The stats given in the intro to this blog caught my attention immediately. I am not a big TV watcher, and the fact that we are exposed to at least 15 TV food commercials during prime-time tv is crazy! What makes it worse is that these commercials are mostly for salty, fatty, or sugary foods. And the absolute worst part of all is this: the commercials WORK.
Yale university colleagues conducted a few studies and found one extremely strinking result:
Children who ahd watched a food advertisement then been offered goldfish ate 45% more than those who hadn't seen the advertisement.
Some may conclude that children are simply more impressionable, but further studies on young adults who viewed adverts for snack or healthy foods revealed that those who had seen the snack food commercials ate one-third more snack food.
The article clearly shows the power advertisers hold over even the most mature eaters. It makes me consider how much more easily I would succumb to unhealthy temptations if I actually watched TV once in a while!
Monday, December 7, 2009
ch. 16 Social Psychology
This was my favorite chapter of the entire book. I didn't get bored reading it because it was highly informative about things we experience all the time, like stereotyping, prejudice, etc.
A few points of interest were:
The theory that cruel acts shape the self. Our high school psychology teacher's motto is "Think Feel Act Become." This theory correlates with his motto perfectly. Act as though you like someone, and you eventually will. I agree with the book in that changing our behavior can change how we think about others and ourselves, boosting likeability and self-esteem.
I also thought the part in the book about things like sickness being PSYCHOLOGICALLY contagious. When we think we will get sick because a large amount of others are, we practically make ourselves sick! I have seen this at school and agree completely.
Finally, I agreed with the section int he text about strengthening conformity. Cliques at school DO seem to strengthen and grow when there are more than 3 people, they all dislike or like the same thing/person, and they have a popular status. Many groups with these characteristics are demeaning toward others. It is hard to find a "nice" group with a good reputation.
I never thought this day would come, but this is the end of my last chapter blog EVER!
A few points of interest were:
The theory that cruel acts shape the self. Our high school psychology teacher's motto is "Think Feel Act Become." This theory correlates with his motto perfectly. Act as though you like someone, and you eventually will. I agree with the book in that changing our behavior can change how we think about others and ourselves, boosting likeability and self-esteem.
I also thought the part in the book about things like sickness being PSYCHOLOGICALLY contagious. When we think we will get sick because a large amount of others are, we practically make ourselves sick! I have seen this at school and agree completely.
Finally, I agreed with the section int he text about strengthening conformity. Cliques at school DO seem to strengthen and grow when there are more than 3 people, they all dislike or like the same thing/person, and they have a popular status. Many groups with these characteristics are demeaning toward others. It is hard to find a "nice" group with a good reputation.
I never thought this day would come, but this is the end of my last chapter blog EVER!
Assignment Blog - Not My Type
Attribution is explaining someone's behavior by crediting either the situation or the person's disposition, in other words, it is explaining someone's behavior rationally and not jumping to comclusions or blaming.
The fundamental attribution error is the tendency to underestimate the situation or overestimate the impact of personal disposition when analyzing another's behavior. An example of the attribution error can be found in the last problem of the final :)
Stereotypes are generalized beliefs we hold about a specific group of people. Examples could be jocks, preps, nerds, goths, emos, Christians, to name a few. Stereotyping is directly related to illusory correlations in that these correlations feed our beliefs. When we believe a relationship exists between two things, we are more likely to notice when something happens that confirm what we think (and less likely to notice or store memories of when something contradicts what we believe). We like to think that what WE believe is what most people believe as well.
The fundamental attribution error is the tendency to underestimate the situation or overestimate the impact of personal disposition when analyzing another's behavior. An example of the attribution error can be found in the last problem of the final :)
Stereotypes are generalized beliefs we hold about a specific group of people. Examples could be jocks, preps, nerds, goths, emos, Christians, to name a few. Stereotyping is directly related to illusory correlations in that these correlations feed our beliefs. When we believe a relationship exists between two things, we are more likely to notice when something happens that confirm what we think (and less likely to notice or store memories of when something contradicts what we believe). We like to think that what WE believe is what most people believe as well.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Blogging Personality
Birth order is something I find very relevant to my personality.
Upon discussing birth order in the text and in class, I pulled out an old favorite... "Perfect Match." It's a book about finding the "perfect" mate, and it relies on birth order theories. I looked into middle children, and a main emphasis was that middle children often try to imitate the parent they admire. They also try to recieve attention by acting like their parent in order to impress them.
