Experiment Number 1

Title: Bobo Doll Experiment

Objectives: To understand Albert Bandura’s controlled experiment study to
investigate if social behaviors (i.e., aggression) can be acquired by observation
and imitation.
Hypothesis: Children are able to learn through the observation of adult behavior.
The observation of aggression in others would increase the likelihood of
aggression in the observer.
Introduction: Bobo doll experiment was a groundbreaking study
on aggression led by psychologist Albert Bandura that demonstrated
that children are able to learn through the observation of adult behaviour. The
experiment was executed via a team of researchers who physically and verbally
abused an inflatable doll in front of preschool-age children, which led the children
to later mimic the behavior of the adults by attacking the doll in the same fashion.
Description of the Test: Bandura’s study on aggression—the experiment for
which he is perhaps best known—was carried out in 1961 at Stanford University,
where Bandura was a professor. For this study he used 3- and 5-foot (1- and 1.5-
metre) inflatable plastic toys called Bobo dolls, which were painted to look like
cartoon clowns and were bottom-weighted so that they would return to an upright
position when knocked down. The subjects were preschoolers at Stanford’s nursery
school and were divided into three groups: one group observed aggressive adult
behaviour models; another group observed nonaggressive behaviour models; and
the third group was not exposed to any behaviour models.
The three groups were then divided by gender into six subgroups in which half of
the subgroups would observe a same-sex behaviour model and half would observe
an opposite-sex behaviour model.

Material Required: For this study he used 3- and 5-foot (1- and 1.5-metre)
inflatable plastic toys called Bobo dolls, which were painted to look like cartoon
clowns and were bottom-weighted so that they would return to an upright position
when knocked down. Toys such as stickers, pictures, prints, train, fire engine,
cable car, jet airplane, spinning top, doll with wardrobe, baby crib, and doll
carriage. 3-foot Bobo doll, mallet, and dart guns. Crayons, paper, farm animals, tea
set, ball, and dolls.
Participant’s Profile: The subjects were preschoolers at Stanford’s nursery
school and were divided into three groups.

Procedure and Administration:

A lab experiment was used, in which the independent variable (the type of model)
was manipulated in three conditions:

 Aggressive model is shown to 24 children

 Non-aggressive model is shown to 24 children
 No model shown (control condition) - 24 children
Stage 1: Modeling
In the experimental conditions children were individually shown into a room
containing toys and played with some potato prints and pictures in a corner for 10
minutes while either:
1. 24 children (12 boys and 12 girls) watched a male or female model behaving
aggressively towards a toy called a 'Bobo doll'. The adults attacked the Bobo
doll in a distinctive manner - they used a hammer in some cases, and in
others threw the doll in the air and shouted "Pow, Boom."
2. Another 24 children (12 boys and 12 girls) were exposed to a non-aggressive
model who played in a quiet and subdued manner for 10 minutes (playing
with a tinker toy set and ignoring the bobo-doll).
3. The final 24 children (12 boys and 12 girls) were used as a control group and
not exposed to any model at all.

Stage 2: Aggression Arousal

All the children (including the control group) were subjected to 'mild aggression
arousal.' Each child was (separately) taken to a room with relatively attractive toys.
As soon as the child started to play with the toys, the experimenter told the child
that these were the experimenter's very best toys and she had decided to reserve
them for the other children.

