Bradshaw, Stimson, Williams & Skinner
(University of York SPRU).

Economic & Social Research Council
Programme on Population and Household Change
Seminar March 1997

(A review by Robert J. Whiston, FRSA).

This is an excellent if, at 20 pages, a rather short pilot into the uncharted waters of Non-Resident Fathers and, by implication, fatherless children.

From the very beginning (page 1) the very pertinent and political point is made that, in these sensitive times of accounting for the tax-payer money, Non-Resident Fathers are not likely, if ever, to be dependant on public services, i.e. state benefits, on the scale presented by single mothers. This nicely parallels the situation with regard to single fathers, with custody of children, who are also less likely to call upon, or be a burden to, state resources. (OPCS "Population Trends", verifies the fact that almost 70% of lone fathers are in full-time employment compared to only 40% for lone mothers – almost half of which are in part-time employment).

Whether these two points will lead to a realisation by Gov't that, at a stroke, expenditure can be slashed by allowing the very many fathers who want to bring up their children a major share in the process, is problematical.

Many of these fathers it would appear have captured the knack that is said to elude so many women, i.e. they are able to combine home with work commitments. By strategies that include balanced days, being self-employed or working at home, men have overcome the very obstacles said to pose the greatest barriers to women returning to the workplace.

Whether this feminine inability is by design or accident, or a function of the different socio-economic class between the two groups is debatable (and with so little data or research directed towards fathers, we couldn't possibly comment at this stage).

It is perhaps worth noting that later on in the Paper figures show that 20% of fathers that were made childless and Non-Resident simply dropped out of the labour market. This should be compared with other estimates that up to 40% of divorced men become less economically active.

Perhaps inadvertently, lone fathers have pioneered a viable way forward for policy makers. Ever practical, men have pre-empted Gov't initiatives by employing full or part-time help (usually female) to help with meals, shopping, clothes washing and buying. The Gov'ts variation on this theme, of course, is the preferred gender reversal approach where millions of pounds will be committed in a 'macho' attempt to show who's in charge.

It continues (and we're still on page 2) in the same vein with some frighteningly poignant observations that are perhaps lost on the rather dull brain cells that are bequeathed politicians and are mandatory for civil servants. The Paper is unequivocal in its castigation of the assertion that fathers are feckless. Almost stridently it mocks, with the aid of statistics, the hollowness of that and the imported term from the U.S. of Deadbeat Dads. Unfortunately, both expressions have entered the popular culture with a vengeance. The York Report explodes the perceived persona as essentially a mythical creation. The blame for this is firmly placed on the Murdoch Press during its successful courtship and ingratiation of the Thatcher administration. Figures from the statistical dept of the Dept of Social Security amply demonstrate that the number of so called dead-beat-dads match almost exactly those fathers who are unemployed or disabled and unable to work.

Commentators all too easily forget that we have, from the 16th century onwards, records and private diaries of men detailing the delight taken in fathering children and being a father to children. Fathers have always enjoyed joining in games and watching their children's development (see "Roads to Divorce" Prof. Stone, Princeton University (trilogy) and "Fatherhood Reclaimed", Adrienne Burgess).

Reading this paper I can't help but feel the authors haven't quite come to terms with the relevant dynamics. Fatherhood, for a man, is a serious but unspoken role he knows his peers and the community at large will judge him by. Less mature males, boys and young men, may be more disposed to so-called macho tendencies and haven't this commitment fully developed. However, in my personal experience, as an employer, even the most wayward apprentice is pulled up short by his entrance into paternity. The transfiguration is truly remarkable.

Where I question the Paper is in the notation that 50% of lone fathers are widowers. Way back in 1971 - before the onslaught of the 25 or more divorce reforms measures - only 20% of men became lone parents through divorce; the vast majority became so via widowhood. By 1991 widowhood had taken a back seat as a source of lone fatherhood accounting for 25% and divorce over 50% (OPCS Population Trends No.71 pp31. See also 'Lone Parenthood & Demographic Change', Haskey, and "Lone Parenthood: Coping with Constraints and Making Opportunities" published by Harvester Wheatsheaf 1991).

The Report makes no mention at this juncture that after bereavement a male spouse gets no state ‘widows’ pension and must continue to work or sign-on as if available for work (despite his domestic and child commitments).

Another criticism I have is in the decision to exclude children attending Boarding School. No distinction is even attempted between termly and weekly Boarders. And worse, they are categorised along with children put into residential care, hostels (Borstal, remand and prisons too, I shouldn't wonder). This not only builds in a bias but could be construed as bigotry and class prejudice of the very worst kind. Not perhaps the open mind one would have hoped for in such a survey.

Perhaps in excluding children at boarding school the research team presumed they were from intact family groups, or that parents who send their children away couldn't love them very much. The truth is children at boarding school come from both divorced and intact families.

In addition, I would have thought it obvious that Non-Resident Fathers have a great deal in common with the parents (fathers) of children at Boarding School in so much as they only see them at set times and for both parents and children the occasion is charged with anticipation. Brief re-unions are well remembered and the time spent together is regarded as precious, even priceless.

Invariably, it's the father that make the commitment and foots the bill to make boarding school possible. He alone makes the financial sacrifice to make it happen. That fatherly financial commitment cannot and should not be disdained, especially when one considers that female head of households (regardless of income) appear not to rate such educational expenditure as essential. In my many years associated with boarding schools I have never come across a mother making the same personal financial sacrifice.

What is also frequently neglected is that many of those who do attend boarding school do so on grants, bursaries etc that match parental contribution. Eton, for example, has a phenomenally high percentage of places paid for by its own foundation, and until recently Assisted Places helped many others on the borderline.

The Paper admits disappointment with the size of sample due to budgetary constraints and the response from those it was able to identify and enlist. If only FNF, ManKind Initiative or other Men’s' groups had been contacted the sample could have been much bigger than the final 590 interviews of Non-Resident Fathers. Any concern, from a purely statistical view point, that FNF or ManKind members may have presented a skewed basis could have been controlled for and, failing that, deployed as a very useful control group to validate results.

On page 3 the paper declares "There are men who don't wish to admit to paternity". The examples cited are those where paternity is doubted by the man, where the mother is confused as to whom she was sleeping with at the time, where the father knows the child lives in another/new household or where the mother is a married women and her husband is not the father.

In the above circumstances I should have thought it very natural, even understandable for men not to make waves.

Only later do we realise this paragraph relates to a mere 8% and 16% of men in survey results. But by then the damage has been done, the innuendo has done its work. Yes, there must always be (for the above reasons) a tiny minority of men who play down their paternity role. I'm sure the authors didn't intend to infer such a slight but the unfortunate wording ought to have carried a caution or prefix. But by the same token it is estimated that women give birth to between 20% and 40% children who are not fathered by their husband/partner. Suggestions that fathers should conduct a DNA paternity test to ensure wifely fidelity, and paternity, have been greeted in the media with howls of anger.

It may be minor point, but the reader is left confused as to whether the children in the other households relate to already married women, someone else's cohabitee, a girlfriend (who has now married someone else) or some other permutation of the above social arrangements.

Response levels from the different social groups within the Non-Resident Father category are eloquent in their betrayal. Single unmarried fathers were far more likely to refuse to participate in the survey in stark contrast to formerly cohabiting and married men who were most likely to co-operate (ref.: Patricia Morgan, The Warrior Class).

And as if to endorse matters, in Occupation Class terms the manual social class were also less likely to co-operate. This gives us a tantalising glimpse at what could be a mirror image of the female incidence of lone parenthood and the probability of such mothers successfully receiving, or not, regular CSA payments.

