How would you define it operationally? Research Idea #4: A social psychologist hypothesized that exposing children to violent television shows would make them behave more aggressively. What is the independent variable? How would you define it operationally? What is the dependent variable?
Consequentialism assumes that if human being would weigh the outcome of their taboos and beliefs, then happiness can be achieved and pain reduced. But utilitarianism assumes that people can only value a virtue if it is deemed beneficial in accomplishing human happiness. For example utilitarians believe that truth will make a better society while consequentialists believe that truth will make a better society only if the outcome causes no harm. Basically utilitarianism assumes that the wrongness or rightness of an act depends on the moral good produced as a result of doing that act. This implies that an act is right if it minimizes violation of a certain moral right thus no one should violate moral rights for happiness sake and be justified.
Prosocial behaviour selfless or selfish Prosocial is defined in the oxford dictionary as: “relating to or denoting behaviour which is positive, helpful, and intended to promote social acceptance and friendship.” oxford dictionary (2012). In this essay I will discuss whether prosocial behavior is selfless or selfish, I will discuss several theories that suggest prosocial behaviour is selfish such as the evolutionary theory, kin selection, reciprocal altruism and the cost reward model. I will also discuss several theories that suggest prosocial behaviour is selfless such as the social learning theory, norm of reciprocity, norm of social responsibility and social and cultural influences. There are several theories as to why prosocial behaviour is selfish; these include evolutionary theory, kin selection, reciprocal altruism and the cost reward model. The evolutionary theory suggests that “prosocially tendencies exist in humans because of (a) genetically based predispositions to act prosocially, and (b) the evolutionary success of people who displayed such predispositions”.
The principle of utility defines how right an act is. It supports or disapproves a certain action. In other words, the moral significance of an action which could be, morally correct or morally incorrect is determined by the resulting outcome. The principle of utility brings out two outcomes; happiness or pain. When any action is done, it may have a right outcome which leads to happiness or a wrong outcome which produces pain.
Rotter believed that a psychological theory should have a psychological motivational principal, and that people were motivated to seek out positive reinforcement or stimulus and to avoid the negative of either. (Mearns). His publication Social Learning in Clinical Society (1954) integrated the concepts of this learning theory with the personality theory. Overall Rotter’s social learning theory suggests that behavior is influenced by social context or environmental factors, and not psychological factors alone. In the 1960’s Albert Bandura expanded on
To which the id demands pleasure and satisfaction, the ego deals with the demands from the id and superego, and the superego is the ethical element which is the conscience and may produce feelings of guilt. The Behaviorism perspective is where any physical action is a behavior which everything that is living does such as acting, thinking, and feeling. Arthur W. Staats’ merges psychological concepts like personality within a behavioral model like Basic Behavioral Repertoires. Humanistic Perspective is the positive image of what it means to be a human being. The ones who theorize the humanistic perspective focus mostly on methods that allow fulfillment of potential.
Consequential is a type of ethical theory; it’s built upon moral views of acts, rules, etc. purely due to the consideration of their consequences, where the norm of consideration is worked as the norm of non-moral goodness. Happiness is a part of acquiring what could be an unsatisfying truth that we do not have a solid handle of our control or impact in our world; giving into the greatest good, as well as, ignoring what can bring negativity. It is important to make the best out of life as possible that represent positive and negative, and take the rest as life wants to give it. The theory of “good” and bad is really not a matter of concern; we have our own particular views, so what can be bad may actually be good.
Describe an example of altruistic behavior, and state how a psychodynamic psychologist might explain the behavior. 5. Compare and contrast biological psychology and cultural psychology. Explain how and why a biological psychologist and a cultural psychologist might investigate the way people learn a particular behavior. Discussion Questions Please post questions and answers on the UNIT ONE discussion boards.
Outline and evaluate one or more social psychological theory of aggression Social psychological theories, such as social learning theory and deindividuation, propose that the causes of aggression comes from our interactions with others. According to social learning theory, aggressive behaviour is learned either through direct experience or by vicarious experience. Learning by direct experience is derived from Skinner's principles of operant conditioning. It is when you act in an aggressive manor and, as a result, get rewarded for it. The reward acts as reinforcement, therefore you are more likely to act like this again in a similar situation.
These big ideas can be categorized under social thinking, social influence, or social relations. The idea that we construct our social reality falls under social thinking, it describes the natural human urge to explain behavior, by attempting to attribute it to a cause, in order to make it seem orderly, predictable, and controllable (Myers, 2010). According to social psychology our social intuitions are powerful and sometimes perilous, suggesting that the human ability to understand something immediately, molds or influences behavior because it also shapes fears, attitudes, impressions, and relationships (Myers, 2010). It is also believed that social influences shape behavior as does behavior shape social influences. Myers (2010) provides an example as to how behavior is shaped by social influences making humans social creatures, “We speak and think in words we learned from others (Social psychology, p. 7).