Category Archives: Human Behavior

Scared of zombie apocalypse? Kids in Belfast have already started preparations to combat it – International Business Times, Singapore Edition

Several Hollywood movies including 'World War Z' and 'Dawn of the Dead' have showcased the fate of the earth in the wake of a zombie apocalypse. If the events portrayed in these movies turn true, it will surely emerge as the most dreaded nightmare for humans. And now, a team of kids in Belfast has apparently learned the technique to combat certain emergencies, specifically a zombie apocalypse.

Preparing to combat a zombie apocalypse

This event was organized by Game Loft as part of Martin Luther King Jr. Day. During the event, the organizers taught kids and their families about the importance of being prepared during an emergency. The organizers conducted presentations, and presented several skits to make children understand the need for preparing themselves during a possible zombie apocalypse that may be triggered in the future.

The event organizers believe that if a person is prepared for a zombie apocalypse, he is actually prepared to face any kind of emergencies, wabi.tv reports.

"We really believe that kids should be able to be active participants in their communities. One of the ways they can do that is to be prepared and to help their families be prepared. Then they can help their neighbors be prepared in case of an emergency. You never know when that could strike," said Patricia Estabrook, co-founder of Game Loft.

Is a zombie apocalypse near?

A few months back, Athena Aktipis, an evolutionary biologist at the Arizona University had claimed that certain parasites are capable of causing a zombie apocalypse among humans. Aktipis made these comments during a podcast named 'Zombified'.

During the talk, Aktipis revealed that Toxoplasma, a single-celled parasite is capable of drastically altering human behavior.

"The parasite somehow evolved to make a rat get turned on by the smell of cat urine, so it goes up to a cat and snuggles with it, and then it gets eaten which completes the life cycle of the toxoplasma if that's not zombification then what is?" said Aktipis.

Excerpt from:
Scared of zombie apocalypse? Kids in Belfast have already started preparations to combat it - International Business Times, Singapore Edition

The Price Is Right is TV’s best car showand not just during Dream Car Week – Motor Authority

I whisk myself in through the raised arm of the security booth at CBS Television City, Studio 33, and the attendant grins at my top-down ruby-red Bentley Continental GT. It flickers across his eyes; I must be someone he doesnt recognize, a cardinal sin in L.A. Maybe a fill-in on Ellen? A warm body for one of the NCIS shows?

Im actually just a guy having my own personal dream car week, and its about to get better.

The parking spot has my name on it. A ribbon of super-excited people hoots and hollers as it funnels through the studios main entrance. I step instead through the glass doors of the stars entrance named for Carol Burnett and fight being star-struck. I forcibly pull my hand down from an instinctive clutch at invisible pearls.

Inside Studio 33, the commotion bears down with its own air pressure. Mic-ed up men and women whirl around a narrow hallway like second-hand sweeps on chronometers, pivoting in 270-degree spins around cars parked mirror-to-mirror and dormant game-show contests waiting to be wheeled on stage. An electronic audience of monitors and cameras ignores my every move, thank goodness, because I proceed to knock over a potted plant on a platform with a prize package worth thousands of dollars. I almost run right into a woman wrapped in a kelly green bathrobe and flawless makeup. A half-second later I realize I almost took out the reigning queen of spokesmodels, Rachel Reynolds.

Before I do any more damage, I slip into a room off stage, tucked behind a studio between those belonging to The Bold and the Beautiful and The Young and the Restless. Across the table are people who love to give away dreams every weekday. Theyll tell me how they do itand then Ill be seated in the audience for the best car show on TV: The Price Is Right.

The Price is Right may shower contestants with everything from ramen noodles to round-the-world cruises, but under the veneer of the longest-running, most popular game show in history lurks a great car show. Who doesnt respond to its bright lights, shocking colors, happy loud voices, and free new stuffespecially the big-ticket items like cars? And if that cars a 4-speed Dodge Journey, well, so what?

The Price Is Right has genuine enthusiasm for new cars that doesnt bury itself in caliper sizes or model-year post-ups or the smoky burnouts that make most car television look like hormonal teenagers given too much budget and too much leeway.

Most car shows revolve around egos and superegos. The Price is Right is the id.

The Price Is Right Dream Car Week

It premiered in 1956, but The Price is Right went dark until CBS rebooted it in 1972. Its been on the air ever since, from the same studio on the CBS lot in Los Angeles: Bob Barker Studios, named for its long-time host and Happy Gilmore scene-stealer. Classic mid-morning couch-potato fare, the show has about five million viewers a day. They tune in from everywhere: doctors waiting rooms, car-repair centers, college campuses, and home offices. Its not just a game show, its our cultural wallpaper.

The show has given away millions and millions of dollars worth of merchandise, the largest one-day payout being more than $260,000 in October 2019, to contestant Mike Stouber. (An evening edition of the show netted a contestant more than $1.15 million.) In its nearly 30,000-square-foot warehouse on the CBS lot, the show hoards millions of dollars in prizes to give away, including about three dozen cars at any given moment.

The shows complex choreography looks simple on screen. Show producers select contestants from the audience before taping; the lucky ones hear the shriek of a lifetimeCOME ON DOWN!and take a place in Contestant Row to bid on prizes. If they bid closest to the prizes actual retail value without going over, they play for a Showcase prize. Win or lose, they get to spin the wheel in their half of the show during the Showcase Showdown. At the wheel, the highest spin amount without going over $1 goes to the Showcase, where two contestants bid. Again, the one who bids closer to actual retail prize value without going over wins. If the bid falls within $250 of the actual retail price, they win both showcases.

The shows longevity means some games have become iconic: the wheel itself, the Check Game, the yodeling cry of Cliff Hangers. The show has been the subject of a documentary Perfect Bid: The Contestant Who Knew Too Much. In 2008, Terry Kniess bid the exact amount for his showcases: $23,743, and the show stopped production for nearly an hour while producers tried to figure out whether the show had been cheated. Kniess said hed studied prices for weeks before attending. Producers changed games and prizes to eliminate the prospect of another moneyballer fouling the good-natured fun.

The shows been on for so long, its been witness to the range of human behavior. Contestants have lost their clothes, have taken spills, or have even fainted. Models have revealed prices and accidentally given away free cars, have knocked over flat-screen TVs, and have dented cars during giveaways. Its all very human; if the host or models make a pricing mistake on camera, the scene must be reshot. Other mistakes arent manicured out. The shows imperfections are one reason for its longevity.

The Price Is Right Dream Car Week

Theres another reason for the shows longevity: the shows synchronizers, director Adam Sandler and musical and talent director Stan Blits. Adam has been with the show for 25 years; Stan, for more than 41 years. The show runs as smoothly as an electric vehicle because of them.

I don't think there's a single person in America who can't relate to cars in one way or the other, Adam tells me from one of the only quiet, calm, and dimly lit niches in all of Studio 33. Its aspirational, its fun. People come from far and wide to see this show. People make it a part of their travel plans.

While Adamno relation to the comedian-actor Adam Sandlerconducts the symphony of cameras and prizes, Stan interviews all the contestants who line the sidewalk at Studio 33, in groups of a couple dozen, to choose who will be brought to contestants row. He talks to more than 50,000 people a year and chooses people who can carry their excitement through the pre-show hours, without pandering. Costumes are right out; cheer and cheering are right in. Pure enthusiasm wins him over, and can win a spot in Contestant Row.

Stan casts the people, and as the shows car strategist, he casts vehicles, tooa car in the shows first three contests, then one in the second three, then usually one or two in the finale. On any given day, The Price Is Right might not give away any carsor it might give away four or five.

Its part science, part art. Stan pairs giveaway cars with games in a formula only he knows. He has a book filled with spreadsheets of car specs and pricesthe shows data bibleand quotes chapter and verse to spread them out for maximum effect. He decides when to play simpler games and include less expensive cars, and how to keep the rumba line of hot wheels in motion. He wont put two SUVs in one show, or two hatchbacks, or two vehicles from the same brand if he can avoid it.

