Results: I found some interesting things after I got my surveys back to see how the participants felt about how much the signs of aggression has changed in the past decade. As far as the participants' answers about how much violence in video games, a possible cause of aggression, has changed in the past decade, eight of the ten participants said that it has increased a lot or little bit over the past decade. When it came to the question of how much violence in movies and in television shows changed in the past decade, the answers were relatively similiar to the answers that they said about violent video games. Once again, eight of the ten participants said that it has increased in some sort of fashion, while the other two participants felt that it hasn't changed at all. As far as the participants' answers about how much poverty in the world has changed, only two of the participants said that it has increased. Even though, one of these participants that answered this way actually came from an African country. Seven of the other participants said that it has stayed the same, while one participant said that it has decreased a little. When it came to talking about indirect aggression this decade, five of the participants said that indirect aggression hasn't changed. But, the other five said that indirect aggression has either increased a little or a lot. When it came to the participants telling about their opinions about how much signs of aggression have changed in the past decade overall, more than half of the participants said that this has increased in the past decade. The other three participants said that this has actually stayed the same the past decade. One of the most interesting things about this study was that there was only one time when the one participant put down an answer where something that has to do with aggression has actually decreased the past decade. For all of the rest of the answers, all of the other participants either said that something having to do with aggression either stayed the same or increased in some sort of way.
Discussion: Looking at the answers to the questions of all of the participants, it looked like that the participants really agreed with my hypothesis that signs of aggression in people has increased in the past decade. My questions on the surveys had to do with the possible causes of aggression and the different effects that can occur when someone has aggression in which most of the participants' answers said that certain things having to do with aggression has increased. It would be interesting to hand this same survey out to possibly hundred people or even more than that to see what their answers might be. If those hundred or so people actually put the same answers like my ten participants did, then this would probably prove my hypothesis even more. One additional question that would be interesting to ask the participants on the survey would be which country were you born in. I think that it would clarify some things about how much poverty has changed in the past decade. Most of the participants from the United States would probably say that poverty in the world has stayed the same or has decreased, while most of the participants coming from other countries would probably say that poverty in the world has increased in the past decade. With video game violence, it would possibly be vice versa compared with poverty especially with video games being more prevalent in the United States. It would probably be most of Americans saying that video game violence has increased, while most people from foreign countries would say that video game violence has stayed the same. With how the answers to my surveys ended up turning out, I feel that my hypothesis was proven to be right.
Monday, December 7, 2009
The glass ceiling affect
Baxter, J. & Wright, E. (2000) The glass ceiling hypothesis a comparative study of the United
States, Sweden, and Australia. Retrieved December 07, 2009 from http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/~wright/GenderGap.pdf
This article gives a really good definition and examples of the glass ceiling effect.
The glass ceiling affect is the term used to define the way most women are treated in the
managerial hierarchies. Most women make it into the position that they are hired for, but when a promotin is on hand the males are priority over females.
I work for a hospice here in Butte as a CNA. A new job position had just opened up for a medical records director and office manager. This job is first open in house meaning one of us already employed can apply. Our entire office is employed with women and just one male. This male's job description is to deliver medical equipment to all our clients when they need it. Therefore he has no prior experience in medical records or being manager of any business. The other two CNA's and I have been training to do medical records for four months now to help out the previous office manager. I think everyone can see where this is going, but last week they posted the results. The male with no prior experience got the job. This is a perfect example of the glass ceiling effect that I experienced.
States, Sweden, and Australia. Retrieved December 07, 2009 from http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/~wright/GenderGap.pdf
This article gives a really good definition and examples of the glass ceiling effect.
The glass ceiling affect is the term used to define the way most women are treated in the
managerial hierarchies. Most women make it into the position that they are hired for, but when a promotin is on hand the males are priority over females.
I work for a hospice here in Butte as a CNA. A new job position had just opened up for a medical records director and office manager. This job is first open in house meaning one of us already employed can apply. Our entire office is employed with women and just one male. This male's job description is to deliver medical equipment to all our clients when they need it. Therefore he has no prior experience in medical records or being manager of any business. The other two CNA's and I have been training to do medical records for four months now to help out the previous office manager. I think everyone can see where this is going, but last week they posted the results. The male with no prior experience got the job. This is a perfect example of the glass ceiling effect that I experienced.
Study Reveals the Angriest Americans
Study Reveals the Angriest Americans
http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20091203/sc_livescience/studyrevealstheangriestamericans
This study suggests that anger is more likely among young people than older people. It discusses how anger is a normal human emotion, but if someone holds onto it too long, it can cause harm. People who express their anger may live longer than those who keep it inside and to themselves. The study did a survey of Americans 18 and older, asking how they feel when they are angry. This was conducted to get a larger range of a social portrait of anger in the US.
The study found that people under 30 experienced anger in all forms or intensity more frequently than older adults. This was because younger people stress more over time pressures, economic hardship, and interpersonal conflict, triggering angry feelings. People with children reported encountering more stress and anger, along with people with limited education. The study suggested that these were all triggers of angry emotions due to stress.