Elsewhere in the paper married fathers again demonstrate a greater interest in their offspring when compared with fathers from cohabiting relationships with single and unmarried fathers bottom of the heap at being the least likely to participate in paternal involvement.

On page 4 of the report some of the main characteristics of Non-Resident Fathers are itemised. These include a greater propensity to leave school at an earlier age, to be in the manual working social classes, be living in "social" housing, not to own a car, be unemployed (inactive) and have a low income. This applies to all fathers, regardless of martial status, who were contacted for the sample - irrespective of whether they subsequently took part in the survey or not.

These alarmingly mimic the traits found in children of lone mothers and one is left wondering if, by accident, the majority of the survey were composed of such children (see Profs. Halsey, N. Dennis and Patricia Morgan).

We know that children raised in Single Mother Households (SMH) distinctively tend to: leave school early; have poor or few academic attainments; have a lower social/occupation class than their father; be unemployed; be living in rented accommodation; be or have been in trouble with the law; for girls to be strong willed and boys weaker willed; and for girls to be more likely repeat their mothers social custom of birthing before or outside of marriage. All of which cries out for correlations to be made with existing survey results emanating from research into single mothers households.

In general terms the trends seen are those we have come to expect in the urban ghettos of America.

Social aberrations of repeating social behaviour, for so long measured on the female side of the social divide, appear to also add up from the other direction. In fact, one questions whether the word aberration is entirely appropriate here. Is it a function of a man's social class, i.e. his illegitimacy, his maturity, loss of identity and sense of purpose (see Norman Dennis) or simply a function of crude economics bludgeoning into a fragile social fabric ?

Do middle class white males yearn to be involved but find the price tag too high, whereas working class men simply don't bother or feel they've nothing really to contribute and so don't exhaust themselves emotionally ?

Is there an obvious, or only an instinctive and illusory, correlation here ?

When surveys again and again show children of single lone mothers disadvantaged whenever their father is shut out of their formative years could the reverse be true ? Namely that children become over-achievers when brought up by a single father and when contact or visitation rights are awarded to the ex-wife ? Is there research to support this hypothesis ?

The caveat, however, to all this must be that "contact", either by amount or intensity, is predetermined in large measure by background forces - and as such must surely rate the very highest priority by the generation after us.

Although the paper reports that "only a minority of fathers apart have children under school age" the tables reveal that the minority is in fact 21% (0-4 year olds). With 45% and 35% representing the 5-10 and 11-18 age groups respectively. Comparisons with the age/incidence of divorce is inevitable.

In asking, "why some fathers stay in contact with their children" the report, from our viewpoint, poses the wrong question. From a father's perspective the question should be "How is it that so many men remain in contact despite all the grief and obstacles thrown our way". One could very easily take issue with the assertion that it was Non-Resident Fathers who had to "overcome" certain practical and emotional barriers to see their children. To then add the phrase if he is "to function co-operatively as a parent with his ex ¬partner" simply serves to underline the prosaic disconnection of authors and public.

Is it all down to men ? Do women play no part in the proceedings ? Are they merely passive spectators to the problems men haphardously appear to inflict on themselves ?

From the sample it is evident that fathers biggest grievance (bigger even than the CSA) is the difficulty in trying to see their children. Contact was made in 47% of cases with only 21% of Non-Resident Father not seeing their children within the last year.

This alone must suffocate the cries from the pro-CSA lobby, stifle the pro-unmarried mothers’ brigade of Anna Coote, Harriet Harman and Patricia Hewitt - not forgetting the motley crew of prejudiced politicians in "sensible shoes".

Intriguingly, this is reported as a much higher incidence of contact than recorded by previous surveys. In fact the discrepancy sent the researchers scurrying off to see where and why the differences could have arisen. Of particular concern was the oft-quoted Bradshaw & Millar (1991) which found that lone mothers reported that only 25% of lone fathers had contact once a week, and 31% had not had contact for over a year, 40% of fathers had "lost contact" (as if it were a misplaced door key) with their children within 2 years of separation or birth of their child.

The switched-on and up-to-speed amongst you have probably guessed by now how the anomaly arose. Yes, Bradshaw & Millar's data was culled from single mothers only and a female perspective ! Even after the York researchers statistically tweaked for variables such as marital status at child birth and length of lone parenthood considerable differences still remained that can, I believe, only be reconciled by ascribing them to attitudes.

Such discrepancies have since been found in other major US studies underscoring yet again the ability of lone mothers to skew data regardless of the consequences.

Indeed, in a subsequent letter the University of York concludes (and therefore not in my first draft) "that it is difficult to reconcile the figures" regarding the amount of fatherly contact and "that someone must be being economical with the truth". (Addendum :: Absent Fathers ?, Bradshaw, J., Stimson, C., Skinner, C. and Williams, J. (1999) , Routledge, London).

The radical differences found by the University of York's report concerning fatherly contact with their children is shown in T3.

Clearly, not only do mothers of a particular kind want fathers out of the picture but are determined to keep him out by duping researchers with exaggerations that appear to make fatherly disinterest "official".

One can't help feeling touched by the pathos of it all. On the one hand mothers are prepared to use fair means or foul to keep their children’s father at bay while on the other, almost desperate fathers cherish each contact no matter how trivial or fleeting.

Fathers find the world blind and deaf to their needs. No wonder they find themselves literally and metaphorically buried under a relentless avalanche of feminist and official dismissiveness. The contact they so cherish is constantly demeaned as having no meaning or consequence to the child.

A glance at the summary on page 12 (see below) shows the tragedy that is the deal dealt to Dads and what they must live with. Suspend belief for a moment and reverse the genders. Can anyone imagine the heartache if the same time allotments applied to mothers, year in, year out ?

Comparative data outcomes in post divorce scenarios can be made by referencing "The Emperors New Clothes" (1997) a study undertaken by the Cheltenham Group.

Children, it would appear, are used yet again as weapons to gain superior advantage. In the divorce process they become unwitting economic weapons in the blitzkrieg for assets. In the post-divorce scenario they are elevated to traitor status should they show feelings toward their father.

This paper does not attempt to discuss the emotive subject of psychological blackmail or emotional abuse known to many of us as PAS (Parental Alienation Syndrome).

The researchers then postulate what could be the barriers to contact and without itemising them but go on to discuss the work of Seltzer (1991) in the US who suggests a link between contact and maintenance. In Australia Sutton (1996) has also shown a positive link between access and income but suggests a further connection after that of relationship with one's ex-partner and the sense of loss of control (presumably for the man). The York survey bore out Seltzer and Sutton findings but found when comparing different types of fathers (single, married, cohabiting) it is the simplest of factors that influence outcomes, e.g. whether the father lives less than 3 miles or more than 25 miles away from his children, whether he was married at the time of birth, his age and if employed.

The York report confirms these earlier findings in their sample but perhaps rather incongruously, also found that Non-Resident Fathers who have good weekly contact or relations with their own families, e.g. seeing his own mother, positively affected outcomes. This could perhaps be correlated with observations already made concerning social background (see page 2 of the Report).

These findings parallel in part a survey conducted by the Cheltenham Group (The Emperors Clothes) which surveyed attitudes of men after exposure to the divorce regime.

In the US, the Bureau of the Census records the compliance rate of US fathers paying child support as ordered by the courts as follows:

In other words, American fathers with joint custody (shared parenting) were paying maintenance in 90.2% of cases. The compliance rate dropped the less the father was allowed to see his children until right at the bottom fathers with no rights whatsoever paid maintenance in only 45% of cases.

