| Course | PSYC 110N Psychology |
|---|---|
| Week | 1 |
| Paper type | Discussion post |
| Length | About 400 words |
| Format | Discussion post with APA 7 citations |
| School | Chamberlain University |
| Program | BSN general education |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for PSYC 110N Week 1
Week 1 Discussion: Initial Post
What Psychology Asserts About Behavior, in My Own Words, Tested on One Morning in the Hospital Cafeteria Line, Where the Assertion and the Moment Touch and the Sentence That Could Be Wrong
The Assertion
Psychology asserts that behavior and mental processes follow regular patterns that can be studied by observation and measurement, so that we can explain and predict what people do better than by common sense alone (Spielman et al., 2020). That is different from an opinion about people, which may be true but is not tested.
One Watchable Occasion
On my clinical day last Tuesday, I stood in the cafeteria line at 7:40 a.m. Twelve people were ahead of me. When the person at the front took a coffee from the left-hand urn, the next five people did the same, though the right-hand urn was full and closer to them.
I noticed it only because I was bored. Nobody spoke about the urns, nobody pointed, and the line moved at its usual pace. If I had not been counting, the moment would have looked like five separate choices rather than one pattern.
Where the Two Touch
The assertion says there is a pattern here that could be studied, not just a coincidence. One pattern psychology describes is that people use others' choices as information when they are unsure. A study could test it: change which urn the first person uses and count what the next five do.
The test would not need to trick anyone. On a quiet morning, the first person in line could be a friend who agreed in advance to use the right-hand urn, and I would count whether the next five followed. If they did, copying gains support; if they did not, the left urn has some other draw.
The Sentence That Could Be Wrong
My explanation is that people copied the first person. That could be wrong. The left urn might have been labeled "regular" and the right "decaf," and I could not see the labels from where I stood. If so, the pattern came from the labels, not from copying.
What the Replies Should Add
Tell me another explanation for the urns, or a way to test mine without bothering anyone in line.
I am also curious whether anyone has seen the opposite: a line where people deliberately chose differently from the person in front.
References
Spielman, R. M., Jenkins, W. J., & Lovett, M. D. (2020). Psychology (2nd ed.). OpenStax. https://openstax.org/details/books/psychology-2e
PSYC 110N Week 1 instructions, in plain terms
The first discussion asks what psychology claims about behavior and how that differs from an opinion about people. State the field's central assertion in your own words, with a source. Then describe one occasion you watched, briefly and with counts where possible, such as how many people did what. Show where the assertion and the occasion touch: what pattern could be studied here, and how. Write one sentence about your own explanation that could be wrong, and say what would show it was wrong. Keep the post to one occasion. Replies should offer a rival explanation for the classmate's occasion or a way to test it that would not disturb the people involved.
How this PSYC 110N Week 1 example is built
The assertion section states that behavior follows regular patterns that observation and measurement can reveal, citing Spielman et al. (2020), and contrasts that with an untested opinion. The occasion section counts twelve people in a 7:40 a.m. cafeteria line and five who followed the first person to the left urn though the right was closer, and notes how unremarkable the moment looked. The touch section names using others' choices as information and proposes a friend at the front using the other urn. The could-be-wrong section admits the urns may have been labeled regular and decaf. The close invites another explanation or a gentler test.
Where the points sit in the PSYC 110N Week 1 rubric
Instructors look for the field's assertion stated accurately and tied to one observed occasion. A post that gives a personal view of human nature without a testable pattern loses the most. Credit goes to the assertion in the writer's words with a source, an occasion described with counts, a link between the two that suggests a study and a sentence that admits a rival explanation. Proposing a test that respects the people observed earns marks. APA citation of the course text is expected. Replies earn credit for offering a specific rival explanation or a practical way to test the original. The best posts say how the writer would know the explanation was wrong, not only that it might be.
PSYC 110N Week 1 help from the desk
Posts most often lose points by describing psychology as the study of the mind without saying what the field claims about patterns. Another common gap is an occasion described in general terms, such as people copy each other, with no counts. Some posts never admit what could be wrong. Others propose a test that would trick or embarrass people. If you cannot think of a public occasion, use a routine at your clinical site or school. A post that ends with the one fact that would overturn your explanation gives classmates exactly what they need to reply well. Count before you interpret; a number such as five of twelve gives classmates something to test.
Get a PSYC-110N Week 1 example written to your instructions
Send the assignment text and the rubric your classroom posted and a PSYC-110N Week 1 post is written to them, replies included, back inside 24-48h. The first one costs nothing. Tell us the length your section expects and the example arrives at that size rather than at a generic one.
More PSYC 110N papers and BSN general education samples
- PSYC 110N Week 2: Principle and Prediction Paper
- PSYC 110N Week 3: Reinforcement Analysis
- PSYC 110N Week 4: Attitude and Persuasion Write-up
- PSYC 110N Week 5: Personality Traits Write-up
- PSYC 110N Week 6: Social Influence Analysis
- PSYC 110N Week 7: Alternative Explanation Paper
- PSYC 110N Week 8: Motivation and Leadership Essay
- PSYC 290N Week 1: Discussion Post
PSYC 110N Week 1 questions, answered
How long should the Week 1 post be?
Most sections publish a length with the assignment text, and yours is what the example gets built to. Where nothing is published, a finished post runs to the size that holds an assertion, an occasion and a falsifiable line without padding between them. Length is never where the points are; the missing third element is.
Do the replies have to disagree with the classmate?
No, and a manufactured objection reads worse than an honest extension. What a reply has to do is add something the original post did not contain: a second reading of the same events, a condition under which the classmate's claim would break, or an occasion from a different corner of life that tests it. Agreement plus new material scores; agreement alone does not.
Does a first-week post need a reference?
In most classrooms yes, and the entry carries more weight than its size suggests. The citation belongs in the paragraph making the claim rather than parked at the bottom, because the marked question is whether the claim came from the course material or from general experience. One well-placed source under the assertion usually does more than three listed and unused.
Where can I find a free PSYC 110N Week 1 sample paper?
The whole PSYC 110N Week 1 post, which tests psychology's claim about patterns on a hospital cafeteria line, is printed further down this page.
What could be wrong in the PSYC 110N Week 1 sample?
The writer's explanation that people copied the first person; the urns may have been labeled regular and decaf, which would explain the pattern without any copying.