Palm Beach State College Psychology Paper

User Generated

Fnqbh

Writing

Palm Beach State College

Description

Write a paper of at least 2000 words in which you:

1. Identify your selected article, using a proper APA-style reference. See examples at the end of this assignment.

2. Describe what type of article it is and how you can tell. For example, is it a primarily a review of existing research, a report of new research, or an analysis of a professional issue? Describe how you can you tell. If it is a research article, identify the type of research involved.

Summarize what you have learned about the content of the article. Be sure to include the main purpose of the article, the major findings, and how the major findings are supported.

Explain how this article fits into the overall field of psychology. Then, identify the corresponding chapter(s) from your textbook.

Explain why this article is different and similar from articles in non-scholarly periodicals, such as magazines and newspapers.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

PSY2012 – General Psychology Term Paper Assignment: Exploration of a Professional Journal Article in Psychology In the Palm Beach State/Florida Atlantic University Online Library, go to online academic database. Find a recent research article from a scholarly journal in the field of psychology. It must have been published less than 12 years ago. Be sure to select an article for which the full-text is available. Actual journals for which full-text is available include Advances in Cognitive Psychology, British Journal of Social Psychology, Journal of Positive Psychology, Issues in Forensic Psychology, Journal of Psychology, among many others. Note: Do not use newspaper or magazine articles or Websites such as Wikipedia to complete this assignment. Visit Palm Beach State University’s guidelines against plagiarism. Your selected article must meet all of the stated criteria or your assignment will not be accepted. Before proceeding, please ensure that your selected article meets the following criteria:  Full-text is available in online database  Is a scholarly journal article in the field of sociology  Was published less than 12 years ago. Get a sense of what the article is about by reading some key sections. Begin by reading the Abstract of the article. Subsequently, read the Introduction and the discussion sections. Flip through the paper and look at any figures or tables. Read as much of the paper as practical; get as much out of it as you can. Write a paper of at least 2000 words in which you: 1. Identify your selected article, using a proper APA-style reference. See examples at the end of this assignment. 2. Describe what type of article it is and how you can tell. For example, is it a primarily a review of existing research, a report of new research, or an analysis of a professional issue? Describe how you can you tell. If it is a research article, identify the type of research involved. 2. Summarize what you have learned about the content of the article. Be sure to include the main purpose of the article, the major findings, and how the major findings are supported. 3. Explain how this article fits into the overall field of psychology. Then, identify the corresponding chapter(s) from your textbook. 4. Explain why this article is different and similar from articles in non-scholarly periodicals, such as magazines and newspapers. How to properly cite your article Author list (Year of publication) Title of article. Name of Journal, Volume number, page numbers. Examples Houston, D. M., McKee, K. J., Wilson, J. (2000). Attributional style, efficacy, and the enhancement of well-being among housebound older people. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 22, 309-317. Iudicello, J. E., Woods, S. P., Scott, J. C., Cherner, M., Heaton, R. K., Atkinson, J. H., Grant, I. (2010) Longer term improvement in neurocognitive functioning and affective distress among methamphetamine users who achieve stable abstinence. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 32, 708-718. Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:  At least five pages long (2000 words).  Be typed, double-spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides.  Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page is not included in the required assignment page length. The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:  Identify key concepts that provide a foundation for the study of adjustment.  Summarize the major psychological perspectives.  Use technology and information resources to research issues in psychology.  Write clearly and concisely about psychology using proper writing mechanics. Grading for this assignment will be based on answer quality, logic/organization of the paper, and language and writing skills, using the following rubric. Points: 350 Criteria Assignment 1: Exploration of a Professional Journal Article in Psychology Unacceptable Below 60% F Meets Minimum Expectations 60-69% D Fair 70-79% C Proficient 80-89% B Exemplary 90-100% A 1. Identify your selected article, using a proper APA-style reference. Weight: 5% Did not submit or incompletely identified your selected article using a proper APA-style reference. Insufficiently identified your selected article using a proper APA-style reference. Partially identified your selected article using a proper APA-style reference. Satisfactorily identified your selected article using a proper APA-style reference. Thoroughly identified your selected article using a proper APA-style reference. 