It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
This paper reviews the contribution of the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations to the development of industrial sociology. Four major contributions are discussed: the development of an `open socio-technical systems' model of the industrial organization; the study of industrial work groups, particularly with reference to different forms of social organization within the same technological limits; the elaboration of ideas concerning management organization; and discussion of the sources of resistance to change in organizations, and means for handling them.
Drucker (1969) claims that the coming Age of Discontinuity will lead to further growth in the discussion of organizational change. Discussion, however, is not enough. It will have to be followed by action. Many people who talk about change think of it as applying to others rather than to themselves. It is natural that organizational change should tend to be welcomed by those who will benefit and resisted by those who will have to give up established attitudes and behavior. In terms of exchange theory (Strauss, 1970), the latter will need to be rewarded so that they are motivated to change. Rewards may be tangible. They may also be related to less material needs, such as self-esteem, participation, and autonomy, or a desire to operate on the basis of valid information.
… JN Druckman distinguishes two kinds of frames: 'frames in communication' ('words, images, phrases, and … According to JN Druckman: 'Manipulation occurs when an elite influences a citizens … J. Sachs, J. Stiglitz, F. Fukuyama25), think tanks (eg The Tavistock Institute, The RAND …
Group relations training originated about 60 years ago (Miller,1989) and has its philosophical and theoretical roots in psycho-dynamics. It is based upon Freud’s writings as the father of psychoanalysis (Czander, 1993), and incorporates the work of Melanie Klein on child and family psychology (De Board, 1978), Ferenczi on object relations (De Board,1978) and Bertalanaffy on systems thinking (Czander, 1993; De Board, 1978; Hirshhorn,1993).
Presents a review of the history, theory, and research of small group intervention. Topics include the concept of feedback, early laboratory studies, network studies, group-induced conformity, evaluation studies, and utopian research.
originally posted by: shellyhk
What comes to mind when I think
Of Tavistock Institute and Word and mind manipulation, I think of the conspiracy that they created The Beatles and The Rolling Stones to influence masses in certain directions through their music, I think of the hippie movement and mind altering drugs, the Aquarian conspiracy...am I way off?
originally posted by: Silk
In particular Im looking for information pertaining to the use of word manipulation and thoughts.
Its a bit of a reach I know but I worked with him over a few years on a homegrown project that was intended to - we he said build a "cosmic tour" or "cruise"based upon a group of subscribers.
This took the form of a large number of word associations and images.
Just interested if anyone else has come across this organisation and any information to be had ?
Ex Colleagues - its grey to start off with but I may ask for RATS later? Thanks Guys
Clancy et al. (2003) used a variant of the Deese/Roediger-McDermott (DRM) paradigm (Deese. 1959, Roegider and McDermott, 1995) to investigate this possibility. The paradigm involves the presentation of word lists to participants. Within each list, all the words presented are associated with a single theme word, often referred to as the critical lure, that is itself not presented. For example, the list might include the words sour, candy, bitter and sugar, all of which strongly suggest the word sweet, although the word sweet would not itself be presented. On subsequent recall and recognition tests, a substantial proportion of the participants are likely to report that the word sweet was in fact presented.
Because the DRM paradigm is easy to use, produces a clear and robust effect, and because Roediger and McDermott included full copies of the lists they used in their 1995 paper, the paradigm has become a popular research tool to help answer a number of questions.
False memory research has important implications for the criminal justice system, and the DRM paradigm has been a useful tool for assessing factors that might influence false memory formation. Using the DRM paradigm, scientists have been able to show that, while learning under stress reduces overall recall, it does not influence false recall or recognition. This suggests that victims and witnesses of stressful crimes are no more likely to create false memories of the crime than they are to create false memories of other everyday events.
Investigating the controversial issue of recovered memories for childhood sexual abuse, researchers have turned to DRM lists. Researchers have shown that individuals claiming to have recovered previously forgotten memories of childhood sexual abuse are more likely to falsely recall and recognise critical lures than individuals that have always known they were sexually abused as a child. These results were taken to suggest that individuals who report recovered memories may have difficulty with source monitoring, and thus may regularly adopt internally generated ideas as genuine memories.
Scientists from the University of Missouri have used the DRM paradigm to look at brain activity for real and false memories. They found evidence that suggests different brain processes may underlie the retrieval of real and false memories, with false-memory retrieval showing distinctly different patterns of neural activity to retrieval of real memories.
The DRM paradigm has also been used to probe a number of other psychological issues including: the methods used to recall information from memory; how stereotypes influence human thought; the thought process employed by drug addicts; how children develop thought processes; and the types of impairments suffered by patients with amnesia.
originally posted by: Dragoon01
I have recently been pondering the topics of "magick" and the occult mindset of the world elite.
In my mind when we are talking about propaganda or mass thought control we are actually talking about a form of Magick. I think what we classically think of as magick i.e. ritual , spells, incantations and such, are largely a form of focusing exercise that focuses the will of the magick user. While this process may actually take advantage of some force that we are as yet unaware of what is happening is a manifestation of the will of the user.
Magick is the Science and Art of causing Change to occur in conformity with Will.
(Illustration: It is my Will to inform the World of certain facts within my knowledge. I therefore take “magickal weapons”, pen, ink, and paper I write “incantations”—these sentences—in the “magickal language” ie, that which is understood by the people I wish to instruct I call forth “spirits”, such as printers, publishers, booksellers and so forth and constrain them to convey my message to those people. The composition and distribution of this book is thus an act of Magick by which I cause Changes to take place in conformity with my Will.)
In one sense Magick may be defined as the name given to Science by the vulgar.
ANY required change may be effected by the application of the proper kind and degree of Force in the proper manner, through the proper medium to the proper object.
(Illustration: I wish to prepare an ounce of Chloride of Gold. I must take the right kind of acid, nitro-hydrochloric and no other, in a vessel which will not break, leak or corrode, in such a manner as will not produce undesirable results, with the necessary quantity of Gold: and so forth. Every change has its own conditions.
In the present state of our knowledge and power some changes are not possible in practice we cannot cause eclipses, for instance, or transform lead into tin, or create men from mushrooms. But it is theoretically possible to cause in any object any change of which that object is capable by nature and the conditions are covered by the above postulate.)edit on 21-10-2018 by The GUT because: (no reason given)