tag:webpub.allegheny.edu,2009:/student/c/crosbya/weblog//262 2009-05-03T18:31:44Z Movable Type 3.36 tag:webpub.allegheny.edu,2009:/student/c/crosbya/weblog//262.6225 2009-05-03T18:26:10Z 2009-05-03T18:31:44Z

"Sustained attention and social competence in typically developing preschool-aged children." Bennett-Murphy, Laurie-Rose, Brinkman, & McNamara (2007) I actually found this article by researching for a paper for a different class. I spent time with preschool children this semester through...

Sarah Raley "Sustained attention and social competence in typically developing preschool-aged children." Bennett-Murphy, Laurie-Rose, Brinkman, & McNamara (2007) I actually found this article by researching for a paper for a different class. I spent time with preschool children this semester through an internship, and for my final paper further explored the development of social competence during preschool. I came across this correlation study that was interested in whether children who had better sustained attention were more socially competent because they could attend to verbal and non-verbal cues during interaction with their peers. Bennett Murphy, Laurie-Rose, Brinkman, and McNamara (2007) used a five minute computerized visual vigilance task to measure sustained attention adapted for preschool children. The participants were forty preschool children, twenty boys and twenty girls ages 3-5 years. The vigilance task asked participants to hit the spacebar when they saw a target picture of a bird appear on the screen. Neutral stimuli were also presented, so children were asked to discriminate between the target symbol and the neutral stimuli. After the task was completed, the researchers assessed social competence by means of behavioral observation during free play according to the Howes Peer Play Scale. This scale assessed overall peer competence, gregariousness, and aggression. They also observed and evaluated object competence by assessing the use of toys during play (correct or incorrect: banging a toy truck against the ground vs. moving it along the floor). Results indicated that the more correct detections the child made during the vigilance task, the more likely he or she was to engage in social or reciprocal play; those who made the more errors of commission displayed more aggressive behavior. The results also indicated that children who were better able to detect changes in stimuli were more gregarious. Overall, the results suggested that the constructs assessed by the Howes Peer Play Scale were correlated to better performance on the computerized vigilance task that tested sustained attention. This study has implications for my own study because it described and used an measure of sustained attention and it was successfully administered to preschool children. It also has implications for the real life application of my study, because I am trying to explore a means of increasing the sustained attention of preschool children, which this study suggests is correlated with social competence of children this age. If sessions of yoga can improve the sustained attention of preschool children, it could be suggested that children engage in yoga before free play because this could improve their social competence. The results of this study also suggest that children who made more errors of commission were more aggressive during social interactions, so perhaps if yoga is associated with a decrease in errors of commission on a vigilance task, children might be less likely to be aggressive during free play after a session of yoga. This study also extensively researched sustained attention, so it provided sources for me to explore in my own study about sustained attention of preschool children. This article can be accessed through the PsycINFO database. ]]> tag:webpub.allegheny.edu,2009:/student/c/crosbya/weblog//262.6211 2009-04-28T14:51:15Z 2009-04-28T16:20:11Z

With the many ways that my senior comp research has been going I’ve been given the opportunity to look at many different research articles pertaining to literature on blogs, podcasts, and the many different subcategories that go into using...

Ashley Crosby With the many ways that my senior comp research has been going I’ve been given the opportunity to look at many different research articles pertaining to literature on blogs, podcasts, and the many different subcategories that go into using them in the classroom. I have solidified the fact that I’d like to study CMC in the forms of blogs and podcasts to determine the effects that it has on student recall of information. The details of this have not yet been solidified but as I was looking further into the research and exploring the different methods I could use, I decided it might be pretty cool to make the design 2 x 2 mixed and include gender as a second variable. This is all still up in the air; however, with the background provided by Caspi, Chaujut, and Saporta it seems like it could be something interesting to look at. ]]> There are a lot of great ideas that I was able to distinguish through this study. For further information on this study it can be searched by: Caspi, A., Chajut, E., & Saporta, K. (2008). Participation in class and in online discussions: Gender differences. Computers & Education, 50(3), 718-724. ]]> tag:webpub.allegheny.edu,2009:/student/c/crosbya/weblog//262.6198 2009-04-24T20:17:43Z 2009-04-25T00:24:08Z

Having, at least for the time being, seemingly depleted the PsycInfo database of all articles that relate to my senior research topic, I decided to go in a slightly different direction for finding an article to write about for this,...

Dan Winston Verbal Learning as a Function of Grammatical Structure by Sheela Singh, from way back in our bicentennial year of 1976. This study provided me with some strong connections between my research topic and my hopeful career field.]]> Psycho-lingua, 6(1 & 2), 1-6.]]> tag:webpub.allegheny.edu,2009:/student/c/crosbya/weblog//262.6177 2009-04-16T14:20:29Z 2009-04-16T17:04:31Z

There are times when I really struggle with just going along with what Mark Bauerlein claims in the “The Betrayal of the Mentors” in his book, The Dumbest Generation. Bauerlein throws so many quotes, other people’s opinions, and even just...