2. Describe what type of article it is and how you can tell. For example, is it a primarily a review of existing research, a report of new research, or an analysis of a professional issue? If it is a research article, identify the type of research involved Weight: 15% Did not submit or incompletely described the type of article it i; did not submit or incompletely described how you can tell. Did not submit or incompletely identified the type of research involved, if applicable. Insufficiently described the type of article it is; insufficiently described how you can tell. Insufficiently identified the type of research involved, if applicable. Partially described the type of article it is; partially described how you can tell. Partially identified the type of research involved, if applicable. Satisfactorily described the type of article it is; satisfactorily described how you can tell. Satisfactorily identified the type of research involved, if applicable. Thoroughly described the type of article it is; thoroughly described how you can tell. Thoroughly identified the type of research involved, if applicable. 3. Summarize, in a paragraph or two, what you have learned about the content of the article. Be sure to include the main purpose of the article, the major findings, and how the major findings are supported. Did not submit or incompletely summarized what you have learned about the content of the article. Did not submit or incompletely included the main purpose of the Insufficiently summarized what you have learned about the content of the article. Insufficiently included the main purpose of the article, the Partially summarized what you have learned about the content of the article. Partially included the main purpose of the article, the Satisfactorily summarized what you have learned about the content of the article. Satisfactorily included the main purpose of the article, Thoroughly summarized what you have learned about the content of the article. Thoroughly included the main purpose of the article, Weight: 25% article, the major findings, and how the major findings are supported. major findings, and how the major findings are supported. major findings, and how the major findings are supported. the major findings, and how the major findings are supported. the major findings, and how the major findings are supported. 4. Explain how this article fits into the overall field of psychology. Then, identify the correspondingchapter(s) from your textbook. Weight 25% Did not submit or incompletely explained how this article fits into the overall field of psychology. Did not submit or incompletely identified the corresponding chapter(s) from your textbook. Insufficiently addressed this criterion. explained how this article fits into the overall field of psychology. Insufficiently identified the corresponding chapter(s) fromyour textbook.. Partially explained how this article fits into the overall field of psychology. Partially identified the corresponding chapter(s) from your textbook. Satisfactorily explained how this article fits into the overall field of psychology. Did not submit or incompletely identified the corresponding chapter(s) from your textbook.. Thoroughly explained how this article fits into the overall field of psychology. Thoroughly identified the corresponding chapter(s) from your textbook. 5. Explain why this article is different and similar from articles in non-scholarly periodicals, such as magazines and newspapers. Weight: 20% Did not submit or incompletely explained why this article is different and similar from articles in nonscholarly periodicals, such as magazines and newspapers. Insufficiently explained why this article is different and similar from articles in nonscholarly periodicals, such as magazines and newspapers. Partially explained why this article is different and similar from articles in nonscholarly periodicals, such as magazines and newspapers. Satisfactorily explained why this article is different and similar from articles in nonscholarly periodicals, such as magazines and newspapers. Thoroughly explained why this article is different and similar from articles in nonscholarly periodicals, such as magazines and newspapers. 6. Clarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements Weight: 10% More than 8 errors present 7-8 errors present 3-4 errors present 0-2 errors present 5-6 errors present 4/14/2020 Discovery Service for Palm Beach State College - Lakeworth Record: 1 Title: Gender and socio-intentionality: Why are 'things' the way they are? Authors: Teo, Thomas, ORCID 0000-0002-1646-5035. Department of Psychology, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada, tteo@yorku.ca Address: Teo, Thomas, Department of Psychology, York University, 4700 Keele Street, Toronto, ON, Canada, M3J 1P3, tteo@yorku.ca Source: Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, Vol 40(1), Feb, 2020. Special Issue: Possibility for Women in Psychology and Interdisciplinary Sciences: Theoreticians, Scientists, and Agents for Change in the 21st Century. pp. 58-61. Publisher: US : Educational Publishing Foundation Other Journal Titles: Theoretical & Philosophical Psychology Other Publishers: US : Division 24 of the American Psychological Association US : Division 24 of the American Psychological Association, Society for Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology US : Division 24 of the American Psychological Association, the Division of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology ISSN: 1068-8471 (Print) 2151-3341 (Electronic) ISBN: 978-1-4338-9334-6 Language: English Keywords: gender, socio-intentionality, women, psychology, sciences, gender issues, history, theory, feminism, political thought Abstract: This comment responds to the four target articles published in this special issue on 'Women in Psychology and Related Sciences.' It is suggested that the articles have explanatory power for answering the question, 'Why are things the way they are?' when it comes to gender issues, by drawing on history, theory, feminism, political thought, and in short, on the psychological humanities. The role of intersectionality and neoliberalism in the articles as well as in everyday life are discussed, and consequences for the analysis of gender are presented. It is argued that psychology needs queering, but that gender remains a significant category when analyzing psychology and related disciplines. It is concluded that resistance needs solidarity and that the Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology will benefit from the inclusion of feminist and women’s perspectives. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved) Document Type: Comment/Reply Subjects: *Feminism; *Human Females; *Human Sex Differences; *Psychology; *Sciences; Feminist Psychology; History; Intention; Sex Roles; Theories; Solidarity PsycINFO Classification: eds.a.ebscohost.com.db19.linccweb.org/eds/delivery?sid=329b543f-6877-45f5-a7ff-6ecdddc3d67c%40sessionmgr4007&vid=1&ReturnUrl=http%3a%… 1/5 4/14/2020 Discovery Service for Palm Beach State College - Lakeworth History & Systems (2140) Sex Roles & Women's Issues (2970) Population: Human Female Format Covered: Electronic Publication Type: Journal; Peer Reviewed Journal Publication History: Accepted: Jul 10, 2019; First Submitted: Jun 28, 2019 Release Date: 20200127 Copyright: American Psychological Association. 2020 Digital Object Identifier: http://dx.doi.org.db19.linccweb.org/10.1037/teo0000131 PsycARTICLES Identifier: teo-40-1-58 Accession Number: 2020-05298-007 Database: APA PsycArticles Gender and Socio-Intentionality: Why Are “Things” the Way They Are? / COMMENTARY By: Thomas Teo Department of Psychology, York University; Acknowledgement: I was honored that the special issue editors asked a person who uses the pronouns he/him/his and identifies as a man to comment on the four target articles on women. I share the belief that ideas can be understood and appreciated by all. Indeed, I value analyses of marginalization and I have learned a great deal from feminist theorizing. Given these circumstances and the fact that I am close to two of the authors, it would be inappropriate to advance a systematic critique, a summary, or an artificial tying together of arguments; rather I seek here to articulate what I learned from these articles in a Gadamerian fusion of horizons that connect the perspectives of the articles with my own. Indeed, I deepened my understanding of the status of women in academic, political, and everyday life. In addition, if we know the current state of affairs, we can introduce change that is needed if we value justice, equality, and solidarity. Why are things the way they are? By “things,” social scientists (including psychologists) do not mean physical and chemical objects and processes, but rather social “things” such as inequality, injustice, oppression, and privilege. The answers that “things are the way they are” because of “God,” “nature,” a metaphysics of “living in the best possible world,” or because of “choice,” are lazy explanations, even when they are dressed up with seemingly sophisticated discourses. The idea that power is the source of such phenomena is equally idle if arguments are not accompanied by studies that show how power plays out and is embodied in reality. Indeed, the studies presented in this special issue make a meticulous case for how power operates when it comes to women and gender in social life, academia, and subjectivity. To address questions about the increasing limitations on women’s reproductive rights in the United States, the policing of pregnancy, and the reduction of women’s rights to their bodies around the world (Cosgrove & Vaswani, 2020), why academia is not a shining beacon for meritocracy (Febbraro, 2020), why the talk of choice is misleading in science and why we need to understand historical trajectories and repetitions (Rutherford, 2020), and why there are gendered communications in interdisciplinary contexts (Osbeck, 2020), the authors draw on feminist theory, philosophy, historiography, political science, and psychoanalysis. Clearly a