a) Few would disagree that human aggression is a very pressing social problem that leads to violent criminal acts, and that it is important to understand the causes of aggression before we can intervene to reduce it. How would a social psychologist approach this phenomenon? How would a social psychologist’s approach differ from the approach of a personality psychologist or a sociologist?
b) You and your friend are debating the greatness of the human mind. She claims that relying on schemas and automatic processes is ultimately detrimental, but you contend that such processes have their benefits. List and explain TWO benefits to relying on schemas and automatic processes, as well as TWO drawbacks to using these processes.
c) Juliana thinks of herself as a health-conscious person. As she is eating a steak one evening, she sees a news report that consuming red meat increases the risk of breast cancer by over 50 percent! At this moment, she is experiencing a large amount of cognitive dissonance. State TWO ways people can reduce dissonance, and apply these techniques to Juliana’s dissonance: that is, give an example of each of the two dissonance reduction techniques Juliana could use. (50-100 words)
d) Explain what two conflicting norms operated in Stanley Milgram’s classic obedience experiments. Explain why one norm was more likely to be obeyed than the other.
e) Write a reflective report on the following: What sort of leader do you think you would be? Discuss the reasons why you think your type of leadership would be beneficial or otherwise should you become a boss in your own company. Discuss also how you can improve. (Your report can include relevant examples, images, citations etc. to support your writing).
Bowlby’s Attachment Theory: Applications in Social Work Distributed: third August, 2018 Last Edited: third August, 2018 Disclaimer: This paper has been put together by an understudy. This isn’t a case of the work composed by our expert exposition essayists. You can see tests of our expert work here. Any assessments, discoveries, conclusions or proposals communicated in this material are those of the writers and don’t really mirror the perspectives of UK Essays. Portray and Evaluate Attachment Theory and Assess Its Value for Social Work. Connection hypothesis, spearheaded by John Bowlby, holds that a person’s passionate and relational improvement all through life can be comprehended, and is at last molded by and established in, an arrangement of connection practices they shape and disguise amid a basic period in early life. As per Bowlby, connection conduct in youngsters emerges out of an intrinsic, instinctual requirement for security and dependability. (Bowlby, 1969) Though a youngster can frame different connections, there is typically one essential figure they put at the highest point of their progressive system. This is generally the youngster’s mom. Be that as it may, there is nothing inherent about the ‘maternal’ relationship as such that sets up its supremacy over other connection connections. It is basically that moms are regularly the most touchy and responsive parental figures consistently finished the longest timeframe. There are vital quantitative and subjective qualifications Bowlby attracts to legitimately portray the connection relationship. The subjective refinement needs to do with the idea of providing care. Kids shape connections in light of the affectability and responsiveness of a grown-up’s response to connection practices. Subsequently, a grown-up who nourishes a kid however who is in the meantime obtuse or lethargic will be a more outlandish possibility for connection than a grown-up who does not encourage them but rather stays touchy and responsive in their collaborations with the youngster. Indeed, even with the subjective conditions met, the connection relationship is as yet in view of their reliable application over an expanded timeframe. It isn’t sufficient to be responsive and touchy as a parental figure in some example. Sound connection connections are framed with these subjective conditions appropriately met after some time. The essential connection figure is generally the most steady and consistently give individual who cooperates the tyke. Moreover, this quantitative qualification seems, by all accounts, to be the more huge of the two in shaping connection connections in light of the fact that the absence of fitting parental figure responsiveness has been indicated not to separate or negate the connection relationship, but rather to bring about undesirable and even neurotic connection practices. (Ainsworth, 1985) So the requirement for security and steadiness with respect to the baby brings about connection practices coordinated most regularly at a parent, for the most part the mother, who turns into their essential connection figure. The idea of these practices is controlled by how the essential connection figure reacts to them. Along these lines, the connection relationship mirrors the cooperation between newborn child require and parental reaction. A standout amongst the most promptly identifiable connection practices is vicinity chasing, where the kid reacts to distressful or unnerving jolt by searching out their essential connection figure. It is this security that the newborn child’s instinctual conduct is intended to accomplish. The part of this security is basic for the arrangement of a mental strength that enables appropriate improvement to happen. Division (or the danger of detachment) from the parental figure, or wrong guardian reactions to connection conduct, can bring about alert and uneasiness which capture the advancement of the youngster as they try to restore the security that enables them to normally create. Bowlby recognizes the day and age of a half year to two years old as a basic stage where a large portion of the essential connections, and after which, the basic disguises of an ‘inward working model’ are shaped. Amid this time babies and little children start to show connection practices that produce associations