My Journey in Psychology - Essay Example

? My journey in psychology has been tremendous and very adventurous, right from my introductory in psychologyall the way to my last class. The whole idea of getting to understand the human behavior and mental processes triggered my interest to study psychology as I was eager and anxious to know what makes us what we are. I can therefore say that psychology has had a great influence on my life and broadened my knowledge. Psychology has its roots from ancient Greek meaning that it has been there for a long time as the science study of individual behavior and mental processes. I have always wanted to understand the mystery behind human behavior and how it varies from person to person. It is funny how in life we meet people with all types of characters, the kind hearted and also those who are cruel and selfish. William Shakespeare marvels at human nature with the question, “what piece of work is man?” that is what man is made of. Psychology answered my question as to why human behavior is greatly varied, why some people are criminals and others are not. In schools too it is evident that some students learn faster than others. My studies have been a great illumination to many things which seemed to be mysteries before. Psychology introduced me to the concepts of learning, motivation, emotion, intelligence, personality and attitude, Blake, R. (1956). Learning is one of the most important concepts as a process through which behavior changes as a result of experience and knowledge acquired. Human beings learn at different paces there are those who are slow learners while others learn fast. My exposure to psychology has helped me appreciate this. Children for instance learn best through repetition and practice for example reciting the alphabet. Consequently the use of reinforcements like ‘good’ and ‘well done’ facilitate learning and prompts positive feedback from a listener, Festinger, L. (1963). I came into contact with many theories used in explaining, describing and also in modifying behavior based on assumptions on behavior. There are some theories that have impacted my life since my first contact with them. One of these theories is the Behavioral view by John Watson an American behaviorist whose contribution that psychology should address the learning of measurable responses to environmental stimuli was an important move from the traditional psychoanalytic view, Festinger, L. (1963). Watson built his work from Ivan Pavlov’s classical conditioning, from his laboratory experiment on dogs whose works paved the way to the behaviorist school of thought. The impact of B.F Skinner’s operant conditioning is just amazing his introduction of the concept of reinforcement to behaviorism. Skinner maintained that organism learn to behave in a certain way because they have been reinforced to do so, Festinger, L. (1963). He demonstrated that laboratory animals would carry out simple and complex behaviors due to reinforcement he used rats to explain this. Similarly human beings can learn behavior through reinforcement for example in school students can be trained through use of rewards to reinforce positive behavior and punishment to get rid of negative behavior, Whittaker, O. (1964). Behaviorism has made its greatest contribution to the psychology of learning: a behavioral perspective that can be applied in many areas of organizations and everyday life. The humanistic theory explains how our actions are greatly influenced by our self-concept and by a need for personal growth and fulfillment. It emphasizes on the positive side of our nature: human ability, growth and potential. Humanistic psychologists as believers in free will, assume that people make unhealthy choices when they perceive only unhealthy alternatives, Festinger, L. (1963). They portray people as having the free will to make choices that affect their lives. This theory has not only had a major impact on the practice of counseling and psychotherapy but also on my life as well, in my decision making process and my interaction with other people. The concept of self actualization by Maslow really got me to view life from different perspectives not just material. Looking at self actualized individuals like Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi who were able to unleash their potential for leadership and creativity. Wonder why two people facing the same situation respond differently? Emotions and personal meaning through cognitive theory gives us the answer. Cognitive theory helps us discover how our thoughts and actions derive from the way we interpret our experiences. Understanding ourselves requires that we look in our minds and our Biology as well. It explains that our actions are profoundly influenced by the way we process information coming from our environment, Whittaker, O. (1964). Cognitive psychologists study mental processes or cognitions thoughts, expectations, perceptions and memories as well as states of consciousness. The work by Albert Ellis shows how modern cognitive psychologists have borrowed from linguists the idea that our most basic language abilities are wired into our brains at birth. It can also be related to computer science which borrowed the metaphor of the