Recently in Physiological Motivation Category

John's video (proposing the questions)

Hank's video (responding)

Here are two Youtube videos of two brothers. One proposed the question, "what is your ultimate concern" the other replied. Just a heads up if you watch the video...they sort of talk about a lot of other things leading up to the excitement of "ultimate concerns", but all in all they are pretty decent videos.

What I took from the videos:
Just think for a minute: What would you die or kill for?  Is there really something in your life that is that important?  At what point in your life does something become that important?  John has a child and at this point in his life his new baby is his ultimate concern...making sure that his needs are met. (Well that sounds familiar doesn't it; babies have needs too, they just can't satisfy them by themselves!!)

A response from the brother, Hank, proposes some interesting questions in response to the initial questions.

What are you concerned with at all, don't limit it to just the ultimate concern.

What I think is neat is how he explains how there are boundaries (visually I imagined a circle) of things you would die for, things you would fight for, things you care at all about, and finally things you just don't care about. 

This then brings up that maybe something like maybe your own child is something you "would die for", but then the stranger-mom at Wal Mart has a child that is in the area of "things you don't care about".  They are both babies but there is something different about your baby that makes it so much more important to you than the stranger's. 

And for each person this will be different, so what is your ultimate concern? Or, what do you care about, or don't care about? 

When these are defined in our own life we may start to realize our motivations and maybe even goals.  We know from class that we all have physiological needs. Those are obviously of some concern to everyone, and they will be satisfied in much the same way. Then there are psychological needs and social needs and whatever our concerns in this world are will affect those needs. 

Take the concern you thought of from above and apply that to a psychological or social need and how that would have an impact on our behavior in order to satisfy that need.  

Advertising is a pretty manipulative business.  All kinds of industries use language, images, commercials, etc. to influence our emotions and motivate us to NEED their product or service.  While the United States is somewhat strict about inflammatory advertising, especially concerning hot topics (i.e. Tim Tebow's abortion commercial during the Superbowl caused quite a stir), France is much more liberal.  First, go to the following site and see what side of the fence you land on: 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/24/french-oral-sex-anti-smok_n_474909.html

The issue at the heart of this controversey is teenage smoking. In France, 33% of the teens smoke.  The anti-smoking agency's motivation behind this is they are trying to extinguish or at least reduce this behavior. General advertising efforts solely commenting on health and dying hasn't elicited the type of reaction anti-smoking agencies would have liked. So this was there behavioral response to that antecedent.  From that, there has stemmed many emotionally-driven responses.  Obviously, the sexual connotations are driving this debate of whether or not this ad should be pulled. Pretty funny though because all this controversy by the opposition has made this ad tremendously popular and famous within France and obviously around the world as it has made it into a college classroom in the Midwest.

Personally, I think the ad is provocative and thus powerfully effective. This will undoubtedly grab the attention of youth emitting this addictive behavior. Consequently, the message will get across to these individuals, positively reinforcing the ad company's behavior of producing ads such as this one. It's ingenious really as controversial ads always seem to get more attention than they would have if the opposition kept its mouth shut. It's a pretty crazy behavior modification tool within the marketing business really as their extrinsic motivation to gain attention by producing this controversial ad proved to be a stimulus for discussion and smoking awareness (response).

While I do not smoke, I do wonder within the context of our class whether smoking is a physiological need or a quasi-need?  Is it possible for a quasi-need (a situationally induced want) to turn into a physiological need over time as one continues to smoke? (physiological need:  biological need within an organism orchestrating brain structures, hormones, etc. to regulate imbalances and necessary well-being)

After reading Sadie's article on why having a puppy is a positive thing and her experience with it, I looked for an article that discussed some of the benefits of it and I came across this article. This article discusses how having a dog can physically and literally improve an indiviuals's physical health. People who own dogs generally have lower colesterol, lower blood pressure,and have reduced chances of cardiovascular diseases. These individuals also have faster recovery times and higher survival rates.These individuals also have fewer visits to the doctor because their physical health is over all better. The main thing in this article that relates to me is how having a dog can improve the emotional state of people. As I said in commenting on Sadie's article, I have been battling severe depression that almost cost me everything I had, including my college career. I have been in counseling, which my counselor suggested I should have some sort of pet even if just a fish. For Christmas this year, my sister and her family got me a female miniature weiner dog which  I named Lady. She has made a huge positive effect in my life and my depression has done a 180 since I got her. I am almost like a completely different person. She gives me a reason to smile each and everyday and something to look foward to going home to. She has made a huge difference in my life and in my emotional state of mind. She gives me a sense of unconditional love and acceptance, and feeling of being needed, which is most important. I couldn't agree with this article more that having a dog can improve a person's physical healtha and also their emotional helath.

NBA superstar and Dallas Maverick's player Caron Butler has an addiction. Actually he has two of them.  For his most recent addiction, the NBA has now gone on to ban this behavior during games due to safety concerns.  What is it you ask?  Has to be something performance enhancing or drug related right? Actually, the NBA has banned Butler for chewing straws during the game, of which he goes through at least 12 a game--60 per day!  Talk about quite an oral fixation.  This got me thinking, why does he do this?  There's obviously a reason for this behavior.  Well Butler stated in his blog that this habit calmed him down, especially helpful during NBA games I imagine.  His motivation for this behavior was to satisfy his physiological response of stress and anxiousness.  Arguably, this was a performance enhancer of sorts for him.  It'll be interesting to see how much the extinction of this behavior will affect him.  Looking back, this behavior could possibly be correlated/as a consequence of his first habit:

In summer 2009, Butler blogged on NBA.com that he had lost 11 pounds just by giving up his daily "addiction" of drinking at least six 12-ounce bottles of Mountain Dew.

