Language of the Neanderthal Essay Example for Free

Language of the Neanderthal Essay It is understood that the Neanderthal was an exceptional thinker and communicator; but there are heavy debates that question whether or not it spoke with a language. Some argue that the hyoid bone of the Neanderthal was too high in relation to its larynx to enable its tongue to form words, while others argue the opposite. With respect to both theories, it was indeed a linguistic hominid. The Neanderthal skull is more similar in shape to the Homo sapien than that of hominids before it; which would make it reasonable to believe that it was able to speak using language. Since it was the transitional species however, it may have been limited in its development of language usage. History of the Neanderthal Before analyzing the arguments discussing the language used by the Neanderthals, it is important to understand what is known about them. Homo neanderthalensis is the last species in the evolution of hominids, which is not considered a â€Å"modern human.† After many years of study, and dozens of findings, scientists observed the differences in the shape of Neanderthal skulls compared to Homo sapiens. They discovered that the brain was smaller, the bones were much more robust, and that the Neanderthal had no chin. The first findings of Neanderthals were in Belgium, Germany, and Gibraltar, in the early to mid 1800s. Some of the most important findings of the Neanderthal were in the La Chapelle- aux- Saints caves of Southern France. The ideas that have come from these rolling hills have both hurt and helped the progress for valid information in Neanderthal studies. In 1908, Jean and Amà ©dà ©e Bouyssonie’s findings led many scientists to conclude that Neanderthals lived strictly in caves. This is now proven to be false. These rumors however, created widespread generalization that made Neanderthals appear vastly inferior to modern humans. One such generalization held sway and brought about artistic depictions of the Neanderthals being sluggish and  awkward creatures. These depictions were created in reflection of the reconstruction of the â€Å"OId Man of La Chapelle- Aux- Saints† by French paleontologist, Marcellin Boule. The bones in the reconstruction of this particular Neanderthal were arthritic; and â€Å"although Boule was aware of the deforming illness†¦his reconstruction apparently did not take it into account sufficiently† (Sommer 2006:213). It wasn’t until the mid- 1900s that paleoanthropologists discovered that the Neanderthal walked upright and wasn’t slouched over at all. Discussions on the Neanderthal Hyoid Bone Despite all of the progress that has been made in figuring out just who Homo neanderthalensis was, anthropologists still have a long way to go. There are many sub-topics about the enigmatic skeletal remains of the Neanderthal that are stirring up heated debates in the world of anthropology, and are still left to skepticism. One of the most controversial is whether it was able to speak with flexible tongue movements that were able to create sophisticated variances in sound; that moreover allowed it to live with social interactions that rivaled the ones we use today. The hyoid bone and larynx position of the Neanderthal compared to Homo sapiens is the most explored aspect of this debate of language. In these arguments, the morphology of the organs and bones in the neck are often times more of a concern than their functionality. The hyoid is a U shaped bone, responsible for harnessing the movements of the tongue. It is located just above the larynx, which is also known as the voice box. The larynx and hyoid bone are positioned in a way that work together to form the words heard among modern day humans. In the early 1970s, scientists E.S. Crelin and Philip Lieberman reassembled the larynx of the Neanderthal and came up with a strong theory that is still agreed with today. They found that the Neanderthal â€Å"larynx is positioned high, close to the base of the skull, and the tongue lies almost entirely within the oral cavity† (Lieberman 1975:494). Lieberman is an expert in the evolution of language and has spent a greater part of his career discussing the major differences between Neanderthal and modern human language. He has written volumes that greatly detail the morphology of the Neanderthal’s mandible and laryngeal bone structure; and has for the most part concluded that Neanderthal language was nowhere near that of modern day humans. Shortly after Lieberman and Crelins’ reconstructed Neanderthal skull, there was not yet an actual Neanderthal hyoid bone found; and other scientists and thinkers in the 1970s disagreed with the way the Neanderthal skull was reconstructed. They based this off of the fact that Crelin was using only five specimens of Neanderthals from the La Chapelle Aux Saints site and also that the culminated skull was reconstructed incorrectly. Many paleontologists believed that the way it was put together would have made it impossible for it to swallow food. â€Å"One cannot help wondering why the vocal tract remodeling concentrates so heavily on La Chapelle when La Ferrassie I is in a much better state of physical preservation† (Carlisle and Siegel 1978: 370).Despite the valid statements made by Carlisle and Siegel that account the pristine condition of the skull that was put together at the La Ferrassie I site; it still did not give any more evidence that pointed to advanced vocal communication among the Neanderthals. Around the late 1980s the first Neanderthal hyoid bone was found in the Kebara Caves of Mount Carmel, Israel. It was discovered in the middle Paleolithic layers of soil that date back to sixty thousand years ago. Upon investigation of the bone, it was discovered that it was nearly identical to those of modern humans. It is important to point out that many of noted paleontologist, Philip Lieberman’s studies were based on comparing the hyoid bones of Chimpanzees to Neanderthals. Lieberman and his colleagues reached a consensus that Neanderthals spoke more like Chimpanzees than modern humans. Chimpanzees have been reportedly able to communicate with very subtle changes in tonality, which indicates there is a primitive language there. That being said, the shape of the hyoid bone of the chimpanzee is worlds apart from the Homo sapien. Whereas, previously mentioned the hyoid was nearly identical to the Homo sapiens’. The chimpanzee’s hyoid bone is much smaller and narrower in comparison to its larynx which is partly what makes its language usage, extremely limited. Not only that, but its brain is much smaller than not only the modern human, but also the Neanderthal. Lieberman’s vast knowledge of Linguistics has made him an important figure in Archaeology, but his morphological ideals that are commonplace have left out some of the more obvious similarities between Neanderthals and Humans. Neanderthal DNA The functions of the DNA structure of the Neanderthal are often times abandoned entirely in the arguments defending their â€Å"lack of language.