Analyse wellness strategy at M&S Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Analyse wellness strategy at M&S - Essay Example Considering the case of Mark and Spencer (M & S) Company with many stores across the UK and 82, 000 employees, there is evidence the welfare of the employees is very important to ensure that the company grows. The company used to provide important service and meals to its employees to maintain their health. According to the company’s belief, a strong connection exists between employee welfare and the success of the business. Wellbeing is one of the things that impacts greatly on the employees’ engagement and the company’s productivity according to Arnold et al. (2010). The company gives health information to its employees through the companys website and advises them on lifestyle issues, and the employees’ wellbeing is on the top priority list. However, the company experienced a decline in sales and other technical challenges leading to losses. The company concentrated too much on the employees’ wellbeing regarding their health and nutrition and neglected other important areas such as employee performance in delivering the goods to the customers. Their understanding of the wellbeing was misplaced, as there are very many factors that constitute the wellbeing of employees other than just health. The problem could be due to less supervision of the employee especially in the online business on matters concerning distribution. The employees spent most of their time concentrating on their wellbeing and reading health matters on the internet rather that concentrating on the company’s activities. The retailer’s distribution centre at Castle Dominion, Leicestershire caused most of the delays and customers raised many complaints in the social media. The intervention by the company to the delivery problem was slo w showing that despite the company ensuring that the employees were comfortable; there was little employee engagement in various issues. The company focused so much on the physical, social, and psychological issues of the employees and less on

Psychological research studies

Psychological research studies It was first believed, according to the empiricists view (e.g. Locke, 1939) that a newborn infants ability to perceive, developed solely through a process of learning via experience. These pinnacle underestimates could have existed due to the extremely difficult nature of assessing what one could consider inaccessible to direct measurements. Contemporary knowledge in this domain has proliferated markedly due to the development of inventive techniques used to measure infants perceptual abilities. These perceptual abilities are considered to form the basis for rapid learning and development (Mehler Dupoux, 1994) and therefore are considered not only fascinating, but of pronounced importance to the study of developmental psychology. This interest is reflected in the numerous methods (e.g. behavioural, psychophsiological, and methods that assess brain responses) applied to infer the abilities of infants to perceive. In the present paper, focus will be dedicated to exploring the various research methods and reference to psychological research studies will be made in order to place the various approaches into a relatable context. The preference method devised by Robert Frantz (1958) is a straightforward technique which involves presenting an infant with two or more stimuli simultaneously, and as the name implies, assessing which was attentionally or perceptually preferred (Houston-Price Nakai, 2004). Early research generally relied on an observer watching the infants face and measuring how long one of the stimuli was looked at; however, present-day research relies on objectively scoring video film of the infants face or recording eye fixation, thereby strengthening accuracy of results (Smith, Cowie Blades, 2007). A variation of this technique was used to evaluate infants responsiveness to pictorial depth cues, in which two objects were placed at equal distances away from the infant. A strong reaching preference was demonstrated under monocular viewing conditions for the object that seemed closer due to pictorial depth cues. As this effect ceased during binocular conditions it was deduced that infants percei ve distance from pictorial cues (Kavsek et al., 2009). Along with this illuminating realization, the preference method has enabled many other intriguing deductions regarding infants perceptual abilities. For example, infants prefer to fixate on emotionally significant (i.e. familiar) stimuli (Burnham Dodd, 1999) as well as visual stimuli that match auditory stimuli (Golinkoff et al., 1987). This matching effect was also investigated and verified by Jeffrey Pickens (1994) through the use of visual preference to one of two television monitors. This method therefore leads to two types of inference; whether discrimination occurred and the salience of the preferred stimuli to infants (Houston-Price Nakai, 2004). The most popular method for measuring infants perceptual abilities is the habituation method, which capitalizes on the simplest form of learning. This technique involves a system in which a repeated stimulus becomes so familiar that initially associated responses cease to occur (habituation). If a new stimulus