brain as a biological computer designed to process information. This has led me to really look at how people use such words as must and should which make part of their everyday vocabulary leading to self defeating behavior. During my classes in psychology and culture I have come to realize that even our culture is greatly influenced by the way we think. Different cultures have different views about things. We may take cultural influences for granted not realizing that what seems natural to you can be shocking and unacceptable to another culture for instance women in the western world can wear sleeveless and open clothes while on the other hand this is viewed negatively in the Muslim society where women are expected to be discreet and covered from head to toe .The socio-cultural approach argues that to predict individual behavior, it is necessary to see the individual as embedded in a social context that includes family, friends, coworkers, social organizations, the larger community , values and traditions of the culture. This has broadened my view about other peoples’ cultures and hence instilled in me deep respect for other people on how they interact with the environment. The grouping of psychology into experimental and applied psychology has been important in maintaining psychology as a science. Experimental psychologists mostly research across the psychological spectrum, Zajonc, B. & Wahl, N. (1961). On the other hand applied psychologists use the knowledge developed by experimental psychologists to tackle human problems such as training, equipment design and psychological treatment. They work in a variety of places such as clinics, schools factories, social service agencies, airports and hospitals. It is important to note that applied specialties play an important role in our day to day activities. For instance counseling psychologist help people deal with a variety of problems like relationships and vocational choice, clinical psychologists specialize in treatment of mental disorders. The other categories include engineering psychologists, Industrial and organizational psychologists. This is a clear sign of the broad and great impact that psychology has in everyday life. The classes on growth and development were illuminating. The topics focused on how human beings change and grow as a result of an interaction of heredity and environment. For instance if I compare myself to my friends I will probably find a lot of similarities in the sense that we both have a social life, we attend school and mature both physically and mentally. However there are other factors that will completely differ from theirs like I might be more self confident or mature more quickly than them. In short my growth and change will result from the most important influences in my life both hereditary and environmental. My interaction with the environment will determine the kind of person I am. Heredity and environment are entwined in an inseparable relationship: the nature nurture interaction. The relative contribution of nature which is heredity and nurture referring to the environment has been the subject of controversy as to how they determine human behavior. Recent studies have shown that neither operates alone. This is after years of the misconception by philosophers, educators, scientists and others that one might have more impact than the other on our thoughts and behaviors. I have always tried to understand which of these two that is heredity and environment determine who I am, Zajonc, B. & Wahl, N. (1961). Am I more of what I have inherited from my folks or has what I have learnt from the environment made me? It is quite a puzzle but I always end up with the same answer, that both of them have equal importance and generally affect my life. None can be said to be more superior to the other. Just like I have inherited a lot from my parents for example my physical appearance, intelligence then the same way have I learnt from my society and those I interact with. From the environment I have learnt the ethics or virtues of life how to relate with people and what is acceptable or unacceptable in the society, Zajonc, B. & Wahl, N. (1961). This has brought me to the conclusion that both nature and nurture mould human behavior. Today we are more interested on how heredity and environment work together to produce our personality and mental abilities. We know that virtually every human characteristic is shaped by both an individual’s biological inheritance and experience that is nature and nurture interact. Heredity establishes one’s potential but experience determines how one’s potential is realized. So which of our characteristics does heredity affect most? And which are most heavily influenced by learning or other environmental factors? Certain genetic disorders such as Down syndrome can lead to mental retardation, aggressive behavior, or social-emotional deficiencies and there is no cure. Growth and development also introduced me to the fact that children show great variation in their development. If a child has not walked or talked by age one you should not panic as some may grow slowly. That a delay in one area such as the onset of speech doesn’t mean the child is retarded or will be generally slow in other