My interest in the subject of whether the U.S. is trying to stop illegal immigration began when I read Hanson's 2006 article about Mexican migration. It seemed to me that the United States didn't really want to stop illegal immigration. They slowed it down on one hand to appease one group of constituents but gave it a free pass with the other hand to appease the manufacturing, farmers, and retailers. Although giving lip service to stopping the flow of illegals the US policy seemed to be primarily focused on stopping illegal contraband such as drugs. However, that journal article seems to not reflect 2009 policies. It appears that within the last year or so, U.S. policy on illegal immigration has begun to move beyond the search for contraband to a serious attempt at reducing the illegal population in the United States. The first part of this article will briefly outline the 2006 research of Hanson and will be followed by government documentation of their attempts to enforce immigration laws. The cost to cross the border is the expense of physically crossing, the threat of being caught, the loss of social networks, the expense of setting up a new home on the other side, and the expense if you are later deported and have to start over. To stop illegal immigration the cost of migrating must exceed the profit of migrating (Hanson, 2006). The expense of hiring a coyote to help the crossing will keep out the most economically distressed Mexicans, but is not insurmountable for most and will be repaid within 13 weeks of steady employment in the United States. The cost of being caught is that you will have to start over after the bus drops you off on the other side of the border as their is no other penalty if you willingly leave. There are networks in the United States consisting of Mexicans from a particular area who help new illegals to settle into their new community and to find a job. This mitigates the loss of social networks and expense of setting up a new home. The jobs will be there because in 2004 the ICE department did not assess the $5000 fine against any business employing illegals and it is common to overlook the huge numbers of illegals working the harvest. And, finally, it is US Federal policy (not by written decree but by actions) to allocate resources to guarding the border and not to removing existing illegals who are further buoyed by the likely and commonly known expectation that if they can hang on long enough the US will give them amnesty. Therefore, the only amazing thing is that moving to the United States is not more common than it already is (Hanson, 2006). Border Security As a result of an Immigration and Border Security Action Directive from Secretary Napolitano in January 2009, the DHS plans to put more personnel on border security and improve intelligence capability and coordination with local and Mexican authorities for the purpose of cracking down on drug smuggling (Torres, 2009). In 2006, Border Enforcement Security Task Forces (BEST) were formed which are led by ICE but include members from: - CBP (Customs & Border Protection) - USCG (U.S. Coast Guard) - DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis (Department of Homeland Security) - DEA (Drug Enforcement Administration) - ATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, & Explosives) - FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation) - U.S. Attorneys Offices - State & Local Law Enforcement Agencies - Mexican representatives and law enforcement agencies These teams have been successful in catching Mexican fugitives and gangs; and confiscating drugs, currency and vehicles (Torres, 2009). However, they are focused on stopping contraband and not illegal immigration. U.S. Interior Strategy - Employers In April 2009, a new Worksite Enforcement Strategy was released which plans to use penalties, asset seizures, and administrative audits to discourage employers from hiring illegals. This new strategy focuses on stopping illegal immigration by removing the jobs (Torres, 2009). After determining that the most efficient method of auditing businesses use of illegal labor was to review the I-9 (document which businesses must provide for each employee documenting their legal status to work in the U.S.), ICE reports that the new Worksite Enforcement Strategy has netted the following since April 30, 2009 (ICE News Release 2009): Enforcement 2008 2009 Business debarred 0 45 Individuals debarred 1 47 Notices of Intent to Fine (NIF) 32 NIFs $2,355,330 142 NIFs $15,865,181 Final Orders 8 orders $196,523 45 orders $798,179 Cases Initiated 605 1,897 I-9 Form Inspections 503 1,069 U.S. Interior Strategy - Deportation Current ICE policy promotes the identification and deportation of criminals, but puts roadblocks in the way of law enforcement agents who are trying to remove illegals who have not committed major crimes. Deportation of illegals from the U.S. interior by ICE consists of two primary methods: identification of criminals and interrogation of suspected illegals. Identification of criminals that are currently being detained in civilian jails is the purpose of the Secure Communities Program and is a top priority for ICE (Torres, 2009). Deportation of illegals residing in the U.S. is more problematic and has come under fire by community organizations who worry about racial profiling (Stana, 2009). If interrogated at the border then the burden to prove their legality is upon the suspected illegal; However, If interrogated in the interior U.S. then the burden of proof rests on the ICE official. If a suspect refuses to speak and the agent does not have "reasonable suspicion" about the suspect's legality then the suspect must be released (Mead, 2008). The 287(g) program allows state and local law enforcement officers to perform immigration enforcement duties; however, the program is currently being revised to discourage law officers from using the program to pick up illegals who are not guilty of major crimes (Stana, 2009)(Riley, 2009). The government's decision to enforce laws prohibiting hiring of illegals will if carried out uniformly and consistently remove one of the primary reasons that Mexicans immigrate to the United States. However, putting the burden of proof on the agent and not encouraging the deportation of all illegals seems to indicate a lack of resolve to solve the illegal immigration program or perhaps simply a bending to the political winds. References Hanson, G. H. (2006). Illegal migration from Mexico to the United States. Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Dec., 2006), pp. 1039-1043. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30032389 Accessed: 20/11/2009 18:19 ICE News Release (2009). ICE Assistant Secretary John Morton announces 1,000 new workplace audits to hold employers accountable for their hiring practices. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement website, 19 Nov 2009. Retrieved on 23 Nov 2009 from http://www.ice.gov/pi/nr/0911/091119washingtondc2.htm Mead, G. E. (2008). Problems with ICE interrogation, Detention and Removal Procedures. Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security and International Law, D.C. 13 Feb 2008. Retrieved on 23 November 2009 from http://www.ice.gov/doclib/pi/news/testimonies/garymead_testimony_ice_interrogation_detention_and_removal_procedures.pdf Riley, W. F. (2009). Examining 287(g): The Role of State and Local Law Enforcement in Immigration Law. House of Representatives Committee on Homeland Security, D.C., 4 Mar 2009. Retrieved on 23 November 2009 from http://www.ice.gov/pi/news/testimonies/index.htm Stana, R. M. (2009). Controls over Program Authorizing State and Local Enforcement of Federal Immigration Laws Should Be Strengthened. GAO testimony before House of Representatives Committee on Homeland Security, D.C., 4 Mar 2009. Retrieved on 23 November 2009 from http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09381t.pdf Torres, J.P. (2009). Securing the borders and America's points of entry, what remains to be done. Senate Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Homeland Security, D.C., 20 May 2009. Retrieved from on 23 November 2009 from http://www.ice.gov/pi/news/testimonies/index.htm
Monday, November 23, 2009
Illegal migration from Mexico to the United States
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Chapter Summary Strategic Management in the Public Sector
The decisions that an organization makes in response to a long-term objective it wishes to obtain is strategy. When an organization makes a conscious choice to link its day to day decisions to this long term objective then it is utilizing strategic management. In order to use strategic management it is necessary to discover where the organization is, where they want to be at some specific time in the future, and what tactical (steps along the path) objectives they need to reach in order to succeed at their strategic objective. Strategic planning is a method commonly used to form answers to these questions. Strategic planning is necessary to utilize strategic management but strategy can exist without formal planning and even without ever being written down. President Truman gave a speech announcing that the United States must stand against those who would oppress others. In response to this strategy to practice containment of Communism, the United States provided money to Greece, a show of force in support of Turkey, and helped to rebuild Europe via the Marshall Plan in 1947. In the 1950's and 1960's the United States entered armed combat to stand against Communist movements in Korea and Vietnam. In the United States during the 1950's the Containment Strategy was used to justify the Federal Aid to Highway Act (build interstates), create NASA, and establish a National Defense Education Act to provide student loans and grants. Strategic planning requires the following minimum steps: Vision Statement Future Objectives Planning Horizon Date for objectives to be completed State of the Union Current conditions of the organization Environment Current and future external threats Decision Select strategy Implementation Strategic management The vision statement must focus on what will be achieved and not on the functions of the organization. According to MBO (Management by Objective) popularized by Peter Drucker in 1954, the vision statement must be achievable by the organization, must provide a specific description of the future status, must be limited in time, and must be measurable. SWOT (strength, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) is a method of analyzing the current capabilities and weaknesses of an organization. Forecasting the future threats to an organization requires the use of historical and current patterns to determine what demands will be made by customers and what opportunities will possibly exist. An important part of strategic management is feedback to make sure that the company is moving towards their strategic objective. Two strategic management tools are benchmarking, comparing mission critical processes with industry best practices or other organizations; and management scorecard which is a basic tally method of quickly comparing departments. The Presidents Management Agenda of 2002 required federal agencies to rank their departments red for failing, yellow for borderline, and green for meeting standards on the following criteria This method allows management to focus attention on mission processes and to create motivation where no real competition might exist. The temporary nature of politicians makes them unwilling to focus on long term planning which may not bear fruit while they are in office; however, the GPRA (1993) requires federal agencies to use the following strategic planning methods: Strategic planning and management has worked successfully in countries where there is limited political debate but has had less success in the highly political Federal government of the United States. It works best when it is not in the center of political debate and in smaller organizations that have measurable outputs and are less dependent on political bodies for funding. Shafritz, J.M., & Russell, E.W. (2005). Introducing public administration (4th ed). New York: Pearson. Kruschwitz, N. The five disciplines. Retrieved on November 9, 2009 from www.fieldbook.com Anderson, J.E. (1975). Public Policy-Making. New York:Praegar.