psychological perspective alone would be insufficient to answer these questions. eds.a.ebscohost.com.db19.linccweb.org/eds/delivery?sid=329b543f-6877-45f5-a7ff-6ecdddc3d67c%40sessionmgr4007&vid=1&ReturnUrl=http%3a%… 2/5 4/14/2020 Discovery Service for Palm Beach State College - Lakeworth The analyses rely on the psychological humanities to address the meaning of reproductive and gendered academic life in specific societies. The four articles also demonstrate that analyses of the status of women, gender, and sexism remain relevant to an understanding of how society as well as science and the discipline of psychology operate, and of how power permeates the minds and actions of persons and is enacted in particular contexts. Women can be the “object” of research (Osbeck, 2020), and gender can be a category that constitutes research (Febbraro, 2020; Rutherford, 2020) or a political interest that is expressed in social life (Cosgrove & Vaswani, 2020). Certainly—as the articles instantiate—gendered reality has become more complex since the 1970s. Third-wave feminism, for instance, has shown that gender needs to be accompanied by analyses of the diversity of women’s ontologies and experiences. Yet, this complexity does not mean that one should abandon women’s studies. As Febbraro (2020) and Rutherford (2020) point out in their articles, one concept that has challenged and complicated the topic of gender (in science) is intersectionality. The two authors have a progressive understanding in mind when they point out that gender oppression is compounded or eased when combined with other social characteristics. Yet, intersectionality can also be used for regressive purposes, when it is argued that we no longer need a psychology of women (or employment equity) and that liberal feminist analyses have become obsolete, because things are more complicated than such claims would suggest. This sentiment is sometimes expressed by students in my classes who use the concept of intersectionality to dismiss feminist analyses. Yet, the articles make the case that gendered power, even when analyses have become more intricate, remains a major structural source of power and resistance, even if not the only such source. The articles also demonstrate that the feminist movement, despite public constructions to the contrary, was never a single-minded framework. To do justice to the complexity of problems, innovative shifts in the theorizing of women’s experiences and lives have occurred since the beginning of the feminist project. There is a long history of this movement in politics, academia, and research that has led to many qualifications, differentiations, and diversifications in theory and practice as well as a backlash intended to turn back its achievements. The four articles in this issue attest to the varieties of theorizing women, from grounding lives in the consequences of laws and policies (Cosgrove & Vaswani, 2020) and academia (Febbraro, 2020; Rutherford, 2020), to analyses about the possibility of gendered interdisciplinary research. Any antifeminist backlash itself can be analyzed within feminist theory and the psychological humanities, as reflected in the target articles. Psychology has had an inclination to align itself with the powerful in society. There are many historical reasons for this tendency, one of which relates to the lower status of the discipline that has frequently led psychologists to embrace a rhetoric of natural science when it comes to constructions of sexism, racism, classism, homophobia, ableism, and so on. Psychology is a status-quo discipline that has a difficulty grappling with large-scale sociohistorical changes, with the idea that science and politics are entangled, or with how a discipline such as psychology itself could be gendered. Psychology’s success has also depended on the neoliberal expansion that focuses on individuals and their families, very much the same way that psychology focuses on the individual. Neoliberal scholars have pointed out that the target of neoliberalism is the family (Cooper, 2017), because the individual with attachments and obligations, or who would “do anything for the family,” is an ideal instrument in a capitalist economic system. Collectively, Cosgrove and Vaswani, Febbraro, and Rutherford, all of whom contextualize their analyses in the advancement of neoliberalism, suggest that neither gender nor analyses of gender can be detached from the contexts of the history, culture, politics, and society in which it appears. Psychological analyses cannot do without socio-intentionality, the idea that mental phenomena refer to cultural-historical meanings of socially constituted objects and processes. eds.a.ebscohost.com.db19.linccweb.org/eds/delivery?sid=329b543f-6877-45f5-a7ff-6ecdddc3d67c%40sessionmgr4007&vid=1&ReturnUrl=http%3a%… 3/5 4/14/2020 Discovery Service for Palm Beach State College - Lakeworth Cosgrove and Vaswani (2020) locate pregnancy profiling, the new maternalism combined with racism, within the neoliberal reality of the United States. They show convincingly, in defense of the relevance of the category of woman, that reproductive rights are still at the center of feminist struggles and that, given the recent attacks