Genetics

Sir I And His Archbishop Of Canterbury William Laud

In 1637 Charles I and his Archbishop of Canterbury William Laud demanded that the new English Book of Common Prayer be used in Scotland as well as in England. In this move to achieve uniformity between the Scottish and English churches Charles created huge amounts of anxiety and anger in the Scottish people- many of whom were Presbyterian and strongly anti-Catholic. The Scots feared that the Kirk would be Anglicized with Charles and Laud’s Armenian and revolted against this religious policy. The Scottish rebellion can be viewed as sowing the seeds for civil war in England by 1642 by fracturing that delicate and fragile union of the Three Kingdoms created by James I. However, there other factors which must be considered when looking at the†¦show more content†¦The ‘Long Parliament’- a direct result of events in Scotland, was disastrous for Charles. Pym and the rival faction took the opportunity provided by the ‘Long Parliament’ to pass the â⠂¬ËœGrand Remonstrance’- a list of grievances against the king. Charles was also forced to execute Thomas Wentworth, 1st Earl of Stafford and William Laud. The execution of Wentworth left a vacuum for royal authority in Ireland leading to the Irish rebellion in 1641. The historian John Morrill highlights the significance of the ‘Long Parliament’ in that Charles would no longer have the freedom to conduct his preferred ‘Personal Rule’ and therefore managers of the Parliament ‘set their sights high’ - rightfully anticipating great change from it. Therefore, the Scottish rebellion clearly had a huge impact on Charles’s rule. His authority and royal prerogative was diminished when he was forced to call a Parliament that listed grievances against him. An allegiance was forged between the English Parliamentarians and Scottish Covenanters who were both strongly anti-papist and anti-Catholic which alienated Charles. Conrad Russell believes that we cannot say the civil war was a result of long-term causes, rather it was the result of a short-term failure to solve a political crisis and he places emphasis on the idea that it was the closely intertwined nature of the Three Kingdoms that led to civil war. Russell states ‘there are more senses than

