Why Things Go Right. The Science of An Appreciative View by Laura King (University of Missouri at Columbia) is the first text to bring a truly appreciative view of psychology-as a science and for exploring behavior-to introductory students. It is built around the idea that students must study the discipline of psychology as a whole, that the sub-disciplines are intricately connected, and that human behavior is best understood by exploring its functioning state in addition to its potential dysfunctions. For example, imagine that you have been asked to create a science of "watchology." You have two watches that both have had the unfortunate "trauma" of being left in the pocket of someone's jeans through the washer and dryer. One watch has suffered the worst possible fate-it no longer tells time. The other has emerged from the traumatic event still ticking. Which watch would you use to develop your new science of watchology? Clearly, the working watch will help you understand watches better than the broken one. What does watchology have to do with psychology? Quite simply, in psychology as in watchology, it makes sense to start with what to gain a general understanding of human behavior and then apply that knowledge to those who have emerged from life's experiences in dysfunction.
This was a mandatory text required for this semester's Introductory Psychology course, I can't deny that it absolutely fulfilled any expectations required for a class on the basics of psychology and supplemented the lectures material perfectly. It addressed all the main facts on brain anatomy, human mind and psychological disorders that are mandatory for a preliminary view on the subject. The information is not presented with a cryptic or academic language that challenges the readers' comprehension, it's pretty straight-forward without falling into minor mistakes due to simplicity. However I was annoyed by the amount of examples that were unnecessary to explain the material, but instead took up space that could be dedicated to taking the topic more into depth. They made the paragraphs appear redundant without adding anything new and weighed down on the text. Some may point out they were entertaining and helped comprehend the concept, but given that this is meant as a college-level textbook I don't think these should be necessary. Sure they lighten the narration but this is not a novel, it's not meant to be a late-night read, but it could be to someone who is dedicated to psychology enough, because this is how cconversational this book is. That was my main problem with this book, had I taken it up for personal knowledge it would have been perfect, but as resource for my queries it rarely contained any answers.
Very interesting and has good information, but it’s pretty long and talks about some odd things every once in a while. (Half a chapter was about whether plants have conscious thought or not. Obviously they don’t, so why are we talking about this?) Overall it was good and my online class was pretty easy. I also like how the definitions of things are set up and how I can search for keywords with the online version. It was also easy to read and had examples of people and events I could relate to. It’s written modernly, if that makes sense.
Salah satu buku kesayangan saya. Buku ini sangat cocok digunakan untuk mereka yang tidak mengambil jurusan psikologi dalam perkuliahan. Psikologi adalah ilmu yang hybrid, artinya ilmu ini mampu masuk ke berbagai bidang yang digeluti manusia. Tidak ada salahnya bagi orang awam atau orang yang membutuhkan kejelasan mengenai psikologi untuk membaca buku ini.
Ada satu kutipan yang cukup saya sukai dari buku ini, yaitu bahwa psikologi adalah ilmu mengenai diri sendiri, bukan mengenai orang lain.
This book was for a Psych class [in which I got an 'A', thank you!]. Overall, it was showed a decent analysis of the European view of this discipline. There were informative comparisons and case studies. Unfortunately, the section on Freud's daughter, who did some great work, was relegated to only a paragraph and a picture, where her father got a section. In fact, none of the women in the psychiatry field got more than a paragraph. To me, this was a dichotomy since this book is written by a woman. Why was Ms. King reluctant to give her predecessors the appropriate 'shelf space?' Go figure!
I got this book for my Intro to Psychology class. It was very informative, but the book also expected you to know something before hand. I am taking an Intro to Psych. How was I suppose to know anything about this subject before this class? I constantly had to look stuff up on the computer for this book to make sense. Other then that this book was not too bad.