UNIT 9 Exploring The Etiology Of Schizophrenia

/in /by

UNIT 9 Exploring the Etiology of Schizophrenia

In their book Divided Minds, identical twins Carolyn Spiro and Pamela Spiro Wagner describe a close childhood relationship, apart from typical sibling rivalries. Carolyn often felt she had to prove that she was as intelligent and creative as Pamela. As they entered their teenage years, however, the twins grew apart. Pamela’s increasingly bizarre behaviors became an embarrassment to Carolyn. By the time the twins were college students at Brown University, Pamela was becoming more and more reclusive. Eventually, Pamela had a psychotic episode, although it was years before she was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia. Carolyn went on to graduate from Brown and then from Harvard Medical School. She is now a practicing psychiatrist. Pamela lives nearby, doing her artwork when she can but constantly battling to keep her schizophrenia under control with medications and counseling. The twins once again are very close emotionally.

Address the following using headings to match content in each bullet point:

· Drawing from the unit readings and your understanding of the etiology of schizophrenia, how might you explain why Pamela developed schizophrenia but Carolyn did not?

 

Support your ideas with references to the course texts, articles from this learning unit, articles from the Optional Readings, or articles from peer-reviewed journals.

 

Readings

Use your Abnormal Psychology text to read the following:

· Chapter 8, “Schizophrenia Spectrum and Other Psychotic Disorders,” pages 210–240.

DSM-5 Review

Use the DSM-5 to read the following:​

· In Section II, “Schizophrenia Spectrum and Other Psychotic Disorders.”

. Review the main diagnoses found here.

Internet

· National Institute of Mental Health. (2016). Mental health medications. Retrieved from http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/mental-health-medications/index.shtml

General Psychology Discussion

/in /by

Do you take vision for granted? Many of us do. Select an activity you can do safely with your eyes closed (e.g. play catch with something soft, fold laundry, put away dishes, water plants, walk the dog). You will likely need a person to help you. First, perform the activity with both eyes open. Cover one eye gently with a patch of some sort or close one (if you can do it!) and do the activity again. Then try it with both eyes closed. (PLEASE pick something you can be safe doing!  Check for sharp objects, don’t go in the street, etc.)  Then, answer the following questions:

  1. What differences did you note in your ability to judge the shape, distance, speed, and direction of the objects with which you were working?
  2. How did your attention change or focus differently in each situation?
  3. Which situation was the most difficult for you? Now, practice doing the activity several times under these most difficult circumstances. Did you adapt? How long did it take?
  4. Do you think there are some activities that are easier to perform completely blindfolded than with one eye patched? If so, what might be an example? If not, why not?

Citing Guidelines:

You shouldn’t need to cite this week, but if you use an outside source beyond your experience for some reason, use APA style.

Writing Guidelines: 

Delete the questions themselves as it makes it look nicer (and we all know what the questions were), but refer to the questions in your answers.  Also, number them!  For example:

1. I decided to try ____ as an activity.  I noted several differences in my judgments.  First, I noticed that ___.  Second, I noticed _____.  I also noticed that ___ was not different.

Construct proper paragraphs and use complete sentences.  It may be appropriate (and necessary) to use several paragraphs for each numbered response.  Also, edit your work.

Collaborative Learning Community: Video Games Violence and Aggression

/in /by

Collaborative Learning Community: 

Video Games Violence and Aggression

We will be conducting a quasi-experimental study as they are used to distinguish relationships in preexisting variables (Privitera, 2020). We decided to use a quasi-experimental research design as the conditions and experiences of participants are not in our full control and factors are not being manipulated (Privitera, 2020). Our goal is to gain a better understanding regarding the correlation between Video Game Violence and aggression.

We will be observing aggressive acts therefore, it would be unethical to control for aggressive acts to take place. Specifically, we will be using a Non-equivalent control group pretest-posttest design to compare aggression scores before and after manipulation. We will test the dependent variable compared to the results of the Non-equivalent control group (Privitera, 2020). Quasi-experimental research allows for certain or specific range values for the independent variable where correlation study measures all values for the independent variable (Privitera, 2020). For this study, the treatment group will be instructed to play 3 hours of violent video games whereas the non-equivalent control group will play 3 hours of non-violent video games.

It is important to note that video games are rated E (Everyone), Everyone 10+, Teen, Mature 17+, Adults only 18+, and Rating Pending (ESRB, 2020). We hypothesize that there will be a relationship in the amount of time spent playing video games and reported levels of aggressive behavior. The H0 is that there is a no relationship between time spent playing video games and level of aggressive behavior between the control and treatment groups. The H1 is that the treatment group will have increased levels of aggression following the 3-hour gaming period compared to the control group. The independent variable in this study is the time spent playing video game and the dependent variable is the level of aggressive behavior.

