Select and describe an Advanced Nurse Practitioner role.Why are you becoming a Nurse Practitioner?Find one research article, expert opinion about the Nurse Practitioner role and summarize the article.What does the Institute Of Medicine (IOM) say about the need of Nurse Practitioners?Identify and describe the effects that you will have as an advanced practice nurse in […]
The post The Role Of The Nurse Practitioner. first appeared on home work handlers.
Incentives matter. Find an example of bad incentives in the real world and suggest waysto fix the problem. Bad incentives are incentives designed to change certain behaviors butfail to do so. Explain why you think your approach is better Sample Solution
The post Bad incentives first appeared on home work handlers.
Your assignment is to prepare and submit a paper on analyze the consequences of the contact and exchange between different cultures and civilizations in world history: technology, Social Intolerance and the Collision of Cultures The more open-minded among us have grandiose hopes that the meeting of new and different cultures will permit a fair exchange of goods and ideas to the betterment of all. But the lesson most often taught by history is one of fear, violence, mischaracterization, and de-humanization. For fair exchange to be possible, or likely, there must first exist commonality between the two colliding cultures. And should the two societies be similar enough to cooperate without strife, the less they would have to teach each other. A premise that can be easily garnered from history is that the clash of cultures will lead to conflict in proportion with the magnitude, and severity of said differences. Facilitating the inevitable conflict is the truism that a completely tolerant civilization cannot exist. The values spawned from economic and political necessities must by definition nourish a religio-cultural matrix that will assert morality to a degree that must at some point become exclusionary. The more different the culture, the greater the likelihood that one or the other will encounter, or perceive, violations of a fundamental tenet central to their way of life, or understanding of the universe. To utilize historical comparisons, England (and much of Europe) during the Middle Ages was of course, characterized by subsistence farming and a loose caste-like system of landed peasants, entitled knights possessing fiefdoms, and city-dwellers which, being ill-defined under the feudal system, inhabited what would become focal points for the dramatic changes to come. Strife was largely continuous, not just during the Middle-Ages, but onward into the Renaissance period to come later, as discrete nations formalized into better-defined hierarchies. (Abulafia, 1999) Cultural clashes occurred, especially for Britain, during the raids of the Vikings and culminating in the Norman conquest of the 11th century. In these early disputes involving England, if anyone can be said to have benefited from the cultural contact, it would arguably be the Norse. While both England and the Vikings would eventually stabilize into Christian states with national identities, England was on the receiving end of centuries of Norse violence. Among the differences between England, all of Europe and China at this point would have been the lack of unification. China had been beset by screaming barbarian hordes from Central Asia, and while these enemies were not always repelled successfully. China was able to eventually stabilize under a succession of Imperial dynasties. while the remnants of the old Roman Empire never truly came back together into a cohesive whole. China’s cultural contact was largely limited to nomadic raiders and goods flowing over the Silk road, contributing to an attitude of superiority as the penultimate civilization. The eventual stability China achieved, ultimately led to complacency in terms of technological progress. whereas the agony of centuries of European strife pushed them into an ongoing death-struggle to gain military advantage over neighboring realms. China’s strife arose from two primary sources. attempts to replace whoever the current emperor was, should the feeling persist that he had lost the ‘Mandate of Heaven’, and the influx of Central Asian hordes, some of whom eventually succeeded in replacing the Jin dynasty, with what would become the Yuan. (Li Bo, 2001) Through a comparison of Europe and Asia, a pattern emerges from which generalizations can be made regarding two likely outcomes of cultural clashes. In both nations, foreign barbarians with military savvy may press their advantage, ravage and harass the settled peoples, not because they perceive some particular religious or cultural outrage that drives them, but out of simple greed. contempt for the ‘settled peoples’ is the only justification needed to take what they are not able to defend – until the barbarians become the settled peoples themselves. This occurred with the aforementioned Vikings, and on occasion, with Mongolian invaders that plundered China only to replace the ruling Dynasty. The other type of clash is one in which a barrier is overcome, and two well-established cultures meet, with values and assumptions so radically different, that both nations will eventually be changed by the contact. in which violence is inevitable. This is closer to what occurred when the British at last reached China. From the 1400’s and until the 19th century, China slept through a period of stagnation that could be considered a decline. There was largely a sense of complacency. China had convinced itself that it was the center of the world, that no other civilization truly mattered. so there was no impetus for unusual innovation. British gunboats adjusted this perception when they shattered imperial