Friday, November 13, 2009
Chapter Summary Managerialism
Chapter Eight Managerialism According to Sharfritz and Russell (2005), managerialism is a return to classical organizational theory with a focus on hierarchical commands and scientific management. Scientific management never goes away as all business seek a measurement tool that will allow them to find the best way to do something. But by their own examples managerialism is not a return to hierarchical command systems because empowerment of teams is a move away from hierarchy. Empowerment, change, entrepreneurialism, constant quality improvement, and customer focus are keywords associated with managerialism. Performance management is a tool to implement managerialism. It involves leadership setting organization wide overarching objectives, measuring their effect, and using that measurement and customer feedback to set new strategic plans. Management control is the component of performance management concerned with linking the entire system together by comparison of actual result to intended result to keep equilibrium between goals of individuals and goals of organization. However, it is difficult to implement the changes necessary in public administrations because managers are restricted in their ability to reorganize workers or reclassify work. In addition there is no incentive for improvement as budget is based on what is spent and not what is saved. Savings go back into the general fund. Empowerment is the formal authority to implement change. In classical organization theory the manager holds all the power. However, one person cannot do everything and if a manager tries to keep all control then workers perform less optimally and manager loses power. Giving away power will result in an increase in power because the group becomes more efficient. Self directed work teams are given the power to self discipline and authority to manage their work along with the responsibility to produce a particular output. This frees up administration to plan and managers to coach employees and focus on customer needs. However, certain policies must be in place for empowerment to work. The information about where the organization is, where it is going, and feedback about processes must be available to every level so that teams can make informed decisions; rewards must be based on outcomes; and the power to make decisions must be at level where decisions are made. Reengineering is change on adrenaline. It rejects incrementalism and re-evaluates not how something can be done better, but if it should be done at all or if something entirely different should be done. It involves determining what the customer needs and then developing processes to meet that need using the latest technologies or managerial ideas. A major change in public administration is a new focus on entrepreneurialism. This competitive public administration model forces public agencies to compete with private business to provide the cheapest product. In order to do this new public management must utilize private sector business techniques, trim their budgets and personnel, decentralize, and put an emphasis on quality. Most importantly it must focus on the customer and not on policy. Three methods of making organizations successful are having an unlimited budget which has resulted in trillions of dollars of debt; producing the cheapest product available without regard to safety or quality which has worked well for China; or putting a greater importance on quality than cost or quantity and meeting your customers needs. Total quality management seems to be the ideal solution but it may not be the solution used because it requires a focus on long term goals and a constancy of purpose which stands at odds with the constantly changing policy setting environment as politicians come and go. The facets of total quality management are: Shafritz, J.M., & Russell, E.W. (2005). Introducing public administration (4th ed). New York: Pearson. Kruschwitz, N. The five disciplines. Retrieved on November 9, 2009 from http://www.fieldbook.com/ Anderson, J.E. (1975). Public Policy-Making. New York:Praegar.
Monday, November 9, 2009
Chapter Summary Organizational Theory
According to Shafritz and Russell (2005), organizational theory is "A set of propositions that seeks to explain or predict how groups and individuals behave in differing organizational arrangements" (pg 247). The mother of modern organizational theory was the military in ancient times; but it is commonly agreed upon that formal organizational theory, classical organizational theory, began with the Industrial Revolution. Classical theory is the trunk of the tree but in modern times the rigidity and top management dictatorship of the trunk has created neo-classical branches of organizational theory that incorporate sociology. Each branch improves upon but does not replace classical theory. Classical organizational theory began with the military where large armies could not be maintained without an administration handling pay, food, taxes, and supplies. The logical choice for an administrative officer to handle these affairs was to take an experienced soldier and put him in charge. And thus, even in modern times, the language of war and administration share terms such as loophole, line officer, and rear echelon. This method of organization was codified in the early part of the Industrial Revolution in the form of parables or principles of management. In time, people began to look for more efficient ways for workers to work. This scientific management using the time and motion studies promoted by Frederick Taylor utilized quantitative measures to study output of workers to create new more efficient techniques, management of workers to promote worker buy-in and to select and develop workers for specific positions, and to develop formal rules of interaction and separation between management and labor. In 1937, Gulick turned this scientific bent onto management and developed seven tenets of managerial functions under the acronym POSDCORB: Planning : What to do and how to do it Organizing : structure of hierarchy and subdivisions Staffing : hiring and training Directing : day to day decisions and management Coordinating : bringing all the parts of the job together Reporting : Record keeping & reporting to superiors Budgeting : planning, accounting, control Max Weber (1922) further defined classical theory by synthesizing the core characteristics of a bureaucracy from the study of existing bureaucracies. He said that bureaucracy is individuals, who do not specifically own any part of the business, freely associating on a permanent and fulltime basis in a