Ashley Crosby The Dumbest Generation. Bauerlein throws so many quotes, other people’s opinions, and even just a ton of summaries all throughout his book. This has been a huge complication for me because I feel like it makes it difficult for me to understand exactly what he thinks when his claims are all through everyone else’s opinions that he just simply agrees with. Since this is the last chapter we’ll be discussing in class, I guess it’s fair to say that there have been many times that I get lost in all of the statistics, quotes, and summaries. It is hard for me many times to pick his claim out of everything he is trying to say. ]]> Bauerlein goes on a huge rant about a sub-cohort of people, which in the Time magazine are called “Twixters”. While I do not quite meet this “Twixter” age cut off (22-30 years old), I can’t help but want to defend my friends who are apart of this supposed sub-cohort. Claims made from the magazine are these young people “pass through a series of service jobs…move back home with their parents or into a house or large apartment with several Twixter peers…engage in serial dating.” Bauerlein says books don’t matter at all to them and their education really has done nothing for their future (172). I struggle believing that this is the first time people have ever been lazy throughout parts of their life, why does this cohort take the brunt of it? What is so different about them that make them deserve these accusations and title? How can generalizations such as this be made? It seems as though releasing articles like this and republishing its findings in books would simply make students slump into this stereotype just because everyone else already believes it. It would almost give this generation of young adults an excuse to be part of their norm. On another note, I was really upset by the reports that Bauerlein gives about students and their professors. I have a very hard time believing that so many students NEVER have talked to their professors outside of classes. On page 187, he notes studies; however, never actually gives the colleges or universities that the students were tested at. I know there are probably some very large universities that would make it difficult to talk to professors, but not all schools are like that. Coming from Allegheny College, once again I know that we have a fairly large amount of students who are interested in discussing literature or class with professors so it is hard for me to read such findings, let alone believe that the numbers could be so high. View image I know this cartoon is a little ridiculous but I thought it was funny. Maybe other schools do have professors such as this guy who don't want to be at office hours. If professors don't want to be talking to students then what would make students want to talk to them? So I know the cartoon is a bit ridiculous but at Allegheny our professors are all (from what I've encountered) very happy to hold office hours and to talk to students. So at the very least this cartoon shows us a different perspective, maybe instead of blaming the students for not being interested in learning, it could have something to do with their professors not wanting to teach outside of the class. A bit far fetched I know, but I think a lot of student engagement comes from comfortable settings. ]]> tag:webpub.allegheny.edu,2009:/student/c/crosbya/weblog//262.6176 2009-04-16T01:53:36Z 2009-04-16T02:21:39Z

I must tangent on this chapter. The idea of coddling children/people for the sake of self-esteem is a personal peeve of mine. My tangent is going to agree with Baurlein. I'm not going to suggest that we never tell...

Sarah Raley I must tangent on this chapter. The idea of coddling children/people for the sake of self-esteem is a personal peeve of mine. My tangent is going to agree with Baurlein. I'm not going to suggest that we never tell children/college students that they do a good job...when they actually do. But Stupnisky et al. (2007) suggests that self-esteem is one of the most researched topics in psychology. This vast storehouse of knowledge about it has yielded little in the academic impact of self-esteem on academic achievement. "'We need to stop endlessly repeating, "You're special," and having children repeat that back. Kids are self-centered enough already." (pg. 192) According to Piaget, children are supposed to grow out of egocentrism at the end of preschool (Gjerde, Block, & Block, 1986). We don't need to bring it back superficially later in life. ]]> article (Perhaps to add credence to the argument of Baurlein, the article is a peer reviewed study that I retrieved from the PsycINFO database) by Stupnisky, Renaud, Perry, Ruthig, Haynes, and Clifton (2007) that suggested self-esteem is actually a product of college student academic achievement, not the other way around. Furthermore, Stupnisky et al. (2007) purported that perceived control is a better predictor of first year college student GPA than self-esteem. An example of the effect of perceived control in academic achievement would be when a first year college student, presented with the crazy new environment conceptualizes the new world as "low control," and therefore blames the first failure on an exam on the nutty professor or the ridiculously difficult course material, instead of internalizing the responsibility. This makes sense to me. They further suggest that this attribution to uncontrollable circumstances would spiral the student into apathy and depression (in some sense). I feel like I've observed or known some students who fall into this, even myself at times. I would like to explore further if this is a new development in our culture since the boom of people going to college or if it is a natural development in life. The concept relates very well with the idea of locus of control, which determines whether an individual attributes events to internal or external causes. On a slightly different topic... I am paying for college because I expect to be educated by people and resources that I recognize as having more experience and knowledge than I do. I could stay home for free and chat online with my peers or blog if all I wanted to do was brainstorm with people on the same intellectual level as myself. It doesn't hurt my self-esteem if professors tell me to reconsider what I think I know or present something completely different. That's why I'm here--to learn from the best. Once I've collected the information I'm paying for, I'll explore on my own based on that previous knowledge: the premise and philosophy of science, never start at the beginning if you've got something to base it on. So...go...Baurlein. But I do find it hard to believe that some college classes are entirely student dominated. I would expect that the classes at least have some faculty involvement. I have never encountered a professor who makes me think I know more than him or her and I would hope not too many of them exist...]]> tag:webpub.allegheny.edu,2009:/student/c/crosbya/weblog//262.6174 2009-04-15T03:39:04Z 2009-04-15T05:23:25Z