with guardians which will shape the reason for how they collaborate and identify with whatever remains of the world. Bowlby portrays the ‘inside working model’, which creates after the ‘affectability period’, as a premise of comprehension against which the youngster relates and reacts to everything from the experience and investigation of feelings to the development and comprehension of human connections and associations. The ‘inside working model’ isn’t unalterably settled amid the basic time frame, yet it is most vigorously and at first affected there. Consequently the formative significance, and effect, of this period on the kid is of tremendous centrality to their sound development and future prosperity. Though Bowlby’s model perspectives connections as the building squares of an ‘inward working model’ that keeps on creating all through the kid’s life, it doesn’t dive profoundly into the part of security made by connection practices, and the different sorts of conduct that can take after from different parental reactions. Here, Mary Ainsworth’s expansion to connection hypothesis is also spearheading. Ainsworth recognizes the part of the essential connection figure as a ‘protected base’ from which the tyke is allowed to investigate. (Ainsworth et al., 1978) This investigation is a characteristic piece of the youngster’s improvement and will happen particularly as per the given components display in the identity and cosmetics of every tyke. Such investigation happens, in any case, under the states of solid connection. To distinguish diverse sorts of connections, Ainsworth directed an exact examination known as the ‘interesting circumstance’ which yielded three beginning characterizations of connection conduct: secure, safe, avoidant. Later investigations following up on this work included a fourth: complicated, more often than not coming about because of injurious circumstances or rationally unsound parental reaction. Together, these four classifications shape the generally acknowledged groupings of connection conduct inside the youngster/guardian relationship in connection hypothesis. In the peculiar circumstance think about, a mother went into a live with her tyke. After they were allowed to sit unbothered and the youngster started playing with toys an outsider went into the room and started chatting with the mother, at that point moved toward the kid with a toy. The mother left as the outsider drew in the youngster, at that point returned. The kid was then taken off alone after which the more unusual, at that point the mother progressively returned. At long last, the more peculiar left and the mother and tyke were separated from everyone else together in the room once more. The examination took a gander at how the youngsters reacted to the nearness and nonappearance of their mom and an outsider, in various varieties, and how they investigated the room and connected with the toys. Safely connected newborn children investigated the room while staying mindful of their connection figure’s area. They were frightened by their mom’s takeoff from the room and ameliorated by her arrival. They were likewise more agreeable and willing to draw in the outsider within the sight of their mom, and more OK with the more abnormal’s communication with their mom missing than those not safely joined. Avoidant unreliably joined youngsters demonstrated little reaction upon their mom’s takeoff or return while safe shakily appended kids showed outrageous pain upon their mom’s flight and opposition upon get-together, as though the requirement for the guardian had been perceived yet not joined by a sentiment of security in tolerating their consoling signals, potentially because of conflicting parental affectability and responsiveness to the tyke’s needs. Here plainly the consistency of parental accessibility and the way of parental reaction are enter in deciding the central structure of how youngsters respond to their condition and interface with others. We see with Bowlby and Ainsworth the improvement of a model concentrated on the most punctual phases of relational and passionate advancement which not just distinguishes the correlative effect upon the prosperity of kids in later life, yet gives a system to understanding the causal components engaged with various kinds of recognized practices. This is an especially helpful apparatus in the field of social work where bunch factors regularly confound the perspective of how best to affect a kid’s welfare. (Howe et al., 1999) Understanding the formative viewpoints that illuminate sound conduct and development is an imperative apparatus in going up against huge numbers of the difficulties confronting social laborers today. This is obvious in the primary case of Howe et al’s. Attachment Theory, Child Maltreatment, and Family Support: A Practice and Assessment Model. His first illustration is of a lady, Melanie, who was raised by a requesting, harsh, and rationally unsound mother, who was sexually manhandled by her dad consistently (He kicked the bucket of a heart-assault the night after he engaged in sexual relations with her at fourteen years old), and who has three youngsters. Her most seasoned child, Peter, age 7, has shown rough conduct toward other kids, exhibited activities of robbery, pyro-crime, mercilessness toward creatures, and has no companions. Her second child, age 3, is peaceful and she is uncertain about her capacity to bring up her baby girl. Howe depicts how “a formative viewpoint in light of individuals’ at various times socio-enthusiastic encounters, especially inside cozy connections, offers a ground-breaking knowledge into human identity, styles of providing care and the character of relational life.” (Howe et al., 1999, p.3) It is this knowledge that empowers a comprehension of underlying drivers in the midst of the mist of formative unpredictability that plays into the difficulties confronting social laborers. With connection hypothesis as an apparatus, filtering through the mist of variables that frame a person�>