Book Reading #4: Opening Skinner's Box

Ch. 1 - Opening Skinner's Box: Chapter one discusses the the life and experiments of B.F. Skinner. Lauren Slater definitely has a unique style of writing and explaining this experiment. She is very loose with her stories and I am still not sure what is truth and what is her imagination. It is very hard to get over her flowery and very verbose manner of explaining. Beyond Slater's style though, I did find the thoughts on Skinner pretty entertaining. It definitely made me want to explore more about him and his experiments. It is interesting how people have such opposite opinions on Skinner's life and experiments. It definitely is intriguing to consider what life would be like if punishment was removed and only positive reinforcement was used to guide people. The idea of always being guided by something and never having your own free will is also a scary thought. I would of liked more insight into his actual experiments.

Ch. 2 - Obscura: Considering that we just finished reading Stanley Milgram's Obedience to Authority, I found this chapter quite interesting. Although it was explained rather poorly, it was nice to get a different vantage point of the obedience experiments. It was good hearing about some of the participants from someone besides Milgram. Hearing their thoughts on the experiment and how it affected their life really added another dimension to the experiment; it becomes more real and you realize that real people had to endure the effects of this experiment. Also, the aftermath of the experiment on Milgram himself was something I did not know about. He ended up losing his job and future jobs because of the harshness of his experiment. Milgram's wife gives up a nice point of view that Obedience to Authority does not even hint at.

Ch. 3 - On Being Sane in Insane Places: This chapter discusses Rosenhan and his experiment of going to psychiatric wards and implying being psychotic by claiming to hear a voice. This experiment pretty much destroyed the field of psychiatry because it proved that the doctors could not tell him and his sane friends from the other "insane" people that also were admitted to these hospitals. I think that this study did good to bring light to some problems in the field, but I do agree with some of its disputers in that if you pretend to be "sick" and ask for help, then the doctors are going to try to help you. I think it is good that Spritzer made the DSM more strict, and that nurses and doctors treat patients more kindly because of this experiment. I do also agree, however, with Rosenhann's claim that doctor's have trouble just saying "I do not know" and will go with prescribing instead of deferring in most situations. This is a problem that I think Rosenhan helped to fix with his experiment.

Ch. 4 - In the Unlikely Event of a Water Landing: Chapter 4 discusses the experiments of Darley and Latane which tries to explain the reason people do not react to emergencies. According to their findings, the larger a group is, the less responsible you feel as an individual if a crisis arises. Another find that they found was that you only worry about a problem if others are also worried. For instance, if a fire alarm goes off and no one seems to panic, then you assume that there is not a problem. I think these experiments were all very interesting and definitely true once you think about them. I think it is good to think about these situations because, as Slater points out, a person that realizes that people freeze up in emergencies will most likely not freeze up themselves. Everyone should learn the five stages in order to help prevent crisis situations from going un-acted upon, like the Genovese case.

Ch. 5 - Quieting the Mind: Chapter 5 focuses on the studies of Festinger and cognitive dissonance. The way I understand this is that it is a way to make situations fit your beliefs in order to avoid having to know that you are wrong. In the example of the Great Event with Mrs. Keech, the people that believed changed their belief from the world ending to the idea that they had saved the world by their beliefs. This made it so that they could get through the pain and avoid being wrong, according to Festinger. I do think that this does happen with people and that Festinger is correct to a degree, but I think he applies it to too much. Is there no such thing as faith? Are all explanations just made up and revised to make us feel better and fit our beliefs? It is definitely something worth pondering, but I do feel Festinger's theory is somewhat flawed considering that not everyone follows it.

Ch.6 - Monkey Love: Chapter 6 is about the experiments and theories of Harlow and his monkeys. He initially reported that all that monkeys (and humans) need was touch. His experiments disproved the ideas of love being based on the need to survive (i.e. food, sex). Eventually, as these monkeys with fake mothers grew up though, they went crazy. Without an actual mother to influence how to act properly, Harlow's monkeys went crazy. I feel that Harlow did find out some very important ideas wit his research, even if he was initially incorrect with his theory. His study of the need for touch, face, and play definitely impacted many different facets of the world at the time. I feel that his experiments showed that it is possible to replicate a mother, it is just better to have a real one. As Harlow's adversaries point out, we already knew this, and many monkeys died in search of proving it. Harlow just presented it with a flare of controversy, and so became more popular for it. I do agree with this, but also feel that Harlow did find some unknowns in his research.