He casts the cars as characters in the drama. You can't just stick any car into any game, he says. We'll look at a Porsche 911 and say, will a 98-year-old woman really want to win that? Some people don't even know what a Maserati is.

It all comes from his spreadsheets, and how he processes all their information. He likens it to a Rubiks Cube. Hes a part of the matrix. Stan is the algorithm.

The steady stream of new cars on the CBS lot means the show has a side hustle. It operates the equivalent of a new-car auction. The team works with local dealers to snare cars for giveaways, and schedule them for games that may be played within a weekor within a few months. Dealers retain the right to sell the cars before theyre given away, which can cause last-minute rejiggerings of the game plan but the relationships run smoothly, Stan says. They don't hate that we buy 17 cars a month from them.

Most of the cars cost less than $25,000, which allows him to give away a lot of new cars and to stick to a budget. Its become much harder to give away some vehicles now that the average paid price of a new car nears $40,000.

They give away fewer trucks now than in the past. Trucks are expensive, Stan says. Trucks used to be our go-to like 10, 15 years ago. They were like skateboards with lawn mower engines and they were like $8,000. Now, theyre like $30,000, $40,000. Theyre not cheap anymore.

The cars have skewed toward economy models, but The Price Is Right has ventured deeply into exotic cars, usually during its annual Dream Car Week. In 2013, schoolteacher Sheree Heil won an Audi R8 V-8 Spyder worth $157,300. The show tried to give away a $285,716 Ferrari 458 Spider in April 2013; the contestant lost playing 3 Strikes. The show also gave away a classic 1964 Bentley S3 in April 2010 in the Hole in One game, and it will be giving away more vintage iron soon.

That kind of variety keeps the show fresh, Adam says. This show's been on for 48 seasons, and 9,000 episodes. You don't get there without giving them variety. When you watch it, it's still that same old great Price Is Right, but its something different everyday.

I spoke to a college class a couple weeks ago, he says, leaning back in a nondescript office chair at the end of a very long day; he reminds me so strongly of Anthony Edwards on ER that I expect to see a stethoscope around his neck. I was explaining to them that The Price Is Right is such a happy place that even when you lose, it's still a win.

When contestants do lose, its usually because they underbid and dont realize how expensive a car is, Stan explains. If it's all wins then its not fun anymore. A loss makes great television.

Cars remain a staple of the show, in part, because Stan and Adam and even its host are car fans, too. Stan is a regular fixture at the Los Angeles Auto Show, on public days.

The car show is a religious experience for me over here, he says. I had to bargain with family members. They wanted to go with me and I said no, I need to touch them, rub up against them. Hold them, caress them, kiss them, and I don't want you there when I'm doing it.

Both Adam and Stan drive electric cars. Both have owned Chevy Volts; its 50-mile-plus electric range was perfect for Adams daily commute, and the CBS lot has convenient electric-car charging. I was actually able to go an entire year on one tank of gas, Adam says. The original tank of gas that I got.

Stan considers his first- and second-generation Volts his favorite cars. His husband drives a Lexus hybrid, while Stan drives a Fiat 500e on a bargain lease deal so cheap, I said, dear God, its like buying a Vespa. I get back into the Lexus after two weeks of driving the Fiat, and I say, oh my God, its like a Bentley in here.

Adam pilots a Tesla Model 3 when he isnt letting its Autopilot do the dirty work. The thing drives me home, he says. The cars smarter than I am. It really is a piece of the future. He rides a motorcycle, too, having been turned on to two wheels by his shows host Drew Carey.

Carey, now in his 13th season as the host, has bikes as well as a fleet of cars, including his own privately commissioned art car. He has his own dream-car story to tell.

Come on down on February 4 for part two of this story, with host Drew Carey.

Go here to read the rest:
The Price Is Right is TV's best car showand not just during Dream Car Week - Motor Authority

Trump ‘Honors’ Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. By Visiting His DC Memorial for 30 Seconds – The New Civil Rights Movement

Whether we want to or not, for the sake of America, we must try to understand the Donald Trump phenomenon, as it has completely swept the nation and also fiercely divided it. What is most baffling about it all is Trumps apparent political invincibility.

As hehimself saideven before he won the presidential election, I could stand in the middle of 5thAvenue and shoot somebody and I wouldnt lose voters. Unfortunately for the American people, this wild-sounding claim appears to be truer than not, at least for the majority of his supporters, and that is something that should disturb us. It should also motivate us to explore the science underlying such peculiar human behavior, so we can learn from it, and potentially inoculate against it.

In all fairness, we should recognize that lying is sadly not uncommon for politicians on both sides of the political aisle, but the frequency and magnitude of the current presidents lies should have us all wondering why they havent destroyed his political career, and instead perhaps strengthened it. Similarly, we should be asking why his inflammatory rhetoric and numerous scandals havent sunk him.

We are talking about a man who was caught on tape saying, When youre a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab them by the pussy. Politically surviving that video is not normal, or anything close to it, and we can be sure that such a revelation would have been the end of Barack Obama or George Bush had it surfaced weeks before the election.

While dozens of psychologists have analyzed Trump, to explain the mans political invincibility, it is more important to understand the minds of his staunch supporters. While there have been various popular articles that have illuminated a multitude of reasons for his unwavering support, there appears to be no comprehensive analysis that contains all of them. Since there seems to be a real demand for this information, I have tried to provide that analysis below.

This list will begin with the more benign reasons for Trumps intransigent support, and as the list goes on, the explanations become increasingly worrisome, and toward the end, border on the pathological. It should be strongly emphasized that not all Trump supporters are racist, mentally vulnerable, or fundamentally bad people. It can be detrimental to society when those with degrees and platforms try to demonize their political opponents or paint them as mentally ill when they are not. That being said, it is just as harmful to pretend that there are not clear psychological and neural factors that underlie much of Trump supporters unbridled allegiance.

The psychological phenomena described below mostly pertain to those supporters who would follow Trump off a cliff. These are the people who will stand by his side no matter what scandals come to light, or what sort of evidence for immoral and illegal behavior surfaces.

For some wealthy people, its simply a financial matter. Trump offers tax cuts for the rich and wants to do away with government regulation that gets in the way of businessmen making money, even when that regulation exists for the purpose of protecting the environment. Others, like blue-collared workers, like the fact that the president is trying to bring jobs back to America from places like China. Some people who genuinely are not racist (those who are will be discussed later) simply want stronger immigration laws because they know that a country with open borders is not sustainable. These people have put their practical concerns above their moral ones. To them, it does not matter if hes a vagina-grabber, or if his campaign team colluded with Russia to help him defeat his political opponent. It is unknown whether these people are eternally bound to Trump in the way others are, but we may soon find out if the Mueller investigation is allowed to come to completion.

According to astudythat monitored brain activity while participants watched 40 minutes of political ads and debate clips from the presidential candidates, Donald Trump is unique in his ability to keep the brain engaged. While Hillary Clinton could only hold attention for so long, Trump kept both attention and emotional arousal high throughout the viewing session. This pattern of activity was seen even when Trump made remarks that individuals didnt necessarily agree with. His showmanship and simple language clearly resonate with some at a visceral level.

Essentially, the loyalty of Trump supporters may in part be explained by Americasaddictionwith entertainment and reality TV. To some, it doesnt matter what Trump actually says because hes so amusing to watch. With the Donald, you are always left wondering what outrageous thing he is going to say or do next. He keeps us on the edge of our seat, and for that reason, some Trump supporters willforgiveanything he says. They are happy as long as they are kept entertained.