† Proteins extracted from digs surrounding Neanderthal sites have been analyzed in labs and their DNA structures have given researchers positive reinforcement that the Neanderthal was very similar in its genetic makeup. According to Dr. Julien Riel- Salvatore from the University of Colorado at Denver, â€Å"Genetically, they [Neanderthals] share with modern humans a distinctive mutation of the FOXP2 gene, which seems to be intimately associated with speech† (Julien Riel-Salvatore, personal communication 2011). This same mutation is not exhibited in the Chimpanzee. Neanderthals and Human Breeding There are other debates that coincide with Neanderthals being able to speak, for instance a study that shows Neanderthals may have been able to breed with humans. This is a paradox in that it would rule out the term Neanderthal entirely, because in order to breed, an animal must be of the same species. If this is true not only would it point out that Homo neanderthalensis could speak as eloquently as the Homo sapien, but the Homo neanderthalensis was a Homo Sapien. The differences would be more in the light of behavior, nomadic skills, and tool technology that made the Homo Sapien with a chin able to out-survive the other. Playful notions aside, this is still a very debatable sub-topic of Neanderthal language and many more discoveries will have to be made to prove its total validity. Misleading Theories Other noted archaeologists believe that the large nose of the Neanderthal made it incapable of speech, insisting â€Å"†¦Contrasts in facial morphology probably led to nasal-like vocalizations†¦[and for]†¦advanced hmmmmm sounds† (Mithen 2006: 226). The brief description that Mithen uses to back up this opinion does not prove anything about how the nose may have certainly caused vocal limitations. Its nose was larger in size, but so were other parts of the Neanderthal, and they were no impedance to how it got around. Conclusion Corrosion of bones and more importantly muscle tissue make many aspects of anthropology a challenging field. It is not always clear how the muscle  tissue that once surrounded the skeletons of our ancient relatives operated in relation to nerves, connective tissue, and bones. The Neanderthal is a confusing hominid because of its somewhat smaller cranial capacity, and extremely large skeletal frame. The shapes of its bones are like larger replicas of ours, aside from the skull which is unique in its brow ridge and lack of chin. The conclusions of inter-breeding seem a bit far-fetched. It may have been able to speak as well as modern humans, but perhaps in comparison to the Darwin Finches, its slight variances in structure may have selected it to extinction. Acknowledgements I would like to thank Dr. Riel- Salvatore for his feedback on the Neanderthal. I am not a professional analyst in anthropology, and am grateful that he was able to provide me with some of his personal inquiries on the controversial debates centered on Neanderthal language. Works Cited Boellstorf, Tom (Editor) 1978 Additional Comments on Problems in the Interpretation of Neanderthal Speech Capabilities Vol 80 American Anthropology Association, Virginia. Lynch, Michael (Editor) 2006 Mirror Mirror on the Wall: Neanderthal as Image and Distortion in Early 20th- Century French Science and Press Vol. 36. SAGE Publications, California. Mithen, Steven 2006 The Singing Neanderthal. Harvard University Press, Massachusetts. Riel- Salvatore, Julien (Interview) 2011 Original notes from email. Ruff, Christopher (Editor) 1996 Structural Harmony and Neanderthal Speech: A Reply to Le May Vol. 45 Wiley-Liss, New Jersey.

Valchromat Pros and Cons

Valchromat Pros and Cons This is our report on our exploration of a manufactured board known as Valchromat. Valchromat is a unique and high quality wood fibre board that is coloured throughout. There is another product similar to it called Fibracolour but this does not match up to the many qualities of Valchromat which we will explore later. We have chosen this topic for several reasons. It is interesting and unheard of to many people while it also relates to two of our learning outcomes in that it is a versatile material that can be used in furniture construction and that it can be used as an architectural woodworking component. A brief description of Valchromat It comes in 8 colours and 7 different thicknesses. Valchromat is made from forest waste, residue from timber mills and recycled pine.http://www.valchromatsa.com/pics/product/10.jpghttp://www.valchromatsa.com/pics/product/1.jpghttp://www.valchromatsa.com/pics/product/8.jpghttp://www.valchromatsa.com/pics/product/6.jpghttp://www.valchromatsa.com/pics/product/4.jpghttp://www.valchromatsa.com/pics/product/16.jpghttp://www.valchromatsa.com/pics/product/12.jpg Its manufacturing process is extremely environmentally friendly. Its production site has zero carbon Emissions. It is manufactured using organic dyes and a specially formed binding resin that ensure exceptional physical and mechanical characteristics while keeping a natural appearance. It is also approved by the British Standards association for safe use in the manufacture of childrens toys.http://www.valchromatsa.com/pics/product/14.jpg It sounds like the perfect manufactured board but can it really be that good? Brief History Of Valchromat Valchromat was created in the research department of valbopan in Portugal as they wanted to improve and develop new and existing wood related products. There was a gap in the market that called for a product combining colour and the features that could already be found in manufactured boards. It was first introduced in Paris in 1998 at the Aprofal fair where it won the technological innovation prise and the display prise. It then hit the market in 1999 through distribution channels in France Switzerland and Belgium. Over the past 30 years MDF has never been completely accepted by specialists as an adequate product for different finishes and decorative processes. Valchromat has broken this taboo. Valchromat is apparently 30 % stronger and more stable than MDF board and can be completely moisture resistant with the right finish. It also increases the lifespan of tools due to a lubricant agent in its composition. But if Valchromat contains all these qualities, then surely most other manufactured boards will also? Manufacturing of Valchromat The wood pigments and glues are carefully selected. The wood is peeled from the bark and torn into small chips. Then the chips are run through a powerful magnet to remove 99% of metals. They are then washed to remove 80 90% of sand which according to the manufactures will reduce the wear and tear on tools. The chips are then sorted into similar sizes and steam cooked. This makes the chips soft and eaier to isolate the fibres. The organic pigments and glue are then added to the fibres. When this mixture has dried the valchromat is pressed in a large press forming large sized sheets. It is then cut to size and assessed in quality control. Properties of Valchromat The Advantages and Disadvantages Valchromat has many advantages above standard MDF. These include strength, wear and tear, machining, environmental and health aspects, variety and finish choices. Strength: During processing special resins are added to the wood fibres bonding them together causing Valchromat to be 30% stronger than ordinary MDF. Due to the strength of Valchromat it can be used in areas of construction requiring high strength material such as, counter tops, table tops, ceilings and walls. Standard MDF would be unsuitable in some cases of these areas of construction as bowing over a large span can be an issue. Wear and tear: Unlike standard MDF, Valchromat is soaked all the way through with organic colour die allowing scratches difficult to detect. Sanding and re-lacquering is all that is required to bring Valchromat panels back to their finished state. Machining: Contained in the special wood fibre bonding resin used in Valchromat is an organic base chemical called melamine. This chemical has lubricated properties which allow the blades of cutting tools to glide through the wood free from friction. It has been verified that blades of cutting tools used for cutting only Valchromat have a life span of four times longer than blades used for cutting standard MDF. Environmental and health aspects: Valchromat is an environmental friendly non-toxic substance made from recycled pine wood and mill waste. Valchromat panels are manufactured using waste wood such as branches and chips from softwood forests. In using waste wood Valchromat helps to sustain forests and minimize carbon emissions given off from felling machinery. Also the carcinogenic odorless chemical gas known as formaldehyde which is found in the wood fibre bonding resin used in standard MDF is absent in Valchromat where a special organic non- toxic wood fibre bonding resin is used allowing Valchomat safe to be used in the manufacture of kids toys. Valchromat also use the same colour dye used in fabric. This dye is organic and non-toxic. Finishing choices All finishes such as lacquer, wax, oil, fire retardant and glossy will give an immense finish when applied to Valchromat. Valchromat is set to take the place of MDF as the standard manufactured panel board used in furniture construction due to its superior strength, moisture resistance and adaptability. Valchromat can take just about any finish required unlike MDF and it surpasses most standard required for furniture construction. http://www.iscsupply.com/id172.html