It seems as though every chapter I read in Mark Bauerlein's book, The Dumbest Generation, follows the same pattern, as far as my reactions to it and my feelings about it. He usually makes some pretty interesting points with some...

Dan Winston The Dumbest Generation, follows the same pattern, as far as my reactions to it and my feelings about it. He usually makes some pretty interesting points with some at least moderately convincing arguments. He also, though, always makes arguments that just rub me the wrong way, and backs them up with further arguments that are flawed or seem ludicrous to me. But I guess that's the nature of reading highly biased literature of any sort, whether you agree with the author's main premise or not. Chapter five was no exception.]]> A Doll's House without an understanding of Shakespeare? I have no doubt that Andy Warhol studied Rembrandt, that Alexander Grahm Bell was familiar with Leonardi Da Vinci, or that Spielberg venerated De Mille. And because I'm both a freak and a nerd, I know that Bob Dylan tried to emulate Woody Guthrie, that Frank Miller holds Will Eisner as the golden standard of sequential storytelling, and that there's hardly a cartoon writer alive that doesn't admire and study the work of Chuck Jones, Tex Avery, and Matt Groening. There, I think I've fulfilled my name-dropping quota for the next year or so. My point is that you need to know the norms and the rules and the traditions in order to break them or transcend them in any original way. Where I disagree with Bauerlein's argument, however, begins to really take shape on pages 191 through 192. At that point in the chapter he begins to argue that teens and "twixters" need a firm understanding of history and Tradition in order to make sense of themselves, their lives, and their time period. Instead, all they do is read pop-literature and stuff on the Internet. My first question to pose to the class: Am I the only one who gets a craving for a candy bar whenever Bauerlein uses the word "twixter?" My second question: Is contemporary literature really that damaging to one's understanding of one's contemporary self, surroundings, and peers? If the whole objective is gaining an education of the present society and getting a firm grasp on one's own personal realities, it seems to me that being exposed to works of literature, art, music, philosophy, et cetera that were written during and about the time in question could only help develop that knowledge. Even using Bauerlein's examples against his own argument, surely the artists, writers, thinkers, and activists in the 1960s were inspired by their contemporaries, who helped them understand the situation that both they and the world were in. Dylan read Ginsberg, Lennon and McCartney listened to the Rolling Stones, and all the activists familiarized themselves with the ways of Kennedy, King, Malcolm X, and others. There I go again, though. Is it possible to form a strong, stable, and complete understanding of oneself and one's times through contemporary work alone? Bauerlein clearly says "no," but I'm not so quick to conclude one way or the other. Furthermore, is the stuff being written now (mostly on the Internet) by our contemporaries about our present lives and circumstances sufficiently different from the stuff written in and about the Sixties that we can argue that the same rules don't apply today? Has technology's democratization of language and publishability made the works of our contemporaries less useful for self-exploration and greater understanding than those of yesteryear? I'll make my next point less verbose, since I feel like I've written a bit much already. On page 188, Bauerlein comes to the conclusion that classes that are centered on the student (as opposed to a lecture-style class, where the professor/teacher is the center of attention and focus) result in less motivation and less interest. I ask you to think about this, and share what you come up with in class... If you'll allow me to draw a parallel between Bauerlein's instructor-oriented classes and lecture class like, say, Psych206; and then another parallel between his student-centered classes and a class like our Junior Sem. Think of all of the lecture classes you've taken at Allegheny, and then think of all of the seminar, discussion-based classes you've had. Which ones do you remember more fondly? And, using one of Bauerlein's own measures, which ones did you skip more frequently?]]> tag:webpub.allegheny.edu,2009:/student/c/crosbya/weblog//262.6136 2009-04-06T23:07:10Z 2009-04-06T23:19:42Z

Mark Bauerlein’s chapter, “The New Bibliophobes” of The Dumbest Generation has really gotten me thinking about my own reading habits and how they’ve changed from my high school years to my current college years. When I was in high school...