resistance to the Opium trade with then-modern firepower. Among the factors that contributed to the social clash was, undoubtedly, a British sense of superiority due to their perceived Christian values, in the way that all cultures want to believe their way of life superior. China, at this time, had a more informal legal system, compared to the well-codified British laws concerning property. The British thus, had a strong impetus to use force to protect their investments in the Chinese people themselves as drug-consumers. (Rosenthal et al, 2011) But as a consequence, China could no longer sleep away the centuries believing in their own manifest superiority in the face of European technology. After decades of exploitation common where cultures of dramatically different value systems clash, China has been forced to embrace a climate of innovation and advancement that has brought to the Chinese people the elevated standard of living common to Europe. Truly alien cultures will almost invariably generate violence upon meeting. as that which holds civilization together must also forbid certain concepts. Even a doctrine of multiculturalism must at some point exclude cultures that insist on their own domination of all other cultures. An entirely equitable exchange between different societies is not to be expected. but with determination, and savvy leadership, it will be possible to maintain one’s integrity while borrowing the advantages of the new society, as the example of China reveals. REFERENCES Abulafia, David. (ed) (1999) The New Cambridge Medieval History: c. 1198-c. 1300. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521362894. Li Bo, Zheng Yin, 2001 “5000 years of Chinese history”, Inner Mongolian People’s publishing corp, ISBN 7-204-04420-7, 2001. Rosenthal, Jean-Laurent. R. Bin Wong, 2011. China and Europe in the Hall of Mirrors. Forthcoming, Harvard University Press, 2011.
I need help creating a thesis and an outline on Personality- Illness Connection. Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide. An abstract is required. Five Models of the Personality-Illness Connection An individual, when sick, experiences stress and changes in its body. The illness of a person is actually caused by a complex framework involving several aspects of life, including the psychological component. There are even studies and literatures which try to create a connection between the personality of the person and the progression of illness, if ever those individuals acquire one. Many theories have been proposed which tries to discuss the connection between personality and health. One of these theories includes the personality-illness connection. The personality-illness connection is actually one of the most interesting theories which explicate that the relationship between personality and health can be explained using five models. These models include the interactional model, the transactional model, the health behavior model, the predisposition model, and the illness behavior model. In the interactional model, a certain event may happen to a person, but it is the personality of that person which determines the impact of events by influencing a person’s ability to cope. In short, it is the personality which directly regulates the association between the stress and illness. It is apparent that the coping strategy of the person affects the degree, duration, and the frequency of a stressful event. In the interactional model, the relevance of having many repetitions that can affect one’s life is greatly discerned. The manner in which an individual adjust with this repetitions can vary significantly. This variation determines the type of personality of the individual. The personality which is difficult to cope with stress tends to suffer more frequently from the disease. In contrast to this, the personality easily copes with stress tends to experience stress less severely. The coping mechanism and response of an individual is indeed a major influence to the relative severity of the stress, the duration of its persistence and the frequency of its occurrence. This model is really fascinating but it also has some problems to some extent. For example, there are inconsistencies regarding the most advantageous types of personalities and coping responses which always deal with stress. Also, there are no certain and consistent types of personality and coping responses that are least effective in dealing with stress. These problems with the interactional model make it unable to identify stable coping responses that are consistently adaptive or maladaptive. Another model, the transactional model, indicates that personality has specifically three potential effects to the health of the individual. One is that it might influence the coping strategy of the person. The personality might also influence the mechanism on how the person appraises events. Some even indicates that the personality might affect the event itself. The appraisal of the person indicates that it is not only the event which causes stress, but rather the manner in which the event is interpreted by a person. Individuals do not simply respond to certain situation for situations can also be created by certain options and executions. The transactional model also infers that the personality can affect the manner in which an individual deals with stress. For example, a person learning that he has a chronic heart disease might interpret this event as either a punishment from his wrongdoings or a challenge which might make him a better person if he surpasses it. He might have different behaviors with handling the situation. The attitude towards the disease or stress depends on the manner in which the individual deals with it. In the health behavior model, the personality is not the