What Causes Conflict Between Adolescents and Their Parents Free Essays

Introduction Conflicts in the family are usually considered as an undesirable symptom of a problem that need to be solved by family members. 1 In the family relationships, the parent-adolescent relationship represents an involuntary association, an imbalance of power and resources, and an obligation for the parent to function as caregiver. 2 While the presenting problem with most families is obviously parent-adolescent conflict. We will write a custom essay sample on What Causes Conflict Between Adolescents and Their Parents or any similar topic only for you Order Now Adolescence is a period of increasing parent-child conflict and conflicts are thought to be rife and common during this development phase. In the puberty, Parents have the totally different interpretations of the conflicts against adolescents. Parents notice the disagreements caused from morality, personal safety and conformity concerns while adolescents consider them as personal choice. 4 This piece of work deals with the question what causes conflict adolescents and their parents. In the first part various issues causing the conflicts in families are introduced. Building upon this, the next chapter concentrates on the analysing the reasons. And a final conclusion of the piece of work is given in the third part. 1. Cf. Samuel Vuchinich (1999) : p. 79 2. Daniel J. Canary,William R. Cupach,Susan J. Messman (1995) : p. 52 3. Cf. Lynn H. Turner,Richard L. West (2006) : quoted according to Riesch, Jackson, Chanchong, (2003) : p. 150. 4. Cf. Lynn H. Turner,Richard L. West (2006) : quoted according to Smetana (1989) : p. 150. 2 Occurrence and Issues of Conflict Owing to that family members share the communal resources and so much time, conflicts are normative and inevitable. As the expressive form, usually family conflicts between parents and adolescents will behaved in a variety of ways like whining, complaining, yelling, crying to arguing, screaming and swearing, which ranged from giving up halfway during the chores to quarrelling and even fighting. 6 Those activities are undesirable in family harmony, everyone wants to live in a warm and so what should be done is to search for the reasons and then analyse them. The disagree ments and conflicts between parents and teenagers can be numerous and diverse. Difficulties associated with marital conflict or personal problem of individual family members lead to variable conflicts. 7 Ten main content categories which lead to conflicts were concluded and defined in Table 1 and the percent frequency of each part is given by Table 2. 8 (Tables are given in the Appendix) From these tables one can easily get the conclusion that doing chores, interpersonal relations, regulating activities and personality characteristics lead to conflicts the most frequently, accounting for 18%, 17%, 12% and 12% respectively. In addition, another research indicated that conflicts about chores and interpersonal relationships were more difficult to resolve than those about personal style. 9 5. Cf. Chris Segrin,Jeanne Flora (2005): quoted according to Sillarset al (2004) :p. 88 6. Cf. Russell A. Barkley, Christine M. Benton (1998) :p. 10. 7 Cf. Arthur L. Robin,Sharon L. Foster (2003) : p. 227 8. Megan R. Gunnar,W. Andrew Collins(1988) :p. 95. 9. Cf. Lynn H. Turner,Richard L. West (2006) : quoted according to Smetana, Yau, Hanson, (1991) : p. 151 On the other hand, parents pay much more attention to adolescents` behavioral style, whereas the adolescents considered the restrictions on their interpersonal relationship as the chief issue leading to the conflicts. 10 Analysis the Reason The different values between parents and adolescents actually exist regarding to the tiny issues as discussed above and the differences always cause the disagreements. 11 During the adolescence, many adolescents refuse to accept the values and standpoints emerged by their parents. Disagreements related to different values finally develop into intense conflicts when both the two sides can not tolerate the other`s behaviour any more. 12 Recently, more attempts have been tried to explain the parent-adolescent conflict. The theory of transformation of family patterns of interaction is emphasized. 13 The theory illustrates that several years have been costed for parents and their children to establish an acceptable pattern of interaction, however, during the puberty of period, both the parent-adolescent relationships change because parties` evelopment, not just one side14. The adolescents are bound to get changes in both psychological and physical aspects. To be more specific, they begin to 10. Cf. Megan R. Gunnar,W. Andrew Collins (1988) :p. 94. 11. Cf. Patricia Noller,Victor J. Callan (1991) :p. 49 12. Cf. Clarence J. Mann,Klaus Gotz (2006) :p. 110 13 Raymond Montemayor (1983):quoted according to Morton, Alexander, Altman (1976) :p. 84 14 Cf. Daniel J. Canary,Wi lliam R. Cupach,Susan J. Messman (1995) quoted according to Smetana 4 (1988) : p. 60 demand increasingly independence and less restriction. On the same time, they cultivate new cognitions and expectations as getting more contact to the society. 15 For the alteration mentioned, the former balance is certainly to be broken. Then the whole family members are going to endeavor to learn from their experiences in their patterns of communication , made a decision if they should adopt or change the family models and form an adjustment of the family system in order to achieve new equilibrium. 16 During this deconstruction and reconstruction 17 procedure poor communication easily brings on conflicts. 15 Cf. Daniel J. Canary, William R. Cupach, Susan J. Messman (1995): p. 59 16 Cf. Peter M. Kellett,Diana (2001) : p. 152 17 Cf. Raymond Montemayor (1983):quoted according to Boszormenyi-Nagy (1973) :p. 84 5 Conclusion The family are, for most of the adolescents, the communicative context in which they learn how conflict should and should not be done. The conflict permeate everyday communication in family experiences become powerful guideposts for how one can avoid and solve conflicts throughout one`s daily life. Some of the common reasons cited for parent-adolescent conflict are chores, interpersonal relations, regulating activities and personality characteristics. A lack of understanding and empathy between parents and adolescents is likely to disrupt family harmony and lead to conflict. It is easy to conclude that early adolescence is more stressful than late adolescence because parents are establishing new guidelines and parameters regarding to acceptable and unacceptable behaviour. Conflicts will not abate until the pubertal maturation and change of relationship are complete, typically by late adolescence. The final result is the eternal change in the relationship that the adolescents are permitted to take participation in family communication as an adult. 18 18 Cf. Anita L. Vangelisti (2004) :p. 35 6 Bibliography Samuel Vuchinich (1999) : Problem solving in families: research and practice Daniel J. Canary, William R. Cupach, Susan J. Messman (1995): Relationship conflict Lynn H. Turner,Richard L. West (2006) : The family communication sourcebook Chris Segrin,Jeanne Flora (2005) : Family communication Russell A. Barkley, Christine M. Benton (1998) : Your defiant child: 8 steps to better behavior Arthur L. Robin, Sharon L. Foster (2003) : Negotiating Parent-Adolescent Conflict: A Behavioral-Family Systems Approach Megan R. Gunnar,W. Andrew Collins(1988): Development during the transition to adolescence Patricia Noller,Victor J. Callan (1991) : The adolescent in the family Clarence J. Mann,Klaus Gotz (2006) : Borderless business: managing the far-flung enterprise Raymond Montemayor (1983): Parents and Adolescents in Conflict: All Families Some of the Time and Some Families Most of the Time Peter M. Kellett,Diana G. Dalton : Managing conflict in a negotiated world Anita L. Vangelisti (2004) : Handbook of family communication 7 Appendix Table1 :Definition of ten main content categories leading to conflicts Table2 :percent frequency of ten main content categories leading to conflicts Table 1 8 Table two 9 How to cite What Causes Conflict Between Adolescents and Their Parents, Papers

