Selfperception affects an individual’s self-efficacy skills, therefore affecting how an individual will communicate their experiences. While self-perception is an important trait to take into consideration when dealing with self-reporting, it does however, as mentioned, affect the validity of the results due to individuals underreporting and over reporting their actions. Comparisons of Limitations All three articles discussed the limitation of self-reporting, more so in Article 1. While self-reporting is indeed a valuable asset, self-reporting at times is affected due to individuals underreporting their behavior, as well as over reporting it (Hauge et al., 2009). Underreporting occurs due to individuals being dishonest regarding their behavior, therefore causing an error in the research done.
If the individual is under constant verbal abuse for their poor hygiene it will more often than not result in the person feeling unconfident from low self esteem, which can lead to depression and isolation. Task 2: Knowing how to encourage an individual to maintain personal hygiene. ⦁ When it comes to addressing such a matter with an individual it is important to first of all make sure the subject is handled in private and as sensitively and tactfully as possible, whilst not imposing any of my own ethics and values about standards of cleanliness as there may be reasons why the individual has poor hygiene that are highly personal to them
Psychophysiology notes that “Self-serving attributions occur when negative personal outcomes are ascribed to external circumstances and when positive outcomes are ascribed to internal factors. Individuals strategically employ the self-serving bias to maintain and protect positive self-views. “(Page 511) Stereo Typing Brown, Rupert (2010). Prejudice: Its Social Psychology (2nd ed.). Stereotypes lead people to expect certain actions from members of social groups.
Society can limit the ways in which people express their identity and seek to fulfill their potential. Our identity is shaped by positive and negative experiences. It is also a self-representation of our interest, relationships, socially activity and numerous other factors. Our sense of identity also stems very closely from our sense of belonging and how we relate to something or someone. However, the society or the occupants of the place we reside in have an underlying impact on how we express ourselves and fulfill our potential. Society defines the right and wrong for us, thereby limiting the choices we have to express ourselves.
This is an extreme view but one that has bearing to depression and spirituality. The situation surrounding the person offers standards for judging one’s own emotions and those of others. Every one tries to explain what starts behavioral abnormality, and the proper responses to it, whether that is therapy or punishment. Certain actions may be totally accepted in some cultures yet looked down upon in others. These influences may be so accepted that the society actually affects the feeling of the individual.
With groups it can affect organisations, communities and society as a whole. Even the people who inflict discrimination can be affected by negative impact -they could fail to experience the benefits of diversity, equality and inclusion. It could also affect their broadening of their horizons. Negative impact can be :- Loss of self esteem Poor self image Confusion, anger and depression Disempowerment Loss of motivation, achievement Missed opportunities Marginalisation 1.3 The importance of inclusive practice is it enables people to be valued, confident, feel safe and have all their needs met. They can then participate in society without feeling prejudice or
(Some) people are good and some are not so good; some do bad things to other people and behave badly generally, while other people behave well and treat people well. Some people believe that we are bad because of our environment – the things that come to influence us throughout our lives, and some people believe we are the way we are because of our birth – that it is our genes that determine whether or not we will be bad people. There are three main reasons why I believe that our environment and our experiences are the main factors in determining what kind of people we are. The first reason is that inherently bad people can sometimes be born into good families, and good people can come from people who do not behave well. People can be good or bad irrespective of their family background.
While rubbish is often perceived as worthless reliance on this colloquial definition can be misleading as its meaning can alter in response to temporal changes in social attitudes resulting in its re-valuation. Yet value, like rubbish, is an ambiguous term since it, too, is subject to these same social processes which can modify its meaning. The relationship between rubbish and value, therefore, is arguably dynamic and complex. The objective of this essay is to examine this relationship, exemplifying the ways in which rubbish can undergo a transformation and assume value within the realm of a consumer society. In understanding this transformation process it is relevant to briefly explore Thompson’s ‘Rubbish Theory’ Thompson articulates a ‘sequence of value transformations’ (Thompson 1988 p14) in a product’s consumption cycle whereby the utility stage (transient-value decreasing) becomes rubbish (zero or very low price) and then re-valued as a durable (value increasing).
In this essay, I will provide a thorough explanation of both the reactive attitude and the assessment accounts and will show how the reactive attitude account outperforms the assessment account. Then I will introduce a common objection to the reactive attitude account and sketch how an advocate of the reactive attitude account might respond to the objection. The assessment account of blame suggests that when we blame a person for an act they performed, we reveal something negative about the person’s character. One way to explain the assessment account is to imagine a moral balance sheet. This moral balance sheet can also be thought as a demerit system.
Bateson et al (1956) suggested that children who frequently receive contradictory messages from their parents are more likely to develop schizophrenia e.g. a mother hugs her child but then disapprovingly tells him off for being “clingy”. This is known as the double-bind theory. There is evidence to support the double-bind theory. Berger found that schizophrenics reported a higher recall of double-bind statements by their mothers than non-schizophrenics.