Essay 2- Attachment Theory

Love and Relationships: Attachment Theory Using examples from your personal relationships, or case studies, explain Attachment Theory. Your response can be written in the first person.

Word Count: 1,525 (excluding references, headings, abstract, appendices, and tables)

Content:
*Abstract
*Introduction
*What is the attachment theory?
*The secure, preoccupied, dismissing and fearful avoidant attachment styles
*How durable are attachment styles?
*Conclusion

Appendix:
* A: Concept map on the four attachment styles
* B: Table containing further personal
* C: Concept map on the durability of attachment styles
* D: Celebrity examples
* E: Self-Assessment

*Theory
*Research
*On-line engagement
*Written expression

Abstract

The following essay will explore the attachment theory by discussing how the theory was developed, making note of the influential theorists involved in the attachment theory and also what the theory entails. The essay will go on to investigate the impacts of being each of the four proposed attachment styles, including the secure, preoccupied, dismissing and the fearful avoidant attachment styles. Personal examples will be supplied throughout the essay to illustrate some of the salient points raised. Finally the essay will contrast the two opposing perspectives on the durability of attachment styles, concluding that the research on the topic is contradictory, and thus no perspective is clearly more accurate than the other. In conclusion, further personal examples, including celebrity examples as well as two concept maps highlighting the essays key points can be found in the appendix.

Introduction

Working for many years in childcare, I have witnessed many children’s reactions to their parents dropping them off at the crèche each morning. Why is it that some of the children can happily begin to play and graciously bid their loved ones adieu, while others become highly distressed, clinging to their parents legs, screaming until their faces turn blue as their horrified parents quickly escape? How come some children appear as though they couldn’t care less if they never saw their parents again while others become highly anxious at the mere sight of the nursery yet are not comforted by their parents nurturing? These questions can be answered by exploring the attachment theory, along with the four proposed attachment styles including, the secure, preoccupied, dismissing and fearful avoidant attachment styles. What are the impacts of being one style over another? How do adult attachment styles impact on interpersonal relationships and are how durable are attachment styles? Using the attachment theory, along with personal examples, these questions aim to be explored.

Attachment Theory

The attachment theory is a psychological theory that provides a descriptive and explanatory framework for discussion of affectionate relationships between human beings. The theory was firstly developed by John Bowlby in 1969, and has remained an influential framework which is still used to explain interpersonal relationships (Hazan, & Shaver, 1987). Bowlby was influenced by the work done by Harry Harlow, who discovered infant monkey’s separated from their mothers cling to fluffy covered objects rather then wire-coated food dispensers, indicating the infants need for nurture (Harlow & Suomi, 1970). Bowlby believed that an individuals attachment style was developed during childhood and was influenced by the child’s relationships with their primary care givers. He also held the belief that the attachment style would be durable into adulthood and would influence the way that individual related to others throughout their lifespan (Bowlby, 1969). This notion has recently been challenged and will be discussed further shortly. Mary Ainsworth was another influential attachment theorist who is known for her ‘strange situation’ experiments. Ainsworth would observe the attachment styles of children by placing the child in a new environment and record their reactions to their primary care givers exiting the room and then returning (Tracy & Ainsworth, 1981). The results of this experiment will be referred to shortly. The latest attachment theory states that individuals can be classified into four attachment styles based on the two dimensions of anxiety and avoidance. Anxiety refers to attitudes towards the self and avoidance refers to attitudes towards others (Cassidy, 2000). The four attachment styles are the secure, preoccupied, dismissing avoidant and fearful avoidant attachment styles and will now be explored in further detail.

Secure Attachment Style

The first attachment style is referred to as the secure attachment style. Securely attached individuals are low on anxiety and low on avoidance, thus, have positive attitudes towards themselves as well as towards others. To promote a secure attachment style in children, primary caregivers should be available, supportive, dependable, and be available as a safe haven (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991). As found in Ainsworth’s strange situation study, a securely attached child is characterised by protesting their primary care givers departure, yet being able to then begin to play happily and later will welcome the return of their parents and will be reassured by their comfort (Tracy & Ainsworth, 1981). Being a securely attached adult too comes with many added benefits. These include having the ability to form close intimate relationships with ease, yet also being comfortable with autonomy. A secure adult will feel a sense of self worth and will have a general expectation that others will be accepting and responsive (Hazan & Shaver, 1987).

As a child my parents were always there or me when I needed them. I always felt safe and my parents were always consistent and reliable, so I knew what to expect from them in most situations. They also made one thing exceedingly clear, they loved me unconditionally. Having this loving and safe environment allowed me to become a securely attached child. When my parents dropped me at play group I would not become distressed on their departure however on their return I would be delighted.

Dismissing Attachment Style

The second attachment style is referred to as the dismissing attachment style. Individuals with a dismissing attachment style are low in anxiety but high in avoidance. Thus, they have positive attitudes towards themselves, but are high in avoidance of others. In children a dismissing attachment style is usually formed when a child’s bids for comfort were rejected and when primary care givers are uncomfortable with close bodily contact, tend to pick up their babies in an abrupt and controlling manner, and have restricted emotional expressiveness (Hazan & Shaver, 1987). Ainsworth observed dismissing children were characterised by not becoming distressed by their parents departure, and too not being bothered by their return (Tracy & Ainsworth, 1981). Adults who are dismissing in their attachment style feel a sense of self worthiness, yet have a negative disposition towards other people. Such adults protect themselves against disappointment by avoiding close relationships and maintaining a sense of independence and invulnerability (Hazan & Shaver).

Preoccupied and Fearful Avoidant Attachment Styles

The third attachment style is known as the preoccupied style, these individuals experience high anxiety with low avoidance. Thus, preoccupied individuals feel a sense of unlovabililty and unworthiness combined with a positive evaluation of others. A preoccupied style is often formed when primary care givers are inconsistent in their parenting, sometimes loving and responsive, but only when they can manage, not in response to the infant's signals (Cassidy, 2000). Adults with this style strive for self acceptance by gaining the acceptance of valued others, they often cling to attachment figures and demand reassurance. The forth and final attachment style can be highly negative for the individual and is referred to as the fearful avoidant style. It is characterised by both high anxiety and high avoidance. Individuals with this attachment style feel unworthy and unlovable and also view others negatively by seeing them as rejecting and untrustworthy. As a result they avoid close relationships with others in an attempt to protect themselves from rejection. Individuals who have been neglected or abused may form this style (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991). (See Appendix A & B for further information).