Ashley Crosby The Dumbest Generation has really gotten me thinking about my own reading habits and how they’ve changed from my high school years to my current college years. When I was in high school I was one of those 77% of students who spent three hours or less per week on “personal reading”. I also was most weeks probably not included in the 2% of students who exceeded 10 hours when it came to “Reading/studying for a class”. Looking back on high school, I took difficult classes; however, I figured out what I needed to do to get good grades and that’s all I did. I rarely read for pleasure, studied extra for the sake of learning, or pushed myself because at my high school I simply did not need to. The only pleasure reading I can recall was during those beautiful Easter vacations that I spent on the beach in Florida. Yes, I was a beach reader and since I grew up in a similar climate to Meadville, I guess it caused my pleasure reading to struggle. ]]> Finally, I would just briefly like to comment on Bauerlein’s use of statistics. I think it is great to have these statistics that support each of the points made in the book; however, sometimes it gets difficult to follow exactly what the point is with all the statistics. Does anyone else feel the book could be seen as a little heavy on the statistics? ]]> tag:webpub.allegheny.edu,2009:/student/c/crosbya/weblog//262.6131 2009-04-06T02:17:58Z 2009-04-06T02:21:24Z

After reading the second chapter of The Dumbest Generation, I went in search of how much high school students read for class in a given year. I know that personally, I would LOVE to read for pleasure, but I...

Sarah Raley After reading the second chapter of The Dumbest Generation, I went in search of how much high school students read for class in a given year. I know that personally, I would LOVE to read for pleasure, but I am too busy reading text for class and trying to give my eyes a break once in a while to be able to devour a delicious piece of fiction. But one would think that any reading in general would add reading skill and knowledge, so are high school and college students even reading out of necessity? I came across a blog by high school literature teachers. One entry was particularly interesting: "I had a colleague who used to teach a novel a week in her AP Literature class - I asked her how the kids could possibly keep up with that pace. She told me that they were highly motivated. Then I asked her if she quizzed her students to see if they were really doing the reading. She then told me that the discussions and essays were enough to show that they were doing the reading. I finally convinced her to give a pop quiz. When she did - she discovered that not one student in her entire class had actually done the reading." -Joseph Scotese This struck a chord with me because I took an AP literature course my senior year of high school and was told by most of my peers that I was an over-achiever because I actually read the books we were assigned...spark notes was the "cool" and normal thing to do. Because I did not have time to read books of my choice, I instead squeezed every ounce of enjoyment I could out of Crime and Punishment and Paradise Lost (which I really did enjoy) that were assigned by the teacher. I am actually hearing the snickers even from my fellow Junior Seminar classmates to whom I am admitting this. I can also see how my teacher could have thought that we were all actually reading, because a select few of my classmates and I did most of the responding to his discussion questions. I really want to disagree with Bauerlein that we are the dumbest generation. But I am wondering how much I and my fellow college classmates are really reading the books and articles we are assigned for class, much less for pleasure. Camille and I were discussing this chapter before I started this blog and would like to propose an activity for the class. This is our challenge to you, classmates: Record how many pages you were assigned to read in the past week, due last Monday through tomorrow (Monday). Then also record how many of the pages of each assignment you read in entirety. Separately, how many pages you "skimmed" and also separately, how many pages you took notes on while reading. In class we would like to discuss how much you feel you learn from reading assignments versus having lectures or discussions in class about the topics. Do you feel you could do well on a pop quiz on the readings for our Junior Seminar class? ]]> tag:webpub.allegheny.edu,2009:/student/c/crosbya/weblog//262.6124 2009-04-04T17:15:00Z 2009-04-04T18:33:02Z

I once saw a stand-up comedian on Comedy Central (I happened to be taking a break from reading Teen Vogue, listening to Britney, and playing Age of Empires II) who talked about arguing with his girlfriend. He relayed how, after...

