Summary
In Susan’s career goal modification case study, she was first encouraged by Frank’s self-assurance and professional success to think about pursuing a similar route. She starts to doubt the viability of her objectives as she deals with difficulties and time restraints in her studies. Susan considers Frank’s appealing appearance and professional achievements, which makes her self-conscious about her attractiveness and ability. She eventually has a justification for changing her goals to more “realistic” ones thanks to this reasoning, relieving her strain.
Susan’s circumstance fits the mere exposure effect, a social psychology idea. According to this hypothesis, people tend to form preferences for items or persons they are exposed to frequently. Susan may have first been drawn to Frank’s work path due to his attractiveness and confidence paired with their regular encounters. Rationalization is also essential in Susan’s decision-making process since she justifies her change in goals based on how she feels about her physical beauty and the benefits of being attractive to success.
Research Summary
The essay by Jansen (2020) is a significant contribution to scholarship that explores the dynamics of the mere exposure effect and illuminates its significance for comprehending human behavior and decision-making. The notion is further explored in the essay, explaining how people tend to develop a preference for stimuli, they encounter frequently. Jansen’s study provides a solid grasp of how familiarity affects our perceptions and influences our decisions by carefully examining the underlying mechanics of the mere exposure effect. Readers will learn important information on the subtle effects of repeated exposure on our preferences and judgments through this study—a phenomenon highly pertinent to Susan’s circumstance. In addition to advancing the theoretical understanding of the mere exposure effect, Jansen’s research illustrates the mere exposure effect’s practical applications in a variety of circumstances, such as career choices and interpersonal perceptions.
The research done by Montoya et al. (2017) considerably adds to the body of knowledge by re-examining the mere exposure effect and delving deeper into its intricacies. The research offers a novel viewpoint by examining the impact of frequent exposure on various factors, including recognition, familiarity, and liking. This all-encompassing strategy deepens our comprehension of how repeated exposure influences not only preferences but also recognition and comfort with stimuli. The study’s conclusions are directly applicable to Susan’s circumstance because their encounters’ increased familiarity may have impacted her initial love of Frank’s beauty and career. The research by Montoya et al. highlights the intricacy of how preferences driven by familiarity can affect individual choices and perceptions and increases our understanding of the mechanisms underlying the mere exposure effect. This study offers a more nuanced understanding of how repeated exposure might affect people’s decisions, which helps to bridge the gap between theoretical ideas and practical situations.
Application of the Mere Exposure Effect
Susan’s scenario fits with the mere exposure effect, a social psychological theory that is relevant in this situation. According to this idea, people have a tendency to form preferences for objects or people to whom they are exposed frequently (Jansen, 2020). Through a delicate mechanism, it affects our perceptions by encouraging, like through familiarity, frequently without our conscious awareness or conscious decision. In Susan’s situation, her constant exposure to Frank’s alluring appearance and professional achievement may have influenced her initial desire to follow his career path. This psychological occurrence illuminates the influence of extraneous elements on a person’s preferences and choices, including interactions and appearance (Montoya et al., 2017).
Relation
Studies in social psychology on the “mere exposure effect” are similar to Susan’s case study because they show how regular contact with a person can affect feelings of familiarity, affection, and even professional aspirations. These investigations explain how environmental factors, including one’s physical appearance and interactions with other people, influence one’s thoughts and actions. The theory highlights the impact of contextual influences in decision-making processes while providing useful insights into the complex ways in which familiarity-driven preferences play a part in molding an individual’s judgments and ambitions.
Ethical Reasoning Concept
According to The University of Texas at Austin (n.d.), states that rationalizations are manufactured explanations that conceal or deny actual acts, causes, and incentives. It is defined as justifications we give ourselves for not upholding our own moral standards. Unconsciously, we construct justifications to convince ourselves that we did nothing wrong or hurtful and that we are even not to blame. Everything has a justification because humans have a propensity to invent justifications and eventually accept them. It diminishes our sense of accountability for the wrongdoings we have committed.
The Susan case study reveals Susan’s unconscious justification for changing her professional aspirations based on perceived attractiveness by using the ethical reasoning concept of rationalizations. In this context, rationalizations refer to the creation of tenable but frequently distorted justifications for behaviors that may not be morally right (Baumeister & Bushman, 2017). Susan justifies her decision by making the mistaken assumption that a person’s physical attractiveness is directly related to their ability to succeed in their careers. She is able to persuade herself that her adjustment is sensible since this justification hides any potential bias and stereotyping that may have been at play in her decision. When she becomes aware of her justifications, she is forced to critically assess her decisions and consider the moral ramifications of continuing to rely success on appearance.
Critical Thinking Concept
Critical Thinking Issue Point of view is a position from which we perceive things. It is dependent on how we interpret what we see and experience. It is the perspective, orientation, and frame of reference (Montoya et al., 2017). It is a person’s core ideals, assumptions, and prejudices. Information analysis, a critical thinking concept, can be applied to Susan’s case study by analyzing the information and context that led to her choices. In this sense, data includes her thoughts on appearance and professional achievement, as well as the relationships between the two. By applying critical thinking, Susan is prompted to investigate whether or not Susan’s outward look is genuinely predictive of her professional success. She may make decisions that go beyond first impressions by analyzing the factors that shape her viewpoint. With this idea in mind, she will be more open to new perspectives, more willing to question long-held beliefs, and more likely to make well-informed decisions as she pursues her professional goals.
In Susan’s case, she made a choice depending on how she saw the scenario. She questioned whether she was deceiving herself by choosing to become a psychologist. She found herself altering her mind as she continued to ask him questions about her educational and career ambitions, and she did not consider what other people might think about the choice. The opinions of others were not an issue because she was aware that some of her family and friends would be disappointed in her because of the adjustments she was making to pursue her educational and professional ambitions. She considered her current predicament to be difficult and wished to make a choice that would ease the pressure she was feeling.
In conclusion, Susan’s case study illustrates the dynamic between the “mere exposure effect,” “rationalization,” and “societal pressures,” as discussed above. The hypothesis explains how the mere sight of Frank’s image may inspire such lofty goals in her life. The significance of the “mere exposure effect” to Susan’s predicament is further bolstered by the information provided by scholarly sources. The dangers of mistaking outward appearance for intrinsic worth are, however, brought into focus from an ethical perspective. Applying critical thinking, it becomes clear that questioning preconceived notions and prejudices is crucial to forming original and diverse professional identities.
References
Jansen, G. (2020, October 1). Mere exposure effect. https://ww.gui.do/post/mere-exposure-effect
Baumeister, R. F., & Bushman, B. J. (2017). Social psychology and human nature (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage.
Montoya, R. M., Horton, R. S., Vevea, J. L., Citkowicz, M., & Lauber, E. A. (2017). A re-examination of the mere exposure effect: The influence of repeated exposure on recognition, familiarity, and liking. Psychological bulletin, 143(5), 459. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2017-10109-001
The University of Texas at Austin. (n.d.). Ethics defined: Rationalizations. Retrieved from https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/glossary/rationalizations
write