InPSYights 'N PSYnippets: 2013

An important requirement for something to be termed “reinforcement” (whether positive or negative) is that the behaviour that led to the reinforcement must be strengthened or increased (Miltenberger, 2008).

Technically, it is possible to say that when negative reinforcement occurs then positive reinforcement is also occurring and vice-versa. Take the example of turning off the light at night time. If you look at it from the perspective of removing the light then negative reinforcement has occurred.

However, if you look at it from the perspective of adding darkness then positive reinforcement has occurred. The behaviour in both cases is the same (pressing the light switch) and the outcomes are the same too (light is removed and darkness is added) it just depends on how you look at it.

There have been a number of articles written about this (Michael, 1975) and recently the subject was discussed again in a number of published articles in the 2006 Spring edition of The Behaviour Analyst. All of these articles are freely available to read if you’re curiosity takes you there (scroll down to the bottom of that linked page to access those articles).

Retrieved 9/22/13, from http://www.educateautism.com/behavioural-principles/negative-reinforcement.html#.Uj_YRD-4iLc at Educate Autism, written by Gavin Cosgrave. Gavin currently works as a Research Consultant for the Eastern Vocational Enterprises (EVE) which is a programme within the Health Service Executive (HSE). He has previously worked within an ABA school teaching children with autism under the supervision of a Behaviour Analyst. He holds a Higher Diploma in Psychology from Trinity College Dublin, an Honours Degree in Industrial/Product Design from the National College of Art and Design, and a FETAC certificate as a Special Needs Assistant.

References

Cooper, J., Heron, T., & Heward, W. (2007). Applied Behaviour Analysis. New Jersey: Pearson Education.

Michael, J. (1975). Positive and negative reinforcement, a distinction that is no longer necessary; or a better way to talk about bad things. Behaviourism, 3, 33-44.

Miltenberger, R. (2008). Behaviour Modification. Belmont, CA. Wadsworth Publishing.

__________________________________

Examples of negative reinforcement and explanations at: http://www.educateautism.com/behavioural-principles/examples-of-negative-reinforcement.html#

Examples of positive reinforcement and explanations at: http://www.educateautism.com/behavioural-principles/positive-reinforcement.html#.Uj_axz-4iLc

Negative Reinforcement vs Positive Reinforcement

A lot of people misunderstand Negative Reinforcement by confusing it with Punishment. Remember that Reinforcement is any consequence that encourages a behavior to continue and a Punishment is any consequence that discourages a behavior from continuing.

Negative Reinforcement starts with a negative condition (like pain) that encourages an organism to perform a behavior that will trigger a reward of relief. The pre-existing negative state can be natural or induced by a trainer.

Example of Natural Negative Reinforcement: If a person has a headache, then takes Tylenol and finds relief, the relief from the headache is reinforcement to take more Tylenol in the future if the headache returns. This is negative reinforcement because the person started out in a negative state.

Negative Reinforcement starts with a negative state and ends with a neutral state.

Positive Reinforcement starts with a neutral state and ends with a positive state.

In a way, you could say that Negative reinforcement involves the use of a pre-punishment.

Many scientists in the field of psychology argue that it is not needed to define the differences between negative and positive reinforcement because they are both so similar. For example, if an animal is hungry so you give it some food, you could say that this was negative reinforcement because he was originally in a negative state of hunger and now he has food which puts him in a neutral state. You could also say that this was positive reinforcement because he got a treat that he loves which probably caused him pleasure.

Example of Positive Reinforcement:

You tell your nephew that if he says you’re his favorite uncle you will take him to the Zoo. He then says you are his favorite uncle and you take him to the zoo. He has been positively reinforced.

Example of induced Negative Reinforcement:

You put your nephew in a headlock and tell him you will only release if he tells you that you are his favorite uncle. He tells you that you are his favorite uncle and you release.

Which of these two examples do you think will work to better gain your nephew’s trust?