Some intelligent people who know better are supporting Trump simply to be rebellious or to introduce chaos into the political system. They may have such distaste for the establishment and democrats like Hillary Clinton that their support for Trump is a symbolic middle finger directed at Washington. These people do not have their priorities straight, and perhaps have other issues, like an innatedesire to troll others, or a deranged obsession withschadenfreude.

Science has unequivocally shown that the conservativebrainhas an exaggeratedfearresponse when faced with stimuli that may be perceived as threatening. A2008studyin the journal Sciencefound that conservatives have a stronger physiological reaction to startling noises and graphic images compared to liberals. Abrain-imaging studypublished inCurrent Biologyrevealed that those who lean right politically tend to have a larger amygdala a structure that is electrically active during states of fear and anxiety. And a2014 fMRI studyfound that it is possible to predict whether someone is a liberal or conservative simply by looking at their brain activity while they view threatening or disgusting images, such as mutilated bodies. Specifically, the brains of self-identified conservatives generated more activity overall in response to the disturbing images.

These brain responses are automatic, and not influenced by logic or reason. As long as Trump continues his fear mongering by constantly portraying Muslims and Hispanic immigrants as imminent dangers, many conservative brains will involuntarily light up like light bulbs being controlled by a switch. Fear keeps his followers energized and focused on safety. And when you think youve found your protector, you become less concerned with offensive and divisive remarks.

A well-supported theory from social psychology, known asTerror Management Theory, explains why Trumps fear mongering is doubly effective. The theory is based on the fact that humans have a unique awareness of their own mortality. The inevitably of ones death creates existential terror andanxietythat is always residing below the surface. In order to manage this terror, humans adopt cultural worldviews like religions, political ideologies, and national identities that act as a buffer by instilling life with meaning and value.

Terror Management Theory predicts that when people are reminded of their own mortality, which happens with fear mongering, they will more strongly defend those who share their worldviews and national or ethnicidentity, and act out more aggressively towards those who do not. Hundreds of studies have confirmed this hypothesis, and some have specifically shown that triggering thoughts of death tends to shift people towards the right.

Not only do death remindersincrease nationalism, they influence actualvoting habitsin favor of more conservative presidential candidates. And more disturbingly, in a study with American students, scientists found that making mortality salient increased support forextreme military interventionsby American forces that could kill thousands of civilians overseas. Interestingly, the effect was present only in conservatives, which can likely be attributed to their heightened fear response.

By constantly emphasizing existential threat, Trump creates a psychological condition that makes the brain respond positively rather than negatively to bigoted statements and divisive rhetoric. Liberals and Independents who have been puzzled over why Trump hasnt lost supporters after such highly offensive comments need look no further than Terror Management Theory.

Some support Donald Trump do so out of ignorance basically they are under-informed or misinformed about the issues at hand. When Trump tells them thatcrimeis skyrocketing in the United States, or that the economy is the worst its ever been, they simply take his word for it.

The Dunning-Kruger effect explains that the problem isnt just that they are misinformed; its that they are completely unaware that they are misinformed, which creates a double burden.

Studieshave shown that people who lack expertise in some area of knowledge often have acognitivebiasthat prevents them from realizing that they lack expertise. As psychologist David Dunning puts it in anop-edfor Politico, The knowledge andintelligencethat are required to be good at a task are often the same qualities needed to recognize that one isnotgood at that task and if one lacks such knowledge and intelligence, one remains ignorant that one is not good at the task. This includes political judgment. These people cannot be reached because they mistakenly believe they are the ones who should be reaching others.

Relative deprivation refers to the experience of being deprived of something to which one believes they are entitled. It is the discontent felt when one compares their position in life to others who they feel are equal or inferior but have unfairly had more success than them.

Common explanations for Trumps popularity among non-bigoted voters involve economics. There is no doubt that some Trump supporters are simply angry that American jobs are being lost to Mexico and China, which is certainly understandable, although these loyalists often ignore the fact that some of these careers are actually being lost due to the accelerating pace of automation.

These Trump supporters are experiencing relative deprivation, and are common among the swing states like Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. This kind of deprivation is specifically referred to as relative, as opposed to absolute, because the feeling is often based on a skewed perception of what one is entitled to.

Intergroup contactrefers to contact with members of groups that are outside ones own, which has been experimentallyshown toreduce prejudice.As such, its important to note that there is growing evidence that Trumps white supporters have experienced significantly less contact with minorities than other Americans. For example, a2016 studyfound that the racial and ethnic isolation of Whites at the zip-code level is one of the strongest predictors of Trump support. This correlation persisted while controlling for dozens of other variables. In agreement with this finding, the same researchers found that support for Trump increased with the voters physical distance from the Mexican border. These racial biases might be more implicit than explicit, the latter which is addressed in #14.

While the conspiracy theory crowd who predominantly support Donald Trump and crackpot allies like Alex Jones and the shadowyQAnon may appear to just be an odd quirk of modern society, the truth is that many of them suffer from psychological illnesses that involve paranoia and delusions, such as schizophrenia, or are at least vulnerable to them, like those withschizotypy personalities.

Thelinkbetween schizotypy and belief in conspiracy theories is well-established, and arecent studypublished in the journalPsychiatry Researchhas demonstrated that it is still very prevalent in the population. The researchers found that those who were more likely to believe in outlandish conspiracy theories, such as the idea that the U.S. government created the AIDs epidemic, consistently scored high on measures of odd beliefs and magical thinking. One feature of magical thinking is a tendency to make connections between things that are actually unrelated in reality.

Donald Trump and his media alliestarget these people directly.All one has to do is visit alt-right websites and discussion boards to see the evidence for such manipulation.

Collective narcissism is an unrealistic shared belief in the greatness of ones national group. It often occurs when a group who believes it represents the true identity of a nation the ingroup, in this case White Americans perceives itself as being disadvantaged compared to outgroups who are getting ahead of them unrightfully. This psychological phenomenon is related to relative deprivation (#6).

Astudypublished last year in the journalSocial Psychological and Personality Sciencefound a direct link between national collective narcissism and support for Donald Trump. This correlation was discovered by researchers at the University of Warsaw, who surveyed over 400 Americans with a series of questionnaires about political and social beliefs. Where individual narcissism causes aggressiveness toward other individuals, collective narcissism involves negative attitudes and aggression toward outsider groups (outgroups), who are perceived as threats.

Donald Trump exacerbates collective narcissism with his anti-immigrant, anti-elitist, and strongly nationalistic rhetoric. By referring to his supporters, an overwhelminglywhite group, as being true patriots or real Americans, he promotes a brand of populism that is the epitome of identity politics, a term that is usually associated with the political left. Left-wing identity politics, as misguided as they may sometimes be, are generally aimed at achieving equality, while the right-wing brand is based on a belief that one nationality and race is superior or entitled to success and wealth for no other reason than identity.

Social dominance orientation (SDO) which is distinct but related to authoritarian personality syndrome (#13) refers to people who have a preference for the societal hierarchy of groups, specifically with a structure in which the high-status groups have dominance over the low-status ones. Those with SDO are typically dominant, tough-minded, and driven by self-interest.

In Trumps speeches, he appeals to those with SDO by repeatedly making a clear distinction between groups that have a generally higher status in society (White), and those groups that are typically thought of as belonging to a lower status (immigrants and minorities). A2016 survey studyof 406 American adults published last year in the journalPersonality and Individual Differencesfound that those who scored high on both SDO and authoritarianism were those who intended to vote for Trump in the election.

Authoritarianism refers to the advocacy or enforcement of strict obedience to authority at the expense of personal freedom, and is commonly associated with a lack of concern for the opinions or needs of others.Authoritarian personality syndromea well-studied and globally-prevalent condition is a state of mind that is characterized by belief in total and complete obedience to ones authority. Those with the syndrome often display aggression toward outgroup members, submissiveness to authority, resistance to new experiences, and a rigid hierarchical view of society. The syndrome is often triggered byfear, making it easy for leaders who exaggerate threat or fear monger to gain their allegiance.

