For my observation, I have viewed video recordings of three separate groups of children being engaged in play. The first video seems to show two caretakers playing with two children, using toy balls and cubes. The second, imaginative play video, contains three toddlers playing with the caretaker who is talking to them in both English and Spanish. The third video shows a group of at least 4 children engaging in role-playing activities. I have watched these videos on an evening, and will be using them to analyze, and measure the children’s behavior and level of development.
For the 3 to the 8-month group, I will be primarily discussing the boy in a blue onesie, who is featured prominently in the video. The infant seems to be in a good physical condition, using the strength of his arms and body to support himself in a semi-crawling position. He is able to move around the playmat, as well as sit. Another prominent signifier of his development is the boy’s ability to grasp objects. He can be seen taking hold of the green cube and pushing the red one away.
In terms of cognitive and linguistic development, the boy also seems to be quite adept. Firstly, he is seen actively interacting with the toys around him, clearly engaging in some form of play, reaching for objects that he wants to play with, and keeping them to himself. Furthermore, as seen by the interaction with the caretaker, the boy recognizes his own name being called and pays attention. In addition to that, he is also seen following toys and other objects with his gaze, as well as mouth on them.
As for social and cognitive development, the child in a blue onesie seems to be a little behind. While the child recognizes the caretaker and engages with her play attempts, he does not appear to fully recognize the presence of another child nearby. The attempts of the caretaker to direct his cube play towards the infant in red are not successful as he keeps to himself. He also does not appear to be reaching out to any people around him or smiling, which are another two signs of social development. While his face is mostly obscured, no laughing can be heard, and even some crying is audible instead.
The child in a 9 to the 17-month group that I will be discussing is a girl in a blue strawberry shirt that seems to be around 14 months old. The girl has a good level of physical development, being able to walk without support in a slow, waddling fashion. She is also seen picking up and carrying objects, such as various kinds of toys. In the later parts, I could also see her crouching down slightly. As seen by the toy camera, the girl in blue has the ability to engage with smaller, more intricate objects and control her motor skills. The action of pointing the camera at the caretaker is made successfully, without dropping the object or hurting the woman.
Cognitive development also appears to be up to speed, as seen by her interactions with the caretaker and others. She is seen repeating the actions of the caretaker, such as playing with the kitten toy to see the results. By picking up the baby toy, she also simulates household activities, such as feeding the baby and carrying it. With the photo camera, similar results are achieved. She places the camera near her face and looks through it, mimicking the actions of the caretaker. While she does not seem to speak, she does copy the actions of another toddler.
Her level of social and emotional development seems up to par with the rest of her growth milestones. The girl actively cooperates with the caretaker during play, accepting toys from her and doing the things she was shown to do. The girl appears to be emotionally engaged with the activity as well, displaying an eagerness to do things. She is also able to play alongside other children, walking to take the baby doll when another child does so, and engaging in play alongside them, while not directly interacting.
The boy in a black blouse looks to be about the age of 24 months, judging by the amount of hair he has and the appearance of his body. Physically, it looks like the boy is quite well-developed, being able to confidently walk around without falling. His walking is efficient, and he does not waddle around much. The boy is also dexterous with his hands, being able to touch other people’s hair without causing much discomfort. He is able to stop himself from continuing when another child does not engage in play further, as well as to navigate the room without bumping into obstacles.
The linguistic and cognitive development of the kid is shown to be quite good, as he is able to effectively interact with the environment around him and other people. Most apparently, the boy engages in make-believe and pretend play, as seen with the hair salon he has organized. He shows an ability to symbolically perform activities in the face of an absence of actual tools. Without a hairbrush or any hairdressing tools, he is using his hands to simulate the activity. In terms of language, he also shows an ability to communicate well. Responding to the questions and narration posed by the caretaker, he is shown to be able to voice his thoughts in a short sentence.
Social/Emotional development is the focal point of this video, as the child actively works with other kids in coordinated play. His actions are directed towards the caretakers and the other children present. He seems to show a willingness to the caretaker to join his play session, as well as other children joining in. The boy is able to maintain a conversation with the caregiver and also seems to show attempts of communicating with the girl in pink he is playing with.
I have observed caretakers playing with multiple toddlers, teaching them to pass the ball around. The play consisted of each of them receiving the ball and then giving it to one of the other children present. In my eyes, this activity was used to facilitate both the social and physical domains. The activity of passing around the ball can be considered the training of smaller motor skills and arm muscles, while the action of sharing the toy with others facilitated coordinated cooperative play with other children.