Stage 3: Test for Delayed Imitation

• The next room contained some aggressive toys and some non-aggressive
toys. The non-aggressive toys included a tea set, crayons, three bears and
plastic farm animals. The aggressive toys included a mallet and peg board,
dart guns, and a 3 foot Bobo doll.
• The child was in the room for 20 minutes, and their behavior was observed
and rated though a one-way mirror. Observations were made at 5-second
intervals, therefore, giving 240 response units for each child.
• Other behaviors that didn’t imitate that of the model were also recorded
e.g., punching the Bobo doll on the nose.
Scoring and Interpretation:

• Children who observed the aggressive model made far more imitative
aggressive responses than those who were in the non-aggressive or control
groups.
• There was more partial and non-imitative aggression among those children
who had observed aggressive behavior, although the difference for non-
imitative aggression was small.
• The girls in the aggressive model condition also showed more physical
aggressive responses if the model was male, but more verbal aggressive
responses if the model was female. However, the exception to this general
pattern was the observation of how often they punched Bobo, and in this
case the effects of gender were reversed.
• Boys were more likely to imitate same-sex models than girls. The evidence
for girls imitating same-sex models is not strong.
• Boys imitated more physically aggressive acts than girls. There was little
difference in the verbal aggression between boys and girls.

Discussion: Children imitated both physical aggression and verbal aggression.

However, the degree of imitation was different and it also differed among male and
female subjects.

Conclusion: Children learn aggressive behavior through imitation. Bobo doll

experiment demonstrated that children are able to learn social behavior such as
aggression through the process of observation learning, through watching the
behavior of another person. The findings support Bandura's (1977) Social Learning
Theory.
This study has important implications for the effects of media violence on
children.

Questions

1. Difference between Social Learning Theory and Social Cognitive

Theory.

Ans.) Social cognitive theory is the expanded form of Albert Bandura’s social
learning theory which states that learning can occur by observing a behavior
 and that the manifestation of that behavior in the learner is regulated by the
triadic reciprocal determinism between personal (cognitive) factors, the
behavior itself, and by the environment (reinforcement). Meanwhile, social
learning theory is a learning theory that proposes that learning occurs in a social
context by means of observation of the behavior and the consequences that
follow it.
Proponent/s
Social cognitive theory was proposed by Albert Bandura alone. Social learning
theory is a collective work, with the most contribution coming from Bandura but
with earlier contributions from Neil Miller and John Dollard, Julian Rotter, and
Robert Burgess and Ronald Akers, as well as an influence from cognitive
perspectives on learning.
Core concepts
Core concepts in the social cognitive theory are human agency, observational
learning and its four meditational processes (attention, retention, production,
motivation), triadic reciprocal determinism between cognitive, behavioral and
environment factors, and self-efficacy. In social learning theory, the core concepts
are observational learning, reinforcement (direct or vicarious), learning as a
cognitive-behavioral process, and identification with a model.
Role of cognitive factors
In the social cognitive theory, cognitive factors play an important and equal role
with environmental factors in the acquisition of new behavior and in its production.
In social learning theory, the cognitive factors are only acknowledged to play a
role in the acquisition of new behavior but not much or none at all in its
production.
Role of reinforcement
In the social cognitive theory, reinforcement or environmental factors has an equal
role with cognitive factors in the learning and production of behavior. In social
learning theory, consequences and reinforcement play a major role in the
acquisition and production of behavior.
Scope
Social cognitive theory has a broader theoretical scope as it includes a
conceptualization of humans as agents capable of shaping their environment and of
self-regulation. Social learning theory on the other hand is limited to tackling the
learning process in the social context.
 2. Applications of Social Learning Theory.

Ans.) Social learning theory can have a number of real-world applications. For
example, it can be used to help researchers understand how aggression and
violence might be transmitted through observational learning. By studying media
violence, researchers can gain a better understanding of the factors that might lead
children to act out the aggressive actions they see portrayed on television and in
the movies.

But social learning can also be utilized to teach people positive behaviors.
Researchers can use social learning theory to investigate and understand ways that
positive role models can be used to encourage desirable behaviors and to facilitate
social change.

3. Based on the theory and its application, do you think violence is

contagious?

