Part
1: article 1: Webster, R. J., & Saucier, D. A. (2017). Angels everywhere?
how beliefs in pure evil and pure good predict perceptions of heroic behavior.
Personality and Individual Differences, 104, 387-392.
doi:10.1016/j.paid.2016.08.037
Article
2: Amodio, D. M. (2014). The neuroscience of prejudice and stereotyping. Nature
Reviews. Neuroscience, 15(10), 670- 682. doi:10.1038/nrn3800
Part
2: In both articles the researchers both examine the phenomenon of evil and
goodness through the perception of the human brain, and the implications it
creates for humans. Both articles are looking specifically at human behavior in
response to certain stimuli or beliefs. How the two articles differ is the type
of behavior the researchers are examining. In the first article the researchers
are looking specifically at heroic behavior, and in the second article the
researchers are looking at prejudice and stereotyping. The first article is
looking at how people beliefs in pure good and evil shapes their belief in
supernatural beings like angels. The second article is looking specifically at
how humans naturally, almost subconsciously stereotype others and have certain
prejudices, even if they do not realize it. Each researcher posed questions whether certain beliefs could be attributed to occurrences that happen in peoples mind and consciousness.
Part
3:
Keywords
for article 1: Pure evil pure good, Heroism, Attributions,
Altruism, Prosociality,
Keywords
for article 2: prejudice, stereotyping.
Conventions
for article 1: People’s behavior, perceptions, references to other scholarly
articles.
Conventions
for article 2: neurological functions, human nature, references to other
scholarly articles.
Affordances
for article 1: easily accessed online, have definitions for keywords, can be
read very easily, divides piece into digestible pieces by using subheadings.
Affordances
for article 2: can be accessed both online and can be printed out, has
footnotes with definitions of keywords, read very easily, divided using
subheadings.
Writing
style for article 1: Scholarly
Writing
style for article 2: scholarly
Organization
structure for article 1: Abstract, article, data, references.
Organization
structure for article 2: Abstract, three subheadings, diagrams, reviews, references.
Intended
primary audience for article 1: Other psychologists researching pure evil and
pure good
Intended
primary audience for article 2: Other psychologist researching stereotyping and
prejudice.
Research
method for article 1: A scientific experiment was conducted and data was
compared.
Research
method for article 2: Many references to previous studies on the brain to
connect and back up to the claims the researchers made in the article.
Scholar’s
argument for article 1: We examined the effects of belief in pure evil (BPE)
and belief in pure good (BPG) on perceptions and evaluations of a
stereotypically altruistic (vs. egoistic) hero who apprehended a criminal
perpetrator. Overall, participants appreciably supported formal, public
accolades for the altruistic hero because they more greatly deified (i.e.,
venerated) the altruistic hero.
Scholar’s
argument for article 2: Social motivations, such as the desire to affiliate or
compete with others, rank among the most potent of human drives.
The
most important thing I noticed in the first article was the experiment they
conducted. This helped back up the claim they made with real hard evidence,
rather than abstract, unbacked claims. The most interesting thing about the
first article was how they connected the belief in pure good vs pure evil to
the belief in supernatural beings like angels. The most important part in the
second article I believe are the diagrams. They help the reader better
visualize what is going on in the brain that causes people to behave in the
ways they do. The most interesting thing I noticed about the second article was
that prejudice was actually caused by neural impulses that occur in the brain.
