Psychology Articles

What is really out there? Why do we think that we think? This article explores some of the classic works on the topic.

Ross and Nisbett argue that our perceptions of ourselves and our casual attributions for our actions are not in fact complete or correct: we are not born tabla rasa, we do not consistently build basic beliefs, and we cannot predict or control the way we will act. Phychologists and sociologists provide support for this through numerous studies that show a basically consistent, unpredicted, and unsystematic patterns of behavior. Some authors begin by breaking down the idea that our opinions or reactions are as independent and systematic as we may believe. Sherif’s “autokinetic” study and the Ash Paradigm study illustrate that we often act differently when in groups (with group norms, pressure, bias, and social factors). We conform to group pressure (Ash), or, even more extremely, shift our perceptions in order to align ourselves with a group (Sherrif). The Bennington studies, which show how our beliefs about the world are deeply and irreversibly influenced by our social surroundings, illustrate that this effect is not trivial or isolated but instead can have far-reaching and self-defining consequences.

Sherif’s later studies on group dynamics similarly show us that our world perceptions (us vs. them, me vs. you, good vs. bad) can be arbitrary. Chapter three expands on this point with a social slant: Our world is constructed in a social setting and so the opinions of others and the judgments of others play a dynamic part in this construction. I.e., our world is not necessarily “warped” by others opinions but others opinions actually play a role in determining what our world looks like. The “attribution theory of emotion” and the Nisbett and Wilson (1977) cognitive process blindness theory take this one step further claiming that we do not really see the world as we think we do at all.

Ross and Nisbett impose their own interpretation on these findings. They repeatedly argue that we interpret and construct the world in a dynamic way, based on the perceptions and influences of our social surroundings, situational factors, and personality characteristics. They then claim that we are overly unaware that we are only seeing one way to interpret the world. “This lack of awareness of our own construal processes blinds us to the possibility that someone else, differently situated, might construe the same objects in a different way… People sometimes construe the same object differently because they view it from different angles rather than because they are fundamentally different people…. The divergence [exhibited in the Asch experiments] may reflect differences not in the “judgment of the object” but in the construal of just what “the object of judgment” is.” (p82). We make the false assumption that we see it as it is rather than as we interpret it. It is not clear here whether the differences in individual interpretations of the worlds are due only to different external factors (social, environmental, etc) or also to different processing factors (i.e. the mental and physical machines with which we process this information).

Ross and Nisbett do not explicitly state what I see as a major consequence, and synthesis, of both their chapters and much of the literature. But perhaps this is because I do not have and have not read their later chapters. With this caveat, Ross and Nisbett (1) begin by attempting to prove that our world is to an extent an arbitrary construction. They continue (2) by showing that it is important to us that out world be in line with others in our group or reference set (social pressure) and they end (3) with the interesting claim that we misunderstand the world in a fundamental way (with mistakes in traits, etc). To me there is a clear logical step that stands between their points (1) and (2). That (1.5) that we are, on some deep unconscious level, insecure and unsure of the ontological nature of the world and thus need to constantly adjust our view of it depending on the situation and context (see they do not take William James’ point on p. 68 seriously enough) or align ourselves with others in order to attempt to interpret it in the best/most useful way.

It helps if we assume for a moment that there is no “correct” way to interpret the world – and Ross and Nisbett I think would agree with this. Perhaps even the idea of a “correct” way to interpret the world is a non-sensical statement. All constructions are heuristics simplifications intrinsically since the world does not have, unlike our constructions of the world, imbedded causality only systematic temporal correlations. An interpretation is meant, therefore, to be useful in our world, which a deeply social and dynamic one. Why is it therefore surprising that we adjust, conform to, and closely monitor others opinions? If our interpretations are wrong, and we know they always are, there is no good reason to stick to them if they are not working. Our perception of length is clearly not functioning correctly if it derives an answer different from everyone else (since deriving an answer that is useful is our goal, not deriving an answer that is true and it is useful to have an agreed upon idea of length).

So the surprising thing is that we ever believe that we are objectively right about things or that we believe our views are “the way things are,” not that we adjust our world-views in the face of social, environmental, or situational pressure (and various evolutionary psychology arguments have attempted to explain this argument on the grounds of efficiency). Bishop Berkeley, Occationalism, and David Hume have all trodden this ground. I do not mean to make the facile claim that we should always give in to social pressure, that we should always tailor our views to match those around us, only that to explain a deviation from this behavior one need to apply to other reasons than one being “correct” or, even, more arguably, perhaps, “truth.” That our views are deeply inadequate and inefficient, as chapter four argues, is a much harsher claim leveled by Ross and Nisbett in this context.

