Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
This can be summed up as the interactionist perspective, which seeks to solve the person-situation debate by explaining behavior with consideration to both situation and stable traits. Traits remain relatively stable over time creating consistent behavioral inclinations, however they become activated when exposed to a trait relevant situational ...
They can be compared to the similarly generative experience of the sense of bewilderment in Zen. [4] Hans-Georg Gadamer believed the limit situation to provide a revelatory encounter with the other [5] and that facing the anxiety arising from the foreknowledge of death can likewise be a growth opportunity arising from a limit situation. [6]
The trigger can be anything that provokes fear or distressing memories in the affected person, and which the affected person associates with a previous traumatic experience. Just as trauma is not merely an unpleasant or adverse experience, a trauma trigger is not merely something that makes a person feel uncomfortable or offended.
When observing one instance of extroverted or honest behavior, it shows how in different situations a person would behave in a similarly honest or extroverted way. It shows that when many people are observed in a range of situations the trait-related reactions to behavior is about .20 or less. People think the correlation is around .80.
The person–situation debate in personality psychology refers to the controversy concerning whether the person or the situation is more influential in determining a person's behavior. Personality trait psychologists believe that a person's personality is relatively consistent across situations. [ 1 ]
In another study involving twenty-one autism patients, FACS analysis demonstrates that people with autism display less facial responsivity when watching evocative films. Specifically, when compared to the control group, the autism group does not demonstrate the more complex muscular movements and displayed less differentiated facial responses ...
The controlling effects of stimuli are seen in quite diverse situations and in many aspects of behavior. For example, a stimulus presented at one time may control responses emitted immediately or at a later time; two stimuli may control the same behavior; a single stimulus may trigger behavior A at one time and behavior B at another; a stimulus may control behavior only in the presence of ...
If a person is able to consider another outcome based on a different path, they may take that path in the future and avoid the undesired outcome. The past cannot be changed, but similar situations may occur in the future, and thus we take our counterfactual thoughts as a learning experience. [1]