GET HELP WITH YOUR ESSAY
If you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional Essay Writing Service is here to help!
I need you to reply to 2of my classmates on their posts using their references and reference page .Please put the student name next to their reply so I know which is which.
Here are the students posts:
W4P1 Petr Zusis
Schemata is the way a human tie their experiences and explain them. A person tends to see the present and expect the future through the prism of their experiences and interpretation. And even that can be influenced by our forthcoming experiences. Our experiences might contradict each other as well as their explanations (Aronson et al., 2017).
This phenomenon can be used either by a prosecutor or the defense. For example, in their final speech, the prosecutor can say:
“The type of crime the defendant committed is detrimental to our society. Person A committed this crime, and it costs our society B, Person C has committed a similar crime, and it costs out society B. The defendant is just like them; let us protect our community from this misfortune,
The defense can respond:
“The prosecutor inferred that by sentencing the defendant, the society would be better. Will society become better? One of the essential freedom it guarantees the right to a fear trial? And why the prosecutor is taking about society instead of focusing on the evidence. In case A, it was in the papers recently, the prosecution did not carefully consider the evidence, and the defendant’s life was ruined, his family was shattered. Is this what makes our society better? When the prosecutor obtains evidence obtained without allowing the defendant to get legal counsel, does this make our society better?
In the prosecution’s argument, the following schemata are evoked: person A committed this, person B committed this; thus, in this case, there is a similar situation. If A and B are guilty, then C is guilty since their cases are identical.
In the defense’s argument, this was refuted, and the different schemata are ignited. The injustice happens, and it is real; we all remember it. In this case, the protection is acting unjustly; therefore, the person is innocent.
PS, In this case, heuristics are triggered, which are the shortcuts in people’s thinking. Thus the jury might not care for exact comparisons but think how their cognitive energy is preserved (Kahanman & Twersky, 1974).
Aronson, E., Wilson, T. D., & Akert, R. M. (2017). Social psychology (7th ed). Pearson
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124-1131.
1 hour agoKatennia Thomas
Discuss 1 Week 4
Great discussion 1 topic this week- There was this high-profile (Brian Nichols) case in Atlanta, GA around 15 years ago. Brian was on trial for rape (the first trial attempted ended with a hung jury). Towards the end of the second trial, I believe Brian thought he would be charged with the rape. Prior to his hearing, he ended up escaping from the courthouse after killing a few court employees. Brian remained at large for 24 hours before he was returned back to custody. Prior to the court escape and shooting spree, there was a great chance that he would not have been found guilty, however; it appears Brian did not have much confidence (per reports he constantly asked if he had a chance of being found guilty) in this which led to the escape and shooting spree.
According to Aronson, Wilson, Akert, & Sommers (2019), our schemas contain our basic knowledge and impressions that we use to organize what we know about the social world and interpret new situations. Schemas are useful for helping us organize and make sense of the world and to fill in the gaps of our knowledge.
In the case of Brian Nichols (on trial for the shooting spree), the attorney for the state attempted to create Brian as a monster that did not deserve to live amongst others while his attorney argued that Brian had a mental break. While listening to the reports and reading up on the case from the beginning, I agreed that Brian displayed “a man scorn” syndrome due to the girlfriend breaking up with him and moving on to a new love. Although I did not believe he sexually assaulted her due to lack of evidence, I do believe his ego got the best of him which caused him to respond in a negative manner (kidnapping and assaulting the ex-girlfriend). Well, as time progress and more information came out including information on his abusive childhood, my preconception of his actions and reasons behind his actions changed. I now feel that yes he must take responsibility for his actions but how much did his upbringing have to do with his inability to handle rejection which in turn created a monster.
In conclusion, I agree that our schema plays a great deal in how we view people, situations, etc. We go in with a small thought in our head that may have been planted there by someone else’s preconception of the person or situation. We will either allow that thought to cause us to respond in the same manner as others or create a new thought by obtaining more knowledge regarding the person or situation.
Aronson, E., Wilson, T. D., Akert, R. M., & Sommers, S. R. (Eds.). (2019). Social psychology (10th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Chapter 3, “Social Cognition: How We Think About the Social World”