opinion 4.2 and answer to the professor

Terrence Sawyer 

2 posts

Re:Module 4 DQ 2

Social influence is not always negative. In some instances, it may be used to promote beneficial behaviors. Are the decisions made by individuals in response to positive social influences more valid than those made in response to negative social influences? Why or why not?

From birth we are given an identity persuasion within religion, nationality, race. Inherently we spend a good part of our life defending this given fictional identity

Establishing a sense of self-identity separate from what is stamped is vital for good social cue disparity in making choices. Positive social influence weighted with a level of achievement in identity results in desired outcomes to risk.

Self-discipline in decisions in choices is always a challenge. Social influence in regards to how it affects the present, the future or what information our memory holds from the past can cause persuasion from consistent decisions creating discourse to alternate decisions (Schutt, Keshavan, & Seidman, 2015).  In the pursuit to do what is beneficial for self, and in cases where family is considered an extent of self, ‘for family’ social cues and trends can inspire change in behavior. Most people utilize When information is received that people have took risk and gained favorable results, this will promote us to take risk not normally taken, to gain the same rewards as information may have reported (Sepinwall, 2002). This can range from donations of time and money to promote a progressive status in our community and home through physical health changes, seeing that society has shown a positive result. Among the greatest advances in elucidating the determinants of disease over the past two decades has been the identification of social and psychological conditions that seem to influence morbidity and mortality directly through physiological processes and indirectly via behavioral pathways (Sepinwall, 2002).

 Choices are avoided with lack of hope or faith in response to doubt from negative social influence causing failure to act therefore missing opportunities that could better serve ourselves and community. Making a choice to allow social influence to promote behavior should be tempered with history, yet also balanced with faith (Francis-Williams, 2006). The factors of faith, self-preservation and beneficence has shown that positive social influence has validity in good outcomes (Francis-Williams, 2006).

Reference:

Francis-Williams, N. (2006). Evaluation of a faith-based Socioemotional support program for parents of African American youth with antisocial behaviors. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED490455.pdf

Schutt, R. K. (2015). Social Neuroscience. Cambridge, MA, United States: Harvard University Press.

(Schutt, 2015)

Schutt, R. K., Keshavan, M., & Seidman, L. J. (2015). Social Neuroscience. 

Sepinwall, D. R. (2002). Health and behavior: The interplay of biological, behavioral, and societal influences. Psychosomatics, 43(5), 431–432. doi:10.1176/appi.psy.43.5.431