Directions: Answer Each Question In Your Own Words

Directions Answer Each Question In Your Own Words Do Not Copy Materi

Answer each question in your own words. Do not copy material from the textbook, the internet, or any other source. All homework is subject to plagiarism scans. Read each assigned chapter thoroughly to understand the material. Provide detailed, multi-paragraph answers based on your comprehension. Simply rearranging textbook words, such as definitions or paragraphs, does not constitute your own words; your answers must reflect your understanding and be written in your own words.

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

Psychology, as a discipline, has evolved through various theoretical perspectives that interpret human behavior and mental processes. Among the earliest frameworks are Structuralism and Functionalism. These schools of thought laid the groundwork for modern psychology by emphasizing different approaches to understanding the mind. Additionally, subsequent perspectives such as Behaviorism, Psychoanalysis, and the Biopsychological approach have contributed to a multifaceted understanding of human functioning. This paper compares and contrasts these historical and contemporary perspectives, elaborating on their core principles, differences, and contributions to psychology.

Comparison of Structuralism and Functionalism

Structuralism, pioneered by Wilhelm Wundt and further developed by Edward Titchener, primarily focused on breaking down mental processes into basic elements or structures. Using introspection, a method where individuals examined their conscious thoughts and sensations, structuralists aimed to map the components of the mind much like a chemist might analyze elements of a compound. Their approach was highly systematic, emphasizing the analysis of immediate experiences to understand the structure of consciousness.

In contrast, Functionalism, influenced by William James, concentrated on the purpose and function of mental processes rather than their structure. Functionalists believed that understanding how the mind helps individuals adapt to their environment was more important than merely analyzing its components. They explored mental processes such as perception, memory, and learning, emphasizing their role in enabling humans to survive and thrive. Unlike structuralism, which focused on the components, functionalism considered the mind as a whole, emphasizing its adaptive functions.

While both perspectives sought to understand the mind, they diverged significantly in methodology and focus. Structuralism relied heavily on introspection and aimed to dissect consciousness into simple elements, often seen as overly subjective. Functionalism was more pragmatic, emphasizing observable behaviors and higher mental functions that support adaptation. Both schools contributed foundational ideas to psychology, but their differing approaches marked a significant divergence in early psychological thought.

Behaviorism and Its Principles

Behaviorism emerged in the early 20th century as a reaction against introspective methods that were considered subjective and unreliable. Represented chiefly by John B. Watson, behaviorism defined psychology as the scientific study of observable behavior. According to Watson, learning occurs through interactions with the environment where behaviors are acquired via conditioning. He argued that mental states or consciousness were not suitable objects of scientific investigation because they cannot be objectively measured.

In Watson’s view, learning primarily takes place through classical conditioning, where an organism associates a neutral stimulus with a reflexive response. For example, a dog conditioned to salivate at the sound of a bell exemplifies this process. Behaviorists emphasize that behavior is shaped and maintained by reinforcement or punishment, leading to observable changes over time. This approach underscored the importance of environmental influences over innate or subconscious factors.

A major difference between behaviorism and humanism is their view of human nature. Humanism, championed by psychologists such as Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow, emphasizes free will, self-actualization, and individual subjective experience. It perceives humans as active agents capable of growth and decision-making. Conversely, behaviorism tends to see humans as reactive organisms whose behaviors are primarily learned responses to external stimuli, downplaying innate qualities or internal mental states. The two perspectives differ fundamentally in their assumptions about human nature and the sources of behavior.

Psychoanalysis and Its Views

Psychoanalysis, developed by Sigmund Freud, is a psychodynamic theory that emphasizes the influence of unconscious forces on behavior and mental health. Freud believed that many psychological problems stem from unresolved conflicts and repressed impulses buried in the unconscious mind. According to psychoanalytic theory, these repressed feelings and instincts, especially aggressive and sexual urges, can manifest as nervous disorders or neuroses if not properly managed or understood.

Freud proposed that personality develops through a dynamic interplay between three components: the id, ego, and superego. The id, present from birth, operates on pleasure principles and seeks immediate gratification. The ego develops to mediate between the impulsive id and the moral constraints of the superego, which internalizes societal rules. Personality formation results from the resolution of conflicts among these components during early development. These conflicts, if unresolved, can lead to neuroses, anxiety, or other mental health issues, according to Freud.

Freud's psychoanalytic approach places significant emphasis on childhood experiences and unconscious motivations as key factors shaping personality and causing psychological disorders. Treatment involves uncovering repressed memories and unconscious conflicts through techniques such as free association, dream analysis, and transference to achieve emotional insight and resolution. Overall, psychoanalysis portrays human behavior as largely influenced by unconscious drives that are often hidden from conscious awareness, significantly shaping personality and mental health.

Differences Between Psychology and Psychiatry

Psychology is a broad scientific discipline that studies human behavior, mental processes, and emotional functioning through research and psychological testing. Psychologists typically hold doctoral degrees (Ph.D. or Psy.D.) and use therapy, assessments, and research methods to understand and treat mental health issues. Psychiatry, on the other hand, is a medical specialty requiring a medical degree (MD or DO). Psychiatrists can prescribe medication and often focus on the biological aspects of mental disorders, integrating biological, psychological, and social perspectives in treatment.

