As experienced in the New England Fisheries, pursuing short-term economic gains can come at the expense of the long-term health of a natural resource. Those whose livelihood depends on the natural resource are often unwilling to sacrifice their rights to the resource if others are not willing to do the same. So, to what extent should those whose livelihoods depend on fishing have a say in decisions about those regulations and how can they participate? How should their views be incorporated, and why?

Self-disclosure can be a useful tool in a clinical setting or it can blur boundary lines if used incorrectly. While it is a controversial approach, research shows that clients who have counselors who disclose some information about themselves have lower stress levels than those whose counselors do not (Barrett & Berman, 2001). Review Karen’s approach below and determine what she could do to utilize self-disclosure in a helpful way. Write a paragraph about your feelings on how she used self-disclosure and write 1-2 sentences on how Karen could have used self-disclosure in a way that would have been more helpful to Joe.

Karen is a counselor in a residential treatment facility. Her client, Joe, shared that he went to jail an altercation he had when he was drunk. Karen responded, “I know what you mean. When I was younger I was almost arrested when I was drunk. I had some crazy times in college!”

C?ompare and contrast the similarities and differences between survey, field, and experimental research

Horney believed that much of our lives may be governed by the tyranny of the shoulds. Can you think of different types of "shoulds" that diverse cultures foster

Note:Subject:EC110/EEC1202 Section 02 Early Childhood Education Curriculum and Instructionn but I choose Pschology to be easy.

In your own words, describe nine learning experiences that cover each of the following: RC II-1: Science/Sensory RC II-2: Language and Literacy RC II-3: Creativity RC II-4: Fine Motor (please choose an indoor activity) RC II-5: Gross Motor (please choose an outdoor activity) RC II-6: Self-Concepts RC II-7: Emotional Skills/Regulation RC II-8: Social Skills RC II-9: Math Preschool For each activity, indicate the age group (3s, 4s, or 5s) and list the intended goals, materials, and process/teaching strategies. For each activity, specify how it is developmentally appropriate for that age group. Infant/Toddler For each activity indicate the age group (young, infants, mobile infants, or toddler) and list the intended goals, materials and process/teaching strategies. For each activity, specify how it is developmentally appropriate for that age group. Of the nine activities, three should be appropriate for young infants, three for mobile infants, and three for toddlers.

What is a co-occurring disorder? Describe this diagnosis and summarize the challenges a behavioral health provider may have when working with this population. Please Cite The Answer

Case Study #1: Mark

Mark has found himself drinking much more in recent months. He doesn’t know why this transition has occurred, but he has a sense that it probably stems back to two different things—a recent divorce and some new friends that he recently met. To be more specific, Mark has found that alcohol really helps him forget the pain of his divorce—for at least a little while—and he has also discovered that his new friends are almost always happy to hang out with him if he goes out to a bar.

• What concept of behaviorism can explain this new development in Mark’s behavior? Use detailed terminology to explain how both of these situations listed above relate to this concept.
• How could issues with generalization and discrimination exacerbate or help in this situation?
• With respect to the concept listed above, how can Mark utilize this concept to help lower his alcohol consumption if he finds that it is getting out of control? Again, use detailed terminology to describe this process.

Please help me explain case 1. Thank you.

State which clinical treatment might be most effective for the bipolar and why.

1. Explain why we sleep and then explain why circadian rhythms are important.
2. Explain the function of REM and slow-wave sleep.
3. Explain the neural basis of attention.

Please answer all the question, thank you.

1. Are there any problems that may occur when people from different gendered speech communities interact? Discuss them providing your own examples or examples from popular media.

When producing the social skills rating system, were the items analyzed statistically for possible bias? What methods were used? How were the items selected for inclusion in the final version of the test?

First, I want you to pick something that you have been thinking about changing in you life (maybe a major decision) but have been on the fence in doing it or unsuccessful in getting to it. Something that you are willing to talk about in class that's appropriate. It must be meaningful (Not something like -- I have been thinking about changing the shower curtain). It may be something that you have attempted to change in the past or maybe not. Yet, it is something that is often at the forefront in your thinking or that you are waiting for a "perfect" time to do it. Be concrete, just pick one thing, e.g, I want to go on a diet to lose 10 lbs, I want to start going to the gym several times a week, I have be thinking of getting a personal training certificate, or I want to quite smoking. Once you name it, access the article from the UMUC library, In Search of How People Change: Applications to addictive behaviors by Prochaska, DiClemente, and Norcoss. Source: The American Psychologist. Sept, 1992, Vol. 47 Issue 9, p1102, 13 p. Read this seminal work. Then read this client-version:

https://www.health.harvard.edu/mind-and-mood/why-behavior-change-is-hard-and-why-you-should-keep-trying

Then write your post. Introduction what you have been thinking about changing, then use the resources above (only) and discussion the stage that you are currently in and justify in detail (a sentence or two won't do) why you selected this stage versus others. Make sure you indicate why you are not in the other stages too. There are many people who have fraudulently taken this model and added stages -- only use this resources. Don't take a short-cut and only read the client-friendly version :) because your post will reflect this. Remember always paragraph form -- and this is a minimum of a 2 paragraph submission for your own post.

