Answer:
Gestalt perspective
Explanation:
Gestalt psychology was proposed by Kohl-er Koffa and Wertheimer. The meaning of this German word gestalt means the whole picture at once. It is the school of psychology that perceives the whole world at once. Sometimes it is also called the simplest form of psychology. Gestalt psychology explained that the whole object is more important than the sub-part of an object. It describes the unique perception of an object. Proximity, similarity, closure, figure and ground some are the form of Gestalt psychology.
Thus here Gestalt psychology is the psychology that focuses on the organization of perception and the thinking as a whole.
Answer:
Psychoanalytic theory concentrates on awareness levels combined with our experiences in early childhood that together can form the basis of certain mental disorders.
Explanation:
Answer:
The answer is the dependent variable.
Explanation:
In experimental studies, an independent variable is expected to affect a dependent variable. In this example, the lighting intensity is predicted to influence the participants' mood. This is, their mood <em>depends</em> on the amount of light to which they are exposed.
An easy way to remember the difference is to think: independent causes change in dependent.
Explanation:
translation = Why are religious and moral norms not coercible?
The relationship between religion and morality has long been hotly debated. Does religion make us more moral? Is it necessary for morality? Do moral inclinations emerge independently of religious intuitions? These debates, which nowadays rumble on in scientific journals as well as in public life, have frequently been marred by a series of conceptual confusions and limitations. Many scientific investigations have failed to decompose “religion” and “morality” into theoretically grounded elements; have adopted parochial conceptions of key concepts—in particular, sanitized conceptions of “prosocial” behavior; and have neglected to consider the complex interplay between cognition and culture. We argue that to make progress, the categories “religion” and “morality” must be fractionated into a set of biologically and psychologically cogent traits, revealing the cognitive foundations that shape and constrain relevant cultural variants. We adopt this fractionating strategy, setting out an encompassing evolutionary framework within which to situate and evaluate relevant evidence. Our goals are twofold: to produce a detailed picture of the current state of the field, and to provide a road map for future research on the relationship between religion and morality.
