The 10% Brain Myth:http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/tenper.htmlSummary: On this website, the author goes into why the phrase, “We only use 10% of our brains”, is a myth and gives examples to support his claim. The author first starts out with where the myth possibly could have started and who might have started it. He soon dismantles this idea as he has not found the answer to that question. Of course there is the question of why the myth is still continuing to circulate throughout the media? With the “popular media’s” help, people believe this phrase and it begins to circulate through another generation of people. Some, who believe this statement, also believe that if we were able to use more than 10% of our brains, humans would be able to move objects with our minds or be able to get super powers. But, at this particular moment there is no data to support these potential claims. Let’s say that we take out the other 90% of our brain that we supposedly don’t use. At that point we would be no different than a sheep’s brain. Our brains, with even the slightest damage can affect us with disabilities we didn’t have before. A few examples would be; having a stroke, Parkinson’s Disease, and even a tumor. Even when neurons are not firing action potentials, these neurons may still receive signals from other neurons. For just vision alone there are several different pathways which could be called redundant. But if one pathway fails, there is a backup pathway to send the original signal. While sleeping, the brain is still active, but it is just in a different state of activity. There is a saying that is, “Use it or Lose it” can also be used for the nervous system. In many studies they show that if, “the input to a particular neural system is eliminated, then neurons in this system will not function”, which is shown in the visual system. In any case it becomes clear that if we only used 10% of our brain, the other 90% of neural pathways would degenerate.How credible was the information?Upon looking up the author (Dr. Eric H. Chudler), it would seem reasonable that the information was credible. The author’s degrees are: a Bachelor’s in Psychobiology, a Masters’ in Psychology, and a Ph.D. in Psychology. Plus the website is affiliated with a college or university, and is an educational website. With all that I would say that Dr. Chudler is credible and should know what he is talking about.Were relevant data and sources provided?Yes there was relevant data as, Dr. Chudler had studies and examples throughout the page. He also provided other websites and two books to further the discussion and knowledge of the reader. Though not all of the websites were credible websites, some were and some interesting views. Also as far as I could see I didn’t see any sources other than from his own knowledge and research.Does the author have sufficient expertise to write on the topic? As stated above, the author does have sufficient expertise to write on this topic of “We only use 10% of our brains”. The reason being of his multiple degrees in Psychology (the study of the mind), and the years after of teaching and research.Was there information that was omitted that should have been included?I feel like Dr. Chudler could have talked more about how the “popular media” is keeping this myth alive. At the end of the page he wrote that if someone says we only use 10% of our brain, to tell them we don’t and that we use actually use 100%. I feel like there could have been a simple example to help explain the reasoning behind said statement.What new things did you learn?One of the new things that I had learned was that there are several pathways that serve similar functions, such as; several central pathways that are used for vision alone. I find that to be very interesting. Another thing I found out was that children’s brains are adaptable and “the function of a damaged brain area in a young brain can be taken over by remaining brain tissue”. They have wonderful recoveries with adults usually don’t. In that case, it makes you wonder about children’s minds.Did any of the information surprise you? If so, why?Quite a bit of it surprised me actually. It was interesting to see how much the myth has been portrayed in the media and how easy it is to disprove it. Though most people don’t try to see if information is true and believe everything that is shown to them.I think the fact that our brain is constantly doing something is pretty cool and it’s good to know that we truly do use all of our brain.Is there any way this site could be considered controversial or could offend someone? How so?I’m assuming that it could offend someone, especially someone who doesn’t understand the information that is being provided to them. Because of this class and some knowledge myself I was able to follow the website and what it was saying but someone who doesn’t know the terminology could get offended that it wasn’t put into simpler terms where they could have a better understanding of the information. It could definitely be considered controversial, all because people don’t know better. All in all, there are always people out there who will be like sheep and follow the media, where they don’t question the information or try to think outside the box.Did you find the web site helpful?Yes, I found this website very helpful and informative. There was a time that I believed in “We only use 10% of our brains”, and I know that was false but this website was able to help me have a better understanding of why we use all of brain.Did it help you to understand the topic better?It most definitely helped me understand the topic and some underlying material I can use in the future.How does it relate to the information in the text?Well this website, even indirectly, relates to the information in the text