is presented and can be distinguished from the previous, attention can be renewed (dishabituated) (Shaffer Kipp, 2007). This method is also referred to as the familiarization-novelty procedure as the infants terminated response indicates recognition of a previously experienced stimulus, whereas regained attention indicates a novel stimulus (Bertenthal Longo, 2002). As this method can be applied to a myriad of research questions, it has elicited numerous substantial discoveries. For example, evidence for perceptual colour categories in pre-linguistic infants was obtained through the classical experiment conducted by Bornstein, Kessen and Weisskopf (1976). After habituation to one stimuli (e.g. red1), more attention was focused onto a colour from what an adult would consider a different colour category (i.e. preferred yellow instead of red2), even though the wavelength of the two novel stimuli where equal (Franklin Davies, 2004). Mayo, Nawrot and Nawrot (2009) proved that dihabituation results (obtained through use of the initial stimulus with manipulated depth) can indicate that infants as young as 16 weeks of age may be sensitive to indisputable depth from motion parallax. Conditioning focuses on the postulation that infants will learn to carry out behaviours if they are reinforced, which allows infants control over their environment and reflects understanding of relationships within the world (Smith et al., 2007). For example, Bower (1965) conditioned infants to turn their heads to one side by rewarding them with an adult engaging them in a peek-a-boo game. Once this response was established, the infant only received the reward if the infant turned his/her head when a certain stimulus was present. Discrimination can thereby be detected and in this case, size constancy was observed, as conditioned responses were three times more probable to the same stimuli (i.e. a 30cm cube) regardless of fluctuating retinal image size than to different stimuli (i.e. a 90cm cube) . Kuhl (1983) found that infants are capable of categorizing speech sounds by adopting the conditioning method and using a battery operated toy as a visual reinforcer. High amplitude sucking takes advantage of the fact that infants have good motor control of their sucking behaviour and this fact can be used to determine discrimination as well as likes and dislikes of the infant in question (Werker, Shi, Desjardins, Pegg, Polka Patterson, 1998). The infant is given an adapted pacifier containing electrical circuitry, and once the infants baseline sucking rate is recorded, variations (i.e. harder or faster sucking) trip the circuit thereby activating the reward (e.g. tape recorder)(Shaffer Kipp, 2007). Siqueland and De Lucia (1969) used a projected light as a visual stimulus to condition infants sucking, with strength of sucking directly proportional to the brightness of the visual stimuli. They concluded that at 4 months this relationship could be learned. A habituation version of the high amplitude sucking procedure was used to determine that infants perceive speech in a categorized manner. This was evident by familiarization (habituation) to the first stimuli (e.g. /ba/), followed by an increased sucking rate (dishabituation) in response to a second, novel stimuli (e.g. /pa/), thereby indicating discrimination between the categories had occurred (Eimas et al., 1971). Unobservable responses can also be accessed through measuring evoked potentials and changes in heart rate. With regards to changes in heart rate, it is expected that if an infant is surprised or upset their heart rate will increase, decreasing when focusing or attending. These effects can thus be manipulated through the habituation method to determine discrimination (Smith et al., 2007). Evoked potentials are measured by use of electrodes placed in positions on the scalp that process the presented stimuli. If a stimuli is perceived, it is reflected by a pattern of brain waves (i.e. evoked potentials), with different stimuli producing different patterns of electrical activity (Shaffer Kipp, 2007). Discrimination can therefore be deduced. A study using evoked potentials proved that visual acuity and contrast sensitivity are poor in the neonate, but improve during the first year of life (Atkinson et al., 1974). There is no question regarding the tremendous impact of these experimental methods; however they are not without their limitations. The preference method is praised as it is easy to employ, has a wide scope of application and response demands are minimal, although results can be confounded by familiarization effects prior to the preference procedure (Houston-Price Nakai, 2004). Another issue appears if an infant fails to show preference between the stimuli, as it is unclear whether the infant failed to discriminate or if the stimuli where found equally interesting (Shaffer Kipp, 2007). These effects can to some extent be controlled for by the use of the habituation method, which exploits the familiarization effect. This is a well understood, versatile procedure which is suited to investigations across many age groups (Werker et al., 1998), although data of an individual infant cannot easily be examined and discrimination behaviour is therefore only described with reference to a gro up (Werker Lalonde, 1988). Another