My mom is my role model and always has been. She's had a rough ride and is still the strongest, most organized, driven, caring person I know. It dawned on me after completing my Big 5 test that my results matched her personality...a lot! We've been told we're very much alike, my results of having a disagreeableness, conscientiousness, high-strung personality verified that! So, I think subconsciously trying to imitate or impress my mother throughout the years has shaped my personality to be more like hers than it would have otherwise been.
I usually don't find the lectures on the text helpful because I read the chapter in depth ahead of time, and the lectures usually just re-iterate what I've already learned. However, I did enjoy the Moral Psychology video. The comparison between various countries concering the 5 foundations we enter the world with at birth (Ingroup, harm, purity, fairness, and authority) was really interesting. Most countries agreed that harm and fairness were important, but the difference came between the liberals and conservatives when questioning the other 3 foundations. The speaker's adaptation of what the greatest wonder of the worlsd was was very interesting also. He thought that people living together within the 5 foundations and finding ways to respect and work together in testing places and climates was the greatest wonder, not the grand canyon. I have to say, I agree!
Upon discussing birth order in the text and in class, I pulled out an old favorite... "Perfect Match." It's a book about finding the "perfect" mate, and it relies on birth order theories. I looked into middle children, and a main emphasis was that middle children often try to imitate the parent they admire. They also try to recieve attention by acting like their parent in order to impress them.
My mom is my role model and always has been. She's had a rough ride and is still the strongest, most organized, driven, caring person I know. It dawned on me after completing my Big 5 test that my results matched her personality...a lot! We've been told we're very much alike, my results of having a disagreeableness, conscientiousness, high-strung personality verified that! So, I think subconsciously trying to imitate or impress my mother throughout the years has shaped my personality to be more like hers than it would have otherwise been.
I usually don't find the lectures on the text helpful because I read the chapter in depth ahead of time, and the lectures usually just re-iterate what I've already learned. However, I did enjoy the Moral Psychology video. The comparison between various countries concering the 5 foundations we enter the world with at birth (Ingroup, harm, purity, fairness, and authority) was really interesting. Most countries agreed that harm and fairness were important, but the difference came between the liberals and conservatives when questioning the other 3 foundations. The speaker's adaptation of what the greatest wonder of the worlsd was was very interesting also. He thought that people living together within the 5 foundations and finding ways to respect and work together in testing places and climates was the greatest wonder, not the grand canyon. I have to say, I agree!
Monday, November 23, 2009
Psyblog - Weather Has Little Effect On Mood
This was a very interesting article, and honestly, I didn't really believe the statement upon reading the title.
Personally, I think that the weather effects one's mood depending on how much time the person spends outdoors. I get really anxious when it's sunny outside and I have to be inside. On the other hand, I don't mind when it's raining and I'm stuck indoors.
The study showed that Germans positive moods were not affected by the weather, whether it was sunny and blue skies or not. Good weather didn't make people feel happier at all. (I am the total opposite.)
Negative weather, on the other hand, did make a difference. Less sunshine was associated with greater tiredness, etc. I agree with this- rain and gray skies make me drowsy, especially when stuck in school.
One thing that I think needs to be considered is that this study was taken in Germany. We don't know how much time Germans spend outdoors on average compared with north or south Americans, Asians, etc. Could this make a difference?
Personally, I think that the weather effects one's mood depending on how much time the person spends outdoors. I get really anxious when it's sunny outside and I have to be inside. On the other hand, I don't mind when it's raining and I'm stuck indoors.
The study showed that Germans positive moods were not affected by the weather, whether it was sunny and blue skies or not. Good weather didn't make people feel happier at all. (I am the total opposite.)
Negative weather, on the other hand, did make a difference. Less sunshine was associated with greater tiredness, etc. I agree with this- rain and gray skies make me drowsy, especially when stuck in school.
One thing that I think needs to be considered is that this study was taken in Germany. We don't know how much time Germans spend outdoors on average compared with north or south Americans, Asians, etc. Could this make a difference?
Chapter 13 - Personality
This was the first chapter that I disagreed with various points throughout. I thought for the most part it was a pretty easy to read, educational chapter, but at times it seemed like the author was talking in circles and that certain points weren't necissarily always valid.
I found Freud's view of fixation very interesting, and although many of todays psychologists are beginning to doubt the credibility of his theories, I think this one should definitely remain considered. Basically, it said that fixation is a lingering focus of pleasure seeking energies at an early stage creating unresolved conflicts. A great example given in the book was a person seeking oral gratification later in life if deprived of is as an infant. This could include smoking or excessive eating. I realize it is not always true, but I think it certainly could be some of the time.