Ch. 7 - Rat Park: The experiments that chapter 7 are based on are from Bruce Alexander and are about the causes of addiction. Normally, people think that addiction is caused by the substances. They assume we can not resist taking drugs and there is withdrawal if addicted. Alexander opposed this view, and stated that addiction was caused by cultural or physical constraints, as opposed to pharmacological ones. All the tests that proved addiction were based on rats cramped in cages. Alexander hypothesized that it was because of the rat's situation that they wanted to get high and take the drugs. His experiment of the Rat Park, where there was plenty of space and food and mating, showed that the rats did not choose to take the morphine laced water. They were content living their lives and not being high. I think this experiment is a very good one and definitely uncovered some good data. I do think it is mildly flawed in that there are no places for humans that equate to the rat park, so he might of made it a little too nice. But this extreme did help to better prove his results. In the end, I think we are far from understanding the human brain, and as Slater states, causes of addiction are still inconclusive.

Ch. 8 - Lost in the Mall: This chapter really made me think. According to Loftus, everything I remember might not even be true; this bothers me some. In Loftus' experiments, she tried to prove that memories could be implanted, that memories can not be trusted. With simple suggestions from people you trust, you can be convinced that an event happened. Loftus used the idea of convincing a person that they got lost in the mall when they were younger. I think this is rather intriguing and it is pretty impressive that 25% of the people completely made up stories and believed them. Although this is not a majority, I agree with Loftus in saying it is a significant minority. When applied to accusations (such as the sexual assaults accused to parents), having 25% of those being false is rather troubling. Overall, although no one can agree on whether or not Loftus' experiments are factual, I think it does bother me to realize that my memories might not even be fully true. I realize that memory degrades over time, but the idea that a completely false one can be created is a little strange. People are made up of their experiences and memories, and so this is why I think Loftus is so controversial, she is essentially taking that away from people.

Ch. 9 - Memory Inc.: Chapter nine discusses the works of Eric Kandel. He was intrigued into studying psychoanalysis when he heard the story of a man named Henry (a.k.a H.M.) losing memory because of a lobotomy. Henry's doctor, Dr. Scoville, took out his hippocampus to reduce seizures. The procedure ended up taking away Henry's ability to remember any new things. The failed surgery did prove, though, that memories are indeed saved in the brain, as Milner proved with her in depth study of H.M.
Kandel's main experiment was done on Aplysia snails (large marine snails). He studied the snails and their neurons while he trained them and they learned new tasks. He learned that the synapses, the links bewteen the neurons, grew stronger with more training. This provided an actual molecular model of primitive memory. He discovered the CREB (cAMP Responsive element binding), which is like the velcro of our brain that helps retain our memories. This opens up many possibilities to increase our memory capabilities, or even do the opposite and remove memories.

Ch. 10 - Chipped: The final chapter discusses Antonio Egas Moniz, who is the father of the lobotomy. He came up with the idea of cutting the neurons in the brain to sever the synapses of the neurons. It was very controversial at the beginning of his first procedures because he was operating on humans, albeit mental patients, but still humans nonetheless. It raises the ethical question of whether it is right to operate on people with such an experimental procedure. You are essentially risking the swap of one mental disability for another.
In the end though, the lobotomy has been improved and become more precise. The procedure is still mirky and no one can seem to decide on where it is actually necessary to make the cuts, but there are  reports of success. The downside is that most that are cured end up with less of spark in their life, almost depression in some cases. I am going to be honest and say that I cannot figure out how this relates to Computer Science, and so I am looking forward to class discussion. I can only guess that maybe we can look at Moniz's study and see that the human brain is very complex and even today we do not fully understand it.