hierarchical organization with clearly written job specifications who are assigned their current and future positions based on merit and the judgment of their superiors. The neo-classical branches developed after WWII and represented a movement away from the mechanistic treatment of workers. Where earlier they were considered replaceable flesh cogs, new recognition of the psychology of groups and individuals led to organizational methods which take into account that people have goals and beliefs not necessarily shared by the organization as a whole and that must be taken into consideration when making plans. The new focus of organizational theory related to structural changes (Systems Theory) and personnel development (Learning Organizations). Systems theory views an organization as a whole organism where a change to any part affects the whole. Broken into parts it consists of inputs, internal processes, outputs, feedback and the environment in which the organization exists. It still utilizes the methods developed earlier by classical theory but puts more focus on measuring outputs that are used to analyze cause and effect to find optimal methods. Systems theory was used by James Anderson in his 1975 book, Public Policy-Making, to describe how the government worked. The inputs are the demands for a solution by constituents, judicial system, other administrative departments, or policy formulated by Congress. The black box is the policy implementation processes by the government agency. The output is some action, distribution, regulation, or redistribution that impacts society and creates new demands that are feedback to the system. Learning organizations such as those formulated by Peter Senge in his book, Fifth Discipline, focus more on developing traits in employees that will improve performance. Senge's work incorporates many of the same ideas as the psychologist Abraham Maslow in his Hierarchy of Needs. According to www.Fieldbook.com learning organizations focus on teaching people how to recognize and act on their personal goals and to recognize the mental filters they use and mental short-cuts that can cause them to not see things as they truly are. In addition, it focuses on developing a shared vision among the members of an organization so they are moving in the same direction and an understanding of how system's theory works. Administrative doctrine is the actions of an organization towards it employees and clients that is a reflection of its values. Values are set by the organizational theory at the base of the organization. Under no pressure or competition administrative doctrine can be as simple as follow the leader's instructions, do your work, and collect your paycheck. Under competition businesses must be flexible enough and with enough power and responsibility at all levels so that the system can adapt to new opportunities. If they do not adapt then organizations are surpassed by competition. One important fact is that change is eternal. As a new theory is developed and adopted by an organization, that company thrives, other companies follow suit, everyone is then equal (except for those that do not adapt and die), and all advantage is gone until the next theory is developed and implemented. The process repeats as long as competition exists. Shafritz, J.M., & Russell, E.W. (2005). Introducing public administration (4th ed). New York: Pearson. Kruschwitz, N. The five disciplines. Retrieved on November 9, 2009 from http://www.fieldbook.com/ Anderson, J.E. (1975). Public Policy-Making. New York:Praegar.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
James Anderson (Public Policy-Making, 1975) is such an organized writer. I would not truly have been able to recognize this if I had not started Jay Shafritz' book, Introducing Public Administration (2005). I read chapter 4. After each section, I asked myself, "Why did he include that topic with that topic" or "Why did he create this section if there is absolutely no meat in it".
The second problem may or may not be a problem. It could be my own bias blindness. If I am of the same ideological bend as Anderson (I don't know) then I probably wouldn't notice him inserting personal bias; But, I felt like Shafritz included much more personal opinion stated as fact than Anderson, who seemed to be more objective. Shafritz came across as snide about those silly ideas of the Republicans.
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Book Summary Public Policy-Making by Anderson (1975)
Public policy making is a series of actions that a governmental body or its approved proxy perform in order to produce an output that addresses a problem. To arrive at an output the policy makers commonly flow through the following steps: Identifying the problem, policy formulation, policy adoption, implementation, evaluation. Public policy is not only what the government says it will do but what it does. Unlike private businesses where profit is measured in dollars, public business profit is measured in the positive impact it has on society less the cost in money and loss of freedom that it imposes. The sections below will describe the steps of public policy making with a focus on the idea that the customer does come first. <Click here to continue>
Anderson, J.E. (1975). Public Policy-Making. New York:Praegar.
Saturday, October 24, 2009
Last Friday, I went to a graduate program presentation at UTA. I have been toying with the idea of getting a Masters in some business field instead of my doctorate in psychology. It is the difference between 8-10 hours a day for six years for my Doctorate or two years for my Masters. I've been doing a lot of web searching and the degree that would seem to be of the most use is the Master in Public Administration. After the presentation, I scoured my home library and found Public Policy-Making by James Anderson. I'm reading that book right now and I ordered Introducing Public Administration by Shafritz. I have over a year before I have to make a decision since I will still be home educating for three more years for certain; but, I need to figure out where I want to jump if they decide to go to public High School. I don't see this as a total jump away from psychology. Much of the stuff I have been reading seems steeped in Social Psychology and a true understanding of how & why people think may be a good thing. So, I will also continue reading my cognitive psychology…and speaking of which…I found a copy of Quest for Consciousness by Koch at Half Price Books so I can start reading that book again. I left my copy at the coffee shop over a month ago and no one ever returned it so I haven't been able to study in a while.
