Why Athletes Choke in the Big Games? :: essays research papers

All sports fans have heard athletes comment that they â€Å"choked† or just couldn’t win the big game. The topic that will be addressed in this paper deals with the outcome of sporting events and why athletes continue to choke during and at the end of extremely important competitions. Baumeister (1992) found that â€Å"the choking reflex can be attributed to psychoneuromuscular influences†(p.3). My interest in the subject comes from being a big sports fan and a former athlete. And also from hearing people make comments such as, Scott Norwood and the entire Buffalo Bills football team are â€Å"chokers†. They can’t even win one Super Bowl in four tries. Barry Bonds can’t get one hit in the playoffs and thinks he’s the best baseball player ever. At the end of this paper you will be able to see why coaches and players go through these rough situations and what they can do to prevent them from happening again. In golf, â€Å"choking† is known as the â€Å"yips† and is defined as a psychoneuromuscular impediment of the execution of the simplest of tasks (Smith, 2000, p. 1). Adler (2003) defined the â€Å"yips† as a motor phenomenon of involuntary movements affecting golfers (p. 1). â€Å"Yips† is believed to be acquired through the deterioration of motor pathways via the basal ganglia. In some players it results from severe performance anxiety. This means that when a high level of stress and physiological arousal is present the â€Å"yips† start to show up. Basic patterns of the â€Å"yips† include sweaty palms, uncontrollable jerks, and anxiety. These symptoms continue to repeat themselves until the person that is affected learns to deal with these situations. These problems can influence quality of performance and even result in decreased playing time. â€Å"Yips† can also lead to the use of both alcohol and drugs as a coping adjacent. (Adl er, Crews, Wharen, & Laskowski 2003). Many of the best golfers in the world have had to experience this including Ben Hogan. Hogan said, â€Å"The difference between competitive golf and pleasure golf is like the difference between ice hockey and tennis† (Wertz, 86, p.

Revenge and Vengeance in Shakespeares Hamlet - Revenge in Hamlet :: The Tragedy of Hamlet Essays

Revenge in Hamlet Revenge causes the characters in Hamlet to act blindly through anger and emotion, rather than through reason. It is based on the principle of an eye for an eye; this action is not always the best means to an end. Fortinbras, Laertes, and Hamlet were all looking to avenge the deaths of their fathers. They all acted on emotion driven by the want for revenge for their father's deaths, and this led to the downfall of two, and the rise to power of one. Since the heads of the three major families were each murdered, the eldest sons of these families felt that they needed to take some kind of action to avenge their father's deaths; this need to bring honour to their respective families was ultimately the demise of Laertes and Hamlet. There were three major families in the tragedy of Hamlet. These were the family of King Fortinbras, the family of Polonius, and the family of King Hamlet. Fortinbras, King of Norway, was killed by King Hamlet; slain by sword during a man-to-man battle.   "...Lost by his father, with all bonds of law, to our most valiant brother."[Act 1, Scene 2; lines 24-25]. This entitled King Hamlet to the land that was possessed by Fortinbras because it was written in a seal'd compact. Polonius was an advisor to the King, and father to Laertes and Ophelia. He was nosy and arrogant, and he did not trust his children, and at one point in the play, using his daughter to probe Hamlet. Young Hamlet killed Polonius while he was secretly listening in on a conversation between Hamlet and his mother. "How now! A rat? Dead, for a ducat, dead!"[Act 3, Scene 4; Line 25].   King Hamlet was the King of Denmark, and Hamlet's father. He had killed King Fortinbras, only to be killed by his brother, Claudius. " ...My offence is rank, it smells to heaven; A brother's murder..." Each of these events affected the sons of the deceased in the same way. Laertes found out about his father's death, and immediately returned home. He confronted the King and accused him of the murder of his father. Claudius told Laertes that Hamlet was responsible for his father's death. He then decides to kill Hamlet to avenge the death of his father. He and Claudius concoct a plot to kill Hamlet. Hamlet dies of wounds from the poisoned tipped sword Laertes used. Revenge and Vengeance in Shakespeare's Hamlet - Revenge in Hamlet :: The Tragedy of Hamlet Essays Revenge in Hamlet Revenge causes the characters in Hamlet to act blindly through anger and emotion, rather than through reason. It is based on the principle of an eye for an eye; this action is not always the best means to an end. Fortinbras, Laertes, and Hamlet were all looking to avenge the deaths of their fathers. They all acted on emotion driven by the want for revenge for their father's deaths, and this led to the downfall of two, and the rise to power of one. Since the heads of the three major families were each murdered, the eldest sons of these families felt that they needed to take some kind of action to avenge their father's deaths; this need to bring honour to their respective families was ultimately the demise of Laertes and Hamlet. There were three major families in the tragedy of Hamlet. These were the family of King Fortinbras, the family of Polonius, and the family of King Hamlet. Fortinbras, King of Norway, was killed by King Hamlet; slain by sword during a man-to-man battle.   "...Lost by his father, with all bonds of law, to our most valiant brother."[Act 1, Scene 2; lines 24-25]. This entitled King Hamlet to the land that was possessed by Fortinbras because it was written in a seal'd compact. Polonius was an advisor to the King, and father to Laertes and Ophelia. He was nosy and arrogant, and he did not trust his children, and at one point in the play, using his daughter to probe Hamlet. Young Hamlet killed Polonius while he was secretly listening in on a conversation between Hamlet and his mother. "How now! A rat? Dead, for a ducat, dead!"[Act 3, Scene 4; Line 25].   King Hamlet was the King of Denmark, and Hamlet's father. He had killed King Fortinbras, only to be killed by his brother, Claudius. " ...My offence is rank, it smells to heaven; A brother's murder..." Each of these events affected the sons of the deceased in the same way. Laertes found out about his father's death, and immediately returned home. He confronted the King and accused him of the murder of his father. Claudius told Laertes that Hamlet was responsible for his father's death. He then decides to kill Hamlet to avenge the death of his father. He and Claudius concoct a plot to kill Hamlet. Hamlet dies of wounds from the poisoned tipped sword Laertes used.