Durability of Attachment Styles

Research on the stability of attachment styles is controversial and has sparked a considerable amount of debate and discussion (Fraley, 2002). According to the attachment theory, after repeated experiences in childhood, a child develops a set of knowledge structures or an inner working model which represents the numerous interactions the child has had with their primary care givers. The child learns that if their primary care givers are responsive, they can count on them and others when needed. On the contrary, if the child’s care givers are cold, inconsistent or unresponsive, the child will learn they can not count on them or others for comfort. This working model is thought to persist through an individual's life time acting as a guide for future relationships (Fraley, 2002). Consistent with this view, is the notion that adults seem to be particularly attentive to experiences and information which is consistent with their internal expectation about the world, often referred to as the confirmation bias. To illustrate, a study conducted by Simpson, Rholes, & Nelligan (1992) found that individuals with avoidant working models who held the view that others were unreliable viewed ambiguous social situations to be negative. A longitudinal study conducted by Roisman, Collins, Sroufe, & Egeland (2005) sought to explore whether infant attachment styles could predict adult attachment styles. The study found that a secure state of mind regarding one’s current romantic partnership as well as a higher quality romantic relationship was foreshadowed by a secure attachment relationship in infancy. A study conducted by Torgersen, Grova, & Sommerstand, (2007) tested the hypothesis that attachment in adults is influenced by genetic factors by comparing monozygotic and dizygotic twins attachment styles. The results found that although a shared environment significantly influenced attachment, so did genetic factors.

For me personally, my secure attachment style was durable into adulthood. I am currently in a relationship of over four years with my partner Adam (For further details see Appendix B).

However more recent theorists disagree with this notion. They propose that the durability of attachment styles is dependent on the stability of the individual's environment. Experiences of being in new relationships, and forming new attachments, can bring about changes in working models of the self and others. For instance, experiences with both current and former romantic partners may contribute to representations of attachment figures and may, in fact, override the influence of representations generalized from representations of the parent (Turan & Horowitz, 2007) Thus, if a partner truly has hostile intent, if a partner truly is likely to be hurtful or likely to abandon the relationship, even an individual who had been securely attached is likely to develop negative representations. Contrary to the previous studies mentioned, research done by Zhang and Labouvie-Vief (2004) found that over a six year period from young to middle adulthood, adult participants attachment styles were quite fluid and flexible, thus suggesting attachment styles may not be concrete. Perhaps more research is needed to settle this debate (See Appendix C for a summary).

Conclusion

In conclusion, the attachment theory has been found to be an influential theory used in explaining interpersonal relationships throughout an individual's life. The four proposed attachment styles, secure, preoccupied, dismissing and fearful avoidant have been explored, examining the impacts on the individual of being each style. Finally the durability of attachment styles throughout the lifespan has been questioned, with theories opposed and theories for the idea that attachment styles are stable. Due to the contradictory and solid research conducted by each opposing argument, no clear theory is more accurate.



References



Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. M. (1991). Attachment styles among young adults: A test of a four category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(2), 226-244.

Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and Loss. London: The Hogarth Press.

Cassidy, J., & Maryland. U. (2000). Adult romantic attachments: A developmental perspective on individual differences. Dept of Psychology, Review of General Psychology, 4(2), Special issue: Adult attachment: 111-131.

Fraley, C. R. (2002). Attachment stability from infancy to adulthood: Meta-Analysis and dynamic modeling of development mechanisms. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6, 123-151.

Harlow, H. F., & Suomi, S. J. (1970). Nature of love: Simplified. American Psychologist, 25(2), 161-168.

Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Interpersonal Relations and Group Processes, 52, 511-524.

Roisman, G. I., Collins, W., Sroufe, A. L., & Egeland, A. B. (2005). Predictors of young adults' representations of and behavior in their current romantic relationship: Prospective tests of the prototype hypothesis. Attachment & Human Development, 7(2), 105-121.

Simpson, J. A., Rholes, W. S., & Nelligan, J. S. (1992). Support seeking and support giving within couples in an anxiety-provoking situation: The role of attachment styles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(3), 434-446.

Torgersen, A. M., Grova, B. K., & Sommerstand, R. (2007). A pilot study of attachment patterns in adult twins. Attachment & Human Develpoment, 9(2), 127-138.

Tracy, R. L., & Ainsworth, M. S. (1981). Maternal affectionate behavior and infant-mother attachment patterns. Child Development, 52(4), 1341-1343.

Turan, B., & Horowitz, L. M. (2007). Can I count on you to be there for me? Individual differences in a knowledge structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(3), 447-465.

Zhang, F., & Labouvie-Vief, G. (2004). Stability and fluctuation in adult attachment style over a 6-year period. Attachment & Human Development, 6(4). Special issue: Attachment and aging Guest Editors: Carol Magai and Nathan S. Consedine. pp. 419-437.





Appendix A

Concept map: The four proposed attachment styles.








Appendix B

Table: Personal examples of each attachment style.






Appendix C

Concept map: The durability of attachment styles.








Appendix D



See: http://clarebear-socialpsych.blogspot.com/2007/10/celebrities-attachment-styles.html for celebrities attachment styles examples.


Appendix E



Self Assessment

Theory: Obviously the main theory I discussed in my essay was the attachment theory. I too however tried to include as many other relevant theorists and theories involved in the development and maintenance of the attachment theory as I could.

Research: I am happy with my research component of this essay. I read so many studies and included only the ones I thought best illustrated each point. This actually meant using some older research which I ordinarily avoid doing. But I think for the purpose of this essay, going back to the original studies helped me gain a better understanding of the topic.

Written Expression: To make my written expression at the highest possible standard I added two concept maps on the main points of my essay and also added a table containing personal examples on attachment styles. I too formatted it in an easy to read layout and added pictures to engage the reader. I also edited my essay until I reached a readability level 12. I used APS formatting where I could.

On-line Engagement: I am really happy with my on line engagement this term. I have posted 10 original posts and 10 comments on other peoples blog postings (hyper links provided on the right hand side of my blog page). I made sure to make regular posts from week 8 onwards, and tried to make each post as thoughtful and helpful as possible. I also received many fantastic comments from my fellow classmates (not to mention a thoughtful comment from a man in the UK who is highly interested in the attachment theory!). Once again, although it took a lot of effort, I thoroughly enjoyed the on line engagement.

Draft for essay 2 (keep in mind is not complete!!)

Abstract
The following essay will explore the attachment theory by discussing how the theory was developed, and what the theory is about. The essay will go on to investigate the impacts of being each of the four proposed attachment styles, including the secure, preoccupied, dismissing and the fearful avoidant attachment styles. Personal examples will be supplied throughout the essay to illustrate some of the salient points raised. Finally the essay will contrast the two opposing perspectives on the durability of attachment styles, concluding that the research on the topic is contradictory, and thus no perspective is clearly more accurate than the other. In conclusion, further personal examples, along with two concept maps highlighting the essays key points can be found in the appendix.