It can be argued that much of the emotional turmoil and administrative costs (CSA) could be slashed if custody and Access were linked to payments. It is truly remarkable that even in the worse case scenario, i.e. 45%, the tenacious bond that binds fathers with their children is still so apparent. Maintenance payments and contact with their children are inextricably linked because of all the fathers who failed to pay the ordered maintenance payments 86% came from those who had no visitation rights.

In the UK no father has the automatic or enforceable right to see his children after divorce. Few people are aware especially politicians (upon whom we all depend) that a father may apply for it and it may be granted - but he has no statutory protection or privilege.

It would be wrong and perhaps crude to attempt a comparison but using the data from Summary 12 the situation in the UK and the US appears to be thus:-

Then, as if pursuing a Pulitzer prize, the report states, "One question these findings raise is whether this level of involvement with children is any less than a resident father would have !" (their exclamation mark, not mine). And then goes on to adds insult to injury by declaring in the same paragraph, "The contact of the Non-Resident Father may not be as regular but the time spent with the child may be longer and the quality may be better". The “comfort factor” for a child to sleep in a home knowing their fathers presence offers them total reassurance is completely overlooked.

For those of you who aren't yet reeling from this teenage logic let me explain by way of an analogy; When you're being chased by a ravenous grizzly bear you're grateful to find a sturdy log cabin and lock yourself in. But when someone pushes you into a cell, locks the door and throws away the key you're a prisoner.

In the alternative: If this contact is as good, if not better than resident fathers get then all fathers should be granted custody and only mothers should be awarded the privilege of this superior quality time. By allowing only visits on prescribed days their contact will be of better quality than spending all day with them. After all, both they and the children (not to mention the economy, women's rights and employment) will be all the better for it - and Harriet Harman will have proved a point.

PART 2.

Rather surprisingly the report sample found that only 43% of fathers had been contacted by the CSA. Of those assessed only 39% had experienced an increase in payments whilst 27% had a lower figure agreed (base of 107). However, and for 4 pages, the Report strongly condemns the CSA as being "counter-productive", "appalling" and ill-conceived". It rounds on the manner of introduction "with hardly any research having been undertaken into the circumstances of Non-Resident Fathers".

It describes its administration as "chaotic" and defying all definitions of fairness. The CSA it continues is based on the principal that "biological father’s absolute and unreserved responsibility" toward their children. In fact the last part of this report is a "must" for students, devotees and campaigners against the CSA.

The average weekly maintenance per child was found to be £26.00 (£16.00 if the father was unemployed). The majority of NRF (Non-Resident Fathers) gave informal monetary help and gave more if they were not paying maintenance regularly. This would perhaps reflect the constraining confines they themselves operated within. However, 28% of NRF had for one reason or another never paid maintenance. This finding is in keeping with historical trends and of the court system page 9 immediately prior to the introduction of the CSA. Of the sample, 59% had handed over their house and were found to be less likely to be paying maintenance than the remainder (who had settled with cash, insurance and pensions).

NRF who are either currently married or cohabiting are some 150% more likely to be paying family maintenance than unmarried NRF.

If the NRF was over 24 years of age when he first became a father he will be 478% more likely to pay maintenance than if he were under 20 and not married.

Where the NRF has 2 or more children he is 163% more likely to have contact with his children.

Overall NRF are 300% more likely to have continuing contact with their children than no contact at all.

There was wholesale (62%) dissatisfaction with the CSA and "the formula" used for calculating paternal contributions.

(1) This is systematic of the system. It would be especially true of Interim Assessments where a typical assessment would be £85 per week/per child only at Finally Assessment for it to be reduced to the national average of around say £35 per week /per child).

(2) Re-marriage can be undertaken as advocated and prescribed in the 1969 Act but second wives live out their lives in relative poverty, if not penury.

(3) Couples who had made satisfactory arrangements found their settlements overturned by a ruling which compelled husbands to pay maintenance in addition to the settlement.

These findings are in line with a survey conducted by the Cheltenham Group (The Emperors Clothes) which went on to detail the scale of asset transfer and psychological impact on men of fatherlessness and the divorce process.

All the above are very interesting and, with time, could be worked up into an alternative cost saving strategy. Items 1 to 5 reflect deeply embedded cultural beliefs pre-dating our century. The equivalent in the 18th and 19th century was bereavement when re-partnering meant the acceptance by the new partner of any and all baggage from the previous union. If it was possible then what has changed, men or the fiscal and taxation regimes ?

Items 6 to 10 are perhaps indicative of reactions to events outside the control of Non-Resident Father calling for reassessments. Biting the bullet and limiting any maintenance payments to say only 3 years is an approach that could make good the promises of the original 1969 Reform Act, which intended that divorcing couples should be capable of remarriage but never delivered.

In an age of equality where women make up 50% of the current labour market it is perhaps anachronistic to insist that "biological fathers have an absolute and unreserved responsibility" to financially support children.

This belittles the role and ability of women and is yet another example of treating women as children. It takes away their power of decision. It insulates them from culpability, responsibility and accountability. It emphatically implies that they have no choice, no input and no control over their circumstances - in this case, when and with whom they become pregnant. Women are now in control of their bodies and we must adjust to a new situation.

Is it not more symptomatic of the real situation for men to be told some weeks later (and too late) that the woman has decided to be a mother and that henceforth he is to be a father. The rights to abort or negotiate the decision are out of the man's hands. After all, wasn't it trumpeted by the activists that the Abortion Act would, at last, give women real control over their bodies ?

An egalitarian society must come to terms with the inversion of the dogma. If it is applicable to fathers, then which of the following propositions apply to wives and partners ?

a). "That no biological mother shall ever have the absolute and unreserved responsibility for their children".

b). "That all biological mothers shall always have absolute and unreserved responsibility for their children".

Could it be that society's defence mechanism has been turned in on itself and that by default women can now exercise capricious control over men ?

Or could it be that the old magical incantation of blaming and burdening men for everything has outlived its usefulness and that a new mantra is required ?

El condicionamiento clásico, también llamado condicionamiento pavloviano y condicionamiento respondiente, es un tipo de aprendizaje asociativo que fue demostrado por primera vez por Ivan Pavlov. La forma más simple de condicionamiento clásico recuerda lo que Aristóteles llamaría la ley de contigūidad. En esencia, el filósofo dijo "Cuando dos cosas suelen ocurrir juntas, la aparición de una traerá la otra a la mente". A pesar de que la ley de la contigüidad es uno de los axiomas primordiales de la teoría del condicionamiento clásico, la explicación al fenómeno dada por estos teóricos difiere radicalmente de la expuesta por Aristóteles, ya que ponen especial énfasis en no hacer alusión alguna a conceptos como "mente". Esto es, todos aquellos conceptos no medibles, cuantificables y directamente observables. El interés inicial de Pavlov era estudiar la fisiología digestiva, lo cual hizo en perros y le valió un premio Nobel(1904). En el proceso, diseñó el esquema del condicionamiento clásico a partir de sus observaciones:

EI------------------RI

EC---------------RC

La primera línea del esquema muestra una relación natural, no condicionada o incondicionada entre un estímulo (EI = Estímulo incondicionado o natural) y una respuesta (RI = Respuesta incondicionada). Los perros salivan (RI) naturalmente ante la presencia de comida (EI).

Sin embargo, en virtud de la contigüidad temporal, es posible que otro estímulo pase a evocar también la RI, aunque antes no lo hiciera. Por ejemplo, la presencia del sonido de un diapasón unos segundos antes de la presentación de la comida: después de algunos pocos ensayos, el ruido del diapasón evocaría confiablemente y por sí solo la respuesta de salivación. Se completa así la segunda línea, y la campana se convierte en un estímulo condicionado que produce una respuesta condicionada.