Role that People’s Bank is playing in distributing these insurance services

People’s bank can be regarded as a mid level distributor in the insurance services sector. The company informs people about insurance products and then directs them to those receptive insurance companies. However, the consumers are entitled to special discounts in if they buy insurance as People’s consumers. (People’s, 2008) Length of the chain that the bank uses to distribute its own accounting product For its own accounting products, People has a very short chain. This is because most of the distributing agents are actually employees of the company. However, there are certain aspects that do not incorporate this short chain. For instance, in the credit card section of their product offering, the company works hand in hand with credit card companies to distribute the product. (People’s, 2008) Description of channel positioning of People’s Bank People utilizes a variety of service distribution outlets to access clients. For instance, the company utilizes direct retailing where sales men target consumers directly. In other instances, the company embraces online banking as method of distributing their services. This method has been found to be quite efficient because it accesses the client immediately, facilitates efficient communication and encourages effectiveness of the banking process. This channel has become a source of people’s channel positioning strategy because it is an aspect that many clients identify the company with. People’s, 2008) People’s unique value proposition People provides itself in offering it clientele services at an efficient and speedy manner. The company has a variety of accounting options that can be conducted online thus creating a convenient way of doing things. Some of the activities that have been streamlined through online banking include, controlling one’s money, managing home finances, controlling stock or one’s business accounts.

A Personalised Induction Will Always Be More Effective

Introduction A personalised induction is a type of hypnotic induction that is designed to suit a certain individual. As humans, we appear to share the same traits, but in reality, we are different in various ways. This is because we have different likes, dislikes, perspectives, values, and we have diverse cultural backgrounds. Because of these unique differences, everyone has his or her way of handling various situations, and every individual has a different level of openness and resistance (Chapman 2006, p.113). Consequently, during hypnosis, it is worthwhile for the hypnotist to adopt a personalised approach because each participant has unique traits, and people normally respond to the hypnotic process in different ways. The personalised approach takes into account the client’s desires, perceptions, likes, dislikes, as well as their cultural background (James 2006, p.30). Thus, by personalising the induction, hypnotherapists can help their clients to realize better quality results that a re in line with each of the client’s goals. . In this essay, I argue that a personalised induction approach will always be more effective. As humans, we communicate with each other in various ways including gestures, facial expressions, body language, as well as tone of voice and intonation. However, during hypnosis, the hypnotist has limited techniques of communication available since the clients have their eyes closed. For instance, he or she cannot adopt non-verbal communication techniques, and this makes the message or the instructions he or she is sending to weaken. Thus, it is necessary for the hypnotist to adopt other appropriate techniques of strengthening the message being conveyed to the clients. In order to do this effectively, the hypnotist can personalise the way he or she speaks to the clients by adopting different words, tone variation, volume, and pace, but ensuring the message remains unchanged (Erickson, Rossi & Ryan 1998, p.37-59). Milton H. Erickson common ly referred to as the father of contemporary hypnotherapy recognised that people have different beliefs, values, perceptions, and cultural backgrounds, and consequently, throughout his career as a psychiatrist, he adopted the personalised induction as the best tool for hypnosis. Erickson differed with Hull’s opinion that the subject should always be a passive participant. According to Hull (1933/1968), adoption of a standardized induction would have the same effect on all the subjects (Hawkins 2006, p.36). Difference of opinion between these two great psychiatrists fuelled Erickson’s quest for a valid understanding of the best approach to the hypnotic induction. Later on, Erickson concluded that it is what the subjects do and understands that matters most, not what the operator wishes. In other words, he believed that in order to realize quality results of the therapy, the subjects must be active participants, and the suggestions given by the therapist ought to concur with the client’s desires, perceptions, values, and goals of the therapy (Zeig & Munion, 1999, p.48-51). Permissive and the authoritarian technique Erickson developed the idea that hypnosis is a natural process that needed a more viable approach such as the permissive technique, because it enhances the client’s responsiveness and cooperation. The permissive technique acknowledges that every individual has unique traits, values, perceptions, and desires. It is normally based on the assumption that every person has a unique way of entering into a trance state and receiving suggestions. In this approach, most of the clients know how to relax and enter a trance state, since the hypnotist briefs every client on how the process takes place at the start. As a result, the hypnotist simply acts as a