Working for many years in childcare, I have witnessed hundreds of children’s reactions to their parents dropping them off at the crèche each morning. Why is it that some of the children can happily begin to play and graciously bid their loved ones adieu, while others become highly distressed, clinging to their parents legs, screaming until their faces turn blue as their horrified parents quickly escape? How come some children appear as though they couldn’t care less if they never saw their parents again while others become highly anxious at the mere sight of the nursery yet are not comforted by their parents nurturing? These questions can be answered by exploring the attachment theory, along with the four proposed attachment styles including, the secure, preoccupied, dismissing and the fearful avoidant attachment styles. What are the impacts of being one style over another? How do adult attachment styles impact on interpersonal relationships and are how durable are attachment styles? Using the attachment theory, along with personal examples, these questions aim to be explored.

Attachment has been defined as seeking and maintaining proximity to another individual, and suggests that infants have a strong innate need to form bonds with particular individuals. The attachment theory was firstly developed by John Bowlby in 1969, and has remained an influential framework which is still used to explain interpersonal relationships. The theory was inspired by the work of Sigmund Freud, who previously touched on attachment within his psychoanalytic work. Bowlby too was influenced by the work done by Harry Harlow, who discovered infant monkey’s separated from their mothers cling to fluffy covered objects rather then wire-coated food dispensers, indicating the infants need for nurture (Harlow & Suomi, 1970). By examining the work done by Freud and Harlow and by observing the behaviour of infants separated from their primary care givers, Bowlby was able to develop the attachment theory. Bowlby’s original attachment theory identified three attachment styles, these included the anxious, secure and avoidant attachment styles. Bowlby believed that an individuals attachment style was developed during childhood and was influenced by the child’s relationships with their primary care givers. He also held the belief that the attachment style an individual gained during childhood would be durable into adulthood, and would influence the way that individual related to others throughout their lifespan (Bowlby, 1969). This notion has recently been challenged and will be discussed further shortly. Mary Ainsworth was another influential attachment theorist who is known for her ‘strange situation’ experiments. Ainsworth would observe the attachment styles of children by placing the child in a new environment and record their reactions to their primary care givers existing the room and then returning (Tracy & Ainsworth, 1981). The results of this experiment will be referred to shortly.

The latest attachment theory states that individuals can be classified into four attachment styles based on the two dimensions of anxiety and avoidance. The first dimension, attachment anxiety, reflects the degree to which a person worries that a partner will not be available or adequately responsive in times of need. The second dimension, avoidance, reflects the extent to which a person distrusts his or her relationship partners' goodwill and strives to maintain autonomy and emotional distance from the partner (Cassidy, 2000). The four attachment styles involved in the latest attachment theory are the secure, preoccupied, dismissing avoidant, and fearful avoidant attachment styles and will now be explored in further detail.

The first attachment style is referred to as the secure attachment style. Securely attached individuals are low on anxiety and low on avoidance, thus, have positive attitudes towards themselves as well as towards others. To promote a secure attachment style in children, primary caregivers should be available, supportive, dependable, and responsive and should provide children with a secure base and be available as a safe haven. Parents should too be vigilant in caring for their child’s physical and psychological needs. As found in Ainsworth’s strange situation study, a securely attached child is characterized by protesting their primary care givers departure, yet being able to then begin to play happily and later will welcome the return of their parents and will be reassured by their comfort (Tracy & Ainsworth, 1981). Being a securely attached adult too comes with many added benefits. These include having the ability to form close intimate relationships with ease, yet also being comfortable with autonomy. A secure adult will feel a sense of self worth and will have a general expectation that others will be accepting and responsive.

As a child my parents were always there or me when I needed them. I always felt safe and my parents were always consistent and reliable, so I knew what to expect from them in most situations. They also made one thing exceedingly clear, they loved me unconditionally. Having this loving and safe environment allowed me to become a securely attached child. When my parents dropped me at play group I would not become distressed on their departure however on their return I would be delighted.

The second attachment style is referred to as the dismissing attachment style. Individuals with a dismissing attachment style are low in anxiety but high in avoidance. In other words, they have positive attitudes towards themselves, but are high in avoidance of others. In children, a dismissing attachment style is usually formed when a child’s bids for comfort were rejected. Dismissing attachment styles are often the result of primary care givers who are uncomfortable with close bodily contact, and tend to pick up their babies in an abrupt and controlling manner, and having restricted emotional expressiveness. Ainsworth observed dismissing children were best characterized by not becoming distressed by their parents departure, and too not being bothered by their return (Tracy & Ainsworth, 1981). Adults who are dismissing in their attachment style feel a sense of self worthiness, yet have a negative disposition towards other people. Such adults protect themselves against disappointment by avoiding close relationships and maintaining a sense of independence and invulnerability.

The third attachment style is known as the preoccupied style, these individuals experience high anxiety with low avoidance. Thus, preoccupied individuals feel a sense of unlovabililty and unworthiness combined with a positive evaluation of others. A preoccupied style is often formed when primary care givers are inconsistent in their parenting, sometimes loving and responsive, but only when they can manage, not in response to the infant's signals (Cassidy, 2000). Adults with this style strive for self acceptance by gaining the acceptance of valued others. The forth and final attachment style is referred to as the fearful avoidant style. It is characterized by both high anxiety and high avoidance. Individuals with this attachment style feel unworthy and unlovable and also view others negatively by seeing them as rejecting and untrustworthy. As a result they avoid close relationships with others in an attempt to protect themselves from rejection.

The degree to which parental attachment patterns have an influence on adult romantic attachments has been controversial and sparked a considerable amount of debate and discussion (Fraley, 2002). Bowlby believed that an individuals attachment style was developed in childhood and remained stable into adulthood. According to the attachment theory, the degree of security an infant experiences is based on the responsiveness and availability of the child’s primary care givers. After repeated experiences, the child develops a set of knowledge structures or an inner working model which represents the numerous interactions the child has had with their primary care givers. The child learns that if their primary care givers are responsive, they can count on them and others when needed. On the contrary, if the child’s care givers are cold, inconsistent or unresponsive, the child will learn they can not count on them or others for comfort. This working model is thought to persist through an individuals life time and it acts as a guide for future relationships and thus an individuals attachment style is though to be relatively durable (Fraley, 2002). Consistent with this view, is the notion that adults seem to be particularly attentive to experiences and information which is consistent with their internal expectation about the world, often referred to as the confirmation bias. For example, a study conducted by Simpson, Rholes, & Nelligan, (1992) found that individuals with avoidant working models who held the view that others were unreliable viewed ambiguous social situations to be negative. They too were found to be less likely to seek emotional support from their partners than secure individuals, leading to their confirmation that others are unreliable. A longitudinal study conducted by Roisman et al (2005) sought to explore whether infant attachment styles could predict adult attachment styles. The study found that a secure state of mind regarding one’s current romantic partnership as well as a higher quality romantic relationship were foreshadowed by a secure attachment relationship with a primary caregiver in infancy.

