Psychology Models

These models and simulations have been tagged “Psychology”.

Related tagsCausation

Insight diagram
in the beginning, expectations are normal for a new employee. By excelling, the employee builds goodwill, and immunizes self from criticism and accompanying shame. However, as time goes on, expectations rise until they first reach, and then exceed, the level of the employee's performance. This may be due to demands from multiple sources that are unaware of each other. It may also come about as completed projects add a layer of ongoing, and growing, maintenance. At this point, perceived criticism of the employee's performance occurs. Depending on the employee's potential for shame, which is likely high due to his/her use of this perfectionist defense, this criticism triggers shame, which then results in an avoiding (withdrawal, quitting) or controlling (secondary anger, irritability) defensive response.  Alternatively, the employee may choose effective action, setting boundaries and beginning to address the shame directly, separating it from  performance.
Perfectionism at Work
Insight diagram
WIP based on MacCrae2011 Compare with MBTI types Insight
Clone of Big 5 Personality Traits
Insight diagram
Causal loop diagram illustrating how anxiety may lead to poor performance (R1) and how this reinforcing loop may be counter-balanced by utilizing tools and techniques to manage anxiety (B2).
Managing Anxiety (2-Loop)
Insight diagram
WIP Mostly a combination of Barone 1998 Advanced Personality book and Charles Hampden-Turner 1982 book Maps of the Mind
Personality Theories
Insight diagram
Double loop learning simulation using a hierarchy of an action and intent system based on Perceptual Control Theory. The action system described in a Control Theory insight now has an added intent system which changes the internal reference signal for the action system. See also Individual Learning causal loop insight story and Double loop learning causal loop insight story
Double Loop Learning using Control Theory by William T Powers
Insight diagram
Simulation based on Control Theory: A model of Organisms System Dynamics Review article. Control systems act to make their own input match internal standards or reference signals.  See also a double loop learning simulation insight
Control Theory by William T Powers
Insight diagram

Barry Richmond's model describing behavior and anxiety theory for the Milgram experiment. Richmond, B. (1977). “Generalization with Individual Uniqueness: Modeling the Milgram Experiments.” Technical Report D-2508-2, System Dynamics Group, Sloan School of Management, MIT.

 Personal versus Situational Dynamics: Implications of Barry Richmond’s Models of Classic Experiments in Social Psychology by James K. Doyle, Khalid Saeed, Jeanine Skorinko Department of Social Science and Policy Studies Worcester Polytechnic Institute 2008

See also CLE Class Notes 2014

Milgram Experiment
Insight diagram
WIP representation of thinking feeling acting and interacting
Human behaviour
Insight diagram
This diagram illustrates the behavioral cycle, which models the sequence of steps that people undergo when responding to situations. The diagram highlights potential risk factors that may lead to problematic behavioral patterns, and may be useful in identifying potential interventions for correcting them.

Disclaimer: this diagram reflects my personal life-practices and understandings and do not constitute professional medical advice.
Behavioral Cycle
Insight diagram

Love affairs and Differential equations. From Michael J Radzicki (1993) Dyadic processes,tempestuous relationships, and system dynamics Syst. Dyn. Rev. 9 (1) :79-94 

Romeo and Juliet
Insight diagram
Mental Health Platform Post-Covid June 2021 including revisiting Wiser Health Decisions
Mental Health Platform
4 3 months ago
Insight diagram
Three Agent Model of IM-13669. Unconscious affective dynamics Josh Epstein's Agent Zero Book webpage 
See spatial patches version IM-15119
 
Fear Conditioning 3 Agents
Insight diagram
WIP representation of thinking feeling acting and interacting
Clone of Human behaviour
Insight diagram
Unconscious affective dynamics From Epstein, Joshua M. (2014-02-23). Agent_Zero: Toward Neurocognitive Foundations for Generative Social Science (Princeton Studies in Complexity) (p. 37). Princeton University Press. Kindle Edition Publisher webpage 
See also Behaviorism insight IM-7776
Next step is a 3 Agent model at IM-14058
Fear Conditioning
Insight diagram
Or the self-fulfilling prophecy
Scared of the needle
Insight diagram
Examples of macroanalysis relevant to clinical reasoning --assessing individual patient causal mechanisms contributing to deficits in wellbeing from book fava guidi sturmey and chapter ethics for judging value from barbosa 2012
Wellbeing Problem Formulation Case Examples
Insight diagram
Launchpad about reorganisation based on Bogdanov's Tektology general theory of organization, perceptual control theory, personal history and current concerns, linked to the modern (or historical) organization of biology and political economy. 
Personalised Reorganization Bogdanov Biology and Political Economy
4 months ago
Insight diagram
WIP ​Book Summary see blog entry Also Chuang2009 ISDC P1127 paper, Newman2017 and Edmondson2014 papers
The Fearless Organization and Psychological Safety
Insight diagram
Unconscious affective dynamics From Epstein, Joshua M. (2014-02-23). Agent_Zero: Toward Neurocognitive Foundations for Generative Social Science (Princeton Studies in Complexity) (p. 37). Princeton University Press. Kindle Edition Publisher webpage
Clone of Fear Conditioning
Insight diagram
Experimenting with body image issues.
Body image issues
Insight diagram
The following model models fear expression. The model implements an expectations model of fear expression in the brain.