Regression was another interesting theory of anxiety defense that Freud came up with. It explained how, when put in stressful, high anxiety situations, people revert back to comforts like thumb-sucking or clinging to a parent.
One of the points I highly disagree with in the text was the point made about personal web sites. I don't agree with the author that most people use facebook or myspace as a canvas or self-expression rather than a way to falsely represent themselves. Many people who have added me on facebook are people I know and go to school with, and many of them use their pages to display sexy pictures for guys that have been photoshopped and dont even look like them. Statuses are set to bring on questions from friends, not always to express oneself.
Another disagreement I had with the text was the example given about learned helplessness. It's not so much the theory I disagree with, but the example of how this theory came to be. Who on earth would repeatedly SHOCK dogs to create fear and anxiety just for a psych experiment?! And why on earth was this example the one published and used in chapter 13? This is ridiculous and cruel to me and I wish the book hand't used it.
What did everyone else think of the 2 disagreements I had??
I found Freud's view of fixation very interesting, and although many of todays psychologists are beginning to doubt the credibility of his theories, I think this one should definitely remain considered. Basically, it said that fixation is a lingering focus of pleasure seeking energies at an early stage creating unresolved conflicts. A great example given in the book was a person seeking oral gratification later in life if deprived of is as an infant. This could include smoking or excessive eating. I realize it is not always true, but I think it certainly could be some of the time.
Regression was another interesting theory of anxiety defense that Freud came up with. It explained how, when put in stressful, high anxiety situations, people revert back to comforts like thumb-sucking or clinging to a parent.
One of the points I highly disagree with in the text was the point made about personal web sites. I don't agree with the author that most people use facebook or myspace as a canvas or self-expression rather than a way to falsely represent themselves. Many people who have added me on facebook are people I know and go to school with, and many of them use their pages to display sexy pictures for guys that have been photoshopped and dont even look like them. Statuses are set to bring on questions from friends, not always to express oneself.
Another disagreement I had with the text was the example given about learned helplessness. It's not so much the theory I disagree with, but the example of how this theory came to be. Who on earth would repeatedly SHOCK dogs to create fear and anxiety just for a psych experiment?! And why on earth was this example the one published and used in chapter 13? This is ridiculous and cruel to me and I wish the book hand't used it.
What did everyone else think of the 2 disagreements I had??
Monday, November 16, 2009
Psyblog- Hows Beliefs Influence What tastes Good
This article dealt with how our preconceptions of what we're about to eat play into how we thinkt he food actually tastes.
Some tests administered tricked the volunteers into thinking they were eating beef when really eating veggie-burger, or vice versa. The same went for a study using pepsi and a store brand cola, but my favorite was the example about whether low or full fat foods tasted better.
So many people, including my own family, won't buy the lowfat milk, whipped cream, yogurt, ice cream, mayo, etc. because they truly believe it tastes worse. Depending on the BRAND, not the fat content, tastes vary, but really, can one honestly tell a major difference between 2% and 1% or skim milk? I don't think so. I think it all has to do with preconceptions.
My mom recently bought low-fat beanutbutter accidentally. I ate it without knowing and couldn't tell the difference, but she was astonished that I even opened the jar! When we dont know that what we're eating is a bit different from what we're used to, I don't think we can percieve a difference. We EXPECT full fat foods to taste better, but why wouldn't we choose the healthy road for a little less flavor (and thats if you can even detect the difference!!)
Currently organic and low fat foods seem to be all the rage...so I wonder what is selling better: full fat, normal foods or the continual supply of new, lowfat concoctions?
Some tests administered tricked the volunteers into thinking they were eating beef when really eating veggie-burger, or vice versa. The same went for a study using pepsi and a store brand cola, but my favorite was the example about whether low or full fat foods tasted better.
So many people, including my own family, won't buy the lowfat milk, whipped cream, yogurt, ice cream, mayo, etc. because they truly believe it tastes worse. Depending on the BRAND, not the fat content, tastes vary, but really, can one honestly tell a major difference between 2% and 1% or skim milk? I don't think so. I think it all has to do with preconceptions.
My mom recently bought low-fat beanutbutter accidentally. I ate it without knowing and couldn't tell the difference, but she was astonished that I even opened the jar! When we dont know that what we're eating is a bit different from what we're used to, I don't think we can percieve a difference. We EXPECT full fat foods to taste better, but why wouldn't we choose the healthy road for a little less flavor (and thats if you can even detect the difference!!)
Currently organic and low fat foods seem to be all the rage...so I wonder what is selling better: full fat, normal foods or the continual supply of new, lowfat concoctions?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)