Written by Jon Perry, graphic artist/parrot owner, www.featherMe.com; http://www.jonperry.com/ and retrieved 9/22/13, from http://www.featherme.com/index.php/category/bird-blog/parrot-glossary/

__________________________________

http://www.wagntrain.com/OC/

An Animal Trainer's Introduction to Operant and Classical Conditioning by Stacy Braslau-Schneck, MA. This page attempts to explain Operant Conditioning, and promote the use of Positive Reinforcement and Negative Punishment in animal training.

Prepared by Mary R. Noble, PhD, LPC, CRC, CHES, GCDF

Sept. 2013; http://psychologyfun.blogspot.com/

Sunday, September 22, 2013

Brain is hard-wired for chronic pain

Online time can hobble brain's important work

Online time can hobble brain's important work

This can't be a good thing; might need more research...

Friday, September 20, 2013

Psychopathic traits in teenagers not cast in stone

Tuesday, September 10, 2013

Early detection of Parkinson’s disease through handwriting

Saturday, September 7, 2013

Little Albert study by Watson and Rayner 1920

This was a short research paper I did for my Introduction to Psychology class. The assignment was to view the Youtube video on the Little Albert study and then discuss it in the forums.

The Little Albert experiment done in 1920 by Watson and Rayner is one of psychology's most famous and well-known, and is included in nearly every introductory psychology course. It was done to illustrate how classical conditioning can be used to condition an emotional response. The three research questions were: 1. Can an infant be conditioned to fear an animal that appears simultaneously with a loud, fear arousing sound? 2. Would such fear transfer to other animals or to inanimate objects? 3. How long would such fears persist? (Harris, 1979).

On the other hand, this study has also been criticized widely for many reasons, and extensive detective work over seven years by psychologist, Dr. Michael Britt, uncovered multiple reported inaccuracies and distortions (DeAngelis, 2010). In fact, it was not even a true “experiment,” but rather a “pilot study” (Britt, 2008). Dr. Vassar refers to it as “a well-known piece of social science folklore” and “an example of myth making in the history of psychology (Harris, 1979).

Some of the criticisms of this so-called “experiment” are:

There were multiple methodological flaws and the experimental design and process was not carefully constructed. Watson and Rayner failed to develop an objective means to evaluate Albert's reactions, but rather relied on their own subjective interpretations (Harris, 1979; Cherry, n.d.). It was not a true experiment and was poorly conducted – it did not have two subjects, two levels of variables, was not controlled, and was never successfully replicated (Mills, 1998), thus, in actuality, it was a pilot study. Nor was the study done with an appropriate sample size or inadequate confidence levels (according to the scientific method). The Little Albert experiment would not be conducted based on today's ethical standards as it did not meet many of the ethical requirements (Cherry, n.d.)

The 9-month old baby named Little Albert was identified as Douglas Merritte, the son of a wet nurse named Arvilla Merritt. Ms. Merritt lived and worked at a pediatric hospital on the John Hopkins University campus called the Harriet Lane Home at the time of the experiment in 1920, and received $1 for her baby's participation. It was discovered that Little Albert was not the "healthy," "normal" boy Watson claimed. Verified with medical records from Johns Hopkins University, Little Albert was, in reality, a neurologically impaired child who suffered from congenital hydrocephalus, and died at the age of 6 (DeAngelis, 2010). Fridlund (2012) believes that "because Watson and Rayner tried to condition fear in an infant and made no effort to follow him after discharge and insure his well-being, the Little Albert study has always led us to consider basic issues of experimental ethics…but now it forces us to confront deeper, more disturbing issues like the medical misogyny, the protection of the disabled and the likelihood of scientific fraud. It's a story all psychologists can learn from."

There was no evidence that Little Albert was conditioned to a white rat (the rabbit was brown), a sealskin coat, fur muffs, white furry gloves, or a teddy bear. Burning newspapers were also tried by putting in front of Little Albert but with no noise. Samuelson (1980) wrote that the Santa Claus mask had been played with, then later it was paired with the steel bar noise, which means it was not properly conditioned to be generalized.

Little Albert’s fear was not powerful or phobic, his reactions were not that strong or lasted very long. He was never unconditioned as there wasn’t enough to uncondition, and his reactions were extinguished on their own. Attempts to desensitize and recondition him were with unethical methods, feeding him candy, milk, cookies. Harris (1979) states that Little Albert’s conditioning was not true fear conditioning reactions, as he cooed and gurgled, and showed only slight fear. In fact, he even allowed the rat to crawl towards him and later touched the rat’s ear. As such, there was no permanent psychological damage, since the “fear” was only a weak reaction.