The literature often builds up a model of perception/ internal_world-creation and the later then added a component questioning the element of causality. For example, Straw, Bell, Clausen piece questions the emergent literature on situational attributions to job attitudes in favor of a more dispositional approach. Studies, they claim lay too much emphasis on the social, the interpretational elements of a job, over-stating the role that the work environment that will determine an individual’s happiness in it. Instead, one can correlate the individual’s happiness and job satisfaction in many respects well before he/she enters the work place. Thus, it is the characteristics, attitudes, and nature and the individual who is the prime determinant of whether or not he/she is happy in the job. This research is interestingly interrelated to the previous Ross Nisbett piece, since Ross and Nisbett’s argument that the person interprets the environment lends itself to the conclusion that no matter what environment an individual is put into, he/she will largely affect the way he/she perceives that environment and thus his/her feelings about it.

In contrast to Straw, et al., Davis-Blake and Pfeffer (1989) argue that the dispositionalist argument is deeply flawed. They claim that the individual’s characteristics are dynamic in nature and therefore they change in time and are furthermore deeply affected by their environment. Therefore, one can expect that an employee, especially in the long term, will be very deeply affected by the nature and prevailing attitudes of his/her workplace. They point to the extreme cases of military training facilities, which are able to dramatically affect the psychology of an individual. Sneider (1987) returns fire with a volley that asserts that the “culture” of a firm is simply the people in it. That these people are self-selecting and will tend to attract compatible people, and that the world is a dynamic place of individuals, not forces. The last piece of the puzzle, the piece by Arvey and Bouchard (1994) builds a strong foundation under the dispositionalist camp but also shows the complexity of the problem. It addresses the nature vs. nurture debate by reviewing the literature to show that while it seems that genetics do make some difference (this lends credit to dispositionalists who would like to claim that people have characteristics, genetic or otherwise, that persist over time) environment is also a large factor (situationalists can grab onto this evidence).

This debate, first between situationalists and dispositionalists about the source of ones attitude about the workplace, and then about the source of our personality (nature vs. nurture) have serious consequences which many of the authors discuss. If we are in fact shaped by our environments, then companies might want to invest significant resources into “culture” and creating a productive workplace. But if our attitudes and productivity are a function of our personalities, then companies might want to select those people with attractive qualities for their company. This has troubling moral consequences as some authors point out.

I would like to emphasize how these points are building up a literature that focuses on central questions about why we view the world the way we do, what effects the world has on us, and what the source of our feelings, attitudes and lives are. The battle lines of the difference sides of this debate are, from this perspective, artificially clear.

If, for example, we ask the question of FREE WILL, for example, the sides dramatically shift. The dispositionalist camp splits into two, some taking a deterministic evolutionary view and others taking view that our personalities are developed early by our environment. The situationalists might point out that we CHOOSE our workplaces and thus choose the sorts of influences that will shape our character. So while we are not in total control of what we will feel about our job, our creativity, etc, we can choose what sorts of forces will affect these metrics. Aristotle, who’s view on almost anything is worth looking up, coined the phrase Akrasia, and this phrase can be applied to this bebate with perhaps some fruitful insights. It is Greek for “weakness of will”. He claimed that we are morally responsible for the consequences of a choice in the long term, even if we are not morally free at the time of our choices. The best modern example of this is if one chooses to get drunk one is responsible for one’s actions while drunk even if one does not have the ability to control one’s actions while drunk. So one is responsible for choosing the path that led to an action even if one is not directly responsible for that action. Of course, Aristotle chose the more controversial example of choosing to live a life of moral weakness and moral compromise which weakened the will to the point that one was not a good/moral person. He claimed that one was responsible for immorality not because we choose to become weak enough to do these acts. I think that these different camps might gain some insight into their nature/nurture dispositionalist/situationalist objective/subjective debates if Aristotle’s wisdom were headed more carefully.

Readings:

Ross, L. & Nisbett, R.E. (1991). The Person and the Situation: Perspectives of Social Psychology. New York: McGraw Hill. Chapters 2, 3, & 4.

Asch, S.E. (1958). Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distortion of judgments. In E.E. Maccoby; T.M. Newcomb & E.L. Hartley (eds.), Reading in Social Psychology. New York: Henry Holt and Company (pp. 174-183).

Staw, B.; Bell, N. & Clausen, J. (1986). The dispositional approach to job attitudes: A lifetime longitudinal test. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31: 56-77.

Davis-Blake, Alison & Pfeffer, Jeffrey. (1989). Just a mirage: The search for dispositional effects in organizational research. Academy of Management Review, 14: 385-400.

Schneider, Benjamin. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel Psychology, 40: 437-453.

Arvey, R.D. & Bouchard, T.J. (1994). Genetic twins and organizational behavior. In B.M. Staw & L.L. Cummings (eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, 16: 47-82.

Phin Upham has a PhD in Applied Economics from the Wharton School (University of Pennsylvania). Phin is a Term Member of the Council on Foreign Relations. He can be reached at phin@phinupham.com

You can find more info here: Phin Upham

An essay that includes a definition, in own words, and history of social psychology, at least six major theorists, the types of issues this field considers, the five major variables of interest to social psychologists, and major contemporary research trends in the field.