areas. Not only are there great variations among children but variations also occur normally within an individual child. A child should be responsive to people almost from the moment of birth, Blake, R. et al (1957). They face especially important developmental tasks in the areas of language, thought processes and social relationships. Piaget’s stages of cognitive development are also important in understanding child growth. What shapes our sense of right and wrong? According to Lawrence Kohlberg who based his theory squarely on Piaget’s theory of cognitive development, moral thinking is just a special form of cognition, Overskeid, G. (2007). An individual moves from concrete, egocentric reasons to more oriented abstract ideas of right and wrong for instance a child may not steal something for fear of punishment in the first stage while at a more advanced level the child may resist stealing for fear of not living up to the parents’ expectations. Generally the earliest stages of moral reasoning are based on self interest while later more advanced stages center on others’ expectations or on broader standards of social good. I reckon that not all individuals attain the later least egocentric stages in fact most adults never even reach this stage. The knowledge gained enabled me understand how we gain our moral standards as human beings. I have come to realize that learning is part and person of me and that you have to learn so as to succeed in life. Right from birth we grow by learning whereby you learn your language by speaking, a child for instance learns each person’s name slowly by slowly starting with those closest to him/her, Blake, R. et al (1957). As we grow we also start learning through experience and interaction with others. Learning is therefore a very crucial topic when learning psychology. We can define learning as a process through which experience produces a lasting change in behavior or mental processes that result from experience. Learning often leads to a lasting change in behavior. We have behaviorist and cognitive psychologists who explain learning in different ways. So what does learning either behavioral or cognitive do for us? Almost everything from working, playing, to interacting with family and friends all involve learning, Overskeid, G. (2007). Without this ability I would have to entirely rely on reflexes and on the inborn behaviors often referred to as instincts. Some forms of learning can be quite simple take for instance if I live near a busy street ,I may learn to ignore the sound of traffic .We refer to this type of learning as habituation which involves learning not to respond to stimulation. On the other hand some other kinds of learning can be much more complex .This involves forming a connection between two stimuli-as when you learn to associate the 10 O’clock bell in school with lunch .we also learn to associate our actions with punishment and rewarding such as when I get reprimanded or praised for doing something by my superiors. Classical conditioning is one of the most important terms I came across in psychology; it refers to a basic form of learning in which a stimulus that produces an innate reflex becomes associated with a neutral stimulus that acquires the power to elicit the same response. Classical conditioning accounts to learning not only in animal s but also to people. Through it organisms learn about cues that warn of danger as well as those alerting them to food, sexual opportunity and other conditions that promote survival. Pavlov’s work focused on simple automatic responses known as reflexes, He placed a dog in a harness then at intervals a tone was sounded and food given to the dog. The dog’s first reaction to the tone was merely an orienting response. It picked up its ears and turned its head to locate the source of the sound. With repeated pairings of the tone and food, the orienting response stopped and the dog began salivating in response to the tone alone. Pavlov found that a neutral stimulus when paired with a reflex –producing stimulus (Food) will come to elicit a learnt response that is salivation which is similar to the original reflex. This completely explains why I or even you salivate at the mere sight of pizza or when your favorite dish is placed on the table before you. Classical conditioning has taught us to associate the smell of smoke with fire. Surprisingly it is also the process behind the association of romance with flowers and chocolates. The use of social psychology to understand how individuals succumb to pressure has led me to retrospect on how many times I have acted not because of my own will but due to influence by peer friends or associates. Henrich, J. & Norenzayan, A. (2011). The power in social psychology has exposed how it has been used in advertisement to engage the general public on a culture of consumption. Studies by Asch on conformity were illuminating on how many times we act due to fear of ridicule and rejection, Asch, S. (1951). Mailgram’s study also shows the power of authority on leading us to act and most of the time neglecting acceptable boundaries in the process. An essay on psychology will not be complete without the mention of the three most common terms associated to psychology: conscious, subconscious and unconscious states of awareness, Overskeid, G. (2007). The exposure to these terms was revolutionary. The understanding on how the unconscious has more impact in our decision making as compared to the conscious has changed my decision making style. I value positive talk knowing that problem solving is faster through the unconscious than the conscious. Psychology has been a gold mine never seeming to dry up always unraveling new areas of human nature. From the importance of motivation for individuals to accomplish any task , to the value of learning. The application of psychological concepts in every aspect of life shows the value of psychology to the larger society. My studies in psychology have led me to spend many hours in retrospection. Leading me to change my view of the world, about other people and what is important or not. I entirely pay tribute to psychology in challenging my believes and broadening my level of thought and value in critical analysis, BIBLIOGRAPHY Asch, S. (1951). Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distort judgment. H. Guetzkow (ed.) Groups, leadership and men. Pittsburgh: Carnegie Asch, S. (1955). Opinions and social pressure. Scientific American, 193(6): 31-35. Asch, S. (1956). Studies of independence and conformity: A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs, 70 (416):52-58 Asch, S. (1956). line judgment task. Psychological Bulletin, 90(119): 111-137. Asch, E. (1952). Social Psychology. Eaglewood Cliffs, N.J. Prentice-Hall. Back, W. et al. (1963). An Interpretation of Experimental Conformity Through Physiological Measures. Behavioral Science 8 (23):34–40. Briny, C &John. P. (1961). The Effects of Creativity, Norm Distance and Instructions on Social Influence. Journal of Personality 29 (2): 294–302. Blake, R. et al (1957). The Generality of Conformity Behavior as a Function of Factual Anchorage, Difficulty of Task and Amount of Social Pressure. Journal of Personality 25 (23): 294–305. Blake, R. (1956). Social Forces in Petition-signing. Southwestern Social Science Quarterly (39):385–390. Blake, R. (1956). Gift-giving as a Function of Group Standards. Human Relations 8 (9):61–73. Bovard,W. (1953). Conformity to Social Norms and Attraction to the Group. Science New Series 18 (118): 598–599. Coleman, J. (1958). Task Difficulty and Conformity Pressures. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 57 (2): 120–122. Crowne, D. (1963). Conformity Under Varying Conditions of Personal Commitment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 66 (32):547–555. Deutsch, M & Gerard. B. (1955). A Study of Normative and Informational Social Influences Upon Individual Judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 12 (51):629–636. Dittes, E & Kelley. H. (1956). Effects of Different Conditions of Acceptance Upon Conformity to Group Norms. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 3(53):100–107. Divesta, J & Cox. L (1960). Some Dispositional Correlates of Conformity Behavior. Journal of Social Psychology 52 (7):259–268. Festinger, L. (1963). Social Pressures in Informal Groups: A Study of Human Factors in Housing.Stanford Univ. Press. Freed, M. et al. (1955). Stimulus and Background Factors in Sign Violation. Journal of Personality 23 (2):499. Gerard, B. (1953). The Effect of Different Dimensions of Disagreement on the Communication Process in Small Groups. Human Relations 6 (78):249–271. Harvey. J & Consalvi. C.(1960). Status and Conformity to Pressures in Informal Groups. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 60(5):182–187. Hoffman, L. (1953). Some Psychodynamic Factors in Compulsive Conformity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 5 (48):383–393. Hollander, P.(1964). Leaders, Groups, and Influence. New York: Oxford Univ. Press. Kalgan, J. (1956). Dependency Themes on the TAT and Group Conformity. Journal of Consulting Psychology 20 (1):29–32. Kiesler, A. (1963). Attraction to the Group and Conformity to Group Norms. Journal of Personality 16 (31):559–569. Lawson, D. & Stagner. R. (1957). Group Pressure, Attitude Change, and Autonomic Involvement. Journal of Social Psychology 45(5) :299–312. Menzel, H. (1957). Public and Private Conformity Under Different Conditions of Acceptance in the Group. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 12(55):398- 402. Mussen, H & Kagan. J. (1958). Group Conformity and Perceptions of Parents. Child Development 29 (9):57–60. Newcomb, M. (1957). Personality and Social Change: Attitude Formation in a Student Community. New York: Dryden. Raven, H &French. J. (1958). Group Support, Legitimate Power and Social Influence. Journal of Personality 26 (5):400–409. Rohrer, J. et al. (1954) .The Stability of Autokenetic Judgments. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 49 (17):595–597. Rosenbaum, E. (1956). The Effect of Stimulus and Background Factors on the Volunteering Response. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 53 (7):118–121. Rosenberg, A. (1961). Group Size, Prior Experience and Conformity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 63(2):436–437. Rosner, S. (1957). Consistency in Response to Group Pressures. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 55(8):145–146. Samuelsson, F. (1958). The Relation of Achievement and Affiliation Motives to Conforming Behavior in Two Conditions of Conflict With a Majority. Oxford University press. John, W.(1955). Motives in Fantasy, Action and Society: A Method of Assessment and Study. Princeton: Van Nostrand. Schooler, E. (1960). The Susceptibility of Chronic Schizophrenics to Social Influence in the Formation of Perceptual Judgments. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 61 (15):348–354. Sheriff, M. (1935). A Study of Some Social Factors in Perception. Archives of Psychology 27(8): 187. Sheriff, M. (1936). The Psychology of Social Norms. New York: Octagon. Steiner, D. & Johnson. H. (1963). Authoritarianism and Conformity. Sociometry 98(26):21– 34. Strickland, R. & Crowne. P. (1962). Conformity Under Conditions of Simulated Group Pressure as a Function of the Need for Social Approval. Journal of Social Psychology 58(13):171–181. Irwin, A. & Bernard. M.(1961).Symposium on Conformity and Deviation. Louisiana State University. Thibaut. W. & Strickland. H. (1956). Psychological Set and Social Conformity. Journal of Personality 25(12):115–129. Tuddenham, D. (1959). Correlates of Yielding to a Distorted Group Norm. Journal of Personality 115 (27):272–284. Tuddenham, D. (1961). The Influence of a Distorted Group Norm Upon Judgments of Adults and Children. Journal of Psychology 52(23):231–239. Whittaker, O. (1964). Parameters of Social Influence in the Autokenetic Situation. Sociometry 70(27): 88–95. Zajonc, B. & Wahi, N. (1961). Conformity and Need-achievement Under Cross-cultural Norm Conflict. Human Relations 125(14):241–250. Baron, A. & Brunsman. B. (1996). The forgotten variable in conformity research: Impact of task importance on social influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 7(1): 915-927. Blass, T. (1996). Attribution of responsibility and trust in the Milgram obedience experiment. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 287 (26): 1529-1535. Dillard, J. (1991). The current status of research on sequential-request compliance technique. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 150 (17) 283-288. Miller, E. & Brief. E. (1995). Perspectives on obedience to authority: The legacy of the Milgram Experiments. Journal of Social issues 51(3): 1-20. Nissani. M. (1990). A cognitive reinterpretation of Stanley Milgram’s observations of obedience to authority. American Psychologist 230(45):1384-1385. Patch, R. & Stahelski. A. (1997). The use of metacommunication in compliance: Door- in-the-face and single-request strategies. The Journal of Social Psychology 137(52): 88-94. Petty, K. & Stathman . J. (1993). Positive mood and persuasion: Different roles for affect under high- and low-elaboration conditions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 64(8): 5-20. Prentice, A. & Miller. T. (1993). Pluralistic ignorance and alcohol use on campus: Some consequences of misperceiving the social norm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 98(64):243-256. Ren, R. & Kallgren. A. (1993). The transituational influence of social norms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 213(64):104-112. Santos, M. & Pratkanis. A. (1994). Mindful persuasion and pique technique. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 157(24): 755-764. Fernald, D. (2008). Psychology: Six perspectives . California: Sage Publications. Hockenbury & Hockenbury (2010).Psychology. New York :Worth Publishers. Mitterer, J. (2008). Introduction to psychology: Gateways to mind and behavior .Stamford: Cengage Learning. Blank art, S. (2009). Psychology : A Dictionary of Psychology. New York Oxford University Press. Green, D & Groff. R. (2003). Early psychological thought: Ancient accounts of mind and soul. Westport, Connecticut: Praeger. George, A. (1983).The Principles of Psychology. New York. Harvard University Press Wozniak, H. (1999). Introduction to memory: Classics in the history of psychology. London: Hermann Windholz, G. (1987). Ivan P. Pavlov: An overview of his life and psychological work. American Psychologist 52 (9): 941–946.  Mandler, G. (2007). A history of modern experimental psychology: From James and Wundt to cognitive science. Cambridge: MIT Press. Moore, B. (1968). A Glossary of Psychoanalytic Terms and Concepts. Chicago: American Psychoanalytic Association. Freud, S. (1955). The Interpretation of Dreams. New York: Hogarth Press.  Damasio, A. (1996). The somatic marker hypothesis and the possible functions of the prefrontal cortex.Oxford.uni.press. Damasio, A. (1999). The feeling of what happens: Body and emotion in the making of consciousness.Newyork. Damasio. A. (2003). Looking for Spinoza: Joy, sorrow, and the feeling brain. Joseph, E. (1998). The emotional brain: The mysterious underpinnings of emotional life. chiago: Touchstone . Panksepp, J. (1998). Affective neuroscience: The foundations of human and animal emotions. Oxford: Oxford University Press Oliver, W. (1984). A leg to stand on. New York: Summit Books. Sam, M. (2000). Clinical studies in neuro-psychoanalysis: Introduction to a depth neuropsychology. London: Karnac Books; Solms, M. & Turnbull, O. (2002). The brain and the inner world: An introduction to the neuroscience of subjective experience. New York: Other Pressand Douglas Watt. Overskeid, G. (2007). Looking for Skinner and finding Freud. American Psychologist 62(6), 590–595. Skinner, F. (1974). About Behaviorism. New York: Random Schlinger, D. (2008). The long good-bye: why B.F. Skinner's Verbal Behavior is alive and well on the 50th anniversary of its publication.  