This stage of change model is used in alcohol treatment programs to determine treatment strategies!

Using Chapter 6 of American Government, explain how the political culture of a state, the workplace, and political elites can influence/shape public opinion. Explain examples that demonstrate how each of the three factors can influence public opinion. Then choose one of the three factors and explain how you see this factor play itself out in your family, among your friends, in your workplace, community, etc.

Study: Two researchers want to see if the presence of a rifle increases how participants retaliate against someone who previously criticized them. The researchers (designated A and B) design a two-part study.

In Part One, all participants write a brief essay about their political views. Another participant (actually a confederate, or a researcher pretending to be a participant) reads the essay and comments that it is “One of the worst essays I’ve ever read in my life”.

In Part Two, all participants are taken to a new room that has one of three objects lying on a table in the corner: a rifle, a water gun, or a tennis racket. Researcher A tells the participants to ignore the item, which was accidentally left in the room from another study. Instead, Researcher A asks participants whether they 1) agree or 2) disagree with the criticism they received on their essay. After recording the participants’ responses, Researcher A asks the participants if they would be willing to participate in a second study by Researcher B, who is interested in measuring people’s ability to detect traces of hot sauce poured into in a cup of water. Researcher B says that the confederate from the first study already agreed to participate as the taste tester, so all the participant needs to do is add as much hot sauce to a cup as they want, which the confederate will then drink. Researcher B explains that the hot sauce is very strong, so the water helps to dilute it. After participants add the hot sauce, Researcher B thanks, debriefs, and dismisses them.

To measure retaliation, the researchers weigh each cup of water before and after the addition of the hot sauce and calculates the difference (in grams). The researchers thus operationally define “retaliation” in terms of “how many grams of hot sauce participants added to the confederate’s water cup”, which ranges from 0 to 50 grams. Although they believe that all participants will want to retaliate against the confederate based on the confederate’s criticism, the researchers hypothesize that participants will add significantly more hot sauce to the water when in the presence of a rifle or a water gun than when in the presence of the tennis racket. They do not expect difference between the water gun and rifle conditions.

Using this study design, answer the following four questions:

1). What is the independent variable in this study, and how many levels are there to each? Choose the correct response (.5 points)

A. IV: Item left in the room, with two levels (Gun or Tennis Racket)

B. IV: Agreement with the criticism with two levels (1 = Agree and 2 = Disagree)

C. IV: The researchers, with two levels (A and B)

D. IV: Item left in the room, with three levels (Rifle, Water Gun, or Tennis Racket)

2). What is/are the dependent variable(s) in this study, and what scale of measurement are they based on (NOIR)? Choose the BEST option (.5 points)

A. DV #1: Criticism Agreement: Nominal scale. – DV #2: Amount of hot sauce added: Ratio scale

B. DV #1: Criticism Agreement: Nominal scale. – DV #2: Amount of hot sauce added: Interval scale

C. DV #1: Item left in the room: Nominal scale. – DV #2: Criticism Agreement: Ordinal Scale

D. DV #1: Criticism Agreement: Interval scale. – DV #2: Amount of hot sauce added: Nominal scale.

3). We are going to run some analyses on the data. First, use the independent variable and the nominal dependent variable in an SPSS analysis. (Hint: Your scale of measurement for the nominal dependent variable should let you know which statistical test to use!). Choose the correct analysis, write-up, and conclusion from the options below (1.5 points)

A. We ran a chi square using condition as the independent variable (Rifle versus Water Gun versus Tennis Racket) and whether participants agreed with the criticism as the dependent variable. A significant effect emerged, χ² (2) = 2.89, p < .05. Participants were more likely to agree with the criticism in the tennis racket condition (30%) than in the rifle condition (10%) and water gun condition (15%). This indicates that participants agreed with the criticism more in some conditions than others.   

B. We ran a chi square using condition as the independent variable (Rifle versus Water Gun versus Tennis Racket) and whether participants agreed with the criticism as the dependent variable. A significant effect emerged, χ² (2) = 2.89, p < .05. Participants were more likely to disagree with the criticism in the rifle condition (90%) than in the water gun condition (85%) and tennis racket condition (70%). This indicates that participants disagreed with the criticism more in some conditions than others.

C. We ran a chi square using condition as the independent variable (Rifle versus Water Gun versus Tennis Racket) and whether participants agreed with the criticism as the dependent variable. A significant effect did not emerge, χ² (2) = 2.89 p > .05. Participants were equally likely to disagree with the criticism in the rifle, water gun, and tennis racket conditions (90%, 85%, and 70%, respectively). This indicates that participants disagreed with the criticism similarly across all conditions.

