Question 1 , four parenting styles

Introduction
Parents have immense impact on conduct and attitudes of their children. Their behavior and
interactions with others reflect the environment in which they were grown as well as how they were
raised by their parent. It depends upon parents to determine how their child will develop and who he
will become. After all, during these critical first few years of life, your child is not only developing
language and communication skills, but he or she is also building their own personality. The family
foundations on which Parents construct will have an impact on their behavior, social capacities, and
ability to adapt to diverse conditions. And it is their parenting style that has the biggest influence on this
environment.

Styles of parenting

Parenting style may influence everything from child’s behavior to their self-esteem. It is vital to
guarantee that the parenting style stir up healthy growth and development since how parents interact
with their child and what discipline they maintain will have an influence on child for the rest of her life.
The parenting styles that are generally employed in psychology today are based on the work of
developmental psychologist Diana Baumrind at the University of California, Berkeley, in the 1960s. In
the 1980s, Maccoby and Martin also helped by developing the model. researchers have discovered four
parenting styles :

Authoritarian Parenting
The term authoritarian implies that focus of this parenting style is imposing power on children without
exception. Children must obey their parents at all times. They also do not allow youngsters to engage in
problem-solving activities or in the construction of obstacles. Instead, they make the rules and
administer the penalties with little respect for children's viewpoints. Authoritarian parents do not use
discipline they just utilize punishment .they teach their children to feel bad after doing
mistakes .Children raised by authoritarian parents are more likely to have low self-esteem since their
views are not valued. When a child questions the reasons for a rule, authoritarian parents are known to
respond, "Because I said so." They are uninterested in negotiations and are just concerned with
conformity. Children of authoritarian Parents most frequently rules at most of the time. Although, they
pay the price of this devotion. They might get bothered or fierce also. Rather than pondering how to
improve things later on, youngsters much of the time center around their sensations of animosity
toward their folks. Since oppressive guardians are normally unforgiving, their youngsters might foster
the capacity to misdirect others to stay away from discipline

Authoritative Parenting
Such Parents make runs and force results, yet they additionally think about their youngsters'
perspectives. These guardians recognize their youngsters' sentiments while underscoring that the
grown-ups are in control eventually. such guardians give the time and exertion important to hold their
kids back from creating social issues. Positive discipline strategies, for example, commendation and
motivating force frameworks are utilized to support acceptable conduct.Children who have
authoritarian parents are likely to be more self-sufficient. They self-regulate more well and are
frequently independent thinkers and self-confident since they were raised to help determine their own
norms and expectations. Authoritarian parents frequently involve their children in the creation of rules,
and they strive to focus on positive reinforcement when expectations are satisfied. This method is
considered as the most beneficial method to youngsters.

Permissive Parenting
This kind of parent is continually lenient and possibly steps in when a significant issue emerges. They are
typically sympathetic and, if essential, can give extra consideration for a young person. Guardians that
are lenient are patient and mindful of their youngsters' necessities. They generally possibly mediate
when there is a significant issue. Guardians that are tolerant frequently act more like companions than
guardians. They consistently urge their kids to converse with them about their concerns, yet they
seldom attempt to forestall hurtful choices or conduct.

Uninvolved Parenting
Guardians who don't partake in their kids' exercises consistently have a murky perception of their
youngsters' exercises. There aren’t great deals of regulations. Guardians may not give the training, care,
or consideration that their youngsters require. Guardians who don't take an interest in their youngsters'
tutoring need them to be autonomous. They don't dedicate a lot of time or consideration regarding
guaranteeing that kids' fundamental requirements are met. Guardians that are uninvolved in their kids'
lives can be careless, however this is generally inadvertent.. Different obligations, like business, funds,
and raising a family, can likewise overpower them. Guardians who are not intrigued by their youngsters'
lives are more inclined to underestimate them. They have a helpless scholastic history. They additionally
participate in an assortment of exercises that are rehashed.
What is the best parenting style and why
According to research, authoritative parents are more likely to produce children who are autonomous,
self-sufficient, and socially competent. While children of authoritative parents are not immune to
mental health problems, interpersonal problems, substance misuse, poor self-regulation, or low self-
esteem, these characteristics are more likely in children of parents who rigorously practice
authoritarian, permissive, or uninvolved parenting styles. Of course, there is no such thing as a "one-
size-fits-all" approach to parenting. The most effective parents understand when to adapt their
parenting approach to the circumstances. When a kid is unwell, an authoritative parent, for example,
may desire to become more permissive by continuing to offer warmth while relinquishing some control.
While a child's safety is at danger, such as when crossing a busy street, a permissive parent may be more
stringent. According to research, authoritative parents are more likely to create confident children who
excel academically. These children have superior social skills, such children are better problem solvers.
Instead of continually coming to their children's aid, as is more common with permissive parents,
authoritative parents allow their children to make errors. This allows children to learn while also
reassuring them that their parents will be there to help them. Authoritarian parenting is especially
beneficial when dealing with conflict since how we learn to cope with conflict at a young age influences
how we endure losses or how resilient we are in our adult life.

Conclusion
While authoritative parenting receives the greatest acclaim from experts, it is crucial to recognise that
utilizing any one strategy does not necessarily ensure favorable results. Parenting isn't a precise science.
It's more like an art form in many aspects. Don't only concentrate on punishment. Be encouraging and
attentive to your child's needs. Pose inquiries to them and attempt to comprehend things from their
perspective. Allow children to participate in decision-making so that they may grow and learn on their
own.