Ans.) Fifty years ago, it was generally accepted that the most important
socialization processes were the operant and classical conditioning of the child to
behave appropriately by parents and society. We now know that an even more
powerful socialization process is observational learning. Indisputable evidence has
accumulated that human and primate young have an innate tendency to mimic
whomever they observe. Young children automatically mimic the expressions on
their parents’ faces, which leads to the automatic activation of the emotion that the
parent was experiencing, as expressions are innately linked to emotions. Such
mimicry of parents’ facial expressions aids socialization of the child because they
automatically feel happy when a parent is pleased and smiles at them, and they
automatically feel sad when a parent is displeased and frowns at them. Children
mimic expressions in early infancy and then imitate behaviors by the time they can
walk. Imitation is defined as delayed copying of a behavior and represents a higher
order cognitive process that simply mimicry. Thus, the hitting, grabbing, pushing
behaviors that young children see around them in the family, peers, neighborhoods,
or in the mass media are often mimicked immediately and then imitated later. In
social information processing terms, the script they observed is mimicked and then
encoded for later use.
After imitation results in the encoding of simple social scripts in young children,
social interactions hone these scripts through conditioning. As the toddler matures
through childhood and adolescence, observational learning becomes more complex
and through inferential processes results in the encoding of more elaborate scripts,
world schemas, and normative beliefs. Children infer the normative beliefs and
world schemas others hold from observations, and then encode them for their own
use. Much of this learning takes place automatically without an intention to learn
and without an awareness that learning has occurred. Repeated observations
strengthen the encodings; so the learned social cognitions persist to influence
behavior even years later in adulthood.
A variety of factors affect the likelihood of observed social information being
encoded into lasting social scripts, normative beliefs, and schemas about the world:
the saliency of the scene to the observer, whether the observer identifies with the
model, whether the context is realistic, and whether the viewed behavior is
rewarded. Based on all the above, I think that violence is contagious.

References:

https://www.britannica.com/event/Bobo-doll-experiment

https://www.simplypsychology.org/bobo-doll.html

https://www.verywellmind.com/bobo-doll-experiment-2794993
 Experiment Number 2
Title: Intelligence
Objectives: To interpret different Theories of Intelligence along with Robert J.
Sternberg’s article on ‘COVID-19 has truly taught us what intelligence is…’ and
write about what true intelligence is.

Introduction: Ever since psychologists started measuring intelligence, including

the academic skills measured by IQ tests and their proxies, they have known that
intelligence is not really your ability to solve obscure multiple-choice problems
with largely trivial content that will have no impact on your future life whatsoever.
Instead, intelligence is the ability to adapt to the environment.

And that’s what Alfred Binet and David Wechsler, the founders of the intelligence
test movement, said. Any evolutionary theorist should be able to tell you that:
organisms that don’t adapt die. Species that don’t adapt die off. That’s also the
consensus of psychologists in scholarly symposia that have sought to understand
what intelligence is. Trivial academic problems don’t measure well your ability to
adapt to the environment.

Why are these tests such mediocre measures of your ability to adapt to the
environment -- of true intelligence? Compare a real problem, like that of dealing
with COVID-19, to the characteristics of standardized-test problems. The
characteristics of real-world problems are entirely different from the characteristics
of problems on standardized tests. Standardized test problems are mostly multiple
choice or short answer and have a right or wrong answer. Real problems require
extended answers; there is no perfect answer, and sometimes, not even a very good
one. Standardized test problems are decontextualized, emotionally bland and have
no real-life stakes. Real-world problems are highly contextualized, emotionally
arousing and may have high stakes. Standardized test problems are solved quickly
and then you are done; real-life ones often take a long time and, after you think you
have solved them, often come back.

Most important, real-world problems require you actively to deploy your

intelligence -- to decide seriously to use it. Standardized tests measure an inert
form of intelligence -- one that may exist in your head somewhere but is rarely
actually put into real-world use. Intelligence is not just about an inert ability to take
tests; it is about the active deployment of that ability to solve problems of life.
Description of the Test/ Experiment: According to Robert J. Sternberg - In
research in his labs at Yale and Cornell Universities on intelligence as adaptive
knowledge and skills, they have consistently found, over a period of many years,
that scores on academic types of tests do not show much positive correlation, if any
at all, with tests of adaptive skills. For example, some years back, my colleagues
and I conducted a study of young people far away in rural Kenya. We discovered
that an important life skill in rural Kenya, knowing how to recognize and treat
parasitic illnesses with natural herbal medicines, actually was negatively correlated
with IQ. The better you did on the practical test, the worse you did on the academic
test, and vice versa.