on Roe v. Wade in the United States, progress is not a given. They also demonstrate that mental health screening is not only not antithetical to the neoliberal agenda but also fits perfectly its ambitions. In their respective works, Febbraro and Rutherford point to the ways in which neoliberal ideas have contributed to changing views of women in science from the 1970s. In particular, they challenge seductive neoliberal concepts such as choice and meritocracy as sources of success in gendered fields of research. Choice and merit depend on socially embodied or materialized premises; once the premises change, agency also changes. The articles by Febbraro and Rutherford both demonstrate, despite different foci, that it is important to know the history of debates to make an informed assessment of why things are the way they are, and how they could be changed. As the target articles show, sexist thinking and acting, and déjà vu arguments related to current gender role reinforcements (as reflected in the studies on brain differences, wage gaps, pornography, mass media, and the arts) indicate the importance of understanding the history of a phenomenon. Sexism in psychology and science, and the popularity of the rhetoric of choice and merit, indicate that an analysis of gendered knowledge and practices is still necessary. Osbeck’s (2020) classical idea that men and women are socialized in different ways, and that this difference in socialization poses unique problems in interdisciplinary research and collaboration, could be further augmented with analyses of the macrophysics and microphysics of power, given that communication, normative structures, and expectations in various disciplines are infused with privilege. Intrasubjectivity is embedded not only in intersubjectivity, but also in sociosubjectivity. The socio-intentionality of choice cannot be ignored. But it would be imprecise to suggest that the articles are mainly about neoliberalism. It is always easy to argue that more recent theoretical developments should have been included, such as posthuman studies (Braidotti, 2013) and their consequences for the analyses of women and gender. More importantly, analyses that go to the heart of the conceptual framework of women’s studies may need to be debated. Some of the authors cite or reflect an awareness of Butler’s (1990) significance for questions about the meaning of gender and the concept of woman. Butler’s argument that feminist heterosexual models may lead to gender norms that have homophobic consequences needs to be taken seriously. Analyses must address sex, gender, and sexual desires, beyond binaries and rigidities. Such constellations do not contradict the analyses provided in this issue, but they would raise new questions, for example, regarding how transgender or nonbinary academics who work in interdisciplinary contexts are experienced and experience interactions and materialities. It is time that the social sciences, and psychology in particular, are queered. The authors cover socio-, inter-, and intrasubjectivity regarding what it means to live more or less gendered lives and to experience oppression as pregnant or academic women, or as women more generally. Even if there may be some disagreement among the authors as to the centrality of gender as a structural category, or regarding the degree to which men and women are political concepts, all suggest that we must pay attention to gender when it comes to politics and policy, to the history of science, or to the practice of interdisciplinary research. Although the role of women in society and psychology has seen some positive change, progress is not inevitable, seldom linear, and always context-dependent. Sometimes change moves in circles, sometimes it is discontinuous, frequently it appears dialectical, and occasionally it ends. Thus, the fight for social justice is never ending, as the articles underline in the context of a global reactionary movement characterized by an increase in sexist, racist, and fascist thinking. Resistance cannot occur without solidarity. The articles also provide a new perspective in a journal that in its past has lacked in the publishing of feminist or womeneds.a.ebscohost.com.db19.linccweb.org/eds/delivery?sid=329b543f-6877-45f5-a7ff-6ecdddc3d67c%40sessionmgr4007&vid=1&ReturnUrl=http%3a%… 4/5 4/14/2020 Discovery Service for Palm Beach State College - Lakeworth centered analyses. Together, the articles represent a fresh starting point for detailed accounts of phenomena from which theoretical and philosophical psychologists can learn about the importance of integrating social characteristics into theoretical work. References Braidotti, R. (2013). The posthuman. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Polity Press. Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York, NY: Routledge. Cooper, M. (2017). Family values: Between neoliberalism and the new social conservatism. Brooklyn, NY: Zone Books. Cosgrove, L., & Vaswani, A. (2020). Fetal rights, the policing of pregnancy, and meanings of the maternal in an age of neoliberalism. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 40, 43–53. 