This is a science that aims to accurately, objectively, open-mindedly and continuously research why and how people are in social settings (Baron, Byrne, & Branscombe, 2005). Some theorists that contributed to advancement of social psychology are French gentleman Gabriel Tarde, with the imitation concept, Gustave LeBon and Emile Durkheim with the theory on society’s influence on the individual. In 1874, Herbert Spencer extended Darwin’s concepts from biology into sociology. He coined the term “survival of the fittest.”

Spencer influenced many early 20th century American psychologists, such as William James, and sociologists, such as Edward Ross, Lester F. Ward and William G. Sumner, who introduced social psychology. J. Mark Baldwin, in 1897, used social psychology in a thesis on children. William McDougall published “Social Psychology” in 1908.

In 1897, Norman Triplett made the first experiment of this science, on how groups competed and set the pace for individual performance. In the mid-1920s social psychology took a firm hold in psychology. In 1924 Floyd Allport wrote “Social Psychology,” a scholarly book used in academia to this date.

In the 1930s, Gardner Murphy, Lois Barclay Murphy and Theodore Newcomb wrote “Experimental Social Psychology” and Carl Murchison “Handbook of Social Psychology”. They defined social psychology as experimental, instead of as naturalistic observations. Sociologists started studying the individual in society.

During the Depression and World War II, Thurstone and Likert researched changes in attitudes. Kurt Lewin and Gestalt psychology studied political groups, frustration and aggression in children. Lewin worked on group dynamics and conflict resolution from the 1940s through the 1970s.

Muzafer and Carolyn Sherif researched small group dynamics in summer camps in the 1940s and 50s. After World War II, the field searched for problems. John Dollard and Neal Miller worked on “Social Learning and Imitation” with learning and rats, in 1941.

In 1950, their “Personality and Psychotherapy” explained psychoanalysis as social learning. In 1946, Fritz Heider preceded Leon Festinger’s Cognitive Dissonance Theory, claiming that there is an imbalance when perceptions of a relationship do not match reality, which causes a change in either perceptions or reality to regain balance. In the early 1960s, Stanley Milgram’s research on obedience set up subjects to believe they were shocking a stranger for incorrect responses. That deception raised ethical concerns. Self-identity, self-esteem and self-image have been researched towards the end of the last century. Social psychology is part of the psychological mainstream.

This science recognizes the connection between social thought and social behavior. Social neuroscience studies social and social behavior in relation to the brain and biology. Modern social psychology focuses on the unconscious and multicultural parts of social thought and behavior.

In naturalistic observations, versus systematic observations, behaviors occur naturally.

There are several methods used in social psychology. One is the survey method. Another one is the correlational method that investigates the possible correlations, not causes, on studied variables.

In this science’s experiments, there is the systematic alteration of independent variables, to study their effects on dependent ones. Successful experiments randomly assign participants to experimental conditions and hold everything else constant to avoid confounding variables.

To determine validity, social psychologists use inferential statistics. They use meta-analysis to determine the effects of independent variables across studies. They also rely on theories to advance their work.

Deception, or withholding information from participants about the scope of an experiment, is often used in social psychology. Social psychology safeguards experiments by using informed consent and meticulous debriefing. To conclude,this science is cutting edge and its five major areas and variables of interest are: attitudes, group processes, social learning and cognition and self-perception (APA, 1999).

References
Baron, R. A., Byrne, D. R., & Branscombe, N. R. (2005) Social Psychology. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
APA (Dec 1999) Social psychology: Once overlooked, now a staple. APA Monitor Online Author 30 (11).

Thank you.

Elena Pezzini, M.S., C.P.C.
You Have Got The Power, Inc.
Turnaround Coaching Psychology & Hypnosis
Office (702) 518-6649 Fax (251) 217-0082
http://www.YouHaveGotThePower.com

It takes students on a journey through the human mind. Intro to Psychology often looks at human behavior, memory, dreams, personality and intelligence. Students in this course are likely also to learn about abnormal behavior, perhaps even sexual attraction.

In an Intro to Psychology course, students might learn the role that genetics and outside influences have in shaping the mind. They might, as a result, come to understand why people behave differently. Students might also come to understand how, through psychotherapy, psychologists come to better understand and help their patients.

There are different approaches to psychotherapy that students in Intro courses might learn about. Students might come to understand a form of psychotherapy that involves focusing on reward and punishment, positive associations and “desensitizing.” They might also learn more about a form of psychotherapy where attempts to change negative thoughts, feelings and behaviors are made by gaining a better understanding of what might be causing that negativity.

Another approach to psychotherapy that might be addressed in an Intro to Psychology course is getting patients to change the way they think in order to change the way they feel and behave. Another form of psychotherapy involves helping people to make intelligent choices that lead them to become the best person that they can be.

Psychology is said to have been founded in the 1870s by William (“The Principles of Psychology”) James and Wilhelm (” Principles of Physiological Psychology”) Wundt. They were involved early on in experimental psychology, and they taught the likes of Ivan Pavlov, Granville Stanley Hall and Russ Dewey. Of course, students in Intro to Psychology are likely also to be introduced to Carl Jung and Sigmund Freud. B.F. Skinner of “Skinner box” behavioral conditioning notoriety, and Kurt Lewin, founder of modern social psychology, might also be introduced in Intro courses.