guide as the subjects enters into a hypnotic state (Simpkins 2001, p.53). Before Erickson pioneered the permissive technique, the authoritative technique was the only available technique that was deemed effective. . The authoritative approach is commanding and direct, and its main objective is usually to establish control over the clie nt and modify his or her behaviour through adoption of repetitive commands. Pioneers of this approach believed that by establishing control over their clients, they would be able to increase the chances of getting remarkable results. However, this approach does not produce effective results as asserted by its pioneers since the subjects, who respond in a positive way to it, are only those who respect their authoritarian figures in their daily lives. As a result, authoritative technique can fail to produce quality results if the participant believes in being at the same level with all the authoritarian figures in his or her live (Sheehan 2005, p.67-70). Unlike the authoritative approach, the permissive technique mainly involves adoption of a soft tone to lull the client into relaxation. Throughout this approach, the client and the hypnotist are usually equal partners. Furthermore, more imagery is employed to increase the magnitude of the suggestions. The subject is also given greater responsibility. Since personalised imagery is incorporated in this technique, the induction becomes more real and viable than in the authoritative approach, since the suggestions used by the hypnotist conform to the clients likes and expectations (Sheehan 2005, p.70-72). Clark Hull and Sigmund Freud’s research on hypnosis Despite Erickson’s insistence on the value of the permissive technique, some people object the personalised induction approach. They claim that the personalised induction approach takes more time than the authoritative approach. Moreover, they support their stance by citing some of the works of the great traditional researchers such as Clark Hull and Sigmund Freud. Arguments involving state and the role theory are also used to analyze Erickson’s position. Hull differed with Erickson’s perspective and on the contrary, he proposed the authoritarian technique, which makes the subject a passive participant (Pintar & Lynn, 2009, p.112). He believed that adoption of a standardized approach would yield the same results on all the subjects. In 1940, Jung (1902/1957) backed him in his research, but Jung was not comfortable in using the authoritarian technique, because it involved commanding clients to do according to their therapist’s expectations. According to Jun g’s perspective, participants ought to be involved throughout the process instead of directing then to comply with suggestions that do not conform to their likes. Consequently, Jung broke away from Hull’s research (Hamill 2012, p.24). Based on this, it is clear that the authoritarian approach is not viable, and as a result, it is not logical to oppose the personalised approach based on Hull’s perspective since he does not take into account preferences and expectations of the participants. In addition, Freud’s research asserts that the process of hypnosis would give better results when the subject was on deep trance. Like Hull, Freud adopted the authoritarian technique in a more assertive manner hoping that he would get better results (Sofroniou 2010, p.12). He was particularly interested in the technique because he believed that it was the perfect way of accessing forgotten events and emotions, a cathartic process, which gave relief to his clients. Howeve r, Freud became uncomfortable with hypnosis because his patients did not respond uniformly to the process. He was also afraid that the direct suggestion technique might do away with symptoms that were important for the clients to retain. In addition, Freud had worries over the sexual perceptions that surrounded the hypnotic process, which labelled a client as ‘giving herself’ emotionally to the psychiatrist. Because of these reasons, as well as lack of sufficient experience with hypnosis both through research and clinically, Freud decided to quit hypnosis (Zeig & Munion 1999, p.48-49). If Freud had adopted the permissive approach, he would have succeeded because the personalised approach relies on suggestions that are in line with the client’s expectations, desires and likes, and as a result, the clients could not lose any important symptom. The permissive technique would also help him to eliminate the ill-sexual perception, since it gives the client greater resp onsibility unlike the authoritarian technique. State and the role theory Advocates of the state theory, which asserts that hypnotic induction arouses a unique modified state of consciousness in the patient, base their argument on the notable changes that occur to the brain during hypnosis, and to the dramatic effects, which hypnosis can cause such as the disappearance of warts and insensitivity to pain. They also claim that sometimes, both hypnotised and non-hypnotised participants take instructions differently. For instance, in a certain study, both the hypnotised and non-hypnotised were told to run their hands through their hair once they heard the word ‘experiment.’ The pretenders carried out the suggestion only when the psychiatrist said the word, but the hypnotised participants complied regardless of who gave the suggestion (Coon, Mitterer, Talbot & Vanchella, 2010, p.194). Based on this, opponents of the personalised induction claim that the authoritative approach is as effective as the permissive approach. They support their claim by a sserting that participants who do not respond to the permissive technique can respond to the authoritarian technique effectively, particularly those who respect authoritarian figures in their life. Moreover, advocates of the role theory assert that hypnosis is not a special state of consciousness. They argue that some of the changes linked with hypnosis can also take place without it. They claim that hypnotised people just comply with the demands of the situation, and act in conformity with a special role. From this point of view, hypnosis provides a socially logical reason to comply with someone’s suggestions, in the same way as a physical exam, which provides a logical reason of removing clothes on request. Supporters of the role theory justify their claims by arguing that non-hypnotised participants sometimes exhibit behaviours that are usually linked with hypnosis (Bernstein & Nash, 2008, p.153). Based on this, I disagree with the opponents of the personalised induction w ho adopt the role theory to support their stance, because the theory rejects the idea of hypnosis without providing concrete reasons. The dissociation theory The dissociation theory provides substantial reasons why the personalised inductions should be adopted during the hypnotic process. The theory suggests that hypnosis is not a single specific state, but the general condition, which temporarily reorganises our normal control over actions and thoughts. Dissociation allows body movements to occur under voluntary control and the involuntary processes to be controlled voluntarily. As Hilgard proposed this theory, he asserted that the relaxation of control occurs because of the social agreement between the hypnotist and the hypnotised person to share control (Bernstein & Nash, 2008, p.153-154). In other words, the theory supports the idea that for the process to be effective, the participant should be an active participant, something advocated in the personalised induction approach. Modern hypnosis Based on contemporary hypnosis, a personalised induction seems to be the most effective approach in hypnosis. The approach takes into account the client’s values, desires, and it views the subjects as active participants. It also supports the idea that it is imperative to have the patient as relaxed as possible, get them involved in the in the process, and discuss the expectations and goals of attending the therapy with the client. Furthermore, the modern hypnotherapist starts the therapy session by establishing a rapport with their patients, which is a key aspect of the personalised induction approach (Gaschler 2009, p.21). In the course of the personalised induction, strong relationships between the clients and the therapist are necessary in order to ensure the client is fully involved in the process. Learning Modalities Overtime, personalised induction has stood out as the best because it takes into consideration learning modalities, which are key channels through which people receive, store, and give information. Modality is comprised of perception, sensation, and memory and the key senses include smell, taste, visual, auditory, and kinaesthetic. Knowledge of modalities enables therapists to personalise screeds for each client. When a patient’s modalities are ascertained, it becomes easy to discuss with them in a way that makes them feel comfortable and relaxed (Hogan & LaBay 2007, p.226-239). As a result, it becomes easy to achieve the objective of the therapy. Conclusion The above discussion has suggested that personalised induction is more effective than the authoritarian approach. This is because we have different likes, dislikes, desires, perceptions, and we come from different cultural backgrounds. Consequently, to achieve remarkable results in the process of hypnosis, the hypnotist should take into consideration all this aspects. Although a standardized approach (authoritative approach) can be effective in some instances, it only works on subjects who respect the authoritative figures. Moreover, the authoritative technique assumes that all people react in the same manner to suggestions. However, this should not be the case since we possess different traits. Thus, the personalised induction or the permissive approach is the only method through which noteworthy results can be achieved during the hypnotic process, since it acknowledges that we have different likes, dislikes, perceptions and that we come from diverse cultural backgrounds. References Bernstein, D. A., & Nash, P. W. (2008). Essentials of psychology. Boston, MA, Houghton Mifflin. Chapman, R. A. (2006). The clinical use of hypnosis in cognitive behavior therapy a practitioner’s casebook. New York, NY, Springer Pub. Coon, D., Mitterer, J. O., Talbot, S., & Vanchella, C. M. (2010). Introduction to psychology: gateways to mind and behavior. Belmont, Calif, Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Erickson, M. H., Rossi, E. L., & Ryan, M. O. (1998). Mind-body communication in hypnosis. London, Free Association. Gaschler, T. (2009). Modern hypnosis techniques Pt. 1. Pt. 1. [Bad Sachsa], Steiner. Hamill, D. (2012). An Introduction to Hypnosis & Hypnotherapy. Bolton, MA, eBookIt.com. Hawkins, P. (2006). Hypnosis and stress a guide for clinicians. Chichester, England, Wiley. Hogan, K., & LaBay, M. (2007). Through the Open Door: Secrets of Self-hypnosis. Gretna, Louisiana: Pelican Publishing. James, U. (2006). Clinical hypnosis textbook: a guide for practical intervention. Oxford, Radcliffe Publishing. Pintar, J., & Lynn, S. J. (2009). Hypnosis a Brief History. Chichester, John Wiley & Sons Sheehan, L. (2005). Basic Hypnosis Manual. Raleigh, North Carolina: Lulu. Simpkins, C. A. (2001). Self-Hypnosis: Plain and Simple. Tuttle Pub. Sofroniou, A. (2010). The misinterpretation of Sigmund Freud. [Raleigh, N.C. ], Lulu Com. Zeig, J. K., & Munion, W. M. (1999). Milton H. Erickson. London, Sage Publications. A Personalised Induction Will Always Be