Watson wanted to establish behaviorism in the midst of Freudian concepts as a science and thus, attain respectability; however, he did not report results accurately, “altered and deleted important aspects of the study in his many descriptions of it,” stretched the truth, and gave frequent unobjective editorial comments (Harris, 1979). Rather, Watson provided a catchy story, nice photographs, and built up his conclusions based on what could happen in a real study. To develop a successful theory that is adopted, it must be “marketed;” one that is easy to understand makes it more successful, (Britt, 2008) which is what Watson’s study was. Watson knew his popularity could be gained if simple tools were used, with familiar concepts, and done by well-known researchers. Watson had a persuasive personality and knew how to get his story across to attain his hidden agenda.

Harris (1979) concluded his research on the misrepresentations that have persisted on the Little Albert study with this:

“What can be deduced from reviewing the many versions of Watson and Rayner's study of Albert? One somewhat obvious conclusion is that we should be extremely wary of secondhand (and more remote) accounts of psychological research… secondary sources themselves come to err in their description of classic studies… In reviewing these classic studies or origin myths in psychology, it should be emphasized that this myth-making process is not anyone's attempt to defraud the public. Instead, it arises ' as largely a byproduct of pedagogy: as a means to elucidate the concepts of a scientific specialty, to establish its tradition, and to attract students’… the major difficulty with such reevaluations of classic studies is that they obscure the actual factors that determine the course of scientific research… It may be useful for modern learning theorists to see how the Albert study prompted subsequent research, but it seems time, finally, to place the Watson and Rayner data in the category of "interesting but uninterpretable results."

References

DeAngelis, T. (2010). ‘Little Albert’ regains his identity. American Psychological Association Monitor on Psychology, 41:1, 10. Retrieved September 5, 2013, from http://www.apa.org/monitor/2010/01/little-albert.aspx

Beck, H. P., Levinson, S., & Irons, G. (2009). Finding little Albert: A journey to John B. Watson’s infant laboratory. American Psychologist, 64(7), 605-614. Retrieved September 7, 2013, from http://libres.uncg.edu/ir/asu/f/Beck_Hall_2009_Finding_Little_Albert.pdf

Britt, M. (2008). Episode 47: The little Albert study: What you know is…mostly wrong (podcast). Retrieved September 6, 2013, from http://www.thepsychfiles.com/2008/02/episode-47-the-little-albert-study-what-you-know-ismostly-wrong/#ixzz2eFmD2sVb

Cherry, K. (n.d.) The little Albert experiment, a closer look at the famous Case of little Albert. Retrieved September 7, 2013, from http://psychology.about.com/od/classicpsychologystudies/a/little-albert-experiment.htm

Fridlund, A. J., Beck, H. P., Goldie, W. D., & Irons, G. (2012). Little Albert: A neurologically impaired child. History of Psychology. doi: 10.1037/a0026720 (abstract available at: http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=buy.optionToBuy&uid=2012-01974-001)

Harris, B. (1979). Whatever happened to Little Albert? American Psychologist, 34(2), 151-160. Retrieved September 5, 1013, from http://htpprints.yorku.ca/archive/00000198/01/BHARRIS.HTM

Mills, J.A. (1998). Control, A history of behavioral psychology. New York University Press, N.J. Retrieved September 7, 2013, from http://www.scribd.com/doc/133434820/Book-Control-A-History-of-Behavioral-Psychology-John-a-Mills

Samuelson, F. (1980). J.B. Watson’s little Albert, Cyril Burt’s twins, and the need for a critical science. American Psychologist, 35(7). Doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.35.7.619 (abstract available at: http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/amp/35/7/619/)

Watson, J. B. & Rayner, R. (1920). Conditioned emotional reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 3, 1-14. Retrieved September 7, 2013, from http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Watson/emotion.htm

Prepared by Mary R. Noble, PhD

(mklecuyer@hotmail.com)

September 7, 2013

Dishonest deeds lead to 'cheater's high,' as long as no one gets hurt, study finds

Thursday, September 5, 2013

Using harsh verbal discipline with teens found to be harmful

Wednesday, August 28, 2013

HigherEdJobs - The Advantages of Not Multi-Tasking

Monday, August 26, 2013

Playing video games can boost brain power

Sunday, August 11, 2013

A critical thinking self-assessment

Here is a critical thinking self-assessment I use in my Introduction to Psychology class. Please feel free to suggest any additional critical thinking resources and why they are valuable. Thank you!