Saturday, August 8, 2009
Status
I've been memorizing brain structure, reading "The Quest for Consciousness" by Koch, and watching his online lectures. I've been teaching all week so that really cuts into my study time.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Research Summary : A feature-integration theory of attention Treisman Gelade (1980)
Treisman and Gelade's (1980) feature-integration theory of attention proposes that the entire field of vision is available to be registered by the brain via parallel processing with respect to features (e.g. color, edges, orientation, location, movement, etc.), but the objects are not correctly unified (e.g. the color is not necessarily matched with the shape). The objects are correctly identified only when attention is focused on them which is a serial action. Serial processing combines all the separate features (conjunctions) of a particular object at a particular location together so that the object can be identified (Treisman & Gelade, 1980). If the unattended objects (objects that are not receiving attention) are not confounded with distracters or if the unattended object can be identified with top-down processing due to context or previous knowledge (i.e. the sun is yellow not blue) then a target can be found amidst the background using the faster parallel processing. Treisman and Gelade's (1980) research indicated that individual features can be searched for in parallel but if a conjunction of features must be located then a slower serial search is utilized; A serial search is indicated if the slope (time to find the target) increases in a linear fashion as the number of distracters increases and the negative condition (the target is not on the screen) slope is twice the value of the positive condition; Serial search is utilized even when the there is little similarity between the conjunctive target and the distracters; A parallel search is indicated if the slope of the positive condition is virtually flat as the number of distracters increases; and, Letters are broken into their individual features and then recombined. The remainder of this paper is a sample of the research methodology and results from their experiments. The researchers define the following vocabulary: Dimension is "the complete range of variation" such as color or orientation; Feature "refers to a particular value on a dimension" such as red or vertical (Treisman & Gelade, 1980). In their first experiment the participants scanned for either a feature (blue or S) or a conjunction (a Green T) during different trials. The distracters were variously colored letters. They varied the number of objects on the screen for each test. Table # 1 Data from Treisman and Gelade Experiment Number 1 Test condition Slope positive Slope negative Conjunction 28.7 67.1 Feature 3.1 25.1 They found that the number of objects on the screen had virtually no effect on the feature searches if the target was on the screen which indicates that the entire field of objects were processed in parallel. If the feature target (blue or S) was not on the screen then it took as long to scan as it took to find the conjunctive target (Green T) which indicates that each object was serially scanned looking for the non-existent target. In the conjunctive trials if the target was not on the screen it took twice as long to respond and the slope increased in a linear form as the number of distracters increased indicating a serial and self-terminating process of search. Further trials which allowed for practice did not improve the scan time and it was assumed that practice did not lead to automatic integration or allow for parallel conjunctive searches (Treisman & Gelade, 1980). *** Individual features can be searched for in parallel but if a conjunction of features must be located then a slower serial search is utilized. *** *** A serial search is indicated if the slope (time to find the target) increases in a linear fashion as the number of distracters increases and the negative condition (the target is not on the screen) slope is twice the value of the positive condition*** *** A parallel search is indicated if the slope of the positive condition is virtually flat as the number of distracters increases *** The second experiment independent variable was the similarity of the target and distracters, number of objects on the screen, and absence or presence of the target. Low similarity was o/n or red/green. High similarity was t/x or green/blue (where the green and blue inks were very similar). The experiment disproves the supposition that parallel search is used when the conjunction target is easy to find. The conjunction target in the low similarity (easy) test was found more quickly than in the high similarity (hard) test; but become slower (linear positive slope) as the number of objects on the screen increased and in the negative condition the slope was approximately double indicating that serial searching was utilized (Treisman & Gelade, 1980). *** Serial search is utilized even when the there is little similarity between the conjunctive target and the distracters *** The fourth experiment tested the recognition speed for a target distracted by letters that were similar to it and easily confused; or by letters that could be separated into features and then recombined to form an illusionary target (conjunction error). The conditions were presented with various frame sizes (number of distracters) and with presence or absence of the target (positive/negative). C: Conjunction Condition R/PQ T/IZ S: Similarity Condition R/PB T/IY c: Conjunction Condition Control R/Q T/Z s: Similarity Condition Control R/B T/Y h1: Heterogeneity Condition T/PQ h2: Heterogeneity Condition Control T/P h3: Heterogeneity Condition Control T/Q Table # 2 Data from