Dan Winston I once saw a stand-up comedian on Comedy Central (I happened to be taking a break from reading Teen Vogue, listening to Britney, and playing Age of Empires II) who talked about arguing with his girlfriend. He relayed how, after an argument had been going on for a while, she would start just throwing any random insult and indignity at him to try to win, completely ignoring the topic being discussed. While arguing about why he never hadn't done the dishes in a week, for example, she would suddenly start attacking his sexual potency. Bauerlein kind of strikes me as a similar sort of cat. What, you don't agree with me that college freshman are less academically equipped now than they ever have been? Fine! I'll just start arguing about Harry Potter! Oh, you don't know who the King of Sweden was in 1658? Well, graphic novels aren't really books, anyway. In the second chapter of his book The Dumbest Generation, Mark Bauerlein argues mercilessly his point that reading isn't cool anymore, so no one in the current generation of teens and young adults does it anymore. Several problems arise from this. Where, precisely, do we get the impression that reading isn't as cool as it used to be, or that people who enjoy reading, for pleasure or for an assignment, are invariably labelled as uncool? Bauerlein seems to make all of his vast generalizations about this "trend" from random encounters with lone individuals, such as those who shout out that books aren't important anymore during a lecture he's giving. When you think about it, though, be honest: who among us wouldn't be highly tempted to heckle this guy if he were to stand in front of a large group of us and proceed to tell us how hopelessly stupid and apathetic we've all become? If it'd produce a laugh or two among our peers, why not? And, forgive me for not citing statistical data from the 1950s to back up this assumption, but it seems to me that obnoxious heckling of a speaker isn't something that our generation of college students invented. Nay, it seems pretty archetypal to me. For me, pages 56 and 57 are where Bauerlein's argument just got absurd. In order to make the point that today's young people don't care about reading and books in the same way that past generations did, he cites four highly exceptional and unique individuals from the past 200 years and describes their love for the written word. I don't really think that there is as big of a problem or difference as he likes to say there is. Even if I did, though, lining up the literary and intellectual capacities and endeavours of today's average high school student alongside those of W. E. B. Du Bois, Frederick Douglass, John Stuart Mill, and Walt Whitman is just ridiculous. Each one of them lived and died at least over a century ago, and we remember these four for their being above and beyond exceptional. What about the average grammar school or university student from 1806? Are not all of the modern-day statistics that Bauerlein cites representations of the average high school student or the average college freshman? Surely if you lined up modern society's brilliant minds with those of the past, you'd find some similar traits. And if Du Bois, Douglass, Mill, and Whitman had had the ability, would they not have propped their feet up on the coffee table and watched the latest Tom Hanks film or the season premiere of South Park? Would they not have checked out the Wikipedia page on Doctor Octopus or searched YouTube for a video of a cat singing Twinkle, Twinkle, Little Star? We do these activities now because we're able and it's enjoyable. Why do you think the great minds of the past read Aristotle? I'm not saying that no one nowadays does that either. We just do other things in addition. So Mr. Bauerlein, why is your book written on stark white paper and printed in manufactured black ink, with every individual letter appearing exactly the same every time it comes up in a sentence? I only ask because it seems a shame that no one scrawls out writings onto scrolls of parchment by hand anymore. I bet I can find statistics showing a sharp decline in the number of cross-country runners who convey messages that they commit to memory, too. I'd just Google it.]]> tag:webpub.allegheny.edu,2009:/student/c/crosbya/weblog//262.6089 2009-03-31T16:51:46Z 2009-04-23T00:06:30Z

I have been working really hard on trying to figure out how to fit all of my information together and narrow down my topic. I never realized how difficult it is to be "picky" with which journal entries will be...

Ashley Crosby Blogging in the Classroom: A Preliminary Exploration of Student Attitudes and Impact on Comprehension. This paper has really helped me in a way figure out which direction I want to go with my project and has given me more hope--There are articles out there for me!! :-) ]]> This study specifically breaks up different parts of blogging to find out which parts students find the most useful. This gives me a better grasp on what I have to do for my project. I struggled at first with figuring out what it is I really want to study and how to go about doing so. This study is very specific when considering which parts of blogging helps students more. While it just takes students opinions on the matters, it still is a good model for my own project. Specifically the study gives students the options of which helps educate the students most: writing the blog, reading others’ blogs, or reading comments placed on their own blogs. Being specific like Ellison and Wu is something that I need to do when looking at the variables of my study. The other aspect of this study which is covered is looking in general at feedback given by peers. With this study I took a specifically close look at their methods section. This type of method would be difficult if not impossible for me to do. The study was set up within a class in which the students had registered for. For my particular study I will be taking volunteers from different introductory classes; however, the way in which the Ellison/Wu study gave different types of assignments and compared them intrigued me. Ellison and Wu used a survey to gather some information from their students, which I think would be very helpful in my study as well. They collected standard demographic information, student perceptions of the assignments on helpfulness and the general topic, and finally they obtained comprehension and behavior results. All of these topics seem to be important and would be a possible addition to the methods of my study. This experiment focusing on the students perceptions of how these different aspects of blogging help them within a classroom is very useful when considering my project. I am looking to find some more articles similar to this so that I can find a better base for reasons why my study needs to be done. Right now I seem to have very broad sources of background information which makes it difficult to narrow down my study. Finding sources such as this one and others like it will help my project, especially since I have decided I would like to look specifically at blogging and its relationship to students’ comprehension of information, specifically as was done in Ellison and Wu’s paper. Citation: Ellison, N. B., & Wu, Y. (2008). Blogging in the classroom: A preliminary exploration of student attitudes and impact on comprehension. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 17(1), 99-122. ]]> tag:webpub.allegheny.edu,2009:/student/c/crosbya/weblog//262.6080 2009-03-30T20:15:46Z 2009-03-31T03:12:29Z

My past two Exploring the Field entries have focused mostly on the study of grammar in written communication and the effects that grammaticality has on the impressions formed by the readers of the author. During my research, though, I came...

