Counselling Central

Science Daily (Mar. 2, 2010) — Iowa State University Distinguished Professor of Psychology Craig Anderson has made much of his life’s work studying how violent video game play affects youth behaviour. And he says a new study he led, analyzing 130 research reports on more than 130,000 subjects worldwide, proves conclusively that exposure to violent video games makes more aggressive, less caring kids – regardless of their age, sex or culture.

The study was published in the March 2010 issue of the Psychological Bulletin, an American Psychological Association journal. It reports that exposure to violent video games is a causal risk factor for increased aggressive thoughts and behavior, and decreased empathy and pro-social behavior in youths.

“We can now say with utmost confidence that regardless of research method – that is experimental, correlational, or longitudinal – and regardless of the cultures tested in this study [East and West], you get the same effects,” said Anderson, who is also director of Iowa State’s Center for the Study of Violence. “And the effects are that exposure to violent video games increases the likelihood of aggressive behavior in both short-term and long-term contexts. Such exposure also increases aggressive thinking and aggressive affect, and decreases prosocial behaviour”.

To read the full story click here . If you are a parent how do you feel about this research and its findings? Does it put you off buying violent games for your children? Or had you already made a decision to ban such games?

A neuron is a nerve cell that receives, processes, and transmits information to other cells in the body. We each have a set number of neurons, so unlike other cells they don’t regenerate. Approximately 10,000 of the neurons in our bodies die everyday. Although this seems a very large number we each start out with between ten and 100 billion, so we only lose about 2% over our lifetime.

Neurotransmitters are biochemical substances which carry signals from one neuron to the next. These signals are sent via a complex web of synapses, which are essentially junction points between neurons. The role of neurotransmitters is important to us because they have a significant impact on our mental health. What are the types and what roles do they play?

Dopamine: involved in movement, attention and learning. Too much has been associated with schizophrenia, while too little has been associated with depression.

Acetylcholine: involved in learning, voluntary movement, sleep and memory. Too much has been associated with depression, while too little has been associated with dementia.

Epinephrine: involved in energy and glucose metabolism. Too little has been associated with depression.

Serotonin: involved in sleep, appetite, mood and impulsive and aggressive behaviour. Too little has been associated with depression and anxiety, although this can be treated with some anti-depressant medications such as SSRI’s. To read more about this click here

Norepinephrine: involved with alertness and eating. Too much has been associated with schizophrenia, while too little has been associated with depression.

GABA (Gamma-Amino Butyric Acid): inhibits excitement and anxiety. Too little GABA is associated with anxiety.

Endorphins: involved in feelings of pleasure and pain relief.

It is worth noting that these increases and decreases in certain neurotransmitters are one possible cause for the mental health issues described.

Carl Rogers based his theories on the following nineteen propositions.

1. All individuals (organisms) exist in a continually changing world of experience (phenomenal field) of which they are the centre.

2. The organism reacts to the field as it is experienced and perceived. This perceptual field is “reality” for the individual.

3. The organism reacts as an organized whole to this phenomenal field.

4. A portion of the total perceptual field gradually becomes differentiated as the self.

5. As a result of interaction with the environment, and particularly as a result of evaluational interaction with others, the structure of the self is formed – an organised, fluid but consistent conceptual pattern of perceptions of characteristics and relationships of the “I” or the “me”, together with values attached to these concepts.

6. The organism has one basic tendency and striving – to actualize, maintain and enhance the experiencing organism.

7. The best vantage point for understanding behaviour is from the internal frame of reference of the individual.

8. Behaviour is basically the goal directed attempt of the organism to satisfy its needs as experienced, in the field as perceived.

9. Emotion accompanies, and in general facilitates, such goal directed behaviour, the kind of emotion being related to the perceived significance of the behaviour for the maintenance and enhancement of the organism.

10. Values are experienced directly by the organism, and in some instances are values introjected or taken over from others, but perceived in distorted fashion, as if they had been experienced directly.

11. As experiences occur in the life of the individual, they are either, a) symbolized, perceived and organized into some relation to the self, b) ignored because there is no perceived relationship to the self structure, c) denied symbolization or given distorted symbolization because the experience is inconsistent with the structure of the self.

12. Most of the ways of behaving that are adopted by the organism are those that are consistent with the concept of self.

13. In some instances, behaviour may be brought about by organic experiences and needs which have not been symbolized. Such behaviour may be inconsistent with the structure of the self but in such instances the behaviour is not “owned” by the individual.

14. Psychological adjustment exists when the concept of the self is such that all the sensory and visceral experiences of the organism are, or may be, assimilated on a symbolic level into a consistent relationship with the concept of self.

15. Psychological maladjustment exists when the organism denies awareness of significant sensory and visceral experiences, which consequently are not symbolized and organized into the gestalt of the self structure. When this situation exists, there is a basic or potential psychological tension.

16. Any experience which is inconsistent with the organization of the structure of the self may be perceived as a threat, and the more of these perceptions there are, the more rigidly the self structure is organized to maintain itself.

17. Under certain conditions, involving primarily complete absence of threat to the self structure, experiences which are inconsistent with it may be perceived and examined, and the structure of self revised to assimilate and include such experiences.

18. When the individual perceives and accepts into one consistent and integrated system all his sensory and visceral experiences, then he is necessarily more understanding of others and is more accepting of others as separate individuals.