Book Reading #3: Obedience to Authority

Chapter Summaries

Ch. 1 - The Dilemma of Obedience: This first chapter serves to introduce the experiment, which, I think is quite an interesting one. After thinking about it, it makes perfect sense. I think it points out a very crucial issues with humans, in that we pass off the blame until no one is held responsible.

Ch. 2 - Method of Inquiry: Chapter 2 is a nice chapter that that explains the procedure of the experiment in greater detail. I like how it tells us the exact steps that were taken. It definitely helps explain how this process was scientific, as I originally thought there would be too many variables due to human interaction.

Ch. 3 - Expecte Behavior: Chapter 3 is a short chapter discussing the expectations of the experiment. Most people predicted that the subjects would stop at the 10th shock level (first demand to be freed). I thought this accurate, because I feel that is what I would of predicted as well.

Ch. 4 - Closeness of the Victim: I found this chapter on closeness to the victim quite a nice twist on the study. It makes sense that the closer the "teacher" is to the victim, the sooner they will disobey. It does seem a tough situation to be in, and I am surprised that some people actually followed through with the close proximity test.

Ch. 5 - Individuals Confront Authority: I think it was very good of Milgram to include some responses from participants in the experiment. This chapter does a good job of giving a "teacher's" point of view. It shows the pain that some of these people went through when obeying instructions.

Ch. 6 - Further Variations and Controls: After reading the first 3 chapters of this book, I was wondering how it would stretch to so many chapters, but now I see that they did many variations of this test. I think this was good, because it was necessary to prove that it was indeed authority. The experiment at Bridgeport was especially interesting to me, as I felt people only followed instructions because the trusted Yale in the initial test. This was obviously proven wrong.

Chapter 7: Chapter 7 just seemed to show the cruelty of the experiment to me. These people seemed quite troubled at the task they obeyed to perform. It seems not quite ethical to put someone through such as scenario. Mrs. Rosenblum seemed especially confused, and Mr. Gino came off as quite cynical with his bragging about "doing his job", even if the man was dead.

Ch. 8 -  Role Permutations: This chapter was quite interesting to me. The one experiment with two authorities and one as a victim really surprised me. It seems crazy that the "victim authority" could lose his role so easily and be treated as any of the other "ordinary victims".

Ch. 9 - Group Effects: The section on the shock administer disobeying early because the rest of the group disobeyed seemed to match my predictions. The interesting experiment was the one where the naive subject does not administer shocks, and so goes on fully with the experiment. It is rather eye opening to think of the real life parallels of such a scenario. People don't stop wrong, but remain accessories to it because they are not directly doing the wrong.

Ch. 10 - Why Obedience? An Analysis: This chapter's in depth look on obedience was an interesting read. It does a good job of explaining why humans would obey and the need for hierarchy. It does make sense -- we need hierarchy and obedience to keep society organized and functioning.

Ch. 11 - The Process of Obedience: Chapter 11 delves into the reasons why people obey. It discusses the social norms and feelings people have when obeying authority. I found the section on anxiety especially true, as it states that breaking social norms is troubling until the break occurs.

Ch. 12 - Strain and Disobedience: This chapter discusses the strain that people go through when they are faced with issues they are uncomfortable with. It also talks about the different ways people reduce their strain, such as passing of responsibility or avoiding the discomfort.

Ch. 13 - An Alternative Theory: Is Aggression the Key?: The author points out the possibility of aggression being the reason for people continuing to shock. As he points out, this is not the case, because as in experiment 11, people chose to shock at the lowest levels when given the option. They were not aggressive, but merely following orders.

Ch. 14 - Problems of Method: This chapter discusses the possible problems the experiment might of had and why they were not in fact issues. The more times and more variations of this experiment just go to show and prove its correctness. People obey authority, even if it is not moral.

Ch. 15 - Epilogue: This chapter goes into the moral aspect of the experiments. It raises a good question of how people can judge the subjects of this experiment with disdain, and then be okay with the killing in wars. The story of the massacre is especially troubling and brings back thoughts of Nazis. It is scary what people will do when they are just obeying orders.

