Application Activity #10

/in /by

Watch this episode of According to Jim, Jim Almighty. In this episode Jim thinks that he can design women better than the creator did. Many gender stereotypes are depicted and reinforced (and some are even abandoned) during this show. Keep track and write down all of the stereotypes for men and for women that are mentioned in the show. With your group, discuss and classify them into physical, sexual, personality, social, and emotional and discuss whether they are accurate, inaccurate, or an exaggeration of a true difference.

Note, if you cannot open the video, you may have to search for “According to Jim, Jim Almighty” in youtube.

“What Is The Nature Of The Mind?” And “How Do We Acquire Knowledge

/in /by

An overarching theme in the history of psychological thought can be summarized with two questions: “What is the nature of the mind?” and “How do we acquire knowledge?”.
When contemplating the nature of the mind you must assess to what extent a theory/approach considers the mind a physical or non-physical phenomenon. A theorist can hold a “soft materialist stance” and argue that the mind is a product of the physical world but has non-physical properties, or that is a completely non-physical thing that does not obey the causal laws of the physical world (see: Descartes).
When discussing how we acquire knowledge the main point is to assess if we can trust our senses (Empiricism vs. Rationalism).
Compare two contrasting views from two different Western Countries (France, Britain, or Germany) on the nature of the mind and how we acquire knowledge. You can pick specific authors to elucidate your point, but you should be able to identify a trend within each of the countries you pick. This analysis should be at least 4 pages, double spaced, in APA format. Feel free to use outside sources to help clarify your point but the information you need should be in the textbook.

Discussion: Research Design And T Tests: How Are They Connected?

/in /by

Whether in a scholarly or practitioner setting, good research and data analysis should have the benefit of peer feedback. For this Discussion, you will perform an article critique on t tests. Be sure and remember that the goal is to obtain constructive feedback to improve the research and its interpretation, so please view this as an opportunity to learn from one another.

To prepare for this Discussion:

  • Review the Learning Resources and the media programs related to t tests.
  • Search for and select a quantitative article specific to your discipline and related to t tests. Help with this task may be found in the Course guide and assignment help linked in this week’s Learning Resources. Also, you can use as a guide the Research Design Alignment Table located in this week’s Learning Resources

 

Write a 3- to 5-paragraph critique of the article. In your critique, include responses to the following:

  • Which is the research design used by the authors?
  • Why did the authors use this t test?
  • Do you think it’s the most appropriate choice? Why or why not?
  • Did the authors display the data?
  • Do the results stand alone? Why or why not?
  • Did the authors report effect size? If yes, is this meaningful?

Be sure to support your Main Post and Response Post with reference to the week’s Learning Resources and other scholarly evidence in APA Style.

 

Required Readings

Frankfort-Nachmias, C., Leon-Guerrero, A., & Davis, G. (2020). Social statistics for a diverse society (9th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Chapter 8, “Testing Hypothesis” (pp. 243-279)

Wagner, III, W. E. (2020). Using IBM® SPSS® statistics for research methods and social science statistics (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Chapter 6, “Testing Hypotheses Using Means and Cross-Tabulation” (previously read in Week 5)
Chapter 11, “Editing Output” (previously read in Week 2, 3, and 4)

https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/rsch8210r

Article is attached

Rubric Detail – Blackboard Learn

file:///C/Users/bryants/Pictures/Camera Roll/Rubric Detail – Blackboard Learn.html[3/29/2021 10:17:23 AM]

Rubric Detail Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.

Excellent Good Fair Poor

Discussion Posting Content

7.2 (36%) – 8 (40%)

Discussion posting demonstrates an excellent understanding of all of the concepts and key points presented in the text(s) and Learning Resources. Posting provides significant detail (including multiple relevant examples), evidence from the readings and other scholarly sources, and discerning ideas.

6.4 (32%) – 7.1 (35.5%)

Discussion posting demonstrates a good understanding of most of the concepts and key points presented in the text(s) and Learning Resources. Posting provides moderate detail (including at least one pertinent example), evidence from the readings and other scholarly sources, and discerning ideas.

5.6 (28%) – 6.3 (31.5%)

Discussion posting demonstrates a fair understanding of the concepts and key points as presented in the text(s) and Learning Resources. Posting may be lacking or incorrect in some area, or in detail and specificity, and/or may not include sufficient pertinent examples or provide sufficient evidence from the readings.

0 (0%) – 5.5 (27.5%)

Discussion posting demonstrates poor or no understanding of the concepts and key points of the text(s) and Learning Resources. Posting is incorrect and/or shallow, and/or does not include any pertinent examples or provide sufficient evidence from the readings.

