A Failure To Communicate

AUTHOR: Pamela Paul
PUBLICATION NAME: The New York Times.
DATE OF PUBLICATION: August 29, 2010
SUMMARY: This article is basically on the fact of knowledge that if someone speaks English to you in an accent, you are less likely to believe what he or she is trying to tell you. I would say this is majority true unless it is a big threat to me or for the sakes of others. They also did research as when you are reading font in newspapers and magazines. If it is typed neat, then you believe what it is saying, but if it is wet and hardly able to see, then people don't take much offense to what the article has to say. They did an experiment with 35 people, some speaking with different accents and their studies related to what they thought the outcome was going to be. This isn't really important to know of in the field of Psychology, but it gives people the more expanding knowledge and research to look for when they come along people with heavy accents. Thus article does not counter exist any research done in the past. It agrees to what other articles to what people wrote about people with heavy accents. It is human nature that people intend to think about strangers that they do not know that they are more helpful or trustworthy when speaking English precisely. Some people might think this is absurd but when you truely think about it, you find that it is actually done by a lot of Americans and there isn't a number out yet, but I wonder what the percentage is of those people are. For me, with strangers, I would think on first reactions about those who speak with accents that they wern't as well educated than those who speak English without an accent.
LINKS TO STUDY: None
ARTICLE: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/29/fashion/29studied.html
SUBMITTED BY: Matthew Menezes

Stereotypes: Why We Do It

AUTHOR: Anne Murphy Paul

PUBLICATION NAME: Psychology Today

DATE OF PUBLICATION: May 01, 1998. Last reviewed: August 01, 2009

SUMMARY: This article is basically about how and why people stereotype. Researchers who studied stereotyping asked people about how they felt towards a certain race or minority group. Because of this, "psychologists now understand that these conscious replies are only half the story. How progressive a person seems to be on the surface bears little or no relation to how prejudiced he or she is on an unconscious level[...]" Another experiment was conducted- how quickly people respond when a positive word was paired with a white name, and a negative word paired with a black name. "Because our minds are more accustomed to making these associations, says Banaji, they process them more rapidly. Though the words and names aren't subliminal, they are presented so quickly that a subject's ability to make deliberate choices is diminished--allowing his or her underlying assumptions to show through. The same technique can be used to measure stereotypes about many different social groups, such as homosexuals, women, and the elderly." (huge quote!) Studies also show that we are too vulnerable to society's judgments about people/minorities/races-- thus making us stereotype. "Without it (stereotypes), we wouldn't survive. Stereotypes changes the field of psychology because it shows how the mind is easily influenced by anything we see or hear. This research doesn't counter existing history, since stereotypes have lived for many centuries. We should care about stereotypes, because, although stereotypes make life "easier," they are also incorrect (at times). For example, not every Asian is smart nor every African American does drugs. Despite it being a "mental shortcut," we should break the stereotype- although it would be very difficult. Stereotypes downgrade (more than upgrade) a person, a race, minority or religion- which is morally wrong. (Idk an alternative word for morally wrong..)

LINKS TO STUDY:

ARTICLE: http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/199805/where-bias-begins-the-truth-about-stereotypes

SUBMITTED BY: Kristine Vu

Being a Mama's Boy: Good for Your Health?

Author: Eben Harrell

Publication Name: Time Magazine

Date of Publication: Aug. 27 2010

Summary:

In a recent study at Arizona State University's School of Social and Family Dynamics, being a mama boy maybe good for your health. By interviewing groups of boy the conclusion came to be that as boys grow up they tend act what they think a man should act, hiding their emotions and acting masculine. So if something bad happens they try to handle it themselves instead so asking for help. With all this pressure of 'being a man' suicide rates for boys jumps at the age of 16. Mama's boys tend to skip all of this, as they did not act as tough and were emotionally available. As result they had a better mental health in middle school.

Another cultural influence to young boys discussed by Sharon Lamb, a professor of mental health at the University of Massachusetts is superheroes. From the result of her survey of 674 boy’s superheroes causes boys to be overly masculine. All of this masculinity is because of the growing acceptance of homosexual, which is cause for a wider gap of gender stereotypes. Since people are afraid of being seen as gay act more 'manly'. She also blames today’s superheroes because in the “modern superheroes” found in movie are all action. Today’s superheroes rarely talks about good virtue. She points out Iron Man as a example of a modern superhero and his bad influence. All in all accepting the gender stereotypes is bad for the health, so being a mama's boy is good for the health.

Links to Study: Not founded

Article: www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2014038,00.html

Submitted by: Hai Vo