Psychology Learning Outcome the Best Method for

¶ … Psychology Learning Outcome The best method for conducting the study would involve the use of a case study. Since this would be a group, setting, the case study method would allow the researcher to conduct in-depth investigations. Case studies offer the researcher an opportunity to use various data gathering sources like interviews, and observations (Halligan & Marshall, 2013). In order for the researcher to conduct an in-depth study of the subjects, the case study would offer an effective method for data gathering.

The researcher would manage to immerse him/herself into the group or could make observations as the participants attend their quit smoking classes. Being a participant would allow the other participants to open up to the researcher more easily. Since the classes mostly consist of around 20 people, this makes it a small number and easy for the researcher to deal with. A case study method would ensure that the researcher manages to study each participant and establishes the subject's life, and history (Huitema, 2011).

The information gathered would allow the researcher to understand the background of the subject and understand why they begun smoking. The reason behind their desire to quit smoking would also be discovered using case study. The possibility that the case study could be generalized for all the subject's is not possible. This ensures that the researcher cannot lie regarding either of the subject. The researcher would have to conduct an analysis for each of the subject's. The researcher could immerse him/herself into the group and carry out individual interviews.

This would offer the researcher first-hand information, which is vital for data gathering. The study carried out would be a prospective study since the subjects would be a group of people and the researcher would be observing the subjects in order to establish outcomes. Strengths and weaknesses of case studies Case studies will provide the researcher with detailed information regarding the subjects. Qualitative data would be gathered, and the data would be rich in information that would assist the researcher tremendously (Popil, 2011).

The quality of information gathered would determine the results and conclusions arrived at by the researcher. Another strength is that case studies would offer insights to assist further research. The researcher could offer information that other researchers can build upon in future research of similar subjects. It is not possible to make observations of such a class without immersing oneself amongst the group. Using the case study method the researcher receives a great opportunity to study subjects. The classes are considered impractical situations that are sometimes considered unethical.

There is no possibility to investigate the case study in a controlled environment. By observing the subjects in their natural setting, the researcher can determine the outcomes in an unbiased manner. Case studies are used in exploratory research, which assist the researcher to generate new ideas. The researcher is given a chance to demonstrate how different aspects of the subject's life are all interrelated. The case study will provide incredibly detailed information regarding the subjects because the study would last over several months or years.

Using a case study the researcher can gather information regarding rare cases. In most cases, the case study would involve data gathering where there are no large sample of similar subjects available. A major weakness of case studies is that the results cannot be generalized for a population (Shultz, Whitney, & Zickar, 2013). Since each subject is unique and has a different background, there is no possibility that the data gathered can be said to represent a population. This limitation makes it hard to use data for representation purposes.

Since the researcher does immerse him/herself within the class, there is a possibility that the data gathered might be biased. The researcher will have subjective feelings that might affect the results of the case study. Close interaction with the subjects is necessary in order to connect and conduct the observation. This interaction would result in biases that the researcher might not be aware of during the research period. It is quite difficult to replicate a case study. This makes it hard to confirm the results.

Other researchers will have to accept the results and can only build upon the study. The amount of time spent collecting the information is a lot. The researcher has to start the research when the class begins, and the research continues for the duration of the classes. Terminating the research midway of the class is not possible since the researcher would not establish if the class was successful or not.

The research question for the study would be; what is the success rate of quitting smoking by participating in a quit smoking class? This question would encompass the study desires and outcomes and would be favorably answered by the case study. The hypothesis of the research would be that it is quite possible for a chain smoker or any other smoker to quit smoking by taking part in a smoke quitting class, than by using any other method. Various challenges and limitations will face the proposed study.

Some of the limitations are the case study will not be scientific in nature. The lack of scientific baseline makes the case study difficult to replicate and the data collected cannot be verified. Having a single person collecting the data and the person having immersed him/herself within the group, there is a possibility that the information gathered could be biased. Bias is difficult to eliminate or proof, because the researcher would present the results as collected and they might not be aware they have any bias.

Closely interacting with the subjects would make the researcher to gain close attachment with the subjects, and they might have sentimental bias in their results. The study would also be limited because it would not be possible to establish a definite cause and effect. Making observations and interviewing the subjects would only offer detailed information to the researcher. There is no possibility for the researcher to have a cause and measure its effect.