For me personally, my secure attachment style was durable into adulthood. I am currently in a relationship of over four years with my partner Adam. I can support all of the research that suggests having a secure attachment style enhances ones adult relationships; we have an intimate, trusting relationship where we feel comfortable sharing our thoughts and feelings. We both know we can rely on each other for support and neither of us doubt the integrity of our relationship. We too value our time apart, having a sense of independence as well as being an intricate part of a couple.

However more recent theorists disagree with this notion. They propose that the durability of attachment styles is dependent on the stability of the individuals environment. Experiences of being in new relationships, and forming new attachments, can bring about changes in working models of the self and others. For instance, experiences with both current and former romantic partners may contribute to representations of attachment figures and may, in fact, override the influence of representations generalized from representations of the parent (Turan & Horowitz, 2007) Thus, if a partner truly has hostile intent, if a partner truly is likely to be hurtful or likely to abandon the relationship, even an individual who had been securely attached is likely to develop negative representations. Contrary to the previous studies mentioned, research done by Zhang and Labouvie-Vief (2004) noted that other studies findings on the stability of attachment styles was inconsistent. Zhang & Labouvie-Vief found that over a six year period from young to middle adulthood, adult participants attachment styles were quite fluid and flexible, thus suggesting attachment styles may not be concrete.

I personally support the research that suggests ones attachment style can alter with the relationship one is in. For example, I consider myself to be securely attached, however in one of my first relationships I was with a person who had a preoccupied attachment style. He was very possessive and insecure and this did end up rubbing off on me. His insecurities made me feel insecure, however I believe that my internal secure attachment over came this because I left the relationship and sought a secure partner.

Conclusion.

Cults and Politics... A Good Mix??

Hi everyone,

I watched a really interesting documentary on four corners the other night on cults. What I found intriguing about the documentary was that it illustrated how much influence religions have on politics. The cult the documentary focused on was the Christian group The Exclusive Brethren. I was quite annoyed watching the cult leaders persuade their group members to vote for specific political parties. The cult also used millions of dollars in donation money to support the liberal party. What really bugged me was how deceptive the cult members were about their influence in politics. They secretly paid for adds that put down the labor party and the greens and hid the fact that it was written and paid for by a religious group by masking it as an official add. I noticed the leaders in the cult used a lot of the techniques in our text book chapter on social influence and persuasion. Like they would ask members if they wouldn’t mind calling a few people on the phone to encourage the community to vote liberal, once members agreed the leaders reveled they actually wanted them to call a list of hundreds of people! (a low-ball technique). Also many ex-members stated they agreed with the groups ideas purely to fit in so they wouldn’t be excluded (an example of normative influence).
What also enraged me was the way the group excluded any member who displayed any differing opinions on politics to the cults beliefs. One man disapproved of the large amount of money being spent on supporting the liberal party and so he was kicked out of the group, never to see his wife or children again!

What do you all think about the mix of religion and politics? Fair… or should the two be independent of each other?

Someone is doing their blog 2 on cults aren’t they… just wondering if they plan to discuss such issues?

Clare.

The structure of my essay.

Hello!
So I have decided how I am going to structure my essay on the attachment theory:

First paragraph will be on a brief explanation of the attachment theory and Bowlby’s ideas on attachment will be outlined.

The second paragraph will be on the secure attachment style and will include how children can become securely attached (e.g with primary care givers offering a safe and supportive environment) and what the impacts of having a secure attachment style has on adults.
The third paragraph will be on the preoccupied attachment style and will outline the same as above.
The fourth paragraph will be on the dismissing attachment style and will cover the same issues as in the secure attachment style.
The fifth paragraph will cover the fearful avoidant attachment style and will also explore the impacts of the style on adults and how the style is developed.

The sixth paragraph will explore the resilience of attachment styles into adulthood and also look at how attachment styles may change and alter depending on who and what relationship an individual is in.

Through out the essay personal examples will be used to highlight the points made in each section.

If anyone had any suggestions on what else I could add that would be great.

Good luck guys!!

Clare.

Celebrities- Attachment Styles!!!

Celebrities. We all seem to know them and their complicated lives oh so well… so I thought I’d find four celebrities as prime candidates for my little ‘attachment styles’ demonstration. (keep in mind that I am obviously making quite large assumptions and I’m sure each celebrity would be highly offended if they knew of my little experiment). Anyway, so what I’ve done is found four celebrities who I think fit into each of the four attachment styles. So lets begin… Introducing our secure attachment candidate… Dr Phil!!! As all of us regular day time TV watchers may well know, Dr Phil is married to his college sweetheart Robin and has been for over 30 years. He has been quoted saying things like: “Robin keeps me pretty much in line. She is a great checkpoint for me, and she is one of the strongest, most intelligent and self-directed people I know. Robin is my Dr. Phil.” “we have such a great relationship because we love, trust and respect each other” Dr Phil makes it clear on his show and in interviews that he is happy to share his feelings with Robin and his secure attachment style has probably helped in making his marriage durable and satisfying.

Now for my example of a preoccupied attachment (high anxiety, low avoidance) style celebrity… Britney Spears! Poor Britney has been going through quite a hard time, what with her unsuccessful come back and the loss in the custody battle over her children, and unfortunately her love life isn’t going so well either. Britney married her back up dancer Kevin Federline just three months after the pair met! She immediately became obsessed with him and even paid for him to fly to… so she could see him a second time. She seemingly forced her love onto him (he said he wasn’t ready to propose to her so tried of waiting she popped the question!). She was constantly insecure about his love for her and she was suspicious that he was unfaithful. She was very clingy with him and had his children while she was still very young, but soon he had enough of her insecurities and divorced her. Britney clearly wanted and enjoyed the closeness she shared with K-Fed, however her high anxiety towards herself led to Kevin leaving her.

Next we have an example of the dismissing attachment style characterized by low self anxiety but high avoidance of others… our celebrity: Shane Warne! Warney clearly has no self directed anxiety like poor Britney did, (so he doesn’t fit the preoccupied style) however he still finds it difficult to form intimate relationships without jeopardising them, therefore I believe he fits nicely into this category. Shane hardly lacks self confidence, however he seems to be very good at separating sex and love. He seems to find it difficult to commit to his wife as he is continually unfaithful to her.