At the time, a journal reviewer thought that the test was too “far out” -- that
knowing how to treat illnesses was not what intelligence is about. He was wrong.
You know who the really adaptively unintelligent people are today, in the age of
COVID-19, not only in Kenya but also right where you live? Not the ones who get
low standardized test scores. Rather, they are the ones who refuse to wear masks,
who don’t socially distance and who don’t trouble themselves to wash their hands.
They are the ones who, from a Darwinian adaptive standpoint, are unintelligent,
regardless of their IQ or standardized test scores. They have inert intelligence but
do not choose actively to deploy it in the real world. They thereby not only risk
their own health and life; they also put other people’s lives at risk when they
breathe on them. They might literally be the cause of others’ deaths. The principle
behind the tests we used in Kenya applies anywhere: in the end, intelligence is
about adaptation to the environment, not solving trivial or even meaningless
problems.

Material Required: Standardized tests of Intelligence, Observations of how

different people have dealt with the COVID 19 pandemic.

Discussion: In our current research at Cornell, we are measuring people’s adaptive

intelligence both at a micro level and at a macro level. A micro-level problem
might concern an interpersonal issue, such as how one deals with two friends who
are fighting and both expect you to take their side. A macro-level problem might
deal with two nations who are having a dispute over shared water resources, where
one nation is accused of taking more than its fair share of water. Solutions are free
response and are scored for the extent to which they seek a common good --
balancing the interests of the various parties over the long as well as the short term
-- through the use of positive ethical values (such as acting toward others as you
wish them to act toward you).
Conclusion: Is adaptive intelligence really important? Well, you be the judge.
Which skill is more important for the great majority of students in college once
they have graduated: the ability to solve artificial verbal and math problems or,
alternatively, to address and try to solve problems of global climate change, air and
water pollution, global pandemics, bacterial resistance to antibiotics, gun violence
against schoolchildren (other than the usual pathetic “our thoughts and prayers are
with them”), and the return of would-be autocrats to declining democracies?

Are you going to buy in to the notion that what matters is standardized test scores?
They measure a small part of intelligence, but only a very small part. IQs increased
30 points around the world in the 20th century (the so-called Flynn effect), and
given the current problems in the world, that increase does not appear to have
bought us much.

According to Sternberg- In my in-press book, Adaptive Intelligence, I argue that

all of us, including colleges and universities, ought to focus not on producing test
takers who are content to see the world go to hell in a handbasket so long as they
get their degrees and make their money. Look around us. It’s not working! Instead,
we need to develop and assess students’ adaptive skills in and willingness to make
the world a better place. If not now, when?

Read the different theories of intelligence as well as the Sternberg’s article

and write your interpretation about what true intelligence is.

General Intelligence

British psychologist Charles Spearman (1863–1945) described a concept he

referred to as general intelligence or the g factor. After using a technique known as
factor analysis to examine some mental aptitude tests, Spearman concluded that
scores on these tests were remarkably similar.

