Recent orders
Article Summary You say tomato Collaborative remembering leads to more false memories for intimate couples than for strangers
Name:
Course:
Professor:
Date:
Article Summary: You say tomato? Collaborative remembering leads to more false memories for intimate couples than for strangers
Many times, people give conflicting accounts of events from their memories. We spend a lot of time talking to different people including strangers and our romantic partners. Research has shown that people report different memories depending on whom they are talking to. The primary reason for this discrepancy is that people’s memories are driven by goals and not actual memories. This is known as memory conformity (French, et al 263). It happens when people watch two different versions of one event and then when they discuss it together; they remember things that they did not actually see.
The misinformation effect occurs when a person recalls information that they gained after an event rather than what they witnessed during the event. Research has shown that people can resist this misinformation effect when they deem the source of information as not being credible. People are also affected by other things such as a speaker’s accent reporting information. From this, people are more willing to trust their romantic partners as compared to a stranger. To prove this, a study was carried out involving pairs of romantic pairs and other pairs of strangers (French, et al 264). These participants were shown different versions of the same movie, and they later discussed the film with their partner. The control items were the records of memory that were not discussed. The findings showed that the subjects showed accurate memory for topics they did not discuss as compared to those items discussed.
There were 64 participants; 32 romantic partners, and 32 strangers. The romantic partners had been together for at least three months. All pairs were heterogeneous. After watching the film, they were given a logic puzzle to fill. Another group discussed questions after the movie. The results showed that the participants were equally likely to dispute a point of misinformation during the discussion. Romantic couples contradicted each other 39 out of 76 times while the strangers challenged each other 36 of 78 times. It was found that each was good at recalling non-discussed items (French, et al 268). However, both groups were worse at remembering the discussed subjects. From their records, they indicated what they were told by their partners rather than what they saw. Couples took longer to document their results that the strangers. It is suggested that the extra time was spent arguing and holding their ground; hence the romantic partners were less likely to be misled by their partner.
The type of relationship did not influence the individual’s confidence that their answer was correct. Both strangers and couples were also more confident about their real memories than false ones. Other factors that influenced memory apart from relationship include who spoke first in the discussion. When analyzing the results, partners agreed but later changed their answers privately which is a sign of normative influence. Where there was a dispute during the discussion, 26% of couples used misinformation in the records while 17% of strangers did (French, et al 272). These results fit in with the importance of the source of information in memory. People often discuss events with others that they know rather than a stranger, and their memories are more susceptible to distortion as a result. This can affects the legal system because witnesses usually know each other and have time to discuss events. This affects the accuracy of their memories and also makes them more confident even in the memory is false. A jury will be willing to consider the account of a confident witness even when their memory may not be correct. This can also work vice versa when a witness incorporates accurate details into their account to make them more confident. The study shows the potential for further research into how people influence each other’s memories.
Works Cited
French, Lauren, Maryanne Garry, and Kazuo Mori. “You say tomato? Collaborative remembering leads to more false memories for intimate couples than for strangers.” Memory16.3 (2008): 262-273.
Genetic Information And Risk Classification In Individual Life And Health Insurance
Name
Subject
Professor
Institution
Genetic Information And Risk Classification In Individual Life And Health Insurance
Risk classification methods for health or individual life insurance cover should be examined critically. The question regarding the nature of information to be obtained from the insured before calculating the cost of insurance has generated mixed reaction from different players in the insurance industry. Different states have hence resulted to enacting different legislations which impose different restrictions for the insurance companies as to what information to be included in calculating insurance costs or even in working underwriting claims. The question of whether genetic information should be a part of the information necessary to insurers should be examined from all perspectives. Since medical information about the insured is extremely important, such information should not only be detailed but also accurate.
While medical information in most cases seeks to identify any pre existing condition before taking a medical cover, it is becoming increasingly important to determine whether an individual has any predisposing factors to certain medical conditions. Such information can either be obtained from the medical history or obtaining the genetic information of the subject. With technological advancements, testing for certain genetic conditions to determine whether an individual is at an increased risk of developing a certain medical condition has become increasingly possible. The increasing number of disease conditions with a genetic predisposition has created the need to examine the efficacy of genetic information as a method to be employed in risk classification. Questions raised regarding the use of genetic information have led to the enactment of certain insurance regulations restricting its use in determining the cost of insurance in some states. Some express the concerns that genetic information testing is an infringement to the individual’s private medical history. Others feel that it might not confer any meaningful advantage over the less costly medical and family history which can reveal almost as much details as a genetic profile would.