Last but not least we have the fearful avoidant attachment style, marked by high self anxiety and high avoidance of others. Welcome Michael Jackson! MJ displays many signs that he has high self anxiety (his numerous cosmetic surgeries, legal battles, and depression) and he also displays high anxiety towards relationships with others. Although he had several brief relationships, they appeared to be weak, with little emotion and intimacy.

So there you have it! Hope this helps you remember the four types of attachment styles.
Clare :)

Love me, love me, say that you love me.

I have recently started a new job working with children who no longer live with their families due to neglect, abuse, death, or jail. Although I haven’t been working there for long I have already noticed that most of the children have attachment disorders (or at least symptoms of attachment issues). I can see how the kids find it really difficult to form relationships with other people, especially adults. One child is too frightened of rejection or of getting “too close” that he purposely avoids entering interpersonal relationships. I suppose it is a way for him to protect himself from getting hurt emotionally again. Another child wants so desperately to be close to others that he clings and almost takes the relationship too far (in inappropriate ways). This child wants so badly to be loved. Which got me thinking, is being loved one of the most important things a human could ever need? And I started to think the answer was in fact.. yes. I know we need the basic survival tools like food, shelter and water, but what use are these things if we have no one to share them with? I know I’d prefer to spend my life in only several days with my loved ones (with no basic essentials) then live a full life alone with all the food and water I needed.
I so often take for granted the fact that I have a family that love me unconditionally. I just assume that everyone does. But sometimes I open my eyes and see that this is not the case. And then I feel guilty. Because I know I couldn’t be the person I am today if I didn’t have the love and support of my parents. They taught me how to love myself, and so now I am able to fully love others. I don’t think anything feels as good as knowing (and I mean KNOWING) that if you fall, someone you love is there to always catch you. For me, I know my secure attachment came from the unconditional love I received from my Mummy and Daddy, and for that I’ll be forever grateful.
So my challenge for you all this week, (me being in this lovey dovey mood) is for you all to tell someone today (at least one person) how much you love them… go on it’ll be fun!

Clare x

Attachment- Harlow's Monkey's

I’m not sure if you are all familiar with the famous experiments that psychologist Harry Harlow conducted in the 1950s on maternal deprivation in rhesus monkeys?? But they were landmarks in evolving the science of attachment and loss. Harlow had the experimental rhesus monkeys placed in a cage with both a “wire pretend mother” which was cold and hard yet had the ability to feed the baby monkey and a “warm pretend mother” which offered the baby comfort yet no food. The question was: would the baby prefer the mother that fed him or the mother that could comfort him? The babies spent the majority of their time with the warm mother that they became attached to rather than the wire mother (they only went to the wire mother to eat). This illustrated that a mothers love was emotional rather than physiological. These monkey love experiments had powerful implications for any and all separations of mothers and infants, including adoption, as well as childrearing in general. He also showed through these experiments that the capacity for attachment was closely associated with critical periods in early life, after which it was difficult or impossible to compensate for the loss of initial emotional security. Very interesting experiments, although they made me really sad watching! I wanted to cuddle the babies… for a viewing of the experiments go to:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLrBrk9DXVk

Clare.

Baboon befriends the unlikely

I recently saw a segment on the news that made me laugh so hard I had tears in my eyes. It also made me think about social psychology and my blog two topic “Attachment”. So the story was about a baboon in a zoo that was fed live chickens for his meals. However this particular baboon was so desperate for company that he adopted his dinner (the chicken) as his “friend”… the baboon cares for his little chicken pal and grooms him, plays with him, and cradles him. I wondered whether this baboon made the choice to sacrifice his meal for a companion? Was he willing to choose to become a vegetarian in return for a buddy? Either way, it was highly heart warming to watch. So I have added the youtube link so you can have a watch (although the footage is not as good as the one broadcast on the news). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFA1H8etYAU

Clare.

Quiz- Attachment Styles

Hi everyone,
I have begun some research on my blog two topic “Attachment Theory” and came across a questionnaire designed to measure your attachment style. The survey was based on the Fraley, Walter, & Brennan. (2000) questionnaire and I found it very interesting! So I have added the link and I invite you all to give it a go (if your interested) and feel free to comment on your results and whether you think they were accurate or not. So heres a bit of information on attachments styles so we're all on the same page...
Anxiety and avoidance are believed to be the two fundamental ways in which people are different from each other in their attachment styles. Being high in anxiety means one worries a lot about whether their partners really love them and they fear rejection. Those high in avoidance are not very comfortable depending on others or opening up to other people. The way anxiety and avoidance apply to the four proposed attachment styles:

Secure attachment style: is low in anxiety and low in avoidance in relationships.
Fearful Avoidant attachment style: is high in anxiety and avoidance.
Dismissing attachment style: is high in avoidance low in anxiety.
Preoccupied attachment style: is low in avoidance high in anxiety.

So if you have a spare few minutes and want to find out your attachment style give the quiz a go- no pressure obviously to disclose your attachment style! I had also added a poll at the bottom of my blog page so feel free to add your result (if you feel comfortable doing so).

Link: http://www.web-research-design.net/cgi-bin/crq/crq.pl

(This interactive survey takes about 5 minutes to complete. The questionnaire is designed to measure your "attachment style"--the way you relate to others in the context of intimate relationships. When completed, the site will reveal your attachment style, and provide a brief summary of what is known about your attachment style on the basis of contemporary scientific research.)

Clare!

Hey Everyone!

Hey Everyone! Are we all enjoying our "class free period"?? I'm not sure about everyone else but I know I'm flat out! I have made some time though to read over some of the essay posted. Got to say that I think everyone has done a great job, I found all the topics so interesting and I learnt so much from reading them. I'm excited about my blog 2 topic Attachment Theory. Havent started research yet but I had a read in our text book and it looks very intriguing. I'm planning on exlporing how parenting might effect a child's attachment style, and whether this effects the child in adulthood...
Anyway, hope everyone is getting some work done over the break, Clare.

CONCEPT MAP- BLOG 1

Stereotyping homosexuals: Why do they exist, how are these stereotypes formed, how are they maintaned and how can they be changed?

Word Count: 1500 (excluding abstract, concept map, appendix and 51 word in references)


Abstract

The purpose of this essay is to examine the socio-psychological variables involved in homosexual stereotyping. The essay will firstly explore possibilities for why stereotypes exist, such as the innate tendency to stereotype, learning stereotypes through socialisation, and using stereotypes to save mental energy. The essay will secondly discuss ways homosexual stereotypes may be formed, including the influence of religion, gender roles, nature, ignorance and the contact hypothesis. Thirdly, how homosexual stereotypes are maintained will be discussed with reference to the media, the acceptance of bulling in schools and the conformation bias. Finally the essay will outline possible factors that could change the negative stereotypes associated with homosexuality, including, positive contact, education and positive role models.