Peer Feedback and Interaction

7.2 (36%) – 8 (40%)

Response posting is excellent and fully contributes to the quality of interaction by offering substantive

6.4 (32%) – 7.1 (35.5%)

Response posting is good and partially contributes to the quality of interaction by

5.6 (28%) – 6.3 (31.5%)

Response posting is fair and partially contributes to the quality of interaction but offers insufficient

0 (0%) – 5.5 (27.5%)

Student does not interact with peers (0 points) or the response posting does not contribute to the

Name: RSCH_8210_Week6_Discussion_Rubric

Grid View List View

 

https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/bbgs-deep-links-BBLEARN/app/course/rubric?course_id=_16810844_1&rubric_id=_2228875_1#
https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/bbgs-deep-links-BBLEARN/app/course/rubric?course_id=_16810844_1&rubric_id=_2228875_1#
https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/bbgs-deep-links-BBLEARN/app/course/rubric?course_id=_16810844_1&rubric_id=_2228875_1#

 

Rubric Detail – Blackboard Learn

file:///C/Users/bryants/Pictures/Camera Roll/Rubric Detail – Blackboard Learn.html[3/29/2021 10:17:23 AM]

constructive critiques, suggestions, in- depth questions, additional resources, and stimulating thoughts and/or probes that draw from the readings and other scholarly sources.

offering adequate constructive critiques, suggestions, in- depth questions, additional resources, and stimulating thoughts and/or probes that draw from the readings and other scholarly sources.

constructive critiques or suggestions, shallow questions, or provides poor quality additional resources.

quality of interaction by offering any constructive critiques, suggestions, questions, or additional resources.

Writing 3.6 (18%) – 4 (20%) Postings are well organized, use scholarly tone, contain original writing and proper paraphrasing, follow APA Style, contain very few or no writing and/or spelling errors, and are fully consistent with graduate- level writing style.

3.2 (16%) – 3.5 (17.5%)

Postings are mostly consistent with graduate- level writing style. Postings may have some small organization, scholarly tone, writing, or APA Style issues, and/or may contain a few writing and spelling errors.

2.8 (14%) – 3.1 (15.5%)

Postings are somewhat below graduate-level writing style. Postings may be lacking in organization, scholarly tone, APA Style, and/or contain many writing and/or spelling errors, or show moderate reliance on quoting versus original writing and paraphrasing.

0 (0%) – 2.7 (13.5%)

ostings are well below graduate- level writing style expectations for organization, scholarly tone, APA Style, and writing, or show heavy reliance on quoting.

Total Points: 20

Name: RSCH_8210_Week6_Discussion_Rubric

 

  • Local Disk
    • Rubric Detail – Blackboard Learn
  1. Fja2JvYXJkJTIwTGVhcm4uaHRtbAA=:
    1. bottom_Exit:
    2. bottom_Exit_(1):

Discussion: Work Engagement

/in /by

All organizations seek employees who are enthusiastic and energetic as well as intelligent and focused. Employees who are highly engaged with their work are found to be more productive and are less likely to exhibit withdrawal behaviors such as absenteeism, burnout, and turnover. The term engagement can describe psychological states and behaviors, which together can be challenging to define and measure. Work engagement may be a unique concept or simply other constructs recombined, with both attitudinal and behavioral components, but it is considered to be an asset for organizations that can foster engaged employees and reap the benefits.

In this Discussion, you will differentiate work engagement from job involvement and determine whether it is a job attitude. You will also explore whether engagement is the opposite of burnout and what that means.

To prepare for this Discussion:

  • Read the article “Burnout and Work Engagement: The JD–R approach.” Consider the antecedents to both burnout and work engagement and whether they are opposing aspects or if they are just related.
  • Review the article “Attitudes: Satisfaction, Commitment and Involvement.” Identify how the article defines work engagement and differentiates it from job involvement and organizational commitment.
  • Read the article “A Process Model of Employee Engagement: The Learning Climate and Its Relationship With Extra-Role Performance Behaviors.” Consider whether work engagement is a job attitude or a consequence of job attitudes. Also consider whether it can be differentiated from job involvement and organizational commitment.
  • Read the article “‘Same Same’ but Different? Can Work Engagement Be Discriminated From Job Involvement and Organizational Commitment?” Consider the differentiation of work engagement from job involvement and organizational commitment. Also consider whether burnout and work engagement are opposites or much more.
  • · Read the article “Enhancing Work Engagement: The Roles of Psychological Capital, Authentic Leadership, and Work Empowerment.” Think about the definitions and the predictors of work engagement.
  • Review the article “Job Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and Job Affect: A Century of Continuity and Change.” Consider whether work engagement could be something other than a job attitude.
  • Read the article “Timeline of Engagement Research and Future Research Directions.” Compare work engagement to burnout.
  • Read the article “Innovative Tools and Techniques to Ensure Effective Employee Engagement.” Consider the definitions presented for work engagement.

 

By Day 3

Post a response to the following:  

Provide an explanation of whether work engagement is a job attitude or a consequence of job attitudes and why. Then explain whether work engagement is the same as or different from job involvement and why. Finally, explain whether work engagement is the opposite of job burnout or something distinct from job burnout and why.