Standards ValchromatÂÂ ® is classified E1 (very low formaldehyde) and has been approved by the British Standards Association for the safe use in the manufacture of childrens toys. http://www.valchromatsa.com/product/index.html Valchromat holds many certificates aswell as their own extremely high standards SGS Certificate Factory production Control certificate Conformity Declaration Certificate Uses of Valchromat Valchromat is leading the field in manufactured boards. It is mostly used in high end furniture construction at the moment but is sure to work its way down to the small workshop because of its superiority to other manufactured boards. Valchromat is used by the leading designers and manufacturers in the furniture industry. Its adaptability means it is used for different furniture projects from table tops, kitchens, Bathrooms, shelving, wall cladding and other things. Valchromat has won numerous awards and has been on show in many prestiges exhibitions. Tent London will host a dramatic pop up cafe bar pavilion designed by award-winning London design studio, Vonsung. From 23-26 September 2010, visitors to Tent London will have the opportunity to experience Vonsungs striking pop-up cafe bar. Commissioned by Tent London the pavilion will provide a unique dining and bar space for the duration of the event. A fast build, the primary structure will be constructed from materials loaned from Vonsungs existing project sites. The cladding material, which will encase the floor and ceiling, is Bolon, a world leader in woven vinyl material. The walls will be ValchromatÂÂ ®, an innovative, award-winning engineered coloured wood, used by architects, designers and decorators. The whole structure will be illuminated by both skylight and dramatic indoor lighting, forming shadows and silhouettes, it will create a compelling feature within Tent Londons design event. http://tentlondon.blogspot.com/2010_08_01_archive.html Interlam is one of the leading manufacturers of carved wooden panels and one of its main materials is Valchromat alongside other materials. INTERLAMÂÂ ® was established in 1985 as an Italian High pressure laminate distributor.ÂÂ   Over the past 23 years we have grown to become a leading manufacturer of sculpted wall panels and expanded our line of architectural components.ÂÂ   INTERLAMÂÂ ® is a designer and manufacturer of high-end SCULPTED WALL PANELS,ÂÂ  CARVED WALL PANELS, DECORATIVE WALL PANELS, ORNAMENTAL WALL PANELS and components based in the United States and exporting to all corners of the globe. The cornerstone of our business is creating and supplying products to the AD community that add significant value to their individual projects. Water resistant, Ecological and Strong; just some of the words used to describe Valchromat from Interlam. Valchromat uses Special resins that are added to the wood fibre during processing which bonds the fibre together. This causes Valchromat to be 30% stronger than standard MDF. Add to that the fact that Valchromat can be used as. Walls, cabinets, seating, tables, ceilings, counters, and general millwork as well as counter tops, table tops, store fronts, and high moisture areas. http://www.interlam-design.com/Products.cfm The TazCorporation is a another major user of Valchromat in furniture manufacture for both local and international markets Valchromat was created to address the need to overcome the limitation of the existing wood fibre materials in the marketplace. For a few decades, MDF has never really been accepted by specialists as an adequate product for different finishes and decorative purposes. Valchromat has broken this convention by introducing a new aesthetic concept of its own while complying with the chemical and mechanical specifications of the MDF. In addition, Valchromat has been awarded for its significant technical innovation ever since its introduction in the Approfal Fair, Paris in 1998. The material has since undergone different industrial tests before its full-fledge distribution in Europe in 1999. Future Possibilities At the moment the future of Valchromat looks very healthy. With new designs available with every advancement in technology. It is already used in Kitchens, Bathrooms, and many other household rooms and offices and is making serious inroads in the childrens toys industry. Whatever route furniture construction takes in the next few years Valchromat is bound to be a part of it for a long time When it comes to choosing the best kind of fibreboard there are many options from LMF, MDF, HDF and now valchromat.http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSQ_K-zGBck77HtTSqEp_vF27qWscAnGc_PWYB80vx1wTD0RWrhRQ The most frequently used fibreboard from knowledge would be MDF (medium density fibre). Its method of manufacture is simple, softwood wood fibres glued under heat and pressure. It has a lot of advantages over solid wood as very little shrinkage and expansion occurs. It is available in large sheets 84 and 95, its Dense, flat, stiff, free of knots, grain not distinguished and very easily machined such as cutting, drilling, filed etc. It can be finished with a variety of solutions such as water based paints, oils, varnishes, lacquers or it can even be laminated. Paint Oil Varnish Lacquer Laminate Along with the advantages of MDF there are also disadvantages, because MDF contains a large amount of glue, this cause blunting to tooling very quickly. Probably the main disadvantage would be the health risks caused by the dust produced from MDF, this is because the fibres are bonded together with formaldehyde resins. Formaldehyde is a toxic chemical and is continuously being released from MDF unless sealed, which can cause irritation to the eyes, nose, throat and mucous membrane. It can also cause irritation to the skin and is cancerous. A new product on the market now is valchromat. It is based on the same principles as MDF but in many ways it is much better. Valchromat unlike MDF is moisture resistant and is recommended to be used in areas with high moisture and humidity, where as MDF will tend to swell and expand when in contact with moisture. The wood fibres come from forest waste and there is no formaldehyde added to the product which makes this product non-toxic and more environmentally friendly unlike its rival MDF. Valchromat is available in a variety of colours due to organic dyes being infused into the wood fibres, these dyes penetrate the wood fibres so that the colours are uniform throughout the board. The dye is also resistant to fading when exposed to UV rays from artificial light. These dyes are non toxic, and they are similar to dyes used in fabrics. Special resins are used to bond the fibres together which along with the organic dyes, make valchromat 30% stronger than standard MDF. Because valchromat comes in coloured panels it is ready for production without the need to be painted, finishes maybe added to deepen the colour of the panel such as lacquer, varnish etc. HDF (high density fibreboard) is another form of fibreboard and in many ways it is much better than MDF. It is manufactured using similar principles as MDF, wood fibres glued together under heat and pressure except, HDF is made from exploded wood fibres and is put under much more pressure than MDF produce a higher quality board. Is HDF a better solution than valchromat? In terms of strength and density . . . . . . . . . . . .Yes, as HDF is 75% denser than MDF (depending on manufacturer), where as valchromat is only 30% denser than MDF. In terms of resistance to moisture and environmental impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . No, HDF incorporates the same moisture problems and dangers as MDF, moisture causes the panel to swell and expand, and danger through formaldehyde which can cause health problem such as cancer. Conclusion From doing this report we have definitely met the two learning outcomes stated in the introduction. Valchromat is without a doubt a versatile woodworking material and can be used for many architectural components. We also feel that valchromat , even though it is so versatile, it still would not be our choice for certain jobs like making jigs and other practical items. We have already decided to use it ourselves in some project at some stage in our woodworking careers.