Some of the ethical considerations that the study should consider are consent from the subjects, confidentiality, conflict of interest, privacy, confidentiality, and disclosure of subject information (Ritchie, Lewis, Nicholls, & Ormston, 2013). The researcher must receive written consent from all the subjects under study. This means the researcher would have to seek consent from the whole classroom before he/she begins the study. Consent should be free, and the subjects should not be coerced to give consent for the study.

Obtaining consent from all the subjects would be difficult for the researcher because some of the subjects might be unwilling to be observed. If there is no consent from some of the class attendees, the researcher should ensure that the results obtained are not inclusive of this group. This might be difficult since the attendees might have a direct impact on the other subjects, and their inclusion would demonstrate the reason the researcher arrived at their results.

Conflict of interest would occur if the researcher attempts to influence the subjects while making observations. The researcher would be interacting with the subjects, but they should ensure that no interactions influence the subjects in any way. If the researcher has some interest in the results of the study, they would be motivated to influence the results towards their preferred direction. Therefore, the researcher should not have interest apart from a desire to establish their hypothesis or answer the research question. Privacy is a critical concern for most subjects.

They would be unwilling to participate in the study if their information were not kept private. The researcher should ensure that no identifiable information is collected from the subjects. The subjects should be guaranteed of their privacy at all times. There should be no disclosure of subject information at any time. The information should only be used during the data collection, but should not be included in the final case study.

Learning Outcome 2 Four schedules of reinforcement Reinforcement is a terminology used in operant conditioning to denote anything that would increase the likelihood of a response taking place (Mace, Pratt, Zangrillo, & Steege, 2011). The effect that reinforcement has on a behavior will define the kind of reinforcement employed. Anything that would increase or strengthen a behavior is considered a reinforcement. It can include an event, stimuli, or a situation. The two main kinds of reinforcement are positive and negative reinforcement.

Positive reinforcement strengthens a behavior by offering an effect the individual would find rewarding. If the required behavior is achieved, the individual would receive a reward. This is considered a positive reinforcement. When a reward is received, the behavior is strengthened, and the individual is most likely to repeat the same in order for them to receive another or similar reward. Negative reinforcement would still promote the required behavior, but in a different manner. Anything unpleasant would be removed if the individual displays the favorable behavior.

This would also strengthen the behavior. The four schedules that could be used to change the behavior of the child are fixed-ratio, variable-ratio, fixed-interval, and variable-interval schedules. These schedules fall under partial reinforcement, which has been identified as the best way learn a new behavior. Using partial reinforcement the parents can teach the child how to stop urinating in bed slowly, and the behavior learned would be effective for longer time. Partial reinforcement has a specified time interval that the subject is reinforced only once.

This would be effective for the child because the parents would require that he go for a couple of nights without urinating before they reward him. Fixed-ratio schedules require that a reward be offered once the subject has reached a specified number of responses (Everly, Holtyn, & Perone, 2014). Using this schedule, the subject would have to maintain a high, steady rate of response. The only time they would pause is immediately after receiving a reward.

In the case of John, the parents could let him know that if he goes for three nights in a row without urinating in bed they would offer him a reward or treat. This would motivate John to stop urinating in bed at least for those three nights. Once the first reward is achieved, the parents could observe him for the next two nights to establish if he has learned how to control his bladder at night.

If John still urinates in bed, then the parents could implement the same strategy, but this time they increase the number of nights. Once he has managed to redeem the reward, the parents should increase the number of nights. There should be breaks in between to establish if the new behavior has been learned. Increasing the number of nights would allow John to learn how to control his bedwetting. The second schedule is variable-ratio schedule where there is no predetermined number of responses before a reward is given.

Making use of this schedule results in a high steady rate of responses. Since the subject is unaware of when they will receive the reward, they will continue performing the required behavior until they receive a reward. This schedule is mostly employed by gambling and lottery games. In the case of John, this schedule might be more effective that fixed-ration schedules. This is because he would be more likely to stop bedwetting if he was unaware of when the reward would come.

Maintaining the hope that a reward is underway would push John not to wet his bed. On the night he fails to control his bladder, he might feel like that was the day he was going to receive a reward. This is a better way to teach him how to stop bedwetting. To ensure that he does not feel cheated, the parents should not go for more than a week initially. After the first month, they could increase the number of nights to a maximum of two weeks.

Remaining unpredictable would force John to learn how to control his bedwetting without an outlook of reward. Not knowing when the reward would come is beneficial to the parents. Fixed-interval schedules are similar to fixed-ration schedules only difference is that fixed-interval would only reward after a specified time has elapsed. When the specified interval is reaching its end, there is an increased number of responses, but after the reinforcer the responses are a bit slow.