Introduction

In Australia approximately 20-35% of homosexuals have attempted suicide, with up to 87% of gay adults reporting having been verbally assaulted (Sewell, 2001). Like most minority groups, homosexuals are often victims of stigmatization, discrimination and being stereotyped. Stereotypical homosexuals are viewed as being girly, camp, with a high pitched lisping voice, promiscuous, limp wristsed, unnatural, prone to pedophilia and very sleazy. For gay men, such negative stereotyping can decrease self esteem and self worth, contributing to the increased suicide risk for homosexual males (McKee, 2000). The following essay will discuss why homosexual stereotypes exist, how these stereotypes were formed and how they are maintained as well as exploring possible ways to change the stereotypes associated with homosexuality. For the purpose of this essay, male homosexuality will be the focus.

Stereotypes are believed to exist because they allow humans to take mental short cuts and to conserve mental energy and effort. Humans all around the world, in all cultures and in all centuries have displayed the tendency to stereotype and discriminate against groups different to their own. Many researchers believe that this is because humans have an innate tendency to stereotype others. Although the tendency to stereotype may be innate, the content of those stereotypes is learned through socialisation (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008). Many influential factors promote the formation of stereotypes. Firstly, stereotypes can be formed when people view homosexuality as a violation of their society’s traditional gender roles. In Australian culture the stereotypical male is often viewed as masculine, tough, white and heterosexual, differing quite dramatically to the stereotypical homosexual (Sewell, 2001). Learning through socialisation can be seen when individuals learn to outcast homosexuals for not conforming to their cultures views of sexuality and gender roles. Viewing homosexuality as a violation of traditional gender roles and valuing conventional prescriptions can influence opinions on homosexuality. Researchers like Dasgupta and Rivera (2006) observed a link between a general acceptance of gender equality and lower levels of anger toward homosexuals. People who desire strict gender boundaries, and want individuals to conform to stereotypical images of femininity and masculinity are often those most likely to discriminate against homosexuals.
A second factor playing an important role in the formation of homosexual stereotypes is religion. In Australia, religions such as Christianity, Catholicism, Judaism, and Islam support homosexual prejudice. These religions promote the belief that homosexuality is immoral, sinful and impermissible. Children in religious setting are often taught that homosexual acts are sinful, or that God created the genitals for procreation purposes alone and therefore homosexuality violates this commandment. When people are taught negative ideas like these about a particular group and they begin to simplify their views of that group, negative stereotypes may result (Kirby, 2000).
A third factor that influences the formation of homosexual stereotypes is the misconception that sex between individuals of the same gender is unnatural and is therefore viewed as disrespecting nature or biology. In actual fact, many species of animals all around the world engage in same sex relations suggesting it is not unnatural at all. This lack of knowledge leads into the fourth factor that can influence the existence of homosexual stereotyping, ignorance. The contact hypothesis is a theory based on ignorance; the theory states that stereotypes are formed when members of different groups do not have much contact with one another. Individuals do not know enough about other group’s members and so fill in the gaps by using stereotypes. As sexual orientation is not as outwardly obvious as race or gender, it is often difficult to identify a homosexual. Therefore, for many people, their only contact with known homosexuals is from those who outwardly portray their sexuality in stereotypical ways, resulting in the maintainence of that stereotype (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008).

The maintanence of homosexual stereotypes can be explained with reference to how these stereotypes were formed. Religious groups are just as influential today as they were in the past, continually maintaing the ideas that support homsexual discrimination and stereotyping. The contact hypothesis can also be used to explain how homosexual stereotypes are maintaned (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008). For example, when people have contact with a homosexual who may be dressed flamboyantly or acting overtly feminine, the homosexual stereotype is confirmed. This often means that everytime a person sees a sterotypical homosexual, their stereotype becomes stronger; a phenonenon known as confirmation bias. However the problem is, these individuals may not recognise individuals who are homosexual who do not fit their stereotype. Even if this person did realise that the “non-stereotypical homosexual” was in fact gay, the person is likely to label them an exception, not to change their stereotype. Therefore stereotypes of homosexuals are often confirmed and strengthened and not challenged and weakened (Swank & Raiz, 2007).
Another factor that has recently developed in the maintance of homosexual stereotypes is the media. An Australian study by McKee (2000) interviewed young homosexual males and asked them what they had thought of gay men before they began socialising with homosexuals first hand. Although none of the men were prompted to refer to the media, most immediately made reference to images they had been exposed to by the media. Many interviewees stated they thought all gay men were sleazy, girly, very feminine and sexual. They stated that their image of homosexuals was a stereotypical one, and a negative one at that. The men reported that shows like Are You Being Served, Pricilla and the Mardi Gras broadcasts affected their view of homosexuals.
Another influencing factor in the maintance of stereotyping and prejudice is that in schools homosexual bulling and discrimination is often tolerated. A study by De Plevitz (2005) noted that in Australia, adolescents who are percieved as gay, lesbian or bisexual are at high risk of being bullied. The study surveyed students around Tasmania, Queensland and Victoria and found up to 11% of students did not classify themselves as heterosexual. The study found that in our culture of robust masculinity, verbal abuse in schools is often tolerated with children calling other students names like “fairy”, “faggot”, “lezzo”, or “poofter”. Tolerating this kind of discrimination teaches children that it is alright to view homosexuals in a negative way, once more reaffirming the stereotype. The research concluded that gay and lesbian students are not protected from verbal abuse in Australian schools and that there is a need for school based education around issues of discrimination.