More Effective Introduction A personalised induction is a type of hypnotic induction that is designed to suit a certain individual. As humans, we appear to share the same traits, but in reality, we are different in various ways. This is because we have different likes, dislikes, perspectives, values, and we have diverse cultural backgrounds. Because of these unique differences, everyone has his or her way of handling various situations, and every individual has a different level of openness and resistance (Chapman 2006, p.113). Consequently, during hypnosis, it is worthwhile for the hypnotist to adopt a personalised approach because each participant has unique traits, and people normally respond to the hypnotic process in different ways. The personalised approach takes into account the client’s desires, perceptions, likes, dislikes, as well as their cultural background (James 2006, p.30). Thus, by personalising the induction, hypnotherapists can help their clients to realize better quality results that a re in line with each of the client’s goals. . In this essay, I argue that a personalised induction approach will always be more effective. As humans, we communicate with each other in various ways including gestures, facial expressions, body language, as well as tone of voice and intonation. However, during hypnosis, the hypnotist has limited techniques of communication available since the clients have their eyes closed. For instance, he or she cannot adopt non-verbal communication techniques, and this makes the message or the instructions he or she is sending to weaken. Thus, it is necessary for the hypnotist to adopt other appropriate techniques of strengthening the message being conveyed to the clients. In order to do this effectively, the hypnotist can personalise the way he or she speaks to the clients by adopting different words, tone variation, volume, and pace, but ensuring the message remains unchanged (Erickson, Rossi & Ryan 1998, p.37-59). Milton H. Erickson common ly referred to as the father of contemporary hypnotherapy recognised that people have different beliefs, values, perceptions, and cultural backgrounds, and consequently, throughout his career as a psychiatrist, he adopted the personalised induction as the best tool for hypnosis. Erickson differed with Hull’s opinion that the subject should always be a passive participant. According to Hull (1933/1968), adoption of a standardized induction would have the same effect on all the subjects (Hawkins 2006, p.36). Difference of opinion between these two great psychiatrists fuelled Erickson’s quest for a valid understanding of the best approach to the hypnotic induction. Later on, Erickson concluded that it is what the subjects do and understands that matters most, not what the operator wishes. In other words, he believed that in order to realize quality results of the therapy, the subjects must be active participants, and the suggestions given by the therapist ought to concur with the client’s desires, perceptions, values, and goals of the therapy (Zeig & Munion, 1999, p.48-51). Permissive and the authoritarian technique Erickson developed the idea that hypnosis is a natural process that needed a more viable approach such as the permissive technique, because it enhances the client’s responsiveness and cooperation. The permissive technique acknowledges that every individual has unique traits, values, perceptions, and desires. It is normally based on the assumption that every person has a unique way of entering into a trance state and receiving suggestions. In this approach, most of the clients know how to relax and enter a trance state, since the hypnotist briefs every client on how the process takes place at the start. As a result, the hypnotist simply acts as a guide as the subjects enters into a hypnotic state (Simpkins 2001, p.53). Before Erickson pioneered the permissive technique, the authoritative technique was the only available technique that was deemed effective. . The authoritative approach is commanding and direct, and its main objective is usually to establish control over the clie nt and modify his or her behaviour through adoption of repetitive commands. Pioneers of this approach believed that by establishing control over their clients, they would be able to increase the chances of getting remarkable results. However, this approach does not produce effective results as asserted by its pioneers since the subjects, who respond in a positive way to it, are only those who respect their authoritarian figures in their daily lives. As a result, authoritative technique can fail to produce quality results if the participant believes in being at the same level with all the authoritarian figures in his or her live (Sheehan 2005, p.67-70). Unlike the authoritative approach, the permissive technique mainly involves adoption of a soft tone to lull the client into relaxation. Throughout this approach, the client and the hypnotist are usually equal partners. Furthermore, more imagery is employed to increase the magnitude of the suggestions. The subject is also given greater responsibility. Since personalised imagery is incorporated in this technique, the induction becomes more real and viable than in the authoritative approach, since the suggestions used by the hypnotist conform to the clients likes and expectations (Sheehan 2005, p.70-72). Clark Hull and Sigmund Freud’s research on hypnosis Despite Erickson’s insistence on the value of the permissive technique, some people object the personalised induction approach. They claim that the personalised induction approach takes more time than the authoritative approach. Moreover, they support their stance by citing some of the works of the great traditional researchers such as Clark Hull and