background preloader

Johari window

Johari window
The Johari window is a technique created in 1955 by two American psychologists, Joseph Luft (1916–2014) and Harrington Ingham (1914–1995),[1] used to help people better understand their relationship with self and others. It is used primarily in self-help groups and corporate settings as a heuristic exercise. When performing the exercise, subjects are given a list of 58 adjectives and pick five or six that they feel describe their own personality. Peers of the subject are then given the same list, and each pick five or six adjectives that describe the subject. Charles Handy calls this concept the Johari House with four rooms. Open or Arena: Adjectives that are selected by both the participant and his or her peers are placed into the Open or Arena quadrant. Hidden or Façade: Adjectives selected only by subjects, but not by any of their peers, are placed into the Hidden or Façade quadrant, representing information about them their peers are unaware of. Johari adjectives[edit] Therapy[edit] Related:  Developing Self-Awareness: The JoHari WindowTeaching tips

untitled Is Wine Bullshit? A Lafite Rothschild Bordeaux sells for a minimum of around $500 a bottle, while humble brands like Charles Shaw and Franzia sell for as little as $2. But as far as “wine economists” are concerned, the level of correlation between the price of a bottle of wine and its quality is low or nonexistent. In a number of damning studies, they suggest that wine is not just poorly priced, but that the different tastes we describe in wine may all be in our heads. A 2008 paper in The Journal of Wine Economics, for example, found that when consumers are unaware of a wine’s price, they “on average enjoy more expensive wines slightly less [than cheap ones].” Experts do not fare much better. The study could not conclude that experts preferred more expensive wine: “In sum, we find a non-negative relationship between price and overall rating for experts. In another experiment, critics tasted one red wine and one white wine. Year after year, Hodgson replicated his results. Not all wine is the same

Giving Constructive Feedback Performance feedback can be given two ways: through constructive feedback or through praise and criticism. Don't fall into the trap of giving praise and criticism on employee performance. Constructive feedback is information-specific, issue-focused, and based on observations. Positive feedback is news or input to an employee about an effort well done. Negative feedback is news to an employee about an effort that needs improvement. The guidelines for giving constructive feedback fall into four categories: content, manner, timing, and frequency. Content Content is what you say in the constructive feedback. In your first sentence, identify the topic or issue that the feedback will be about.Provide the specifics of what occurred. Without the specifics, you only have praise or criticism. Manner Manner is how you say the constructive feedback. Timing Timing answers this question: When do you give an employee feedback for a performance effort worth acknowledging? Frequency

Fenêtre de Johari Un article de Wikipédia, l'encyclopédie libre. La fenêtre de Johari est une méthode de représentation de la communication entre deux entités. Elle a été créée par Joseph Luft et Harrington Ingham en 1955[1]. Le mot "Johari" est d'ailleurs tiré des premières lettres des prénoms de ses inventeurs[2]. La fenêtre de Johari sert à classer les différentes informations sur une personne : Les informations dont la personne dispose sur elle-même (zone publique et cachée)Les informations dont elle ne dispose pas (zone aveugle et zone inconnue) Son utilisation en formation/séminaire, se révèle être un outil, un repère structurel favorisant la connaissance de soi et la connaissance de ce que les autres perçoivent et savent de nous. Portail de la psychologie

untitled Yerkes & Dodson (1908) Classics in the History of Psychology An internet resource developed by Christopher D. Green York University, Toronto, Ontario (Return to Classics index) Robert M. Yerkes and John D. First published in Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology, 18, 459-482. In connection with a study of various aspects of the modifiability of behavior in the dancing mouse a need for definite knowledge concerning the relation of strength of stimulus to rate of learning arose. The habit whose formation we attempted to study quantitatively, with respect to the strength of the stimulus which favored its formation, may be described as the white-black discrimination habit. As a detailed account of the important features of the white-black visual discrimination habit in the dancer has already been published,[1] a brief description of our method of experimentation [p. 460] will suffice for the purposes of this paper. This table shows also the general classification of our experiments. [p. 473] [p. 474]

Giving and Receiving Feedback Sections of This Topic Include Feedback: Negative, Positive or Just Right? How to Share Useful – and Respectful – Feedback Additional Perspectives About Giving and Receiving Feedback Also see Related Library Topics Learn More in the Library's Blogs Related to Giving and Sharing Feedback In addition to the articles on this current page, see the following blogs which have posts related to Giving and Sharing Feedback. Library's Coaching Blog Library's Communications Blog Library's Leadership Blog Library's Supervision Blog Feedback: Negative, Positive or Just Right? © Copyright Gail Zack Anderson Some of us are really good at giving positive feedback. Too little positive feedback. While working recently with a manager, I noticed that he tended to give mostly negative feedback, and very little positive. When most or all feedback is negative, people know what you don’t like, but they often have to guess at what you do like or want from them. That said, negative feedback has its place. “Good job.

Placemat Method in Teaching | Berufspädagogik2011/2012 By Tsam on During our BP session on the 12th January, we were introduced to the “System Theory” and I found the method of introduction to the topic quite interesting. I first thought it´s called “placement method” but later found out it is called “placemat method” (or do both the names refer to the same concept? ) Anyways, I thought it was an interesting and a useful teaching method. Here´s how it works: At first you briefly introduce the topic. We then watched short video clips on “system method” but before watching, we were instructed to write our questions and doubts on the concept while watching. implementation in language teaching: I can imagine using this method in the following ways: In order to introduce or revise a topic just like we did in the BP session. Drawbacks: Like any other method, I think this method isn´t also without downsides. To sum up, this activity includes a good combination of individual and group work. References:

untitled Cognitive bias Some cognitive biases are presumably adaptive. Cognitive biases may lead to more effective actions in a given context.[6] Furthermore, cognitive biases enable faster decisions when timeliness is more valuable than accuracy, as illustrated in heuristics.[7] Other cognitive biases are a "by-product" of human processing limitations,[8] resulting from a lack of appropriate mental mechanisms (bounded rationality), or simply from a limited capacity for information processing.[9][10] A continually evolving list of cognitive biases has been identified over the last six decades of research on human judgment and decision-making in cognitive science, social psychology, and behavioral economics. Kahneman and Tversky (1996) argue that cognitive biases have efficient practical implications for areas including clinical judgment, entrepreneurship, finance, and management.[11][12] Overview[edit] Bias arises from various processes that are sometimes difficult to distinguish. Types[edit] List[edit]

Secrets of Positive Feedback - Douglas R. Conant by Douglas R. Conant | 9:48 AM February 16, 2011 [For more, visit the Communication Insight Center.] Have you ever noticed how a pat on the back makes you feel great for days? Sadly, kudos from bosses are all too rare. I was devastated, of course. Ultimately, I went on to another division, where the general manager recognized my efforts and patted me on the back when I deserved it. Over the years, I’ve worked on acknowledging others for their efforts. Make a personal connection early on. I’ve also have found that what goes around truly does come around. What kind of difference has a bit of praise made to you? Douglas R.