Brain Plasticity To begin with, brain plasticity is the capacity of the nervous system to change its structure, and its function over a lifetime, in reaction to environmental diversity. This term is used to refer to changes at many levels in the nervous system ranging from molecular events, such as gene expressions to behavior. Three main forms of plasticity occur in the human brain, and is lectured in Psychology throughout the world: Synaptic plasticity, Neurogenesis Plasticity, and functional compensatory processing. The key element for the discovery of Plasticity focuses on the theory that brain changes development over time. Synaptic Plasticity explains how the brain changes and adapts in fundamental ways.
Environmental psychologist solves problems regarding human-environment interactions, whether globular or localized, and tries to predict the environmental conditions under which humans will act in a proper and constructive demeanor. Arousal theories dictate that an inverted-U relationship survive between operation and stimulation—meaning that the change of state increases so does functioning, but only up to a point (Arkkelin & Veitch, 1995). The arousal theory states that intermediate levels of arousal are best for neurological stimulation, noise levels, personal space, and physiological responses. Stimulus load theories examine the finite capacity of individuals to compute knowledge (Arkkelin & Veitch, 1995). A stimulus load theory proposes a theory of stance restriction to explain the fundamental phenomenon between stimuli and performance.
Innate knowledge is a view (that rationalists share) that claims that humans are born with information about the world which isn’t learned through sense experience, we gain this knowledge a priori. Empiricists (like John Locke) say that innate knowledge and ideas do not exist, when we are born the mind is a tabula rasa (blank slate) and we gain knowledge and Ideas through sense experience and if we have no experience of the world therefore it is impossible for us to possess any knowledge. Kant argues that we need innate knowledge and sense experience. Kant was a transcendental idealist. He was an idealist in the sense that we are aware of the real world and a transcendent because he thought that ultimate reality goes beyond our sense experience.
Something important to consider when looking at the theory of relativism is that it is just a theory. I personally believe it to be a good theory in general, but it should not be interpreted as a foundation for a belief structure. Nor should it be applied to every set of circumstances encountered throughout life. It is purely illogical to assume that one single theory will provide us with the proper guidance required to successfully negotiate every “right or wrong” decision. Relativism allows people to understand that individuals develop belief structures
* In Q4, I am aware that I can be indecisive. Although this trait can be controlled, I find that I like to make the best decisions possible with respect of all stakeholders in mind. This can be improved with having more confidence in me with risk-taking. Sometimes the answers will not always be there. Making the best decisions may come from developing evidence-based management derived from trial and error.
Operant conditioning is a concept developed by behaviorist B.F. Skinner. Skinner did not agree with Pavlov's ideas and thought that his classical conditioning could not give an answer to all behaviors. To Skinner operant conditioning takes place when the behavior has an outcome, and repeated behavior will occur whether the result is negative or positive (Lawson, Graham, Hall, & Baker, Chapter 10, 2007). So in simple words operant or instrumental conditioning for most people is a form of learning, in which the behavior occurs more frequently when followed by reinforcement. However, the behavior that is punish will occurs less frequent.
These criteria dealt with damage to the brain indicating how a portion of the brain could be affected while the other portion still worked fine. Another criteria area was savants and prodigies. Savants are people possessing an astonishing intelligence in a particular area and little intelligence when it comes to additional areas. Prodigies are people possessing above average intelligence, “early- developing genius,” in a particular area, and normal intelligence when it comes to additional areas.
According to Bernstein (2011) nurture refers to all environmental influence, after the birth of a child that affects development. Hence nurture can be called post natal factors that influence development of people. Lahey (2009) purports that genes and environment work together in a complex way to influence the psychological characteristics of children in what is known as gene environment correlation. Intelligence is an example of the relationship between genes and environment. Feldman (2009) believes that heredity defines people’s general level of intelligence setting an upper limit that regardless of the quality of environment, people cannot exceed.
A. SOCIAL COGNITIVE THEORY In the Social Cognitive Theory, we are considering 3 variables: • behavioral factors • environmental factors (extrinsic) • personal factors (intrinsic) These 3 variables in Social Cognitive Theory are said to be interrelated with each other, causing learning to occur. An individual’s personal experience can converge with the behavioral determinants and the environmental factors. In the person-environment interaction, human beliefs, ideas and cognitive competencies are modified by external factors such as a supportive parent, stressful environment or a hot climate. In the person-behavior interaction, the cognitive processes of a person affect his behavior; likewise, performance of such behavior can modify the way he thinks.
Intelligence, in this case –the way that one’s mind works, is clearly inborn. Another argument supporting innate intelligence is that gender and intelligence is related (Seal, 1997). While this might be a controversial topic for some, there are many statistical facts on the matter that cannot be argued. Generally, males excel at logical reasoning and spatial relations, while females are better on tests of verbal capabilities and fine dexterity (ibid.). These particular differences either become more distinctive themselves as the person grows up, or orientate the person to enhance them in his education (ibid.).