Although authoritarian personality is found among liberals, it ismore common among the right-wingaround the world. President Trumps speeches, which are laced with absolutist terms like losers and complete disasters, are naturally appealing to those with the syndrome.

While research showed that Republican voters in the U.S. scored higher than Democrats on measures of authoritarianism before Trump emerged on the political scene, a 2016Politico surveyfound that high authoritarians greatly favored then-candidate Trump, which led to a correct prediction that he would win the election, despite the polls saying otherwise

It would be grossly unfair and inaccurate to say that every one of Trumps supporters have prejudice against ethnic andreligiousminorities, but it would be equally inaccurate to say that many do not. It is a well-known fact that the Republican party, going at least as far back to Richard Nixons southern strategy, used tactics that appealed to bigotry, such as lacing speeches with dog whistles code words that signaled prejudice toward minorities that were designed to be heard by racists but no one else.

While the dog whistles of the past were subtler, Trumps signaling is sometimes shockingly direct. Theres no denying that he routinely appeals to racist and bigoted supporters when he calls Muslims dangerous and Mexican immigrants rapists and murderers, often in a blanketed fashion. Perhaps unsurprisingly, a recent study has shown thatsupport for Trump is correlated with a standard scale of modern racism.

Excerpt from:
Trump 'Honors' Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. By Visiting His DC Memorial for 30 Seconds - The New Civil Rights Movement

Understanding Human Behavior – A Physiological Approach …

As fantastically (and fanatically) self-aware organisms, we humans tend to ascribe great importance to our intellectual processes: Were rational and reasoning creatures, we assert, capable of stepping back and assessing our own behavior through an analytical lens.

Like any other biological entity, however, were interacting with and responding to our environment in myriad ways well beyond the realm of our conscious perception. We usually take these subconscious, autonomic aspects of our being for granted, but naturally, theyre fundamental to both our appreciation of the world around us and, critically, our day-to-day survival.

We dont need to compel ourselves to shiver when the mercury drops; our hand recoils at the lick of the flame or the bite of the dog. Thankfully, we dont have to think our way through the mechanics of walking in order to pull it off start trying to, and youre liable to beeline for the pavement.

The conscious and the nonconscious, the voluntary and the involuntary: When it comes to Homo sapiens, these processes arent either-or propositions. Theyre thoroughly intertwined, influencing and echoing one another. In short, human beings (breaking news) are complicated systems, and the study of human behavior a complex task. Parsing out behavioral and emotional nuances requires zoomed-in looks at the tempos and intensities of all kinds of physical and psychological networks and a holistic, big-picture perspective of how those networks interface with one another.

Researchers interested in how humans respond to stimuli, therefore whether its an Internet ad or an interpersonal encounter can enhance their investigations by employing biosensors that document psychophysiological patterns.

Self-assessment/ self-reporting remains a powerful and useful tool for understanding the how and the why of human behavior but has some major limitations.

People arent always entirely honest when describing how something makes them feel not necessarily because theyre trying to be duplicitous or crafty, but because they may feel pressured by the formal self-critical exercise to give what they think is the right answer (or the least embarrassing one).

Furthermore, its often exceedingly difficult to explain in coherent sentences our response to a piece of information, or our mood at a given moment. We may not know exactly why we favor one product over another, or why were feeling generally joyful or generally depressed (there are many techniques for honing a surveys efficacy you can learn more in one of ourblog posts).

Meanwhile, physiological data such as the rate of our heartbeat, the degree of our perspiration, and the direction and rhythm of our eye movements can shed light on behavioral phenomena our conscious minds may deny, distort, or completelyfail to register.

The academic and commercial applications of the psychophysiological studies considering such data are virtually limitless, relevant tofields as diverse as neuroscience, psychotherapy, marketing, and design.

Whats remarkable about such studies are the incredibly fine-scale insights into the human emotion that can be gleaned from the minute subconscious or involuntary phenomena.

Consider galvanic skin response or GSR. This is a measure of electrodermal activity: the relative conductance of our skin from perspiration. Sweating is an utterly autonomic operation that, in addition to its role in thermoregulation, is a reaction to arousal, from general excitement to flat-out terror. By measuring sweat production via skin conductance, GSR can reveal evidence for a stimulated, agitated state of being thats beyond a persons deliberate control including arousal too subtle to manifest on the self-aware spectrum.

Electrocardiography (ECG) registers the electrical signature of a heartbeat, revealing intricacies of their rate and variability that, like GSR, can demonstrate physiological, emotional, or psychological arousal.

Then theres electroencephalography (EEG), which tracks brainwaves via scalp-affixed electrodes that measure the electrical pulses produced by mass neuron firings. An EEG readout indicates the moment-by-moment geography of brain activity which cortex is excited when, basically as well as the brains overall state at a given time.

Eye tracking, meanwhile, quantifies when and where a subjects gaze lingers, the rhythm of reading, and other optical minutiae, while facial expression analysis looks up-close at the configuration of the faces musculature for clues to a persons emotions.

The information outputted by a single kind of biosensor can be intriguing and useful, but only to a point. For instance, GSR and ECG readings can suggest the condition of arousal, but not its valence, or emotional character. In other words, sweaty palms or a ramped-up heartbeat doesnt reveal whether were dealing with a love-at-first-sight (i.e., a positive stimulus) sort of situation or a figure-looming-out-of-the-shadows (i.e., a negative stimulus) deal.

Integrate those electrodermal and cardiac data with EEG, facial expression analysis, eye tracking, and other analyses, and youve got a much more multifaceted picture. Thats what iMotions is all about.

As we noted earlier, psychophysiological investigations have wide-ranging utility whether its a company trying to gauge the appeal of a new product design to a prospective shopper, or its a therapist treating a patient with post-traumatic stress disorder.

As research into human behavior continues to expand in concert with improvements in the technology and methodology for implementing that research it goes without saying that its applications will as well.

Read more:
Understanding Human Behavior - A Physiological Approach ...

Understanding the 10 Most Destructive Human Behaviors …

Why we do stupid stuff

Compared with most animals, we humans engage in a host of behaviors that are destructive to our own kind and to ourselves. We lie, cheat and steal, carve ornamentations into our own bodies, stress out and kill ourselves, and of course kill others. Science has provided much insight into why an intelligent species seems so nasty, spiteful, self-destructive and hurtful. Inside you'll learn what researchers know about some of our most destructive behaviors.

Editor's Note: This list was first published in 2011 and was updated in March 2016 to include the latest studies and new information.

Nobody knows for sure why humans lie so much, but studies find that it's common, and that it's often tied to deep psychological factors.

"It's tied in with self-esteem," says University of Massachusetts psychologist Robert Feldman. "We find that as soon as people feel that their self-esteem is threatened, they immediately begin to lie at higher levels."

Feldman has conducted studies in which people lie frequently, with 60 percent lying at least once during a 10-minute conversation.

And lying is not easy. One study concluded that lying takes 30 percent longer than telling the truth.

Recent studies have found that people lie in workplace e-mail more than they did with old-fashioned writing.

It's a whole other matter whether people really mean to lie in many instances. Figuring that out requires coming up with a complicated definition of lying.

"Certain conditions have to be in place for a statement to rise to the level of a lie," explains philosophy professor James E. Mahon of Washington and Lee University. "First, a person must make a statement and must believe that the statement is false. Second, the person making the statement must intend for the audience to believe that the statement is true. Anything else falls outside the definition of lying that I have defended."

However, a study in 2014 found that white lies, for the right reasons, can can strengthen relationships

Animals are also known to be capable of deception, and even robots have learned to lie, in an experiment where they were rewarded or punished depending on performance in a competition with other robots.

Scroll up to click to the next item: Violence

The oldest evidence of human warfare dates back 10,000 years ago. Skeletons of 27 people show signs of projectile wounds and blunt force trauma. And so it has been ever since.

