The Incident Of The Platteville Police Department

The ride along occurred on March 2nd of 2016, with the Platteville Police Department. The ride along itself was done by a female police officer, known as Sierra Vessels with her badge number being 913. The time of the ride along was during one of the non-busier times, as it occurred from 2pm to 6pm. The reason for choosing the Platteville Police Department was because during the time of establishing the ride along my driver’s license was suspended. The only transportation that I had was either my parents or my legs, so I decided on my legs. Coming into the ride along there was nothing to my knowledge as to how exactly law enforcement was accomplished. Other than being in traffic incidents the job itself was always a question to me as what they do over all. Doing the ride along in a small town meant that it would not be as eventful as doing it with a bigger department. This did not in fact stop the idea of broadening my knowledge about the daily duties that a law enforcement officer goes through. After the ride along I can say that they should be appreciated more often, as they are only doing their job by keeping everyone safe, and enforcing the law in order to prevent terrible accidents. The female officer that took me on the ride along was very friendly so I had the chance to ask multiple questions. Her experience level was small as she had only been a police officer for six months. She received her bachelor’s degree in Criminal Justice from Colorado State University. TheShow MoreRelated_x000C_Introduction to Statistics and Data Analysis355457 Words   |  1422 Pagesof Florida and at Oberlin College and has had visiting appointments at Stanford, Harvard, the University of Washington, and New York University. From 1998 to 2006, Jay served as Chair of the Statistics Department at California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. The Statistics Department at Cal Poly has an international reputation for activities in statistics education. In addition to this book, Jay has written several widely used engineering statistics texts and is currently working on

The New Colossus By Jane Addams Essay - 1364 Words

Immigration to America is often a decision based solely on the idea that America has some sort of redeeming qualities for a chance at a better life. America’s founding ideals of â€Å"life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness† are what compel foreigners to escape the troubles and oppression of their homeland and cross over onto American soil. The tales of America being the â€Å"land of opportunity† have continued to lure and attract people to immigrate. The Industrial Revolution of the nineteenth century brought millions of immigrant laborers from across the globe to America in a short span of time. This large influx of laborers fashioned a well-defined distinction between â€Å"settlers† and â€Å"immigrants,† causing many observers to be concerned with how these new arrivals would fit in to American society. Emma Lazarus in â€Å"The New Colossus†, Jane Addams in Twenty Years at Hull House, Walt Whitman in â€Å"Crossing the Brooklyn Fe rry†, Theodore Roosevelt in American Ideals, and Thomas Aldrich in â€Å"Unguarded Gates† are just a few names in American Literature who use their work as a medium to voice their opinions on the issue of immigration. Emma Lazarus’s poem, â€Å"The New Colossus†, has become the fundamental expression of America’s self-image as a welcoming and hospitable nation of immigrants. Through her poem, Lazarus transformed the Statue of Liberty—built by the French to commemorate shared American ideals of democracy—into an inspiration of hope for foreigners seeking a better life in theShow MoreRelatedMelting Pot6314 Words   |  26 Pagesin American cultural and political ideology? These are some of the questions considered in the following discussion. The Statue of Liberty is by now a universally recognized symbol of American political mythology. She stands at the entrance of New York harbor, wearing a spiked crown representing the light of liberty shining on the seven seas and the seven continents. The statue was a gift to the United States from the people of France in 1884. It is made of riveted copper sheets, only 3/32 of

