Motivation & Emotion: Zombie Game Processing Worksheet
Use this handout to process your observations and experiences from the Zombie Apocalypse Game. Remember to
communicate clearly, using academic/technical language, and to use proper psychological terminology. Each group will
share with the class.
Part One: Reflection- Human survival and/or achievement
As you answer the questions in this section, please think about them in terms of human behavior. Yes, you played a
zombie at one point, but you were still a human “playing” a zombie. (What did the human you experience?)
1. In your group list and rank 5 characteristics of a great leader.
2. Identify observed behaviors were the result of the following:
a. intrinsic motivation: Perform activities because it is personally rewarding in itself.
b. extrinsic motivation: Perform activities to earn a reward or avoid a punishment.
1. According to the article on McCelland’s Need for Achievement Theory there are three major achievement
types. Using the chart to identify how they may have occurred in the Zombie game!
n Ach
n Pow
n Aff
3. Discussion: At any point (human or zombie) did your group have a plan of action? Did anyone step up to lead the group
and give directions? Discuss how group dynamics and plan of action contributed to (or hindered) the outcome for your
group. Create a poster illustrating how leadership changes when stressors occur! Be creative and have fun, buy be sure
to use proper psychological terminology.
Leader we value today
Leader we value during an apocalypse
McClelland’s Need for Achievement Theory:
Another well-known need-based theory of motivation, as opposed to hierarchy of needs or satisfactiondissatisfaction, is the theory developed by David C. McClelland and his associates. McClelland developed his
theory based on Henry Murray’s (1938) developed long list of motives and manifest needs used in his early
studies of personality.
McClelland’s need theory is closely associated with learning theory, because he believed that needs are
learned or acquired by the kinds of events people experience in their environment and culture. He found that
people who acquire a particular need behave differently from those who do not have.
His theory focused on Murray’s three needs: achievement, power, and affiliations. In the literature, these three
needs are abbreviated as “n Ach”, “n Pow”, and “n Aff” respectively.
A brief description of these three follows:
Need for Achievement (“n Ach”):
This is the drive to excel, to achieve in relation to a set “standard, and to strive to succeed. In other words,
need for achievement is a Behaviour directed towards competition with a standard of excellence. McClelland
found that people with a high need for achievement perform better than those with a moderate or low need for
achievement, and noted regional, national differences in achievement motivation.
Through his research, McClelland identified the following six characteristics of high need achievers:
1. High-need achievers have a strong desire to assume personal responsibilities for performing a task or finding a solution
to a problem.
2. High need achievers tend to set moderately difficult goals and take calculated risks.
3. High need achievers have a strong desire for performance feedback.
4. They have need for achievement for attaining personal accomplishment.
5. They look for challenging tasks.
6. The high need-achievement individuals are not buck-passers.
Need for Power (“n Pow”):
The need for power is concerned with making an impact on others, the desire to influence others, the urge to
change people, and the desire to make a difference in life. People with a high need for power are people who
like to be in control of people and events. These result in ultimate satisfaction to man.
People who have a high need for power are characterized by:
1. A desire to influence and direct somebody else.
2. A desire to exercise control over others.
3. A concern for maintaining leaders-follower relations.
Need for Affiliation (“n Aff”):
The need for affiliation is defined as a desire to establish and maintain friendly and warm relations with other
people. The need for affiliation, in many ways, is similar to Maslow’s social needs.
The people with high need for affiliation have the following characteristics:
1. They have a strong desire for acceptance and approval from others.
2. They tend to conform to the wishes of those people whose friendship and companionship they value.
3. They value the feelings of others.
As regards the above three needs, McClelland holds the view that all three needs may simultaneously be
acting on an individual. But, in case of an entrepreneur, the high need for achievement is found dominating
one.
Motivation & Emotion: Zombie Game Processing Worksheet
Use this handout to process your observations and experiences from the Zombie Apocalypse Game. Remember to
communicate clearly, using academic/technical language, and to use proper psychological terminology. Each group will
share with the class.
Part One: Reflection- 3 Theories of Emotion
As you answer the questions in this section, please think about them in terms of human behavior. Yes, you played a
zombie at one point, but you were still a human “playing” a zombie. (What did the human you experience?)
In the following chart describe how each of the following theories of Emotion apply to the game, cite specific
examples.
1. In the top of the chart make a meaningful connection or mnemonic to help us remember it.
2. In the bottom place your example.
James-Lange
Cannon-Bard
Schacter’s Two-Factor
Be prepared to share your experiences with the class!! You are going to explain each theory by acting
them out for us all to understand!
