Consistently addresses the assignment instructions with accurate interpretations of evidence, identifies the most important aspects of the topic, and presents conclusions that demonstrate thoughtful analysis and evaluation.

/in /by

For this assignment, you’ll write three limericks about neuroscience.  A limerick is a miniature poem. Here’s an example, about neuroplasticity:

It’s a fortunate person whose brain
Is trained early, again and again,
And who continues to use it
To be sure not to lose it,
So the brain, in old age, may not wane.

(in Rosenzweig & Bennett (1996). Behavioral Brain Research, 78, 57-65)

Each of your three limericks should be five lines long, and should obey the conventional limerick rhyming structure (AABBA; the first, second, and fifth lines should rhyme with each other, and the third and fourth should rhyme as well).  Usually the first, second, and fifth lines are a little longer than the third and fourth lines.

One of your limericks should be about neurons, one of your limericks should be about a neurotransmitter of your choice, and one of your limericks should be about a brain structure, region, or lobe of your choice.  Your limericks should each present accurate and thoughtful descriptions of their biological functions, and their role in psychology.

Your submission, like all reflection assignments, will be graded according to the following rubric:

  • ONE POINT: Consistently addresses assignment instructions with irrelevant information, ignores instructions, or provides superficial, incomplete, or unwarranted responses to the instructions.
  • TWO POINTS: Mostly addresses the assignment instructions, but includes misinterpretations of evidence, faulty conclusions, or presents claims that are not consistent.  Two points will be given if the submission is reasonably complete, but still appears to have been given minimal thought and critical analysis.
  • THREE POINTS: Consistently addresses the assignment instructions with accurate interpretations of evidence, identifies the most important aspects of the topic, and presents conclusions that demonstrate thoughtful analysis and evaluation.

Your limericks must be written originally, by you.  Submissions will be processed through TurnItIn.com to ensure their originality.

With two seemingly dichotomous understandings of the nature of friendship, how exactly can both conceptions be true?

/in /by
  • The study of the philosophy of friendship provides us with an opportunity to explore the concept of dissimulation and its vital role in friendship.Novelist Marcel Proust believed that friendship was only bearable if we wear masks of good manners. This makes a deep and honest friendship very challenging. He believed that the greatest honesty meant acknowledging that real friendship could never really be fully given or received. Similarly, Immanuel Kant noted:

    “For everyone has his weaknesses, and these must be kept hidden even from our friends… so that humanity should not be offended thereby. Even to our best friend, we must not discover ourselves as we naturally are and know ourselves to be, for that would be a nasty business” (p. 85).

    Yet, some philosophers believe that when we do experience those powerful moments of truth and honesty between close friends, and completely let our guards down, it is a moment of great clarity and insight. In those honest moments, a friend becomes another self. One may feel as close to a friend as one does to oneself. Most philosophers recognize this phenomenon, including the French writer Michel de Montaigne, who described this friendship as becoming ”one soul in two bodies.”

    Aristotle took it further to mean that only in friendship can we truly discover ourselves. Similarly, philosopher Giorgio Agamben shares, “The friend is not another I, but an otherness immanent in self-ness, a becoming other of the self.” Vernon adds: “It’s implying that a close friend is another part of you and that you can only fully become who you are in who they are too” (p. 87).

    In a post of 250-350 words, please answer the following:

    • With two seemingly dichotomous understandings of the nature of friendship, how exactly can both conceptions be true?
    • Is a certain amount of feigning actually necessary in order to achieve a meaningful connection in a friendship?
    • What are the ethical implications of such behavior in friendship?

Describe any additional information you would need to help formulate your diagnosis, and propose specific questions you might ask the client in order to obtain this information from him or her

/in /by

For this discussion, you will assume the role of a clinical or counseling psychologist and diagnose a hypothetical client.  Begin by reviewing the PSY650 Week Two Case StudiesPreview the document document and select one of the clients to diagnose.

