Unit 3 Reflection
As we approach the end of the final unit, I ask that you post three items that you have learned this unit that you did not know before. Pose one question that still lingers. Answer the previous person's post. We are a community of writers--Yes!!!
posted by DrEmmerling at 8:34 PM
17 Comments:
Things I've learned this unit:
1. Learned how to properly do APA format.
2. Learned a bit on the process of social experiments, and learned about the Zimbardo experiment.
3. Also learned more about how to approach style and clichés better.
I still was wondering if you think that if the Zimbardo experiment would effect us if we were the group, and how interesting would it be?
1. In this unit I learned how to write in the proper APA format.
2. I learned about different psychological experiments regarding human behavior, such as Zimbardo's and Milgram's experiments.
3. I also learned how to use non sexist language.
The one question that still remains is this: People involved in a group tend to think like the group, but if these individuals are already aware of how there thinking can be affected do they have the power to think independently and not like the group?
In response to Sam's question, I believe that the Zimbardo experiment would definitely still affect us if we were in the group. I don't think the effect would be quite as profound since our classmates already know about the experiment, but it would be interesting to see who would take on the roles of power and who would readily submit to authoritative figures.
The three things i learned in the social science unit are:
1. How to use the APA format
2. The dangers and unoriginality of clichés
3. Using active instead of passive voice
The one question i still have is:
Fromm's experiment shows people wont stand up for the answer they believe is correct, when others in the room choose the wrong answer. In some ways i think this experiment does not prove all that Fromm says it does. It proves people wont stand up for little things, like the sizes of the lines. On the other hand, i think if the issue was of greater importance people would be more likely to stand up for their opinion. Would a different experiment more directly prove this?
In response to xkingalbertivx,
People will be more aware of their thinking and when they are influenced by others, but I don’t think that someone can all together stop being influenced by the people around them. Part of the way we learn is by others. I think what is more important is to surround yourself with educated, supportive people who won’t hinder your thinking.
1. I've learned about the use of gender-neutral language, and how it is important in law-making as well as our writing.
2. I learned about the Stanford Prison Experiment and how it was nearly immoral.
3. I learned about the citation methods in the APA format and how they are different from the other styles.
To answer Lauren's question, I think that it would be difficult to run a high-risk decision-making experiment because of that whole process of allowing human participation in experiments. However, I think that Fromm's experiment shows to a certain extent this behavior in people and it can be applied to heavier situations with caution.
I am still confused why Zimbardo didn't do his experiment in a real prison and observe new prisoners.
three things that I have learned in this unit:
1. how to take out any biased language, especially language that is assuming or degrogatory to any ethnic groups. Also to write a gender neutral paper as much as possible.
2. i learned how to change cliches to make them sound less elementary and say what I literally mean, without annoying, overused cliches!
3. I learned, through the readings in WRAC, about the influence a person of power may have on an individual and how their power will make the lower individual be extremely obedient to them, even if their task is horrible and inhumane the "teacher" will do
anything the " experimenter" says seeing their actions as merely, just doing their job.
answering michael's question: I didn't do the readings on Zimbardo as well as was absent the day the readings were discussed so I am unable to successfully answer michael's question, sorry. I will try to answer the next question posed.....
Thing learned:
1. Learned the difference between CBE and APA format.
2. Learned that you can write a paper in different tones, such as passive or active.
3. Learned about the Milgram experiment, and obidience.
Question: Why is it bad to use cliches? Couldn't they be used as attention grabbers since they are well known?
In response to Micheal:
Im not to sure why Zimbardo didn't do this experiment with real prisoners, but I can guess that it is because if he would use real prisoners they could not have retracted from the experiment because they were forced to be in jail for their crimes.
since i failed to answer Michael's question i shall answer janet's:
Janet, it is bad to use cliches because of the following reason:
cliches are overused, boring, unoriginal, slang, casual tone, vague, and unacademic. Even though there are some positive to them such as cliches are effective and quick and definately interesting, the negatives outweigh the positives and many times the literal meaning is completely different from the cliche. Yes they can be attention grabbers, but not always grab positive attention!
and here is my question for the next individual to answer or at least try to:
Do you think that Milgram's experiments were sane or inhumane?
Do you think that he did a good job of demonstrating hope obedience to authority is brought about by easy influence from a superior figure?
Three Things I learned:
1.I learned about APA format and the differences/similarities it has with CSE and MLA.
2.I learned about abstracts and how to write one – under 120 words and a summary of your paper.
3.I learned how the social sciences are kind of like a mix between humanities and sciences and the paper style is similarly a mix between the two.