Aquí tenemos una foto del perro de Paulov:

EL CONDICIONAMIENTO OPERANTE:

En psicología, el condicionamiento operante es una forma de aprendizaje en la que la consecuencia (el estímulo reforzador) es contingente a la respuesta que previamente ha emitido el sujeto. El condicionamiento operante implica la ejecución de conductas que operan sobre el ambiente.

El condicionamiento operante es un tipo de aprendizaje que tiene que ver con el desarrollo de nuevas conductas, y no con la asociación entre estímulos y conductas reflejas existentes como ocurre en el condicionamiento clásico. Los principios del condicionamiento operante fueron desarrollados por B.F. Skinner, quien recibió la influencia de las investigaciones de Pavlov y de Edward L. Thorndike.

El nombre condicionamiento operante es el que dio Skinner, aunque hoy se prefiere el de condicionamiento instrumental, por ser más descriptivo. Roger Tarpy los equipara, decantándose por el término instrumental, especialmente para el aprendizaje humano, aunque para todos en general. Para él ambos son iguales en tanto en cuanto ambos dan lugar a consecuencias reforzantes. Desde el punto de vista histórico, el término de condicionamiento operante se ha utilizado para hacer referencia a situaciones experimentales en las que los sujetos actúan a su propio ritmo, en contraposición a recibir ensayos directos. Algunos defienden en esto la separación de ambos términos que por lo demás se considera poco operativa.

En el condicionamiento operante las conductas se emiten espontáneamente y sus consecuencias determinan el aprendizaje. Así, las consecuencias agradables tienden a fortalecer una conducta. En cambio, las consecuencias desagradables tienden a debilitar una conducta.

Un ejemplo claro del aprendizaje por condicionamiento operante ocurre en los perros que jalan la correa cuando salen a pasear. El perro jala la correa y su propietario lo sigue, hasta que llegan a donde el perro quiere ir. Entonces, la conducta (inapropiada) de jalar la correa se fortalece porque el perro consigue lo que quería. Es por eso que ves tantos perros arrastrando a sus dueños por las calles.

Por el mismo proceso de aprendizaje, aunque con consecuencias opuestas, algunos niños aprenden que no deben tocar la estufa cuando está caliente. Cuando tocan la estufa se queman la mano. Entonces, la conducta de tocar la estufa cuando está encendida desaparece porque tiene consecuencias desagradables.

Como se ve en la imagen, los refuerzos positivos condicionan al ratón para que encuentre el final del laberinto. El ratón es recompensado con un alimento cuando llega a la primera etapa (A). Una vez que este tipo de conducta se ha arraigado, el ratón no recibe más recompensas, hasta que alcanza la segunda etapa (B). Después de varios intentos, el ratón debe encontrar el final del laberinto para recibir su recompensa (C). La investigación de Skinner sobre condicionamiento operante le llevó a la conclusión de que las recompensas más simples pueden condicionar formas complejas de comportamiento.

APRENDIZAJE VICARIO:

El Aprendizaje Vicario o Social es una forma de adquisición de conductas nuevas por medio de la observación. En la terapia de la conducta se llama también modelado.

En el aprendizaje vicario, el refuerzo es de otra índole y se basa en procesos imitativos cognitivos del sujeto que aprende con el modelo. En los primeros años, los padres y educadores serán los modelos básicos a imitar.

Uno de los conceptos más interesantes expuestos por Albert Bandura es el de aprendizaje activo (aquellos conocimientos que se adquieren al hacer las cosas), el cual contrasta con el de aprendizaje vicario, que es aprender observando a los otros. Por el solo hecho de ver lo que otros hacen y las consecuencias que tienen por su comportamiento, se aprende a repetir o evitar esa conducta. Lo que propone es que no todo el aprendizaje se logra experimentando personalmente las acciones.

Bandura también dice que al ver las consecuencias positivas o negativas de las acciones de otras personas, las llevamos como si fueran nuestra propia experiencia en otras circunstancias.

Son muchos los ejemplos de cómo los niños observan e imitan a sus padres y aprenden de lo que les sucede a sus hermanos, cuando éstos son regañados o premiados, y entonces rigen su actuación con base en sus observaciones. Así se aprenden los valores y las normas sociales —que son adecuadas o no según cada cultura-, cómo manejar los impulsos agresivos, cómo prestar y compartir las cosas, por mencionar sólo unos ejemplos. Estos procesos se dan toda la vida.

I'd like to first return briefly to Dr Michael Shermer's book 'Why People Believe in Weird Things'. You may have even seen the TED talk of the same title - here's part one of two:

From the book:

For a variety of reasons related to the subject matter and style of reasoning, creationism, revisionism and UFOlogy are guy beliefs. [my emphasis]

Having already discussed what evidence that Dr Shermer did draw upon, in both the section on gender and beliefs and in his bibliography, as well as what research existed prior to 2002 that supported that statement (beyond just 'I saw fewer women at conferences'), I'd like to have a closer look at the appeal of 'subject matter' and why women would tend towards some subjects and why.

Had a great chat today on Skype with a friend about the issue of difference - mostly cultural differences and what work I'll have to do when looking at whether or not we can consider belief scales to be universally applicable. I keep doubting that there is ever going to be one 'grand answer' when it comes to the human condition in this regard, because there are so many different environmental and cultural influences. Guess it's my way of not only acknowledging the biological but the functional / contextual aspects that come into this kind of study.

Suggested elements that have appeared in previous research as to 'why people believe' really are quite extensive! What has been documented in research so far, thanks to the essay by French and Wilson (2007) 'Cognitive factors underlying paranormal beliefs and experiences', include some of the following elements:

A correlation between paranormal belief and deficit in syllogistic reasoning (Evans & StB, 1989; Evans, StB, Newstead & Byrne, 1993; Merla-Ramos, 2000). Such as affirmation of the consequent in 'UFO cover-ups' - French and Wilson (2007) use the following example:

If the government is engaged in a cover-up of the existence of UFOs, then they will deny that UFO landings have taken place

The government does deny that UFO landings have taken place.

Therefore, the government is engaged in the cover-up of UFO landings.

Yes, that is the CUTEST little UFO costume ever, isn't it? Apparently it's actually an umbrella! But I don't think it's the sort of 'cover-up' that they're actually talking about, in case you were wondering...

Other research pointed to a distorted concept of randomness, e.g Type I or 'false alarms' to be more likely held by believers (Brugger, Landis & Regard, 1990; Brugger, 2001; Brugger & Taylor, 2003). There's a mention of perceptual biases tendency (Brugger, Regard, Landis, Cook, Krebs & Nederberger, 1993; Pizzagalli, Lehman, Gianotti, Koenig, Tanaka, Wackermann & Brugger, 2000); a susceptiblity to experiencing anomalous sensations / some cases believers are just more suggestible (Wiseman, Watt, Greening, Stevens & O'Keeffe, 2002; 2003).

There's also a tendency towards more memory bias (French, 2003; Clancy, McNally, Schacter, Lenzenweger & Pitman, 2002); believers in the paranormal being more prone to false memories (Wilson & French, 2006); non-conscious processing (Wilson, 2002; Rensink, 2004); Dual processing (Lindeman & Aarnio, 2005; 2007, Stanovich & West, 2003).

Sure, there's a lot of 'lists' out there, like the National Science Board (2000) and Sagan (1996), that seem to encourage us to simplify with 'this will make the believer in the paranormal or pseudoscientific'. But thanks to continuing research, there have been shown to be inconsistencies or sometimes no relation regarding items like probabilistic reasoning ability; intelligence (usually no correlation); science education levels; College year or College Major (self-selection as a confounding factor); animate / inanimate distinction problems; career choice; extroversion/introversion; moral contamination (age difference - the 'dirty fork - ten second rule' tradition in Australia). Of course, even the items I've listed as having more significant or consistant evidence may need further unpacking too!

