Texting While Driving Caught on Tape (Today Show)

Reflection~Safe Driving

             Using  a cell phone while operating a motor vehicle should be banned in the United States. In support of this position, the National Safety Council advocates for a legalized ban in all 50 states. It has been proven dangerous, sometimes deadly, to use a mobile phone while driving. Drivers have difficulty maintaining a safe speed limit, keeping a proper distance between their vehicle and other vehicles, and staying in the proper lane. Reaction to dangerous situations is decreased because the driver’s attention is on the conversation and not the road.  A study done in 1997 showed that people talking on cell phones were four times more likely to crash. Another study, conducted in 2003 by the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis, estimated cell phone usage contributes to at least 6% of car crashes. This study also put the yearly financial total for cell phone related crashes at 43 billion dollars. Safe driving should be the goal of all who get behind the wheel of a car. Based on the evidence of distraction directly from cell phone usage while driving, the United States should ban this practice for the safety of all citizens on the road. 

Resources and related information can be accessed @ these websites:

            http://www.livescience.com/health/060629_cell_phones.html

            http://www.nsc.org/news/cellphone_ban.aspx

            http://www.ergoweb.com/news/detail.cfm?id=1694

            http://www.nsc.org/resources/issues/factsheet.aspx

            http://www.sciencedaily.com/videos/2005/0806-cell_phone_risk.htm

4) Interference

 

For quite some time, I kept giving out my old phone number without realizing I was not giving out my current number. This is an example of proactive interference. Old information was blocking new information.

I decided to experiment at home. I brought my two overgrown kids into the kitchen and had them “help” me move the silverware to a different drawer, which they thought was a total waste of time. They are so busy with more important matters. Then, I watched. They still open the old silverware drawer first before they remember the change. Proactive interference - at work again.

3) Baddely, Chap. 1

 

 

1)      The robot is not a good simulation of human memory due to the fact it repeatedly bumps the same empty Pepsi can. The robot also took down a couple of empty Pepsi cans, which is was not supposed to  do. The robot is a decent simulation of the proposed Parable of the Ant, interacting with the environment as it appears. It is an ironic thought to observe the robot repeatedly trying the same can or knocking over the wrong can, akin to some similarity in human bx’s (a person repeatedly making the same mistakes).

2)      This robot doesn’t show semantic or episodic memory. It has no storage for either; it is merely sensing the outer stimuli/environment as it is encountered.

3)      This robot has the specific knowledge of a light sensor and a touch sensor. A light sensor for staying inside of the black tape and touch sensor for distinguishing empty cans from full cans. Of the two, I would say the light sensor worked best.

4)      The robot was inefficient at it’s task. To make it more efficient, a working memory and short-term memory would be beneficial to the task at hand.

2) Second Assignment

 

 

 

 

 

1. It is my opinion that stimulus control can be clarified in human bx by certain examples: a driver stopping at a red light, waking up at a specified time with an alarm clock, a person answering the phone when it rings. I don’t feel it describes human bx well because these occurrences are not absolutes. People run red lights, hit snooze on the alarm (or turn it off), and a person may screen their calls with an answering service/machine. Human bx is driven by many factors of which I am uneducated, but would conjecture, motivational and instinctual drives to play a larger role than stimulus control. 

 

2. A) Change the motivation of the child to stop him from mistreating the family dog. Pay particular attention to the child when the child is in the dog’s presence and encourage positive interaction. You may want to verbally instruct the child on proper etiquette with the pet and congratulate him on being kind with the pet. You could reward him with teaching him extra’s, such as walking the dog with your supervision. 

 

2. B) Negative reinforcement may be implemented to stop the child from mistreating the family pet. Clearly explain which bx’s are acceptable around the family pet. Tighten supervision of the child and if the child mistreats the family pet /c unwanted bx, immediately remove him from the pet’s location and/or verbally rebuke the bx.

 

  Why is the child mistreating the pet anyway? and in what way?