Roles: Survivor
Zombies
Narrator
When done explain to the class which one of these theories your group believes applies best to this
situation.
Emotion Theories in AP Psychology
Emotion is a complex psychophysiological experience of an individual as a result of his interactions with the
environment. Every human experiences different emotions in one single day. There are positive emotions and
negative emotions. Emotions can be related to objects, related to one’s future, related to an event, social
emotions and self-appraisal emotions, etc. Some emotions are primary such as love, care, joy, surprise, anger
and fear. These primary emotions are innate and present from the time of birth. Secondary emotions, which we
learn through our experience or learn by modelling other, include pride, rage, shame, neglect, sympathy, horror
etc. In psychology, there are different theories related to emotion. We are going to talk about 4 of these
theories in this post.
James-Lang Theory
The James Lang theory of emotion was proposed by psychologist, William James and Carl Lange. According
to this theory, as we experience different events, our nervous system develops physical reactions related to
these events, such as increased heart rate, trembling, stomach ache. These physical reactions in turn create
emotional reactions such as anger, fear, sadness etc. Therefore, a person’s emotional reaction depends upon
how he/she interprets his/her physical reactions. For example, when someone cries, according to the James
Lang theory, she is sad therefore she cries. Here’s another example: when you are sitting in a dark room all by
yourself. Suddenly you hear breathing nearby. Your heart rate increases and you may even begin to tremble.
You interpret this as you are scared and therefore you experience fear.
Cannon-Bard Theory
The Cannon-Bard theory is developed by physiologists Walter Cannon and Philip Bard. According to this
theory, we feel the emotions and experience the physiological reactions such as sweating, trembling and
muscle tension simultaneously. For example, consider the same situation mentioned above. You are in a dark
room all by yourself and suddenly you hear breathing nearby. According to the Cannon-Bard theory, your heart
rate increases and you begin to tremble. While you are experiencing these physical reactions, your experience
the emotion of fear simultaneously.
Schachter-Singer Theory
According to the Schachter-Singer theory, the element of reasoning plays an important role in how we
experience emotions. This theory proposed that when an events occurs, reasoning takes place along with the
arousal and emotion. When an event causes physiological arousal, we try to identify a reason for this arousal
and then we experience and label the emotion. For example: you are sitting in a dark room all by yourself and
all of a sudden you hear breathing. Your heart rate increases and you begin to tremble. Upon noticing this
physical reactions, you realize that the reactions come from the fact that you are all alone in a dark room. You
think that you may be in danger and therefore you feel the emotion of fear.
Schachter-Singer’s Two-Factor theory
This theory focuses on the role of physiological arousal as a primary factor in emotions. However, it also
suggests that physical arousals alone cannot be responsible for all the emotional responses. Therefore, this
theory also takes into account the cognitive aspect of the emotional reaction. It suggests that there are
interactions between physical arousal and how we cognitively label that arousal. For example, you are sitting in
a dark room all by yourself and all of a sudden you hear breathing. Your heart rate increases and you begin to
tremble. You notice the increased heart rate and realize that it is caused by fear. Therefore, you feel
frightened. The whole process begins with an external stimulus (breathing sound in a dark room), followed by
the physiological arousal (increased heart rate and trembling). The cognitive labels come into action when we
associate the physiological arousals to fear, which is immediately followed by the conscious experience of the
emotion of fear.
Motivation & Emotion: Zombie Game Processing Worksheet
Use this handout to process your observations and experiences from the Zombie Apocalypse Game. Remember to
communicate clearly, using academic/technical language, and to use proper psychological terminology. Each group will
share with the class.
Part One: Reflection- Pyramid of Power!
As you answer the questions in this section, please think about them in terms of human behavior. Yes, you played a
zombie at one point, but you were still a human “playing” a zombie. (What did the human you experience?)
How would Abraham Maslow explain the behaviors observed in the zombie game?
On the paper provided recreate Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs based on the Zombie game. Make it flashy with your best
attempt at artwork! You’ll be sharing with the class.
How did this “zombie apocalypse” bring out the “best” and the “worst” in people?
Be honest about your own behavior as well
How might disasters do this in real life? Provide examples of how this takes place in real world scenarios.
Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs
Citation: Huitt, W. (2007). Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State
University.