Book Summary

I thought this book was very interesting and did a good job of testing out its initial goal. The goal was to see if most people would obey even if it is immoral. This question was supposed to parallel the obedience that Nazis held during their experiments that killed and harmed people. Although the Nazis operated over a decade long and this experiment lasted only an hour, I feel that it still did a great job of proving the correlation because both tasks involved the same inherent behavior.

I, like most of the people questioned before the tests were run, thought that people would hold to their morals more than the social contract of the experiment. I would not think that a person would continue to shock a complete stranger just because a scientists tells them to. I especially think that screams from the learner would immediately halt the experiment and cause disobedience, but as this book showed, this hypothesis was wrong. It seems quite crazy that so many people went to the full shock value of 450 volts.

Milgram does do a good job of explaining why people obey. Upon further evaluation, you start to understand the position those subjects were in. They volunteered for the experiment and did not want to mess it up. Although they had no reason to trust the scientists, you find yourself trusting such an authority and assuming they are right and that no harm will come of the shocks. The especially interesting point that Milgram makes is the strain that the subjects go through and how they try to reduce it. I can see myself using these same tactics -- avoidance, passing off the blame, "lightly" shocking, etc. -- if I was placed in the situation. Whatever it took to both complete the experiment and not do too much harm to the victim.

I of course hope that I would not go through with the experiment at all, as I can not imagine shocking another stranger for forgetting random word pairs. Of course, the odds would have been against me though, since it appears most people obey, and so I can only assume I would have too. This is a scary thought, and it really makes you wonder. I feel sorry for the subject's that had to learn this the hard way. It seems wrong to inform someone that they are willing to hurt others, without them asking or even wanting to know. Overall though, I guess it was a good experiment and brought to light some important facts about people.

Book Reading: Gang Leader for Day

     Gang Leader for a Day by Sudhir Venkatesh was a very interesting read, and definitely my favorite book in this class so far. Contrary to popular belief, I have never been in a gang, nor have I known anyone that has been, so this was very enlightening. The study might not have been a typical ethnography, but I feel that is what made it such a unique read.

     I think the ethical aspect of the whole study was the most intriguing portion. Sudhir was present for many illegal activities and even the planning of drive by murders. I do not know if I would have been able to watch all of those activities go down. I do think that he definitely got attached to the people in the community and so this was a big reason for letting his morals slide. I know that just from reading the book, I felt sorry for J.T. because his rise was ending and the gang was falling apart. If I, from just reading the story, feel bad that there are no more crack users to help supplement J.T., I can only imagine how attached Sudhir got during his many years there. I think this study was a great one, but it definitely broke the rules of typical ethnographers.

    Another aspect of the book that I found interesting was the way the community as a whole functioned. It was practically its own little city with its own government and hierarchy. There were jobs and taxes and even a punishment system that was separate from the rest of Chicago. Everyone in the community depended on one another, whether it be protection or services or food, in order to get by. They seemed to even have their own currency to go with cash, in that they just trade favors or threats to get what they want. It definitely is a fight to survive for all of the people, always just trying to get by, and doing what is necessary to get what you need. It seems like an endless cycle that can not be escaped.

Ethnography Ideas

My idea for an ethnography at Texas A&M would be to study the Corps of Cadets. I think this would be an interesting study because most students at Texas A&M do not know what life in the corps all entails. I can't say I even know too many corps people personally so it would definitely be a study that is completely new to me. I know they have very strict rules and a busy schedule so it would be interesting to see what that lifestyle is like.

My idea for an ethnography of a group that I am familiar with and think would be an interesting ethnography for another person would be the Texas A&M Football team. I do not know if this is totally a plausible idea (considering access issues), but from being in the locker room and around those guys for my first three years, I think it would be an interesting study. Most of them are not what you think of when you think of college football athlete (although some fit the stereotype very well). It would be interesting to compare the way the media portrays them and how they really are.