Many Intro to Psychology courses explore how personalities develop in children, how and why people are different in terms of thoughts and emotions. These courses also explore different theories related to dreams, what they mean and why they might exist. A few of these theories, Intro students might learn, include the ability to preserve sleep through the experience of hallucination, the ability to develop our personalities and solve problems.

In Intro to Psychology courses, students also are likely to learn the difference between normal and abnormal behavior. They might gain a better understanding of how professionals determine whether patients are afflicted with disorders such as depression or anxiety. As a result, students in Intro courses are likely to learn what the symptoms of these and other disorders are.

Intro to Psychology introduces students to what scientists so far understand about people’s behaviors. The course provides a broad overview that might help students begin to better understand others as well. Some students might find that their interest in psychology is piqued enough that they decide to minor in the subject or venture into the human mind even farther, perhaps by pursuing a degree and career in psychology. Test Drive College offers free psychology courses for students interested in studying psychology. http://www.testdrivecollege.com/ also may be found through Test Drive College.

There are different fields of psychology each assuming a study of different aspect of human behaviour as it relates to social, mental, emotional and developmental issues. Whilst clinical psychology looks at diagnosing and treating disorders of the brain, emotional disturbances and behaviour problems, child psychology looks at the mental and emotional development of the child and is also a part of developmental psychology which takes into consideration the study of change in behaviour that occurs throughout the lifespan of the child.

Cognitive psychology looks at how the human mind receives and interprets impressions and ideas while social psychology examines how the actions of others influences the behaviour of an individual (Webster’s New World Medical Dictionary).

Consequently there are several schools of thought on the subject and countless tests, assessments and research have been carried out in these different branches of psychology, each addressing issues and causes as they relate to human behaviour. The branch of psychology relating to the child however has seen a great deal of interest over the years. Understanding the mystery that is the child has been the subject of endless studies and debate. Out of this has emerged a great spotlight on the family hence greater recognition is placed on the impact of various family related factors on the overall development and social interaction of the child. Some of these factors include the roles of parents or guardians, spousal separation. Children are seen as vulnerable beings who are therefore easily affected by changes to their ‘familiar’. Since these impacts so greatly on the child, quite a lot of children enter the school system each year plagued with varying behavioural issues. These issues as we will come to see later on can have dire consequences for the child as well as those having responsibility for the child.

The idea that children are extremely complex individuals is brought out in the emphasis that psychologists place on childhood studies.On the one hand are those children who are anxious and afraid while on the other are the ones with aggression and deceit. However there are also those who do not fall into either of these groupings. From some of the highlighted studies carried out in different parts of Britain, it was found that the percentages of school age children who are considered as having behaviour problems is quite high with some studies showing as high as 33% in combined levels of behaviour difficulties. These problems are as varying in types and levels as they are in root causes among which are gender and class. Some of these problems are seen from quite an early age and while some children will grow out of it others will continue to display difficult traits for quite some time. This may to a great extent depend on the cause of the problem. It becomes obvious that the role of the teacher can offer a situation that in itself can be quite a complex and daunting task especially for an individual who has no understanding of psychology as it relates to the child.

Having the knowledge of how and why children react the way they do to certain situations,and understanding how and why they are influenced by the people and situation created by their environment, will undoubtedly assist the classroom practitioner in assessment of and planning to meet the needs of these children. An understanding of how the classroom situation may offer challenges particularly to younger children is crucial to helping children adjust to and consequently enjoy their school life.

It is however in understanding the behaviour and more importantly the root cause of it that any individual can begin to address it in the appropriate context. Barnes proposes two contrasting perspective on behaviour as it relates to children with difficulty.The first from a medical point of view where the child’s behavior is inherent while on the other hand the problems are borne out of the social situation of which the child is a part. Whether or not either of these models is in fact correct is not very relevant but presents the idea that difficulty in children can be borne out of various contributing factors. Also, he highlights the idea that a “difficult” child can be something of a perception on what difficulty is. For one individual a child may be problematic while for another who is able to identify certain traits and characteristics, the child is perfectly normal and manageable.

The term difficult is quite relative. Difficulty in children will therefore manifest itself in different ways /forms and to different individuals. In this respect one might question whether this is indeed a difficult child or is it rather that the child is relating to different situations and individuals in a different way, testing the boundaries perhaps? An individual who is firm and set certain boundaries for the child may find it far easier to deal with that child than one who is more relaxed and does not set clear boundaries. Then again there are those children who because of some of the factors mentioned before, will display difficult behaviour.This behaviour will manifest itself in different ways. While some troubled children are withdrawn and shy others will act out their insecurities in a totally different way often being boisterous and angry, refusing to conform to requirements. Some of the common factors that often manifest itself in school age children are tantrums, withdrawal, and refusal to conform among others.