People who performed well on one cognitive test tended to perform well on other
tests, while those who scored badly on one test tended to score badly on others. He
concluded that intelligence is a general cognitive ability that can be measured and
numerically expressed.
Primary Mental Abilities

Psychologist Louis L.Thurstone (1887–1955) offered a differing theory of

intelligence. Instead of viewing intelligence as a single, general ability, Thurstone's
theory focused on seven different primary mental abilities.4

 Associative memory: The ability to memorize and recall

 Numerical ability: The ability to solve arithmetic problems
 Perceptual speed: The ability to see differences and similarities among
objects
 Reasoning: The ability to find rules
 Spatial visualization: The ability to visualize relationships
 Verbal comprehension: The ability to define and understand words
 Word fluency: The ability to produce words rapidly

Theory of Multiple Intelligences

One of the more recent ideas to emerge is Howard Gardner's theory of multiple
intelligences. Gardner proposed that the traditional idea of intelligence, based on
IQ testing, did not fully and accurately depict a person's abilities. His theory
proposed eight different intelligences based on skills and abilities that are valued in
different cultures:

 Bodily-kinesthetic intelligence: The ability to control your body

movements and to handle objects skillfully
 Interpersonal intelligence: The capacity to detect and respond
appropriately to the moods, motivations, and desires of others
 Intrapersonal intelligence: The capacity to be self-aware and in tune with
inner feelings, values, beliefs, and thinking processes
 Logical-mathematical intelligence: The ability to think conceptually and
abstractly, and the capacity to discern logically or numerical patterns
 Musical intelligence: The ability to produce and appreciate rhythm, pitch,
and timbre
 Naturalistic intelligence: The ability to recognize and categorize animals,
plants, and other objects in nature
 Verbal-linguistic intelligence: Well-developed verbal skills and sensitivity
to the sounds, meanings, and rhythms of words
 Visual-spatial intelligence: The capacity to think in images and pictures, to
visualize accurately and abstractly
 

Triarchic Theory of Intelligence

Psychologist Robert Sternberg defined intelligence as "mental activity directed

toward purposive adaptation to, selection, and shaping of real-world environments
relevant to one's life."

While he agreed with Gardner that intelligence is much broader than a single,
general ability, he suggested that some of Gardner's types of intelligence are better
viewed as individual talents. Sternberg proposed what he referred to as "successful
intelligence," which involves three different factors:

 Analytical intelligence: Your ability to evaluate information and solve

problems
 Creative intelligence: Your ability to come up with new ideas
 Practical intelligence: Your ability to adapt to a changing environment

So in conclusion I would like to say that as per my understanding and opinion it is

a person’s ability to adapt to the environment that is a measure of his or her true
intelligence. All other aspects may be used and would have a role to play in better
adaptation to the environment but as witnessed in the current pandemic situation, a
person with a higher ability to adapt would be more intelligent and would be able
to adapt to all kinds of environments and situation.
References:
https://www.multipleintelligencesoasis.org/blog/2020/9/1/67pmqk1mg1uzre4qlcxe
tz6pbl3ayj
https://www.verywellmind.com/theories-of-intelligence-2795035
https://www.simplypsychology.org/intelligence.html
 Experiment No. 3
Title: Interviewing an older adult
Objectives/ Aims: To understand the process of aging through interaction.
Introduction: Aging is a gradual, continuous process of natural change that
begins in early adulthood. During early middle age, many bodily functions begin
to gradually decline.

People do not become old or elderly at any specific age. Traditionally, age 65 has
been designated as the beginning of old age. But the reason was based in history,
not biology. Many years ago, age 65 was chosen as the age for retirement in
Germany, the first nation to establish a retirement program, and it continues to be
the retirement age for most people in developed societies, although this tradition
is changing.

When a person becomes old can be answered in different ways:

 Chronologic age: Chronologic age is based solely on the passage of time.