Sigmund Freud. Arguments involving state and the role theory are also used to analyze Erickson’s position. Hull differed with Erickson’s perspective and on the contrary, he proposed the authoritarian technique, which makes the subject a passive participant (Pintar & Lynn, 2009, p.112). He believed that adoption of a standardized approach would yield the same results on all the subjects. In 1940, Jung (1902/1957) backed him in his research, but Jung was not comfortable in using the authoritarian technique, because it involved commanding clients to do according to their therapist’s expectations. According to Jun g’s perspective, participants ought to be involved throughout the process instead of directing then to comply with suggestions that do not conform to their likes. Consequently, Jung broke away from Hull’s research (Hamill 2012, p.24). Based on this, it is clear that the authoritarian approach is not viable, and as a result, it is not logical to oppose the personalised approach based on Hull’s perspective since he does not take into account preferences and expectations of the participants. In addition, Freud’s research asserts that the process of hypnosis would give better results when the subject was on deep trance. Like Hull, Freud adopted the authoritarian technique in a more assertive manner hoping that he would get better results (Sofroniou 2010, p.12). He was particularly interested in the technique because he believed that it was the perfect way of accessing forgotten events and emotions, a cathartic process, which gave relief to his clients. Howeve r, Freud became uncomfortable with hypnosis because his patients did not respond uniformly to the process. He was also afraid that the direct suggestion technique might do away with symptoms that were important for the clients to retain. In addition, Freud had worries over the sexual perceptions that surrounded the hypnotic process, which labelled a client as ‘giving herself’ emotionally to the psychiatrist. Because of these reasons, as well as lack of sufficient experience with hypnosis both through research and clinically, Freud decided to quit hypnosis (Zeig & Munion 1999, p.48-49). If Freud had adopted the permissive approach, he would have succeeded because the personalised approach relies on suggestions that are in line with the client’s expectations, desires and likes, and as a result, the clients could not lose any important symptom. The permissive technique would also help him to eliminate the ill-sexual perception, since it gives the client greater resp onsibility unlike the authoritarian technique. State and the role theory Advocates of the state theory, which asserts that hypnotic induction arouses a unique modified state of consciousness in the patient, base their argument on the notable changes that occur to the brain during hypnosis, and to the dramatic effects, which hypnosis can cause such as the disappearance of warts and insensitivity to pain. They also claim that sometimes, both hypnotised and non-hypnotised participants take instructions differently. For instance, in a certain study, both the hypnotised and non-hypnotised were told to run their hands through their hair once they heard the word ‘experiment.’ The pretenders carried out the suggestion only when the psychiatrist said the word, but the hypnotised participants complied regardless of who gave the suggestion (Coon, Mitterer, Talbot & Vanchella, 2010, p.194). Based on this, opponents of the personalised induction claim that the authoritative approach is as effective as the permissive approach. They support their claim by a sserting that participants who do not respond to the permissive technique can respond to the authoritarian technique effectively, particularly those who respect authoritarian figures in their life. Moreover, advocates of the role theory assert that hypnosis is not a special state of consciousness. They argue that some of the changes linked with hypnosis can also take place without it. They claim that hypnotised people just comply with the demands of the situation, and act in conformity with a special role. From this point of view, hypnosis provides a socially logical reason to comply with someone’s suggestions, in the same way as a physical exam, which provides a logical reason of removing clothes on request. Supporters of the role theory justify their claims by arguing that non-hypnotised participants sometimes exhibit behaviours that are usually linked with hypnosis (Bernstein & Nash, 2008, p.153). Based on this, I disagree with the opponents of the personalised induction w ho adopt the role theory to support their stance, because the theory rejects the idea of hypnosis without providing concrete reasons. The dissociation theory The dissociation theory provides substantial reasons why the personalised inductions should be adopted during the hypnotic process. The theory suggests that hypnosis is not a single specific state, but the general condition, which temporarily reorganises our normal control over actions and thoughts. Dissociation allows body movements to occur under voluntary control and the involuntary processes to be controlled voluntarily. As Hilgard proposed this theory, he asserted that the relaxation of control occurs because of the social agreement between the hypnotist and the hypnotised person to share control (Bernstein & Nash, 2008, p.153-154). In other words, the theory supports the idea that for the process to be effective, the participant should be an active participant, something advocated in the personalised induction approach. Modern hypnosis Based on contemporary hypnosis, a personalised induction seems to be the most effective approach in hypnosis. The approach takes into account the client’s values, desires, and it views the