It is in understanding the groupings children’s behavior is generally classified into that the teacher will be able to cope in the classroom.

One of the key roles of the teacher apart from the ability to teach is the ability to maintain class control which involves managing behaviour in the classroom. As mentioned before, classroom behaviour will manifest itself in different ways. This involves children who refuse to do as asked, including completing tasks, children who are constantly out of their seats disturbing others, consistent talking and even bullying. Ultimately the teacher has to be able to deal with and understand difficult children. This task can prove quite challenging. Pupils come to school from all types of backgrounds and situations and consequently with all types of issues.

With the focus of the Education system today so result driven, teachers are placed under extreme pressure to ensure that students achieve often unrealistic targets. Schools are often also guilty of placing expectations on pupils based on school type, region and age rather than focus on the individual child and his/her circumstances. Therefore they are seen as problematic when their behaviour falls outside the acceptable range of tolerance and age appropriateness.

In order for all students to achieve their maximum potential the classroom atmosphere must be free of any and all situations which may be stressful to both the pupils and the teacher, for there to be a consistent approach to learning and teaching in the classroom it is important that the teacher be armed with a lot more than an excellently drafted lesson plan. This awareness begins with the process of the entire school understanding key issues in child development and child psychology. While most schools today have a behaviour policy and generally they do try to enforce this, it is more important for schools to focus on child development issues in order to understand and deal effectively with behavior in children. What teachers need most therefore are not so much insets on enforcing the behaviour policy but looking more closely at understanding the causes of the behaviour.

Some schools of thought believe that schools should develop a ‘consistent’ Behaviour Management Plan that incorporates different techniques. These techniques together should enable the schools to deal with the most common classroom behaviours. This involves the teacher’s ability to develop and apply different strategies that will address behaviour in the classroom. This encourages the use of a fixed set of rules.The problem with this however is that as we have mentioned before no two children are alike and similarly no child’s problems are the same. Assuming however that the teacher has got grounding in psychology as it relates to children, this model can in effect be quite instrumental and effective. It is however important that key issues are addressed. Some of these will include consideration given to the stage and development of the children in question, ensuring that the child is treated with respect and fairness, considering whether it will enable the child to meet targets and achieve goals and whether it allow for continuity outside of the classroom. However to conform to this school of thought without taking into consideration the above issues associated with that child could possibly lead to further problems for the teacher and ultimately the child.

A teacher who is armed with the psychological facts is undoubtedly in a good position to be able to understand and therefore cope effectively with children displaying difficult behaviour. Being aware of the fact that a child with temper tantrums may only be craving attention, other children behaving out of sort or acting up in class may simply be rebelling against the inability to express themselves at home. Expressions of fears and mistrust in others may stem from deeper more disturbing causes either imminent or suffered at an earlier stage in their development. Problems at home, in their society, within their peer groups, childhood development and socialization, parental bonding or lack of it, sibling rivalry, peer pressure, molestation are only a few of the issues that children come to school with. The teacher is not just a facilitator but a confidant and often has to deal with issues that students will confide in them. It is aslo important therefore that the teacher be aware of certain protocols governing student’s confidentiality issues and how to proceed in identifying the right channel through which to direct the child. Since the child spends a much greater part of the day in the care of the teacher, the teacher is in a good position to spot inconsistencies and changes in a child’s behaviour patterns. This is where being able to identify and put a name to symptoms might prove crucial to helping a child going through a difficult situation.

The ability to differentiate between behaviour that is relevant to a child’s developmental stage as against behaviour that is distinctly caused by psychological disturbance, will be crucial to the early years teacher. But an understanding of when this behaviour is a normal attribute for a child of that age and when it is not, is key to pinpointing the emergence of a problem. Clinginess, bed wetting and tantrums are named as key traits among these young children. While these will be acceptable in very young children it becomes a concern if these traits continue into later stages of development. Certainly, an awareness of how children relate to environmental changes and routines will sometimes impact negatively on their behaviour.Some children may display different patterns of behaviour at home than at school. Then again acceptable behaviour will be relative to the expectations of those making the judgment and also to each individual child.

Since one must first underpin the cause of the problem in order to be able to attempt to find a solution, the teacher who has no understanding of psychology will try to apply various conventional methods of discipline to remedy a child’s behaviour and in doing so may only worsen the situation. Some simple remedies can sometimes alter a child’s behaviour in a radical way. So a child who acts up because he/she lacks attention,given small ‘jobs’ or tasks of responsibility in the classroom can change so much of that child’s behaviour because the child now begins to feel self-worth and see him/herself as being as good as or even better than other children. All that the child needed was a confidence boost.