probable inadequacy of this method concerns the lack of motivation of infants to show discrimination from a familiar stimulus, due to novelty being the only reward (Werker et al., 1998). Conditioning methods can rectify these problems as they provide reward and are able to provide data on individual subjects and hence able to identify individual differences. This paradigm is also useful in studying developmental changes through implementing experiments at different ages (Werker et al., 1998). The high amplitude sucking method is advantageous as it can measure a newborns (only a few hours old) perceptual ability due to sucking being easily conditioned (Werker et al., 1998). Williams and Golenski (1979) identified the major limitation with this study being that there is often a high drop-out rate due to infants who are fussy or sleepy, which may result in skewed data. Neurological and autonomic understanding has undoubtedly developed from studies involving evoked potentials and heart rate fluctuations; although these studies do little in accessing what differences are significant to the individual infant. All the above discussed paradigms are beneficial in assessing infants perceptual abilities, each having both strengths and weaknesses. As the habituation-dishabituation method is the most popular method of assessing infants perceptual abilities, along with the fact that many methods may be considered a variation of this paradigm, one might be lead to the inference of its superiority. However, over the years the differences between the methods have diminished due to modern research methods encapsulating on positive aspects from the various paradigms (Houston-Price Nakai, 2004). Therefore, with regards to methods in assessing infants perceptual abilities, what seems of most importance is the link between the research question of interest and the appropriate method to answer that question. References: Atkinson, J., Braddick, O., Braddick, F. (1974). Acuity and contrast sensitivity of invant vision. Nature, 247, 403-404. Bornstein, M. H., Kessen, W., Weisskopf, S. (1976). Colour vision and hue categorization in young infants. Journal of experimental psychology: Human perception and performance, 1, 115-129. Bower, T.G.R. (1965). Stimulus variables determining space perception in infants. Science, 149, 88-9. Burnham, D., Dodd, B. (1999). Familiarity and novelty preferences in infants auditory-visual speech perception: problems, factors, and a solution. In C. Rovee-Collier, L. Lipsitt, H. Hayne (Ed.), Advances in Infancy Research, 12, (pp. 170-187). Ablex: Stamford. Eimas, P.D., Siqueland, E.R., Jusczyk, P., Vigorito, J. (1971). Speech perception in infants. Science, 171 (3968), 303-306. Franklin, A., Davies, I. R. L. (2004). New evidence for infant colour categories. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 22, 347-377. Frantz, R. (1958). Pattern vision in young infants. The Psychological Record, 8, 43-47. Golinkoff, R., Hirsh-Pasek, K., Cauley, K., Gordon, L. (1987). The eyes have it: lexical and syntactic comprehension in a new paradigm. Journal of Child Language, 14, 23-45. Houstin-Price, C., Nakai, S. (2004). Theory and Method in Developmental Research: Distinguishing novelty and familiarity effects in infant preference procedures. Infant and Child Development, 13, 341-348. Kavsek, M., Granrud, C. E., Yonas, A. (2009). Infants responsiveness to pictoral depth cues in preferential reaching studies: A meta-analysis. Infant behavior and development, 32, 245 -253. Kuhl, P.K. (1983). Perception of auditory equivalence classes for speech in early infancy. Infant behaviour and Development, 6 (2-3), 263-285. Locke, J. (1939). An essay concerning human understanding. In E. A. Burtt (Ed.), The English Philosophers from Bacon to Mill. New York: Modern Library Longo, M. R., Bertenthal, B.I. (2006). Common coding of observation and execution of action in 9-month-old infants. Infancy, 10 (1), 43-59. Mehler, J., Dupoux, E. (1994). What infants know. The New Cognitive Science of Early Development. Oxford:Blackwell. Nawrot, E., Mayo, S. L., Nawrot, M. (2009). The development of depth perception from motion parallax in infancy. Attention, Perception and Psychophysics, 71 (1), 194-199. Pickens, J. (1994). Perception of Auditory-Visual Distance Relations by 5-month-old infants.Developmental Psychology, 30 (4), 537-544. Shaffer, D. R., Kipp, K. (2007). Developmental Psychology: Childhood Adolescence (8th ed.). Belmont, USA: Nelson Education Ltd. Siqueland, E. R., De Lucia, C. A. (1969). Visual reinforcement of non-nutritive sucking in human infants. Science, 165, 1144-1146. Smith, P. K., Cowie, H., Blades, M. (2003). Understanding Childrens Development (4th ed.). Oxford, England: Blackwell Publishing. Werker, J. F., Lalonde, C. E. (1988). Cross language perception: initial capabilities and developmental change. Developmental psychology. 24 (5): 672 683. Werker, J.F., Shi, R., Desjardins, R., Pegg, J. E., Polka, L., Patterson, M. (1998). Three Methods for testing infant speech perception. In A. Slater (Ed.), Perceptual Development: Visual, Auditory and Speech perception in infancy (pp. 389-418). Hove, UK: Psychology Press Ltd. Williams, L., Golenski, J. (1979). Infant Behavioural State and Speech Sound Discrimination. Child Development, 50, 1243-1246.