Certainly what I have read indicates that superstitious behavior can arise in any situation where the consequences of a particular response are not causally related to the response. This is termed "noncontingent reinforcement" or "response-independent reinforcement". Just look at the classic work by Skinner with his pigeons, particularly on 'Superstition in the Pigeon'.

Take the cross-walk outside my office, where the indicator light is broken. The first press on a button activates the mechanism, but there's no indication that it registered. You've probably had this happen yourself - you see someone pressing the cross-walk button in a frenzy if there's a delay in getting the desired safe-to-cross green light. Sidman (1960) classified this as superstitious behavior produced by delayed reinforcement. The pressing repeatedly is eventually reinforced by the green light - just like rain-dancing bringing rain. Kind of a 'post hoc, ergo propter hoc'.

In regards to 'why look at gender differences anyway?', I would point out one of the most inspirational essays I read on the matter back in 2005, the essay 'Sex, Brains & Hands - Gender Differences in Cognitive Abilities' by Diane F. Halpern, the author of Sex Differences in Cognitive Abilities.

I was first lead to read her work when investigating how one of the most powerful influences on whether a young females develops an interest in mathematics is parental attitudes towards the subject - something that Australia has already started to deal with with parent education programs that target mothers.

The study of sex differences has... been criticized as being inherently sexist, because it creates an emphasis on the way women and men differ, while ignoring the multitude of similarities.... I find the reasons for conducting such research to be much more persuasive than those against doing so....The study of sex differences, like any of the other individual or group differences that psychologists study, is not a zero-sum game where one group gains only at the expense of another.

...Perhaps most importantly, sex differences research is the only way that we can empirically determine if common myths and stereotypes about men and women have any basis in fact... Some have suggested that psychology should not study the biological basis of sex differences because biologically-based theories legitimize negative stereotypes of women. I respond to these critics by noting that silence does not counter stereotypes, ignorance does not promote equality, and differences are not deficiencies. We have had stereotypes a lot longer than we have had research. I think it is time to look at what research has to say.

I think it would also be helpful to determine if such a difference in beliefs is universal before trying to find a mechanism that will always drive this difference. If we can show that the differences are universal or are local only, perhaps we could narrow down the field of potential causes. Some of the papers I've found show how it is not just researchers in the UK, USA or Australia who have an interest in this topic - papers I've found include superstition levels in people from formerly Communist countries; Turkish stress and uncertainty levels and use of superstition strategies; Chinese business-decision making; comparison between an African population and American, comparing Grade 11 and undergrads; Spanish gamblers; Italian undergrads and superstition as an ineffective strategy for coping with uncertainty and threat and German vs Venezuelan comparisons of paranormal beliefs! Yep, it's not just the local psychic fair that packs the crystal balls!

The one on business-decision making will be of use when looking at superstitions about numbers in businesses - like having hotels that 'skip' Floor Thirteen or my local movie theatre that doesn't have a 'Theatre Thirteen'!

More recently I've started looking at lectures from a parapsychology conference, which greatly remind me of the comment on my blog from a self-professed psychic (mentioned earlier in Part One).

Anjum Khiliji spoke of the traditions of the Islamic mystical tradition of the Tasawwuf, in her presentation 'Behind the Veil: Muslim Women's contributions to Parapsychology'. In that she discusses how the Sufis (followers of the path of Tasawwuf - 'the Islamic mystical tradition which developed out of meditation on the Quaran and considered to be the source of such religious experiences and the resultant psychic phenomena') include a tradition of women as:

...always nurturing and holistic or Jamali (loving and integrative) in nature and they had positive social implications. In contrast... male Sufis at times tended to be more competitive and heirarchical or Jalali (aggressive or forceful) in nature.

In particular, the Aminal or 'guardians' in the Sufi tradition 'were the patronesses and benefactresses of the Sufi movement and were vitally important to its growth and transmission. These women often belonged to the ruling or affluent families. They provided financial, moral, physical and even political support to safeguard and propagate positive attitudes towards Tasawwuf'.

When you consider that this includes Khilji's statement that '...Sufi belief that is transmitted cannot be validated by intellectual sciences. So that really puts an end to using any prevalent scientific methodology to ascertain the validity...' - you can see why there's several aspects at play that will encourage the belief and immune it from questioning. Women are thus educated, encouraged, seen as highly valued and in fact lauded for qualities that then go onto encourage other women to be likewise. No wonder the belief in psychic ability is seen as valued!

I also noticed that there were particular 'feminist' readings of belief in the paranormal. Beverly Rubik in 'Sister Can You Paradigm? A Feminine Perspective on Parapsychology' presented that 'since time immemorial, the female gender has not only opted for the preservation of life but upheld spiritual traditions regardless of societal retributions.' To be against the paranormal could register as being sexist or going against a 'woman's right to define herself as an individual in a male-dominated world'! I'm also reminded of several points raised about indirect societal encouragement, discussed in R.T Carroll's review of Ghost Hunters by Deborah Blume:

Perhaps it is dangerous for a female writer to accuse many members of her gender of being deceivers and manipulators, but it is not risky to note that men love to be deceived by women...and by other men...and by children. But men especially love to be deceived by women. In the course of doing their psychical research, these distinguished men got to spend a lot of time in dark rooms with women who were not their wives, all in the name of science. Blum is frank in her discussions of chemist Sir William Crookes (1832-1919) and his sexual involvement with Florence Cook and the romantic intoxication of Frederick Myers with the ghost of Annie Marshall.

In the West, mediumship arose after the 1840s as a part of spiritualism. In one sense, mediumship is continuous with tribal shamanism. The shaman, too, mediates between the living of this world and the denizens of another world, although these are most often spirits and gods, not the souls of the dead... Mediums tend to be women, whereas shamans tend to be men. The prevalence of women was historically determined by the role that women had assigned to them in the 19th century. Spiritualism offered them an opportunity to break out of that role in a socially acceptable manner.' (p.211)

To be brutally frank - why wouldn't anyone, let alone women, find it useful to independently support themselves economically and gain social standing by engaging in practices that draw on paranormal beliefs, acting in a role that has historical precedence across many cultures and over a significant period of time? Although 'witches' were condemned, midwifery and healthcare, traditions and 'family heritage' all create a framework for a 'womanly' tendency and even a sense of 'ownership' when other occupations were denied them.

I then begin to think too, as Susan Blackmore wrote in her paper on 'Are Women More Sheepish? Gender Differences in Belief in the Paranormal' - that 'perhaps it is best not to try to separate experience from belief in trying to find reasons for the gender differences'.

In another anecdotal sense, after looking over the message board for a skeptic gathering, I notice a 'former member' discussing the issues that his wife had with the aggressive, non-nurturing stereotype she held of skeptics, which led her to reject going to Skeptic Meetups. It reminded me of the blog entry on 'Losing My Religion', about the experiences of a former christian.

In it, she recalls elements community spirit and kinship that can exist with shared beliefs. When it comes to speaking out as a skeptic should be considered as a factor as to why women would not self-identify so easily with the skeptically-minded, nor find it so easy to give up what can be a significant 'comfort zone':

So many things, not just church and camp ... I can barely stand to think of the beautiful old hymns that I have played so many hundreds of times, hymns that guided my beliefs, comforted my tears, challenged my mind. Their comfort and teaching was real, but now that I question what they taught, their comfort begins to fade and that breaks my heart more than almost anything else in this rocky journey. I want clarity of thought and honesty of mind, but the cost is mounting and I must wonder what price I will eventually pay in memories and comfort lost.