Assignment 7: Nonobvious Observation

Blog your response about the videos you created and the nonobvious things you might be able to take note of to determine more about a person

In order to create our videos for this project, we rode our bikes from Rudder Tower to the C-Store by Sbisa. We then bought an item from the convenient store and returned to the tower on our bike. This made for an interesting video for all the group members. Riding our bike down military walk gave ample opportunity for interaction with pedestrians. This gave many changes for observation of the person wearing the camera and quite a fun task of guessing who it was.

After just watching a few of our group's videos, you start to notice many different things that give away who is wearing the camera. For instance, by seeing the path they took and the pace they rode it, you could start to guess who was the rider. The different directions the person looks is also a hint. You can see if the person is focused on the goal or has a wondering gaze. Another nonobvious thing that could be noticed was the way they let pedestrians travel in front of them. Did they cut them off or let them go first, or just totally go around them altogether. These are just some of the hints that could be viewed when analyzing the videos and the process we took.

I now realize how much more there is about people and the way they interact in general. There are many nonobvious things that this assignment helped point out -- things that would not be otherwise noticed without this extra analysis. Just like in Pennebaker's book "The Secret Life of Pronouns", sometimes it is the small things such as pronouns, or hand gestures and head movement (in the case of the videos), that can tell a lot about a person.

Ethnography Articles Response

eth·nog·ra·phy 
Pronunciation: \eth-ˈnä-grə-fē\ 
Function: noun 
Etymology: French ethnographie, from ethno- + -graphie -graphy 
Date: 1834

: the study and systematic recording of human cultures ; also : a descriptive work produced from such research

              -Merriam-Webster Online

As I was not very sure what an ethnography was before reading these three articles, I found them very informative. The "American Ethnography" and Wikipedia descriptions pointed out many important points in describing what an ethnography is. The Wikipedia article was especially descriptive and discussing the different types of ethnography. Some of these types included Cultural and Social Anthropology,  Sociology, and Communication Studies.

As an example of one the "Cultural and Social Anthropology" type of ethnography, the third article discussed Coming of Age in Samoa by Margaret Meade. I found this ethnography quite interesting. It is about Meade, at the age of 23, doing field work in Samoa and the information she gathered. She was trying to discover if troublesome adolescence was just an issue in the United States or if it was prevalent in other cultures as well. By going to Samoa and studying young girls, Meade discovered that adolescence was a smooth transition for those girls. This proved that problematic adolescence for children was due to the culture of the United States.

This example of Meade's study in Samoa helped me better understand how an ethnography could be helpful. Before these articles, I just assumed that an ethnography was a way to get to know other cultures. This is true, but what is important is that this information can be used to better our society.

Book Reading #2: Emotional Design

     Chapter One of Emotional Design, by Dan Norman, is a very interesting read. It focuses a lot on how people think and they way design can be affected by emotion. As the chapter is titled, "Attractive Things Work Better", I find it ironic that Norman is the author, due to his adamant stance on functionality over aesthetics in his book Design of Everyday Things. The two books do have some things in common though, as they both seek out finding the best way to interact with users of designs. The two books just seem to approach this matter differently.

     Emotional Design discusses the visceral, behavioral, and reflective ways of thinking by humans. Norman points these out because it is important to think of the state of the user when designing. By placing yourself in the user's situation, you can more effectively plan for improving the user experience. This is similar the point made in Design of Everyday Things -- design with the user in mind.

     In contrast though, Emotional Design focuses on improving design by making it look better, by relaxing the user and having them accept more fault because they are in a better mood. I do agree that this make sense, and the Mini Cooper example is an excellent one for this very scenario. I do think this contradicts Norman's points in Design of Everyday Things though. In that book, he stresses focusing on fixing errors and changing designs as opposed to just covering them up by making them look better.

    While both books seem to have valid points, I think Design of Everyday Things has a stronger case. Attractive designs are important, and Norman's total lack of focus on it in his first book did bother me, but I think it is more important to provide better feedback and visibility as opposed to a more attractive design. Playing on the user's state of mind seems to be too risky when designing because, as Norman points out, people are all different and designing in this way can be a hard way to please everyone.