Abraham Maslow (1954) attempted to synthesize a large body of research related to human motivation. Prior to
Maslow, researchers generally focused separately on such factors as biology, achievement, or power to explain
what energizes, directs, and sustains human behavior. Maslow posited a hierarchy of human needs based on two
groupings: deficiency needs and growth needs. Within the deficiency needs, each lower need must be met
before moving to the next higher level. Once each of these needs has been satisfied, if at some future time a
deficiency is detected, the individual will act to remove the deficiency. The first four levels are:
1) Physiological: hunger, thirst, bodily comforts, etc.;
2) Safety/security: out of danger;
3) Belongingness and Love: affiliate with others, be accepted; and
4) Esteem: to achieve, be competent, gain approval and recognition.
According to Maslow, an individual is ready to act upon the growth needs if and only if the deficiency needs are
met. Maslow's initial conceptualization included only one growth need--self-actualization. Self-actualized
people are characterized by: 1) being problem-focused; 2) incorporating an ongoing freshness of appreciation of
life; 3) a concern about personal growth; and 4) the ability to have peak experiences. Maslow later differentiated
the growth need of self-actualization, specifically identifying two of the first growth needs as part of the more
general level of self-actualization (Maslow & Lowery, 1998) and one beyond the general level that focused on
growth beyond that oriented towards self (Maslow, 1971). They are:
5) Cognitive: to know, to understand, and explore;
6) Aesthetic: symmetry, order, and beauty;
7) Self-actualization: to find self-fulfillment and realize one's potential; and
8) Self-transcendence: to connect to something beyond the ego or to help others find self-fulfillment and realize
their potential.
Maslow's basic position is that as one becomes more self-actualized and self-transcendent, one becomes more
wise (develops wisdom) and automatically knows what to do in a wide variety of situations. Daniels (2001)
suggested that Maslow's ultimate conclusion that the highest levels of self-actualization are transcendent in their
nature may be one of his most important contributions to the study of human behavior and motivation.
Norwood (1999) proposed that Maslow's hierarchy can be used to describe the kinds of information individual's
seek at different levels of development. For example, individuals at the lowest level seek coping information in
order to meet their basic needs. Information that is not directly connected to helping a person meet his or her
needs in a very short time span is simply left unattended. Individuals at the safety level need helping
information. They seek to be assisted in seeing how they can be safe and secure. Enlightening information is
sought by individuals seeking to meet their belongingness needs. Quite often this can be found in books or other
materials on relationship development. Empowering information is sought by people at the esteem level. They
are looking for information on how their egos can be developed. Finally, people in the growth levels of
cognitive, aesthetic, and self-actualization seek edifying information. While Norwood does not specifically
address the level of transcendence, I believe it is safe to say that individuals at this stage would seek information
on how to connect to something beyond themselves or to how others could be edified.
Maslow published his first conceptualization of his theory over 50 years ago (Maslow, 1943) and it has since
become one of the most popular and often cited theories of human motivation. An interesting phenomenon
related to Maslow's work is that in spite of a lack of empirical evidence to support his hierarchy, it enjoys wide
acceptance (Wahba & Bridgewell, 1976; Soper, Milford & Rosenthal, 1995).
Motivation & Emotion: Zombie Game Processing Worksheet
Use this handout to process your observations and experiences from the Zombie Apocalypse Game. Remember to
communicate clearly, using academic/technical language, and to use proper psychological terminology. Each group will
share with the class.
Part One: Reflection- I’m all outta gas!
As you answer the questions in this section, please think about them in terms of human behavior. Yes, you played a
zombie at one point, but you were still a human “playing” a zombie. (What did the human you experience?)
1. How would Hans Selye explain life for the human survivors, in terms of stress and burnout?
2. Knowing what you know about General Adaptation Syndrome, what helpful advice would you offer zombie
apocalypse survivors who are trying to make the best of their new world situation?
3. What role would the hormone cortisol play in their lives?
Create a detailed version of this chart using examples from the Zombie game and be prepared to share with
the class.
FYI:
Illustrations are awesome
Acting out a scenario is also awesome
Hans Selye: The Discovery of Stress By Gerald Gabriel
G.A.S. Spells Stress
As with so many wondrous discoveries of science and medicine, it was
by chance that Hungarian-born Hans Selye (1907-1982) stumbled upon
the idea of the General Adaptation Syndrome (G.A.S.), which he first
wrote about in the British journal Nature in the summer of 1936. The
G.A.S., alternately known as the stress syndrome, is what Selye came
to call the process under which the body confronts “stress” (what he
first called “noxious agents”). In the G.A.S., Selye explained, the body
passes through three universal stages of coping. First there is an “alarm
reaction,” in which the body prepares itself for “fight or flight.” No
organism can sustain this condition of excitement, however, and a
second stage of adaptation ensues (provided the organism survives the first stage). In the second stage, a
resistance to the stress is built. Finally, if the duration of the stress is sufficiently long, the body eventually
enters a stage of exhaustion, a sort of aging “due to wear and tear.”
