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.
No comments:
Post a Comment