Critical Thinking Self-Assessment

Take the following self-assessment to find out what level of critical thinking you are at, and how you can improve it.

You will be asked 8 questions regarding your understanding of critical thinking and its application in your life. After each question are a series of possible responses. Select the response box that most accurately represents your present level of understanding and application of critical thinking in your life (Read ALL responses before choosing your most honest answer). Circle your answers, add up the numbers you chose, and at the end of this self-assessment, read about your approximate level of thinking.

Question 1 What does "everyday thinking” mean for you?

1. I am mostly unaware of my thinking. I really don't think much about my thinking. I have other more important things to think about.

2. I am becoming aware that my thinking affects my life and that problems I have with my thinking could be causing problems in my life.

3. I have begun to take my thinking seriously. I have become increasingly aware of the need to further develop my thinking.

4. I recognize some problems exist in my thinking and I need to address those by deliberately following an action plan to improve my thinking.

5. Unsolved problems and conflicts in life are frequently the result of undisciplined "everyday thinking.”

Question 2 How would you define "critical thinking”?

1. I don't have a good definition for critical thinking. However, I know what it means to be critical of others.

2. I have a vague concept of critical thinking. I have heard about it, but I cannot provide a clear definition.

3. I can provide a workable definition of critical thinking and name some of the components involved.

4. I can provide an excellent definition of critical thinking and name the components of the critical thinking process.

5. I can provide an excellent definition with examples because I utilize it in my daily life to great benefit.

Question 3 What is the role or function of critical thinking in your life?

1 There is no role for critical thinking in my life. And I'm doing fine, thanks.

2 I have only an initial awareness of the role of critical thinking in my life.

3 I have a beginning awareness of the importance of critical thinking.

4 I have a clear recognition of the important role that critical thinking plays in my life.

5 I have a deep understanding of the powerful role of critical thinking in my life.

Question 4 How actively do you practice critical thinking?

1 I do not actively practice critical thinking.

2 I practice critical thinking only when called upon to do so in classes or in work settings.

3 I have sporadically started to use critical thinking, but I must force myself to think in disciplined ways.

4 I am beginning to practice critical thinking with more regularity.

5 I have established habits of using critical thinking and it is paying off in my daily life.

Question 5 How actively do you monitor your thinking?

1 I don't monitor my thinking. If I detected something wrong with my thinking I would know it.

2 I occasionally monitor my thinking, usually when called upon to do so in my classes or work.

3 I monitor my thinking in a hit and miss fashion. I have no plan to follow to monitor my thinking.

4 I actively analyze my thinking in a number of areas and regular monitor my thinking in daily life.

5 I actively analyze my thinking in all significant areas of life. I have insights into problems at deeper levels of thought.

Question 6 How would you describe your skill level in critical thinking?

1 My beliefs feel reasonable to me and so I believe them with confidence. I have no need for critical thinking.

2 My thinking is not that bad. I question a lot of things. I'm not prejudiced. I'm not as self-deceived as some people I know.

3 I can begin to monitor my own thoughts but it is sporadic. I can begin to recognize egocentricity in myself and others.

4 I can critique my own powers of thought. I can articulate strengths and weaknesses in thinking and often recognize egocentricity in myself and others.

5 I regularly and insightfully critique my own thinking and improve it. I consistently monitor my own thoughts and effectively articulate strengths and weaknesses in thinking.

Question 7 What is your understanding of the elements of thought, standards of thinking and intellectual traits of critical thinking?

1 I am unfamiliar with these concepts and so I don't understand them.

2 I have heard of these concepts and occasionally make use of them in course work, but I do not use them outside of classes and I cannot provide a good definition of them.

