Social Competence Prism Model: Social Competence In Lifespan

I am risky and make calculated decisions when I feel it is necessary. I do not consider the group as a whole but as individuals who are coming from different walks of life. Autonomy is how you approach the situation, when making decisions that will affect other individuals. My preferred lens does not change based on my location, situation, or attitude. The situation can not define you; the moment cannot be too big, I lead and I cannot follow.

Learning From analyzing my crisis, I learned that even though it was an experience I did not want to have, it provided me an opportunity to challenge myself and go head on with something I disagree. It opened my eyes that I learn and grow from experience and by approaching different situation instead of avoiding them or relying on someone else. Because of this, I try to approach more situations and deal with them by myself, if possible, so that I would learn how to deal with situations as these with more ease and professional

I only utilized perspective taking to better understand where Harry was coming from. This made me favor too much to Harry which limited the solutions that I thought of that would have equally benefited both Harry and ModernThink. This type of negotiation needed a high level of understanding of the interests of both parties in order to effectively make a deal between them. By not doing this to its full potential ultimately assisted in the decision of not making a

Wallace argues that actual thinking and education involves gaining a conscious awareness, often that those around us are in reality just as important as we are. So while people are more likely to attribute behavior to another’s personality, especially if it’s negative, this is far from accurate. This is a big piece to Gilbert’s model if people do not use controlled think or thinking that is effortful, conscious, and intentional (textbook, p.65) to see someone’s situational attribution they are misinterpreting information. This occurs automatically and even involuntary, which is why Wallace referred to it as a default setting. However, even if initially people are making attributions to someone’s internal state, they can change this way of thinking and recognize outside situations.

Identity Most people believe that identity is a fixed factor of your personality, but as Mel Schwartz says in her article, “we are perpetually re-framing, re-organizing, re-thinking, and re-considering ourselves”. With all the changing we as humans do it would be impossible to constantly be grounded to the same couple of words that we claim to be our identity. Schwartz mentions that there are two extremes when it comes to identity; those who know themselves and those who don’t know themselves. The perfect balanced between these two extremes is said to be ideal for truly creating your identity, but unfortunately is a very difficult task.

This mechanism gives rise to those states of mind which we are training ourselves to avoid - things like greed, lust, hatred, aversion, and jealousy. We choose to avoid these hindrances, not because they are evil in the normal sense of the word, but because they are compulsive; because they take the mind over and capture the attention completely; because they keep going round and round in tight little circles of thought; and because they seal us off from living

Even if I dislike taking risks, I am personally very good at making quick

The superego almost seems to be outside of the self, making moral judgments, telling us to make sacrifices for good causes even though self-sacrifice may not be quite logical or rational. And, in a sense, the superego is “outside”, since much of what it tells us to do or think we have learned from our parents, our schools, .or our religious institutions. What the ego and superego tell us not to do or think is repressed, forced into the unconscious mind.

The case “Alpha – Beta” is a very interesting case, which could be considered as one of my most favorable cases so far. What interested me was the fact that we had to act totally different from our conventional style. In fact, we were asked to behave collectively, formally, indirectly, patiently, unemotionally and passively. Although we could not make the deal, we all found this outcome understandable and predictable. What we learned from the exercise was to be aware of the existence of cross-cultural differences as well as how these differences affect our negotiation outcomes, then find out what should we do in the similar negotiation in our future.

When making a decision I prefer to analyse my surroundings, check the facts and concluded to practical solutions instead of making assumptions. When the decision is made I will gather the necessary information needed to achieve my goals and if working with others I expect them to grasp the situation immediately and take action. I have little to no tolerance for indecisiveness and assumptions in situations where there is a deadline because it is expected that persons hold their own. My obligations are my main priority even if personal matters have to suffer. I tend to lead or prefer to work alone in order to produce high quality results.

Rather than trying to make a different the easiest option is to keep status quo. Status quo is a great bias to be aware, people tend to make choices that do not cause anything to change ("Wise Geek," n.d.). Being aware of these bias my cause necessary change in one 's life that may not have happened

I get the sense of someone who is so accustomed to this oppressive state of affairs as normal that they do not question it, do not analyze its harmful effects, nor think to find a viable means out. And in some cases, of course, those means are not easy to come by. = = =

I believe I am more similar to the Extroverted, Sensing, Thinking, and intuition type than the Extroverted, Sensing, Feeling, and intuition type. This is mainly because I am a thinker, not feelers. I am a leader who can be pretty stubborn and bossy, and I like to choose the decision I know is right, even if it doesn 't benefit other people. I believe the reason I had an inaccurate first test, Is because I was sugar-coating some of my behaviors. When the test asked, "Do you usually make sure you get your way or do you value others opinions just as much as yours?

Meaning, that we must be careful when expressing our thoughts that are based merely in our judgments without testing them with a fair and noble mind. With this in mind, no individual has the power to make another upset, sad, or feel any other emotion, as we have the power over our mind to allow it or not to allow it. However, some of us are quick to lead our opinions with our hearts or external factors, instead of seeing the bigger picture. Therefore, our quick judgments/reasoning can have an ugly impact in our world. But, what are truly the limits of human freedom?

Overtime I came to conclude that being only acquainted with one of the three D’s at the moment actually benefited me in the long run. Due to my non interactive persona, it made me more analytical. It allowed me to stay within the shadows and become a spectator of society. I often found myself questioning in my head the positive and negative effects of decisions other people would make. Determining whether it’s really worth it or not and slowly forming a strong understanding and interpretation of society.