Before the completion of this assignment, I have not considered the differences between the ways in which children interact with each other depending on their age. My initial assumption was that a toddler of any age group should be able to play cooperatively with others, it seemed like a simple and essential skill to develop. By witnessing the difference between the approaches of younger and older kids, I was able to see that their capacity for play with others expands and grows with age.
The setting of this interactive play is a table stationed outside. The children and the caretaker are sitting around the table playing various games connected with clouds, made to improve their cognitive, motor skills, memory, and coordination. Children of different ages are present, an older girl of around 5 in a flowery dress, a 4-year-old boy in a red shirt, and an even younger girl dressed in pink. With this examination, I am planning to examine the behavior and developmental level of different children, as a way to improve my skills in identifying child development and showcasing them on paper.
In the video, a 3-year-old girl in pink can be observed, as she is playing with the other children. Her level of physical development is good, as she is able to sit at a table without the support of a char’s back and lean on it as well. During the card matching game, she demonstrates the ability to pick up and flip over cards, which speaks to the development of her motor skills. Furthermore, during the section where children create their own clouds, she can be seen being able to arrange cotton balls in a pattern and glue them to the paper without issue.
Cognitive development for the girl appears to be adequate, as she is able to fully handle the tasks outlined by the caretaker. She is seen flipping over and trying to match cards, recognizing the similarities and differences between pictures observed. Furthermore, she is able to create her own cloud in her hand, and use glue and markers while holding them in her hand. In terms of language, she appears to be less developed than her peers, speaking up more rarely and generally being more focused on observing the environment.
Emotional and social skills are well-developed in the pink girl. She plays with children, taking active participation in the activities they perform. She follows the instructions and guidance shown by the caretaker, as well as showcases her creations to others. Due to the constraints of the video, not many other factors pertaining to emotional and social development can be seen, unfortunately.
The 4-year-old shown in the video is a boy in a redshirt. His physical development is hard to estimate since the children are sitting down most of the time, but he can be seen sitting comfortably and leaning over the table, showing control of his movements. Furthermore, he is able to coordinate his actions well, in both holding the glue with his hands and properly handling a marker to draw lightning. He also shows the ability for careful and precise movement, as seen by his flipping over the cards.
In the domain of cognitive and linguistic development, the kid in red also succeeds, showing a great capacity for both action and communication. He seems to understand differences in various pictures, as well as to know what positional words mean. In the cloud-making exercise, he is seen being able to make a cloud out of cotton balls, as well as to answer questions about it. The directions given by the caretakers are also being followed. In terms of language, he is able to communicate well, and use different words to either answer questions or explain something.
Socially, the boy plays with others, understanding the rules of the games made by everyone. During the match a cloud to its description process, he is seen working with other children to make correct decisions and working alongside them with no problems. He reacts positively to success and recognizes how his actions affect the space around him.
The oldest child that can be seen in the video is a 5-year-old girl in a flowery dress. His physical development is great, evident by the height difference between her and her playmates, and her ability to sit near the table and handle all the aspects of the 3 plays the caretaker engages them in.
She understands the differences between objects, as seen by her ability to explain how to play memory. She is also able to recognize which clouds are on the top or the bottom, as seen by her skill in the last game. The girl can work with smaller objects, such as markers, glue, and cotton balls to take a picture of a cloud. Her ability to relay the rules of the game and constant coherent talking also showcase her linguistic proficiency.
Actively engages in playing with other children and has an ability to coordinate her movements in a group of others for convenience, as seen by her taking the cotton balls out of the box. Does not require the assistance of the caretaker to create her picture, and is able to operate independently from other children.
An activity I witnessed was a drawing exercise, led by a caretaker among 5 children. They were tasked with drawing a robot using markers and pencils, as well as other kinds of supplementary crafting tools. After each child was finished, they had to explain what their particular robot could do to others kids. The activity was focused on improving the physical skills of the children, and their ability to handle small objects such as pens and markers. It has also facilitated communication between them and the development of linguistic skills. An ability to play with others was also improved.
Before my completing this assignment, I had not realized that children are able to understand complex phrases and difficult words, thinking that a caretaker should seek to make their speech more understandable and childlike for them. During the process of watching the video and writing down my observations, I have found out that they are much more perceptive and context-vary than I had imagined.