Treisman and Gelade experiment number 4 Measured Factors Stub head Positive Slope Negative Slope Ratio of Slopes Conjunction T/IZ 12.2 34.7 .35 Conjunction R/PQ 27.2 52.1 .52 Average Conjunction 19.7 43.4 .45 Similarity T/IY 5.3 18.1 .29 Similarity R/PB 9.7 40.5 .24 Average Similarity 7.5 29.3 .26 Heterogeneity 4.9 20.5 .24 The control conditions where a target was to be located within a distracter field of identical letters (e.g. one T in a field of 14 I's) confirmed that letters that are similar in shape are found much more slowly than letters which simply share features (conjunction condition). The opposite result occurs in the test condition where the target is located either in a distracter field of letters which can create conjunction errors or a field of letters which are simply similar in shape. The time to locate the target in the Similarity Condition and the Heterogeneity Condition were basically the same. This disproves the possibility that the responsible variable was similarity of features and not conjunction of features. In the positive conjunction condition it took 2 to 3 times longer to find the target than in the condition where the target was hidden among letters which were similar to it. Letters should be so familiar that they are processed as templates but this slower time recognizing letters which share features indicates that the letters are broken into their component features and then a slow serial process must be used to identify each letter without putting it back together incorrectly with its neighbors features. In the negative condition the Conjunction condition was about twice as long as the positive condition indicating that the search was serial and self-terminating. In the Similarity condition it was about half this time indicating a different method of searching. *** Letters are broken into their individual features and then recombined. *** REFERENCES Treisman, A, and Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology 12, no. 1: 97-136. MEDLINE, EBSCOhost (accessed July 19, 2009).
Wider than the sky by Edelman
Well, I finished the book. That's the most I can say. I still don't understand where he believes consciousness arises. I'm going to take a break and then read the book again with a notebook and pencil in hand...and maybe a dictionary.
Monday, July 13, 2009
Summary of Lecture: The Brain & Mind by Mriganka Sur
Brain cells (neurons) are unique in that they are semi-permeable, can have around 100+ dendrites and have enough synapses on those dendrites to communicate with 10,000 + other neurons. The genes of the cells determine the type of cells that are formed and the pathways between the sensory organs and the sensory areas in the brain. The neurons of the auditory system are the same as the neurons of the visual center. The function of a particular area of the brain is due to networks forming and those networks form due to interactions with the environment. Dr. Sur rewired the eyes of a ferret to the auditory center of the brain before the areas of the brain became specialized. Testing of which groups of neurons in the auditory system were activated by the eyes viewing edges of various orientations indicated that the neurons of the auditory system formed networks that were normally found in the visual centers of the brain. Sur, M. (2003). MIT World Lecture Series: Fundamentals of the brain and mind: A short course in neuroscience. The brain and mind. Video retrieved on 13 July 2009 from http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/194
Monday, July 6, 2009
How the Mind Works by Pinker
I've read the first chapter and part of the second and my first impression is that I'm reading lots of words and getting very few ideas or facts. However, after walking away and now coming back I think perhaps he is preaching to the choir. I already believe in neural networks and the physicality of the mind. However, I'm only a short ways into the book and perhaps he will give me more meat soon. Here are my first thoughts which may not represent what he means at all. First, the mind is a group of organs developed through natural selection to solve problems our ancestors faced during the stone age – how to talk, how to walk, how to see, how to make predictions. Second, the radical part of his theory is that the rules we use to process new information are hard wired into the components of our brain. When I am presented with a stimulus then my brain runs a process of "if, then, else" using data I have accumulated over my life time. It is not obvious that my program is the same as your program because my inputs vary from yours in the same way that both of us can write a blog entry using Microsoft Word but the text created is unique based upon what we know and wish to present. Intelligence is simply the rational use of rules to pursue goals around obstacles in our path. It is not a supernatural otherness existing outside the physicality of our brains. The idea that people have an innate human nature and not one simply shaped by our culture leads some scientists and people to fear that Dr. Pinker counters these arguments but it is not necessary to explain that here as it is not necessary to understanding the theory. Here are some interesting videos This first video takes real audio and is a lecture Pinker gave at Rice University which summarizes several things from the first couple of chapters. Fast forward through the first 8 minutes of introduction speakers. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4A_r6_GGv3U&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuwNfPca_Pw&feature=related http://robertsandberg.net/2009/06/23/steven-pinker-the-blank-slate-fallacy
Pinker Lecture at Rice University
http://realaudio.rice.edu/PresLect/Pinker/PinkerVid.ram
Here are some more videos.