subjects as active participants. It also supports the idea that it is imperative to have the patient as relaxed as possible, get them involved in the in the process, and discuss the expectations and goals of attending the therapy with the client. Furthermore, the modern hypnotherapist starts the therapy session by establishing a rapport with their patients, which is a key aspect of the personalised induction approach (Gaschler 2009, p.21). In the course of the personalised induction, strong relationships between the clients and the therapist are necessary in order to ensure the client is fully involved in the process. Learning Modalities Overtime, personalised induction has stood out as the best because it takes into consideration learning modalities, which are key channels through which people receive, store, and give information. Modality is comprised of perception, sensation, and memory and the key senses include smell, taste, visual, auditory, and kinaesthetic. Knowledge of modalities enables therapists to personalise screeds for each client. When a patient’s modalities are ascertained, it becomes easy to discuss with them in a way that makes them feel comfortable and relaxed (Hogan & LaBay 2007, p.226-239). As a result, it becomes easy to achieve the objective of the therapy. Conclusion The above discussion has suggested that personalised induction is more effective than the authoritarian approach. This is because we have different likes, dislikes, desires, perceptions, and we come from different cultural backgrounds. Consequently, to achieve remarkable results in the process of hypnosis, the hypnotist should take into consideration all this aspects. Although a standardized approach (authoritative approach) can be effective in some instances, it only works on subjects who respect the authoritative figures. Moreover, the authoritative technique assumes that all people react in the same manner to suggestions. However, this should not be the case since we possess different traits. Thus, the personalised induction or the permissive approach is the only method through which noteworthy results can be achieved during the hypnotic process, since it acknowledges that we have different likes, dislikes, perceptions and that we come from diverse cultural backgrounds. References Bernstein, D. A., & Nash, P. W. (2008). Essentials of psychology. Boston, MA, Houghton Mifflin. Chapman, R. A. (2006). The clinical use of hypnosis in cognitive behavior therapy a practitioner’s casebook. New York, NY, Springer Pub. Coon, D., Mitterer, J. O., Talbot, S., & Vanchella, C. M. (2010). Introduction to psychology: gateways to mind and behavior. Belmont, Calif, Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Erickson, M. H., Rossi, E. L., & Ryan, M. O. (1998). Mind-body communication in hypnosis. London, Free Association. Gaschler, T. (2009). Modern hypnosis techniques Pt. 1. Pt. 1. [Bad Sachsa], Steiner. Hamill, D. (2012). An Introduction to Hypnosis & Hypnotherapy. Bolton, MA, eBookIt.com. Hawkins, P. (2006). Hypnosis and stress a guide for clinicians. Chichester, England, Wiley. Hogan, K., & LaBay, M. (2007). Through the Open Door: Secrets of Self-hypnosis. Gretna, Louisiana: Pelican Publishing. James, U. (2006). Clinical hypnosis textbook: a guide for practical intervention. Oxford, Radcliffe Publishing. Pintar, J., & Lynn, S. J. (2009). Hypnosis a Brief History. Chichester, John Wiley & Sons Sheehan, L. (2005). Basic Hypnosis Manual. Raleigh, North Carolina: Lulu. Simpkins, C. A. (2001). Self-Hypnosis: Plain and Simple. Tuttle Pub. Sofroniou, A. (2010). The misinterpretation of Sigmund Freud. [Raleigh, N.C. ], Lulu Com. Zeig, J. K., & Munion, W. M. (1999). Milton H. Erickson. London, Sage Publications.

Education in the United States Personal Statement

Education in the United States - Personal Statement Example Choosing to come to the United States to further my academic studies seemed to be the logical next step for me in terms of higher education because my family has always had a well rounded, international education. After all, my father is an architect who lives in California, my mother works as a principal in South Korea, and my brother is already attending medical university studies in the United States at the University of Texas at Austin. I believe that my opportunity to have worked as a Japanese translator helped to entice me to further my studies in English and other languages. It was because of this desire to learn about other cultures and languages that I took a year-long sabbatical from my studies in order to travel and immerse myself in the cultures of China and Japan, the 2 most advanced and highly admired countries in Asia. I fully intend to return to my mother country after the completion of my degree in order to help my mother further expand and enhance the educational system in the school where she works as a principal. By working alongside her, I fully expect to effectively enact a language knowledge transfer program in our South Korean school. In the end, I hope to further raise the educational standards of our school using the knowledge that I will gain from my American educational experience. There are a number of reasons that come to mind as to why I wish to attend SUNY. However, the most important reason I have is that I have already lived in Texas for 3 years and have developed a liking for the area both for the educational opportunities that it offers, and the uniquely American lifestyle that I am experiencing while I live here. Since South Koreans are becoming a major part of the educational landscape of the United States, I am sure that I will be a welcome addition to the SUNY international student community where I can help other fellow South Koreans feel at home and welcome on campus.