direct factor which influences the relation between stress and illness. However, this model explains that personality affects health indirectly, either through health promoting or health degrading behaviors. The outcome of the health of the individual depends on the health behavior of the individual, whether it will aggravate the illness or alleviate it. For example, it is the behavior of the person to eat more when in stress. Learning that he has Diabetes mellitus will of course cause stress to that person. However, his behavior of eating a lot when in stress might aggravate the disease which is already detected on that individual. The associations between the personality and illness may also exist because of a third variable that is causing them both. This describes the predisposition model. There will be a relationship found between the personality and illness because of some predisposition that underlies them both. For example, cancer is a disease which can be caused by several factors. One of the major risk factor for the development of cancer is the genetic predisposition of the individual, which means that the person has already the genes which have the tendency to transform normal cells into malignant ones. This genetic predisposition might also affect the behavior of an individual. Some of these genes are also believed to cause addictive behaviors to the individual, like abnormally strong craving to alcohol and cigarettes, which also increases the risk of developing cancers. Having the genetic predisposition increases the risk of having cancer not only in its physical attributes, but also on the behavior of the individual. The last model, the illness behavior model, is described as having the personality as a major influence to the extent in which a person recognizes bodily sensations, and the degree in which a person interprets and labels these sensations as illness. Illness behavior is the manner in which an individual observe their own bodies, try to determine and understand the symptoms that they had, try to relieve the conditions present, and use health-care system or other options for help. This model is very unpredictable because each individual has the unique interpretation and perception of sensations. Each individual also has a unique response to the perceived sensation. For example, the treatment of migraine depends on how the person perceives it as pain. Some individuals have a high tolerance to pain while others are not. This tolerance is a major factor for the management of disease of each individual. The management of the disease is dependent on how the individual usually strategize on dealing with its illness. The illness-behavior model also considers the biological, psychological and social aspect to be equally important dimensions, because it believes that there should be no priority in determining human behavior in health and disease. These models which try to explain the relationship between personality of the individual and the illness are unique in its own way. It is important for us to determine which model is suitable for certain situation so that its understanding would be efficiently done. Also, we must also take into account that each model is not fixed on its own and have the tendency to overlap with other models in trying to explain cases of personality-illness connection. These models have indicated that personality is really a major factor with the fate of the illness or disease of an individual. References: Ashton, M.C., Lee, K., & Goldberg, L.R. (2004). A hierarchical analysis of 1,710 English .personality-descriptive adjectives. .Journal of Personality .and Social Psychology, 87, 707-721. Bermudez, J. (1999). Personality and health-protective behaviour. European Journal of Personality, 13, 83–103. Brayne, C., Do, K.-A., Green, L., et al. (1998). Is health protective behaviour in adolescents related to personality? A study of sun protective behaviour and the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (junior version) in Queensland. Personality and Individual Differences, 25, 889–895. Compton, W. C. (1998). Measures of mental health and a five-factor theory of personality. Psychological Reports, 83, 371–379. Digman, J. M., (1990). Personality structure emergence of the Five-Factor Model. .Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 417-440. Friedman, H. S. (2000). Long-term relations of personality and health: Dynamism, mechanisms, tropisms. Journal of Personality, 68, 1089–1107. Judge, T. A., Klinger, R., Simon, L. S., & Yang, I. W. F. (2008). The contributions of .personality .to organizational behavior and psychology: Findings, criticisms, and future research directions. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2, 1982-2000. Manning, M. R., & Fusilier, M. R. (1999). The relationship between stress and health care use: An investigation of the buffering roles of personality, social support and exercise. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 47, 159–173. Yamaoka, K., Shigehisa, T., Ogoshi, K., et al. (1998). Health-related quality of life varies with personality types: A comparison among cancer patients, non-cancer patients and healthy individuals in a Japanese population. Quality of Life Research, 7, 535–544. Zhang, L., & Huang, J. (2001). Thinking styles and the five-factor model of .personality. European .Journal of Personality, 15, 465-476.
We are experienced and have access to ample research materials to guarantee quality A+ papers. Our Professional Writers can handle all subjects and deliver your papers on time.
For any questions, feedback, or comments, we have an ethical customer support team that is always waiting on the line for your inquiries.
Send us an E-mail: support@homeworkhandlers.com or Call us: +1 (518)-934-6741