Some researchers figure we crave violence, that it's in our genes and affects reward centers in our brains. However, going back millions of years, evidence suggests our ancient human ancestors were more peace-loving than people today, though there are signs of cannibalism among the earliest pre-history humans.

A study in 2008 concluded that humans seem to crave violence just like they do sex, food, or drugs. The study, reported in the journal Psychopharmacology, found that in mice, clusters of brain cells involved in other rewards are also behind their craving for violence. The researchers think the finding applies to human brains.

"Aggression occurs among virtually all vertebrates and is necessary to get and keep important resources such as mates, territory and food," said study team member Craig Kennedy, professor of special education and pediatrics at Vanderbilt University in Tennessee. "We have found that the reward pathway in the brain becomes engaged in response to an aggressive event and that dopamine is involved."

Many researchers believe violence in humans is an evolved tendency that helped with survival.

"Aggressive behavior has evolved in species in which it increases an individual's survival or reproduction, and this depends on the specific environmental, social, reproductive, and historical circumstances of a species. Humans certainly rank among the most violent of species," says biologist David Carrier of the University of Utah.

Scroll up to click to the next item: Stealing

Theft can be motivated by need. But for kleptomaniacs, stealing can be motivated by the sheer thrill of it. One study of 43,000 people found 11 percent admitted to having shoplifted at least once.

"These are people who steal even though they can easily afford not to," says Jon E. Grant of the University of Minnesota School of Medicine.

In a study in 2009, participants either took a placebo or the drug naltrexone known to curb addictive tendencies toward alcohol, drugs and gambling. Naltrexone blocks the effects of substances called endogenous opiates that the researchers suspect are released during stealing and which trigger the sense of pleasure in the brain.

The drug reduced the urges to steal and stealing behavior, Grant and colleagues wrote in the journal Biological Psychiatry.

Theft may be in our genes. After all, even monkeys do it. Capuchin monkeys use predator alarm calls to warn fellow monkeys to scatter and avoid threats. But some will make fake calls, and then steal food left by those that scattered.

Scroll up to click to the next item: Cheating

Few human traits are more fascinating. While most people would say honesty is a virtue, nearly one in five Americans think cheating on taxes is morally acceptable or is not a moral issue, according to a survey by the Pew Research Center. About 10 percent are equally ambivalent about cheating on a spouse.

People who espouse high moral standards are among the worst cheats, studies have shown. The worst cheaters tend to be those with high morals who also, in some twisted way, consider cheating to be an ethically justifiable behavior in certain situations.

Cheating on spouses by celebrities and politicians thought to be moral leaders has become rampant. The behavior has a simple explanation, experts say: Guys are wired to want sex, a lot, and are more likely than gals to cheat. The behavior may be particularly likely for men with power.

"People don't necessarily practice what they preach," says Lawrence Josephs, a clinical psychologist at Adelphi University in New York. "It's not clear to what extent people's ethical values are actually running what they do or don't do."

Experts say there are two main reasons people cheat on their spouses: Either they bored with their sex life or they are unhappy with their relationship. A 2015 study found that a person who is economically dependent on their spouse is more likely to cheat than those in a financially equitable relationship.

Scroll up to click to the next item: Clinging to bad habits

Perhaps everything else on this list would be far less problematic if we were not such creatures of habit. In fact, studies have found that even when the risks of a particular bad habit are well-known, people find it hard to quit.

"It's not because they haven't gotten the information that these are big risks," says Cindy Jardine of the University of Alberta. "We tend to sort of live for now and into the limited future not the long term."

Jardine, who has studied why people cling to bad habits, cites these reasons: innate human defiance, need for social acceptance, inability to truly understand the nature of risk, individualistic view of the world and the ability to rationalize unhealthy habits, and a genetic predisposition to addiction.

People tend to justify bad habits, she says, by noting exceptions to known statistics, such as: "It hasn't hurt me yet," or, "My grandmother smoked all her life and lived to be 90."

Scroll up to click to the next item: Bullying

Bullying in childhood can leave worse mental scars than child abuse, and being bullied as a teen doubles the risk of depression as an adult, according to two separate studies in 2015.

Studies have found that half or more of grade-school children experience bullying. A European study found that children who bully at school are likely to also bully their siblings at home. That led a researcher involved in the study to speculate that bullying behavior often starts at home.

"It is not possible to tell from our study which behavior comes first, but it is likely that if children behave in a certain way at home, bullying a sibling for instance, if this behavior goes unchecked they may take this behavior into school," said Ersilia Menesini of the Universita degli Studi di Firenze, Italy.

But bullying is not just child's play. One study found that almost 30 percent of U.S. office workers experience bullying by bosses or coworkers, from withholding of information critical to getting the job done to insulting rumors and other purposeful humiliation. And once it starts, it tends to get worse.

"Bullying, by definition, is escalatory. This is one of the reasons its so difficult to prevent it, because it usually starts in really small ways, says Sarah Tracy, director of the Project for Wellness and Work-Life at Arizona State University.

Experts say to combat workplace bullies, respond rationally, specifically, and consistently.

Why do we do it? To gain status and power, psychologists say. And for some, it may be hard to resist the behavior. Researchers have seen bullying behavior in monkeys and speculate that the behavior may stretch way back in our evolutionary tree.

Scroll up to click to the next item: Nipping, tucking and plumping

Americans spent a record $13.5 billion on surgical and nonsurgical "aesthetic procedures" in 2014, the latest year for which data is available. Some 17 percent of U.S. residents now get cosmetic procedures, the industry estimates. Some would call it self-edification, of course, or art, or a way to kill time or perhaps rebel against authority. But in general, and given that people have died from cosmetic surgery procedures, what makes so many people so intent on artificially remaking themselves?

First, it's worth noting that while options at the body shop have never been more varied, the practice is ancient, often tied to cults and religions or power and status, and in fact much of the modern nip, tuck, paint, poke and plump procedures are benign compared with some ancient practices. People have reshaped their heads, elongated their necks, stretched their ears and lips, painted their bodies or affixed permanent jewelry for thousands of years.

Perhaps the strongest motivations nowadays are to be beautiful, however one might define that, or simply to fit in with a particular group.

The lure of beauty can't be denied as a prime motivator to nip and tuck. Studies have shown that shoppers buy more from attractive salespeople; attractive people capture our attention more quickly than others; and skinny people have an easier time getting hired and promoted.

"There's this idea that if you look better you'll be happier. You'll feel better about yourself," says psychologist Diana Zuckerman, president of the National Research Center for Women & Families. "And logically that makes so much sense, because we live in a society where people do care what you look like."

A sign of the times, as Baby Boomer age: While cosmetic surgery sales sagged during the Great Recession a few years back, wrinkle-blasting laser treatments skyrocketed. In 2015, the industry said cosmetic procedures for men were up 43 percent over the past 5 years.

Scroll up to click to the next item: Stress!

Stress can be deadly, raising the risk for heart problems and even cancer. Stress can lead to depression, which can lead to suicide yet another destructive behavior that's uniquely human (and glaringly not on this list).

But exactly why we stress is difficult to pin down. These truths will resonate with many, however: The modern workplace is a source of significant stress for many people, as are children.

More than 600 million people around the world put in 48-hour-plus workweeks, according to the International Labor Organization. And advances in technology smartphones and broadband Internet mean a blurring of the lines between work and free time. About half of Americans bring work home, according to a recent study.

The stress of being a parent while also working is borne out by a 2007 study that found older people feel less stress. However, research in 2015 found high-stress jobs raise the risk of stroke, and stress can increase the risk of memory problems in older people.

"Many older workers are empty-nesters," says researcher Gwenith Fisher, an organizational psychologist at the University of Michigan's Institute for Social Research (ISR). "They don't have the same work-personal conflicts that younger and middle-aged workers deal with, juggling responsibilities to children along with their jobs and their personal needs."