Essay about Analyzing Chilrdren Child Observation Essay Example For Students

Essay about Analyzing Chilrdren: Child Observation Essay Children are some of the most interesting creatures on Earth. At any moment they may do something that makes you laugh. The next moment they may do something that makes you want to crawl under your seat in embarrassment. That’s what drew me to them. I’m around adults all day and all night since starting college. I wanted to sit and observe God’s most precious creation in action. My mother-in-law’s home was the most obvious choice for my observation. She keeps several children, including my sixteen month old son, in her home daycare business. All of the children who are kept there are little boys ages three or under. I chose Friday, August 28, 2009 to analyze how the children interact not only with each other, but also with their environment. Upon beginning my initial observation, there were six children playing on my mother-in-law’s front porch. When I walked up to the porch, the children greeted me with the usual, â€Å"Hey Mr. Jeff.† I replied with, â€Å"Hi boys, what are you doing today?†(Boyd). The boys did not have a clue that I was about to embark on a quest for knowledge about them, but one of them did ask me, â€Å"What are you going to do with that pencil and paper?† As I started to take notes, Reid, age 7 months, was in the stroller on the porch. Karson, my sixteen month old, was pulling on the gate, Gage and Austin both there, were sitting on the top of a container and were pretending to cook me some lunch. Brayden, the other three year old was sitting in one of the rocking chairs. As I looked down at my paper and then looked up again it was as if the whole scene was changed in an instant. Karson had ventured off to the rails on the porch and had managed to stick his head through them, turn his head to the side. .in the road and saying some other lingo that only he is able to interpret. In sitting here watching these children for only an hour I have pondered many ideas about how children communicate, how they build relationships, how they play and interact with other children of the same gender and age. Child psychologist Kenneth N. Condrell, Ph.D. states in his book Wimpy Parenting from Toddler to Teen, at this age the average toddler is a whirlwind of activity, and everything is an adventure. The world is all brand new to them and they don’t know where to begin. Toddlers are free spirits and since they are still babies everything is smelled and tasted. They have not interest in toilet training, and forget self-control, because toddlers have no conscience yet. They operate on the pleasure principle: if it feels good and it is fun, they want to do it (Condrell).