There’s no doubt that regressing a client to a “past-life” can be therapeutic. But does that mean the client actually returns to a previous life, dozens or hundreds of years ago? No. The journey is akin to believing you’ve been abducted onto a flying saucer and impregnated by aliens. Past-life therapy is a tribute to the human imagination. And a metaphorical way to deal with present-day issues. After all, it’s patently absurd to think that because you recall in hypnosis being hit by an arrow in your neck when you were with Robin Hood that that can cure you of a mysterious ache in your neck today. Yet such metaphorical time-travel can actually have beneficial results (relief of the neck pain for example) but unfortunately, “The use of past-life therapy among professionals… can undermine the credibility of licensed practitioners.” *

This is the conclusion of two South Korean researchers whose experiments, published in the International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis,show how heavily influenced hypnotic subjects are by their culture and belief systems when they are hypnotised to go back to a supposed “past life.”

While there is not a shred of evidence that people actually return to a past life (and plenty of evidence that they do not — see, for example, the famous Bridey Murphy**story) there is no doubt that many people who have experienced hypnotic regression firmly believe that they actually returned to a previous life.

The researchers discovered that the “previous life” is strongly influenced by culture and religion. For example, some of the Korean subjects in the study reported having been animals in previous lives whereas none of the 110 subjects in a Canadian study*** reported having been an animal in a previous life.

Surprising to me was the finding that a previous belief in past lives was not correlated with a higher production of past life memories. Non-believers produced past life “memories” at the same rate.

Much of what is seen or thought in a client’s mind comes from suggestions of the hypnotist, coupled with the hypnotized person’s background and nationality.

Past-life hypnotic therapy creates fantasies. And that’s why it can be effective in dealing with a present-day problem. Once the human imagination is engaged (i.e. hypnosis) the possibilities are endless. If you believe that something in a previous life affects you in your current life then “visiting” that previous life (of course, in your imagination), can indeed provide the metaphorical basis for a real solution. Hypnotherapy rests on the focused use of one’s imagination.

So the fantasy can and does affect reality.

References

*Pyun,Y.D., & Kim, Y.J., (2009). Experimental Production of Past-Life Memories in Hypnosis. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 57, 269-276.
** Straight Dope

***Spanos, N.P., et al (1991). Secondary identity enactments during hypnotic past-life regression: A sociocognitive perspective.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 308-320.

Bryan M. Knight is Canada’s foremost hypno-psychotherapist. Find out more about how you can benefit from hypnosis by visiting his site Hypnosis Depot where all your questions about hypnosis will be answered.

Social cognition theory is based on two fundamental assumptions. One assumption is that humans learn from the behavior of other humans. The second is that it is important to understand the thought process of a human in order to make a valid and reliable psychological assessment.

Social cognitive theory uses key ideas from two main branches of psychology: cognitive psychology and social psychology. It places emphasis on the cognitive stages of information processing in the presence of social stimuli. Particularly, it assesses the impact of the “actual, imagined, or implied presence of others” on the” thoughts, feelings and behavior of individuals.”

Social cognition theory uses an amalgam of personal factors, environmental factors and behavior in order to produce its model. In the first stage of social cognition, the individual must receives and perceives a stimulus. After that, the individual encodes the perceived stimulus, using prior knowledge (such as stereotypes) to make additional decisions, judgments or inferences. During this process, a person simultaneously stores and retrieves information from memory. After the main processing of information has occurred, a behavioral response is the outcome.

Social cognition is important in many aspects of our daily lives, particularly when interacting with others. However, when we are observing or receiving information (such as an advertisement), the theory is applicable. An advertisement represents a social stimulus. A person begins processing the images and messages within the advertisement and judges the desirability of the product or message. Whether the individual had a good experience with that product or company affects how the individual perceives the advertisement (prior knowledge/ memory).

Social cognition is important in the media because the media is a fulcrum of information and communication. For example, individuals must process news, advertising and multimedia programs. The media, particularly visual media, normally use a range of stimuli to facilitate communication. Awareness of how viewers or readers perceive and process information is critical to effectively presenting and communicating social data.

Understanding the social cognitive processes of individuals is important to media personnel such as producers and advertisers. Media workers, particularly journalists and editors, use their understanding of human perception to write attention-grabbing headlines or produce popular programs. For example, producers are concerned about the appearance, voice and delivery of presenters based on how viewers might perceive them.

Social cognition is pertinent to communication and education- apart from being a core theory in social psychology. Social cognition is also critical to applied psychology as well, and is also useful in understanding stereotypes and biases that occur in information processing.

History:

Forensic psychology came in light in the twirl of the twentieth century. In 1901, William stern studied on recollection of memory course. He made his students to analyze a picture for few seconds and then asked questions to them relating to it. He then concluded from his research that memories which are recalled are in general not precise. Lead-in query are frequently use in police force cross-examination and in inquiring spectators. The first forensic psychologist is often said to be “Hugo Munster berg”. He wrote a book which was published in 1908 which was titled as “On the Witness Stand”. There were some other scientist who has created some test which is helpful for the legal proceeding is Sigmund Freud and Alfred Bi net. There studies suggested that the time taken by an individual to answer a question may possibly be an aspect in determining guiltiness or incorruptibility.