“Stress,” in Selye’s lexicon, could be anything from prolonged food deprivation to the injection of a foreign
substance into the body, to a good muscular workout; by “stress,” he did not mean only “nervous stress,” but
“the nonspecific response of the body to any demand.”
Selye’s breakthrough ideas about stress helped to forge an entirely new medical field – the study of biological
stress and its effects – which blossomed through the middle part of the twentieth century to include the work of
thousands of researchers, and it is a science that continues to make advances today by connecting stress to
illness and discovering new ways to help the body efficiently deal with life’s wear and tear.
Though his efforts were met with skepticism early on (he did suggest some fairly radical things, including the
idea that stress had a causal relationship to a number of major illnesses – heart disease and cancer, among
them), Selye’s impeccable methods and research gradually won out, and his ideas were eventually treated with
respect by health and science professionals of every stripe.
In Selye’s own words, his discovery was just “enough to prevent the concept from ever slipping through our
fingers again; [making] it amenable to a precise scientific analysis.”
Stressed-out Lab Rats
Selye had actually been searching for a new hormone when he stumbled upon all of this. In 1934, at the age of
28, he was an assistant at McGill University’s Biochemistry Department in Montreal. He was a promising
young endocrinologist carrying out quite orthodox biochemical experimentation involving the injection of rats
with ovarian extract. His hope was to uncover changes in the organism that could not be caused by any known
sex hormone, and the initial results gave him cause for great optimism.
The rats developed a triad of symptoms from the extract injections, including enlargement of the adrenal cortex,
atrophy of the thymus, spleen, and lymph nodes, and deep bleeding ulcers in the lining of the stomach and
duodenum — all of which could be increased or decreased in severity by adjusting the amount of extract.
It seemed obvious to the young Selye that he was on the verge of pinpointing a new hormone, as none then
known produced these sort of symptoms. “You may well imagine my happiness!” he writes. “At the age of 28, I
already seemed to be on the track of a new hormone.”
His hopes began to diminish, however, when, first, placental extract and, later, pituitary extract brought about
the same symptoms. But he was not yet defeated, for, he writes, “mine was supposed to be a new hormone and
(who knew?) perhaps the pituitary could also manufacture this one.”
Next, however, he injected the extract of kidney, spleen and numerous other organs, all of which produced the
same effect. He was baffled. In a last ditch effort to clarify these bizarre results, he injected a toxic liquid,
Formalin, (used in the preparation of tissues for microscopic study) and when even it produced these symptoms,
he knew he had failed in discovering a new hormone.
The Unique View Afforded to the Young and Ignorant
He was left, at this point, with two options. The first and most apparent was to give up on this line of research.
There was plenty of reason to believe that this trail would lead to nothing of worth, and, he knew, many capable
scientists had wasted their best years being led around by just such a red herring. “I became so depressed that
for a few days I just sat in my laboratory,” he writes, “brooding about how this misadventure might have been
avoided and wondering what was to be done now.”
The other, much more difficult, possibility was to devise some new way of examining his data. This, of course,
is the option he chose.
Selye revisited a theory he first began to formulate years before at the German-speaking University of Prague,
where, at the age of nineteen, he began medical school. It was here that Selye unwittingly developed ideas that
would eventually lead to the discovery of the G.A.S.
Selye recalled years later that as the various patients were brought in and examined during his introduction to
clinical medicine, they all “felt and looked ill, had a coated tongue, complained of more or less diffuse aches
and pains in the joints, and of intestinal disturbances with loss of appetite.” They also generally “had fever,
enlarged spleen or liver, inflamed tonsils, a skin rash” and a number of other general symptoms. It wouldn’t be
until later that the telltale signs would appear of, say, liver disease, and treatment could be recommended.
“Since these were my first patients,” Selye writes, “I was still capable of looking at them without being biased
by current medical thought. Had I known more I would never have asked myself questions, because everything
was handled just the way it should be.”