An investigation in the phenomenon of humour

An investigation in the phenomenon of humour Humor is a universal phenomenon which shows in the tribal and industrialized societies (Apte, 1985). In the Oxford English Dictionary, humor is defined as that quality of actions, speech, or writing which excites amusement; oddity, jocularity, facetiousness, comicality, fun (Simpson Weiner, 1989). From the psychology perspective, humor is stated as a cognitive, emotional and motivational stance toward incongruity, as inherent in funny artifacts, but also in inadvertently amusing situation, our fellow behaviour and attitudes, in fate and life and human nature and existence in general (Ruch, 2002). The term sense of humor will be more specific which refer to a personality trait or individual-differences variable (Ruch, 1998). In addition, Schmidt-Hidding (1963) and Ruch (1998) pointed out that humor has changed rapidly throughout history and during different epochs which has been viewed as predominant mood, talent virtue, style, philosophical attitude or world view. According to Marti n, Puhlik-Doris, Larsen, Gray and Weir (2003), the different facets of sense of humour lend themselves to different measurement approaches, including maximal performance tests (eg. Humour as cognitive ability), funniest ratings (eg. Humour as aesthetic response), observer ratings and self-reported scale. Furthermore, Tamaoka Takashima (1994) stated that humor actually is grounded in a cultural and social context as understanding humor should requires some knowledge of the language which humor was written. From past research, humor is often to be tested in different dimensions which include how it deals with stress and depression (Thornson, Powell, Sarmany-Schuller Hampes, 1997). Lefcourt (2001) stated that people with great sense of humor are easily get well with others, have better ability to cope with stress and also have a better mental and physical health. Martin (2000) explained that humor has become a broad and multi-faceted construct in current psychological research which refers to mental processing in creating, perceiving, understanding and appreciating humor, to characteristics of a stimulus or to the responses of the individual. Nowadays, there are lots of approaches to measure humor, which includes the self-report scales, ability tests, behavioural observation techniques and human appreciation measures. Among all the measurements, there are a few well-known measurements which are frequently used by researchers in their studies. These measurements include Coping Humor Scale (CHS; Matin Lefcourt, 1983), Situational Humor Response Questionnaire (SHRQ; Matin Lefcourt, 1984), The Sense of Humor Questionnaire (SHQ; Svebak, 1974), Multidimensional Sense of Humor (MHSH; Thorson Powell, 1993), and Humor Styles Questionnaire (HSQ; Martin, Puhlik-Doris, Gray Weir, 2003). Coping Humor Scale was a 7 items scale which designed to report individuals on the humor in coping with stress and the association between sense of humor and both mental and physical health. Besides that, Coping Humour Scale inquires participants used humour to alter difficult situation (Ruch, 1998). Following that, Situational Humor Response Questionnaire was a 21 items scale which has been used in research on sense of humor as a stress-moderator and also the association between sense of humor and both mental and physical health. Thorson (1990) critic SHRQ is a measurement that defines sense of humor purely in terms of laughter frequency. Kuiper and Martin (1993) stated that individuals who score higher marks in both the Coping humour Scale and Situational Humour Response Questionnaire had higher level of self esteem, less discrepancy between their actual and ideal self-concepts, and greater stability in their self concepts over time. Sense of Humor Questionnaire was a 21 items measured with 3 dimensions (Metamessage sensitivity, liking of humor, and emotional expressiveness. SHQ used for investigating relationship between sense of humor and other personality dimensions as well as measures of psychological and physical health and well being. Then, Multidimensional Sense of Humor Scale was a 24 items scale with 4 factors (humor creativity and uses of humor for social purposes, uses of coping humor, appreciation of humorous people and appreciation of humor) comparing groups on sense of humor for determining correlates between sense of humor and other personality variables. Humor Styles Questionnaire was a 32 items scale which used to measure 4 humor styles (affiliative, self-enhancing, aggressive and self-defending) in accessing both positive and negative styles of humor in correlational research on the role of humor in psychological and physical health, etc. Lefcourt (2001) described that humor has always been found to occur in everyone across many different cultures around the world. Three different categories of research area in cross cultural differences or national differences in humor were suggested by Goldstein (1976): cross cultural comparisons, cross national replications, and intracultural research of Western and non-Western cultures. Other than that, Nevo, Nevo Yin (2001) stated that cross cultural studies are valuable because they help assess the generality of empirical phenomena and highlights the effects of specific cultural influences which show in Castell and Goldstein (1976) research. They compared different culture group like Belgium, Hong Kong and US, and found out that US unlike others nations, they preferred jokes which related to sexual and aggressive content. In addition, humor tends to be interpreting in different way by various cultures which results of cultural and linguistics differences (Thorson, Brdar and Pow ell, 1997). Besides that, Hofstede (1983) found out that cultures could be differentiated on two dimensions: individualism-collectivism andpower-distance. There are several studies using Multidimensional Sense of Humor to measures humor in cultural differences with the finding which culture score higher in creativity. In Nevo, Nevo Yin (2001) studies, there is a significant cross cultural difference found in the structured questionnaires was the tendency of Singaporean students to rely less on humor when coping with difficulty which concludes (Crawford Gressley, 1991) that they are tendency to produce humor rather than to appreciate it. The relationship of humor and gender are being discussed over year and year. According to Lampert Tripp (1998), men are more likely to joke, tease and kid, whereas women are more likely to act as an appreciative audience than to produce humor of their own. Powell, Sarmany-Schuller and Hampes (1997) stated that there are pretty much gender neutral in using the MSHS questionnaire, however, there are still some differences between male and women in the sense of humor. A past research which done by Thorson and Powell (1996) using the MSHS questionnaires showing that males tended to respond with higher score on the humor production and the social uses of humor, while woman respond with higher score in the coping mechanism. The study of Ho Chik (2010) have examines there is a gender differences in association with the moderating effects of coping humor on environmental mastery. The present study is interested in investigating the humour responses in both Malaysian and British cultures, cross gender comparison and also the interaction between the culture differences and the gender in humour. There are few studies in humour using Western