Behavioural Approach Free Essays

BEHAVIORISM Fred Luthans, James B. Avey and Brett Luthans Definition Behaviorism is a theoretical foundation with roots in psychology with an intentional focus on observable, measurable behavior as the primary unit of analysis (Luthans, Youssef, Luthans, 2005). Behaviorism systematically analyzes the relationships between an individual’s behavior and environmental contingencies. We will write a custom essay sample on Behavioural Approach or any similar topic only for you Order Now The study and practice of behaviorism emphasizes predicting and controlling/managing behavior and thus is especially relevant to organization studies. The behaviorism paradigm is in contrast to the popular cognitive psychology theories in that behaviorism is not focused on internal cognitive or affective processes or indirect measures of beliefs, attitudes or feelings. Whereas cognitive based approaches attempt to understand and explain the multifaceted causes and complexity of human behavior, behaviorism is based on the premise that behavior is a function of its environmental consequences or contingencies (also see Motivation, Contingency Theory). There are four primary historical building blocks of behaviorism. These major foundational contributions are Pavlov’s (1849-1936) classical conditioning experiments, Thorndike’s (1874-1949) law of effect, Watson’s (1878-1958) experiments with human conditioning, and Skinner’s (1904-1990) work and conceptualization of operant conditioning (also see Operant Conditioning). However, applied to organization studies, the most influential application of behaviorism would be Luthans and Kreitner’s (1985) book Organizational Behavior Modification and Beyond. Conceptual Overview Have you ever wondered how children, adults, and even animals learn to respond to and operate in their world? Early in the twentieth century, Thorndike coined the famous law of effect by systematically studying cats in a puzzle box. Thorndike’s law of effect states behaviors followed by positive consequences tend to be strengthened and increase in subsequent frequency, while those followed by negative consequences tend to weaken and decrease in frequency. Even before Thorndike established the law of effect, a Russian scientist named Ivan Pavlov conditioned several dogs to salivate to the sound of a ringing bell. Originally the bell was sounded with the presentation of food (meat powder, positive consequence) and ultimately the dog’s salivation was in accordance with the bell regardless of food presentation (Pavlov highlighted the stimulus-response phenomenon). In a logical progression, Watson applied the behavioral conditioning mechanism to humans when he conditioned the subject â€Å"little Albert† to fear white rats by associating them with a loud, unpleasant noise (negative consequence). In the 1930’s the famous psychologist B. F. Skinner made a significant discovery for modern behaviorism that led to the modern practice of organizational behavior modification. Using rats and pigeons in controlled environments, his studies found that the consequences of behavior were influential in determining, predicting and controlling that behavior. Skinner highlighted the important distinction between respondent conditioning (Pavlovian S-R connection) where the stimuli elicit the behavior and operant conditioning (the organism operates on the environment in order to obtain the desired consequence, or the R-S connection) where the behavior is a function of the consequence. Skinner’s operant conditioning with the focus on environmental consequences as behavioral determinants instead of antecedent stimuli led to the underlying core premise of modern behaviorism. Based on this scientific foundation, the study of behaviorism suggests that we can predict and modify behavior by strategically controlling (i. e. , managing) the consequences. This well-known practice of managing behavioral contingencies has become known as â€Å"behavior modification. † Modern behaviorism and behavior modification has been applied to organization studies and performance management in the workplace by Luthans and Kreitner (1985) as â€Å"organizational behavior modification,† or simply O. B. Mod (Luthans and Kreitner, 1985 for a full review) (also see Classical Management, Organizational Behavior). The O. B. Mod. approach to performance management involves five sequential steps: (1) identify critical performance-related behaviors; (2) measure the frequency of those identified behaviors; (3) analyze the antecedents and consequences associated with the behavior within the existing environment; (4) intervene by applying positive consequences/reinforcers contingent upon exhibiting the desired behavior; and (5) evaluate the results by measuring changes in the behavior and its impact on performance. In over 30 years of multiple research studies and applications of this O. B. Mod. approach, Luthans and colleagues ( Stajkovic Luthans, 1997, 2003), and other behavioral management scholars have been able to reach consistent, conclusive findings. First, three types of positive consequences/reinforcers result in an increase of desired work related behaviors and performance outcomes when administered contingently. These are: money, performance feedback, and social recognition (Luthans Stajkovic, 1999). A major finding for managing organizations is that in many cases feedback and/ or recognition, which typically involve no direct cost, often results in similar (and sometimes higher) performance outcomes than monetary reinforcers that are often outside a manager’s direct control. Luthans and colleagues offer guidelines for use of these reinforcers. For example, effective performance feedback must be positive (emphasizing what is right), immediately following the desired behavior, graphic, and specific. Effective social recognition must include personal one-on-one attention and appreciation from the manager communicating to the employee that the desired behavior has been noticed and admired by the manager versus a standard program where randomly selected employees are recognized regardless of demonstration of desired behaviors (which is what many of the formal recognition programs become over time). Positively reinforcing desired behaviors is significantly more effective in terms of performance impact over time than punishing undesired behaviors. It is important to note that punishment may be necessary when there is a need to immediately cease potentially harmful behavior. For example, in the case of a workplace safety violation (e. g. not wearing a helmet or eye protectors on a construction site), the behavioral management approach