Dan Winston Exploring the Field entries have focused mostly on the study of grammar in written communication and the effects that grammaticality has on the impressions formed by the readers of the author. During my research, though, I came across several pieces of research that had little or nothing to do with grammar but were still quite relevant to the topic I'm currently pursuing for my senior comp. One such study was conducted by N. Epley and J. Kruger and was published in 2005, and was entitled When what you type isn't what they read: The perseverance of stereotypes and expectancies over e-mail. I thought I'd give an article that wasn't related to grammar mechanics a chance to shine on my blog.]]> When the participants, who consisted of 60 college undergraduates, came to the experiment, they were either designated as interviewers or interviewees. This was done at random, except that all of the interviewees were male so that their gender would match that of the pre-designed profiles that were given to the interviewers. The interviewers each went to a private area and were asked to fill out a questionnaire that asked for such information as GPA, major, and greatest high school achievement. Their picture was also taken with a digital camera by one of the researchers. The answers were then collected by the researcher, and the interviewers were given either of two fake profiles that had been pre-designed by the researchers. One of the profiles was meant to create the impression of a person of high intelligence, and pictured a well-dressed Asian-American male whose profile listed a 3.85 GPA, a Physics/Philosophy double major, and being valedictorian of his high school class. The other fake profile was meant to create the impression of a person of low intelligence, and pictured a White male wearing a torn Metallica T-shirt whose profile listed a 2.30 GPA, a Hotel Administration major, and being voted most valuable player on his high school football team. The participants were not told, however, that these were fake profiles, and were given the impression that this was the person whom they would interview. Therefore, deception was the only reason that the interviewers filled out questionnaires with their own information and had their own pictures taken. Each of the interviewers was then assigned to either the telephone or e-mail interview condition. They each were given a list of questions to ask the interviewee and conducted an interview with one of the other participants whose real identity was kept secret. The answers provided by the interviewees in the telephone condition were audio recorded, written down verbatim, and used as the responses to the interviewers' questions in the e-mail condition. This assured that the medium and the inherent limitations or benefits therein were the only elements of the variable being manipulated, not the words themselves. After the interview was finished, the interviewers rated the intelligence and impressions of their respective interviewees. The data revealed that there was no significant difference between the interviewers' post-interview impressions of the interviewees in the telephone condition. There was, however, a significant difference between the interviewers' impressions of each fake interviewee profile in the e-mail condition. In other words, the interviewers maintained their stereotyped impressions of the interviewees when communicating over e-mail, but rated both the intelligent and the unintelligent fake interviewees the same when they communicated over the telephone. The medium of communication strongly and signficantly affected whether or not stereotypes were maintained. This was an impressive study because of its ecological validity and the power of the variables and measurements. The findings are relevant to situations such as job interviews or college applications, because they suggest that unfortunate and even "bogus impressions" of a person can be broken down if later communication allows for vocal inflections. One might take a logical step or two and hypothesize that stereotypes would be even more prone to rejection if the interviewer could see the other person as well as hear them, such as in video-mediated or face-to-face communication. It is in precisely this way that this particular study is both important and relevant to my senior research project. I also hope to implement a similar procedure in my own experiment. I to will attempt to deceive the participants to the true nature of the study and the true variables being measured. I hope to use the same idea of making my confederates appear to the participants as just other participants, and the questions that I will design and prepare look as though they have really been written by the confederate participant. I will then observe and measure the effects of each level of the independent variable on the subsequent face-to-face conversation. The Epley and Kruger experiment also brings up the important idea that the pieces of communication (in the case of my experiment, the written questions) must be exactly the same across all possible variables but the one being manipulated. Therefore I will also make sure that all of my prepared questions are exactly the same in terms of wording, order, and all other characteristics except grammatical correctness. The article can be accessed through PsycInfo. Epley, N., & Kruger, J. (2005). When what you type isn’t what they read: The perseverance of stereotypes and expectancies over e-mail. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41(4), 414-422.]]> tag:webpub.allegheny.edu,2009:/student/c/crosbya/weblog//262.6019 2009-03-12T01:56:57Z 2009-03-12T02:07:47Z

Every chapter of David Crystal’s txtng the gr8 db8 is packed with tons of information presenting both sides of the “gr8 db8” over txtng. Personally, I enjoy the fact that Crystal seems to be in favor of texting. The...