countries culture like British, Canadian and Eastern countries culture such as Singaporean, Hong Konger and Japanese but they arent studies done on Malaysian humour. There wasnt any research have been done between Malaysian and British but there were researches done between western and eastern culture which the hypothesis was made accordingly to the results done by previous cultural studies. In the support of the past research, two hypotheses were made for this study. The first hypothesis were that male participants will be more humorous than female which based on the finding of past research like Thornson Powell (1996) which shows men will score higher in the humour production and humour creativity of Multidimensional Sense of Humour Scale. Additionally, the second hypothesis was British tend to be funnier, hilarious comparing to Malaysian due to the cultural differences. Acordingly to the studies of humour in most of the eastern culture showed that they are not humourous as western cultures because of their own cultural bias. Method Participants There were 100 participants (28 female Malaysian, 28 male Malaysian, 22 female British, 22 male British) were recruited for this study. 75% of British and Malaysian participants were recruited Middlesex University and Malaysia, the remaining 25% were recruited through email within Middlesex database and Malaysias friends. All the participants were required to respond to a demographic form and 4 sets of questionnaires (Coping Humour Scale, Situational Humour Response Questionnaire, Multidimensional Sense of Humour Scale, Humour Scale Questionnaire). For this experiment, participants were between 16 to 57 years of age, the average mean of the age was 24.44 (SD= 6.76). All of them were English literate, able to do their questionnaire without others help. Design The present study carried out had an independent groups design. There were two independent variables which the first independent variable was the nationality of the participants and the second independent variable was the gender of the participants. The dependant variables are participants humour responses, which measured through 4 sets of questionnaires. These dependent variables include the Coping Humour Scale questionnaires, Situational Humour Responses Questionnaires, the affiliative humour, self-enhancing humour, aggressive humour and self-defeating humour of Humour Scale Questionnaires, the humour creativity, coping humour, attitude towards humorous people and facility of social uses of humour of Multidimensional Sense of Humour Scale. Materials Participants are required to complete a demographical form with few questions, eg.Gender, nationality, age etc. (appendix 3) and 4 sets of Humour questionnaires which they were Coping Humour Scale (appendix 4), Situational Humour Response Questionnaire (appendix 5), Multidimensional Sense of Humour (appendix 6), and Humour Styles Questionnaire (appendix 7). The Coping Humour Scale (CHS; Martin Lefcourt, 1983) is a 7-item scale which designed to measure participants tendency to make use of humour as a strategy for coping with stress and also the association between sense of humor and both mental and physical health. The CHS (Coping Humour Scale) is a 4-point Likert scale which ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (4). Eg 1. extract from appendix 4 Strongly disagree Mildly disagree Mildly agree Strongly agree 1. I often lose my sense of humour when I am having problems. 2. I have often found that my problems have been greatly reduced when I try to find something funny in them. Example 1 The Situational Humour Response Questionnaire (SHRQ; Martin Lefcourt, 1984) is designed to assess participants sense of humour as the tendency to laugh and smile in a wide range of situations. The SHRQ includes 18 situational items that describe a possible life situation. Participants were asked to respond to the situation by imaging or recalling it, which they could be as irritating or they might be amusing. These questionnaires will be rated in a 5-point Guttman-type scale ranging from I wouldnt have found it particularly amusing (1) to I would have laughed heartily (5) (Martin 2006). Besides that, Martin (2006) also explain that the SHRQ correlated significantly with peer ratings of participants laughter, and tendency to use humour in stressful situations . Eg 2. Extract from appendix 5. 1. If you were shopping by yourself in a distant city and you unexpectedly saw an acquaintance from school (or work), how have you responded or how would you respond? (a.) I would probably not have bothered to speak to the person (b.)I would have talked to the person but wouldnt have shown much humor (c.) I would have found something to smile about in talking with him or her (d.)I would have found something to laugh about with this person (e.) I would have laughed heartily with the person Example 2 Humour Style Questionnaires (HSQ; Martin, Puhlik-Doris, Gray Weir, 2003) is a 32 items scale which consists of 4 humour style (each humour style contains of 8 items). The four humour style includes affiliative humour ( I enjoy making people laugh), self-enhancing humour (If I am feeling depressed, I can usually cheer myself up with humour), aggressive humour (if someone make mistake, I will often tease them about it) and finally the self-defeating humour (I let people laugh at me or make fun at my expense more than I should). Humour Style Questionnaires consists of 21 positively- phrased item and 11 negatively-phrased items which the 11 negatively-phrased items will be reversed in scoring. All questions are answered by participants on a seven-point scale ranging from totally disagree (1) to totally agree (7). Eg 4. Extract from appendix 7 Totally Disagree = 1 Moderately Disagree = 2 Slightly Disagree = 3 Neither Agree nor Disagree = 4 Slightly Agree = 5 Moderately Agree = 6 Totally Agree = 7 1. ______ I usually dont laugh or joke around much with other people. 2. ______ If I am feeling depressed, I can usually cheer myself up with humor. Example 4 The Multidimensional Sense of Humour Scale (MHSH; Thorson Powell, 1993) contains 24 self descriptive Likert item testing for the four factors which assess individual aspects of the sense of humour. These four factors includes humour creativity (sometimes I think up jokes and funny stories), use of humour as a coping mechanism (Uses of humour help to put me at ease), attitudes towards humour itself (people who tell jokes are a pain in the neck) and appreciation of humour (I appreciate those who generate humour). Multidimensional Sense of Humour Scale consist of 18 positively- phrased item and 6 negatively-phrased item. The 6 negatively-phrased items are reversed in scoring. In this questionnaire, participants with higer scores indicate higher sense of humour (Thorson, Powell and Samuel, 2001). Participants were required to indicate their choices on every question on a Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). Eg3.extract from appendix 6 Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 1. I can often crack people up with the things I say. 1 2 3 4 5 2. Other people tell me that I say funny things. 