Of course, issues such as building connections despite distances between fellow skeptics, and regretfully hearing of skeptic pub-nights and social events that don't cater so readily to children's bed-time schedules - let alone the problem of a lack of distinct direction in skeptic groups for women and vaguely-defined goals which are already better met by other organizations are issues I've raised before in this blog post.

All of these point to several reasons why any person, let alone a woman, might grit their teeth and nod with a 'non-skeptical choir' even though they might harbor questions as to why the presenter is saying a great many weird things... including how great it is to have your bottom read in order to tell your fortune.

I think I have much more research to go, but certainly there is a lot more now that comes to mind when answering the question 'why would a woman be superstitious?'

Select References:

Della Salla, S [ed.] (2007). Tall Tales About The Mind And Brain - Separating Fact From Fiction. Oxford University Press, UK.

Coly, L & White, R. (1991). Women and Parapsychology - Proceedings of an International Conference. Parapsychology Foundation, New York.

Sidman, M. (1960). Tactics of scientific research. New York: Basic Books.

Wolfradt, U. (1997). Dissociative Experiences, Trait Anxiety and Paranormal Beliefs. Personality and Individual Differences, 15-19.

Wiseman, R. & Watt, C. (2004). Measuring superstitious belief: Why lucky charms matter. Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 1533-1541.

Zusne, L & W.H Jones. (1982). Anomalistic Psychology: A Study of Extraordinary Phenomena of Behaviour and Experience. (1st ed.) Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Zusne, L. & W. H. Jones (1989). Anomalistic Psychology: A Study in Magical Thinking. (2nd ed.) Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.

"Abor una nueva categoría llamada Sobre los Simpsons.

¿Por qué?

1. Me gustan Los Simpsons desde que los comenzó a transmitir Venevisión a comienzo de los 90's
2. En Otakus en Venezuela la amiga Shaorin por el revuelo que trajo consigo la pelicula abrió un club al cual pertenezco y por el que siempre estamos indagando curiosidades.

Muy bien, ahora escrito lo que iba a escribir...

* El apellido de la familia puede proceder del director colegial de Matt, Josh Simpson. (aunque literalmente significa «Hijo de un simplón/inocentón”)
* Lisa Marie Simpson: Lisa Groening: Hermana de Matt Groening y Lisa Marie Presley.
* Marge Simpson: Marge Groening: la madre de Matt Groening se llamaba "Margaret" pero normalmente era llamada "Marge".
* Homer Simpson: Homer Groening: padre de Matt Groening y uno de sus hijos.
* Maggie Simpson: Maggie Groening: hermana de Matt Groening.
* Bart jo-jo Simpson: Anagrama de "Brat"(travieso), en referencia al propio Groening; además de abreviación de "Bartholomew"
* Abraham Simpson: tomado al azar por los escritores de Los Simpson, pero casualmente coincide con el nombre del abuelo de Matt Groening.
* Jacqueline Bouvier: Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, cuyo apellido de soltera era, de hecho, Bouvier.
* 742 SW Evergreen Terrace en Portland, Oregon es la dirección del lugar donde Matt Groening creció. En un episodio de la cuarta temporada, 742 Av. Siempreviva es el hogar de Snake, el ladrón, localizada junto a la puerta del Reverendo Alegría; sin embargo esta es normalmente la dirección de la casa de los Simpson. Marge una vez dice que la Av. Siempreviva es "La calle que huele a pis".
* La "J" en Homer J. Simpson, Bartholomew J. Simpson, Abraham J. Simpson, en referencia a Bullwinkle J. Moose y en adelante, por proximidad, Jay Ward. La inicial central de Homer significa Jay (en inglés es como se pronuncia la Letra Jota). Existe una discusión respecto al segundo nombre de Homer, pues además del de Jay se le han adjudicado otros segundos nombres (como "Jimeno" según la traducción mexicana). Algunas personas que trabajan en la serie dicen que Homer no tiene segundo nombre y la "J" no significa nada.

Escuela Primaria de Springfield

* Kearney el matón: es nombrado por la calle NW Kearney St, también en Portland.
* Dolph el matón: Nombrado en honor del compañero de Groening, Dolph Timmerman. Groening dijo sobre Timmerman que no era del todo un matón, pero que era un tipo realmente guay/extrovertido.
* Seymour Skinner:

1. En referencia a Eugene Skinner, fundador de Eugene, Oregon (ciudad cercana a Springfield, Oregon).
2. Quizá también proviene de Skinner Butte, una colina bastante conocida allí. La broma de "El culo de Skinner", en inglés "Seymour Butts", ¿tiene algo que ver?.
3. También quizá provenga de un psicólogo del comportamiento B. F. Skinner.
4. Skinner es dibujado de forma muy similar al profesor de 5º grado de Groening.

* Elizabeth Hoover o maestra Estricter (la profesora de Lisa): Una de sus profesoras de primaria.

Los Flanders

* Ned Flanders: En Portland, Oregon, ciudad de nacimiento de Groening, existe una calle llamada NE Flanders St., la cual es llamada por algunos como "NED" Flanders St.
* Maude, Rod y Todd Flanders: todos riman con "God" (Dios en inglés), Maude es pronunciado Mod en determinados acentos norteamericanos).

Policía

* Clancy Wiggum: Conocido como jefe Gorgory en Latinoamérica, Wiggum es el apellido del amor de Groening en la universidad y el nombre de soltera de su madre.
* El oficial de policía Lou fue nombrado en honor al jugador de béisbol Lou Whitaker.

Villanos

* Kang y Kodos (aliens): En la serie original de Star Trek, Kang es un Klingon, y Kodos ("El Ejecutador") es un villano humano. Un tercer alien (visto tan sólo en la primera aparición de los aliens en el primer especial de Halloween, Treehouse of Horror) fue llamado "Serak", parecido a los personajes Vulcan Sarek y Surak.
* Sideshow Bob (Actor Secundario Bob en España y Bob Patiño en Latinoamérica) (nombre completo: Robert Terwilliger): Terwilliger Boulevard y las curvas Terwilliger en la I-5 en Portland.
* Tony el Gordo: Por el personaje principal de Los Soprano, Tony Soprano.

Otros

* Troy McClure (actor): los actores de serie B Troy Donahue y Doug McClure.
* Apu Nahasapeemapetilon (dueño del Kwik-E-Mart): En referencia al famoso Apu trilogy de Satyajit Ray, uno de los favoritos de Groening.
* Reverend Lovejoy: NW Lovejoy St., el nombre de otra calle de Portland.(Conocido como Reverendo Alegría en Latinoamérica)
* Joe Quimby: (Alcalde Joe Diamante)

1. NW Quimby Street, el nombre de otra calle de Portland.
2. También quizá se deba al jefe corrupto de la policía de Portland, Diamond Joe Purcell.

* Charles Montgomery Burns:

1. La abreviatura de una calle de Portland llamada "West and East Burnside Street", así como el vecindario de Portland Montgomery Park.
2. Charles es una referencia Charles Foster Kane de Ciudadano Kane, en el cual está basado el Señor Burns.

* Barney Gumble (Barney Gómez, el amigo borracho de Homero): Barney Rubble (Pablo Mármol) de Los Picapiedra, y no Bryant Gumble, como muchos creen.
* Dr. Nick Riviera (el médico sin licencia): el médico de Elvis Presley, George C. Nichopoulos, era llamado Dr. Nick, fue quien prescribió la gran cantidad de medicamentos que en su momento mataron a Elvis.
* Milhouse Mussolini Van Houten:

1. Presidente de los EEUU Richard Milhouse Nixon.
2. Literalmente, por el dictador fascista italiano Benito Mussolini.
3. El miembro de la familia Manson y asesino convicto Leslie Van Houten
4. Pero bastante más probable debido a la Avenida Van Houten en Portland.