Ashley Crosby Every chapter of David Crystal’s txtng the gr8 db8 is packed with tons of information presenting both sides of the “gr8 db8” over txtng. Personally, I enjoy the fact that Crystal seems to be in favor of texting. The first thing that stuck out to me in Chapter 7 was his introduction of how different languages are used in texting and the adaptations they must make. The languages that have been around for practically forever HAVE to adapt to technology. This point was super cool to me simply because I am so in favor of technology. He is setting the stage to show us that English is not the only language adapting on account of advances in technology and he follows this point the whole way through to the end of the book. The main focus, however, of Chapter 7 is the similarities (and differences) that occur in text messaging among different languages. ]]> Another idea that caught my eye was how “small” English words actually are, Crystal states that the languages has “few long words in everyday use”. To contrast the shortness of English, Malayalam and Inuit words are approximately 10 and 14 characters long respectively. Later (in Chapter 8) Crystal simply states that not as many English speaking texters even abbreviate words, this could be caused by the shortness of the words to begin with. In that same chapter Crystal clearly states that this idea of overusing abbreviations along with texting becoming a new language is clearly a myth. I feel like much of Chapter 8 was a “Myth Busters” episode. I fully agree with Crystal on his claims that textese is not forming a new language and that it is simply a variety of the already formed language. I am curious, out of our small class, who would side with texting being a variety of language and who would side with texting being its own new language? I feel like Crystal heavily supports the idea that texting is just another variety of the language already created; however, I wonder, is this because I only pick up on what I want to from his reading? …others opinions…? It seems so simple to believe that all of these shortenings of words, misspellings, and other declines in writing started many years ago, but why are people pegging it on text messaging? Since I feel so strongly and honestly love the convenience of text messaging it makes complete sense that I have really enjoyed Crystal’s book. It was not until the end of Chapater 8 though that I even found my favorite paragraph, (I’m not sure if I’ve ever had “favorite paragraphs” of books before. :) ) Regardless it is the last paragraph on page 173 and continues to page 174. Crystal talks about all the reasons why people really should not like text messaging on cellular phones; however, he does so in a humorous tone which is very entertaining. Everything he says about the new form of communication is absolutely correct; so why do we love it so much? ]]> tag:webpub.allegheny.edu,2009:/student/c/crosbya/weblog//262.6002 2009-03-11T03:15:45Z 2009-03-11T03:18:56Z

Crystal had a number of really interesting thoughts in Chapters 7 and 8 of Txtng: the gr8 db8, one even relating to my interest in texting in other languages. However, I found that the relationship between texting and development...

Sarah Raley Crystal had a number of really interesting thoughts in Chapters 7 and 8 of Txtng: the gr8 db8, one even relating to my interest in texting in other languages. However, I found that the relationship between texting and development of formal language skills in adolescence caught my attention. Crystal suggests, as we also discussed in class, that it takes a firm grasp on the formal conventions of a language to be able to play with it in text. He lends evidence to this idea by describing recent studies on the effects of texting on language skills of adolescents. Crystal quotes recent studies of reading and vocabulary ability of pre-teen students as finding, "that the younger the children when they received their first phone, the higher their scores." I found this quote particularly intriguing because my gut reaction to this statement was that it didn't seem right. I would have thought that it would have been more beneficial to have had a longer time to develop conventional formal language skills before being exposed to a medium with which to play with the language. However, Crystal is suggesting that the ability to play with the language suggests that these students are adept at language skills in the first place and this is evidenced by their texting behaviors. He also suggests that more research should be done with students of varying aptitude levels to see if these results are the same with other students. Was it the extra practice and the intellectually stimulating task of playing with language that enhanced these students' language skills, and if so, would this be beneficial to students of all aptitude levels? Should we be encouraging younger and younger students, or students struggling with language skills to text more? Crystal suggests that as long as teachers, parents, and researchers can teach children the difference between when it is appropriate to use texting language and when it is not, every opportunity to write and communicate is beneficial to the development of formal language skills, especially in the ability to summarize and be concise. However, he does describe a concern with the structure of messages in texts as being simple and short statements and that this method of communication impedes the ability to make detailed descriptions and explanations in formal writing. Which should be valued more in formal writing, conciseness or detail? Technically it depends on the style and field of writing, but in general, are we sacrificing the development of eloquence for effective summary by learning texting as a variety of language, and if so, is this a good thing? ]]> tag:webpub.allegheny.edu,2009:/student/c/crosbya/weblog//262.6003 2009-03-11T02:55:05Z 2009-03-11T04:01:59Z

In the eighth and final chapter of his book, txtng: the gr8 db8, David Crystal gives the reader an array of examples of criticism of and support for (mostly criticism) text messaging from modern society. According to him, people from...