It is a person’s age in years. Chronologic age has limited significance in
terms of health. Nonetheless, the likelihood of developing a health problem
increases as people age, and it is health problems, rather than normal aging,
that are the primary cause of functional loss during old age. Because
chronologic age helps predict many health problems, it has some legal and
financial uses.
 Biologic age: Biologic age refers to changes in the body that commonly
occur as people age. Because these changes affect some people sooner than
others, some people are biologically old at 65, and others not until a decade
or more. However, most noticeable differences in apparent age among
people of similar chronologic age are caused by lifestyle, habit, and subtle
effects of disease rather than by differences in actual aging.
 Psychologic age: Psychologic age is based on how people act and feel. For
example, an 80-year-old who works, plans, looks forward to future events,
and participates in many activities is considered psychologically young.
Normal aging
Exactly what constitutes normal aging is not always clear. Changes that occur
with normal aging make people more likely to develop certain disorders.
However, people can sometimes take actions to compensate for these changes.
For example, older people are more likely to lose teeth. But seeing a dentist
regularly, eating fewer sweets, and brushing and flossing regularly may reduce
the chances of tooth loss. Thus, tooth loss, although common with aging, is an
avoidable part of aging.

Description of test/ experiment: The interview was conducted with a purpose to

understand the process of ageing as experienced by the subject. The subject was
identified and was contacted to take permission for the interview. As the subject
agreed for the interview, the day and time were fixed for the same. The purpose of
the interview was explained to the subject during the fixing of the interview. A list
of questions was prepared to be used during the interview. Care was taken to not
be intrusive and to respect the subject for as much as he wanted to share.
Material Required: List of questions to be asked in the interview, paper-pen,
mobile phone as it was a virtual meeting.
Participant’s profile: The subject was a 67 years old male who had retired from
his Government job after working for 39 years. He had retired at the age of 60 and
was now enjoying his retired life. He had two children who were now grown up
adults and were married. The daughter lived in her own house in the same city and
the son and his wife stayed with the subject and his wife. The subject has had
multiple medical issues which had only increased over a period of time. He was
able to cope up with these issues well and was on medication for some of the
chronic conditions.
Procedure and administration:
1. Preparation- After the subject was identified and the date and time of the
interview was fixed, it was important to be ready with a list of questions. So
the list of questions was prepared and these were carefully thought through.
Care was taken to ensure that the questions are not intrusive and yet are able
to understand the life of the subject well.

2. Rapport- As the subject was a known person it was not difficult to establish
a rapport easily. He was made comfortable by asking about his health and
taking care that his privacy is respected. Questions that would make
someone uncomfortable were avoided.
3. Instructions- A questionnaire was used for the interview and the subject was
advised to answer as per his level of comfort and as much as he wanted to
disclose and share.

4. Precautions- Care was taken to keep the subject at ease. The interview was
conducted telephonically keeping in view the safety of senior citizens in the
corona times. Certain things were overwhelming for the subject so complete
care was taken to validate his feelings. His privacy was respected and too
much probing was avoided to give him the space to talk as much as he
wanted. He was thanked at the end of the interview and I was grateful that
he took time to speak to me and gave the interview.

5. Introspective Report- The interview process was easy to conduct. Pre

planning of the questionnaire was very helpful and it also helped in tweaking
some questions as we went along in the conversation. The subject was
comfortable throughout and was cheerful though at some points he appeared
slightly overwhelmed but was trying to camouflage it. The interaction gave a
lot of insight into the life of an individual as one ages and the changes
brought about with ageing.