Fuente: Wikipedia en Español

"In August last, died, in the prime of life, after a long and painful illness, the Rev. Tregonwell Napier, Rector of Chettle, Dorset. This gentleman had for several years the management, and also hunted Mr. Chaffin's fox-hounds. Mr. Napier was as good a sportsman as ever entered Cranbourne Chase; he was an excellent fisherman and shot, but his favourite diversion was fox-hunting. He had a good head and a quick eye. The writer of this was very fond of listening to his sweet converse, which was exactly congenial to his own feelings and propensities; and the very many stories and anecdotes of his, Mr. N.'s exploits and performances in the sporting way, were very acceptable. Mr. Napier was an excellent classical scholar, was blessed with a retentive memory, and nothing which he ever read was forgotten by him. He was an excellent parish priest, very attentive to his duties, and very kind to the poor, and died much regretted by a numerous host of friends and acquaintance."

John Tregonwell Lewis Napier was born on or about February 8, 1785 at Sutton Waldron, Dorset the son of the Rev. Edward Napier and his wife Elizabeth. His father had been the Rector of Sutton Waldron since 1782, a position he was to hold until his death at the age of 67 in 1816.

Little is known of his childhood at Sutton Waldron, where in 1878 a younger brother Henry Arichibald Napier was born, followed in 1791 by a sister Emma Rhoda Napier. In 1803 his elder sister Elizabeth died at the age of 31 and was buried at Sutton Waldron on November 4th.

It is not known at this time where he received his schooling, but on March 1, 1802 he was admitted, sizar, to Emmanuel College, Cambridge where he obtained his Batchelor of Arts degree in 1806. Under the patronage of William Chaffin, John Tregonwell Napier was appointed Rector of Chettle, Dorset on July 27, 1810.

September 26, 1812 saw him back at Sutton Waldron where he officiated at the wedding of his sister, Emma Rhoda Napier, to Phillip Lawrence of Fontmell Magna, Dorset.

The Salisbury and Winchester Journal on Monday, August 30, 1813 reported, "On Tuesday the 24th inst. was married, at Fordingbridge, by the Rev. P. Rideout, the Rev. John Tregonwell Napier, Rector of Chettle, in the county of Dorset, to Catherine, youngest daughter of Mrs.Skinner, of Redbrook, in this county." The marriage was performed under a license Granted by the Bishop of Winchester on August 23 with William Skinner Jr., a tanner, as bondsman.

As previously noted John's father, the Rev Edward Napier died in 1816 and was buried at Sutton Waldron on April 25th of that year. The service being conducted by Philip Rideout, Rector of Farnham, the same person who had married John and Catherine in 1813.

The Chettle parish registers record the burial of John Tregonwell Napier, rector of this parish on September 8, 1819 at the age of 33. It would be 6 months before he was replaced as rector on February 25. 1820

The burial of Catherine Napier of Redbrooke near Fordingbridge, widow of John Tregorwell, late rector is recorded on November 14, 1833 at the age of 45.

tutte le serie dei simpson, lin a file di testo conttenete TUTTI i link degli episodi!!!!

http://rapidshare.com/files/108184869/simpson.txt

As most educators who have been in the profession can attest to, behaviorism has been a dominant force in thoughts and policies. Before a person can decide if a school of thought is for them, it is important to understand the underlying ideology of that school. In this essay we will take a closer look at what behaviorism is, what are some of the basic tenants, and is it still a viable school of thought in today's educational world.

What is Behaviorism?

While this term is well known in the education world, what does it actually mean? Behaviorism is a school within psychological that deals with learning and personality.
When dealing with an organism, be it human, monkey, pigeon, rat, lawyer, etc...there are three components:

• The stimulus
• The brain
• The outcomes

The Stimulus

This is any change in the environment. It is something that causes the organism to leave a state of equilibrium and seeks to once again regain a stable relation with its environment.
The environment can be both internal and external. The external environment is what is around us. Hot, cold, bright, dark, loud, quite, anything we find ourselves immersed in outside the body. The internal environment is what is going on inside our bodies. Are we tired, hungry, under stress, etc...
So a stimulus is any change in our internal and/or external environments.

The Brain

Behaviorism was developed in part as a reaction to the then pervasive introspective ideas of psychology. Behaviorist holds dear the idea that the brain and thoughts cannot be directly observed and therefore are not part of the overall equation of behavior. This is a polar opposite of introspective psychology. Introspective is when the individual thinks about their thinking. They self report on their own thoughts, desires and sensations. (Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 2008)
The term observable is a sacred word in behavioral psychology. All stimuli, and outcome must be observable. Thoughts are subjective, they cannot be objectively studied therefore are inconsequential to the true behaviorist.
Keep in mind as the discussion continues that observable is a key term in behaviorism. If it is not observable, and cannot be objectively measured then behaviorists do not sully themselves with it.

Outcomes

This is the organism's response to the stimuli. This is the component of the equation that behaviorist are interested it. It is by manipulating the stimulus that outcomes should change

Join us for Part 02 Classical Conditioning

Serie de dibujos animados creada por Matt Groening. Esta serie narra las aventuras de una familia de clase media estadounidense, y realiza de forma satírica una crítica de la sociedad estadounidense; de sus formas de vida, de sus prejuicios...

Los componentes de esta familia son Homer ( el padre), Marge ( la madre), Bart ( el hijo), Lisa ( la hija) y Maggie ( el bebé). Tienen 2 mascotas un perro ( pequeño ayudante de santaclaus) y un gatito ( bola de nieve II).

Homer trabaja en una central nuclear, Marge es ama de casa, Bart y Lisa estudian en el colegio elemental de educación de primaria de Springfield (Lisa es un pequeño genio, mientras que Bart es el gamberro reconocido) y Maggie el bebé todavía no a aprendido a hablar.

Estos personajes amarillos que son fácilmente reconocidos por su aspecto (ya que sus ropas no varían practicamente en ningun capitulo) disfrutan del día a día y nos hacen vivir mil aventuras en la ciudad de Springfield.

Actualmente podemos ver la popular serie todos los días en Antena 3 y también en NEOX o en FOX.

A continuación un ejemplo de la serie:

I suffer, you guys.

So tonight, as part of my commitment to service of all kinds, I am going to an author signing at our local bookshop. Freelance journalist E. Benjamin Skinner traveled all over the world undercover to investigate and write A Crime So Monstrous: Face to Face with Modern Day Slaves. Consider this, from a recent Salon.com article: "There are more slaves today than at any point in human history," writes Skinner, citing a recent estimate that there are currently 27 million worldwide."

Jesus. Did you have any idea? I didn't.

Because I am a sensitive, thoughtful woman, and because I care deeply about pain and suffering and the myriad untold stories of this world, I will be in attendance tonight. If this kind of thing is going on in today's day and age in this very country, then dammit I want to know. I need to know. I will go to the reading tonight and I will bear witness and I will do whatever I need to do to make this world a better place.

By the way, this is what he looks like.

Hope your night is as good as mine's about to be!

See you tomorrow, jokers.

******

Update, April 10: You non-swooners were right: No amount of hotness could have saved me from this guy's awful message. You should force yourselves to hear it, too. Seriously.

Go to his website

Buy his book

Then learn more here, a place Skinner says is the most effective use of your money

Have fun. :(

Here we go..! 