Self Esteem and Culture in a Learning Environment

Essay Sample on the Pavlovian Model in Preparedness Theory

Essay Sample on the Pavlovian Model in Preparedness Theory Pavlovian conditioning is basic to learning and is obviously a critical factor in the acquisition of phobias. This model assumes that all members of a species share a common set of reflexes, hard-wired responses to certain stimuli. These unconditional reflexes are critical to survival. Pavlovian conditioning, which relies on these reflexes, or the stimulus-response relationship, has been shown to be fundamental to learning such that all animals learn to adapt to their environment based on this concept. The traditional learning model, based on animal conditioning research, has been extraordinarily useful but unfortunately very limited where phobias are concerned (McNally 284). First of all, one cannot assume that human phobias are the same as fears conditioned in animals in a laboratory, and they are not, as will be discussed later. Field and Davey also had the following problems with the traditional model (191-192). Phobias, for one, tend to be highly resistant to extinction, more so than other acquired responses. Some phobics have no memory of an aversive conditioning event at the onset of their phobia while others recall an associated traumatic event. Some persons become more phobic with successive presentations of the conditioned stimulus, even when this stimulus is unreinforced by an aversive conditioned response. Furthermore, not everybody who undergoes a traumatic experience will develop a phobia. In addition, while the Pavlovian model views all stimuli as being equivalent in their ability to create an association with a negative consequence, phobias should be uniformly distributed across a broad range of experiences (Field and Davey 192). It is obvious, however, that this is not the case, since some fears are more common than others. While most Americans, for example, live in an urban environment, they are more fearful (in both intensity and frequency) of insects, reptiles, heights, and storms than guns, cars, and stoves, even though nonbiological stimuli have a much higher likelihood of being associated with an aversive consequence. Also, human phobias of animals tend to be developed at younger ages, when they are still vulnerable to predators. Thorpe and Salkovskis have noted other pathways to fear besides the Pavlovian model of direct acquisition through conditioning: (1) indirect acquisition, for example, by observing phobic people, and (2) acquiring fear-inducing information, from reading car crash statistics, for instance (81-83). So other factors must be at work besides direct Pavlovian conditioning if we are to explain these variations. Coming from an evolutionary point of view, Seligman proposed a theory wherein an organism evolves a predisposition, or preparedness, to learn certain associations that are important for survival (406). These are instances of â€Å"prepared learning.† Associations that are irrelevant to survival are unprepared and associations that are detrimental to survival are contra-prepared.† Seligmans theory of preparedness was meant to explain the inconsistencies about phobias seen in the traditional behavioral model of learning. Seligman noted four characteristics of phobias that differentiate them from fears conditioned in the laboratory: (a) ease of acquisition, (b) irrationality, (c) belongingness, and (d) high resistance to extinction (qtd. in McNally 295). Ease of acquisition refers to the number of trial repetitions required to elicit a fearful response from the stimulus. In the case of phobias, a single trial can be sufficient and often is. Irrationality, or noncognitiveness, refers to the fact that a phobic will continue to be fearful in the presence of the object of fear even after it is clear that no threat exists. Belongingness is the quality a person recognizes when realizing that a stimulus and response are paired, such as the object of a phobia and the threat it posed in prehistoric times. A high resistance to extinction is even today the hallmark of a phobia. It is, indeed, one of the most challenging aspects of phobias. Mineka has been a strong supporter of preparedness theory (199). It had been thought that monkeys were innately fearful of snakes; however, Mineka demonstrated that when first exposed to a snake, a lab-reared monkey will show no fear. It will, however, demonstrate fear if the mother is present upon first exposure; that is, it learns to be afraid by observation of its mother. But this behavior did not carry through to nonfrightening situations and remained specific to biological stimuli. It was concluded that the potency and rapidity of observational learning in association is due to the evolutionary significance of the biological stimuli (Mineka 239-240). But what of differences between individuals? The Pavlovian model assumes that inborn reflexes are shared by all members of a species. Ãâ€"hman and Mineka believe that humans are genetically predisposed with the ability to associate fear with stimuli that threatened the survival of our earliest ancestors (6). Since this is a genetic mechanism, and there are genetic differences among humans, some people will be more or less fearful than others, depending on the situation. Ãâ€"hman believes that although humans are in general prepared to acquire fears of ancestral dangers easily, some individuals must be more prepared than others to acquire specific fears. These super-prepared humans are, he proposes, vulnerable to phobias (qtd. in Ledoux 229). Snakes were found to be among the most prevalent of human phobias, with close to 40% of females and 12% of males in New England reporting an intense fear of them. The authors noted the fact that primates, the animals closest to us on the evolutionary scale, also commonly fear snakes, although captive primates were consistently less fearful than primates in the wild. These observations are strongly consistent with the evolutionary role for fear. The adaptive nature of this fear is reinforced by the fact that large snakes regularly attack primates in the wild. Mineka and Ãâ€"hman recently proposed the concept of a fear module, a behavioral module with the following four main characteristics: selectivity of input (the central tenet of preparedness theory), automatic activation, encapsulation (where a learners cognitive skills are focused in some areas and not others), and a dedicated neural apparatus (931-933). The appeal of this concept is that it is allows for the neurobiological point of view of fear conditioning. Mineka and Ãâ€"hman also proposed two levels of learning in fear conditioning, based on learning through ontogeny and phylogeny (928). There is a basic associative level of learning, evidenced by automatic emotional responses, controlled by the amygdala. Then there is the cognitive level of contingency learning, controlled by the hippocampus. Fear learning in human conditioning with fear-relevant stimuli activates both levels, but fear learning with fear-irrelevant stimuli tends to occur only at the cognitive level, unemotionally. It is important therefore to note that fears created in the laboratory in response to survival-irrelevant stimuli (e.g., auditory cues such as buzzers) involve unprepared learning and therefore offer a poor framework within which to conduct experiments on human phobias. Neuroscience looks at phobias from the point of view of neural circuitry, more specifically the amygdala and a variety of complex hormones, and this has been written up extensively in the literature. But even in the face of such technologically advanced research, the theory of biological preparedness still plays a role. It has been shown that conditioning to fear-relevant stimuli, including angry facial expressions, is less resistant to extinction than other conditioning to neutral stimuli and can even be acquired through visual masking techniques (LaBar and Cabeza 55). But with the rise of cognitivism, the theory of preparedness fell into disfavor with some. Lovibond, Siddle, and Bond proposed an alternative theory to explain resistance to extinction: selective sensitization, where a pre-existing response tendency is activated by a perceived threat (449). This phenomenon explains why many phobic disorders arise when the fear-relevant situation is experienced after a traumatic or stressful event, rather than before it, as required by conditioning theories (Lovibond, Siddle, and Bond 452). Gray and McNaughton noted in particular how the skin’s conductance response is also associated with the orienting reflex, which can tarnish the results of preparedness studies, since most use the skin’s galvanic response to gauge the degree of fear (306-312). Harris even went so far as to state a number of interpretive problems with Watson and Raynor’s famous conditioning of Little Albert (151-158) and Field and Davey pointed out the phenomenon of rumination influencing the perceived future threat of a fear-related stimulus (197). When McNally conducted an extensive review of the research on phobias to see how well preparedness theory stood up, he found no evidence that acquisition was any faster and had problems supporting the view that there was lack of rationality (295). He did, however, find much evidence demonstrating that extinction is slower for prepared learning (McNally 292). Perkins attacked Seligman’s archetypal yawning dog by showing that dogs can indeed be conditioned to yawn, even though it is a contraprepared learning task (138-144). The author even stated, It is proposed to limit Preparedness Theory to physiological preparedness, and that psychological preparedness either be revised (to exclude dogs yawning on cue) or abandoned (Perkins 138). One problem with preparedness theory is that it involves a circular definition. We define preparedness in terms of the ability to learn quickly because of a biological predisposition. However, how can we then tell if there is a biological predisposition? Because of the ability to learn quickly? This lack of underlying theory is one of the criticisms the cognitive psychologists have and it will hopefully be addressed eventually. But despite this, preparedness theory has held up well through the decades and today enjoys its status among even the most sophisticated conditioning models, which tend to be a mix of behavioral and cognitive theories. And theories, if they are to survive, must change and adapt; even if Seligmans original statement of preparedness theory was lacking in areas, it has benefited greatly from new research. In response to criticism from the cognitivists, the theory evolved and can now explain many of the problems that were pointed out in the earlier literature. It should be mentioned that the field of psychology has evolved and branched out to the point where only a melting pot of specialized theories, from traditional behaviorism to the most advanced neuroscience, can hope to explain the complexities of the mind.