Australian’s have made some positive steps towards reducing homosexual stereotyping and prejudice. The anti-discrimination legislation provides some protection for homosexuals from discrimination, and in 1973 homosexuality was removed from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Psychiatric Disorders as a mental illness (Kirby, 2000). However more can be done to reduce the stereotypes associated with homosexuality. The contact hypothesis can not only be used to explain why stereotypes may be formed, but can also be used to reduce the stereotypes associated with homosexuality. Just as having limited contact with homosexuals can increase stereotypes, increased positive contact can decrease stereotypes. When people experience positive exposure to homosexuals, stereotypes can be weakened and even eliminated. Research on contact has found that people who know or have regular contact with homosexuals are less likely to stereotype people on their sexuality. These results can be magnified if the exposure is with some one they share an interpersonal relationship with as contact seems to create greater ramifications when participants share both emotional closeness and similar amounts of power. People who have little contact with homosexuals think of them in more symbolic, stereotypical ways (Swank & Raiz, 2007).
According to the attribution theory, people are viewed more harshly if their hardships are perceived by others to be chosen, or self caused than if these hardships were perceived to be a result of biology, luck or accidental. For homosexuals, this means if people perceive sexual orientation to be a choice, then negative stereotypes are more likely to be held. Therefore, to reduce these negative stereotypes, people need to be educated and taught that homosexuality is not a choice (Swank & Raiz, 2007).
A common thread amongst research on sexulity in schools has indicated a lack of knowledge on homosexuality and a lack of positive homosexual role models for students (Grulich, et al, 2003). An Austrailan study noted that many potential “non-stereotypical and positive role model” homosexual teachers were too frightened to disclose their sexuality to their students in fear of loosing their job (De Plevitz, 2005). In another study, young gay males reported never being taught at school about homosexuality, and having limited role models to look up to (McKee, 2000). Perhaps indroducing school children to thorough education on homosexuality along with offering positive role models could decrease the streotypes associated with homosexuality.

Conclusion

Stereotypes appear to exist because humans have an innate tendency to stereotype and to save mental energy and we learn these stereotypes through socialisation. The perceived violation of society’s gender roles, the powerful influence of religion, ignorance and limited positive contact have all been acknowledged to be contributors to the formation of homosexual stereotypes. The stereotypical images of homosexuals in the media, conformation bias and bulling in schools being tolerated are factors that have been identified to maintain homosexual stereotypes. Finally, with the use of positive contact and role models along with education on sexuality, homosexual stereotypes have a chance to be changed.

References

Sewell, J. (2001). 'I just bashed somebody up. Don't worry about it mum, he's only a poof': The 'homosexual advance defence' and discursive constructions of the 'gay' victim. Southern Cross University Law Review, 5, 47-81

De Plevitz, L. (2005). Take-home lessons for gay, lesbian, transgender and bisexual school students. Alternative Law Journal, 30(4), 180-183

McKee, A. (2000). Images of gay men in the media and the development of self esteem. Australian Journal of Communication, 27(2), 81-98.

Grulich, A. E., De Visser, R. O., Smith, A. M. A., Rissel, C., & Richters, J. (2003). Sex in Australia: homosexual experience and recent homosexual encounters. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 27(2), 155-163.

Baumeister, R.F., & Bushman, B. J. (2008). Social psychology & human nature. Thomson Wadsworth, Belmont, USA.

Kirby, M. D. (2000). Remaining sceptical, lessons from psychiatry’s mistreatment of homosexual patients. [Paper presented as the First Annual Psychiatric Lecture for the Mental Health Branch of the Australian Capital Territory.] Quadrant (Sydney), 44, (1-2), 48-53.

Swank, E. & Raiz, L. (2007). Explaining comfort with homosexuality among social work students: the impact of demographic, contextual, and attitudinal factors. Journal of Social Work Education, 43(2), 257(23).


Dasgupta, N., & Rivera, L. M. (2006). From automatic antigay prejudice to behavior: The moderating role of conscious beliefs about gender and behavioral control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(2), 268-280.


Links/Web Resources

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality
Looking at the definition of homosexuality, the history behind sexual orientation and the difference amongst different cultures is well worth a read. This site offers a thorough history of sexuality and the implications for homosexuals.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/homosexu.htm
This website offers an interesting look at the different perspectives of homosexuality, although you may not agree with all of the ideas, they are interesting to read none the less.
http://www.psychology.org.au/publications/tip_sheets/orientation/
The Australian Psychological Society website offers some valuable iformation on homosexuality. Including information on sexuality as a mental illness, is it a choice, homosexual parenting, the coming out process, how to reduce predjudice and education.

Cherney, A. (1998). Understanding and documenting anti-homosexual sentiment [The recognition that there exists a general social, cultural, political and legal disapproval of homosexual desire, and animosity towards gay and lesbian identity, politics and lifestyle]. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 10(2), 125-137.

Flood, M. (2003). Homophobia and schools [Keynote speech at the Homophobia in Educating Settings Roundtable on 27 August (2003) in Sydney]. Newsletter (Australia Institute), 36, 9.










APPENDIX

Concept Map:

Can be found through the following link

http://clarebear-socialpsych.blogspot.com/2007/09/concept-map-blog-1.html

Self-Assessment:

I feel as though overall I am happy with my final blog. It was quite difficult to write the essay because I found it hard to decide which aspects of the topic were most important. Due to the reasonably small word limit, I did struggle at times to figure out which bits of information were the best. However I do believe that I choose the most salient pieces of information and incorporated them into my final blog.

Theory:

The theory component of my blog was probably one of the easiest sections, only because there are so many excellent theories on stereotypes. I applied the contact hypothesis, the conformation bias theory and the attribution theory to my essay topic. The challenge was applying the theories to homosexuality; however it was an interesting and useful process for me because I learnt a lot.

Research:

The research section was the most time consuming part of my blog process. I had a reasonably hard time finding relevent Australian articles on the topic, so I am happy with the final result. I added all the relevent research studies I found and those I didn’t have the word limit to fit into my final blog I have added into my web resources section. All of the research articles I used in my blog were published from 2000 onwards, so they are all recent and up to date. I am highly satisfied with the research articles I obtained and read in the process of writing my essay. I found the information very interesting and I understood the key points and issues raised. I believe I made effective use of the best literature available on the essay topic by adding research to back up each of the key points raised.

Written expression:

Written expression was the most challenging section for me. I had to work really hard to get the right balance between a readability of grade 12 and flare in my writing. I also found it extremely hard to make my essay flow the way I wanted it to. I think this was due to the fact I had so much information I wanted to add, therefore making lots of paragraphs, I feel as though the final result is expressed the way I aimed. I asked several people to read my essay and I made slight changes to improve my written expression. A level 12 readabilty was required for this essay and my final blog reached this goal by shortening certain sentences and long words. This helped to decrease the readability from a grade level of 14 down to the desired level 12. I used APA formatting where appropriate, for example in references and overall structure. The concept map was useful in organising and clearly presenting my argument. By breaking my essay into smaller paragraphs instead of four large ones, I believe made the essay easier for the reader to read.