Seligman, M.& Maier, F. (1967). Failure to escape traumatic shock. Journal of Experimental Psychology 74 (1): 1–9.  Overmier, B.& Seligman M. (1967). Effects of inescapable shock upon subsequent escape and avoidance responding. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology 63 (1): 28–33.  George, A. (2003). The cognitive revolution: a historical perspective, Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 7(3): 32-36.  Gazzaniga, Michael (2010). Psychological Science. New York: W.W. Norton & Company Rowan, J. (2001). Ordinary Ecstasy: The Dialectics of Humanistic Psychology. London: Brunner-Routledge. Hergenhahn, R. (2005). An introduction to the history of psychology. Belmont: Thomson Wadsworth.  Frankl, E. (1984). Man's search for meaning (rev. ed.). New York: Washington Square Press.  Seidner, S. (2009) .A Trojan Horse: Logotherapeutic Transcendence and its Secular Implications for Theology. Mater Dei Institute. Chomsky, A. (1959) A Review of Skinner's Verbal Behavior Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: A social learning analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Aidman et al. (2002). Evaluating human systems in military training, Australian Journal of Psychology. 54(3): 168–173 Pinel, J. (2010). Biopsychology. New York: Prentice Hall.  Brain, C. (2002). Advanced psychology: applications, issues and perspectives. Cheltenham: Nelson Thorne’s. Eric, L. (2003). The effectiveness of psychodynamic therapy and cognitive behavior therapy in the treatment of personality disorders: A meta-analysis. The American Journal of Psychiatry 160 (7): 1223–33..  Reisner, A. (2005). The common factors, empirically validated treatments, and recovery models of therapeutic change. The Psychological Record 55 (3): 377–400.  Jensen et al. (1990).The meaning of eclecticism: New survey and analysis of components. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice 21 (2): 124–30. Palmer, S & Wolfe R. (1999). Integrative and eclectic counseling and psychotherapy. London: Sage. Clarkson, P. (1996). The eclectic and integrative paradigm: Between the Scylla of confluence and the Charybdis of confusion. London: Sage. Goldfried, M & Wolfe, B. (1998). Toward a more clinically valid approach to therapy research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 66 (1): 143–50. Seligman, M. (1995).The effectiveness of psychotherapy: The Consumer Reports study. American Psychologist 50 (12): 965–74.  Wilson, E. (1978). On Human Nature . Cambridge: Harvard  Myers.W. (2004). Motivation and work Psychology. New York: Worth Publishers Carver. C & Scheier. M. (2004). Perspectives on Personality . Boston: Pearson. Gelder, M & Geddes (2005). Psychiatry. New York: Oxford University Press Inc. Glaser. B & Strauss. A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine. Harlow.M. (1968). Recovery from the Passage of an Iron Bar through the Head. Massachusetts Medical Society 58(2):327–347. Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral Study of Obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 67 (4): 371–78. Ron Sun, (2008). The Cambridge Handbook of Computational Psychology. Cambridge University Press. New York. Kuhn. S. (1962.) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: Univ. Press. Panksepp, J. (1998). Affective neuroscience: The foundations of human and animal emotions. New York: Oxford University Press. Beveridge. A. (2002). Time to abandon the subjective objective divide? The Psychiatrist 25 (3): 101–103. Peterson. C. (1957).Psychology Today. 13(5)112-132.Carlifonia. Cohen. J. (1994). The Earth is round: American Psychologist 49(9): 997–1003. Elliot. R. (1998). A Guide to the Empirically Supported Treatments Controversy: Psychotherapy Research 8 (2): 115.  Dawes. R. (1994). Psychological Myths. Chicago: ree Press.  Beyerstein. B. (2001). Fringe psychotherapies: The public at risk. The Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine. 5: 70–79 Sherwin et al (2003). Guidelines for the Ethical use of animals in the applied ethology studies. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 81: 291–305. Milgram, S. (1974), Obedience to Authority; An Experimental View. New York: Harpercollins Blum, D. (2002). Love at Goon Park: Harry Harlow and the Science of Affection. New York:Perseus Publishing Klamer et al (1989). The Consequences of economic rhetoric. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  Lehrer, J. (2010). The Truth Wears Off. The New Yorker. 5(3):25-26  Sterling, D. (March 1959). Publication decisions and their possible effects on inferences drawn from tests of significance—or vice versa. Journal of the American. 7(9):67-70  Henrich, J. & Norenzayan, A. (2011). Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(6): 61-135. Billig, M. (2009). Discursive psychology, rhetoric and the issue of agency. Semen: Revue de Semio-linguistique des Textes et Discours.New York : Sage . Read More