For this study, there are two variables that are being defined and measured. The independent variable for this study is the time spent playing violent video games. To measure how frequently each participant plays violent games, they will be issued a questionnaire asking how often they play video games and for how long, what genre of video games do they play most often, how many violent games do they own, ect. Next, participants were randomly assigned into a control or treatment group. The treatment group are to be instructed to play a violent video game for 3 hours while the control group will play non-violent video games.

Aggression was measured using the Brief Aggression Questionnaire (Buss & Perry, 1992). This survey consists of 29 questions measuring physical and verbal aggression, anger, and hostility. For this study, aggression is defined as any behavior intended to harm others who want to avoid it (Bushman & Huesmann, 2010, as cited in Webster et al., 2014). The survey was reissued to each participant following the 3-hour gaming period to distinguish any differences in their level of aggression.

Participants will be obtained randomly through email following IRB approval. To avoid any ethical issues, participants had to be 18 years or older to partake in this study. Although there is no previous gaming experience required for this study, it is recommended that participants are familiar with the nature of violent video games. Individuals who are sensitive to flashing lights and/or epilepsy should also refrain from this form of study.

Internal validity is used to measure whether or not the experiment was conducted correctly (Slack & Draugalis, 2001). Internal validity is based on the number of confounding variables (Slack & Draugalis, 2001). To have a high internal validity than you must avoid confounding variables because the more confounding variable you have the lower the internal validity will be. This experiment will have a high internal validity because there will be no confounding variables such as regressions to the mean or changing the instruments used. The experiment will also not include confounding variables such as participants dropping out, unexpected changes, and not completing protocols. This will ensure that the internal validity will be high for this experiment.

The group will ensure that the study has high internal validity by having a single independent variable. The group will also ensure that the study has high validity by making sure to using random sampling. Each participant will be randomly assigned to either the control or treatment group because it ensures that there will be a sample that can represent the entire population and makes sure that the chance of being selected is equal.

When conducting an experiment is essential that the study be conducted in a way that is ethical for the researcher and the participants (Britton, 1979). When the participants are presented with the informing and consent form it is important that they must be aware of any risks that may be associated with the study. The participants also must be aware that their data will remain anonymous This ensures that the researcher is conducting the experiment in an ethical manner.

The debriefing form also allows the participants to have access to the necessary information for reporting in case they felt that the study was performed in an unethical manner. In this specific study the ethical concerns that emerge about the participants is that the video games may make them become more of an aggressive person which can be displayed in many different ways. Another ethical concern that could emerge from this study is that the participants will be exposed to video games that contains violence, cursing, and sexual nature. This study also could be a risk for those sensitive to bright and flashing lights or epilepsy, or seizures.

7.

8.

References

Britton, B. K. (1979). Ethical and educational aspects of participating as a subject in psychology  experiments. Teaching of Psychology, 6(4), 195-198.

Privitera, G.J. (2020). Research methods for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA:  Sage

Ratings Guides, Categories, Content Descriptors. (2020, June 26). Retrieved September 22,  2020, from https://www.esrb.org/ratings-guide/

Slack, M. K., & Draugalis Jr, J. R. (2001). Establishing the internal and external validity of experimental studies. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 58(22), 2173-2181.

Webster, Gregory & Dewall, C & Pond, Jr, Richard & Deckman, Timothy & Jonason, Peter & Le, Bonnie & Nichols, Austin & Orozco, Tatiana & Crysel, Laura & Crosier, Benjamin & Smith, Carrie & Paddock, E. & Nezlek, John & Kirkpatrick, Lee & Bryan, Angela & Bator, Renee. (2014). The Brief Aggression Questionnaire: Psychometric and Behavioral Evidence for an Efficient Measure of Trait Aggression. Aggressive Behavior.

Running head: COLLABORATIVE LEARNING COMMUNITY

COLLABORATIVE LEARNING COMMUNITY 1

 

 

 

 

Collaborative Learning Community:

Video Games Violence and Aggression

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Collaborative Learning Community:

Video Games Violence and Aggression

We will be conducting a quasi-experimental study as they are used to distinguish relationships in preexisting variables (Privitera, 2020). We decided to use a quasi-experimental research design as the conditions and experiences of participants are not in our full control and factors are not being manipulated (Privitera, 2020). Our goal is to gain a better understanding regarding the correlation between Video Game Violence and aggression.

We will be observing aggressive acts therefore, it would be unethical to control for aggressive acts to take place. Specifically, we will be using a Non-equivalent control group pretest-posttest design to compare aggression scores before and after manipulation. We will test the dependent variable compared to the results of the Non-equivalent control group (Privitera, 2020). Quasi-experimental research allows for certain or specific range values for the independent variable where correlation study measures all values for the independent variable (Privitera, 2020). For this study, the treatment group will be instructed to play 3 hours of violent video games whereas the non-equivalent control group will play 3 hours of non-violent video games.