1 2 3 4 5 Example 3 Procedure Participants were invited to participant in the study as they will be given an information sheet (appendix 1) which explained about the study. After finished reading the information sheet, they will be given the informed consent form (appendix 2) to sign if they willing to participate the experiment. After signing the consent form, they will require to fill in the demographic form (appendix 3) which consists of gender, age, nationality etc. Then, four sets of questionnaires which include the Multidimensional Sense of Humour Questionnaire, Humour Styles Questionnaire, Coping Humour Scale and Situational Humour Response Questionnaire will be given to them to fill in. After finishing all the questionnaires, participants were given a debriefing sheet (Appendix 8) and dismissed from the study. For participants recruited through email, they had also received the information sheet by email before they agreed to do the experiment. Then, they will receive a consent form to sign and together with the demographic form and four sets of questionnaires to fill in. After finished filling in all the answer, the consent form, demographic form and four sets of questionnaires will be given back through email. After receiving the questionnaires set, a debriefing sheet will be emailed to them. Results Descriptive statistics The means and standard deviations (S.D) for each of the measures are shown in table one to table two, by splitting gender (male, female) and nationality (British, Malaysian) respectively. From the table 1 shown below, British male had higher mean than Malaysian Male in all of the measures except Coping Humour scale. In the other hand, Malaysian female had higher mean compare to the British Female except Multidimensional sense of Humour Sense which shown in table 2. To be more specified, descriptive tables for both four subscale of Humour Style Questionnaires and Multidimensional Sense of Humour Scale are shown in table three to table six. The Mean and Standard Deviation (S.D) of the dependent variables of Male Participants (50) were shown below as table 1. British Male Sample size = 22 Malaysian Male sample size= 28 Total Sample size =50 Mean S.D Mean S.D Mean S.D Coping Humour Scale 2.89 0.43 2.96 0.40 Situational Humour Response Questionnaire 2.70 0.62 2.47 0.45 Humour Style Questionnaire 5.44 4.33 4.09 0.50 Multidimensional sense of Humour Sense 4.01 3.17 3.22 0.24 Table 1 The Mean and Standard Deviation (S.D) of the dependent variables of Female Participants (50) were shown below as table 2. British Female Sample size = 22 Malaysian Female sample size= 28 Total Sample size =50 Mean S.D Mean S.D Mean S.D Coping Humour Scale 2.60 0.37 2.90 0.32 Situational Humour Response Questionnaire 2.34 0.43 2.46 0.39 Humor Style Questionnaire 4.05 0.46 4.09 0.67 Multidimensional sense of Humour Sense 3.30 0.29 3.16 0.26 Table 2 The Mean and Standard Deviation (S.D) of the Humour Style Questionnaires sub-factors (dependent variables) of Female Participants (50) were shown below as table 3. Humor Style Questionnaire British Male Sample size = 22 Malaysian Male sample size= 28 Total Sample size =50 Mean S.D Mean S.D Mean S.D Affiliative humour (HSQ) 5.41 1.23 5.18 0.79 5.29 1.00 Self-enhancing humour (HSQ) 4.70 1.10 4.00 0.89 4.28 1.04 Aggressive humour (HSQ) 3.50 1.04 3.50 0.68 3.49 0.85 Self-defeating humour (HSQ) 3.75 1.03 3.73 0.86 3.74 0.93 Table 3 The Mean and Standard Deviation (S.D) of the Humour Style Questionnaires sub-factors (dependent variables) of Female Participants (50) were shown below as table 4. Humor Style Questionnaire British Female Sample size = 22 Malaysian Female sample size= 28 Total Sample size =50 Mean S.D Mean S.D Mean S.D Affiliative humour (HSQ) 5.58 0.96 5.28 0.82 5.41 0.89 Self-enhancing humour (HSQ) 4.05 0.82 3.88 0.77 4.00 0.79 Aggressive humour (HSQ) 3.55 0.83 3.47 0.71 3.50 0.76 Self-defeating humour (HSQ) 3.03 0.90 3.72 1.05 3.42 1.04 Table 4 The Mean and Standard Deviation (S.D) of the Multidimensional Sense of Humour Scale Questionnaires sub-factors (dependent variables) of Male Participants (50) were shown below as table 5. Multidimensional Sense of Humour Scale British Male Sample size = 22 Malaysian Male sample size= 28 Total Sample size=50 Mean S.D Mean S.D Mean S.D Humour creativity 3.48 0.94 3.49 0.61 3.46 0.76 Coping humour 3.63 0.48 3.62 0.51 3.62 0.49 Attitude towards humorous people 3.89 0.65 3.91 0.55 3.90 0.59 Appreciation of humour 4.25 0.65 4.29 0.63 4.27 0.63 Table 5 The Mean and Standard Deviation (S.D) of the Multidimensional Sense of Humour Scale Questionnaires sub-factors (dependent variables) of Female Participants (50) were shown below as table 6. Multidimensional Sense of Humour Scale British Females Sample size = 22 Malaysian Females sample size= 28 Total Sample size= 50 Mean S.D Mean S.D Mean S.D Humour creativity 3.36 0.61 3.32 0.76 3.29 0.70 Coping humour 3.56 0.67 3.53 0.43 3.54 0.54 Attitude towards humorous people 4.31 0.63 3.95 0.72 4.11 0.70 Appreciation of humour 4.57 0.44 4.52 0.59 4.54 0.52 Table 6 Factor Analysis Factor analysis was carried out in order to test the validity of the sub-scales in two measures (Humour Style Questionnaires and Multidimensional Sense of Humour Scale). It was expected that the four factors of each measure would emerge from this analysis. Both Humour Style Questionnaires and Multidimensional Sense of Humour Scale used Principal Component Analysis (PCA) as the analysis. Table seven and table eight showed both of the results of the PCA of Humour Style Questionnaires and Multidimensional Sense of Humour Scale using the Varimax rotation and Kaiser-Meyer-Oblin test. The results showed that the expected factors loading in previous studies did not emerge from the current sample. For the Humour Style Questionnaires, five items (questions 6, 22, 26, 27, 28) load in different factors comparing to Martins (2003) original questionnaires, which looks a bit confusing. In addition, four items (questions 7, 13, 16, 30) did not load significantly (at above .3), therefore, there were excluded from the tables 7. For the Multidimensional Sense of Humour Scale, table 8 showed messy values load in each factors. Two factors can not be identified due to the messy items comparing with Thornson Powells (1993) original scale. Only one item did not load significantly (at above .3) on any factors. The overall results of the factor analysis were not satisfied, because the analysis came out in a mess. One of the reasons which contribute the following table 7 and table 8 might because of the small sample size (100) comparing with the large sample size (>1000) in Martins (2003) and Thornson Powells (1993) studies. Therefore, the following reliability test and ANOVA will adopt past researchs scale. Table 7: Factor loadings of the 32 items of Humour Style Questionnaires (Principal Componenet Analysis using Varimax Rotation, N=100) Items Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 I usually dont like to tell jokes or amuse people. .765 I dont often joke around with my friends. .711 I usually dont laugh or joke around much with other people. .654 I enjoy making people laugh. .650 I usually cant think of witty things to say when I m with other people. .640 Even when Im by myself, Im often amused by the absurdities of life. .564 I rarely make other people laugh by telling funny stories about myself. .557 I dont have to work very hard at making other people laugh I seem to be a naturally humorous person. .468 I often go overboard in putting myself down when I am making jokes or trying to be funny .767 Letting others laugh at me is my way of keeping my friends and family in good spirits. .716 I often try to make people like or accept me more by saying something funny about my own weaknesses, blunders, or faults. .618 I will often get carried away in putting myself down if it makes my family or friends