Den store klokke på perronen slår 16:35 og ind ruller (selvfølgelig 5 min. for sent) lyntoget fra Frederikshavn til København. To dage tidligere havde jeg været så heldig, at fremskaffe den sidste pladsbillet til denne afgang (vogn 21, plads 68) - men dette held forvandt lige så hurtig, som simpelt rimfrost kan nedlægge al togtrafik i Danmark!!

Allerede da toget stopper, kan jeg se, at DSB har gjort det igen, for hvor fanden er halvdelen af vognene henne (vogn 21 og 22, red)!?! Da dørene endelig går op, kommer en meget bestemt kontrollør ud, der beder alle de folk med pladsbillet om at stige om bord, imens resten skal vente på det næste tog.    

Ordet "kaos" er nok det udtryk, der bedst beskriver tilstandene inde i toget (undtagen selvfølgelig 1. klasse), for overalt står folk op med deres tasker, kufferter osv. Da toget endelig sætter i gang fortæller en skrattende højtaler at vogn 21 og 22 står i Frederikshavn grundet tekniske problemer. Højtaleren fortæller også, at der måske vil blive koblet ekstra vogne på i Aarhus, men 10 min senere kommer den groteske skinbarlige sandhed frem. Det viser sig nemlig, at der IKKE har været tekniske problemer med de to vogne, men at problemet derimod skyldes sne. DSB kunne altså ikke bruge vognene, da disse var sneet inde - og så er det jo at man undres, for hvor meget nedbør, var der egentlig kommet?? Ja, ifølge DMI var der faldet 20 cm i Frederikshavn, så hvordan fanden kunne to vogne sne inde?? DSB havde jo haft hele dagen, så mon ikke et par underbetalte ansatte og samme antal sneskovle, ville have været i stand til, at fjerne den værste nedbør fra skinnerne?? Og som om at dette ikke var nok, så blev det også oplyst, at der ikke ville komme ekstra vogne på før Fredericia, hvilket på dette tidspunkt lå 2 timer væk. Arrh #¤%&!!

Men her stopper mit fantastiske held ikke, for skæbnen skulle selvfølgelig lige smide lidt mere benzin på mit "bål af arrigskab". Benzinen bestod af en fuld stodder, som stod i midtergangen, og som troede, at han var Kong Gulerod, hvilket resulterede i at han skulle snakke med ALLE og kommentere ALT (Ja, så manglede man sgu lige den menneskelige "mute-knap")!!     

Present time..!

Oven på sådan en oplevelse er ens første tanke selvfølgelig "aldrig, aldrig, ALDRIG mere DSB!!!", men virkeligheden er desværre ikke så simpel, for hvad er alternativet? Tja, som studerende rækker SU'en sjældent til egen bil eller taxa. Tilbage står man så med fly eller bus. Fly kræver ofte en landingsbane, hvilket endnu ikke er kommet med på Vesthimmerlands Kommunes budgetforlig, og bus er bare super råddent, grundet den lange transporttid og få afgange.

Når alt kommer til alt, er man altså afhængig af DSB (Nej, det er aldrig rart at se realiteterne i øjnene - især ikke når disse tilhører Djævlen), og derfor må man ofte bare bide i det sure æble.

DSB: Tog til tiden - når det ikke lige sner, regner, blæser, er frostvej eller solen skinner.

Mester

Have been very inspired during lectures:

'Whether the egg or the chicken came first depends on whether you side with Pavlov (behaviourist) or Piaget (cognitivist)'- DOA

More can be seen at my little gallery younglass

I have to start cleaning up the posts on this blog...some of them are way too long and can be broken up in separate posts. I wonder how to keep chronological order though? anyway, I am on a psychoanalytic spree at the moment. Sure causing my poor teacher some headaches (as I always do hehehe).

Call me the teacher's pest! =]

Health tip: You may not look a gift horse in the mouth, but you may look a gifted chicken in the .....

(P.s. 'sanity is statistical' - 1984, George Orwell)

McDonald's CEO: Company will put full resources behind gay agenda.

McDonald's has signed on to a nationwide effort to promote "gay" and "lesbian" business ventures.

According to McDonald's CEO Jim Skinner, McDonald's will aggressively promote the homosexual agenda. In remarks on McDonald's Web site concerning the company becoming a member of the National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce (NGLCC), Skinner wrote: "Being a socially responsible organization is a fundamental part of who we are. We have an obligation to use our size and resources to make a difference in the world ... and we do."

The company gave an undisclosed amount of money to the NGLCC in return for being recognized as a major promoter of the homosexual agenda. In return, NGLCC placed Richard Ellis, vice president of communications of McDonald's USA, on the NGLCC Board of Directors.

Ellis was quoted as saying: "I'm thrilled to join the National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce team and ready to get to work. I share the NGLCC's passion for business growth and development within the LGBT community, and I look forward to playing a role in moving these important initiatives forward."

McDonald's refused to comment to World Net Daily on the placement of its executive on the board of the "gay" advocacy organization but did send an e-mail confirming the corporation's support for the agenda of the homosexual business lobby.

"McDonald's is indeed a Corporate Partner and Organizational Ally of NGLCC. Our vice president of U.S. communications, Richard Ellis, was recently elected to its board of directors," said Heidi M. Barker, senior director of media relations for McDonald's. NGLCC describes itself as promoting the LGBT community first and always, including same sex marriage.

NGLCC gives credit to sponsors such as McDonald's for its financial and other support that helps in its work. "Through the commitment of our corporate partners, the NGLCC has been able to advance the ideas and causes of the LGBT business community," the Chamber said.

We've done this trek before - the 11 mile uphill ski into the Skinner Hut, one of Colorado's 10th Mountain Division Huts. Skinner is just outside of Leadville, CO, a small mountain town that sits at 10,200 ft elevation. This town is so cute in the winter, with its old victorian architecture, brick buildings, and snow packed up to the windows of most of the homes. (Yet we were reminded that this town is ONLY cute in the winter, as the snow covers the "sanford and son" yards full of old tires, engines, trash, and other disposables. Hey, Salvation Army - it's a goldmine up there!

11 miles really isn't that bad on skis. The first 7 miles or so are pretty rolling, along a road that cuddles between Turquoise Lake and the forest. After that, the trail heads straight up. For an elevation gain of close to 2000 ft in about 3 or 4 miles. There are some spots, although short lived, that are so steep they challenge the skins on the bottom of your skis. But the steepness makes it possible to wear only a long sleeve shirt even though it's only 20 degrees outside. And the alternating snow, sun, snow, sun surrounded by the pines and huge mountains, I remember why I love this state.

Skinner Hut itself is well equipped with a raging wood burning stove to heat the hut, a second wood burning stove to cook on, and well if that isn't enough, four propane burners. There is also a cistern pump to wash your dishes, pots, and pans (also provided by the hut). And the mattress that I slept on was actually more comfortable than the hotel's in Leadville (or maybe I was just so exhausted that I fell asleep as I was laying down).

From 2008-3 Skinne...

The downsides of the weekend were few:
1 - Both my big toes are black and blue and swollen. Pretty sure I won't be keeping those toenails!
2 - Constantine - a Russian guy that was up with his friend Matt. His sense of humor was, shall we say, caustic? Hey Constantine - we changed your name to ConstantJERK.
3 - My own head! Our one ski day was very epic, extremely stable, but deep, creamy, untracked snow under blue skies. Yet I was very unnecessarily freaked out by avalanches that I just couldn't relax enough to enjoy myself. Factor that in with my toes, and crappy, hindering skins, and I was a head case. Damn head!

But the snow and the conditions were truly epic. It was one of those weekends, great weather, fabulous company, unbelievable skiing, one of tho