of chapter two, due to the nervous system. The brain in all it’s glory is a major part to the nervous system. The brain is part of the central nervous system but it is related to the other nervous systems.If you were the author of this website, how would you improve it?I would improve this website by adding definitions of certain terms on the side so people who don’t quite understand can have a better understanding and where they wouldn’t have to keep looking terminology up. Not only that but I would add more on how the media keeps the myth circulating to where people believe it’s a fact.Positive Reinforcement:https://psych.athabascau.ca/open/prtut/index.phpSummary: On this website, it goes over a tutorial on positive reinforcement with examples and a quiz. So the first part of the tutorial is where six example/nonexample pairs are defined and illustrated for the concept of positive reinforcement. While the second part is where the reader practices at responding to examples and nonexamples, and then are given feedback. If taught in a normal course, then more background information would be given but with this tutorial it is demonstrated as the reader goes through it on their own. The website then gives you the definition of positive reinforcement and how it is one of the key concepts in behavior analysis. Positive Reinforcement happens when three conditions are met: A consequence is presented dependent on a behavior, the behavior becomes more likely to occur, and the behavior becomes more likely to occur because and only because the consequence is presented dependent on the behavior. The tutorial then goes into the first part where the six example/nonexample pairs are presented to give you an idea of what is an example or nonexample of positive reinforcement. The examples ranged widely and all were completely different from one another but made a point in telling you what was positive reinforcement and was not positive reinforcement. After going through the six example/nonexample pairs, the tutorial leads you to the second part, which is the practice exercise. This part of the tutorial is in the form of a quiz, to where the reader will go through and answer if a scenario is a positive reinforcement or not. After each answer the website will tell you if you got it correct or incorrect with the reasoning. After about ten questions, the quiz will give you a progress report on how you are doing. Once you have completed the quiz it will tell you where the reader still needs improvements on identifying examples or nonexamples of positive reinforcements.How credible was the information?The information on the website are being backed by a university and the author(s) would have expertise in the subject field because the website was created by the Centre for Psychology, so the information was in my opinion very credible.Were relevant data and sources provided?There was relevant data as the entire website is data of what is positive reinforcements. As there were sources and links that could be clicked on so the reader could continue being educated on positive reinforcements.Does the author have sufficient expertise to write on the topic?I would say yes because the author of the website is the Centre for Psychology at Athabasca University. With a college supporting and creating the website, it is sufficient to say that the author has expertise in the topic of Positive Reinforcement.Was there information that was omitted that should have been included?In this case, that would have to be a yes, since on the very first page that they aren’t giving background information other than the definition of positive reinforcement. I believe having some more knowledge on a topic before taking a quiz would make it easier to answer the questions.What new things did you learn?I was able to learn all the different positive reinforcements and how easy it is to get them mixed up with nonexamples of positive reinforcements. I didn’t realize there were different types of positive reinforcements and that’s not including any other type of reinforcements.Did any of the information surprise you? If so, why?None of the information on this one really surprised me. It was very informative but nothing really stood out to make me surprised. Is there any way this site could be considered controversial or could offend someone? How so?It does not seem very plausible that someone could consider this controversial. There is nothing on this website that could be considered controversial as it is a tutorial.Did you find the web site helpful?I found the website to be very helpful. The website was able to teach me more of an understanding of the concepts of positive reinforcement. The quiz was able to test what I had learned from part one and I was able to better understand the subject.Did it help you to understand the topic better?I believe that this website did help me better understand the topic. It was discussed in the book but the website had more information to where the readers could get to know what the topic is meaning with all the examples.How does it relate to the information in the text?The book talked about positive, negative, and non-reinforcement but doesn’t go into depth about all the different parts of the sub-categories in the reinforcements. It goes along with and adds to the information in the text.If you were the author of this web site, how would you improve it?I would add some background information on positive reinforcement but I would also add background information on negative reinforcement. So readers could understand the negative side of reinforcement as well.Controlling Anger–Before It Controls Youhttp://www.apa.org/topics/anger/control.aspxSummary: How credible was the information?The information is very credible as it is coming from the American Psychological Association (APA) which is a credible and reputable website. Other than the known credibility, all of the authors of this article have their PhD’s.Were relevant data and sources provided?Due to the website being the American Psychological Association the source is in itself as well as Charles Spielberger and Dr. Jerry Deffenbacher who both have PhD.’s. Now there is no solid data or statistics on the website but due to the credibility of the website, it’s data is relevant.Does the author have sufficient expertise to write on the topic?Yes, the author has sufficient expertise to write about anger management. As the website is the American Psychological Association it makes sense that it would be expert enough to write about the study of anger which is part of psychology when you look at it.Was there information that was omitted that should have been included?I believe that there should have been more information on the people who went through anger management and how it had helped them. There wasn’t much that was omitted from the website, it went through each step carefully.What new things did you learn?I learned new techniques on how to be to handle my anger if it arises, especially the cognitive restructuring. The different techniques and information on anger wasn’t all new to me but it definitely expanded my outlook onto anger and anger management. Did any of the information surprise you? If so, why?I found that a person who is extremely angry could show significant improvement within a minimum of eight to ten weeks to be very surprising. I feel like that is a short amount of time for someone to show that quick of improvements in such a short amount of time. Is there any way this site could be considered controversial or could offend someone? How so?I do not see how this website could be considered controversial in the least. It tries to tell you that anger is a natural emotion and that it’s okay to be angry but not to the point of it taking control over your entire person. I could see an already angry person being offended by a website that’s informative but I believe that the website made it where it wouldn’t be offensive.Did you find the web site helpful?I found the website very helpful and informative on anger and how to control that anger. The website makes it where all the information isn’t overbearing and can be understood easily.Did it help you to understand the topic better?I believe that this website has helped me better understand anger and how it can affect people, including myself. Anger is sometimes unpredictable so trying to control and manage that anger is a really great thing.How does it relate to the information in the text?Chapter 9 Motivation and Emotion discusses the physiological, behavioral, and cognitive aspects of emotions with anger being a viable emotion. The text is about emotions so anger can relate to the book perfectly.If you were the author of this web site, how would you improve it?I would improve and add the different types of anger on a scale so the reader could be able to identify the different types of anger’s. The American Institute of Stresshttps://www.stress.org/Summary:How credible was the information?The information in my opinion is credible as the many contributors to the site all have their PhD.’s and they continuously update the website to go along with what we have learned about stress so far.Were relevant data and sources provided?There was plenty of relevant data and many sources were provided for you to continue your education on stress and how it can affect you. There were many different routes for you to take and be able to examine different aspects of stress.Does the author have sufficient expertise to write on the topic?The author(s) and contributors to this website are all health care professionals and highly educated physicians with mass amounts of knowledge on stress. They can identify the different stresses for people so yes I believe that they so have sufficient expertise to write on stress.Was there information that was omitted that should have been included?There wasn’t anything that I could find that was not covered in the website. And if it was not on the original website, then it was in one of the links that was attached to the original website.What new things did you learn?One new thing that I learned from this website is all the different way stress can affect you and your body.Did any of the information surprise you? If so, why?Additionally it surprises me to learn how wide and far reaching stress disorders are such as the impact it has on neurological and psychiatric disorders, dermatological problems, and endocrine issues. Is there any way this site could be considered controversial or could offend someone? How so?I did not find anything controversial about this website and could not really find anything that could be taken as offensive. I believe that this website is anything but controversial as it can help people be less stressed in their everyday lives.Did you find the web site helpful?I found the website very helpful to my everyday life. I have had issues with dealing with stress and how to handle them and this website has helped me better understand the different types of stresses.Did it help you to understand the topic better?Yes this website has helped me understand the topic better and has opened my eyes. I’m planning on researching stress more through the links on this website and other websites that can help me not be as stressed.How does it relate to the information in the text?It relates perfectly to the text from our book. The website is able to expand on information that the book isn’t able to expand on due to limited space.If you were the author of this web site, how would you improve it?I would add more on the different stresses and how they can affect your everyday life and health.