D. We ran a One Way ANOVA using condition as the independent variable (Rifle versus Water Gun versus Tennis Racket) and whether participants agreed with the criticism as the dependent variable. A significant effect did not emerge, F(2, 57) = 1.44, p > .05. Participants were similarly likely to agree with the criticism in the rifle condition (M = 1.90, SD = 0.31), the water gun condition (M = 1.85, SD = 0.37) and the tennis racket condition (M = 1.70, SD= 0.47). Since the F test was not significant, a post hoc test was not necessary. This indicates that participants disagreed with the criticism similarly across all conditions.

4). For the main analysis, the authors predicted that participants would add more hot sauce in retaliation for the essay criticism when in the presence of either a rifle or a water gun than when in the presence of a tennis racket, though the rifle and water gun conditions would not differ from one another. Run the correct analysis to see if they confirmed their predictions, and choose the correct conclusion from the options below (1.5 points)

A. We ran an independent samples t-Test using condition as the independent variable (Rifle versus Water Gun) and how much hot sauce participants added to the cup of water as the dependent variable. A significant effect emerged, t(38) = 2.86, p > .05. Participants added more hot sauce to the water in the rifle condition (23.05, SD = 6.56) than in the water gun condition (M = 17.25, SD = 6.25). This indicates that the presence of a rifle increases retaliation more than the presence of a water gun.

B. We ran a One Way ANOVA using condition as the independent variable (Rifle versus Water Gun versus Tennis Racket) and how much hot sauce participants added to the cup fo water as the dependent variable. A significant effect did not emerge, F(2, 57) = 4.13, p > .05. Participants added similar levels of hot sauce to the water in the rifle condition (M = 23.05, SD = 6.56), the water gun condition (M = 17.25, SD = 6.25) and the tennis racket condition (M = 17.05, SD= 9.31). Since the F test was not significant, a post hoc test was not necessary. This indicates that participants were not influenced by the presence of a rifle, water gun, or tennis racket in the experimental room.

C. We ran a One Way ANOVA using condition as the independent variable (Rifle versus Water Gun versus Tennis Racket) and how much hot sauce participants added to the cup of water as the dependent variable. A significant effect emerged, F(2, 57) = 4.13, p < .05. Tukey post hoc tests showed that participants add more hot sauce in the rifle condition (M = 23.05, SD = 6.56) than in both the water gun condition (M = 17.25, SD = 6.25) and the tennis racket condition (M = 17.05, SD= 9.31), though the water gun and tennis racket conditions did not differ from each other. This partially confirms the predictions, as only the presence of a real gun (in this case a rifle) led to higher levels of retaliation.   

D. We ran a One Way ANOVA using condition as the independent variable (Rifle versus Water Gun versus Tennis Racket) and how much hot sauce participants added to the cup of water as the dependent variable. A significant effect emerged, F(2, 57) = 4.13, p < .001. Tukey post hoc tests showed that participants add more hot sauce in the rifle condition (M = 23.05, SD = 6.56) than in both the water gun condition (M = 17.05, SD = 6.25) and the tennis racket condition (M = 17.25, SD= 9.31), though the water gun and tennis racket conditions did not differ from each other. This partially confirms the predictions, as only the presence of a real gun (in this case a rifle) led to higher levels of retaliation.   

Part Two (Use the SPSS DataAnalysisFIU#2HotsauceSummer.sav data set for this section).

Imagine we alter the design a bit. First, in terms of items left behind, we focus only on the rifle and the tennis racket conditions only. Second, we tell them that the confederate has either a high tolerance for spicy food or a low tolerance for spicy food. The dependent variables remain the same. Using this new design, answer the following questions.

5). What is/are the independent variable(s) in this study, and how many levels are there to each? (.5 points)

A. IV #1: Criticism Agreement, two levels (Agree versus Disagree) – IV #2: Amount of hot sauce added (0 versus 50)

B. IV #1: Item, three levels (Rifle versus Water Gun versus Tennis Racket) – IV #2: Tolerance (High versus Low)

C. IV #1: Item, two levels (Rifle versus Tennis Racket) – IV #2: Tolerance (High versus Low)

D. IV #1: Researcher, two levels (Original Researcher versus New Researcher) – IV #2: Confederate, two levels (Believes he is a researcher versus Does not believe)

6). Consider all of the possible main effects and interactions for this study. Run a 2 X 2 ANOVA (I will let YOU figure out which dependent variable to use for this!). Choose the option below that best describes the outcome. (.5 points)

A. There are two significant main effects and a significant interaction

B. There is one significant main effect, one non-significant main effect, and a significant interaction

C. There are two significant main effects but there is no significant interaction

D. There is one significant main effect, one non-significant main effect, and no significant interaction

2:

Please respond to the following questions with a minimum of 100 words (total of 500 words, but no more than 600 words total). Write the number of words used after each question.

1. What is a stereotype? Why do we stereotype?
2. What are the stereotypes of the elderly? What are the consequences of stereotyping the elderly?
3. Why do most Americans fear getting old? Why is it that many older persons do not want to be labeled “old”?
4. What are some ideas for changing current attitudes toward the elderly?
5. How do you feel about growing old yourself? What aging will be like for you?

Please answer this asap. Thanks