"I was going through withdrawals," Butler said on NBA.com. "... Honestly, those first two weeks without The Dew [were] the roughest two weeks of my life. I'm talking headaches, sweats and everything."

Like the straws became a psychological need and fixation, Butler had conditioned his body to the physiological extremes with his habitual caffeine intake.  It had really become an addiction. 

It will be interesting to see how Butler's behavior will be affected by the NBA's banning of chewing straws during games.  Will he take up another habit to help calm him down?  We'll see.  Here's a link to a video clip and article discussing the situation.  It's funny to watch the video and see all the fans and radio broadcasters who came to the game chewing straws in support of Butler's behavior.  It's also interesting to note in the sportsnation poll that 54% of people in America enjoyed chewing on straws...:

http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/nba/news/story?id=4945104

http://www.wisegeek.com/can-drinking-too-much-water-be-unhealthy-or-even-dangerous.htm

 

        In the Understanding Motivation and Emotion textbook, on page 86 there is a discussion about the dangers of drinking flavored water and how drinking too much water can be downright dangerous. Specifically, the book says, "When factors such as a sweet taste offer a high incentive value for drinking, human beings drink excessively and sometimes consume dangerously high amounts ... Both alcohol and caffeine (introduce biological processes) that motivate people to drink in excess."

 

I have to admit, I was very surprised by this finding. I did not think that mere flavoring in water could cause people to drink dangerous levels of water. The book also mentions that the "Drink 8 glasses of water per day" rule has absolutely no scientific basis. Of course most of us know about the dangers involved with alcohol, and the nutritional deficiencies that can arise from excessive amounts of alcohol, but I think most people are not aware that drinking too much water can kill you. When I was little I actually remember hearing about a girl who drank too much water and died because of it, but my mother assured me that she must have drank an extremely excessive amount for it to be a problem. I do not think the amount need be so excessive to prove fatal.

 

 This article mentioned that the 6-8 glasses of water per day probably does not do any harm because it still falls within the normal range, but it mentions that sometimes dieters and athletes try to get an "extra edge" by drinking more. One of the major problems is that "too much water can quickly deplete electrolytes like sodium compounds" and "(This sodium depletion) can rupture cells" either from the inside or outside of the cells. The symptoms arise quickly.

 

In hindsight, perhaps I should not be too surprised that I did not know this information. I have not yet taken Personal Wellness or been active in any sports programs. This may be common knowledge among certain groups, but I for one did not know any of this. I had assumed that the thirst satiety response cycle would be exactly the same for both flavored and regular water.

 

 Another question arose in my mind as I read about this problem among athletes. If drinking dangerous amounts of water can sometimes give an athlete an edge, it is probable that some people will continue to partake in excessive drinking even after learning about the dangers. In some ways this directly relates to the debate over steroid use. What motivates athletes to use steroids when some of the side effects can be very serious?

 

 I think it is important to note that we must never allow ourselves to become too comfortable with anything that could be dangerous. There is probably not a day in our lives when we have gone without water. We often think of it as completely harmless, but in reality in sufficient quantities there are a great many things that can kill a person. I think there is also a desensitization problem with dangerous machinery. I used to do occasionally work on projects in woodworking and had a couple close calls, which I think I can attribute to my lack of attention because after so many uneventful encounters with the dangerous machinery my fear response seemed to decline substantially.  

 

While the problem of drinking too much water is by no means an epidemic, I think it is a potential problem we need to be aware of, especially as energy drinks and flavored water drinks are becoming more common. There are serious dangers to even moderate amounts of certain energy drinks.

 

Another related topic I wanted to briefly bring up here is the food sold in fast food restaurants, the cigarettes sold in stores, and the drugs (such as caffeine) put in energy drinks. I am curious as to what others think regarding possible regulation for fast food restaurants, cigarette companies, and energy drink companies. If some of their products are found to be extremely harmful and found to contain addictive ingredients that encourage addiction and excess, should the public be simply warned through information campaigns or should the government set regulations that prevent certain unsafe products from being sold? One might argue that a black market of sorts would arise and people would just have to find ways around the regulations, but do we have a moral obligation to take greater action against these problems? There is a great deal more about the fast food restaurants and smoking companies using that could be said in this discussion, but I suppose that would be best left for another time.

 

The main reason why I believe this discussion is relevant and applicable to our class is because these chemicals and ingredients in these products directly influence the behavior of consumers and sometimes motivate them to do things against their best interests. I believe people are generally smart enough to make decisions on their own and excessive regulations can become ridiculous, but it is my opinion that a few extra standards may need to be implemented regarding these products.   

 

This is just a small excerpt from the main article I hyperlinked in case anyone would like to read the conclusion of the article without going to the hyperlink...

 

Generally too much water is defined as water consumed above what the kidneys can process in an hour. Extremely healthy kidneys would be able to process about 30 ounces of water in an hour. A person with kidney problems or with only one kidney should drink much less, as per doctor's instructions.

 

The person with healthy kidneys could develop water intoxication by drinking about 2 to 3 times what the kidneys can process. For a person with kidney problems or with one kidney, too much water might be defined as just an ounce or two over the recommended amounts.

 

For people with healthy kidneys it should be perfectly safe to drink two cups of water an hour, and for the dieter, even one cup an hour will fulfill requirements for getting plenty of water. However, drinking too much water in rapid succession can prove fatal and should definitely be avoided.