It is important to note that video games are rated E (Everyone), Everyone 10+, Teen, Mature 17+, Adults only 18+, and Rating Pending (ESRB, 2020). We hypothesize that there will be a relationship in the amount of time spent playing video games and reported levels of aggressive behavior. The H0 is that there is a no relationship between time spent playing video games and level of aggressive behavior between the control and treatment groups. The H1 is that the treatment group will have increased levels of aggression following the 3-hour gaming period compared to the control group. The independent variable in this study is the time spent playing video game and the dependent variable is the level of aggressive behavior.

For this study, there are two variables that are being defined and measured. The independent variable for this study is the time spent playing violent video games. To measure how frequently each participant plays violent games, they will be issued a questionnaire asking how often they play video games and for how long, what genre of video games do they play most often, how many violent games do they own, ect. Next, participants were randomly assigned into a control or treatment group. The treatment group are to be instructed to play a violent video game for 3 hours while the control group will play non-violent video games.

Aggression was measured using the Brief Aggression Questionnaire (Buss & Perry, 1992). This survey consists of 29 questions measuring physical and verbal aggression, anger, and hostility. For this study, aggression is defined as any behavior intended to harm others who want to avoid it (Bushman & Huesmann, 2010, as cited in Webster et al., 2014). The survey was reissued to each participant following the 3-hour gaming period to distinguish any differences in their level of aggression.

Participants will be obtained randomly through email following IRB approval. To avoid any ethical issues, participants had to be 18 years or older to partake in this study. Although there is no previous gaming experience required for this study, it is recommended that participants are familiar with the nature of violent video games. Individuals who are sensitive to flashing lights and/or epilepsy should also refrain from this form of study.

Internal validity is used to measure whether or not the experiment was conducted correctly (Slack & Draugalis, 2001). Internal validity is based on the number of confounding variables (Slack & Draugalis, 2001). To have a high internal validity than you must avoid confounding variables because the more confounding variable you have the lower the internal validity will be. This experiment will have a high internal validity because there will be no confounding variables such as regressions to the mean or changing the instruments used. The experiment will also not include confounding variables such as participants dropping out, unexpected changes, and not completing protocols. This will ensure that the internal validity will be high for this experiment.

The group will ensure that the study has high internal validity by having a single independent variable. The group will also ensure that the study has high validity by making sure to using random sampling. Each participant will be randomly assigned to either the control or treatment group because it ensures that there will be a sample that can represent the entire population and makes sure that the chance of being selected is equal.

When conducting an experiment is essential that the study be conducted in a way that is ethical for the researcher and the participants (Britton, 1979). When the participants are presented with the informing and consent form it is important that they must be aware of any risks that may be associated with the study. The participants also must be aware that their data will remain anonymous This ensures that the researcher is conducting the experiment in an ethical manner.

The debriefing form also allows the participants to have access to the necessary information for reporting in case they felt that the study was performed in an unethical manner. In this specific study the ethical concerns that emerge about the participants is that the video games may make them become more of an aggressive person which can be displayed in many different ways. Another ethical concern that could emerge from this study is that the participants will be exposed to video games that contains violence, cursing, and sexual nature. This study also could be a risk for those sensitive to bright and flashing lights or epilepsy, or seizures.

7.

8.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

Britton, B. K. (1979). Ethical and educational aspects of participating as a subject in psychology experiments. Teaching of Psychology, 6(4), 195-198.

Privitera, G.J. (2020). Research methods for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage

Ratings Guides, Categories, Content Descriptors. (2020, June 26). Retrieved September 22, 2020, from https://www.esrb.org/ratings-guide/

Slack, M. K., & Draugalis Jr, J. R. (2001). Establishing the internal and external validity of experimental studies. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 58(22), 2173-2181.

Webster, Gregory & Dewall, C & Pond, Jr, Richard & Deckman, Timothy & Jonason, Peter & Le, Bonnie & Nichols, Austin & Orozco, Tatiana & Crysel, Laura & Crosier, Benjamin & Smith, Carrie & Paddock, E. & Nezlek, John & Kirkpatrick, Lee & Bryan, Angela & Bator, Renee. (2014). The Brief Aggression Questionnaire: Psychometric and Behavioral Evidence for an Efficient Measure of Trait Aggression. Aggressive Behavior. 10.1002/ab.21507.

CNL-545 Topic 4: Safety Planning And Harm Reduction Planning

/in /by

Directions: Respond to the prompts following each of the scenarios below based on the topical readings and any other resources you find helpful. Each response should be 75-100 words.