Health experts suggest exercise and adequate sleep are two of the best ways to battle stress. [More Tips]

Scroll up to click to the next item: Gambling

Gambling, too, seems to be in our genes and hard-wired into our brains, which might explain why such a potentially ruinous behavior is so common.

Even monkeys gamble. A study that measured monkeys' desire to gamble for juice rewards found that even as potential rewards diminished, the primates acted irrationally and gambled for the chance to get a wee bit more.

A study published in the journal Neuron last year found that almost winning activates win-related circuitry within the brain and enhances the motivation to gamble. "Gamblers often interpret near-misses as special events, which encourage them to continue to gamble," said Luke Clark of the University of Cambridge. "Our findings show that the brain responds to near-misses as if a win has been delivered, even though the result is technically a loss."

Other studies have also shown that losing causes gamblers to get carried away. When people plan in advance how much to gamble, they're coldly rational, a study last year found. But if they lose, rationality goes out the window, and they change the game plan and bet even more.

Scroll up to click to the last item: Gossiping

Gossiping is a social skill, not a character flaw, argues psychology researcher Frank T. McAndrew at Knox College in a 2016 op-ed article.

We humans are evolutionarily set up to judge and talk about others, no matter how hurtful it might be, researchers say. Here's how Oxford primatologist Robin Dunbar sees it: Baboons groom each other to keep social ties strong. But we humans are more evolved, so we use gossip as social glue. Both are learned behaviors.

Gossip establishes group boundaries and boosts self-esteem, studies have found.

In many instances, the goal of gossip is not truth or accuracy. What matters is the bond that gossiping can forge, often at the expense of a third party.

People are mostly likely to spread a story if it's about someone familiar to them, and if the story is particularly "juicy," according to a 2014 study. "When two people share a dislike of another person, it [gossip] brings them closer," says Jennifer Bosson, a professor of psychology at the University of South Florida.

See the rest here:
Understanding the 10 Most Destructive Human Behaviors ...

HBO’s ‘Avenue 5’ Is the First Great Comedy of the 2020s and a ‘Crushing Existential Nightmare’ – The Daily Beast

While researching their new HBO series Avenue 5, which takes place on a space cruise ship 40 years in the future, Armando Iannucci (creator of Veep and The Thick of It) and Hugh Laurie (the actor best known for House) spent time with the people from Virgin Galactic, SpaceX, and the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory.

Scientists explained to them, with a casual, almost unsettling seriousness, that when planning a long-distance journey, like to Mars, for example, it is of the utmost importance that astronauts continue to produce fecal matter, as one of the best ways to protect from radiation poisoning while in outer space is to pack the walls of a spacecraft with human waste.

Iannucci and Laurie, two men hoping to create a comedy series at least somewhat rooted in fact, looked at each other with glee. Actual space science was serving them comedy on a silver platter.

The Daily Beasts Obsessed

Everything we cant stop loving, hating, and thinking about this week in pop culture.

We sort of looked at each other and I said, Wouldnt it be funny if there was a puncture? Iannucci recalls. You know, because not only is there the comedy of just seeing a stream of shit flying out of the ship, but also the real danger that youre going to die of space cancer if somebody doesnt go out and sort that out. Sort out the gushing pipeline of human waste. That science requires for actual space travel. Poop in space.

Avenue 5, which debuts Sunday on HBO, takes place on a massive spacecraft making its eight-week maiden cruise around Saturn, on which passengers can swan around in kaftans, take yoga classes, and luxuriate in spas while participating in a revolutionary mission through the solar system. Yes, after all the fetishizing about the future of space travel and the glamour that may come from the possibilities technology may provide, in the end were just going to use it to push off a shitty cruise in space.

When a gravitational hiccup violently sends everyone careening to one end of the ship, the Avenue 5 is knocked off its orbit. The eight-week cruise is now on track to last three and a half years. If youve ever seen how entitled travelers react when things beyond their control go wrong during their trips, imagine how that mindset presents itself with four more decades of narcissistic incubation and the stakes being an additional two years and eight months spent 1.02 billion miles from earth.

Laurie stars as the ships fearless captain, who turns out not to be a captain at all, but an actor meant to keep up appearances. Josh Gad is an Elizabeth Holmes, Billy McFarland-esque tech grifter whose company owns the ship. Zach Woods is a hapless customer service rep with no tact, while Suky Nakamura, Nikki Amuka-Bird, and Lenora Crichlow all play the adults in the roomthe people with the smarts to actually stave off certain disaster, mutiny, or both.

Meanwhile on the passenger side, theres a couple (Jessica St. Clair and Kyle Bornheimer) who thought a little cruise adventure might save their marriage, only now to be trapped stewing in their toxicity for what may be years. Appointing herself as a de facto voice of the aggrieved is the futures version of the Id like to speak to the manager woman, played by Rebecca Front. Her name is, of course, Karen.

(Iannucci explodes with laughter upon learning about the Karen meme. He had no idea when he named the character. There must be some collective subconscious at work.)

For fans of Veep or The Thick of It, it might be surprising, and maybe even confusing, to learn that the man responsible for some of the greatest political insights, satirizations, and deconstructions in modern television is making what seems to be a sci-fi comedy. I dont call it sci-fi, Iannucci grins. I call it a crushing existential nightmare. But with a light touch!

You quickly learn that this sci-fi comedy/crushing existential nightmare has much to say about our current state of affairs as a society on the brink of a collective panic attack.

Not only is there the comedy of just seeing a stream of shit flying out of the ship, but also the real danger that youre going to die of space cancer if somebody doesnt go out and sort that out.

Armando Ianucci

I wouldnt claim that Avenue 5 has reduced the entire human condition to a single half-hour comedy, because you wouldnt believe that if I said it, Laurie says, flashing a wry grin. But what it has in common with Veep and The Thick of It is seeing how structures survive and what people are prepared to do to make it through the day when theyre under pressure.

The subject matter may be different from those political comedies. But its still one gigantic Stanford prison experiment, Laurie continues. Iannucci is professor Philip Zimbardo in the metaphor, the man who investigated the psychological effects of perceived power by focusing in on prisoners and prison officers.

He relishes putting people in stressful, compressed situations and seeing how will they survive, how will they struggle, who will go up, who will go down, how will they compete and make alliances with each other, and how long will the structure last before everything just gets ripped to pieces.

On the one hand, there is the threat of utter doom and destruction as the change in course could have fatal consequences, a danger that is met in the ships executive suites with concern for shareholders more than for the affected travelers. On the other hand, in the face of life-changing circumstances, customers are still bitching about towel service and the restaurant being out of tiramisutogether, dual indictments of corporate cynicism in tandem with our vapid human instinct.

Our anxieties seem to operate simultaneously on so many different levels, Laurie says. We have the why are we here, what happens after we die? kind of questions. And we also have why are the nuts so salty? questions.

Its as much a coping mechanism as anything else, Iannucci ventures. He remembers when he was working on his film The Death of Stalin, a historical comedy chronicling the power struggle following the death of Joseph Stalin, being struck by the reality that, facing the bleakest possibilities, people still find ways to get through the day. How the hell else would they get through the years?

It was a low-level fear under Stalin, he says. You couldnt be hyper, like, Im going to get shot at any minute, because you wouldnt last. So you had to just get through the day thinking, I might be shot today. I dont know. But Ive got to do the shopping.

Dark? Yes. Nihilistic. Of course. This is the man who brought you Veep, after all. Accurate to human behavior? Irrefutably.

At the same time, Laurie is quick to qualify, one of the things that I think gives the show a sort of merry kind of optimism is that it at least postulates a future.

He thinks about films like Blade Runner and its copycats, where things were so dystopian that audiences were left wondering if there would be a future at all.