would not take time to measure the outcomes and wait for the desired safe behavior to occur in order to administer positive reinforcement. However, in general, the potential long term harm of punishment (e. g. stress, burnout, revenge, turnover, decrease in commitment) may be more than its potential benefits. It is important to point out that behavioral management works across various organizational types, industries, and cultures (Luthans Stajkovic, 1999). For example, the behavioral management technique has been successfully employed in a Russian factory, where it demonstrated stronger performance outcomes than the participative management technique (Welsh, Luthans, Sommer, 1993) and most recently with Korean information service providers. Critical Commentary and Future Directions The contributions of behaviorism in general, and more specifically the O. B. Mod. approach to behavioral management, have been very positive in organizational studies. Behaviorism provides understanding of how we learn, operate, and perform in all types of organizations. Organizations achieve their missions, visions, goals, and competitive advantage through the performance and behavior of people. A meta-analysis shows that the application of the O. B. Mod. model in the workplace across multiple industries, levels, and cultures increased performance on average 17 percent (Stajkovic Luthans, 1997). Despite the overwhelming support of how well behaviorism works in the organization, several limitations to the technique must be highlighted. First, individuals are unique and thus not all people respond the same way to reinforcers. Their desires are not only different, but they may also change over time. However, this is not a major problem when applying O. B. Mod. in the workplace because people in general desire money, feedback and recognition. However, they may vary in the level of intensity in their responses and which reinforcer has a relatively greater impact. Although behaviorism helps us to predict, modify, and change behavior over time, it does not attempt nor intend to understand how or why the phenomenon works. Behaviorism tends not to recognize the complexity of human cognitive processes. Another potential limitation is that in most cases multiple contingencies are salient in the context within which behavioral management attempts take place, resulting in complex interactions. These multiple contingencies can become competing contingencies as to which one the behavior links to and its subsequent effects. Behaviorism is not concerned with nor does it account for the social context within which contingent reinforcement (or punishment) takes place. In fact, modern behaviorism including O. B. Mod. treats antecedent factors as cues for the desired behavior. Still another limitation to the behaviorism approach is the requirement for action on behalf of the manager. In behaviorism, if the contingent reinforcement is removed and no longer exists, the desired behavior that was previously reinforced is likely to decrease in frequency and intensity, eventually fading away. This elimination of the controlling consequence is referred to as â€Å"extinction. This implies that managers who practice a behavioral management approach to increase the performance of their staff need to at minimum maintain an intermittent reinforcement schedule in order to avoid this going to extinction. In an attempt to combine the best of both worlds, and to present a more comprehensive and realistic view of human beh avior in organizations, many previously radical behaviorists have â€Å"mellowed out† (Luthans Kreitner, 1985) to adopt a social cognitive approach to understanding behavior (Bandura, 1986) (also see Social Cognition, Self-Efficacy, Cognitive Approach). The social cognitive approach asserts that behavior is the result of a continuous reciprocal three-way interaction between the person (cognition), the environment (physical context, including organizational structure and design; social context, i. e. , other people), and the individual’s past behavior. As opposed to behaviorism where behavior is a function of its contingent consequences, the social cognitive lens argues that behavior is also influenced by the processes of symbolizing, forethought, observation, self-regulation, and self-reflection (Bandura, 1986). Furthermore, from a social cognitive perspective, the role of contingent reinforcement in enhancing performance can be understood in terms of outcome utility, informative content, and regulatory mechanisms (Stajkovic Luthans, 2001). The future of behaviorism at least as it is applied to organization studies is likely to continue within the comprehensive theoretical framework of social cognition. Both organization scholars and practitioners realize the value of the objectivity and predictive validity behaviorism in general and O. B. Mod. in particular has on measurable performance impact. However, in today’s complex, ever-changing work environment, radical behaviorism is not comprehensive enough to stand alone. With the increasing emphasis on human resources as the primary source of long term competitive advantage, the confluence of behaviorism theory and cognitive theory through social cognitive theory may best accomplish the goals of understanding, prediction, and effective performance management. References Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Luthans, F. , Kreitner, R. 1985). Organizational Behavior Modification and Beyond. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman. Luthans, F. , Stajkovic, A. (1999). Reinforce (not necessarily pay) for performance. Academy of Management Executive, 13, 49-57. Luthans, F. , Youssef, C. , Luthans, B. (2005). Behaviorism. In Nicholson, N. , Audia, P. , Pillutla, M. (Eds. ). The Blackwell encyclopedia dictionary of organizational behavior. London: Blackwell. Stajkovic, A. , Luthans, F. (1997). A meta-analysis of the effects of organizational behavior modification on task performance, 1975-1995. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 1122-1149. Stajkovic, A. , Luthans, F. (2001). Differential effects of incentive motivators on work performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 580-590. Stajkovic, A. , Luthans, F. (2003). Behavioral management and task performance in organizations: Conceptual background, meta-analysis, and test of alternative models. Personnel Psychology, 56, 155-194. Welsh, D. H. B. , Luthans, F. , Sommer, S. M. (1993). Managing Russian factory workers: The impact of U. S. -based behavioral and participative techniques. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 58-79. How to cite Behavioural Approach, Essay examples