Dan Winston txtng: the gr8 db8, David Crystal gives the reader an array of examples of criticism of and support for (mostly criticism) text messaging from modern society. According to him, people from all over and from all different fields have pointed their prophetic finger at the mobile phone, blaming it and its texting functions for many of the world's linguistic woes. Even after one manages to get through Crystal's obviously and heavily biased arguments, though, the reader sees him more or less effectively refute all of these accusations with realitive ease and simplicity. There is one point that he brought up, however, that at first just piqued my interest, but then began to absorb more and more of my attention and thought.]]> textese abbreviations an individual used in an ordinary text message and the individual's scores on reading and vocabulary tests. In other words, students who spoke less "conventionally" (one might say more creatively) via text messages were better readers and spellers and had larger vocabularies. Moreover, the study found that, the younger a child had been when he or she received his or her first cell phone, the higher his or her scores. Crystal argues that these results are to be expected. His argument makes sense. The more comfortable, well-versed, and learned one is with a language, the more one is capable of playing around with it in a particular medium. One could easily infer that those same children who used high amounts of "textese" and had high linguistic scores also made more plays on words in casual conversation or more easily picked up on linguistic games or cues while reading or speaking. I don't disagree with Crystal on this point. I was, however, struck by the words he chose to use when explaining this phenomenon. He says, "Children could not be good at texting if they had not already developed considerable literacy awareness. Before you can write abbreviated forms effectively and play with them, you need to have a sense of how the sounds of your language relate to the letters" [emphasis mine]. Crystal is clearly indicating that, at least in the case of these pre-teens, firm linguistic skills were set in place and mastered prior to the onset of texting. This reminded me of a point that he brought up several times earlier in the book. He makes the statement again and again that every generation has new technology that changes or revolutionizes language in some way. At the same time, every generation has "doomsayers" who blame these innovations on the linguistic problems of the day and prophesize the ultimate destruction of language. Keeping in mind this point and the point brought up by Crystal in regards to the pre-teen study, I pose a question or two. Because firmly established linguistic ability probably preceded the students' creative use of texting, what will be the case for the first generation to be born learning the texting language from the very start, right alongside more traditional, conventional language skills? Obviously no studies have yet been reported on this idea, because that generation is either not yet alive or it is not able to be tested. The time is drawing ever closer, though, when we'll have a viable population for such a study. Will it be just like children who are raised bi-lingual, and they will just learn to distinguish when to use either? Will the languages supplement one another still, as was demonstrated with the abovementioned study? Is there a possibility that that nifty correlation between linguistic abilities will be lost if both languages (if you'll allow me to refer to textese as a language...some people sure won't) are learned simultaneously? Could the finding that, the earlier the students began using text messages, the higher their language ability scores were, provide some evidence to one answer or another?]]> tag:webpub.allegheny.edu,2009:/student/c/crosbya/weblog//262.5992 2009-03-09T03:40:06Z 2009-03-09T03:40:48Z

The study I read for my March entry of Exploring the Field was by Silverstein and Allison (1994), "The comparative efficacy of antecedent exercise and methylphenidate: a single-case randomized trial." This was especially interesting to me because the participant...

Sarah Raley The study I read for my March entry of Exploring the Field was by Silverstein and Allison (1994), "The comparative efficacy of antecedent exercise and methylphenidate: a single-case randomized trial." This was especially interesting to me because the participant was a preschool child and if I had the ability to administer medication or to select a sample of medicated children, I would be especially interested in furthering this exact study with a much larger sample of children in a typical rather than special education classroom. This study is dated by comparison to much of the other research I have come across on this subject and discourages my hypothesis that antecedent exercise will reduce disruptive behavior, but is very important because (as it admits) it is one of very few studies that explore this topic. It also provides a methodology that would be easy to replicate without medication, and suggests a measure of hyperactivity that I might consider for my own project. The participant was a 3-year-old African American boy who had been diagnosed with ADHD according to the DSM-III. The participant received all three conditions of 10mg of methylphenidate once a day plus attention placebo, antecedent exercise, which entailed 20 minutes of jogging, plus medication placebo, and the attention placebo plus medication placebo condition. Researchers describe the lasting effects of the medication as 4 hour after administration and the rigorous exercise as 24 hours, so the procedures for the conditions were alternated each day. The Conners' Abbreviated Symptom Questionnaire was used to measure hyperactive behavior. The results indicated that antecedent exercise was associated with the most hyperactivity, the placebo with less, and the medication with the least. Researchers suggest the implication of research of this topic will become even more important as children are diagnosed with ADHD at younger ages, specifically, during preschool. The perspective of this study seems to indicate that more treatments need to be developed because there are more preschool children that will be diagnosed and need this treatment, which is slightly counter to the idea of many of my other studies. Other studies suggest that behavior considered symptoms of ADHD in elementary school children are normal in preschool children because they have not yet physically developed the brain area that controls impulses so it is questionable to diagnose preschool children with a disorder. I acquired this article through the Illiad service, but its abstract may be found in the PsycINFO database.]]>