2 resultados para South Carolina Governor’s School for the Arts and Humanities
em Digital Commons @ DU | University of Denver Research
Resumo:
Despite its essential and universal nature, humor has historically received limited attention from the behavioral sciences, particularly as compared to other affective experiences like anger and sadness. Some authors (e.g., Bell & Malhi, 2009; Provine, 2000a; Roeckelein, 2002) suggest that this is because researchers have traditionally failed to "take humor seriously" and, according to O'Connell (cited in Roeckelein, 2002), have too often pursued its study in a piecemeal manner lacking scientific rigor, resulting in "no comprehensive network of facts about the development and purposes of humor in human existence" (p. 1). Roeckelein (2002) found not a single mention of humor, laughter, wit, comedy, or theories relating to these topics in introductory psychology textbooks published between 1930 and 1996.While research interest in the area has grown, especially over the last decade, it remains an elusive and nebulous topic, more likely to be examined in specialty psychology texts (e.g., social psychology and child development) than general ones (Martin, 2007; Roeckelein, 2002). Organizations (e.g., The International Society for Humor Studies; The Association for the Advancement of Therapeutic Humor), journals (e.g., Humor: International Journal of Humor Research) and internet phenomena such as "The Humor Project" (www.humorproiect.com) have made great strides in integrating information about humor from discreet fields such as the arts and humanities, biological and social sciences, education, and business management. Still, the therapeutic potential of humor remains a relatively young subject of serious scientific inquiry (Marci, Moran, & Orr, 2004; Sala, Krupat, & Roter, 2002). While humor does make appearances in self-help books and publications addressing clinical applications, these sources are much ...
Resumo:
Environmental degradation from point and non-point source pollution in the past ten years has made it increasingly clear that threats to aquatic resources cannot adequately be addressed without a more integrated watershed approach to the management. Through comprehensive, qualitative interviews of experts in the watershed approach in South Carolina, recommendations will be made to improve this holistic process. Conducting interviews to compile institutional knowledge on the incentives and barriers from professionals working within the watershed approach will show how managing the natural resources in South Carolina could be more effective and efficient. By gathering experiences of lessons learned, best approach techniques, and suggestions for future watershed planning, several recommendations were made to further the use of the watershed approach in South Carolina.