Brand Overview And Analysis: The Heineken
Introduction Stage
The Heineken brand is an example of a product that has gone through the product life cycle over the 140 years it has been on the market. Heineken was first produced and marketed in the year 1864 In Amsterdam under the brand name “Workman’s Ale”. This marked the introductory phase of its life cycle. At this time the market was devoid of high quality purer beers and Heineken utilized this loophole to venture into the production of beers targeting the high-end segment of the market by putting the market a beer named the “Gentleman’s Beer” that was produced through a totally unique technique of bottom fermentation. The introduction of this beer marked the start of the Heineken brand (Donna 15). During this phase, the brand met several challenges that included convincing customers that Heineken was better than the available brands. In addition, the price was high resulting in low sales. Most of the marketing was done in the Netherlands, initially in Amsterdam before spreading out to the rest of the country as the customer base grew (Heineken International par.4).
Growth Stage
It can be argued that the growth stage of the Heineken brand is still in process (Wikipedia par.3). This stems from the fact that the brand is always penetrating a new markets as recent as 2010. The growth phase of the Heineken brand started in 1870 during the Franco-Prussian War when the importation of beer to the Netherlands became impossible. These circumstances facilitated the growth of the then local beer that was Heineken, since imported beer became scarce and expensive (Reamish and Ashford 33). This growth phase saw the expansion of brewing plants in and around Amsterdam facilitating the company to become the largest exporter of beer to France in 1874.
In addition, the brand grew in the following years through the application of new discoveries such as cooling systems, the A-yeast strain for fermentation, and electric lighting systems. All these innovations led to increased production and public awareness of the Heineken brand. In the early 1900’s new players entered the market forcing a reduction in the price of the beer-making the management changed strategies by promoting on-premises sales. The growth phase of Heineken continued with expansion into other parts of the world including Africa, Asia, Continental Europe and the Americas (Onkvisit and Shaw 43). The expansion entails acquisitions, mergers, and the setting up of novel plants in the respective countries in order to boost and consolidate the Heineken brand.
Maturity Stage
The Heineken brand has reached the maturity stage in some markets across the globe (Karp 91). This is because of increased competition in the high-end segment of the beer market. As a result of this, the company has been forced to emphasize innovating the brand to get a grasp on the market. An example is in the United States of America in 2005, where, Heineken introduced a new Heineken light beer to ensure sustenance of the brand in a market where light beer is preferred to normal beers due to its low caloric index. Back home in the Netherlands, Heineken introduced a new form of beer in the same year called the DraughtKeg that can be consumed during any drinking forum. This was in a bid to maintain the relevance of the brand in the face of stiff competition from local and international brewers and market saturation.
Decline Stage
One could argue that the decline stage for Heineken as a brand has not yet been reached. This is because in almost any region that Heineken was introduced, it is still one of the leading brands due to its superior quality. Furthermore, the brand is still being introduced in new markets with remarkable success despite stiff competition (Stark 23).
Works Cited
Anselmo, Donna. Marketing demystified. New York: McGraw-Hill Professional, 2010.
Heineken International. Brands. Heineken International, 2005. Web.
Karp, Robert. Issues in marketing. New York: Ardent Media, 1974.
Onkvisit, Sak and Shaw, John. International marketing: strategy and theory. Washington: Taylor & Francis, 2008. Print.
Reamish, Karen and Ashford, Ruth. Marketing planning, 2007-2008.London: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2007.
Stark, John. Global product: Strategy, product lifecycle management and the billion customer question. London: Springer, 2007.
Stark, John. Product lifecycle management: 21st century paradigm for product realization. New York: Birkhäuser, 2005.
Wikipedia. Fast moving consumer goods. Wikipedia.org, 2011.Web.
The Factors Which Determine Substance Abuse
Substance abuse is an emerging issue that deteriorates the population’s health and increases the crime rate. It is often a chronic condition that results in the cardiovascular, lung, mental diseases, and the death of the abuser. Some time ago, people argued that addiction is only a mental state but not a disease. At present, many scientists and doctors recognize the condition as a disorder in which treatment is complicated and extensive (Fletcher et al., 2015). The illness is determined by a neurobiological response to substance and related symptoms, such as the transformation of behavioral patterns, self-isolation, and regression.
There has been a controversy about whether substance abuse is a disorder. The condition is often related to only behavioral changes, which confused many researchers. However, at the beginning of the 21st century, it was discovered that long-term exposure to a substance may worsen the brain’s function and change its structure (Fletcher et al., 2015). That is why worldwide drug abuse centers defined addiction as an illness of the central nervous system.