10.1037/teo0000139 Febbraro, A. R. (2020). Critical feminist history of psychology versus sociology of scientific knowledge: Contrasting views of women scientists?Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 40, 7–20. 10.1037/teo0000133 Osbeck, L. M. (2020). Lost and found in the margins: Women, interdisciplinary collaboration, and integrative development. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 40, 32–42. 10.1037/teo0000132 Rutherford, A. (2020). Doing science, doing gender: Using history in the present. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 40, 21–31. 10.1037/teo0000134 Submitted: June 28, 2019 Accepted: July 10, 2019 This publication is protected by US and international copyright laws and its content may not be copied without the copyright holders express written permission except for the print or download capabilities of the retrieval software used for access. This content is intended solely for the use of the individual user. Source: Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology. Vol. 40. (1), Feb, 2020 pp. 58-61) Accession Number: 2020-05298-007 Digital Object Identifier: 10.1037/teo0000131 eds.a.ebscohost.com.db19.linccweb.org/eds/delivery?sid=329b543f-6877-45f5-a7ff-6ecdddc3d67c%40sessionmgr4007&vid=1&ReturnUrl=http%3a%… 5/5 Social Cognition  This section covers:  The importance of roles and norms  How we form judgments about others SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY © 2016 Cengage Learning. Social Psychology  How do interactions with others affect a person’s thoughts, feelings, and behaviors?  Humans have evolved to be social beings Social Cognition © 2016 Cengage Learning. Social Roles  What position does someone occupy in society?  What behaviors are expected from him or her? Social Cognition © 2016 Cengage Learning. Attributions  Why did somebody behave in a particular way? What caused the behavior? Internal (dispositional) Social Cognition External (situational) © 2016 Cengage Learning. Fundamental Attribution Error  A tendency to attribute others’ behavior to internal factors  Why is this woman yelling at her companion? Social Cognition © 2016 Cengage Learning. Other Attribution Errors  We make different attributions for ourselves and others. Actor-observer bias Social Cognition Self-serving bias © 2016 Cengage Learning. Attitudes  May include cognitive, affective, and behavioral components Attitude on gun control Social Cognition Cognitive (beliefs, ideas) “Gun owners are more likely to shoot a loved one than a criminal.” Affective (emotions, feelings) “Guns just make me sick” Behavioral (actions) “I vote for guncontrol politicians.” © 2016 Cengage Learning. Persuasion  Related to characteristics of the communicator, the message, and the audience Social Cognition © 2016 Cengage Learning. Cognitive Dissonance  An uncomfortable state that occurs when behavior and attitudes do not match  How can this state be resolved? Social Cognition © 2016 Cengage Learning. Stereotyping  A simplified set of traits that are associated with group membership Social Cognition © 2016 Cengage Learning. Prejudice  A preconceived opinion or attitude about an issue, person, or group Social Cognition © 2016 Cengage Learning. Discrimination  The biased treatment of people based on their membership in a particular group or category Social Cognition © 2016 Cengage Learning. Reducing Prejudice  Increase contact in cooperative activities Social Cognition © 2016 Cengage Learning. Social Influence  This section covers:  How our behavior is influenced by others  How we interact with others Social Cognition © 2016 Cengage Learning. Conformity  Behaving in ways that increase the likelihood of gaining a group’s approval and avoiding rejection Social Cognition © 2016 Cengage Learning. Compliance  Agreeing to do something simply because we have been asked Social Cognition © 2016 Cengage Learning. Obedience  Complying with instructions given by an authority figure Social Cognition © 2016 Cengage Learning. Social Facilitation  Occurs when the presence of other people changes individual performance Social Cognition © 2016 Cengage Learning. Social Loafing  Reduced motivation and effort by individuals who work in a group as opposed to work alone Social Cognition © 2016 Cengage Learning. Deindividuation  Immersion of the individual within a group, making the individual relatively anonymous Social Cognition © 2016 Cengage Learning. Groupthink  A type of flawed decision making in which a group does not question its decisions critically Social Cognition © 2016 Cengage Learning. Aggression  An action done with the intent to harm others  Several contributing factors:  Biology  Frustration  Learning Social Cognition © 2016 Cengage Learning. Altruism  Engaging in helping behaviors without the expectation of any personal gain Social Cognition © 2016 Cengage Learning. Bystander Apathy  People’s willingness to lend help decreases when others are around. Social Cognition © 2016 Cengage Learning.
Purchase answer to see full attachment
Explanation & Answer:
2000 words
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Here you are! In the paper, you'll still need to add your name and the course details on the title page. I hope it turns out to be good for you! I spent a lot of time researching on these topics.