Technology Evaluation and Recommendation Research Paper - 2

Technology Evaluation and Recommendation - Research Paper Example Information Security Project Plan There are many differences between physical security, and information security. Information security is concept that entangles most aspects of the society, majorly because of the ubiquitous adoption of computing technology in the modern world. In our daily lives, we use computers at work place for our employers, play on computers in homes, study online, do business, and check emails, and so on. The level of development in the modern world has greatly improved especially with the increased rate of innovation, and growing technology. Everyone in the modern world is impressed at how the level of technology is increasing so fast because they benefit from it in very many different ways (Matford & Whitman, 2012). Owing to the fact that most people have the urge to make things easier in the modern world, everyone is turning towards the direction of Information technology because online seems to be the future of everyone, and everything. The web is viewed as the future of most activities in the world today since currently it serves as a very useful tool even though it also has some intimidating proposition. Although technology enables more productivity and allows access to much information, it also carries a lot of security issues. Employers preserve information about their companies, employees, and other important documents on the computer systems. Banks also store vital information on money transaction between them, and other clients. One of the most common challenges in the modern technology world is hacking, and piracy. When someone hacks information about a company, then this leaves the company in danger of either breaking down or losing credibility from the public that it serves because this interferes with its reputation, and competitors can take advantage of this situation. Employers can lose millions of dollars, and suffer damage of reputation, face legal prosecution through system configuration when hackers accesses personall y identifiable data. These issues are more common in the media, and they have disturbing regularity (Matford & Whitman, 2012). The rapid growth of technology brings many security issues, and this means that security standards need to be put in place with effective implementation. When discussing security issues, it is often helpful to use a model that has a baseline or foundation. This provides consistent concepts, and set of terminologies, which professionals can refer to when security issues arise. Information security has three primary concepts that are confidentiality, integrity, and availability triad since it focuses on security in relation to available data. Concept of confidentiality is similar but not the same as privacy. This component entails protecting data from those who are unauthorized to view it. One of the best examples of implementation of concept of confidentiality is when a person goes to the ATM to withdraw money; he or she is very keen on maintaining, and prote cting the account number, and card pin number. This is how simple concept of confidentiality operates (Matford & Whitman, 2012). This concept of information security goes hand in hand with that of physical security because the idea of confidentiality is still applicable in many ways. With the rapid expansion of global networks through interconnecting information systems in the modern

Modern Life Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Modern Life - Essay Example Fatalism means practical knowledge of limits, self reliance suggests freedom from dependence, religion is a validation and knowledge is developed outside of metropolitan institutions. (Seitz, 1995, p. 128). In this modern life, women are now working shoulder to shoulder with men, and this progress actually happened gradually. Gradually because there are certain impediments that women had to face to prove their capability and potential to be able to become self dependent; some of which have been aforementioned such as the value of women in existing cultures. Other than external factors, do the women folk even appreciate the value of self dependence themselves? Here, the question being posed suggests that are women an impediment to their own progress towards self dependence? Well, the answer is partly yes, because of the reason is that she is not taught self dependence. (Mill, 2008, pg. 111). Understanding the Meaning of Self Dependence Self dependence simply means to be dependent on one’s own self in order to achieve something such as a one’s goals, aims, desires and the like. Self dependence is a synonym for self reliance. A self dependent person accepts and realizes that fact they are responsible for their lives as an individual. Self dependence is a strong belief that one can face the challenges in life alone with no one’s help and guidance other than oneself. When a person is able to listen to himself., they can trust themselves and move their life according to their will. Women and Self Dependence The word self dependent has been started being associated with women, too. However; women of today do not enjoy the bounties of this term completely. It is partial for them. â€Å"If you want a thing done, go yourself; if not, send.† This axiom is clearly and fully valued by most men but not appreciated by the women. It suggests that one of the very last things women are taught, often thr ough a course of miserable helplessness, difficulties, heart burning and pain, is self dependence which boys are taught from their school days till they are grown men. (Craik, p. 27). There are a number of impediments that come in between women and the development of their complete self dependence in this modern world. First basic reason is the way they are brought up, secondly are the cultural values, thirdly the existence of gender disparity at different environments such as educational institutions, workplace environment and the like. Women and Their Brought Up In today’s societies, girls are brought up in similar ways as they were brought up traditionally. That is, they are still told the differences between the female and male gender since they are children. Females are raised to be dainty and lady like, and males on the other hand are raised to be strong and never show weakness. Since the start of their lives, children are taught their different respective roles in the society. For example, girls are made to wear pink dresses and boys are made to wear blue colored dresses. This small differentiation has great and hidden impact on the minds of both the genders. When playing with toys, girls tend to play with dolls and boys tend to play with cars, trucks. Some of it is an inherited quality and some things in them are shaped by the environment. This is also called socialization, in which girls and boys are brought up with different beliefs. All societies have this norm. Women are not considered physiologically equal to men. Males are made to believe that they are predisposed to becoming aggressive. And women on the other hand are made to believe that they are gentle and tender. (Digital Term papers). Cultural Aspects For Women’s Self Dependence Most of the cultures recognize women as belonging to the