One question I still have:
I still get confused about active/passive voice – what is the difference?
Amanda,
I do think his experiments were inhumane. Even though they did not hurt anyone there was probably some psychological damage to the subjects.
Yes I think that the experiment showed how easy it is for an authority figure to make someone do something. People have to follow directions throughout their day without even thinking about it. In the experiment, the authority figure did not have to do that much to make the people “shock” the people who gave wrong answers. The people rarely questioned the authority and continued with the experiment.
What I learned this unit:
1. Using clichés in academic writing is inappropriate and should be avoided because it interferes with the originality of the writer.
2. Its preferable to use gender neutral titles as opposed to sexist terms.
3. The role obedience plays in the lives of people as they react to it differently.
My question: I know that in the APA format it is preferably accepted to write in the active voice, but could it be written in the passive voice?
In response to Alexis, this is how I interpret it: Passive voice is when the subject of a verb receives the action that the verb describes. An example would be: The ball was kicked by Sam. Sam in this case is the subject and he receives the action of kicking the ball.
Active voice is the opposite as the subject of the verb performs the action. An example would be: Sam kicked the ball. Here Sam performs action, not receiving it.
In this unit,I learned
1. APA format
2. people are often afraid of being criticized by their peers as Lessing and Asch states.
3. Milgram should have told his subjects the dangers of serious aftereffects of the experiment.
In response to Jesus's question:
"APA style advocates active over passive voice whenever possible" (http://www.psichi.org/pubs/articles/article_578.asp)
My question:
How much do I need to indent for block quote for CSE format?
1. I learned to document sources with the APA system of in text citations and references.
2. I learned the factors that contribute to conformity in the gorup.
3. I read many articles related to obedience to suthority and learned how to read in the social science.
Question: what is the advantage of writing an abstract?
Jesus,
I think that sentences in active voice are generally clearer and more direct than those in passive voice. Sentences in active voice are also more concise because fewer words are required to express action. Use of passive voice in the paper can cause readers to lose interest or to become confused.
1. The difference between first and second order thinking.
2. I learned that the power of peer review can be helpful,
3. That different career fields have different formats of writing. Not everyone uses MLA.
Question:
We talked a little about communication and demonstrated it slightly through blogs by reviewing and responding to other’s responses. So can a better speaker truly make a better writer?
Kim,
An abstract helps give the reader a better understanding of what they are about to read. It allows for the reader to get an overall knowledge of what the central them of your paper will be.
1) I have learned about the Milgram 'Obedience Experiment' and how it is now regarded as very unethical.
2) I learned how to avoid using cliches in papers.
3) I learned how to correctly use the APA format when writing papers for the Social Sciences.
Question- Were the Milgram/Zimbardo experiments regarded as unethical when they were first carried out or has this only come into light over the past decade or two.
In response to Kyle's question, I believe that a better speaker can be a better writer because a better speacker probably has more sophisticated grammar and a better overall understanding of the language. The writer can then use this to create better writing.
1. I learned about what some of the most recent views on gender in language are.
2. I learned that citation in APA is as oriented towards scientific precision as the CSE format.
3. Finally, I learned that moral issues were introduced to psychological and sociological studies only fairly recently.
My question would be: Would the type of test Milgram and Zimbardo undertook be considered unethical today if those experiments had taken place? Would it still be possible for us know what we do from them, if experimental ethics had prevented an experiment of their kind from taking place?
In answering Kerion's question- I recall reading that both Milgram and Zimbardo soon came under a fair amount of academic criticism; not only complaints against the test themselves, but personal attacks against their ethical role in the experiments.
A few things I have learned from Writing 2:
1. Learned the different formats of writing, such as APA, CSE, and MLA and the requirements of each.
2. Learned about gender neutral writing and why it should be used.
3. Became interested in group confomity and the pressures of obedience from the Zimbardo and Milgram pieces.
TVHoward:
My answer to this question is very uncertain. I think in this day and age we live in a society that is constantly pushing buttons and has a rising shock factor. When it comes to those experiments,I believe many would find it unethical, but then another group might want to make a reality tv show about it. See my point?
My question is about conforming groups. I was just wondering if the person who reads this had ever conformed in college, and what it was.
1) I learned how to write with more style.
2) I learned about metacognitive thinking.
3) I learned to not use cliches in my writing.
My question:
What does it really mean to "conform" to a group?
Lauren:
Well, if you read my question then you know i don't really know what it means to conform. But, I guess in a way i didn't conform to the idea of the stereotypical college student. I never drank and that set me apart from most of the people, especially at this school.
-Matt Hale
Post a Comment
<< Home