John's parents would specify that if he manages to go for a specified time without bedwetting they would reward him. Initially John might not be receptive, but as the realization dawns on him and the interval approaching its completion, he will try to stop wetting his bed. This schedule results in slow behavior response, and there is a likelihood of the subject losing interest.

If the only time he would receive, a reward is after not wetting his bed the first time and waiting for a couple of days to receive his reward, the probability of him quitting this habit is reduced. Variable-interval schedules refer to situations where the subject is rewarded after an unpredictable time has elapsed (Everly et al., 2014). This schedule would result in a slow, steady rate of responses.

Failing to wet his bed would not automatically result in a reward, and John would have to wait for a while before he receives any reward. This schedule has the effect of teaching John how to stop bed wetting slowly, and not because of the rewards he would receive. Altering the schedule ensures that John cannot predict when he could expect a reward.

Initially since he would not know when the reward would come, he would find it hard not to wet his bed, but after a few tries and receiving a reward for them, he would try to maintain this behavior in order to receive more rewards. The unpredictability of the rewards would encourage him to maintain and adapt to the new behavior. Within no time, the parents will find that John has stopped wetting the bed without any rewards.

Factors that determine if a stimuli applied to John will control or affect their bedwetting include punishment, fear, and anxiety. The parents could punish John every time he wet the bed. Since punishment causes pain to John, there is a possibility that it would affect his bedwetting. John would after some time stop wetting the bed because he does not want to be punished. This is a positive stimulus since punishment can be avoided by not wetting the bed.

Learning and associating failure to urinate in bed with a positive outcome would result in the preference to perform the same behavior over and over. There would be an avoidance response from John, because he would try his best to avoid punishment. Negative reinforcement could also be effective in stopping or teaching a new behavior. Fear is another stimulus that the parents could use to affect John's bedwetting.

Knowing there is a negative event that would take place if he wet the bed, John could learn how to control his bladder or wake up to urinate. Controlling the bladder would be the ultimate response, but waking up and urinating would result in the same positive outcome. Positive reinforcement could also be used to affect John's bedwetting. Using positive reinforcement like rewards or praises would lead to John stopping to wet the bed eventually.

If he wets the bed John would receive negative feedback and scorning from the parents, but whenever he does not wet his bed the parents would reward or offer praises. The positive reinforcement would be a stimulus for him to stop wetting his bed. Associating his failure to wet the bed with positive outcomes would result in John adapting a new behavior, since he would rather receive praises from his parents. Learning Outcome 3 The social psychology phenomenon described in the scenario is attribution.

According to Shaver (2012) attribution is the procedure of establishing the cause of behaviors or events. Using attribution an individual can easily explain the causes of an event or behavior even if they were not there personally. Attribution is something that people do all the time and sometime without realizing. The biases that people have in regard to a situation or event will influence how they attribute something.

In the scenario presented, it is clear that all the people who were questioned had underlying biases in regards to the situation yet they were all wrong. Blaming external forces instead of taking action when they heard the screams, all the people were attributing the event to what they believe. Blaming external forces is easier for people to justify the events that take place (Graham & Folkes, 2014). The biases that people have will determine if they will blame external or internal forces when an event occurs.

The attributions that a person makes on a daily basis will have a direct effect on their feelings and how they think in regards to the events taking place within their life. There are three types of attribution people use on a daily basis. Interpersonal attribution occurs when a person paints him/herself in a positive light when they are telling a story. This kind of attribution ensures that the people listening to the story will view the person in another light after they listen to the story.

Predictive attribution would occur when a person attempts to make future predictions. In the scenario, the couple that posited the alley was dangerous, and the police were not increasing their patrols had made a predictive attribution. This goes to indicate that the couple had heard, seen, or experienced something negative at that alley. Their failure to act is informed by the fact that they saw no reason since they believed the police would not respond in time.

Explanatory attribution is used to make sense of the things taking place around us. People can either have a pessimistic or optimistic explanatory style. Based on the explanatory style a person has, the explanation they have on the events taking place around them will demonstrate this. For the couple that thought it was another couple having an argument, this shows they had an optimistic explanatory style. They did not associate the screams to any negative event, and they assumed the couple would eventually stop fighting.

Attribution is thought to occur because of the perceptions that people have, which are influenced by past experiences, and the expectations that people have and their needs (Weiner, 2012). When a person has undergone a negative event in the past, they would easily associate the negativity to another similar event. For example, if a person parks his/her car and the next morning, they find the car has been vandalized. They will blame the garage where they parked, and they will not park their again.