Weight of Marijuana and Criminal and Tax Law :: social issues

Weight of Marijuana and Criminal and Tax Law Conclusive research has shown that wet (uncured) marijuana is not psychoactive. Before drying, decarboxylation of inactive THCA acid into THC has not yet occurred. During the curing (drying) process, the COOH bonded to the THC is released. The result is the psychoactive compound delta9 THC. The State of North Carolina’s laws do not distinguish between the uncured weight of marijuana from the cured (dry) weight, necessary for marijuana to be consumed or sold. No one purchases wet marijuana at a price comparable to suggested market value because approximately 80% of this weight consists of water, both in the plant tissue and chemically bonded by carbon to the THC molecule. No one smokes fresh, wet, uncured marijuana because it cannot produce a euphoric effect. Decarboxylation must occur by drying prior to it’s combustion that occurs with smoking (this does not occur when attempting to smoke uncured marijuana), drying must also occur before eating marijuana, if it is to produce a euphoric effect. . North Carolina’s G.S. 15A-903(a)(1) allows the State to retain only a small random sample of marijuana to be made available to prosecutors and notably the defendants for the discovery rights. This deprives the defense of having all the evidence available to them. The actual weight of marijuana is an essential element of the criminal statute. The marijuana’s weight is the primary factor in determining the NC unauthorized substance tax assessment. ‘Mature stalks’ are found on all mature marijuana plants. The percentage by weight of marijuana’s ‘mature stalks’ can vary widely by different cultivation methods and by genetic variation. NC G.S. 90-87(16) clearly exempts ‘mature stalks’ from being considered toward the weight of ‘marijuana’ for criminal sentencing purposes. ‘Mature stalks’ are exempt because the State has recognized that they have neither intrinsic value as an intoxicant, nor any noteworthy market value. Marijuana’s ‘shade leaves’ are a waste product for marijuana farmers. These leaves are not smoked, and are not psychoactive. Marijuana’s initial wet, uncured weight can be over 500% of the final, dried, consumable and marketable weight. Uncured marijuana cannot be bagged or jarred because without curing because it would mold, rot, and become valueless. The State’s weighing of water content in uncured marijuana has resulted in many citizens receiving far harsher imprisonment, taxes and fines. Marijuana trafficking in North Carolina carries a mandatory minimum 2-year sentence for anyone possessing 10 lbs.

Maths Coursework- Matrix Investigation

Maths SL Matrix Investigation I will try to investigate in powers of matrices (2Ãâ€"2). Also, try to find a pattern, if there is one. A=[pic] Using my GCD calculator to raise matrix A to different powers [pic]= [pic] [pic]= [pic] [pic]=[pic] [pic]= [pic] [pic]= [pic] [pic]= [pic] [pic]=[pic] The pattern that I can see is that when the power of matrix A is an even number e. g. 2,4,6,8 then the result is [pic] the identity matrix. However, when the power is an odd number the matrix stays the same so [pic] My prediction for [pic] matrix is: [pic] Using the GCD calculator I checked my answer and it is correct.The determinant for this matrix A is -1 because (1x(-1)-0x3), that means that if we multiply A with the inverse of A so [pic] the result would be [pic] identity matrix. [pic]= [pic] [pic] [pic] which basically shows us that the inverse of this matrix is the same as the original one. A general rule for [pic](using algebra) When the ‘n’ is an even number [pic]= A[pic] wh en the ‘n’ is an odd number [pic]= A(A[pic] It’s basically really simple one because of the determinant, which was -1, so when we make it as a fraction [pic] the result is still the same.Now, I am considering the matrix B= [pic] Using my GCD calculator I am calculating B raised to different powers. [pic]= [pic] [pic]= [pic] [pic]= [pic] [pic]= [pic] [pic]= [pic] The determinant of this matrix is -4 so probably the formula from before would not work because it’s not an identity matrix. But what we can see it is somehow related to the identity matrix. Because of the first result, which is just squaring, is 4x[pic] From these calculations I can see that the formula for an even powers would be: [pic]= [pic] so [pic]= [pic] = [pic] [pic]= [pic] = [pic]And when the power is an odd number det= -4 [pic]= [pic][pic] [pic] so [pic]= [pic] = [pic]=[pic] [pic]= [pic] = [pic]=[pic] My prediction for [pic] would be [pic]= [pic] = [pic]=[pic]= [pic] =[pic] As I checked i t using my GCD calculator and it is right we can consider that the formula is working for matrix B, which has a determinant equal to -4 Now I am trying to generalized this rule and try different values for a, b and n. pic] Using the GCD [pic]= [pic] [pic]= [pic] Checking with the formula (the determinant is equal to -16) [pic] So [pic] [pic]= [pic] = [pic]= [pic] Using the GCD and formula to see if the pattern is working: [pic]=[pic] [pic] So [pic] (the determinant is equal to -9) [pic]=[pic] [pic]=[pic]=[pic] [pic]=[pic] [pic]= [pic] The formula works so far, however now I am going to try raise matrix to a negative power and see, if the formula is working: [pic] I can’t put it into the calculator.But we know that when we raise something to the negative power is the same as: e. g. [pic] = [pic] [pic]=[pic] [pic] [pic]=[pic] [pic]= [pic] The rule for negative powers make sense, we would always end up with 1 over matrix. So simply saying when the n was a positive odd number the matrix was [pic] and when n was the same but negative the result was [pic] so almost the same but every element in the matrix was 1 over the result from the positive. Now I am going to try a different value for b: [pic] = [pic] [pic]= [pic] pic] = [pic] [pic]=[pic] We could also consider the power n= [pic] [pic] Which we can rearrange as [pic] We can’t really use the pattern here because we cannot square root the matrices The results hold true in general because the third element(c) was always 0. Which made the determinant always a negative number and multiplication of two the same numbers e. g. (2x-2) (3x-3) It is important because of the rule, so when we use odd numbers as a power a formula is that n-1 which makes it an even number, which then is divided by two.Now, I will consider powers of the form [pic] Using the GCD: [pic]= [pic] the determinant is equal to(-4-4)=-8 [pic]=[pic] [pic]= [pic] so [pic] = [pic] [pic]= [pic] so [pic] [pic]= 64[pic]=[pic] [pic] determinant = -19 [pic]= [pic] =[pic] [pic]= [pic] =[pic] it doesn’t work [pic]= [pic] =[pic]= [pic] [pic]= [pic] =[pic]= [pic] when I do [pic]= [pic] the formula doesn’t work anymore so I’ll try this one [pic]= [pic] [pic] = [pic] which is the same as in the calculator et’s see with the other matrix [pic] the determinant= -19 [pic]= [pic] = [pic] [pic]= [pic] =[pic]= [pic] [pic]= [pic] [pic] = [pic] As we can see the generalized rule is: For even powers: [pic]= [pic] Now I need to find out the formula for odd powers [pic]= [pic] so [pic] [pic]= 64[pic]=[pic] [pic] [pic] the determinant =-19 [pic]=[pic] [pic]= 19 [pic]= [pic] [pic]=[pic] [pic]=[pic] Using my GCD I checked the answer and it’s the same. The general rule for odd powers: [pic]= [pic]

Why Do We Dream?

No one knows the true answer as to why we humans dream. Probably no one ever will truly know but there are many theories concerning this topic. One theory brought about by famed psychologist Sigmund Freud is that dreams are secret wish fulfillments of the dreamer. Another is the information-processing theory. A third theory is called the activation-synthesis theory. All three are valid theories that deserved to be looked at and discussed with a little more detail. Sigmund Freud was a psychologist in the late 1800s to the mid-1900s. Much of his work is now considered to be dated and even a bit absurd but it is still studied to this day. Perhaps his most famous contribution to the world of psychology, along with being the father of psychoanalysis, was his work on the interpretation and meaning of dreams. He wrote, and in 1900 published, the book â€Å"The Interpretation of Dreams†. He himself found his book to be very important and said â€Å"[It] contains†¦ the most valuable of all the discoveries it has been my good fortune to make. Insight such as this falls to one's lot but once in a lifetime† (Cherry). His theory is that dreams are repressed, secret, often sexual, desires in the unconscious mind of the dreamer. While dreaming, these secret fears and desires make themselves known. After listening to some dreams from patients of his, Freud said â€Å"What is common in all these dreams is obvious. They completely satisfy wishes excited during the day which remain unrealized. They are simply and undisguisedly realizations of wishes† (Freud). Another theory about why humans dream is called the Information-Processing Theory. It is also known as the Off-Line Theory.