Interpretation:
- How old are you?
I am 67.
- Where have you been working?
I worked with Government of India. I have been in service for 39 years and
have been retired for the last 7 years.
- How has the post retirement life been different from the preretirement life?
Not too different except that there is no office work now and no travelling
for work which was quite frequent earlier. I have a good routine, meet
people, do some yoga, manage the daily household chores.
- Any major health conditions or problems that you have?
I have had high BP and diabetes for many years now. Also had a bypass
surgery about 10 years back. I now have a pacemaker and have to go for my
regular medical checkups and take medication for these conditions.
- How have these conditions impacted the quality of life?
 Life has changed slightly because of these conditions. Have to be careful
with my diet and exercise. Had to make life style changes as well.
- How do you cope up with the changes as a result of your medical condition?
Being regular with medication, having a routine, along with a positive
attitude.
- Has the medical condition increased your dependency on others?
Not really. I manage everything on my own. I am quite independent.
- How do you manage your day to day activities? Do you need some help?
I am able to take care of myself on my own.
- What are the dietary changes you had to make as a result of your medical
condition?
Avoiding fried food, sweets, including more of salads, vegetables and lightly
cooked food with no spices.
- How do you meet the medical expenses?
I am entitled to medical facility from the Government so all my medical
expenses are taken care of. I don’t have to worry about them.
- What is the family support system that you have?
My son lives with us and my daughter lives in the same city. They are
around in the hour of need.
- How often do you socialize with friends and family?
I don’t meet very often but get together for festivals and family functions.
But I make it a point to stay connected with everyone over the phone on a
regular basis.
- How do you like to spend your free time?
Catching up with news, reading newspaper, watching TV, going for a walk
- Do you like to travel to places out of town?
Yes I enjoy travelling to hill stations with my wife. But the journey now
becomes very tiring. It feels good once we reach there and spend a few days.
- Do you participate or follow any religious or spiritual activities? Have you
always been following this? How long back did you start?
My wife goes for her satsang and I sometimes go along with her. She has
been going for many years now.
- Is there any exercise routine that you follow?
I am very particular about my walk and yoga. Have joined a senior citizens
club for yoga
- How has life been different from what it was ten years back?
 Had to slow down quite a bit, I still keep myself involved in the bank work
and house hold chores.
- If there was one thing you could do by going back in time what would that
be?
Taking care of my health and not being stressed about things. It is not worth
to take stress for small things and I would advise the same.

Discussion: Ageing causes a lot of changes in a person’s life. Not just

physical changes but mental and emotional as well. A person goes through a
lot of changes after retirement. However, in the case of my subject, he was
happy leading a retired life after being in service for 39 years. His job also
involved travelling to hard areas and though he thoroughly enjoyed his
work, he was happy that he no longer had to do that as his health did not
permit him too much exertion involved in work related travelling. My
subject had medical problems like high blood pressure and diabetes right
from a very young age. He had undergone a bypass surgery at the age of 57
years and also had a pace maker implanted. With all these health
complications, he was full of life and enthusiasm at his age and with his
medical conditions that had only aggravated with age. He was quite
independent and had a routine set for the day. He had suffered from
insomnia for the last few years and it had only increased with age. As a
result of his medical conditions, he had to make certain dietary changes but
he did have his favorite things once in a while. Due to his vulnerability for
heart related problems, his family took care to avoid any stress and strain.
He went for his regular medical checkups from time to time. In addition he
went for a walk regularly and did some light yoga exercises. He was very
social and had a big circle of friends whom he would call up once in a while
and check on them. He also kept in touch with his extended family and
attended family functions as and when something came up. He also liked to
keep in touch with the current affairs through newspapers and TV news
along with other entertaining programs. He shared he had slowed down quite
a bit in the last ten years and had to take things easy. He had to avoid being
stressed about trivial matters. He loved travelling with his wife to nearby hill
stations as the environment there was peaceful, serene and pollution free.
However, though he enjoyed visiting these places the journey was becoming
more and more difficult in the last few years due to low energy levels in the
body and fragile health conditions. Though all of this bothered him
 sometimes, yet he was on the whole an enthusiastic and lively person who
wanted to make the most of his life. When asked if he could go back in time
and do one thing what would that be he shared that he would take better care
of his health by avoiding stress and strain of any kind.

Conclusion: The subject looked older than his chronological age.

Biologically he appeared to be aging at a much faster rate as indicated by his
medical conditions and slowing down. However, psychologically and
socially he was much younger than most 50 year olds.

References:
https://www.apa.org/pi/aging/resources/guides/aging.pdf
https://www.msdmanuals.com/home/older-people%E2%80%99s-health-issues/the-
aging-body/overview-of-aging
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-socialproblems/chapter/6-1-the-concept-
and-experience-of-aging/