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Heritability, Shared and Non Shared Environment
Heritability, Shared and Non Shared Environment According to Turkheimer (2000) there are three nearly unanimously accepted "laws of behavior genetics". First Law: All human behavioral traits are heritable Second Law: The effect of being raised in the same family is smaller than the effect of genes. Third Law: A substantial portion of the variation in complex human behavioral traits is not accounted for by the effects of genes or families. The study of the way that people in a family are similar or different has three major parts. The first is how much of their personality depends on their genetics (h). The second is how much of their personality depends on their shared environment (E2). And the last is how much of their personality is different because of their non-shared environment (E1). Rowe and Plomin (1981) reviewed the family study research data from various researchers and described the following findings. Dizygotic (DZ) twins have a personality correlation of about .28 due to shared genetics and E2 (shared environmental factors) while non-twin siblings have a correlation of about .12. This means that about 75% of the variance in personality is due to E1 (non-shared environmental factors). Intelligence correlations show more effect of E2 but still leave 40% of the variance to non-shared factors. Table # 1 Correlation of Personality and Cognition (Rowe & Plomin, 1981) Sibling type Trait DZ Twin Non-twin sibling MZ Twin Adopted Siblings Personality .28 .12 .50 Cognition .62 .34 .86 .25 The weakness of the family study using DZ twins and non-twin siblings is that it does not separate out the genetic from the shared environmental factors. To separate these factors researchers turn to the adoption study to remove the shared environment factor or to the MZ twin study (monozygotic or identical) to remove the genetic factor. The correlation of personality between DZ twins is due to having about half (h/2) of their genes in common which is referred to as heritability (h) and having a shared environment (E2). The correlation of DZ twins (CDZ) = (h/2)+ E2. However there is no way pull out the heritability factor using just this formula. MZ twins have 100% of their genes in common so the correlation of MZ twins (CMZ) = h+ E2. Algebraically combining, removing the common environment, and solving for heritability results in a formula where heritability is roughly equal to twice the difference between the CMZ and CDZ (Plomin, DeFries, McClearn, & McGuffin, 2001) CMZ = h + E2 CDZ = (h/2) + E2 CMZ – CDZ = h – (h/2) + E2 – E2 CMZ – CDZ = (2h/2) – (h/2) CMZ – CDZ = h/2 h = 2(CMZ-CDZ) Once heritability is found then it can be used in the CDZ formula to find out what part of the CDZ is due to shared environment. The final element, non-shared environment (E1), represents the part that is different between the siblings will be the parts already known subtracted from 1. Shared genetics (h) 2(CMZ-CDZ) 2(.50-.28) .44 Shared environment (E2) CDZ - ( h /2 ) .28 - (.44 / 2) .06 Non-shared environment (E1) 1 – h – E2 1 - .44 - .06 .50 Table # 2 Factors Affecting Personality and Cognition between DZ Twins Calculated values Trait Shared genetics (h) Shared environment (E2) Non-shared environment (E1) Personality .44 .06 .50 Cognition .48 .38 .14 As adopted siblings share environment but no genetics the estimated E2 for DZ twins and the measured E2 for adopted siblings should be similar (DZ twins = .38 vs Adopted = .25). Rowe and Plomin (1981) suggest that the large effect of non-shared environment (E1) may imply that E1 events are random such as meeting a person outside the home that inspires a child to do something different, an illness not shared, birth order, peers not shared by siblings, pre-natal trauma, deidentification (child chooses to be different), or differing parental or sibling interactions. Turkheimer (2000) discussed the research of Plomin and Daniels (1987) research where they suggested that there are two kinds of nonshared environment. The first is objective where the event is actually not experienced by both siblings. The second is effective or subjective where the event is experienced by both siblings but interpreted differently. Turkheimer claims that this conjecture is false based on a review of 43 studies. I will leave his disagreement for discussion in a later post so that I can now discuss some of the research supporting that the non-shared environment can be analyzed if not completely then in parts. The research of Daniels, Dunn, Furstenberg, & Plomin (1985) discusses non-shared environmental effects of events that are actually happening in the family unit or with shared peers. This seems to be an example of effective or subjective non-shared environment (E1). They first reviewed other researcher's data that had indicated that non-twin siblings had about a .20 correlation in personality. Their nonshared environment included such factors as sex, age, and birth order which only accounted for 1% of variation and de-identification between first and second born children and between siblings of the same sex. The researchers proposed that the perceived and real differences in how people within the family and shared peers treated an individual affected the personality of the individual. Research with siblings age 11-17 years-of-age indicates that they perceived that the environmental influence of their differing relationships with family and peers was different than that of their siblings. Parents of the siblings reported minor differences in their relationship with each of their children. They found that perceived differences in Maternal Closeness, Siblings Friendliness, and Peer Friendliness account for 4% to 13% of the variance in sibling adjustment. They also found that there was only about a .15 correlation of emotional adjustment between siblings. The researchers (Daniels, Dunn, Furstenberg & Plomin, 1985) tested nine environmental areas:
- Parental Rule Expectations,
- Parental Chore Expectations,
- Maternal Closeness,
- Paternal Closeness,
- Child's Say in Decisions,
- Siblings Friendliness (parental perception & child perception)
- Peer Friendliness (parental perception & child perception).