The Signs of Shopping by Anna Norton Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

The Signs of Shopping by Anna Norton - Essay Example It is to be noted that although the approach taken by these authors is very different yet there are some common observations provided by them as well. This paper will compare and contrast the perspectives of the two authors with regard to the subject of shopping. The first common point highlighted by these authors is that how customers are captivated and convinced to shop. Gladwell with his research found that how people like Paco Underhill are employed to affect consumer behavior by observing and analyzing the activity of a potential customer before they buy a product. Anne Norton has illustrated in her article about the practical consequences of this work. She has described how sources of shopping like malls and catalogues have been tailored to serve the masses with a personalized touch to it. Malcolm Gladwell has further explained that conducting these kinds of observations has led to a new field of study called retail anthropology. On the other hand, Norton has underlined the rea son why this new field of study is introduced which is known as retail anthropology. The cause given by the author is that the American society has become decentralized and there is a lack of cultural centers. Due to these reasons shopping has become a vital mean of assembling ones distinctiveness. Another common aspect of these two articles is about the way shopping malls have become a source for common class people to socialize. Norton has observed that because of shopping malls becoming a centerpiece of the American culture, most people socialize there and a class differentiation is clearly visible. The reason given by Gladwell is that, there is a systematic approach taken on the placement of the items and how they are positioned among other things. The first contrast that is noticeable of these articles is that Anne Norton has taken into account the various popular mediums of shopping while Malcolm Gladwell has only focused his work on shopping malls. Another contrast in the wor k of these two authors is the way they have perceived about shopping done by women. Norton explains that women like to shop behind their husband`s back because it gives them a feeling of becoming a rebel. Women do so because it is a practice in the society to keep women as a property rather than giving them the power to decide for themselves. Hence, shopping has become more of a freedom and a way for women to have their own individuality. On the other side, Malcolm Gladwell has explained a rather exciting shopping principal called butt-brush theory. He explains that an individual woman shopper who does not have someone to support her while shopping would get out of the mall quickly without buying anything. Gladwell has come to the conclusion that large corporations use ways to manipulate the consumers to actually buy their products. But the opposite effect occurs and it is actually the sellers who have to give in and sell products that suit the wishes of the consumers. The cooperati on in reality has failed miserably to do so because the sellers are now obeying more to the wishes of the consumers. Norton has a completely different view explaining that a person could be judged from where and what he or she is shopping from. An example given by her is that when a person uses William-Sonoma catalogue to buy products it not