We may be starting to feel that now, he continues. You look at the footage of Australia on fire, and you wonder whether were going to be around [until the time Avenue 5 takes place]. This at least postulates the idea that were actually going to exist. The space cruise awaits.

See more here:
HBO's 'Avenue 5' Is the First Great Comedy of the 2020s and a 'Crushing Existential Nightmare' - The Daily Beast

Column: Two views on the state’s poverty rate – Hickory Daily Record

Garbage in, garbage out. This rule of thumb applies to every field of human behavior very much including politics. For example, our political conversation about poverty is based on a fact that most political actors think is true but really isnt: that a persistently high share of the population lives in poverty.

Progressives who believe it contend that federal, state and local governments spend too little tax money combating poverty. Conservatives who believe it contend that governments have wasted gobs of tax money combating poverty with little to show for it. While the two groups draw different conclusions, they are assuming the same fact to be true.

Theyre mistaken. When you see an apocalyptic news report about our high poverty rate, you should discount it. This statistic is fundamentally flawed and routinely misinterpreted.

There are, of course, desperately poor people in North Carolina and the rest of America. There are hungry people. There are abused and neglected children, with addicted or absent parents, for whom academic achievement and life prospects are severely impaired. As fellow human beings, we should care about their plight and offer our time, efforts and resources to assist them. Our government should also expend our tax dollars on temporary assistance for jobless adults and their dependents, education and other interventions for disadvantaged children, and long-term assistance for those with severe disabilities.

Still, no good policy ideas can come from believing there are massive numbers of people who, even after taking such assistance into account, continue to live below the poverty line.

The official poverty measure leaves out free health care, free housing, free food, and other public assistance other than cash. It relies on data from income-tax returns and thus leaves out lots of off-the-books income. For poverty rates over time, government statisticians significantly overstate the effects of inflation. For these and other reasons, the official poverty rate is at best a measure of the extent of government dependency among low-income families, not the extent of material deprivation.

How big is the mismeasurement? Consider the most recent analysis from Bruce Meyer at the University of Chicago and James Sullivan at the University of Notre Dame. For years, Meyer and Sullivan have calculated a measure of consumption poverty based on what low-income households consume rather than the income they report to the IRS.

According to the standard poverty measure, the rate of American households in poverty was 13 percent in 1980. In 2018, it was 11.8 percent. Hardly an impressive improvement.

But watch what happens when Meyer and Sullivan used a more realistic inflation adjustment and include all forms of income consumed by households: the true poverty rate drops from 13 percent in 1980 to 3.3 percent in 2018.

Want to go further back in time? The official poverty rate was 19.5 percent in the early 1960s. By 2018, it had fallen 7.7 points to 11.8 percent. But measured properly, the decline in poverty was far larger roughly 25 percentage points!

I know thats a lot of numbers to digest. The policy nutrition is worth it, though.

When conservatives suggest that throwing tax money at poor people doesnt make any difference because they will still remain poor, conservatives are drawing the wrong conclusion from the wrong data. Government threw lots of tax money at the War on Poverty. The poverty rate declined dramatically. (Wiser conservatives point out that dependency didnt decline and single parenthood rose.)

As for progressives, while they might cheer the effects of government redistribution on an accurately measured poverty rate, they will find it hard to admit that the current poverty rate is in the low single digits, including for children (3.7 percent). A comprehensive and honest look at child poverty, observes American Enterprise Institute scholar Angela Rachidi, shows that American children are doing better than ever.

That doesnt mean there arent problems left to address. But how can we chart the right course for the future if we lack a clear picture of the past and present?

John Hood (@JohnHoodNC) is chairman of the John Locke Foundation and appears on NC SPIN, broadcast statewide Fridays at 7:30 p.m. and Sundays at 12:30 p.m. on UNC-TV.

See more here:
Column: Two views on the state's poverty rate - Hickory Daily Record

What is Classical Conditioning, and How Does it Impact Psychology – The Good Men Project

Classical conditioning is a type of learning where a conditioned stimulus is associated with a particular unconditioned stimulus to produce a response. The response is a behavior in reaction to the stimulus. The conditioned response is something that the participant learns. Ivan Pavlov, a renowned physiologist, did many experiments with animal and human behavior, and coined the term classical conditioning. He made the participants elicit a response in various studies. Pavlov had a famous study where he researched the behavior of dogs and how he could condition them to salivate upon hearing a sound. He would make a sound, and the dogs would respond by drooling. Even if there was no food involved, just by making the sound, the dogs associated the sound with the food, and so they began to salivate. He developed multiple experiments to prove his theory that classical conditioning could produce behavioral responses.

The conditioning is successful when the affiliation has been made between stimuli and a response that wasnt affiliated, to begin with. In the case of Pavlovs dogs, this was the bell and the salivation.

Think about how responses to stimuli occur in our brains. For example, when a dog sees food, several senses are involved, their vision and smell, that are sending information to their brains and different neural pathways that cause them to salivate. Our conditioning is displayed in a variety of ways. For example, if we have a bad experience every day at school, well begin to affiliate school with bad experiences and might start to fear to go to school. We can also purposefully condition ourselves, which would relate to conditioned stimulus and conditioned responses rather than unconditioned stimulus and responses. An example of this is if we give ourselves a reward for completing a task. For example, if we allow ourselves to watch television after completing homework, well start to look forward to finishing our homework because it means that we now get to watch the television show that we were looking forward to.

After Pavlovs famous experiment with dogs, there have been many more research studies conducted that show that classical conditioning works with humans. In the study of Little Albert, which was conducted by John B. Watson, a hammer would bang every time a boy interacted with a rat. The hammer taught him to be afraid of rats, whereas prior to the experiment, the young child was not at all afraid of animals. This experiment is one of the many pieces of proof which taught us that classical conditioning can be used on both animals and humans. With this knowledge, weve been able to make strides in the world of both psychology and education.

Human behavior is complex and multi-faceted. Sometimes, we dont understand why we do the things that we do, or we want to change our behavior, which is why therapy can be so helpful. Its essential to learn about yourself so that you can foster healthy relationships. A therapist can support you in understanding your behavior and make changes if needed. You can work with an online therapist or someone in your local area and work on your mental health.

Stock photo ID:528903494

Link:
What is Classical Conditioning, and How Does it Impact Psychology - The Good Men Project

War on alcohol: An experiment that was a ‘catastrophic failure’ – TribLIVE

The United States was a battleground before World War I with armies of people opposed to liquor and saloons lobbying politicians and marching on Washington, D.C., in their mission to outlaw what they considered a scourge on nations morality alcohol.

Prohibition had been a long time in coming, dating back to colonial times and the early 19th century, when opponents were concerned that husbands spending hard-earned money on liquor could lead to family poverty and domestic violence, said Jeanine Mazak-Kahne, who teaches American history at Indiana University of Pennsylvania.

A whole lot of people believe it (alcohol) destroys families, Mazak-Kahne said.

The Anti-Saloon League and Womens Christian Temperance Union, with the enthusiastic backing from Protestant evangelicals mixed in with a dose of anti-Catholic sentiment, gained more influence in the early 1900s. This highlighted the natural tension between the rural white Protestants and the diverse urban population, Mazak-Kahne said.

They saw it as a womens issue. This is one of the key movements to improve family life, said Laura Tuennerman, a California University of Pennsylvania history professor.

As women fought the right to vote, these groups convinced male legislators to pass various anti-liquor laws in 12 states by 1914.

They thought they could fix the problem (of drinking) with a law. They saw a need to clean up society, Tuennerman said. Some pushing Prohibition had a religious fervor and anti-immigrant bent, feeling it was those rapid waves of immigrants flooding the country from Eastern and Southern Europe who brought with them a propensity for drinking and needed to be controlled, Tuennerman said.

They also won the support of powerful industrialists wanting no part of a less-productive, hungover workforce on Blue Monday, Mazak-Kahne said.