In this model, four broad brain regions are identified: the sensory/association cortices (SC), the lateral and basal lateral amygdala (FA), the basal medial amygdala (BA), and the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (PFC).

The sensory/association cortices signal the perception of stimuli to FA and the PFC. The FA and PFC each form an expectation that the subject will (FA) and will not (PFC) experience an intrinsically fearful stimulus (IFS). The PFC inhibits activation of the FA. The amount of inhibition is proportional to the PFCs confidence that the subject will not encounter an intrinsically fearful stimulus. The modulated signal is transmitted to the BA which then stimulates other brain regions that induce the physical changes associated with fear.

Both the FA and PFC adapt their expectations based on experience. This model uses two scaled geometric sum probability estimation models (PEM) to represent the behavior of the expectation circuits within the FA and PFC. In reality, the PFC and FA probably estimate the probability that the subject will encounter an IFS based on the ease of recall of positive (instances in which the observed stimulus predicted the IFS) and negative (instances in which the observed stimulus did not predict the IFS) memories involving the observed and expected stimuli. The memories associated with positive instances are probably more easily recalled as the amygdala sends signals to the hippocampus that strengthen episodic memory formation during stressful events. Accordingly, the PEM associated with the PFC has an additional decay term that weakens the negative expectations over time, modeling memory decay. This decay term, allows us to model spontaneous fear recovery.

Experimentation suggests that fear extinction does not, principally, involve forgetting fear associations. Rather, it involves learning new associations that suppress previously learned fear associations. Brain imaging experiments suggest that fear expression and suppression are generated by different brain regions; the amygdala (expression) and the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (suppression). The theory that fear extinction does not involve forgetting fear associations was supported by observations of fear recovery, in which it was observed that subjects recover fear faster than they did during fear induction, which suggests that fear associations persist after fear extinction. To model this, we associate two different sensitivity coefficients to the FA PEM and the PFC PEM. This allows us to express the relative stability of fear associations stored within the FA in comparison to those stored within the PFC.

This model uses a simple linear model to represent fear suppression by the PFC. We define a parameter, ki, that defines the maximum proportion of fear generated by the FA that can be suppressed by the PFC. In reality this property corresponds to the strength of the neural projections from the ventromedial prefrontal cortex to the amygdala. The neurons within this pathway are serotonergic, chronic deficiency in serotonin may inhibit the structural development of this pathway contributing to anxiety regulation disorders. Medications such as serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) can increase the amount of serotonin available within this region and over time may foster development. Accordingly, we allow ki to evolve over time within the model.

Significantly, our model posits the existence of intrinsically fearful stimuli. It assumes that certain stimuli, such as extreme pain, and fear, are innately anxiogenic. Expectation models, posit that the fear induced by most stimuli however are the result of learned associations. Presented with a non-intrinsically fearful stimlus (NIFS), the amygdala estimates the probability that the NIFS signals an IFS. The fear elicited by the NIFS is proportional to the estimated probability of encountering the IFS.
Anxiety Model
Insight diagram
Summary of US apa2017 report pdf link
Stress and Health Disparities
Insight diagram
WIP based on McCrae2011 article Compare with MBTI types Insight
Big 5 Personality Traits
Insight diagram
Based on 1990 SDR Article. Control systems act to make their own input match internal standards or reference signals. Competent control systems create illusions of stimulus response causality. Stimulus-response theory can approximate the relationship between disturbance and action, but it can't predict the consequences of behavior. These consequences are maintained despite disturbances. See IM-9007 for a double loop version
Clone of Clone of Control Theory by William T Powers