laugh. .598 If I dont like someone, I often use humor or teasing to put them down .554 I let people laugh at me or make fun at my expense more than I should .517 When I am with friends or family, I often seem to be the one that other people make fun of or joke about. .479 It is my experience that thinking about some amusing aspect of a situation is often a very effective way of coping with problems. .391 -.311 If I am feeling upset or unhappy I usually try to think of something funny about the situation to make myself feel better. .775 If Im by myself and Im feeling unhappy, I make an effort to think of something funny to cheer myself up. .755 If I am feeling depressed, I can usually cheer myself up with humor. .703 My humorous outlook on life keeps me from getting overly upset or depressed about things. .357 .322 .360 If I am having problems or feeling unhappy, I often cover it up by joking around, so that even my closest friends dont know how I really feel. .344 I do not like it when people use humor as a way of criticizing or putting someone down. .654 If I am feeling sad or upset, I usually lose my sense of humor. .393 .579 Even if something is really funny to me, I will not laugh or joke about it if someone will be offended .506 If someone makes a mistake, I will often tease them about it. .487 Sometimes I think of something that is so funny that I cant stop myself from saying it, even if it is not appropriate for the situation. .443 I never participate in laughing at others even if all my friends are doing it. -.334 .336 Eigenvalue 4.73 3.21 2.41 2.02 % of Variance 14.80 10.04 7.53 6.34 * Only Coefficient above .3 were shown Table 8: Factor loadings of the 24 items of Multidimensional Sense of Humour Scale (Principal Componenet Analysis using Varimax Rotation, N=100) Items Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 I can say things in such a way as to make people laugh. .837 Other people tell me that I say funny things. .825 Im confident that I can make other people laugh .793 My clever sayings amuse others. .785 I use humour to entertain my friends .779 Im regarded as something of a wit by my friends. .779 People look to me to say amusing things .773 I can often crack people up with the things I say. .755 Sometimes I think up jokes or funny stories .699 I can actually have some control over a group by my uses of humour .643 .324 I can use wit to help adapt to many situations. .545 .337 Trying to master situations through uses of humour is really dumb. .704 .333 Humour is a lousy coping mechanism .697 Calling somebody a comedian is a real insult. .695 I like a good joke .592 People who tell jokes are a pain in the neck. .581 Humour helps me cope .814 Uses of wit or humour help me master difficult situations .798 Coping by using humour is an elegant way of adapting. .750 I appreciate those who generate humour .774 Uses of humour to put me at ease. .523 .641 I dislike comics .566 Im uncomfortable when everyone is cracking jokes .372 .447 Eigenvalue 6.67 3.41 2.26 1.13 % of Variance 27.82 14.19 9.40 5.61 * Only Coefficient above .3 were shown Reliability Test The internal consistencies (Cronbach Alpha) were run in order to check the reliability of the test. The Cronbach Alpha for the Coping Humour Scale was low, .50 but still acceptable and it was lower than the value .61 found in Martin and Lefecourts (1983) studies in Canada. The corrected item-total correlation for the 7 item of Coping Humour Scale fall between .199 to .483, with an exception of Item 1 ( I often lose my sense of humour when I am having problems), which the corrected item-total correlation was -.22. This means that item 1 is not consistent with other items, if item 1 was deleted, the Cronbach Alpha of Coping Humour Scale will become .58, higher than current value .50. The Cronbach Alpha of the Situational Humour Response Questionnaire was high, .78 which was a reliable measure although it only consists of 18 items comparing to 21 items. The corrected item-total correlation for the 18 items of Situational Humour Response Questionnaire falls between .151 and .519. Given its comparability to previous study of 21 items, Cronbach Alpha ranging from .70 to .85 and test-retest correlation of around .70 was presented (Lefcourt Martin, 1986; Martin Lefcourt, 1984). The Cronbach Alphas of the four sub-scales (affiliative humour, self-enhancing humour, aggressive humour and self-defeating humour) of the Humor Style Questionnaire were .77, .68, .47 and .69 respectively. The Cronbach alpha of aggressive humour was low .47, if the item 27 (If I dont like someone, I often use humor or teasing to put them down) was deleted, the Cronbach alpha will rise to an acceptable value .50. Comparing with Martin, Puhlik-Doris, Gray and Weirs research(2002), reliabilit

T.S. Eliots use of Poetic techniques in The Lovesong of J. Alfred Prufr

T.S Eliot, widely considered to be one of the fathers of modern poetry, has written many great poems. Among the most well known of these are â€Å"The Waste Land, and â€Å"The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock†, which share similar messages, but are also quite different. In both poems, Eliot uses various poetic techniques to convey themes of repression, alienation, and a general breakdown in western society. Some of the best techniques to examine are ones such as theme, structure, imagery and language, which all figure prominently in his poetry. These techniques in particular are used by Eliot to both enhance and support the purpose of his poems. The theme of Prufrock is the negative, individuality repressing effect that society has on its people. The Prufrock persona illustrates this, he is alienated by the inane social rituals that define his life, â€Å"I have measured out my life with coffee spoons† and make it insignificant and useless. The Waste Land’s theme is that the world, in particular western civilisation, is a culturally and spiritually barren place. Society is portrayed as a pile of â€Å"†¦stony rubbish†¦Ã¢â‚¬ , the ruins of a once great city now reduced to rubble where nothing can grow. Lives mean nothing, but the poem also offers hope through a return to basic religious values, ending with the repeated chant of â€Å"Shantih shantih shantih†, which means, â€Å"the peace which passeth understanding†. The poems both portray the same basic idea, but they have two main differences. Firstly, there is the way in which the themes are expressed. In Prufrock , Eliot uses a pers ona as an example of the debilitating effect of living with so many expectations, rules, standards and meaningless rituals has on a the individual. In many ways, this is a very effe... .... Figuring very prominently is Dante, with the epigraph in Prufrock an exact quote from Inferno, and more subtle references found in The Waste Land that are very suggestive of a Dantean descent into hell. Dante, and to a lesser extent Joseph Conrad, from whom Eliot derives a certain amount of horror, which subtly complements his themes, have had a profound impact on Eliot’s writing. He chooses to quote or allude to parts of other works that complement his own. The techniques used by Eliot in creating both The Waste Land and Prufrock, are used in largely similar ways as far as furthering his purpose, yet differ slightly in style or small alterations when examined more closely. Some techniques, such as imagery, are more similar than others. Though he may use devices differently for each poem, it is only in such a way that makes them unique, and conveys his purpose.

