved; this will help you a lot in gaining self confidence.

d) Focus on your personality, think that why your friends like you.

Posted in Applied Psychology Articles, Behavioral Psychology Articles, Cognitive Psychology Articles, Personality Psychology Articles | No Comments »