I need this papaer completed by tomorrow at 9:30 pm. This is the lik to the site fofor the reading that needs to be used to write the paper. Tris is a strict teacher for grading so please refer to grading guide. Thank youhttp://journals.sagepub.com.contentproxy.phoenix.edu/doi/pdf/10.1177/0022022110381121
use social psychology theory to explain what would lead someone to confront the person who made the offensive comment or joke, when doing so may likely make them the target of the joke teller’s retaliation.________________________________________________________________________________Though this happened years ago, I still remember it vividly. When I was in 7th grade, my friends and I were at lunch talking about a test that most of the class had not prepared for. One of the white Latinas in my class who was labeled as a ‘popular’, had come up to my friend and I holding a large a chicken nugget and said, “Look it’s shaped like your country” and proceeded to laugh and make clicking sounds with her mouth. For context, my peer and I are black and the nugget she had displayed was shaped like Africa. No one knew what to say and she was the only one laughing. Apart from her labeling a continent as a country, my peer and I are both Afro-Latino, so our offense was strictly toward her bigoted behavior and clear lack of knowledge. Looking at it from a social psychology viewpoint, staying mute in this instance can hold different perceptions. Even if a joke is “funny”, it does not negate those that find it offensive, I firmly believe that intent does not equal impact. One of the factors to rule in with this girl specifically was the reasoning behind her so-called joke. There’s the possibility that she made the joke toward us based on negative stereotypes or the conditioned ideology that Latin culture holds toward Afro-Latinos that is primarily fueled on colorism. Regardless of her intention behind it, it was not kind. Aronson et. al (2019) notes that prejudice attitudes hold negative intent and through that meaning, there is the chance that she was trying to provoke us by using phrasing that can be perceived as harmful.
Using CogLab, complete the levels-of-processing e xperiment and create a r eport on the e xperiment.In your report, write a brief introduction of the e xperiment explaining the levels-of-processing framework. Next, in the M ethods section, describe the process that you followed to complete the experiment. Make sure to include enough information so that others can also perform the same experiment successfully.Finally, describe the e xperimental results in all the three conditions. In addition, identify the condition where you performed the best and the worst. Provide a rationale explaining why the results differed in all the three conditions. Summarize your r eport, including answers to the following questions:Were the results in accordance with your e xpectations? Provide a rationale to support your answer.Did anything about the e xperiment surprise you? If yes, what?What factors would influence the results of the levels-of-processing e xperiment?
Required ResourcesRead/review the following resources for this activity:Textbook: Chapter 5, 6LessonMinimum of 2 scholarly sources (in addition to the course textbook)InstructionsThis assignment is the first step in a three part project. You only need to focus on part one at this point. Each step will build on earlier steps. However, it is not a matter of providing a rough draft of all or even part of the entire project here in week three. That is, further steps might require completely new and original text. At the same time, completing each step will aid you in completing a future step or future steps. And, you should use the same topic in all steps.First, select a topic of moral controversy, debate, disagreement, and dispute, Examples of such topics are euthanasia, the death penalty, abortion, cloning, etc. You can pick any such topic. It need not be listed here.Next, detail the positions of each side of the ethical debate. Note at least two moral reasons each side presents to show their view on the topic is correct.Now, we want to evaluate these positions using the moral theories we studied this week:What would an Ethical Egoist say about this topic? What side would the Ethical Egoist take? What would the Ethical Egoist say to justify their moral position? Is there a conflict between loyalty to self and to community relevant to your topic? If so, how so? Note what you feel is the best course of action.What would a Social Contract Ethicist say about this topic? What side would the Social Contract Ethicist take? What would the Social Contract Ethicist say to justify their moral position? Does your topic involve a collision between personal obligations and national ones? If so, how so? Note what you feel is the best course of action.Finally, reference and discuss any professional code of ethics relevant to your topic such as the AMA code for doctors, the ANA code for nurses, or any other pertinent professional code. State whether and how your chosen topic involves any conflicts between professional and familial duties.Cite the textbook and incorporate outside sources, including citations.Writing Requirements (APA format)Length: 3-4pages (not including title page or references page)1-inch marginsDouble spaced12-point Times New Roman fontTitle pageReferences page (minimum of 2 scholarly sources in addition to the course textbook)ReferenceRachels, S., & Rachels, J. (2019). The elements of moral philosophy (9th ed.). Mcgraw-Hill Education.
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