19. As the individual perceives and accepts into his self structure more of his organic experiences, he finds that he is replacing his present value system – based extensively on introjections which have been distortedly symbolized – with a continuing organismic valuing process.

Have you ever wondered why some people seem to be highly motivated and successful individuals?  Where does their energy and drive originate? Is it nature or nurture? Motivation is an area of psychology that has received a great deal of attention in recent years, because many of us crave success and drive and the rewards it brings. According to psychologists there are five distinct theories of motivation:

Humanistic Theory

Humanistic Theory is the most well documented theory of motivation.  According to this theory unless obstacles are put in our way, such as safety, hunger or financial problems, we are driven to achieve our potential. For further information on this theory see Maslow

Drive Reduction Theory

We have certain innate biological needs which motivate us to behave in a certain way.  These drives are defined by Hull (1942) as an internal tension which must be reduced.  A good example would be feelings of hunger which motivates us to eat. In order for us to keep a sense of internal calmness we are motivated to reduce these drives.

Instinct Theory

Instinct theory is another example of a biological drive.  Just as we are driven to eat, drink, sleep and reproduce our biological programming motivates us in other ways to survive. For example we are born with the ability to cry, which notifies our parents when something is wrong, and muscular reflexes which protect us from danger and promote survival.

Psychoanalytic Theory

Sigmund Freud believed that humans have two basic drives: Eros and Thanatos. Eros is the life drive and Thanatos the death drive. According to Freud’s Psychoanalytic theory, everything we do, think and experience emotionally has the goal of helping us to survive or prevent our demise. Freud believed that these drives, unlike in Instinct Theory, are buried in our unconscious mind. From the cars we chose to the food we eat, everything we do can be traced back to one of these two motivators.

Arousal Theory

In the same way that Drive Reduction Theory describes our attempts to remain calm, Arousal Theory describes our desire to maintain certain levels of arousal in order to feel comfortable. Arousal Theory explains why we might drive cars around a race track, climb a mountain, or watch a sad film. It also states that we have an innate biological need to keep a balanced amount of stimulation in our lives.

The dictionary definition of gossip is “Rumour or talk of a personal, sensational, or intimate nature. Trivial, chatty talk or writing. A person who habitually spreads intimate or private rumours or facts”. Is gossip malicious in intent? Do people who gossip perhaps need to find more depth in their own lives? Or does gossip form a natural and healthy part of our daily social interaction?

The Good: Although most of what we learn as we grow up comes from parents/guardians and other authority figures, part of what we learn also comes from more informal social contact with friends and acquaintances. Gossip therefore has the potential to form part of our moral learning and social instruction. It can also help us deal with a strong desire to avoid social exclusion and punishment. For example, in the work situation most of what we learn comes from a HR person, a company handbook, an induction programme and (hopefully) some on the job training. But what about the other things we learn such as who to trust and who to avoid? Who are the good bosses and who are the bad? Gossip can help us navigate many areas of life successfully.

The Bad: Gossip has a bad reputation in most circles. It can be used to attack someone without facing up to them, damage the reputation of another and spread vicious rumours about someone else. Psychologists call this relational aggression. Experiences such as these can be emotionally damaging and in some cases even lead to suicide. We all have an inbuilt need to be liked (it’s how we survived in primitive times) and in some cases this can lead us to worry about what our actions will lead other people to say about us.

The Ugly: Celebrity gossip exposes us all to the ugly side of gossip. Most of us have a ‘need to know’ what goes on in the lives of the rich and famous, and in some cases their failings can even act as our moral instruction. Tiger Woods had a clean cut image until his affairs became public knowledge. “What a hypocrite!” we hear people cry, “I wouldn’t have presented such a great image to children and then done such terrible things!” The truth, of course, is that we are all capable of going against our character in certain situations. Gossip can be ugly.

Think about the types of gossip you hear or engage in everyday. Is it good, bad or ugly? What do you learn from it? Make a mental note. You’ll be surprised just how it impacts on your life.

The following article was published in the Telegraph.

Modern life is making us miserable because we have too much choice, claims new research. From the foods we eat to the television channels we watch to the schools we send our children to and the career we choose to pursue, society has never offered us so much variety.

But while the ability to choose is generally a good thing, too much freedom of choice is crippling us with indecision and making us unhappy, claims the new research published in the Journal of Consumer Research.

Professor Hazel Rose Markus, the author from Stanford University’s Department of Psychology, said: “We cannot assume that choice as understood by educated, affluent Westerners is a universal aspiration and that the provision of choice will necessarily foster freedom and well-being. Even in contexts where choice can foster freedom, empowerment and independence, it is not an unalloyed good. Choice can also produce a numbing uncertainty, depression and selfishness.”

The authors looked at a body of research into the cultural ideas surrounding choice. They found that among non-Western cultures and among working-class Westerners, freedom and choice are less important or mean something different than they do for university educated people. Professor Markus said her study, which focused on Americans, applied to all middle-class Westerners: “Americans live in a political, social and historical context that advances personal freedom, choice and self-determination above all else. Contemporary psychology has proliferated this emphasis on choice and self-determination as the key to healthy psychological functioning.”

Although I agree with the idea that too much choice is not good for some people, I struggle with the idea that this is only an issue for ’middle-class university educated’ people in Western cultures. Psychologically when do you stop being working-class and become middle-class? Can we assume that all middle-class Westerners think the same way? Can we assume that no working-class Westerners experience this issue? How do you feel about this research?