[To be continued next weekend]
Citations
Daniels, D., Dunn, J., Furstenberg, F., & Plomin, R. (1985). Environmental differences within the family and adjustment differences within pairs of adolescent siblings. Child Development, Vol 56(3), Jun 1985. pp. 764-774. Retrieved PsycINFO July 5, 2009. http://libproxy.uta.edu:2066/login.aspx?direct=true&db=psyh&AN=1985-25181-001&site=ehost-live
Plomin, R., DeFries, J.C., McClearn, G.E., & McGuffin, P. (2001). Behavioral Genetics. New York: Worth. P 350.
Rowe, D.C. & Plomin, R. (1981). The importance of nonshared (E-sub-1) environmental influences in behavioral development. Developmental Psychology, Vol 17(5), Sep 1981. pp. 517-531. Retrieved July 5, 2009 PsycARTICLES. http://libproxy.uta.edu:2066/login.aspx?direct=true&db=psyh&AN=1981-32469-001&site=ehost-live
Turkheimer, E. (2000). Three laws of behavioral genetics and what they mean. Current Directions in Psychological Science 9(5), (2000): 160-164. Retrieved July 2, 2009, http://www.psychologicalscience.org/newsresearch/publications/journals/currdir/cd9_5_5.pdf
Saturday, July 4, 2009
The Truth about Cinderella: A Darwinian View of Parental Love
In the book, The Truth about Cinderella: A Darwinian View of Parental Love by Daly, M., & Wilson M. (1999) the authors explain the steps leading up to their research on abuse in step-families and their methodology in doing the research. In many cultures there exists a variation of the Cinderella story in which a parent’s genetic children are favored over their step-children (p 1-4). The author’s research supported the real existence of this Cinderella effect and the authors contend that there are evolutionary reasons for this effect.
Evolutionary sexual selection adaptation (same sex/same species competition for limited resource of mating partner) comes into play when a new male partner kills the dependent children of his partner’s previous mate which allows him to more quickly produce his own children and have his genetics passed along (e.g. male lions pg. 9 and Jacanas p. 10). If a male did not do this then fewer of his children would be born compared to a male who practiced infanticide of step-children.
Infanticide of step-children is not evolutionarily adaptive if the risks outweigh the benefit which is the case in human society; but it does seem to exist in a more minor form where the scarce resource of parental attention is lavished more upon one’s genetic children than upon the genetic children of a rival. Attachment to a child would have made a male more likely to put up with the resource demands of a dependent child. Forming this bond indiscriminately with a rival’s child would have depleted the resources available for his genetic child. This would not have been advantageous to his genetic offspring and therefore his genetics would not have been passed along in a larger quantity than his rival’s (p 38-39).
The researchers analysis of existing child abuse records supports this contention since a greater percentage of all step-families in the population at large have recorded child abuse records. The number of step-families in the population at large is perhaps over estimated but if so then this indicates that the percentage of step-child abuse is even greater than the article represents.
In a Canadian municipality of 500 thousand the researchers found that 1 in 3000 pre-schoolers who lived with their genetic parents were reported for abuse but 1 in 75 pre-schoolers who lived with a step=parent were abused (p. 30). This abuse was far more likely to occur to pre-schoolers than teenagers (p. 30).
A possible flaw in the research is the existence of the Cinderella myth itself which might lead a neighbor to report possible abuse more readily if a step-parent was present. The researchers repeated their research using only fatal child abuse situations and found the same extreme rates of child abuse in step-families (p. 32).
Friday, June 26, 2009
Mind, Brain, and Teaching
Johns Hopkins University
http://education.jhu.edu/otherspecializations/mind-brain/
Mind, Brain, and Teaching
Adviser: Mariale Hardiman, 410-516-8225
The 15-credit graduate certificate in Mind, Brain, and Teaching is designed for P-12 teachers, administrators, and student support personnel who seek to explore how research in the cognitive and neurosciences has the potential to inform the field of education. Courses will promote integration of diverse disciplines that investigate human learning and development.The proposed certificate builds upon basic and applied research from the fields of cognitive science, psychology and brain sciences, neurology, neuroscience, and education. It will provide educators with knowledge of cognitive development and how emerging research in the brain sciences can inform educational practices and policies.
Requirements (15 credits)*
Explorations in Mind, Brain, and Teaching
Fundamentals of Cognitive Development
Neurobiology of Learning Differences
Cognitive Processes of Literacy and Numeracy
Special Topics in Brain Sciences: Emotion, Memory, and Attention
*Note: This certificate program will commence in summer 2009 and online in fall of 2009.
Posts