Scenario 1: Jeannine and Robert have been together for five years and have been married for the past three years. They live in an apartment together. There have been a few instances of physical violence from Robert toward Jeannine throughout the relationship, mostly shoving her around and, a couple of times, slapping her, always followed by effusive apology, explaining his actions as stress from his job.  Imagine you are Jeannine’s counselor and she reveals that Robert has been showing signs of more violence, escalating in verbal threats. A couple of weeks ago, he grabbed her by the shoulders and shook her so violently, she ended up with a sore neck and migraine headache. Last week, he punched her in the ribs a couple of times, resulting in bruising, which she revealed to you. She fears for her safety, though she is not yet ready to move out or leave him.

1.  Describe Jeannine’s level of lethality:

2.  Devise a harm reduction plan for Jeannine.

3.  Explain why you devised the harm reduction plan the way you did:

Scenario 2: Maria states she met Justin at a party a couple months ago. They have gone out a few times. Justin has never been to Maria’s house but she has been to his apartment; client states she usually meets him at a restaurant or club. Maria tells you that the other night, while out with Justin, he became “physically aggressive.” She reports that she woke the next morning at her home with a lack of memory from the night prior. She tells you that she was too ashamed to report it to the police and she wasn’t sure what happened. Imagine you are Maria’s counselor and she reveals to you that yesterday Justin became abusive and threatening toward her after she refused his sexual advances. Justin threatened that he would break off their relationship and find someone “more mature” in her attitude toward sex. She is afraid that he will follow through on his threats to break off their relationship. You know from past visits that she has self-esteem problems.

1.  Describe Maria’s level of lethality.

2.  Devise a safety plan for Maria:

3.  Explain why you devised the safety plan the way you did:

Scenario 3: Arthur and Melissa have been married for seven years but have been separated for the past year. The couple has two small children. They share custody. Imagine Arthur is your client, and, during a session, Arthur reveals that Melissa has recently become physically violent with him, slapping and punching him, but he has been too embarrassed to disclose the abuse. Client states that his wife has never acted this way before and he is afraid that the children may not be safe when left alone with her. Client states he is unsure about how to protect himself and, more so, his children.

1.  Describe Arthur’s level of lethality:

2.  Devise a safety plan for Arthur:

3.  Explain why you devised the safety plan the way you did:

CNL-545 Topic 4: Safety Planning and Harm Reduction Planning

Directions: Respond to the prompts following each of the scenarios below based on the topical readings and any other resources you find helpful. Each response should be 75-100 words.

Scenario 1: Jeannine and Robert have been together for five years and have been married for the past three years. They live in an apartment together. There have been a few instances of physical violence from Robert toward Jeannine throughout the relationship, mostly shoving her around and, a couple of times, slapping her, always followed by effusive apology, explaining his actions as stress from his job. Imagine you are Jeannine’s counselor and she reveals that Robert has been showing signs of more violence, escalating in verbal threats. A couple of weeks ago, he grabbed her by the shoulders and shook her so violently, she ended up with a sore neck and migraine headache. Last week, he punched her in the ribs a couple of times, resulting in bruising, which she revealed to you. She fears for her safety, though she is not yet ready to move out or leave him.

1. Describe Jeannine’s level of lethality:

 

 

2. Devise a harm reduction plan for Jeannine.

 

 

3. Explain why you devised the harm reduction plan the way you did:

 

 

Scenario 2: Maria states she met Justin at a party a couple months ago. They have gone out a few times. Justin has never been to Maria’s house but she has been to his apartment; client states she usually meets him at a restaurant or club. Maria tells you that the other night, while out with Justin, he became “physically aggressive.” She reports that she woke the next morning at her home with a lack of memory from the night prior. She tells you that she was too ashamed to report it to the police and she wasn’t sure what happened. Imagine you are Maria’s counselor and she reveals to you that yesterday Justin became abusive and threatening toward her after she refused his sexual advances. Justin threatened that he would break off their relationship and find someone “more mature” in her attitude toward sex. She is afraid that he will follow through on his threats to break off their relationship. You know from past visits that she has self-esteem problems.

1. Describe Maria’s level of lethality.

 

 

2. Devise a safety plan for Maria:

 

 

3. Explain why you devised the safety plan the way you did:

 

 

Scenario 3: Arthur and Melissa have been married for seven years but have been separated for the past year. The couple has two small children. They share custody. Imagine Arthur is your client, and, during a session, Arthur reveals that Melissa has recently become physically violent with him, slapping and punching him, but he has been too embarrassed to disclose the abuse. Client states that his wife has never acted this way before and he is afraid that the children may not be safe when left alone with her. Client states he is unsure about how to protect himself and, more so, his children.

1. Describe Arthur’s level of lethality:

 

 

2. Devise a safety plan for Arthur:

 

 

3. Explain why you devised the safety plan the way you did:

© 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

 

© 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.