In your initial post, compare the assessments typically used by clinical and counseling psychologists, and explain which assessment techniques (e.g., tests, surveys, interviews, client records, observational data) you might use to aid in your diagnosis of your selected client. Describe any additional information you would need to help formulate your diagnosis, and propose specific questions you might ask the client in order to obtain this information from him or her. Identify which theoretical orientation you would use with this client and explain how this orientation might influence the assessment and/or diagnostic process. Using the DSM-5 manual, propose a diagnosis for the client in the chosen case study.

Analyze the case and your agency’s required timeline for diagnosing from an ethical perspective. Considering the amount of information you currently have for your client, explain whether or not it is ethical to render a diagnosis within the required timeframe. Evaluate the case and describe whether or not it is justifiable in this situation to render a diagnosis in order to obtain a third party payment.

 Cultural  information can be found in the DSM-5. You are also encouraged to use  outside Cross Cultural sources as needed, but please reference if doing  so.  

/in /by

Assignment 4

 

Vignette Analysis I:
This  assignment focuses on vignette analysis and direct application of  course concepts to the persons and situations presented in the  vignette.   All discussions must take into account the legal and ethical  considerations, as well as cross-cultural issues that pertain to the  situations presented below.

Use  the reading assignments thoroughly in an integrative discussion. All  assignments MUST be typed, double-spaced, in APA style, and written at  graduate level English. Be sure to cite your work according to APA  format. Please keep your responses focused on what is presented in the  vignette. Do not add information but use your creativity to support what  you see in the vignette as written. Avoid elaboration and assumptions.

The  course text is the primary resource for this assignment. You should be  citing the text often to support your discussion (along with the DSM-5).  Outside references should be minimal, except for culture.

Note:  Cultural  information can be found in the DSM-5. You are also encouraged to use  outside Cross Cultural sources as needed, but please reference if doing  so.  

Discussion must be 6-7 pages plus a title and reference page. 

Vignette Analysis I

Vignette Analysis I will be covering Chapters 1 through 3 in the course text and the relevant DSM-5 disorders.

Your discussion must include at least five (5)  of the following areas covered in the text that you see relevant,  directly and specifically to the persons and situations presented in the  vignette:

(Please identify which areas you are choosing)

· Type I, II, III Trauma

· Developmental and lifespan trauma

· Anxiety, depression and anger Reactions

· Physical and somatic problems

· Emotional dysregulation

· Loss of self-integrity

· Compromised relationships with others

· Safety and the therapeutic relationship
Vignette One
Roni is a 25-year-old female of Asian descent who has been diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Roni  and her family came to the United States when she was 17 years old  after her paternal uncle was killed.  She does not remember the details,  but she has fleeting memories of “gunshots, people screaming and all  the children being pushed into a car and taken to some strange  place”.  No one in the family was allowed to mention her uncle’s death  once they arrived in the U.S.  Roni also tells you, “I hate July 4th in this country. The only way I can cope with that horrific noise, is by taking medicine my doctor gives me”. Roni  also reports that she has overwhelming fears of abandonment and is  terrified of being alone. During the history taking, Roni tells you that  when she thinks of her uncle’s death, she has great relief and,  “sometimes I am glad he is dead. I feel so guilty for admitting that,  but he was creepy and I hated being alone with him.”

Roni  is now married for 4 years to a wonderful man she met in junior  college. The couple has a 2 year old daughter whom she loves dearly. At  times when Roni and her daughter are in the neighborhood playground,  Roni has the sensation that she is being stalked and fears that someone  is going to hurt her daughter. She knows this is irrational, but these  terrifying thoughts come over her and, “I must run home to protect my  daughter from bad people.” She claims that her life is fulfilling and  meaningful but that sometimes she finds herself numb for no reason and  feels like her life is a movie.  

References:

Courtois, C.A. & Ford, J.D.    (2015).   Treatment of Complex Trauma: A Sequenced, Relationship-Based Approach.   The Guilford Press.      ISBN 978-1462524600