Question no 2
Memory has a wide range of uses in criminology. In practice, it is the obligation of the criminal
investigator to make use of the usefulness of memory. It is a journey that both the analyst and the
survivors must travel in order to unearth previous events. This can be used to put the pieces of a good
homicide case together, or to counter charges of sexual assault in false reporting. Humans' ability to
retain sensory information is both extraordinary and flexible. In recollection, there are two
acknowledged frameworks one is called Short-term memory and the other one is called as Long-term
memory (LTM) .these both are useful in criminal investigations. Working memory and short-term
memory have biological similarities; nevertheless, working memory has construct which is more
complicated as compared to short-term memory. Working memory is defined in cognitive psychology
as a system with limited capacity that allows for temporary holding and abstract transformations
necessary for complex processes such as comprehension, learning, and reasoning. Emotional or arousing
information, especially negatively arousing information, stands out and is easier to recall than neutral or
positive emotional information. Adults frequently offer detailed and convincing recollections of their
childhood experiences in court. Judges and juries are expected to determine guilt or innocence solely on
the basis of these decades-old recollections and "traditional" memory theories. However, the findings of
neuroscience and behavioural studies on memory development contradict these views. Judges and
juries may struggle to accurately assess the weight of memory evidence in cases requiring adult
remembers of prior events if they don't have expert help. childhood.

Memories are not stored in the brain as a video-like recording of events. Previous experience, emotional
state, and a range of other elements all affect how we construct memories in the first place. When we
recall a memory, we don't recover it in the same way that it was saved. Instead, it's a distorted version
of the original memory, influenced by everything we've experienced since then, as well as our emotional
state at the time of recall, and with other details simply forgotten. As a result, memories "are
fragmentary, contain amnesic gaps, information is usually out of order, require assumptions, and
regularly contain erroneous data," according to the researchers. The basic essence of the scene is well
encoded in high-stress conditions, although peripheral details are frequently weakly encoded. These
memories are not protected against distortion by any specific process. "Flashbulb" memories of a
traumatic experience, such as seeing a crime, are kept in great detail.

We have a tendency to overgeneralize our recollections as we become older. As a result, elderly people
are more prone to inadvertently add incorrect elements into a recollection after the event while
maintaining the overall idea of the recall. Jurors and judges must be aware that human memory is
extremely suggestible, and that this suggestibility grows with age. One of the most common
misconceptions held by law enforcement and jurors is that full, confidently recalled memories are more
reliable than foggy or fragmentary recalls. However, studies have found that there is little, if any,
association between a witness' confidence in their statement and its correctness. The significance of
incorporating memory research into judicial debate cannot be emphasized. A single eyewitness's solid
evidence should not be enough to incarcerate someone. However, this is usually due to a general
misunderstanding of memory. Not only are witnesses prone to memory distortion, but so are juries.

Emotions control human behavior, and their relevance in human behavior, and hence in criminal law,
must be recognized. Emotions are relevant to criminal law on several levels, from their function in
punishment to the emotional experiences of victims. The influence of emotions on behavior, as well as
how the emotions experienced by criminal offenders should affect the attribution of blame and
punishment, is of relevance to criminal theory, particularly the defenses of duress and necessity. One of
the key elements that may affect the reliability of eyewitness evidence is the emotional experience of a
witness to a crime. Individuals who witness a traumatic emotional experience may have better
recollection of the event's core or important qualities but poor recall of the event's peripheral details.

The emotions evoked by seeing a crime may have varying consequences on various components of
eyewitness evidence. While emotional witnesses remembered more details about the protagonist, they
were less likely to recognize him in a subsequent lineup. In addition, the emotional witnesses
remembered fewer details about the event itself. Emotions connected with witnessing a crime are likely
to hinder recall for the occurrence as well as identification of the culprit. Being there while a crime is
committed can be a painful experience. It may cause physical, emotional, and psychological responses
that you are unaware of. It is critical to understand that everyone reacts differently to crime and that
every emotion is normal. In general, studies have discovered that being exposed to negative emotional
material or being primed with negative emotions resulted in improved memory recall.

Emotionally connected events and stimuli had greater memory recall than neutral events, with
individuals in negative conditions having stronger memory recall than those in positive conditions.
Emotion has been suggested as a retrieval cue, making recollection of emotional material simpler than
retrieval of neutral information. At any of the three phases of memory: encoding, storage, and retrieval,
mood can have an impact. When an event is observed, it is encoded. When the information is retrieved
and judgments are made, the witnessed information is stored. Later, incorrect information may affect a
person, and finally, the location in which a person makes judgments based on the information may
impact a person during retrieval. When we are in a bad mood, we process information by paying close
attention to the real aspects of the outside environment.

. To recap, even if eyewitness testimony is not particularly reliable, jurors find it extremely powerful and
persuasive. Missteps proceed to occur, and these bungles can prompt unfounded complaints and even
prison time. Straightforward inquiries, false impressions of occasions, discussions with witnesses, and
their own assumptions regarding what ought to have happened would all be able to cloud an observer's
review. Individuals might even beginning recalling things that won't ever occur.