Экзаменационный билет №15

Phobias.

A phobia is a persistent fear of some specific object or situation that presents no actual danger to the person. The danger is magnified out of proportion to the actual situation. The individual perceives the situation as a threat to survival and experiences high levels of anxiety, perhaps even a panic attack if escape from the situation is impossible. Phobias are divided into three areas: agoraphobia, simple phobia and social phobia.

Agoraphobia is the fear of being in places or situations from which escape would be physically impossible or help unavailable. It is frequently a complication of panic disorder. Agoraphobia is derived from the Greek word agora, or «meeting place». Many agoraphobics are fearful of open places, shopping malls, concerts, and so forth. Whenever the person is exposed to that environment, he or she may experience an intense fear reaction. Agoraphobia accounts for two-thirds of panic sufferers.

Simple phobias are irrational, exaggerated fear of those things that many of us fear, including snakes, heights, fires, spiders, and darkness. These reactions can vary from mild to extreme; for example, quitting college because you find a spider in the shower is an irrationally extreme reaction to fear.

Social phobia is manifested by a fear of exposure to focused scrutiny by others and/or fear that you might do something to embarrass or humiliate yourself. Stage fright is the most common example of this condition. Social phobia is easily treated and the outcome is generally very good. Most of us live with our phobias and they don’t disrupt our lives. If, however, the phobia begins to take over your life and interferes with functioning, seek professional help.

Экзаменационный билет №17

Social psychology in court.

Broadly speaking, the field of Social Psychology concerns the study of the individual in a social context. Within social psychology, the specific field of group dynamics theory can be applied to many different types of small groups, including juries. However, given the broad context of such research, the principles arising from research in the area are largely global in nature and, so, difficult to apply to specific situations. A complete review of these principles would be outside the remit of this article. Nonetheless, a few universals are worth referring to briefly. For example, when a group appoints a spokesperson, it is more often the first member to speak, the person sitting at the head of the table, or a man. Each of these effects occur when juries appoint a foreman. Secondly, juries—like other groups—are prone to group polarisation, where deliberations usually strengthen individual members’ initial impressions. Thirdly, the larger the group, the more discussion of issues that takes place prior to reaching a decision. Some American courts have experimented with five- and six-person juries, and subsequent research on the matter suggests that the smaller juries are more likely to hold secret ballots and less likely to examine the evidence in detail. These principles of group dynamics suggest little in the way of improving the effectiveness of juries, except perhaps that a twelve-member jury is more likely to give the verdict more rigorous deliberation than the six-person version. This is particularly interesting given that the US Supreme Court has repeatedly argued that no difference exists between the two sizes, with regard to decision-making.