The Biopsychological Perspective

The biopsychological perspective, also known as the biological perspective, emphasizes the influence of biological processes on behavior and mental states. It examines how brain structures, neurochemical activity, genetics, and physiological functions contribute to understanding human behavior. For example, variations in neurotransmitter levels can influence mood and cognition, while genetic predispositions may increase the risk of mental disorders.

This perspective asserts that many psychological phenomena have biological underpinnings and can often be explained through brain function and physiology. It emphasizes the importance of studying the brain and nervous system to comprehend how biological factors interact with environmental influences, shaping behavior and mental health.

Case Studies in Schizophrenia

Case studies involve detailed examinations of individual cases to understand complex psychological conditions such as schizophrenia. In researching schizophrenia, a case study might include demographic information, personal history, family background, and symptom descriptions. It would record observations of hallucinations, delusions, disorganized thinking, and social withdrawal, which are typical symptoms. The case might also explore the patient's response to medication, therapy, and social support systems.

Additionally, the researcher could include historical data on onset, progression of symptoms, and any triggers or exacerbating factors. Neurobiological assessments, such as brain imaging or genetic testing, might also be part of the case history. In this way, case studies provide rich, contextualized insights into the individual's experience, which can lead to better understanding and treatment strategies for schizophrenia, as well as contribute to broader theories about the disorder.

Naturalistic Observation

Naturalistic observation is a research method where researchers observe subjects in their natural environment without interference or manipulation. This approach is often preferred because it provides data on behavior in real-life contexts, increasing ecological validity. For example, observing children in a playground or animals in their habitat allows researchers to see genuine behavior rather than behavior influenced by artificial settings.

One advantage is that naturalistic observation reduces researcher bias and reactivity, making the behavior observed more authentic. However, limitations include lack of control over variables, which makes it difficult to establish causal relationships. Additionally, it can be time-consuming and challenging to observe rare behaviors or events, and ethical concerns about privacy and consent can arise when observing individuals in natural settings.

Despite these limitations, naturalistic observation remains a valuable tool in psychology for understanding how individuals behave in everyday environments, providing insights that are often unavailable through experimental methods alone.

The Correlational Method and Correlation Coefficients

The correlational method examines the relationship between two variables to determine if and how they are connected. The strength and direction of this relationship are quantified using a correlational coefficient, typically ranging from -1.00 to +1.00. A positive correlation indicates that as one variable increases, so does the other, such as a positive correlation between SAT scores and GPA. Conversely, a negative correlation signifies that as one variable increases, the other decreases, like hours spent watching TV and academic performance.

When a researcher finds a positive correlation between SAT scores and freshman year GPAs, it suggests that students who perform well on the SAT tend to also have higher GPAs in their first year. However, it is important to remember that correlation does not imply causation; the relationship may be influenced by other factors such as socioeconomic status, study habits, or motivation. The correlational method helps identify patterns and relationships but cannot determine cause-and-effect relationships.

Understanding these correlations can inform future research or interventions by highlighting variables that tend to vary together, guiding more detailed experimental studies to explore causal links.

The Experimental Method and Its Limitations

The experimental method involves manipulating one or more independent variables to observe their effect on a dependent variable, allowing researchers to establish causal relationships. For example, in the provided study, the independent variable is the dose of methamphetamine administered, while the dependent variable is feeding behavior. Random assignment to experimental and control groups helps ensure that results are due to the manipulation rather than other factors.

Compared to the correlational method, experiments can determine causality, making them more powerful for testing hypotheses. However, experiments also have limitations. They can be artificial and lack ecological validity when conducted in laboratory settings. Ethical concerns may also limit the types of manipulations that can be performed. Additionally, experiments may not always account for variables that influence behavior outside of the experimental setup, and results may not always generalize to real-world situations.

Analysis of a Research Scenario on Psychomotor Stimulants

In the experiment involving rats and methamphetamine, the independent variable is the type of injection, which is either methamphetamine or saline solution. The dependent variable is the amount of time the rats spend feeding, which indicates feeding behavior. The control group consists of rats that received the saline solution, serving as a baseline for comparison. The experimental group comprises rats that received the methamphetamine injection, allowing assessment of the drug's effects on feeding behavior.

This setup helps isolate the effect of methamphetamine on feeding behavior, demonstrating how the independent variable influences the dependent measure. The results, showing decreased feeding in the drug group, suggest that methamphetamine suppresses feeding, consistent with its stimulant properties. This experiment exemplifies the scientific method's application in understanding drug effects on behavior and the importance of control groups in experimental designs.

References

• Cherry, K. (2020). What Is Behaviorism? Verywell Mind. https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-behaviorism-2794864
• Freud, S. (1923). The Ego and the Id. SE, 19: 12-66.
• James, W. (1890). The Principles of Psychology. Henry Holt and Company.
• Wundt, W. (1879). Principles of Physiological Psychology. Verlag von Wilhelm Engelmann.
• Watson, J. B. (1913). Psychology as the Behaviorist Views It. Psychological Review, 20(2), 158–177.
• Pinel, J. (2017). Biopsychology. Pearson.
• Rosenhan, D. L. (1973). On Being Sane in Insane Places. Science, 179(4070), 250–258.
• Neisser, U. (1967). Cognitive Psychology. Appleton-Century-Crofts.
• Gazzaniga, M. S., Ivry, R. B., & Mangun, G. R. (2018). Cognitive Neuroscience: The Biology of the Mind. W. W. Norton & Company.
• Myers, D. G. (2014). Psychology. Worth Publishers.