About forensic psychology:

It is the interface between psychology and the law, so all psychosomatic services offered for the official community is forensic psychological services. The services provided are both medical and forensic in nature. It is also known as the application of science and its answers to the queries relating to the rules and regulation of the legal system. The term “forensic” came from “forensic” which means the forum it is a Latin word. Presently it refers for the purpose of technical and scientific principles to carry out a challenging process which is possible with a well-educated and highly professional scientist.

Key terms:

Some key terms in forensic psychology are Insanity, Expert Witness, Competency, Jury Consulting and Criminal Profiling. Some motivating Sub fields contained by this Psychology are social psychology, developmental psychology, cognitive psychology, criminal investigative psychology and clinical-forensic psychology.

Pros and cons in the field of forensic psychology:

Pros: Helping Others, Opportunities, Varying surroundings, acknowledgment and Personal Fulfillment, long-lasting Education, threat of Injury, no independent work it always teamwork, and Burnout Risk.

Cons: long-lasting Education, threat of Injury, no independent work it always teamwork, and Burnout Risk.

Qualities needed in Forensic Psychologist:

Desirable ability, aptitude, and acquaintance are the key qualities for forensic psychology. Those with an aspiration to work must be patient, flexible, at ease working with others, and take pleasure in doing research. One also have to be a good quality speaker for the reason that a lot of people who do work in this field work as specialist spectators at a few point through their career. An expertise in irregular, motivational, scientific, and social psychology is also main features to be victorious in this field. Additionally, working in this field requires continuing education throughout career, even after 5-7 years of graduate school. One cannot be a certified psychologist with out a doctoral degree.

Institutions for Master degree courses

A few Terminal Master Degree courses for practicing a profession in Forensic Psychology are Forensic Psychology at John Jay College of Criminal Justice at the University of Melbourne.

George Anto is a Copywriter of Psychology, Forensic Psychology, Community Psychology. He written many articles in various topics such as sports Psychology. For more information visit: http://psychegames.com.

From two Greek words: psyche, which means the mind or the soul and logos, which means study, the science of Psychology has been studied and defined by many people throughout the ages. Hilgard, Morgan, Silverman, and Schlesinger are just a few. A careful analysis of their foregoing definitions of psychology reveals common points: Psychology is the scientific study of the behaviors of living organisms; the term behavior must not be solely attributed to man’s physical reactions and observable behavior; and thoughts, feelings, and attitudes are also connected to the term behavior.

The primary goals of Psychology are mainly to describe, identify, understand and explain behavior, to know its factors, and to control or change behavior. Psychologists often apply their knowledge and understanding of human behavior to solve issues and help in our society. Different areas of specialization in Psychology are studied to provide better understandings of this science.

Among these are the traditional fields consisting mainly of: Clinical Psychology which deals with the diagnosis, treatment, and evaluation of psychological problems. It also relates to Psychiatry which pertains to more serious problems; Counseling Psychology which deals with administering, storing, and interpreting psychological exams; Educational or School Psychology which deals with students’ learning and adjustment; Community Psychology which deals with problems of the aged, prisoners, and other problems in the community.

It also focuses on providing accessible care for these people; Social Psychology which deals with the behavior of man individually and in groups; Industrial or Organizational Psychology which deals with issues of people in the workplace; Personality Psychology which is concerned with the uniqueness of a person; Developmental Psychology which deals with factors affecting human groups; Experimental Psychology which focuses with the basis of scientific research; Physiological Psychology which is concerned with the functions of the brain; and Comparative Psychology which targets the differences of the species.

Aside from these, several branches of Psychology were discovered during the 70’s. Forensic Psychology deals with legal, judicial, and correctional systems. Environmental Psychology is primarily concerned about issues relating to the environment. Computer Science, on the other hand, uses computer programming for behavioral analysis. There is also Engineering Psychology which seeks to make the relationship between man and machines; and Psychopharmacology which deals with the relationship of behavior and drugs.

Furthermore, the latest fields of Psychology that were recently developed consist of: Health Psychology which focuses on multidimensional approaches that emphasize lifestyle and health care systems; Sports Psychology which applies psychological principles to improve performance and enjoy participation; Cross-culture Psychology which examines the role of culture in understanding behavior, thoughts, and emotions; and Women Psychology which emphasizes the importance of promoting research and study of women.

Allan enjoys writing up on a variety of subjects. Other than the above topic, he also likes to set up sites on different topics. Do check out his new site which covers useful information on spinal decompression.

High Sensitivity (HS) and Highly Sensitive People (HSP) are concepts elaborated by Dr. Elaine Aron beginning with her original publication in 1997 and popularized in her book “The Highly Sensitive person: How to thrive when the world overwhelms you (1996). Dr. Aron is a psychological researcher and a practicing Jungian analyst. Much of her research has been done in tandem with her social psychologist husband Dr. Arthur Aron, who is well known for his academic research into love and close relationships.

HSP is not a DSM-IV diagnosis.

It is instead a description of the experience of the 15 to 20 % of the population who appear at the top end of the human continuum for physical and emotional responsiveness stimuli. Like left handers in a world geared to right handedness, they often struggle physically and psychologically in a cultural environment which is geared towards the 80% who are less easily stimulated.