The main question that stuck in Selye’s mind was a simple one really: how was it that doctors over the long
history of medicine had spent so much time and energy on the discovery and treatment of individual diseases
and had given so little thought to “the syndrome of just being sick”? Though captivated by this idea, being
young and inexperienced – and working under the deadlines and demands of medical school – Selye hadn’t the
time, energy or expertise to pursue it. He briefly mentioned the idea to his advisor who promptly chuckled at the
young mans naivete, and thus the idea fell dormant for the better part of the next decade.
On “the Syndrome of Just Being Sick” and Bloodletting
The memory of the nonspecific illness did not altogether abandon Selye, though, and years later, when he was
casting around for a rubric under which he could examine his failed hormone experiments, he was reminded of
the symptoms of the patients in the Prague hospital. Those patients, he understood, shared something in
common with his sick rats. His intention was to find out what that connection was, and he in fact decided very
quickly to devote his life to the discovery of the root of this nonspecific illness.
“If there was such a thing as a single nonspecific reaction of the body to damage of any kind,” he writes of his
jubilant epiphany, “this might be worth study for its own sake. Indeed, working out the mechanism of this kind
of stereotyped syndrome of response to injury as such might be much more important to medicine than the
discovery of yet another sex hormone.”
In piecing together the puzzle, Selye was aided by two other bits of medical knowledge. Certain treatments, he
knew, were useful to patients suffering from just about anything. Doctors prescribed to most patients things like
rest, eating easily digestible food, and protection against great variations in temperature. Also, he recalled that
there existed a number of nonspecific treatments in the history of medicine – and, in fact, in contemporary
medicine, too – that, though odd (some would say barbaric), had met with undeniable (if sporadic) success:
practices like the injection of foreign substances into the body, fever therapy, shock therapy, and bloodletting.
It didn’t take long for Selye to formulate an idea that made all of this seemingly disparate information coalesce.
There was some mechanism in the body, he rightly surmised, whose response to external agents – “noxious
agents” was the best term he could then muster – was somehow general. The quality of just being sick he had
seen in the Prague patients, the shared symptoms in his experimental rats, the universal usage of certain
treatments, as well as the successful practice of stressful remedies like shock therapy, when taken together,
suggested that specific illnesses, if not wholly caused by a single influence, were certainly bound by similar
forces; there was a link in the body’s reaction to illness that gave the appearance of some internal mechanism
combating the stressing agents.
The Hypothalamus-Pituitary-Adrenal System
Selye’s genius, then, was in suspecting and, through research, identifying this complicated internal stressprocessing mechanism, which came to be known as the hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal system.
This system, in short, governs the amount and kind of response the body produces to combat a stressing agent.
Simplified, the hypothalamus (the bridge between the brain and endocrine system) sends a message to the
pituitary gland (a hormone-producing gland embedded in bones at the base of the skull) to release ACTH
(adrenocorticotrophic hormone) into the blood stream. This signal prompts the adrenal cortex (located above the
kidneys) to create corticoids, another hormone, from available raw material. These corticoids are then dispersed
to the places in the body they are needed, where they are put to use in the various stages of defense against a
stressing agent.
This was the fruition of Selye’s goals: the identification of stress based upon “demonstrable biological laws.”
Sometimes a discovery is in part remarkable for the fact that nobody has made it before; this was just such a
discovery. It “could have been discovered during the Middle Ages,” writes Selye. “[Its] recognition did not
depend upon the development of any complicated pieces of apparatus, but merely upon an unbiased state of
mind, a fresh point of view.”
The Legacy
With the knowledge of the G.A.S. and hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal system, it was all of a sudden possible to
begin gauging the role of stress in our lives – which is precisely what Selye and a multitude of researchers have
been doing for the last half century.
Selye himself went on to publish 33 books and over 1,600 scientific articles, almost all of them on the subject of
stress. Among his many scientific texts, he also wrote a handful of popular books intended to educate about
stress, the most popular of which was The Stress of Life, an in-depth explanation of the stress syndrome and its
origins.
Selye served as professor and director at the Institute of Experimental Medicine and Surgery at the University
of Montreal from 1945 until retiring in the mid-1970s. But he also evolved into a sort of philosophical leader
whose views on health helped to change the way the body and mind were viewed in the decades after World
War II.
Selye moved easily into the role of well-being representative, and was just as likely to be asked to speak to a
religious group as to a medical group. He often spoke of the value of love, and of the essential importance in
our own well-being of helping others. He was not, at any point in his career, anyone’s vision of a “normal”
scientist. But he was indeed an innovator, and his influence stretches behind him still, nearly twenty years after
his death, as his students and colleagues continue to toil in the wake of his ideas.