<p>What about the question with the dots, and also the neuron question near the end?</p>
<p>For the bar graph, did we need to show standard deviation and put a title? :x (I didn’t do either so I’m kinda worried).</p>
<p>@Firemeter Wow. Thanks though. =) I just hope I passed, just curious about the score of a 5.</p>
<p>@hjjulie I got negative reinforcer because I thought that the police car would negatively reinforce the cars to go with the law more often. The police car increased the behavior of it. ;o</p>
<p>@Niveds313 Yup. I got Delta too. :)</p>
<p>@Niveds313 It was discriminative stimulus (I just looked it up). Unfortunately, I got that wrong. DDDD:</p>
<p>It’s not a negative reinforcer. Negative means that it is taking away something and reinforcer means it is encouraging a behavior of it. It’s more discouraging the speeding behavior of the cars so it would be punishment if anything.</p>
<p>dots was continuous, not figure-ground similarity and can someone else post their thoughts about the cop question?</p>
<p>@capitalamerica: i got it wrong as well then…lol this is unfortunate. </p>
<p><a href=“https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qxpVtphM7mmd8q2Ezj8rHS7mtybxp-qoVhAEtINpB5M/edit?usp=sharing”>https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qxpVtphM7mmd8q2Ezj8rHS7mtybxp-qoVhAEtINpB5M/edit?usp=sharing</a></p>
<p>what was the one about the kid who did worse on the exam because he took it in a different room?</p>
<p>continuity doesn’t explain why we would see the 4 rows instead of the 7 columns does it?</p>
<p>What is the answer to the synapse question towards the end with the neurotransmitter?</p>
<p>@capitalamerica and @Niveds313: Don’t you think it could be a negative reinforcer? Seeing the police car = not speeding = removing the chance of a speeding ticket, which is basically what negative reinforcement is. I think that question & the bar graph may be omitted in the scoring. </p>
<p>@DaneBrick Why would it not be Proximity? I put that since they were all grouped together in rows close to eachother.</p>
<p>The cop is definitely discriminative stimulus. If you look up what it is, it’s something along the lines of a particular behavior is reinforced only in the presence of that stimulus (the cop car).</p>
<p>@AznStevy I agree, I put proximity.</p>
<p>@quirkymath That’s the thing I hate about defining these things because you can be very logical with it and have it make sense but still be “wrong”. Based on what a discriminative stimulus is, I believe that is what they were going for.</p>
<p>The neurotransmitter question: I put receptor sites, which made sense but I’m not 100% sure.</p>
<p>What about the question of the twins, fraternal and identical…I don’t remember much more about the question, sorry.</p>
<p>Edit: and what about the question of the guy not noticing driving home?</p>
<p>@VS12345 I think I put that fraternal twins raised together have a higher correlation than fraternal twins raised apart. The identical twin options would strengthen the genetic argument too much instead of the environment argument… and the second one with the non-twin siblings didn’t really make sense (same thing, how twins are more correlated in intelligence than non-twins… it would strengthen the genetics argument more).</p>
<p>For dots question I said proximity. For twin question, I put A. I forgot the answer though.</p>
<p>@dextrous That was the answer with fraternal twins raised together and apart.</p>
<p>Darn, according to Sparknotes…Twin studies show a higher correlation between identical twins in IQ than between fraternal twins. This holds true even when identical twins reared apart are compared to fraternal twins reared together.</p>
<p>@VS12345 it was regarding proof of evolution </p>