For any risk classification method to be effective, it should be unique in terms of accuracy and cost efficiency. The accuracy of genetic testing in determining the actual probability of developing a certain medical condition cannot be quarantined due to the fact that genetic factors are subject to certain environmental factors. Medical information obtained from family history may exclude some vital information regarding the risk of the individual in developing certain serious genetic conditions like Huntington’s disease among others which can be more accurately diagnosed through genetic testing. While this may suggest the need for using genetic information in the determination of an individual’s loss potential, an understanding of the criteria used in deciding the methods to be used in calculating the risk factor will shed more light on the subject.
The actuarial equity is an important criterion which seeks to classify individuals in terms of risk groups. In this case, any person seeking insurance can either be at high risk, low risk group or average. This can create different implications both to the insurer and the insured. Determining an individual’s level of risk can be a costly exercise for the insurer. The competitive nature of the insurance market is creating the need for insurers to explore unique ways of determining the loss potential of an individual in an effort to promote equity within the insured population. Due to the difficulty in determining the morbidity associated with certain risk factors owing to interference by environmental factors, genetic technological advancement has created the need for insurers to determine the exact genetic information of the individual. This will reduce cases of people been denied insurance cover or paying high insurance costs when they are classified in the high risk potential.
The ability of an insurer to determine the accuracy of the data obtained about the risk factor is a question of its administrative efficiency. Inefficiency on the side of the insurer will result to unreliable data regarding the risk factors of the insured. Use of proxy in addition to primary factors as a means of verification to the medical information is a common phenomenon among many insurers. This creates the need to use genetic information together with medical history since both are interrelated and any of them can act as proxy to the other. The question of whether the risk classification method confers any valuable incentive to the insurer and the insured is very vital. Genetic testing done to determine the loss potential of an individual before insurance can reveal a curable or manageable disease condition which the individual might not have been aware of and hence seek early medical or surgical intervention. This can also be advantageous to the insurer since a person who would have been excluded from insurance cover due to a high risk factor will end up receiving the insurance cover. In this case, if genetic information will act as an added incentive to both the insurer and insured, it is recommendable. However, in certain instances, it might be disadvantageous to both parties.
Genetic testing can raise certain ethical questions. It is important for the insurer to treat information obtained pertaining the genetic information of the insured as confidential. However, in some cases, this is not realistic since most insurance companies share underwriting information about their clients. The necessity the medical cover tom the individual is also a common question. In addition, obtaining genetic information can sometimes perpetuate discrimination among certain groups that are naturally discriminated against. However, it can be a useful tool since it can provide information regarding individual who may be reluctant to take insurance cover and hence encourage them to accept insurance.
Genetic Engineering should be regulated by the Government
Name:
Institution:
Course:
Tutor:
Date:
Admission Essay: Genetic Engineering should be regulated by the Government
To enhance their quality of life, human beings pursue different facets of knowledge. They explore greater knowledge about their existence as well as the existence and functioning of the world. Science provides a clear and practical tool through which humans explore their quest for this important knowledge. Using this, they are able to unlock many mysteries and answer a host of questions about their entire wellbeing. In the recent past, humans have explored capacities to manipulate genetic material. Indeed, this is revolutionary knowledge that greatly enhances the quality of life of humanity. Nonetheless, the fact that all living organisms’ genetic wellbeing can be manipulated using relative technologies raises various concerns. Thus although the benefits are immense, the government should regulate the practice.
One of the technologies associated with genetic engineering pertains to cloning. Basically, this is creation of multiple replicas of the existing organism. Various scientific procedures are employed during cloning to ensure that the ultimate product has idyllic qualities. For instance, cloned human beings often have the best qualities, at least from the point of view of the current population. Failure to regulate the practice can amount to production of persons of similar attributes. In the long run however, it should be appreciated that human tastes and preferences are dynamic. It would be difficult to reverse the procedure if the respective qualities are no longer considered to be ideal.
If genetic engineering is not regulated, it can culminate in the extinction of important species. In this respect, humans utilize both plant and animal species for various purposes. Naturally, inherent diversity cushions populations against negative effects that occur periodically. Extinction of important species and creation of dominant species compromises the very existence of humanity. In particular, it exposes the human race to various social, economic and environmental threats that can wipe out the entire generation. For this reason, it is imperative for the practice to be regulated.
Finally, unregulated genetic engineering can mess up the global economy. Since all products as well as relative production processes would be ideal, there would be no need for employment. Innumerable products that are currently in the market would be taken to waste if cloned products are allowed to flood the market. Business would lose meaning and the economy would be destabilized. In this consideration, it is vital for the practice to be regulated.
In sum, recent developments in the field of knowledge have culminated in the exploration of genetic engineering. This allows for manipulation of the genetic wellbeing of living organisms. Although the practice has various benefits; it needs to be regulated by the government to yield optimal outcomes. Lack of regulation culminates in extinction of important species, exposure of the human race to imminent social, economic and environmental threats due to creation of dominant species, and destabilization of the global economy. Undoubtedly, these impacts have far reaching implications on the general wellbeing of the human race.