I would have to agree that stress is the main cause of anger. The more pressure a person has on them, the more they might have aggressive tendencies. We have been studying aggression in class and I thought this article could relate. Although anger may not always be aggressive behavior, I think it can lead to that. People who are frustrated and angry can lead to frustration aggression. I thought the age factor was an interesting insight to anger because young people these days do have a lot more stress on them, a big one being money with the poor economy. I like the idea about that if a person holds in anger it could harm them later. I would have to agree. When I hold a grudge for too long it takes a toll on me. I am not saying that to release the anger a person should yell at people or become aggressive. People have to find constructive ways of dealing with their anger whether it is working out, participating in a hobby, time to themselves, etc. What do other people think? How do you release your anger? Or do you bottle it up?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20091203/sc_livescience/studyrevealstheangriestamericans
This study suggests that anger is more likely among young people than older people. It discusses how anger is a normal human emotion, but if someone holds onto it too long, it can cause harm. People who express their anger may live longer than those who keep it inside and to themselves. The study did a survey of Americans 18 and older, asking how they feel when they are angry. This was conducted to get a larger range of a social portrait of anger in the US.
The study found that people under 30 experienced anger in all forms or intensity more frequently than older adults. This was because younger people stress more over time pressures, economic hardship, and interpersonal conflict, triggering angry feelings. People with children reported encountering more stress and anger, along with people with limited education. The study suggested that these were all triggers of angry emotions due to stress.
I would have to agree that stress is the main cause of anger. The more pressure a person has on them, the more they might have aggressive tendencies. We have been studying aggression in class and I thought this article could relate. Although anger may not always be aggressive behavior, I think it can lead to that. People who are frustrated and angry can lead to frustration aggression. I thought the age factor was an interesting insight to anger because young people these days do have a lot more stress on them, a big one being money with the poor economy. I like the idea about that if a person holds in anger it could harm them later. I would have to agree. When I hold a grudge for too long it takes a toll on me. I am not saying that to release the anger a person should yell at people or become aggressive. People have to find constructive ways of dealing with their anger whether it is working out, participating in a hobby, time to themselves, etc. What do other people think? How do you release your anger? Or do you bottle it up?
Saturday, December 5, 2009
Reacting to negative justice in modern media.
Justice is seen as being held together by the courts, by law, and the law enforcement officers that go by the rules. In recent years there have been many TV shows that deal with a typical anti-hero. The most prominent ones that come to mind are characters such as Dexter Morgan, Jack Bauer, and Vic Mackey in Dexter, 24, and The Shield respectively. I'm choosing TV as an example but you can even see it in books such as "The Count of Monte Cristo". Each has a sort of vigilante justice that act when others are bound due to laws or a basic majority on morality and justice.
Do they act because the system is unjust, or do they act for their own selfish reasons? Each has a sense of right and wrong but no one can define what right or wrong is. Most modern law comes from common law where the majority of people speak up for the justice in society. Is it more dangerous with these shows to show that when the law falls short that it is ok to act if an injustice goes unanswered? Is revenge a dish best serve cold, or as a society have we accepted that there are people that will act when everyone else has their hands tied because of the law or even a majority opinion of what justice is?
Another question to ask is that when you see people in authority that are supposed to bring about justice act with injustice, does that blur the line in what the public can trust as justice?
Do they act because the system is unjust, or do they act for their own selfish reasons? Each has a sense of right and wrong but no one can define what right or wrong is. Most modern law comes from common law where the majority of people speak up for the justice in society. Is it more dangerous with these shows to show that when the law falls short that it is ok to act if an injustice goes unanswered? Is revenge a dish best serve cold, or as a society have we accepted that there are people that will act when everyone else has their hands tied because of the law or even a majority opinion of what justice is?
Another question to ask is that when you see people in authority that are supposed to bring about justice act with injustice, does that blur the line in what the public can trust as justice?
Spanking and aggression
CBS News Health. (2005, November,9). Can spanking cause aggression? Retrieved from http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/11/14/health/webmd/main1042550.shtml.
We had talked in class about spanking causing aggression in young children. I found an article that makes a lot of sense to me. Spanking can cause aggression in children because it causes them to be more anxious and angry. This only holds true though when these children live in countries where punishment is seen to be uncommon and bad. For instance, in Thailand discipline and punishment are bad and looked poorly upon therefor spanking causes high aggression in kids. Kenya on the other hand, is a country where punishment is acceptable therefor spanking causes little aggression if any.
Spanking also depends on the children' s feelings. If the childs friends are also being spanked no aggression is caused. If a child thinks they are the only one being spanked then it does not seem fair, and aggression rises.
This study asked the mother's of children ages 6-17 how often they physically abused their children. The aggression of the children was then measured. This was done in five different countries therefor using five separate cultures. I think this study should have been done also with younger aged children, like age 2 and up. I believe this because it is said that children start learning aggression at a very young age. If there had been a lot of aggression before the age of 6 then the children are more likely to be aggressive by six years of age.