The primary aspect by which any addiction is identified is a rewarding system. All substance abusers, as well as process abusers, report that they get pleasure and fulfillment after using the object of addiction. This is explained by the neural system of the human organism. When a person obtains a certain amount of the drug or alcohol, high dopamine levels are released as a response. The brain’s receptors for dopamine trigger the temporary rewarding sensation. Then, the individual seeks more substance, even after lessening the pharmacological effect. The addict gradually loses interest in natural rewards and becomes dependent on a substance. Drug or alcohol use also affects the release of neurotransmitters other than dopamine, which are responsible for mood swings, motivation loss, memory deterioration, and anxiety (Koob & Volkow, 2016). Thus, the nervous system’s reaction to the increase of neurotransmitters resulting from substance introduction is the reason behind compulsive behavior.
The early studies on addiction strongly correlated it with only drug ingestion. Later, the term was characterized as an obsession with any substance or process, such as eating, gaming, or internet use. Any addiction symptoms include salience, mood and behavioral change, withdrawal from society, and relapse. However, the main difference between substance and behavioral addiction is that the first one involves the ingestion of chemicals into an organism, which frequently leads to physical disorders (Loxton & Tipman, 2017). As a result, substance and process abuses are similar in their effect on the patient’s nervous system and mood, but the latter does not introduce toxic chemicals to the body.
People with traumatic experiences and depression have a higher risk of developing an addiction. According to Schimmenti et al. (2017), children from families with low socioeconomic status and those who were exposed to violence by their parents are more prone to use a substance in their adulthood. Victims of molestation and cruelty report finding a sense of false help and pleasure in narcotics or liquors. Besides, psychological illnesses like bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, and depression make a person vulnerable to addiction. The self-medication of drugs such as cannabis is popular since they are perceived to treat stress and anxiety (Schimmenti et al., 2017). Hence, people with other psychological diseases and traumas are in danger of developing an obsession.
Some biological factors increase the potential of being addicted to a substance. An Individual’s predetermination is frequently linked to their family portfolio, gender, and age. For instance, women seem to be more susceptible to drugs and their toxicological side effects (Loxton & Tipman, 2017). The chance of gaining an addiction at a younger age is much higher than at an older age. People under the age of 30 are a risk group for substance abuse (Buccelli et al., 2016). Moreover, there is a possibility of being susceptive to substance for the person who has a history of addict parents. Addiction is often correlated with genetics since there are many records of families who have a behavior of smoking or drinking. It does not seem to depend on whether they live together or separately. There are cases when people become addicted, even though they have never seen their relatives (Schimmenti et al., 2017). Therefore, not only society and the presence of mental disorders can be responsible for the condition.
The consideration of a person’s race or ethnicity proves to be unnecessary when evaluating the cause of addiction. Some people suggest that certain nations or races are more prone to have a drinking or drug-using habits. Nonetheless, studies illustrate the insignificance of demographics and ethnic origin in affecting compulsive behavior (Pagano et al., 2018). Thus, a person’s predisposition to substance addiction should not be related to their ethnicity.
To sum up, substance addiction is a disease that affects the patient’s behavior and physical well-being. It is always associated with mood modification, dependence, hostile attitude, social isolation, and chemical intoxication. Individuals with mental illnesses and violent experiences at a younger age are often at risk of developing substance abuse. Additionally, biological factors, such as sex, age, and genetics, can determine the predisposition to addiction.
References
Buccelli, C., Della Casa, E., Paternoster, M., Niola, M., & Pieri, M. (2016). Gender differences in drug abuse in the forensic toxicological approach. Forensic Science International, 265, 89-95.
Fletcher, K., Nutton, J., & Brend, D. (2015). Attachment, A Matter of Substance: The potential of attachment theory in the treatment of addictions. Clinical Social Work Journal, 43(1), 109-117.
Koob, G. F., & Volkow, N. D. (2016). Neurobiology of addiction: A neurocircuitry analysis. The Lancet Psychiatry, 3(8), 760-773.
Loxton, N. J., & Tipman, R. J. (2017). Reward sensitivity and food addiction in women. Appetite, 115, 28–35.
Pagano, A., Gubner, N. R., Le, T., Yip, D., Williams, D., Delucchi, K., & Guydish, J. (2018). Differences in tobacco use prevalence, behaviors, and cessation services by race/ethnicity: A survey of persons in addiction treatment. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 94, 9-17.
Schimmenti, A., Passanisi, A., Caretti, V., La Marca, L., Granieri, A., Iacolino, C., Gervasi, A.M., Maganuco, N.R., Billieux, J. (2017). Traumatic experiences, alexithymia, and Internet addiction symptoms among late adolescents: A moderated mediation analysis. Addictive Behaviors, 64, 314–320.