AP21220

Science Summary

Scientist Julie Sedivy is studying, along with many other scientists, about how the brain interprets reading on a screen versus a paper book. Immediately when I hear this I jump to Barrett's Law #8: More of something good isn't always better. Although reading too much can never negatively impact you, is there something positive we might be getting from a computer screen that we aren't getting from tangible text? Scientists have now seen in studies, though, that we get different triggers for cognitive goals based on the different stimuli.This may change for following generations as paperback becomes more and more rare and screens become more and more standard. Our triggers may just be a result of classical conditioning, with the screen being the conditioned stimuli and a sense of leisure being the conditioned response. (Mastering the World of Psychology, page 138) We see classical conditioning at work with [|this] experiment when people who saw the Apple logo worked more creatively than those who saw the IBM logo for the sole reason that Apple focuses on creativity as their business approach (G. Fitzsimons, T. Chartrand, G. Fitzsimons). Despite this information, science runs on careful criticism and requires common data (Barrett's Laws #3-4), and we have not seen nearly enough research to jump to any immediate conclusions. Psychology has come a long way and it still has a long way to go.

References:

Sedivy, Julie. "Do Screens Make Us Stupider? Time for a Rethink of Reading." //The Crux//. N.p., 17 June 2014. Web. 19 July 2014.

Wood, Samuel E., Ellen R. Green. Wood, and Denise Roberts. Boyd. // Mastering the World of Psychology //. Fourth ed. Boston: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon, 2011. Print.

Only graders edit below this line!

Grader #1: 1405897111 Grader #2: 1406073923 Grader #3: 1406074278] Grader #4: 1406126025] Grader #5: 1406131551 =Grading Form= media type="custom" key="25032734"