Unconditioned Response

Moral Relativism is classified under any positions concerning the differences in moral judgments between people and the culture. Moral relativism is the position that ethical or moral propositions make claims regarding cultural or personal circumstances. Moral Relativism affirms relative form of validation of moral statements but doesn’t deny them. Moral relativist typically view the ethical standards of right or wrong are culturally based and are issued to a person's individual decision. Instead of making their decision on “what is right,” decisions are based on self-interest. This procedure has a negative impact on behavior and will affected the way we treat others.

The nature vs nurture issue has been a controversial argument among psychologist for decades. This argument exposes two different views. One of them emphasizes that our personality depends solely on genetics (nature). On the other hand, the second view suggests that humans “develop through experience” (Myers 2013, SG 6) (nurture).

Before Classical Conditioning even takes place, there is what one refers to as an unconditioned stimulus (US), which is something in the environment that naturally and automatically triggers an individual to respond. This in turn causes an unconditioned response (UR), which is a natural (meaning is has not been taught), reaction that occurs in the presence of an unconditioned stimulus. The next term we must be familiar with is neutral stimulus. A neutral stimulus (NS), can be either a person, place or object that does not produce a response until it is paired with the unconditioned stimulus. Imagine for example, your grandmother has just baked a fresh batch of chocolate chip cookies. As the cookies (the US) sit by the window to cool,

As many people have begun to pay attention to formation of personality, the debate over nature vs. nurture has raged for a long time and this issue is still controversial. However, as shown the

If we review classical conditioning, we can see that an unconditioned stimulus is one that unconditionally and naturally results in a response. In contrast, a conditioned stimulus incorporates an unconditioned stimulus with a neutral stimulus to elicit a response. The classic case that highlights this concept is that of Pavlov's

Then, later, the unconditioned stimulus can be withdrawn and the neutral stimulus evolves to become the conditioned stimulus. Now the conditioned stimulus or learned stimulus evokes a conditioned response, or learned response. Given the example, the conditioned response is salivation. When it hears the bell, the dog salivates because the dog was conditioned to associate the hot dog with the sound of the bell.

Developments in genetic research and cognitive psychology in recent years support the notion that personality is ingrained in individuals, and therefore unchanging. While it had been hypothesised since the 1960s that individuals could be genetically predisposed to psychiatric disorders (Heston, 1966), this field of study has expanded to explore the predisposition of personality traits, where it is now

Classical conditioning, also called respondent conditioning, involves the use of unconditioned stimuli (UCS), conditioned stimuli (CS) and/or neutral stimuli (NS) to achieve unconditioned responses (UCR) and conditioned responses (CR). One of the most famous cases of this was made by a Russian scientist named Ivan Pavlov. During Pavlov’s study of digestive processes in animals, for example, he noticed the dogs in his experiment would salivate when his lab assistants entered the room, whether or not they had food (Burch and Bailey, 1999). In this scenario, the lab assistant was originally a NC (neutral due to producing no response prior to food pairing), the food was the UCS and the salivation was the UCR. By associating the lab assistant (NS) with the food (UCS), the lab assistant became a CS to the dog and the salivating became a CR.

As a matter of fact, a common idea of what actually influences the personality of an adult at the beginning of his or her life has been swaying between different opinions and options - from behaviorism, social and environmental determinism to hereditarianism and fatalism. Despite the controversies do not subside and new and new arguments in the dispute appear almost permanently, the majority of professionals and early development experts agree that human personality is rather a result of the two factors working together.

The unconditioned stimulus (US) is the stimulus that naturally causes a response from the subject being observed. The unconditioned response (UR) is the unlearned action by the subject that comes from the response to the unconditioned stimulus. The conditioned stimulus (CS) is the stimulus that is previously a neutral stimulus, but it becomes conditioned after being associated with the conditioned response. The conditioned response (CR) is what is learned from the subject of the previously neutral

Throughout time several personality trait theories have argued differently. Some state that traits are inherently part of our DNA and others state that they are solely based on the context or environment. My argument aligns with Costa and McRae’s theory in that personality traits are ‘situated in a comprehensive model of genetic and environmental causes and contexts (McCrae & Costa,1994).’

There are many theories that attempt to clarify the structures that influence personality, for example dispositional, and Evolutionary theory. This paper will discuss the differences that are among dispositional and evolutionary personality theories, as well as, strengths and limitations of dispositional and evolutionary and biological personality theories their bearing on human behavior. Furthermore, the Big Five personality test and what technique is used to study personality.

During this stage a stimulus which produces no response (i.e. neutral) is associated with the unconditioned

Classical Conditioning focuses on stimuli in the environment, such as noise, light, shock, and taste of food, that automatically evoke reflex responses. These stimuli are known as unconditioned stimuli, while the responses they elicit are known as respondents, which are often involuntary or automatic seeing as the individual has no control over them. An example of a respondent would be an individual exhibiting a startle reaction in response to a loud noise. A conditioned stimulus, or a neutral stimulus, can become associated with an unconditioned stimulus that evokes the response and if the two are presented simultaneously, the conditioned stimulus alone will eventually evoke the response. In classical conditioning, a new stimulus gains the ability to evoke a respondent behavior within the individual (Craighead, Criaghead, Kazdin, & Mahoney, 1994).

It is not difficult to assess the degree to which an individual is affected by the environment in which he lives. We know that climatic and social surroundings are no less influential. We know also that a person is born with the basic characteristics which are going to shape his personality and eventually his destiny. We can safely say that the interactions of both heredity and environment produce the individual. It would be interesting to analyse the effects of environment on the personality and activities of the individual.