Student Responses to Class Discussions (Psychology Class)

The scholar needs to have his/her own responds based on the thread related to the topic the student is talking about and please highlight it in different color so I know what to copy and paste back to the student. Only paragraph in length. Please use this outline so I don’t get confuse as I have to go back to the portal and access each thread. I will attach this to the scholar so he/she can write the responses on this sheet. Please make sure that NOTHING is plagiarize and that you cite everything. This is the book were using A History of Modern Psychology 10th edition by: Schultz, D., & Schultz, S. (2012) The writing has to be double space, 12 font, Times Roman Question 1: 1 Ethics in Research, Limits of Behaviorism (Benjamin Hopper writes) According to our text, behaviorism asserts that all behavior is the result of things that happened in an individual’s past and there is no such thing as conscious thought, because it cannot be scientifically explored (Schultz, 2012). This has some very interesting ethical implications and is an example of the intersection of psychology and philosophy, from which psychology originated. There is no room in behaviorism for free choice, which means that ethics are irrelevant. If people do not have a choice and everything that happens is predetermined, it does not matter what behavior is ethical because the behavior is simply a result of past events and cannot be controlled. From this point of view there is no unethical behavior, there is only conditioned responses. One can no more be blamed for a conditioned response that a computer could be for carrying out its program. Schultz, D., & Schultz, S. (2012). A history of modern psychology (10th ed.). New York, New York: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Question 1 Scholar: How would you respond to this student? Please write your response below. Question 1: Little Albert & Ethics in Research (Crystal Kingsley writes) The “Little Albert” has been used for the support of behaviorism for many years. Psychology students learn much about this experiment but it’s come to the attention of some that little Albert may not have been a health subject from the get go bringing up many questions regarding Watson’s celebrated experiment. Green’s TWITHOP podcast summarizes an article that appeared in the History of Psychology journal in 2012. Green suggested that researchers are now suspecting that little Albert was neurologically impaired at the time of the study. They cite that after reviewing medical records, family history, and the film of the experiment, researchers have concluded that little Albert was suffering from Hydrocephalus (a condition of excessive cerebrospinal fluid in the brain), and neurologically impaired at the time of the study done by Watson (Green, 2012). Fridlund, et al., are suggesting that little Albert was not only far less responsive to the animals than a healthy child would be at the same age, he was lacking in social awareness, and he also seemed to have “underdeveloped body movements” (Green, 2012). With such recent findings, the famous 1920 experiment is now being called into question not only about the validity of the study but also the ethical concerns of whether Watson knew of little Albert’s conditions. Ethical implications and methodological flaws as suggested by the article include the following: 1.Why did Watson claim that little Albert was “healthy” and “normal”? Did he intentionally misrepresent and misreport his data? 2.The study is flawed in investigating fear conditioning, which consequently poorly supports the idea that the conditioning will last or become a phobia. 3.Watson and the loud noise of the metal stimulus looks more like punishment than classical conditioning. 4.The subjectivity of measuring Albert’s fear. 5.Generalized assumptions and theories of fear conditioning came out of the study of one participant. 6.Failures in test retest. (Fridlund, Beck, Goldie, Irons, Pickren, 2012). There have been many additional criticisms towards behaviorism with regard to its “extreme objectivity” that Watson advocated (Schultz & Schultz, 2012, p. 230). Since the peak of behaviorism, psychologists have asserted that there are other important elements with regards to the processing of sensory and perception that Watson disregarded. Additionally, it’s also important with these recent findings that the discussion of ethics is brought up in experimental research (Schultz & Schultz, 2012). Many years would go by after the little Albert experiment before psychology would implement ethical standards for research involving children and other vulnerable populations. In the 1970’s, ethics and research abuse became publicized and resulted in the 1974 development of the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. In 1979 this commission outlined the federal regulations in protection humans in research studies. Its basic principles include: Respect of persons, beneficence, and justice. In addition, certain application requirements must be met which include: informed consent, risk/benefit assessment, and