We had talked in class about spanking causing aggression in young children. I found an article that makes a lot of sense to me. Spanking can cause aggression in children because it causes them to be more anxious and angry. This only holds true though when these children live in countries where punishment is seen to be uncommon and bad. For instance, in Thailand discipline and punishment are bad and looked poorly upon therefor spanking causes high aggression in kids. Kenya on the other hand, is a country where punishment is acceptable therefor spanking causes little aggression if any.
Spanking also depends on the children' s feelings. If the childs friends are also being spanked no aggression is caused. If a child thinks they are the only one being spanked then it does not seem fair, and aggression rises.
This study asked the mother's of children ages 6-17 how often they physically abused their children. The aggression of the children was then measured. This was done in five different countries therefor using five separate cultures. I think this study should have been done also with younger aged children, like age 2 and up. I believe this because it is said that children start learning aggression at a very young age. If there had been a lot of aggression before the age of 6 then the children are more likely to be aggressive by six years of age.
Bullying, is fighting back NEVER the solution?
After reading Selekman's reading on bullying, there is one source of contention I have with the reading, not encouraging a kid to fight back. This isn't to say that this should be the first avenue travelled by a bullied student. They should tell their parents, friends, teachers, and principals. This is all well and good for support but this doesn't exactly stop the bullying when the bully is the most popular kid in school and he gets to keep acting out with impunity.
In my own personal experience a kid had bullied me for many years. He would run the gamet from insults to rumors but he never physically hit me. One bad day I took out my aggression on my brother. My dad told me that my actions were misplaced and if I really need to hit someone it should be the bully. Now, my dad isn't a child psychologist but it made more sense to hit the kid that deserved it then to bully my undeserving brother.
One day the bully assaulted me by shooting a spitwad point blank at my face. I started hitting him several times and gave him a black eye and bloody nose. I was punished for it but I don't think I've ever felt a better sense of justice in my life. Looking back there was probably a better way but afterward the bullying stopped by that kid completely. Is it so wrong that after all avenues have been taken that a bullied kid is told that he can fight back? I never got to the point of hurting myself or suicidal thoughts but are there some circumstances that a kid is better off hurting a deserving bully than themselves? These are just my opinions and statistics may be against me but I know that in my own personal experience fighting back helped me in my life.
In my own personal experience a kid had bullied me for many years. He would run the gamet from insults to rumors but he never physically hit me. One bad day I took out my aggression on my brother. My dad told me that my actions were misplaced and if I really need to hit someone it should be the bully. Now, my dad isn't a child psychologist but it made more sense to hit the kid that deserved it then to bully my undeserving brother.
One day the bully assaulted me by shooting a spitwad point blank at my face. I started hitting him several times and gave him a black eye and bloody nose. I was punished for it but I don't think I've ever felt a better sense of justice in my life. Looking back there was probably a better way but afterward the bullying stopped by that kid completely. Is it so wrong that after all avenues have been taken that a bullied kid is told that he can fight back? I never got to the point of hurting myself or suicidal thoughts but are there some circumstances that a kid is better off hurting a deserving bully than themselves? These are just my opinions and statistics may be against me but I know that in my own personal experience fighting back helped me in my life.
Conformity
Dindo M, Whiten A, de Waal FBM (2009) In-Group Conformity Sustains Different Foraging
Traditions in Capuchin Monkeys (Cebus apella). PLoS ONE 4(11)
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0007858
In this study an alpha male chimp is given a learned task to complete, such as opening a foraging device.. After opening the device the alpha male returned to his group. The researchers let some time go by, then gave each of the members in the group a foraging device. There was two groups with an alpha male in each. About 90% of the other group members mastered the opening of the device. This happened because the alpha male went back to the group playing with his device so the rest of the group wanted to do the same. I found this article very interesting because it shows conformity in animals. Even though chimps are the closest thing to humans they still have their own ways of becoming part of the group.
This study would be very interesting to do over with a group of chimps and a group of humans. We would then be able to distinguish the likes and differences between human and animal conformity. Would humans follow another human because they are looked at as superior or does this only happen with animals?
Traditions in Capuchin Monkeys (Cebus apella). PLoS ONE 4(11)
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0007858
In this study an alpha male chimp is given a learned task to complete, such as opening a foraging device.. After opening the device the alpha male returned to his group. The researchers let some time go by, then gave each of the members in the group a foraging device. There was two groups with an alpha male in each. About 90% of the other group members mastered the opening of the device. This happened because the alpha male went back to the group playing with his device so the rest of the group wanted to do the same. I found this article very interesting because it shows conformity in animals. Even though chimps are the closest thing to humans they still have their own ways of becoming part of the group.
This study would be very interesting to do over with a group of chimps and a group of humans. We would then be able to distinguish the likes and differences between human and animal conformity. Would humans follow another human because they are looked at as superior or does this only happen with animals?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)