3 I can give a rough definition of these concepts and have some familiarity with them through use in my classes.

4 I can name the elements, standards and traits. I can accurately define them to others. I can apply them in principle.

5 I routinely utilize the elements, standards and traits in my everyday thinking.

Question 8 What is your plan of action to further develop your critical thinking skills?

1. I have no need for a plan to develop my critical thinking skills.

2. I recognize that it would take effort to develop my critical thinking but I have no plans to do so.

3. I have actively decided to develop my critical thinking but I still have not developed an action plan.

4. I have adopted a regimen of regular daily practice in order to develop healthy habits of critical thinking.

5. I have successful habits of critical thinking and I am constantly aware of the need for continuous improvement.

Add up the numbers for each question to find your total score and read about it below.

If your score is 1 – 8, your current stage of thought is Unreflective: To build up your critical thinking skills at this level, use the following steps:

· Begin at the beginning. Develop an initial awareness of thinking in general, and critical thinking in particular. Just begin to think about thinking.

· Familiarize yourself with the various elements and critical thinking resources (several resources below) as an overview of this subject. Find out what is involved in developing your thinking.

· When you find something of interest about critical thinking, study it. Your goal is to develop and hone the motivation to pursue the study of thinking. When you believe this study is worthwhile to you and can improve the quality of your life, you will be ready to move on.

· View "Did You Know 4.0" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ILQrUrEWe8) to get an idea of how fast the world of information is changing and how important it is to develop and continually improve your critical thinking skills.

If your score is 8-15, your current stage of thought is challenged thinking. Challenged thinkers have an initial awareness of the role thinking plays in their life and the problems associated with this level of thinking. They become aware of the difficulties involved with improving their thinking and risk rationalizing back to the unreflective stage to avoid the challenges of growth. To build up your critical thinking skills at this level, use the following steps:

· You're at the "window-shopping” phase in your development as a thinker. You may think there is some merit to learning critical thinking, but you are not yet ready to "buy.” That's OK, just keep looking!

· Review the information in the resources below to expand your awareness of the various components of critical thinking.

· Develop an awareness of intellectual humility, one of the powerful intellectual traits. To grow in your thinking will require humility and avoiding an arrogant return to the unreflective stage.

· Use the "wasted time” strategy. Each day invest ten minutes of time you might waste in diversions or worrying and reflect on your best and worst thinking of the day and what you could do differently with your thinking.

· Click on some of the links in the resources below available to further explore information on topics that catch your interest about critical thinking.

· Just keep moving forward. Learning any worthwhile skill is a process, a journey that will last a lifetime. Focus on becoming a beginning thinker.

If your score is 16-29, your current stage of thought is beginning thinking. Beginning thinkers have begun to take their thinking seriously. They have experienced a growing awareness and awakening to the need for developing their thinking. They recognize problems in their thinking and have begun to modify their thinking in a hit and miss manner. To build up your critical thinking skills at this level, use the following steps:

· Become aware of the many influences (biological, economic, ethnic, and cultural) that have affected your thinking, and over which you had no control.

· Download and print out copies of available ebooks and/or website below, of thought, intellectual standards, and intellectual traits and keep them handy to review regularly.

· Begin the process of monitoring your own thinking. Can you spot signs of egocentric thinking? In discussions, do you consider the purpose of the discussion, assumptions, point of views, strength of evidence presented, implications, etc.? Can you recognize and affirm clarity, accuracy, precision and relevance in the posts of your peers?

· Focus on the intellectual traits of humility and confidence in reason. The traits are important at this stage of your thinking. Developing these traits will help you move to the next stage of development.

If your score is 30-45, your current stage of thought is practicing thinking. Practicing thinkers have a sense of the habits needed to take charge of their thinking and they are actively analyzing their thinking in a number of domains. They recognize the natural tendency toward egocentric thinking. To build up your critical thinking skills at this level, use the following steps:

· Your primary goal here is practice, to follow through with an organized plan of study and application of critical thinking concepts and principles.

· Develop an understanding of how all the components of critical thinking (elements of thought, intellectual standards and traits, egocentricity and sociocentricity) work together.