selection of subjects (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2015). Additionally, vulnerable populations (those unable to give consent) such as children, prisoners, or those considered mentally disabled complicate this issue. However, the US Dept HHS has implemented extra measures to protect vulnerable populations including the requirement of additional justification when researchers are intending to use participants under this category. These specific studies and its additional safeguards are extensively reviewed and need approval by the institutional review board (IRB) in order to move forward with the study (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2015). If Watson did this study today under these federal regulations, Watson would have had to follow the regulations set forth for vulnerable populations. Furthermore, due to the nature of the experiment and its possible psychological harm on the child, this study may never have been approved by the IRB. References: Green, Christopher. (2015). Little Albert: a Neurologically Impaired Child. This Week in the History of Psychology. Retrieved from http://www.yorku.ca/christo/podcasts/TWITHOP-shorts1.AlbertB.mp3 Fridlund, A., Beck, H., Goldie, W., Irons, G., & Pickren, Wade E. (2012). LITTLE ALBERT: A Neurologically Impaired Child. History of Psychology, 15(4), 302-327. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. (2015). The Belmont Report. Retrieved from http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/belmont.html Schultz, D.P. & Schultz, S.E. (2012) A history of Modern Psychology (10th edition). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Question 1 Scholar: How would you respond to this student? Please write your response below. Question 4: Ego Psychology student Leonel Alvarez writes After Freud there have been several other psychologist that have studied his ideas and theories in more depth. One of these of his youngest daughter Anna Freud who studied with her father and helped to keep his ideas and theories alive. She focused more on the development of children and the role of Ego in their development.Erick Erikson who took Freud's ideas and and developed his own model of developmental stages. He labeled the five stages originally outlined by Freud under new names and added three additional stages. The stages he developed where Infancy, Muscular, Locomotor, Latency, Adolescence, *Intimacy, *Productivity, and *Maturity. He emphasized more of the impact of society on the ego and personal identity. He believed the ego was mainly a way of problem solving and enhancing performance as a way to prevent anxiety. Karen Horney was a medical doctor by trade but studied the effects of anxiety and developed the a theory known as "Tyranny of should". Her theory focused on the behavior of people and how the need to belong causes them to return to familiar situations despite the negative outcomes associated with them. Erick Fromm combined the work of both Freud and Marx to develop his own theory of personality. He believed the human emotion of loneliness drives a person towards others. He developed five basic concepts related to his theory of personality - Relatedness, Transcendence, Rootedness, Identity, and Orientation. Melanie Klein developed her Drive Theory and Object Relationship which described the way children associate key figures such and their parents to other individuals. It also described how a child associates and identify people in their own imaginative mind. Klein was a strong opponent of Anna Freud and contested her training ideas and concepts publicly. Klein's own daughter worked along side Anna Freud which led to a fall out between the two which was never reconciled. NU Neo-Freudian video. Question 4 Scholar: How would you respond to Leonel Alvarez student? Please write your response below. Question 4: Ego Psychology student Richard Perez writes this: After Freud's psychoanalysis different idea merged from key players, Anna Freud continued to promote ideas but focused more on children. Erik Erikson emphasized the impact of society on the ego, he saw the ego as a creative problem solver helping to organize a person’s personality. He proposed 8 stage of development comparable to 5 stages of Freud. Karen Horney was influenced by Freud and took some of Freudian though and developed an idea called “tyranny of should” stating how one may live under the rules of others. Horney believed how strongly we strive for the approval of others. New school of psychology was delivered by Anna Freud in different ways. She focused more of children, and their ability to adapt to reality. Learning from cues from their parents. She created a classification system of their observed reactions. I recent found a tiny video clip that actually put some of psychoanalysis in perspective. It details ideas that have to do with the subconscious conflicts and how to bring them to be recognized in the conscious state to take corrective action. http://www.simplypsychology.org/psychoanalysis.html Question 4 Scholar: How would you respond to Richard Perez student? Please write your response below.