In such a case, if they ever hear of a friend or relative wanting to park at that garage, they will openly discourage them and use the event as an explanation. The person would not be willing to understand that his/her case was a random event and not the norm. The perceptions that a person has will have a direct effect on the attributions they will make in life.

For the scenario presented, it is clear that the people interviewed all had different perceptions and past experiences regarding the event. The individuals all acted differently, but none of them came to the rescue of the young woman. These individuals all had past experiences regarding the alley, and they used these experiences to justify their reactions and attributions. None of the individuals shows any remorse or concern since they have experienced this before, and it was nothing major. It is natural for people to attribute negative results with external forces.

If any of the individuals had called the police instead of making the assumptions they made, the case would have been quite different. Blaming external forces is easy for people then taking responsibility for an event. Placing blame makes a person feel good about him/herself. Personal responsibility is not something that people like taking if the results are negative. The expectations that people have regarding life will also result in attribution. If a person expects that they will pass an exam, but they fail, they will automatically deny responsibility.

Since the person had great expectations for the exam, they would be disappointed and they only way they know how to deal with the result is blaming external forces. If the results were positive, they would have laid praise on him/herself. The self-serving bias that people have ensures that they can protect their self-esteem. The scenario presented demonstrates the expectations of the individuals. Ms. J was not willing to take action and instead convinced herself that another person closer to her would make the call. Mr. & Mrs.

A blamed the police, and they had expected that they would increase the patrols along that alley. Therefore, they did not see why they should bother calling. Since their expectations were not met, the couple was disappointed and opted not to take any action. Learning Outcome 4 Piaget's theory of cognitive development is a theory regarding nature and development of the human intelligence. The theory was developed Jean Piaget, who was a developmental psychologist.

Piaget held on to the belief that a person's childhood would play an important role in the growth of their intelligence (Modgil, Modgil, & Brown, 2013). He also posited that a child learns by actively exploring and doing. According to Piaget, cognitive development was continuous reorganization of mental processes that result from environmental experience and biological maturation. Piaget believed that children constructed an understanding of their world, and then they will experience discrepancies with what they know and what they discover.

Cognitive development was claimed to be at the center of human organism. Parents were encouraged to offer a supportive and rich environment for their children in order to activate the child's natural desire to learn and grow. Piaget's theory is different from the theories of others because his is only concerned with children. His theory focuses on development and not learning. Therefore, his theory does not cover the learning of information or acquiring certain behaviors.

Lastly, his theory differs from others because it proposes discrete developmental stages that are marked by qualitative differences and not the complexity of behaviors and increase in number. The main goal of the theory is explaining the processes and mechanism through which an infant develops to be an individual who thinks and reasons using hypotheses. Lev Vygotsky proposed social development theory. The work of Vygotsky has been the foundation of much theory and research in cognitive development in the past several decades.

Social development theory has been developed from the work of Vygotsky. Social development theory stresses on the fundamental role that social interaction plays in the development of cognition. Vygotsky (2012) believed that the community plays a vital role in the individual's process of making meaning. Vygotsky differed with Piaget because he believed that learning was a universal and necessary aspect of the development process especially in human psychological function. According to Vygotsky, social interaction would precede development. Cognition and consciousness are the results of social behavior and socialization.

Vygotsky's theory differs from Piaget's in a couple of ways. His theory places emphasis on culture shaping cognitive development, which contradicts Piaget's view. Vygotsky placed considerable emphasis on how social factors contribute to cognitive development. Vygotsky criticized Piaget for not placing emphasis on the role that language plays in cognitive development. Piaget posited that language was dependent on thought in for one to develop language. Vygotsky on the other hand viewed the two as separate initially, and they only merge when a person reaches the age of three.

Information processing is at the heart of cognitive psychology. In the same way that a computer takes in information, Cognitive psychology views an individual like a processor for information in order to produce an output. The theory posits that individuals process the information they receive, and they do not merely respond to stimuli (Wyer Jr., 2014). Information processing theory addresses the fact that as children grow, their brains grow too, which leads to the advancement in their abilities to process and respond to the received information.

A continuous pattern of development is emphasized by the theory. This is in direct contrast to what Piaget believed regarding cognitive development. In the same way that a computer receives information and processes the information, stores the information, and later makes use of the information. Cognitive psychologists perceived the human mind as similar to the computer. Human thought is assumed to work in the same way as a computer. Thinking is the environment.