· Handle a problem a day. Develop the habit of taking one problem a day and in your spare moments reflect on the problem using the elements of thought to analyze the problem, not necessarily to solve the problem.

· Internalize the intellectual standards. Try focusing exclusively on one intellectual standard (e.g., clarity, precision, accuracy) for one week at a time.

· Keep an intellectual journal. Provide a daily description of one emotional event, how you responded, and then analyze what was going on to explain your response in critical thinking terms.

· Develop a plan to systematically monitor your thinking. It could be as simple as having copies of the elements of critical thought on your desk while you study, or carrying a copy of the intellectual traits in your pocket.

· Place renewed focus on the intellectual traits of perseverance and humility at this stage of your development. You will need them to move up to more advanced thinking.

· Catch yourself whenever you engage in egocentric or sociocentric thinking. It may be easier to catch others, but focusing on others' shortcomings could be egocentric thinking.

· Develop the habit of focusing on the elements of thought whenever you try to solve a problem. In school or life in general, practice analyzing your thinking whenever you are problem-solving to monitor and strengthen your own thinking.

To build up your critical thinking skills, here are some more strategies you can use:

Redefine the way you see things. Virtually any situation can be redefined from multiple perspectives. Challenge preconceived notions about yourself or your personality; focus on developing your strengths rather than overcoming your weaknesses.
Get in touch with your emotions. Whenever you experience negativity, examine the thinking that contributes to this state. Discover more positive perspectives that can be substituted for improved health and well-being.
Analyze group influences on your life. Examine the impact of your groups on your thinking and your life decisions. What is acceptable and what is forbidden? Evaluate what influences you wish to perpetuate and those you prefer to change.
Seek guidance from trained thinkers who have reached higher levels of thinking than yours. As in most sports, it pays to play against people more skilled than you.

Reference

The Foundation for Critical Thinking. What stage of thought are you at. Retrieved August 11, 2013, from http://www.criticalthinking.org/

Resources for critical thinking:

Brookfield, S. D. (1987). Developing critical thinkers. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Browne, M. N., & Keeley, S. M. (2010). Asking the right questions: A guide to critical thinking (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Chaffee, J. (2012). Thinking critically (10th ed.). Boston, MA: Wadsworth-Cengage Learning.

Ennis, R. H. (2011). Critical thinking definition, instruction, and assessment: A rigorous approach. http://www.criticalthinking.net/definition.html

Facione, P. A. (2004). Critical thinking: What it is and why it counts. http://www.insightassessment.com/pdf_files/what&why2009.pdf

Facione, P. A. (1990). Executive summary: Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction.

The Foundation for Critical Thinking. What stage of thought are you at. http://www.criticalthinking.org/ Videos at: http://www.youtube.com/user/CriticalThinkingOrg

Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press. http://www.insightassessment.com/pdf_files/DEXadobe.PDF

Nosich, G. M. (2012). Learning to think things through: A guide to critical thinking across the curriculum (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2006). Critical thinking: Tools for taking charge of your learning and your life (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2006). Critical thinking: Learning the tools the best thinkers use. (Concise ed.) (p. 258, exh. 10.1). Upper Saddle River, N.J: Prentice Hall. ISBN: 0131703471

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2004). The miniature guide to critical thinking concepts and tools (4th ed.). Dillon Beach, CA: The Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Vaughn, L. (2008). The power of critical thinking (2^nd ed.) New York, NY: Oxford University Press. http://www.scribd.com/doc/95467813/Lewis-Vaughn-The-Power-of-Critical-Thinking

Bits and pieces of fun/interesting facts about PSYchology

Thursday, December 26, 2013

Saturday, November 30, 2013

Wednesday, November 27, 2013

Tuesday, November 26, 2013

Sunday, November 24, 2013

Friday, November 22, 2013

Thursday, November 21, 2013

Friday, November 8, 2013

Thursday, October 31, 2013

Thursday, October 24, 2013

Wednesday, October 23, 2013

Friday, October 18, 2013

Saturday, October 12, 2013

Saturday, October 5, 2013

Thursday, September 26, 2013

Wednesday, September 25, 2013