Educational Philosophies Essay -- Philosophy Education Psychology Essa

Educational Philosophies Many different ideas of the correct educational philosophy exist. Highly acclaimed psychologists and educators developed these varying philosophies. Each of these philosophies have their strengths and weaknesses and have their positives and negatives in different situations. It is our job as educators to sift through this list of philosophies to find our own style and philosophy. We must research the pros and cons of each philosophy and pick and choose which sections of each idea to take out and make our own. Our job is also to familiarize ourselves with the philosophies that we do not agree with. So that we have a clear picture in our minds of what we want and do not want as part of our educational thinking and to have the knowledge to back up these opinions. After reading through different writings on each of these philosophies, I have begun to take on the task of sorting out which I choose to support and which I strongly oppose. Once having a clear idea of which philosophies appeal to me and which do not, I hope to have the groundwork laid to then analyze the philosophies and take from them what I need to develop my own personal philosophy. Sometimes to find out what you are or what you find true, you must first learn what you are not and what you do not find as truth. Therefore, in beginning my search for my own personal philosophy, I began with ruling out the philosophies that I am strongly opposed to. These philosophies are perennialism and behaviorism. Perennialism is a very conservative and inflexible philosophy of education. It is based on the view that reality comes from fundamental fixed truths-especially related to God. It believes that people find truth through reasoning and revelation and that goodness is found in rational thinking. As a result, schools exist to teach reason and God’s will. Students are taught to reason through structured lessons and drills. The teacher’s role is a fountain of knowledge, put in place to regurgitate the wisdom of the past and pass it down to the next generation. To begin with, I find this philosophy extremely outdated since church and state have been separated for quite some time now. Perenialism leaves no room for progression, which seems to be it’s objective. Students in these schools do not learn to think independently. They do not learn creativity or how... ...personal satisfaction. I most identify with this philosophy and strongly agree with the majority of its principles. As stated above, the most important lesson a teacher can teach a child is the importance of learning, the enjoyment of learning and how to learn. Above all, this is the most important lesson. I agree that students are self-motivated if the desire to know something. The job of the teacher is to make the student want to learn, not make the student learn. I agree that self-evaluation and self satisfaction should weigh above grades. Grades should be a measure more for the teacher, not the student. The humanistic philosophy can be effectively applied to literacy mainly with its ideas of choice and desire. Students will be more inclined to write to their best ability and read at a high level if they are the ones choosing the topic to write on or the book to be reading. Humanism parallels with my strongest conviction of teacher and once again I will repeat what I have repeated throughout this entire paper. The goal of literacy learning is to instill a love of reading and writing within them and to give them the tools to continue with that love.

Ford Focus vs. Mazda Mazda 3

Ford Focus vs. Mazda Mazda 3 Two great new cars out there are the Ford Focus and the Mazda 3. If you’re looking for a fast car with the latest technology then you’ll have a tough decision between these two cars. In an opinion, the Ford Focus is the best for a family and the Mazda for enjoyment. They both set with GPS system, inline-4 engine, and chassis platform. They also have some differences as in the gas mileage, performance, and equipment. When it comes down to the end of it all, they are lot closer in ratings than usual cars are.The first and most important is the safety, especially if you have children. Both of the cars are an average of 4-4. 5 in top rating, but the Mazda 3 only has 3 stars in side crash rating, while the Ford Focus as a 4 in frontal crash rating. One big advantage of the Ford Focus is the technology which could also help in safety. The Ford has a navigation system, park assist, bi-xenon adaptive lightning, memory power sears, blond-spot monitor ing, and a ten-speaker Bose surround sound system.These cars have many similarities, but have more differences. The choice lies between your personality, budget, and your family. If you have a big family, of course you’re going to go for the bigger, safer car. Now if you’re single of don’t have a big family, then you would most likely lean towards the sporty car for looks. The biggest is your budget, we all need some help in the economy now of days, so you might go to the car with better millage and cheaper.

How Sarbannes-Oxley Act affects internal controls

Sarbanes-Oxley Act which is also referred to as the public company accounting reform and investor protection act is a wider legislation passed in 2002. The SOX act has provisions touching on the standards for all the United States public firms’ boards, management as well as the public accounting companies. Sarbanes-Oxley Act has been considered one of most important legislation to the America’s security laws probably since the New Deal of passed in 1930s. According to Moeller (2008) it has eleven sections that clearly spell out the standards it oversees. The provisions of this law implies that American companies as well as those with the united states listings have a legal obligation to show that they have efficient and effective mechanisms of both internal control and financial reporting. The main objective of the Act is to enhance both transparency and financial reporting disclosures that would stifle any form of corporate or financial fraud. The SOX also enforces the responsibility of the senior officers in ensuring accuracy as well as honesty in the disclosure of financial outcomes (Porter & Norton, 2007). The Sarbanes-Oxley act of 2002, in sections 302 and 404 have some tough provisions regarding the internal controls. Section 302 for example calls for certification of all information relayed to the public or market as correct. This section also requires evaluation of the â€Å"disclosure controls† (that is having full control of all information issued to the public) as well as being aware of any changes that would or might affect the performance of the controls from the time evaluation was done. It requires that every company set up certain internal procedures that would ensure honesty and accuracy in financial reporting (Kairab 2004). Section 404 on the other hand a requirement for annual evaluation of controls effectiveness and procedures for financial reporting. It further stipulates that this evaluation must be vindicated by an external auditor’s report. Moeller (2008) suggests that the external auditors are obligated to give opinion regarding the effective internal controls over financial disclosure was adhered to in every material respects by the management. In addition to this, the external auditors are further mandated to offer an opinion on the financial statements accuracies (Ramos, 2006). Section 404 of the Sarbanes Oxley act requires both the management and the external auditor to disclose on the adequacy of the firm’s internal control over financial disclosures. It has been considered quite costly to implement because documenting as well as testing some of the vital financial manual and other related automated controls would need a lot of effort (Moeller 2008). Benefits so Far In a research carried out in 2006 among almost 2,500 American companies, it was found out that those firms that had no material limitation in their internal controls and those that corrected any of such limitations in appropriate and timely manner, registered a greater outcome in share prices as oppose to firms that did not. The report further showed that the profits to a compliant firm in share price were much higher than the companies’ respective costs for Sarbanes-Oxley Act section 404 (Ramos, 2006). Conclusion Despite many attempts by PCAOB to help reduce the high cost of compliance, practice as well as guidance, much is needed to be done to improve on the management of companies vis-a-vis adherence to the Sarbanes-Oxley act. Nevertheless it is one great piece of legislation that will help to safeguard some of the America’s companies fundamental imperative in their markets which are characterizes by high level of corporate confidence as well as participation which has long been second to none.