The opposition to alcohol created unusual political alliances, no stranger than the strong support they received from the Ku Klux Klan, said Mazak-Kahne. The Klan, which hated African-Americans, Catholics and Jews, was a willing partner in the anti-alcohol movement, yet also backed the Suffragette movement to give women the right to vote, she noted. Women finally gained the right to vote with the passage of the 19th Amendment in 1920.

By the time America entered the war in Europe in April 1917, 26 of the countrys 48 states banned the sale of alcohol, spurred on no doubt by the need to feed the troops with the grain that had been devoted to making all that alcohol.

By December 1917, the 18th Amendment was submitted to the states and ratified by January 1919. The amendment lacked the measures to enforce the restrictions, which was remedied with the passage of the Volstead Act, giving the feds the authority to arrest violators. Congress passed it over President Woodrow Wilsons veto.

The call for repealing the 18th Amendment began as early as 1923 and gained more traction in 1925, as criminals rose to fill the void left by banning alcohol, Mazak-Kahne said. Preventing the production of illegal alcohol, and bootleggers bringing it in across the Canadian border, was near impossible.

With three Republican presidents in the 1920s Warren Harding, Calvin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover and the Republican Party toeing the Prohibition line, the repeal movement could not gain traction.

It took the election of President Franklin Roosevelt to break the deadlock over Prohibition. By the 1930s, even womens groups were pushing for the end of Prohibition, Mazak-Kahne said.

Within a few weeks of FDRs March inauguration, the Democrats pushed through Congress the Beer and Wine Revenue Act, levying a federal tax on the sale of beer with 3.2% alcohol content and wine, thus permitting the first legal sale of alcohol. It raised revenue for the cash-starved federal government struggling through the Great Depression.

In a sense, Prohibition worked because it reduced alcohol consumption, but it did not end alcohol consumption. Nothing really changes human behavior, said Tuennerman, the California University of Pennsylvania professor.

That modification of the Volstead Act cleared the path for passage of the 21st Amendment, which repealed the 18th Amendment.

Americas experiment to control peoples behavior in terms of drinking was a catastrophic failure, Tuennerman said. Most Americans broke the law. Its the law that made the average American a criminal. Everybody drank a little.

Prohibition proved, Mazak-Kahne said, you cant legislate morality. It never really works.

Joe Napsha is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Joe at 724-836-5252, [emailprotected] or via Twitter .

Prohibition TimelineCalls to ban the production and sale of alcohol in the U.S. started nearly a century before Prohibition, with the creation of temperance societies and growing support of the abstinence movement. Here are some key dates in the push for Prohibition and its eventual repeal:1826: American Society for the Promotion of Temperance formed in Boston.1836: American Temperance Union forms through merger of two national groups.1851: Maine becomes first state to prohibit manufacturing and sale of alcohol. (Repealed five years later.)1873: World's Woman's Christian Temperance Union formed in Hillsboro, Ohio.1893: Anti-Saloon League founded in Oberlin, Ohio, then organized as a national society in 1895.1913: Women's Christian Temperance Union and Anti-Saloon League march on Washington to demand a Prohibition constitutional amendment.May 9, 1917: Rotary Club of Pittsburgh calls for a temporary prohibition of alcohol during World War I as a means of preserving wheat, corn, rye and barley used by distillers and brewers for the war effort.Dec. 18, 1917: Congress passes the 18th Amendment, which would restrict the manufacture and sale of alcohol.Jan. 16, 1919: 18th Amendment is ratified when Nebraska becomes 36th state to bar the "manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors for beverage purposes." 46 of 48 states eventually support prohibition, with Connecticut and Rhode Island as the only holdouts. (Alaska and Hawaii were not yet states.)June 30, 1919: Wartime Prohibition Act took effect, restricting the sale of beverages containing more than 2.75% alcohol.July 1, 1919: Commonly referred to at the time as June "Thirsty-First" the first day after wartime prohibition started.Oct. 28, 1919: Congress overrode President Woodrow Wilson's veto of the Volstead Act, which made it illegal to manufacture beverages with more than a half percent of alcohol and provided enforcement of the 18th Amendment. It was named for Andrew Volstead, a Minnesota Republican who served as chairman of the House Judiciary Committee and introduced the bill.Jan. 17, 1920: The United States goes dry.Dec. 5, 1933: 21st Amendment repealing Prohibition is ratified, followed by announcement from President Franklin D. Roosevelt.Sources: Library of Congress, National Archives, National Constitution Center, Tribune-Review research

TribLIVE's Daily and Weekly email newsletters deliver the news you want and information you need, right to your inbox.

More Westmoreland Stories

Read more:
War on alcohol: An experiment that was a 'catastrophic failure' - TribLIVE

6 charts break down 2019, the second-hottest year on record – Grist

This story was originally published by Mother Jones and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

On Wednesday, scientists from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and National Aeronautics and Space Administration released their combined study on 2019 weather trends around the world. The main takeaway was stark: 2019 was the second-warmest year on record, and the trend from Alaska to Antarctica has been one of steady warming. According to data from the two government agencies collected independently, then presented in tandem the last five years were the hottest in recent human history, with 2016 barely beating 2019 for first place.

The respective organizations covered much of the same ground, but both made some unique additions to the joint report. NASA, for example, contributed a global temperature uncertainty analysis tracking margin of error while NOAA added specific coverage of domestic heat and rain conditions for the year.

Get Grist in your inboxAlways free, always fresh

The Beacon Other choices

Ask your climate scientist if Grist is right for you. See our privacy policy

Notwithstanding the potential for major disruptive events a volcano, some sort of massive social action if setting those aside, Deke Arndt, chief of climate monitoring at NOAA, told reporters, the chances are well continue to climb at about the rate weve been climbing. Though the report contained no predictions beyond that one, their data illustrates that even though 2019 may have been an anomaly on the grand scale, if the scope were narrowed to the last decade, it was yet another example of how the planet is moving towards a hotter future.

Here are some of the most striking charts from the report:

According to data collected by NASA, and corroborated by NOAA, 2019 was the second-warmest year ever recorded. Thats 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than the average temperature of the Earth between 1951 and 1980.

Despite being collected independently of each other, there is remarkable consistency between the findings. On a given year, its normal for there to be some discrepancy, but Arndt says the data from 2019 were in complete agreement, showing a consistent increase in global average temperature since at least 1980. By presenting that data side by side, he notes, the findings of both are reinforced. Were measuring the same planet, and we do have slightly different methods, he said. It actually helps that we have slightly different ways in a checks and balances way to make sure our methods are solid.

According to Gavin Schmidt, the director of NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, the Arctic sea ice levels oscillate between March and September, when seasonal ice melting and expansion take place. In recent decades, the measurements of sea ice taken at those times have dramatically fallen, uncovering sections of Arctic ice that havent touched the open air on the earths surface in 50,000 years.

Across the United States, mean temperatures in 2019 also were above average. The differences were particularly dramatic in the American South, where large swathes of Georgia, Virginia, and North Carolina saw record heat.

Yet it was Alaska that saw the most dramatic deviation from the norm. Average temperatures in the state in 2019 were 32.2 degrees Fahrenheit, more than 6 degrees higher than the cumulative average from 1925 to 2000.

These findings are jarring and come during a long campaign of climate change erasure and denialism from the Trump administration. Though the organizations have been pulled onto the political chessboard in the past by President Donald Trump, both scientists were clear about the fundamental cause of the warming temperatures: Certainty that the trend is the result of human behavior is at near 100 percent, says Schmidt. All the trends are anthropogenic at this point.

Never miss a beat! Sign up for The Beacon today. Its your daily dose of good news coupled with all the latest environmental coverage from Grist. Stop freakin and sign up for The Beacon. Youre gonna love it.

Originally posted here:
6 charts break down 2019, the second-hottest year on record - Grist