On-line engagement:

The on-line engagement component was extremely fun, educational and interesting. I found it very benefical reading other peoples posts and other peoples comments on my blogs were also of high use to me. I set up my blog account in week one and made my first posting in week two. Since then I have made regular postings. I have made the effort to research my posting and also have put a lot of thought into them. From the very beginning I made sure I commented on other peoples postings, and I have read all the postings and do so on a daily basis. In total I have made 5 original postings (see my blog page: http://clarebear-socialpsych.blogspot.com), and have commented on approx 6 other students’ postings (I have added links to 4 below). I have also tried to develop my postings on my blog 1 topic, however I could have put up more posts on my drafts. I also received two light bulbs on my page implying a very active blog, with a clear evolution of thinking.

http://jfavettasocialpsychology.blogspot.com/2007/08/confronting-issues-of-beauty-oprah.html
http://mikesocialpsychology.blogspot.com/2007/08/10-worst-genocides.html
http://jo-socialpsych.blogspot.com/2007/08/stolen-generation-was-it-genocide.html
http://beckpsychblog.blogspot.com/2007/08/more-on-stereotypes.html

Improvements:

Given more time I would have liked to have done more readings and research on the topic to get a deeper understanding and a broader perspective on homosexual stereotypes. There a lot of great information out there and I attempted to read as much as I could on the broadest range of topics. The influence of religion on homosexuality was a topic of interest for me, and given more time I would have attempted to search through the bible to find quotes. I also found it difficult to keep to the world limit, overall though I am happy with my essay.

Maybe we just can't help it...

Hello fellow social psychians,

Just a posting to say that I thoroughly enjoyed this week’s lecture on prejudice and stereotypes. My blog 1 topic is on stereotypes and the lecture offered me much food for thought. It was somewhat upsetting to discover though that as a species, us humans may be innately destined to be prejudiced. Although sad to hear, it did offer me some comfort… as strange as that may sound. You see, I always wondered why we hadn’t learnt yet how to just be nice! I mean, why do we still continue to discriminate people based on such silly superficial characteristics? We have come so far, in the way of medicine, technology and education, however we still go to war, stigmatize, discriminate, and stereotype people different to us. If we can’t really help this prejudiced way of acting then I suppose it’s not that all that bad now is it… We are after all only animals, maybe that’s all we are really capable of being? Animals, who fight, challenge others, and who are wary of strangers… Animals with the addition of ipods and trendy designer clothes… maybe we have no control over our tendency to behave in this manner… Or maybe there is more to acting in a prejudiced way than simply following our innate drives? Not all of us act on these negative feelings… perhaps we all secretly hold these prejudiced thoughts, but only some of us act on them… of course I am not being serious here and this premise is far from what I believe… but it is an interesting idea… Any thoughts?

Clare.

I've decided on my blog topic!!

Hello everyone,
I have finally decided on my topic for my first blog. I previously stated I was going to do the question on stereotypes “Choose and describe a stereotype that is commonly held about a minority group in Australian society. Discuss why this stereotype exists, how that stereotype was formed, and how it is maintained. Also consider how this stereotype could be changed. Present a concept map depicting your understanding of the socio-psychological variables involved.”
Now I have decided that I am going to write about homosexuals as a minority group in Australia. Although it has been time consuming trying to find Australian journals, I am slowly gathering some great information! I’m thinking my essay will outline how Australians perceive the stereotypical homosexual, then explore why this stereotype exists. I’m probably going to discuss things like gender roles, cultural norms being violated, how people are frightened of the unknown and different… Then I will look at how this stereotype was formed focusing on religion, biology, laws and fear. I have found a lot of interesting studies about how the media can contribute to the maintenance of homosexual stereotypes. I will finally outline some possible ways to change the stereotypes associated with homosexuality, things like education.
Just a starting point… any ideas on things I should look at researching more, or things I shouldn’t discuss would be greatly appreciated. And does anyone know if the concept map for this question should focus on how stereotypes exist, how they were formed, how they are maintained or how they can be changed or all of these factors???
Clare

Online world..

Hi everyone,
I must say I was apprehensive to read the latest blog posted by “willing participant” due to its length! However I began reading it and found that I couldn’t stop myself from finishing it. I have to completely agree with you WP, there is an online world or society out there, which comprises of rules and regulations that one must follow if one wishes to be accepted as a valued member (not unlike the real world!). I often find myself trying to explain my online assignments (for example this blogging idea) to my Grandma, only to be reminded that- she just doesn’t get it… I often tell my Mum the latest gossip about friends I haven’t seen in years and she replies… “Oh did you run into her?? How lovely” and I always disappoint her when I reply “Nah Mum, we were chatting on myspace”. So I guess the online generation has a massive advantage in the way of communication and socialising. We can chat and share stories with our friends on the other side of the world, or that we don’t have the time to catch up with, or even chat with people we have never met before. But this advantage can also act as a disadvantage. People can get comfortable conversing only online, and may not have the opportunities to develop their interpersonal skills in the real world. Not to mention the dangers involved in sharing personal details with strangers. Although I agree with the idea raised by willing participant, that the generations before ours can be uninformed about the online world, I don’t think they are to blame. The online world is a daunting and challenging one. Like a child being taught in the real world, we too must become accustom to the ways in which the online world works. This process can’t be easy for those people or generations who have no experience with the internet. I think communication between the online generation and the offline generation about the implications of the online world could really help in reducing the incongruence on the issue... any other thoughts?
Clare

Hey everyone, in response to Jessica's posting, I find it hard to believe that so many people did conform to Asch's conformity experiment. I would like to think that I would not conform to an obviously incorrect group of people. But I guess in certain situations I feel more inclined to just agree with the crowd to avoid conflict. Like we learnt in this weeks lecture, when I am with a group of people I believe know more about a particular subject than I do, I am more likely to conform and agree with them, an informational social influence. When I was younger, like in high school, I was more likely to go along with the crowd to be liked, a normative social influence. But I think now, that I am more confident in who I am, and what I know and believe in, I am less likely to conform. Standing up to a crowd can be intimidating though, and maybe this has a lot to do with why so many people in the experiment just agreed with the group. Although this conformity isn't really an issue with experiments like Asch's, in the real world, it can have devastating effects. So I for one will aim to speak up, and say "I do not agree that line A is the same length as line B!".

Clare.

Hey everyone,

Beck i agree with you that the "speeding- no one thinks big of you" add campaign is a very effective one. I think it targets the right audience too, being young males. It illustates that when young men speed, they not only do not impress the girls, they dont impress their male mates either. A fantastic lesson to be taught! Hopefully aiding in an attitude and behaviour change.

I am thinking about doing the blog topic "stereotypes". I think it is very important to understand the origins of stereotypes, esspecially negative ones. Because I believe only after one understands where and how stereotypes are formed can one begin to challenge these stereotypes. Any thoughts on the topic?

Clare.

Test Blog

Hello everone, just another test blog... test, test, test... hope this one works...

Hey everyone,
Just testing my blogging abilities!