High sensitivity is a double edged sword.

HSP’s are highly sensitive to both danger and reward in the environment. They appreciate subtlety and nuance and are often creative and empathicBut…. They are often overwhelmed by situations which others can take in stride

With prevalence in the population of 15 to 20% that makes almost one in five of our friends and relatives or clients “highly sensitive.”

HSP research suggests that High Sensitivity arises out of three predisposing factors:
Introverted Temperament: (MBTI Introversion)
Extra cognitive processing : Lower Latent Inhibition… lower ability to screen out stimuli High Arousability or “reactivity”: (High BIS – low BAS, Gray, 1997)

These three factors create a particular configuration of strong responses to stimuli …
…which lead to behaviors…
……………which lead to experiences…
………………………..which can often, but not always , lead to psycho-pathologies…
……………………………………….which then bring these individuals to therapy.

The most common problematic responses are related to stress and chronic over-arousal, such as anxiety, panic attacks and psycho-somatic responses. These individuals are also susceptible to depression, feelings of low self esteem and feelings of vulnerability created by a lifetime of being “out of step” with their peers or misunderstood by those around them.

If a therapist is not aware of the existence of this natural variation in sensitivity, it is very tempting to see the sensitive response as “neurotic” In fact the client themselves, may not debate or object to this because they do not have an alternative explanation either.

15% of the population but probably more than 15% of psychotherapy clients….

It is rare that a client will seek therapy knowing that they are HSP’s. Very often they have no understanding that their problems emerge from their sensitivity rather than the reverse.

When High Sensitivity has been mismanaged for a lifetime the cumulative effect often leads to anxiety, depression and low self esteem. It is these psychological disturbances which bring individuals to therapy.

Not “mentally ill”

Having the concept of High Sensitivity in your therapeutic repertoire takes many clients out of the category of the “mentally ill” and makes them interesting and struggling human beings like oneself. They become a person with a difference that needs to be managed and deserves to be respected.

Ordinary therapy….

Once the understanding of their sensitivity is arrived at by therapist and client the work that needs to be done is the every-day work of therapy…
Construction of appropriate boundaries,
Developing communication skills,
Re-building self esteem,
Integrating or “working through” past traumas
Overcoming learned fearful responses.

This work is appropriately done in any therapeutic modality but when they overcome their fears and feel safe in therapy, these individuals do very well in psychodynamic or psychoanalytic therapies because they often have an unusually strong ability:
to be self-reflective,
to think deeply,
to be aware of their physical responses to their thoughts and feelings
to be aware of and interested in unconscious products such as fantasies, dreams and active imagination.

HSP’s are an “education” for their therapist.

There is an enormous amount that a therapist can learn through working with these clients.
Acceptance, respect for, and interest in a client’s difference is not just healing for the client but expansive for the therapist.
HSP responsiveness means that they react in ways that are strong enough to be undeniable to experiences that might also bother others but which less sensitive individuals succeed at repressing … sometimes to their cost.
The combination of responsiveness and a willingness to be reflective means that these clients can often shed light on thoughts and feelings which emerge from others with much more difficulty. They can expose and illuminate interpersonal dynamics in a way that is generally informative.
They are often sensitive to the leading edge of disturbances in their group, their society or their age cohort.

Sensitive rather than neurotic.

To suggest that someone’s response is “neurotic” is to imply that it is exaggerated or inappropriate to the circumstance. It is another way of saying that their experience is “not real.” It also implies that once the psychological “fix” is made that the problem will go away and that the individual will be “just like everyone else” in their responses to stimuli. Given that a temperament is a basic, inborn and “given” attribute of the individual which is almost impossible to alter, this proposition can only lead to frustration and a continuing feeling of being different and wrong in their experience of the world.

By contrast, when we approach an individual respectfully and curiously with the belief that what they are experiencing is “real,” we come with a more empathic point of view. Empathy and openness to individual differences are ideally the therapist’s stock-in-trade…the greatest tools for healing that we can offer. Therapeutic empathy is a big part of what makes the therapeutic relationship safe, healing and growth producing.

If you do not treat Highly Sensitive individuals as neurotic you will be better able to appreciate them as the responsive, reflective people that they are… and they may well become your favorite kind of clients!

Recommended reading for the curious therapist:

E.N. Aron (1996). The Highly Sensitive Person: How to Thrive When the World Overwhelms You, New York, Broadway Books.
E.N. Aron & Aron, A. (1997b) Sensory-Processing Sensitivity and Its Relation to Introversion and Emotionality, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,73, (2), pp. 345-368
E.N. Aron (2004). Revisiting Jung’s Concept of Innate Sensitiveness.Journal of Analytical Psychology, 49, pp.337-367.

Susan Meindl, MA, is a licensed psychologist in private practice in Montreal Canada. She has a special interest in Jungian ideas and practices a Jungian approach to psychodynamic psychotherapy

http://therapists.psychologytoday.com/rms/59983