Gender
and sociointer1

[Add Title Here, up to 12 Words, on One to Two Lines]
[Author Name(s), First M. Last, Omit Titles and Degrees]
[Institutional Affiliation(s)]

Author Note
[Include any grant/funding information and a complete correspondence address.]

Gender and
sociointentionality
2
Abstract
Understanding why our society is set up in a particular way or why things have turned out
the way that they have, Thomas Teo expresses his observations in this informative article which
speaks on the research and findings of other respected professionals. Critically looking at the
problems of feminism and women’s rights and coming to educated conclusions on why some
beliefs may be widespread and inherently harmful, Teo uses historical examples and repetitions
to make sense of this complicated issue. I discuss my thoughts on Teo’s interpretation of these
social issues, as well as give my own commentary of what I learn and understand. This article
aims to make the major problems and questions involving feminism and women’s rights more
understandable and to be viewed under a more analytical scope. The connection to these issues
and Psychology is also discussed.
Keywords: Feminist, women, Women’s studies, Discussion, psychology.

Gender and socio-intentionality: Why are ‘things’ the way they are?

My chosen article and presented research

The article I chose was titled: “Gender and socio-intentionality: Why are ‘things’ the way
they are? By Thomas Teo, a professor at York University and an exceptional contributor to the
fields of numerous studies of psychology; including historical, philosophical, and critical
psychology. Teo analyzes and discusses multiple published articles on the research of woman’s
reproductive rights, historical components, gendered results and terms within psychological

Gender and
sociointentionality
3
studies, and the relationship between gender oppression and intersectionality. Since the author is
speaking of his thoughts on topics and articles already written and published for public viewing,
this piece is simply a review of existing research. Many topics covered are deeply studied in
many areas of psychology, and the professor gives his thoughts on them.
The research presented in this article covers a few topics: Woman’s reproductive rights
(Cosgrove & Vaswani, 2020), gendered communications in scholarly studies (Osbeck, 2020),
precision not wholly being reliant on research (Febbraro, 2020) and the concept of choice being
misleading and the need for understanding of historical repetitions (Rutherford). These articles
and the analyses Teo gave all of them speak of one subject consistently: Woman’s struggles.

The complicated definition of gender.
We must first understand that the study of women and gender is an ever-evolving process. It is
not something that is absolute, as mentioned in (Febbraro 2020). Some may start believing that the
increased complications of factors that must be considered for the oppression of woman means that
woman’s studies should be dropped. However, this complexity is arguably what makes this branch of
study so interesting. Intersectionality is an example of this and a part of what...


Anonymous
Really helped me to better understand my coursework. Super recommended.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Related Tags